Middle East latest: Ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon is set to begin at 4 am
Tech entrepreneur Elon Musk caused uproar after backing Germany’s far-right party in a major newspaper ahead of key parliamentary elections in the Western European country, leading to the resignation of the paper’s opinion editor in protest. Germany is to vote in an early election on Feb 23 after Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s three-party governing coalition collapsed last month in a dispute over how to revitalize the country’s stagnant economy. Musk's guest opinion piece for Welt am Sonntag — a sister publication of POLITICO owned by the Axel Springer Group — published in German over the weekend, was the second time this month he supported the Alternative for Germany, or AfD. “The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the last spark of hope for this country," Musk wrote in his translated commentary. He went on to say the far-right party “can lead the country into a future where economic prosperity, cultural integrity and technological innovation are not just wishes, but reality.” The Tesla Motors CEO also wrote that his investment in Germany gave him the right to comment on the country's condition. The AfD is polling strongly, but its candidate for the top job, Alice Weidel, has no realistic chance of becoming chancellor because other parties refuse to work with the far-right party. An ally of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, the technology billionaire challenged in his opinion piece the party's public image. “The portrayal of the AfD as right-wing extremist is clearly false, considering that Alice Weidel, the party’s leader, has a same-sex partner from Sri Lanka! Does that sound like Hitler to you? Please!” Musk’s commentary has led to a debate in German media over the boundaries of free speech, with the paper's own opinion editor announcing her resignation, pointedly on Musk's social media platform, X. “I always enjoyed leading the opinion section of WELT and WAMS. Today an article by Elon Musk appeared in Welt am Sonntag. I handed in my resignation yesterday after it went to print," Eva Marie Kogel wrote. The newspaper was also attacked by politicians and other media for offering Musk, an outsider, a platform to express his views, in favor of the AfD. Candidate for chancellor, Friedrich Merz, of the Christian Democratic Union, said Sunday that Musk's comments were “intrusive and presumptuous”. He was speaking to the newspapers of the German Funke Media Group. Co-leader of the Social Democratic Party, Saskia Esken said that “Anyone who tries to influence our election from outside, who supports an anti-democratic, misanthropic party like the AfD, whether the influence is organized by the state from Russia or by the concentrated financial and media power of Elon Musk and his billionaire friends on the Springer board, must expect our tough resistance,” according to the ARD national public TV network. Musk's opinion piece in the Welt am Sonntag was accompanied by a critical article by the future editor-in-chief of the Welt group, Jan Philipp Burgard. “Musk’s diagnosis is correct, but his therapeutic approach, that only the AfD can save Germany, is fatally wrong,” Burgard wrote. Responding to a request for comment from the German Press Agency, dpa, the current editor-in-chief of the Welt group, Ulf Poschardt, and Burgard — who is due to take over on Jan. 1 — said in a joint statement that the discussion over Musk's piece was "very insightful. Democracy and journalism thrive on freedom of expression.” “This will continue to determine the compass of the “world” in the future. We will develop “Die Welt” even more decisively as a forum for such debates,” they wrote to dpa.How the fridge almost spoiled ChristmasHouse Democrats who voted yes on NDAA lament transgender restrictions
With nearly all of the votes counted, left-leaning Mr Milanovic won 49% while his main challenger Dragan Primorac, a candidate of the ruling conservative HDZ party, trailed far behind with 19%. Pre-election polls had predicted that the two would face off in the second round on January 12, as none of the eight presidential election contenders were projected to get more than 50% of the vote. Mr Milanovic thanked his supporters but warned that “this was just a first run”. “Let’s not be triumphant, let’s be realistic, firmly on the ground,” he said. “We must fight all over again. It’s not over till it’s over.” Mr Milanovic, the most popular politician in Croatia, has served as prime minister in the past. Populist in style, the 58-year-old has been a fierce critic of current Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic and continuous sparring between the two has been a recent hallmark of Croatia’s political scene. Mr Plenkovic has sought to portray the vote as one about Croatia’s future in the EU and Nato. He has labelled Mr Milanovic “pro-Russian” and a threat to Croatia’s international standing. “The difference between him (Mr Primorac) and Milanovic is quite simple: Milanovic is leading us East, Primorac is leading us West,” he said. Though the presidency is largely ceremonial in Croatia, an elected president holds political authority and acts as the supreme commander of the military. Mr Milanovic has criticised the Nato and European Union support for Ukraine and has often insisted that Croatia should not take sides. He has said Croatia should stay away from global disputes, thought it is a member of both Nato and the EU. Mr Milanovic has also blocked Croatia’s participation in a Nato-led training mission for Ukraine, declaring that “no Croatian soldier will take part in somebody else’s war”. His main rival in the election, Mr Primorac, has stated that “Croatia’s place is in the West, not the East”. However, his bid for the presidency has been marred by a high-level corruption case that landed Croatia’s health minister in jail last month and which featured prominently in pre-election debates. Trailing a distant third in the pre-election polls is Marija Selak Raspudic, a conservative independent candidate. She has focused her election campaign on the economic troubles of ordinary citizens, corruption and issues such as population decline in the country of some 3.8 million. Sunday’s presidential election is Croatia’s third vote this year, following a snap parliamentary election in April and the European Parliament balloting in June.
NoneGuest Opinion: Trump should reform financial watchdogs. Here’s howNone
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia’s House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would ban children younger than 16 years old from social media , leaving it to the Senate to finalize the world-first law. The major parties backed the bill that would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts. The legislation passed 102 to 13. If the bill becomes law this week, the platforms would have one year to work out how to implement the age restrictions before the penalties are enforced. Opposition lawmaker Dan Tehan told Parliament the government had agreed to accept amendments in the Senate that would bolster privacy protections. Platforms would not be allowed to compel users to provide government-issued identity documents including passports or driver’s licenses. The platforms also could not demand digital identification through a government system. “Will it be perfect? No. But is any law perfect? No, it’s not. But if it helps, even if it helps in just the smallest of ways, it will make a huge difference to people’s lives,” Tehan told Parliament. RELATED COVERAGE North Carolina’s governor has vetoed a GOP bill that would weaken his successor and other Democrats Venezuela’s government will investigate opposition leader Machado for supporting US House bill Australia rejects Elon Musk’s claim that it plans to control access to the internet Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the Senate would debate the bill later Wednesday. The major parties’ support all but guarantees the legislation will pass in the Senate, where no party holds a majority of seats. Lawmakers who were not aligned with either the government or the opposition were most critical of the legislation during debate on Tuesday and Wednesday. Criticisms include that the legislation had been rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, would not work, would create privacy risks for users of all ages and would take away parents’ authority to decide what’s best for their children. Critics also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of positive aspects of social media, drive children to the dark web, make children too young for social media reluctant to report harms they encountered and take away incentives for platforms to make online spaces safer. Independent lawmaker Zoe Daniel said the legislation would “make zero difference to the harms that are inherent to social media.” “The true object of this legislation is not to make social media safe by design, but to make parents and voters feel like the government is doing something about it,” Daniel told Parliament. “There is a reason why the government parades this legislation as world-leading, that’s because no other country wants to do it,” she added. T he platforms had asked for the vote on legislation to be delayed until at least June next year when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies made its report on how the ban could been enforced. Melbourne resident Wayne Holdsworth, whose 17-year-old son Mac took his own life last year after falling victim to an online sextortion scam, described the bill as “absolutely essential for the safety of our children.” “It’s not the only thing that we need to do to protect them because education is the key, but to provide some immediate support for our children and parents to be able to manage this, it’s a great step,” the 65-year-old online safety campaigner told The Associated Press on Tuesday. “And in my opinion, it’s the greatest time in our country’s history,” he added, referring to the pending legal reform.
"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." Section 1.10.32 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum", written by Cicero in 45 BC "Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" Thanks for your interest in Kalkine Media's content! To continue reading, please log in to your account or create your free account with us.Pat Riley on the truth behind signing LeBron James and Chris Bosh for Miami Heat, and his one regret
Shohei Ohtani wins his third MVP and first in the NL following a historic offensive season with the Los Angeles Dodgers
Maybe it was the host of the UN climate summit in Azerbaijan this month calling oil and gas a .” Or the US, the world’s biggest oil and gas producer, reelecting a president who says “ ” just before the conference. Then again, the biggest outcome — or disappointment, depending on how you look at it — was an incremental increase in the amount of climate aid wealthier nations committed to less affluent countries dealing with the consequences of other people’s pollution. Any way you look at it, the summit (called the Conference of the Parties, or COP) that fizzed out over the weekend was exasperating, particularly for delegates from parts...Hot money net inflows hit $96.6M in November
Croatia's president faces conservative rival in election run-offBrazil’s Bolsonaro planned and participated in a 2022 coup plot, unsealed police report alleges
Due to President-elect Donald Trump nominating veteran Pete Hegseth as the Secretary of Defense, the country is once again revisiting the conversation about military readiness and its recruitment problem. The Atlantic , a leftist rag if there ever was one, spent precious time and publishing space to claim that Hegseth’s comments about the negative effects of women in combat were wrong. They argue that Hegseth is unfairly lumping female military service members into a broader conversation about Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. Pete Hegseth has said that women should no longer have combat roles in the military. His comments reflect a broader tendency among Trump and his allies to treat every evolution in social norms as a DEI project gone awry, @juliettekayyem writes: https://t.co/GVYYRsPJpu — The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) November 23, 2024 “These comments reflect a broader tendency among Trump and his allies to treat every evolution in social norms as a triumph of ‘wokeness’—a DEI project gone awry,” The Atlantic wrote. “Men with higher ranks and much greater responsibility than Hegseth long ago recognized that ending combat exclusion wasn’t primarily a matter of women’s equality, but of military readiness.” Hegseth made headlines when an interview he did with podcast host Shawn Ryan went viral. In it, he argued that women shouldn’t be placed in combat roles because it affects the lethality and readiness of our military. (ROOKE: ‘Fighting For Women’s Rights’ Is What Got Us Into Transgender Bathroom Mess In The First Place) “Everything about men and women serving together makes the situation more complicated,” he said. “And complication in combat means casualties are worse.” Of course, Hegseth is correct. It doesn’t take an expert in military command to know this. You just have to be a serious person who understands the uniqueness that divides the sexes and how men and women interact in society to see that problems will arise when men and women are forced into the same box. Feminists would like to believe that women and men are the same. But they are not — just ask the Marine Corps. In 2015, the Marine Corps spent $36 million to study the military readiness of mixed-sex units versus those made up of all males. The results found that mixed-sex ground combat teams underperformed in almost every area compared to the all-male teams. “ Data collected during a monthslong experiment showed Marine teams with female members performed at lower overall levels, completed tasks more slowly and fired weapons with less accuracy than their all-male counterparts. In addition, female Marines sustained significantly higher injury rates and demonstrated lower levels of physical performance capacity overall,” The Marine Corps Times reported. Also, there is an anecdotal thread from X in which current and former service members recount their experience deploying to combat zones and completing basic training in mixed-sex units. 3. Females breaking down crying on training ruck marches in good conditions. This is common. — Paulos (@myth_pilot) November 14, 2024 5. Females getting special treatment for basically everything. Preferential admission for schools and training, females being hand-held through Ranger School, females being prioritized for career advancement in order to satisfy diversity targets. — Paulos (@myth_pilot) November 14, 2024 Bonus Round stories from friends: 16. “The FET (Female Engagement Team) attached to my platoon once wandered off during a patrol, because their E5 NCOIC fancied herself just the same as a maneuver unit, I noticed but it was too late they were inside some house of the village... — Paulos (@myth_pilot) November 14, 2024 23: The reality behind behind the first “female Marine infantry.” Alcohol issues, routinely excused from duty, failing to meet standards. The Marine Corps made a museum exhibit dedicated to these women: “Your thread on women in the military is incredible. I was on Camp Lejeune... — Paulos (@myth_pilot) November 15, 2024 The Atlantic decided not to mention the Marine Corps study in its piece. Instead, it focused on comments from the current ineffective leadership who made this integration possible. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, for example, said women “make us stronger. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley said that the enemy doesn’t recognize whether a male or female is firing the round that kills him. Maybe the latter is true, but Austin and Milley are ignoring a larger problem that could explain in some way why the military has suffered to bolster recruitment numbers for decades. 🚨Mark “White Rage” Milley really wants your daughters to fight in military combat: “Don’t lecture me about women in combat. Women have been in combat and it doesn’t matter if that 762 hits you in the chest, no one gives a sh*t if it’s a woman or guy who pulled the trigger. If... pic.twitter.com/0er9zlqa9B — Steve Cortes (@CortesSteve) November 22, 2024 There is little discussion about whether the man in the foxhole next to the woman (who has apparently failed physical tasks repeatedly) feels safe going into battle with her or whether having a woman deploy with a man creates romantic complications. Not to mention that the direct result of emphasizing female empowerment over qualified candidates ensures that men are discouraged from joining. While this may hurt the feelings of someone suffering from Girl Boss Syndrome, it dramatically affects the performance capabilities of our military if its members have little faith in their counterparts. (ROOKE: Corporate Media Carries Out Anti-Christian Smear Campaign Against Pete Hegseth) The left believes that the answer to the military’s recruitment problem is to continue filling the gaps with women, even in places like submarines. Hegseth suggests that the military return to its original mission, which was to be a lethal defense system to protect our citizens. They’re attacking Pete Hegseth for saying women shouldn’t be in combat with men. As a woman who has a combat action ribbon & was in Fallujah, Iraq, when we attacked Fallujah in 2004, I couldn’t agree more with Pete. I did masonry & carpentry & was one of only two women who did my... — Mrs. Dirty Driver (@guntotinchick) November 21, 2024 Still, our country is drunk on feminism, which clouds our judgment. This is why The Atlantic writes unironically about how the change in military rules reflects “how military personnel operate in the real world.” As we’ve seen in the real world, when war comes to your borders, the government’s first move is not toward female soldiers. While I’ve seen several terrifying videos of Ukranian subscription officers rounding up military-aged civilian men to be forced into serving on the frontlines, there hasn’t been one showing females being dragged away from their families. Like the generations before us, they come for their men. Whether the Pentagon (or the left) will admit it, we need men to protect us. It’s not a patriarchal appreciation thing but a reality. Men are stronger, faster and more violent, making them uniquely more capable of military service. Fixing our recruitment problem hinges on activating American men to pick up their swords. At some point, we either realize that having women in combat is antithetical to that mission, or our country is going to learn the hard way through death and humiliation at the hands of our enemies.
If the Los Angeles Lakers want to compete for a championship this season, they must be willing to execute a player swap or two. To prepare for a successful postseason, the Lakers may consider cutting ties with an inconsistent role player in favor of a veteran San Antonio Spurs guard. “The Lakers are sitting at 10-4, but they’re not without their issues," Fadeaway World's Fran Leiva wrote Thursday. "D’Angelo Russell, while showing flashes, hasn’t been consistent enough, although he's found some success lately off the bench." “He’s averaging 11.8 points, 2.4 boards, and 4.9 assists, but shooting just 39.7% from the field and a rough 31.2% from deep. Defense? Let’s just say it’s not his thing. A lot of people are questioning if he’s the right fit to run alongside LeBron (James) and (Anthony) Davis as his contract expires after the season.” “Meanwhile, the Spurs are 7-8 and clearly focused on rebuilding around Victor Wembanyama. Chris Paul, even at 39, is still a steady presence, putting up 10.7 points, 3.8 rebounds, and 8.5 assists while shooting 46.7% from the floor and 39.7% from three." "But let’s be real—CP3’s timeline doesn’t match the Spurs’ long-term plans. They might prefer someone younger who can grow with the team.” “Enter D’Angelo Russell. He’s younger, has scoring potential, and could slide into a key role for the Spurs while clearing a big chunk of cap space with his $18 million deal off the books after the season." "For the Lakers, CP3 brings leadership and playoff experience that could elevate their roster when it matters most. Plus, Julian Champagnie adds some depth, even if he’s not a game-changer yet.” “There’s risk, though. Chris Paul’s age and injury history are real concerns, and D’Lo’s inconsistency makes him a gamble for any team. But hey, risky trades are what keep the NBA spicy. This one might just make sense for both sides.” The Lakers would trade Russell to the Spurs for Paul and Champagnie in Leiva's mock trade. Paul is 39 years old and preparing to complete his 20th season in the NBA, so it's safe to assume his best days are behind him. The astonishing yo-yo dribbler isn’t the same ball screen operator, downhill ball handler, and sneaky athlete he was early in his career, but he’s likely a safer bet than Russell. While Paul's enduring one of the worst campaigns of his two-decade-long career, his astute basketball knowledge, admirable leadership skills, and valuable NBA finals experience give him a clear edge over the 2019 All-Star. Perhaps Russell will raise his level of play moving forward, but if the Lakers want to avoid the stress the Ohio State product brings during the playoffs, they’ll make a change before Feb. 6. More NBA: Puzzling trade proposal sends fragile $149 million Clippers star to Rockets
Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah start a ceasefire after nearly 14 months of fightingPhoto Story | Day 16 of Protests in Georgia
Australia Senate committee backs bill to ban social media for children