Tucker Carlson:
Many times I said on television, "The problem is Islam. The problem is Muslims. They all want to kill us. They're all crazy. They're all in this lunatic suicide cult created by Muhammad in the 7th century." And I believed that.
I was hysterical. I believed that. No, that's not true. Nothing about that is true, but I believed it.
🚨 Joint-statement from Cape Verde, Curaçao, Uzbekistan, Congo, Haiti, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Ghana, Senegal, South Africa and Côte d’Ivoire expressing their “profound disappointment” following the recent comments made by UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin arguing the expanded World Cup will create “uninteresting” games.
“We respectfully but firmly reject these comments.
“For our countries, there is no such thing as an unimportant World Cup match.
“For Cape Verde, Curaçao and Uzbekistan, qualification for the FIFA World Cup represents a historic achievement and the realization of a dream shared by generations.
“For nations such as Congo and Haiti, returning to football’s biggest stage after a long absence carries a special meaning for millions of supporters who have waited years, and in some cases decades, for this moment.
“To suggest that these matches are somehow less important is deeply disappointing and fails to recognize the efforts, sacrifices and aspirations of players, coaches, clubs, football leaders and supporters across the world.
“Behind every qualification stand years of work and investment. Behind every national team stand entire communities and millions of people who see football as a source of pride, hope and unity.
“Football does not belong to a select group of nations. Its strength comes from its universality. The FIFA World Cup is the world’s greatest football competition precisely because it brings together different cultures, different histories and different football journeys.
“For many countries, participation in the FIFA World Cup is not only a sporting achievement. It is a moment that inspires a generation, accelerates football development and creates memories that last a lifetime.
“We believe that every nation that qualifies deserves respect. Every team has earned its place on merit. Every supporter has the right to dream. Every match carries meaning for millions of people around the world.
“We therefore reject the UEFA President’s comments and reaffirm our belief that the growth of football must continue to create opportunities, inspire new generations and strengthen the truly global nature of our game.
“Every team qualified on merit.
“Every match matters.”
Artificial intelligences do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature through relationships, and do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean. Nor do they have a moral conscience, since they do not judge good and evil, grasp the ultimate meaning of situations, or bear responsibility for consequences. They may imitate or even simulate, but they do not understand what they produce, for they lack the affective, relational, and spiritual perspective through which human beings grow in wisdom. #MagnificaHumanitas
A fiery speech by South Africa's🇿🇦 EFF leader Julius Malema, over xenophobic attacks targeting foreign nationals.
“You say Zimbabweans take your jobs. Nigerians take your jobs.
You march, close shops and beat up people. Tell us after doing that how many jobs have you created, by beating up these Nigerians, Zimbabweans and Ghanaians?
You beat people because they took your jobs.
You close a shop that hires people. How many have you created after beating and chasing them?
Unskilled men, with no skills, none whatsoever, say somebody took away their jobs. I don't want your votes if you behave like that. Take them away.
Pushing out of school an African child that looks like you, I will never do that. You can take your votes. Make me die with my conscience very clearly.
I will never refuse a pregnant woman of African descent to give birth in the clinics of South Africa. Never!”
The heart will not be pure unless the deeds are pure. And the deeds will not be pure unless the intention is pure. So, it doesn't matter what you're doing externally, or why you're doing it.
We are told that security in the Middle East requires defeating Iran, security in East Asia requires defeating China, and security in Europe requires defeating Russia. We never discuss security in terms of how to learn to live together by harmonising interests and managing competition. This is by design. This is hegemonic peace, in which security depends on defeating rivals rather than managing a balance of power.
Subsequently, security relies solely on deterrence rather than reassurance; diplomacy is dismissed as appeasement; peace agreements are temporary and deceptive; and war is peace. Our rivals do not have legitimate security concerns, as their policies are allegedly always motivated by aggressive, irrational, or expansionist behaviour.
We have convinced ourselves that our liberal hegemony is a force for good, and that our opponents oppose our dominance because they reject our benign values of freedom. Discussing the security concerns of adversaries is believed to “legitimise” their policies, which is treasonous. The world is divided into good guys (liberal democracies) and bad guys (autocracies). We should not ask how defeating Russia, as the world's largest nuclear power, is a rational security strategy, or why our governments refuse to even speak with Moscow to discuss the European security architecture and end the war. Our governments have relabelled nuclear deterrence as nuclear blackmail to signal that there can be no more constraints.
All empires can become irrational during decline. Leaders take greater risks to avoid decline, legitimacy crises at home must be distracted with enemies abroad, outdated strategies from a bygone era of strength are still embraced, and there is a tendency to double down on narratives of being indispensable, representing universal values, and dismissing all opposition as illegitimate and dangerous. Are we the fanatics?
Abbas Araghchi: “Why We Insist on Uranium Enrichment”
“Why have we insisted, and continue to insist, on uranium enrichment? Why won’t we surrender it, even under the threat of war? Because no one has the right to dictate what we may or may not possess. This is rooted in a fundamental principle: the rejection of domination.
Enrichment is our right under international law, and whether we choose to exercise it is our business alone. For years we’ve been told, ‘You have no right to enrich; enrichment must be zero.’ Why? ‘Because we’re concerned,’ they say. If you’re concerned, we’re prepared to address that. Have questions? We’ll answer them. Is trust lacking? We’ll build it. But no one has the right to say, ‘You cannot have this because we don’t want you to.’
This is the heart of our resolve: we have stood firm in defense of our own rights. Enrichment matters, but what matters even more is demonstrating that the Islamic Republic of Iran takes orders from no one and submits to no domination.
If there are doubts about the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program, we are ready to answer them. The only path forward is diplomacy. Every other path has been tried and has led nowhere. Negotiations will only succeed when the rights of the Iranian people are recognized and respected, not granted, because our rights are already legitimate in and of themselves. What we ask is simply that they be respected.”
In my view, Araghchi’s statement is more than a dignified reply to the United States. It is a rebuke of the condescending posture the West has held toward Muslims for nearly a century. It is a declaration that the era of bullying and imposed values is over. If Iran emerges from this with its honor intact, God willing, neither the United States nor the Muslim world will be what they once were.