Teachers, TV stars rally against student arrests as Bangladesh protests resume

Special Teachers, TV stars rally against student arrests as Bangladesh protests resume
Bangladeshi actress Azmeri Haque Badhon, center, and other TV stars demonstrate in Dhaka on Aug. 1, 2024 against a crackdown on student protesters. (Azmeri Haque Badhon)
Short Url
Updated 01 August 2024
Follow

Teachers, TV stars rally against student arrests as Bangladesh protests resume

Teachers, TV stars rally against student arrests as Bangladesh protests resume
  • At least 11,000 people arrested following last month’s job quota protests
  • Demonstrators return this week to demand accountability for protester deaths

Dhaka: Hundreds of Bangladeshi university teachers and TV stars held demonstrations in Dhaka on Thursday, demanding the withdrawal of police from campuses and the release of students arrested in a crackdown over last month’s mass protests.
Students have been demonstrating since the beginning of July against a rule that reserved the bulk of government jobs for the descendants of those who fought in the country’s 1971 liberation war.
The protests turned violent in mid-July, when nationwide campus rallies were attacked by pro-government groups, leading to clashes with security forces, a week-long communications blackout, a curfew, and more than 200 deaths.
The Supreme Court eventually scrapped most of the quotas last week to open civil service positions to candidates on merit, but this was followed by a crackdown on student leaders and protesters, with thousands arrested.
Demonstrations resumed this week, with more groups joining the students and holding separate rallies across Dhaka and in other cities to demand accountability for the violence and the release of those arrested.
“Around 200 teachers from Dhaka University and some other universities joined with us ... This teachers’ protest is to express solidarity with the students facing oppression, arrest,” Samina Lutfa, a lecturer in the sociology department of Dhaka University, told Arab News.




Dhaka University lecturers demonstrate at the university’s campus on Aug. 1, 2024 against a crackdown on student protesters. (A.S.M. Amanullah)


The teachers’ protest in Dhaka took place in front of the Aparajeyo Bangla, a sculpture on the university campus and a memorial to those who fought in the 1971 liberation war against Pakistan that resulted in Bangladesh’s independence.
They also demonstrated against the presence of security forces, which entered the campus two weeks ago to expel protesting students.
“We demanded immediate withdrawal of police force from the Dhaka University campus,” Lutfa said.
“Teachers from many other universities also organized protests at their campuses today. I have already received information from Rajshahi University, Jahangirnagar University, North South University, Independent University. Teachers from both public and private universities joined the protest.”
At least 11,000 people, mostly students, have been arrested following the job quota protests.
“We demand justice for the atrocities against the innocent and unarmed students committed in an unconstitutional way by different government forces,” said Prof. A.S.M. Amanullah, a social lecturer at Dhaka University.
“We will not be able to stand in front of our students in the classrooms if we don’t stand beside them today ... Students also joined our protest today. It has been decided that from now on, we, the teachers, will be in the front rows during the protests. Teachers across the country will do the same.”
Meanwhile, about 300 actors, film directors and TV stars blocked the main intersection in Farmgate, one of Dhaka’s busiest and most populous areas.
“It’s a critical time for the country when many lives are lost, and students are the main stakeholders of this situation. We gathered on the streets to express solidarity with the students,” said filmmaker Piplu Khan.
“We want the state to sensitively listen to the demands of the students.”
Azmeri Haque Badhon, a popular Bangladeshi actress and co-organizer of the rally, said it was her responsibility to protest.
“The demands placed by the students are justified, and we expressed solidarity with them,” she told Arab News.
“We can’t tolerate that in an independent country piercing bullets would take the lives of children ... protesting students would face bullets in the streets for asking for their rights.”


Biden pushed Gaza pier over warnings it would undercut other aid routes, watchdog says

Biden pushed Gaza pier over warnings it would undercut other aid routes, watchdog says
Updated 50 sec ago
Follow

Biden pushed Gaza pier over warnings it would undercut other aid routes, watchdog says

Biden pushed Gaza pier over warnings it would undercut other aid routes, watchdog says

WASHINGTON: President Joe Biden ordered the construction of a temporary pier to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza earlier this year even as some staffers for the US Agency for International Development expressed concerns that the effort would be difficult to pull off and undercut the effort to persuade Israel to open “more efficient” land crossings to get food into the territory, according to a USAID inspector general report published Tuesday.

Biden announced plans to use the temporary pier in his State of the Union address in March to hasten the delivery of aid to the Palestinian territory besieged by war between Israel and Hamas.

But the $230 million military-run project known as the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore system, or JLOTS, would only operate for about 20 days. Aid groups pulled out of the project by July, ending a mission plagued by repeated weather and security problems that limited how much food and other emergency supplies could get to starving Palestinians.

“Multiple USAID staff expressed concerns that the focus on using JLOTS would detract from the Agency’s advocacy for opening land crossings, which were seen as more efficient and proven methods of transporting aid into Gaza,” according to the inspector general report. “However, once the President issued the directive, the Agency’s focus was to use JLOTS as effectively as possible.”

At the time Biden announced plans for the floating pier, the United Nations was reporting virtually all of Gaza’s 2.3 million people were struggling to find food and more than a half-million were facing starvation.

The Biden administration set a goal of the US sea route and pier providing food to feed 1.5 million of Gaza’s people for 90 days. It fell short, bringing in enough to feed about 450,000 people for a month before shutting down.

High waves and bad weather repeatedly damaged the pier, and the UN World Food Program ended cooperation with the project after an Israeli rescue operation used an area nearby to whisk away hostages, raising concerns about whether its workers would be seen as neutral and independent in the conflict.

US National Security Council spokesman Sean Savett said Tuesday that the project “had a real impact” of getting food to hungry Palestinian civilians despite the obstacles.

“The bottom line is that given how dire the humanitarian situation in Gaza is, the United States has left no stone unturned in our efforts to get more aid in, and the pier played a key role at a critical time in advancing that goal,” Savett said in a statement.

The watchdog report also alleged the United States had failed to honor commitments it had made with the World Food Program to get the UN agency to agree to take part in distributing supplies from the pier into Palestinian hands.

The US agreed to conditions set by the WFP, including that the pier would be placed in north Gaza, where the need for aid was greatest, and that a UN member nation would provide security for the pier. That step was meant to safeguard WFP’s neutrality among Gaza’s warring parties, the watchdog report said.

Instead, however, the Pentagon placed the pier in central Gaza. WFP staffers told the USAID watchdog that it was their understanding the US military chose that location because it allowed better security for the pier and the military itself.

Israel’s military ultimately provided the security after the US military was unable to find a neutral country willing to do the job, the watchdog report said.


Colombia’s ambassador to Nicaragua charged with drug trafficking

Leon Fredy Munoz. (Twitter @LeonFredyM)
Leon Fredy Munoz. (Twitter @LeonFredyM)
Updated 28 August 2024
Follow

Colombia’s ambassador to Nicaragua charged with drug trafficking

Leon Fredy Munoz. (Twitter @LeonFredyM)
  • Munoz was freed several days after his initial arrest six years ago, and then served in Congress before being appointed ambassador to Managua in 2022, a position he still holds

BOGOTA: Colombia’s Supreme Court on Tuesday indicted the country’s ambassador to Nicaragua for drug trafficking, six years after he was arrested with nearly 350 grams (about 12 ounces) of cocaine in a suitcase.
Leon Fredy Munoz has been under investigation since police found the drugs on him at the Medellin airport in May 2018, according to prosecutors.
Munoz claims the drugs were planted by political rivals.
He was freed several days after his initial arrest six years ago, and then served in Congress before being appointed ambassador to Managua in 2022, a position he still holds.
His indictment comes amid a political spat between the two countries.
Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega lashed out Monday against his Colombian and Brazilian counterparts for refusing to recognize Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro’s claim to a reelection victory, disputed by the opposition and much of the international community.
Colombia’s Gustavo Petro hit back on X, saying: “At least I don’t trample on the human rights of the people in my country.”
A press advocacy group said Tuesday Nicaragua had seen a “dramatic increase” in the persecution of journalists, reflecting a wider trend of harassment of government critics under Ortega’s presidency.
 

 


Prosecutors resubmit charges that Trump tried to overturn election

Prosecutors resubmit charges that Trump tried to overturn election
Updated 28 August 2024
Follow

Prosecutors resubmit charges that Trump tried to overturn election

Prosecutors resubmit charges that Trump tried to overturn election
  • Trump referred to the new indictment as an “act of desperation” that was part of a “witch hunt” against him

WASHINGTON: Prosecutors on Tuesday filed a revised indictment of Donald Trump, pressing ahead with bombshell charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 US election after losing to Joe Biden.
The superseding indictment retains the same four charges against Trump as in an earlier version but takes into account a recent Supreme Court ruling that a former president has broad immunity from criminal prosecution.
The new indictment of the 78-year-old Republican White House candidate is 36 pages long, down from 45 pages previously, and removes material affected by the immunity ruling from the conservative-dominated top court.
It retains the same core, stating that Trump lost in 2020 but “was determined to remain in power” and attempted to subvert the results.
The Supreme Court ruled in July that an ex-president has broad immunity from prosecution for official acts conducted while in office, but can be pursued for unofficial acts.
This threw into doubt the historic prosecution of the ex-president.
Trump referred to the new indictment as an “act of desperation” that was part of a “witch hunt” against him.
“The illegally appointed ‘Special Counsel’ Deranged Jack Smith, has brought a ridiculous new Indictment against me, which has all the problems of the old Indictment, and should be dismissed IMMEDIATELY,” he posted on his Truth Social platform.
The new indictment comes three days before Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought the charges against Trump, and lawyers for the former president had been set to file a schedule for pre-trial proceedings.
Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the case, had also scheduled a status hearing for September 5 in Washington and it was not immediately clear if that would go ahead now, following the filing of the superseding indictment.
Trump’s lawyers have been seeking to delay a trial until after November’s election between Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate.
Trump is accused of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding — the January 6, 2021 joint session of Congress that was attacked by Trump supporters.
Trump is also accused of seeking to disenfranchise US voters with his campaign of false claims that he won the 2020 election.
He was originally scheduled to go on trial on March 4, but that was put on hold while his lawyers pushed his claim of presidential immunity all the way up to the Supreme Court.
It will be up to Chutkan, an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama, to decide which of Trump’s actions regarding the 2020 election were official acts and which were unofficial acts subject to potential prosecution.
That and other pre-trial issues are expected to take months, making it unlikely the case will go to trial before the November 5 presidential vote.
The new indictment drops references to Jeffrey Clark, a former senior Justice Department official who was one of six co-conspirators listed in the original indictment allegedly enlisted by Trump to press his false claims of election fraud.
The Supreme Court, in its immunity ruling, said a president’s communications with members of the Justice Department should be considered official acts.
The remaining co-conspirators, who include Trump’s former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, “were acting in a private capacity,” the indictment said, “to assist him in his criminal efforts to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election and retain power.”
Regarding the ruling on Trump’s immunity, Supreme Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson said that she was “concerned” about the July verdict, according to an interview released by CBS news on Tuesday.
“I was concerned about a system that appeared to provide immunity for one individual under one set of circumstances, when we have a criminal justice system that had ordinarily treated everyone the same,” she said.
Jackson was among three justices to dissent from the court’s ruling.
Trump was convicted in New York in May of 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels.
Sentencing has been scheduled for September 18, but Trump’s lawyers have asked for his conviction to be tossed, citing the Supreme Court immunity ruling, and sentencing to be delayed.
Trump also faces charges in Georgia related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Trump was also charged in Florida with mishandling top-secret documents after leaving the White House.
The judge presiding over the documents case, Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, dismissed the charges on the grounds that Smith, the special counsel, was unlawfully appointed.
Smith has appealed Cannon’s ruling.


How lessons learned from the 2016 campaign led US officials to be more open about Iran hack

How lessons learned from the 2016 campaign led US officials to be more open about Iran hack
Updated 28 August 2024
Follow

How lessons learned from the 2016 campaign led US officials to be more open about Iran hack

How lessons learned from the 2016 campaign led US officials to be more open about Iran hack
  • They accused Iranian hackers of targeting the presidential campaigns of both major parties as part of a broader attempt to sow discord in the American political process

WASHINGTON: The 2016 presidential campaign was entering its final months and seemingly all of Washington was abuzz with talk about how Russian hackers had penetrated the email accounts of Democrats, triggering the release of internal communications that seemed designed to boost Donald Trump’s campaign and hurt Hillary Clinton’s.
Yet there was a notable exception: The officials investigating the hacks were silent.
When they finally issued a statement, one month before the election, it was just three paragraphs and did little more than confirm what had been publicly suspected — that there had been a brazen Russian effort to interfere in the vote.
This year, there was another foreign hack, but the response was decidedly different. US security officials acted more swiftly to name the culprit, detailing their findings and blaming a foreign adversary — this time, Iran — just over a week after Trump’s campaign revealed the attack.
They accused Iranian hackers of targeting the presidential campaigns of both major parties as part of a broader attempt to sow discord in the American political process.
The forthright response is part of a new effort to be more transparent about threats. It was a task made easier because the circumstances weren’t as politically volatile as in 2016, when a Democratic administration was investigating Russia’s attempts to help the Republican candidate.
But it also likely reflects lessons learned from past years when officials tasked with protecting elections from foreign adversaries were criticized by some for holding onto sensitive information — and lambasted by others for wading into politics.
Suzanne Spaulding, a former official with the Department of Homeland Security, said agencies realize that releasing information can help thwart the efforts of US adversaries.
“This is certainly an example of that — getting out there quickly to say, ‘Look, this is what Iran’s trying to do. It’s an important way of building public resilience against this propaganda effort by Iran,’” said Spaulding, now a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
The Aug. 19 statement by security officials followed a Trump campaign announcement that it had been breached, reports from cybersecurity firms linking the intrusion to Iran and news articles disclosing that media organizations had been approached with apparently hacked materials.
But the officials suggested their response was independent of those developments.
The FBI, which made the Iran announcement along with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said in a statement to The Associated Press that “transparency is one of the most powerful tools we have to counteract foreign malign influence operations intended to undermine our elections and democratic institutions.”
The FBI said the government had refined its policies to ensure that information is shared as it becomes available, “so the American people can better understand this threat, recognize the tactics, and protect their vote.
A Wholesale Reorganization
A spokesperson for the ODNI also told AP that the government’s assessment arose from a new process for notifying the public about election threats.
Created following the 2020 elections, the framework sets out a process for investigating and responding to cyber threats against campaigns, election offices or the public. When a threat is deemed sufficiently serious, it is “nominated” for additional action, including a private warning to the attack’s target or a public announcement.
“The Intelligence Community has been focused on collecting and analyzing intelligence regarding foreign malign influence activities, to include those of Iran, targeting US elections,” the agency said. “For this notification, the IC had relevant intelligence that prompted a nomination.”
The bureaucratic terminology obscures what for the intelligence community has been a wholesale reorganization of how the government tracks threats against elections since 2016, when Russian hacking underscored the foreign interference threat.
“In 2016 we were completely caught off guard,” said Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “There were some indications, but nobody really understood the scale.”
That summer, US officials watched with alarm as Democratic emails stolen by Russian military hackers spilled out in piecemeal fashion on WikiLeaks. By the end of July, the FBI had opened an investigation into whether the Trump campaign was coordinating with Russia to tip the election. The probe ended without any finding that the two sides had criminally colluded with each other.
Inside the White House, officials debated how to inform the public of its assessment that Russia was behind the hack-and-leak. There was discussion about whether such a statement might have the unintended consequence of making voters distrustful of election results, thereby helping Russia achieve its goal of undermining faith in democracy.
Then-FBI Director James Comey wrote in his book, “A Higher Loyalty,” that he at one point proposed writing a newspaper opinion piece documenting Russia’s activities. He described the Obama administration deliberations as “extensive, thoughtful, and very slow,” culminating in the pre-election statement followed by a longer intelligence community assessment in January 2017.
“I know we did agonize over whether to say something and when to say it and that sort of thing because it appeared in the case of the Russians that they were favoring one candidate over the other,” James Clapper, the then-director of national intelligence, said in an interview.
A Bumpy Road

In 2018, Congress created CISA, the Department of Homeland Security’s cyber arm, to defend against digital attacks. Four years later the Foreign and Malign Influence Center was established within the ODNI to track foreign government efforts to sway US elections.
Bret Schafer, a senior fellow at the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a Washington-based organization that analyzes foreign disinformation, said he’s pleased that in its first election, the center doesn’t seem to have been “hobbled by some of the partisanship that we’ve seen cripple other parts of the government that tried to do this work.”
Still, there have been obstacles and controversies. Shortly after Joe Biden won the 2020 election, Trump fired the head of CISA, Christopher Krebs, for refuting his unsubstantiated claim of electoral fraud.
Also during the 2020 elections, The New York Post reported that it had obtained a hard drive from a laptop dropped off by Hunter Biden at a Delaware computer repair shop. Public confusion followed, as did claims by former intelligence officials that the emergence of the laptop bore the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign. Trump’s national intelligence director, John Ratcliffe, soon after rebutted that assessment with a statement saying there were no signs of Russian involvement.
In 2022, the work of a new office called the Disinformation Governance Board was quickly suspended after Republicans raised questions about its relationship with social media companies and concerns that it could be used to monitor or censor Americans’ online discourse.
Legal challenges over government restrictions on free speech have also complicated the government’s ability to exchange information with social media companies, though Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco said in a recent address that the government has resumed sharing details with the private sector.
Earlier this year, Warner said he worried the US was more vulnerable than in 2020, in part because of diminished communication between government and tech companies. He said he’s satisfied by the government’s recent work, citing a greater number of public briefingsand warnings, but is concerned that the greatest test is likely still ahead.
“The bad guys are not going to do most of this until October,” Warner said. “So we have to be vigilant.”

 


Daesh supporters turn to AI to bolster online support

Daesh supporters turn to AI to bolster online support
Updated 28 August 2024
Follow

Daesh supporters turn to AI to bolster online support

Daesh supporters turn to AI to bolster online support
  • A January study by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point said AI could be used to generate and distribute propaganda, to recruit using AI-powered chatbots, to carry out attacks using drones or other autonomous vehicles, and to launch cyber-attacks

BEIRUT: Days after a deadly Daesh attack on a Russian concert hall in March, a man clad in military fatigues and a helmet appeared in an online video, celebrating the assault in which more than 140 people were killed.
“The Daesh delivered a strong blow to Russia with a bloody attack, the fiercest that hit it in years,” the man said in Arabic, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, an organization that tracks and analyzes such online content.
But the man in the video, which the Thomson Reuters Foundation was not able to view independently, was not real — he was created using artificial intelligence, according to SITE and other online researchers.
Federico Borgonovo, a researcher at the Royal United Services Institute, a London-based think tank, traced the AI-generated video to an Daesh supporter active in the group’s digital ecosystem.
This person had combined statements, bulletins, and data from Daesh’s official news outlet to create the video using AI, Borgonovo explained.
Although Daesh has been using AI for some time, Borgonovo said the video was an “exception to the rules” because the production quality was high even if the content was not as violent as in other online posts.
“It’s quite good for an AI product. But in terms of violence and the propaganda itself, it’s average,” he said, noting however that the video showed how Daesh supporters and affiliates can ramp up production of sympathetic content online.
Digital experts say groups like Daesh and far-right movements are increasingly using AI online and testing the limits of safety controls on social media platforms.
A January study by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point said AI could be used to generate and distribute propaganda, to recruit using AI-powered chatbots, to carry out attacks using drones or other autonomous vehicles, and to launch cyber-attacks.
“Many assessments of AI risk, and even of generative AI risks specifically, only consider this particular problem in a cursory way,” said Stephane Baele, professor of international relations at UCLouvain in Belgium.
“Major AI firms, who genuinely engaged with the risks of their tools by publishing sometimes lengthy reports mapping them, pay scant attention to extremist and terrorist uses.”
Regulation governing AI is still being crafted around the world and pioneers of the technology have said they will strive to ensure it is safe and secure.
Tech giant Microsoft, for example, has developed a Responsible AI Standard that aims to base AI development on six principles including fairness, reliability and safety, privacy and security, inclusiveness, transparency, and accountability.
In a special report earlier this year, SITE Intelligence Group’s founder and executive director Rita Katz wrote that a range of actors from members of militant group Al-Qaeda to neo-Nazi networks were capitalizing on the technology.
“It’s hard to understate what a gift AI is for terrorists and extremist communities, for which media is lifeblood,” she wrote.

CHATBOTS AND CARTOONS
At the height of its powers in 2014, Daesh claimed control over large parts of Syria and Iraq, imposing a reign of terror in the areas it controlled.
Media was a prominent tool in the group’s arsenal, and online recruitment has long been vital to its operations.
Despite the collapse of its self-declared caliphate in 2017, its supporters and affiliates still preach their doctrine online and try to persuade people to join their ranks.
Last month, a security source told Reuters that France had identified a dozen Daesh-K handlers, based in countries around Afghanistan, who have a strong online presence and are trying to convince young men in European countries, who are interested in joining up with the group overseas, to instead carry out domestic attacks.
Daesh-K is a resurgent wing of Daesh, named after the historical region of Khorasan that included parts of Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia.
Analysts fear that AI may facilitate and automate the work of such online recruiters.
Daniel Siegel, an investigator at social media research firm Graphika, said he came across chatbots that mimicked dead or incarcerated Daesh militants in earlier research he conducted before joining the firm.
He told the Thomson Reuters Foundation that it was unclear if the source of the bots was the Daesh or its supporters, but the risk they posed was still real.
“Now (Daesh affiliates) can build these real relationships with bots that represent a potential future where a chatbot could encourage them to engage in kinetic violence,” Siegel said.
Siegel interacted with some of the bots as part of his research and he found their answers to be generic, but he said that could change as AI tech develops.
“One of the things I am worried about as well is how synthetic media will enable these groups to blend their content that previously existed in silos into our mainstream culture,” he added.
That is already happening: Siegel had tracked videos of popular cartoon characters, like Rick and Morty and Peter Griffin, singing Daesh anthems on different platforms.
“What this allows the group or sympathizers or affiliates to do is target specific audiences because they know that the regular consumers of Sponge Bob or Peter Griffin or Rick and Morty, will be fed that content through the algorithm,” Siegel said.

EXPLOITING PROMPTS
Then there is the danger of Daesh supporters using AI tech to broaden their knowledge of illegal activities.
For its January study, researchers at the Combating Terrorism Center at Westpoint attempted to bypass the security guards of Large Language Models (LLMs) and extract information that could be exploited by malicious actors.
They crafted prompts that requested information on a range of activities from attack planning to recruitment and tactical learning, and the LLMs generated responses that were relevant half of the time.
In one example that they described as “alarming,” researchers asked an LLM to help them convince people to donate to Daesh.
“There, the model yielded very specific guidelines on how to conduct a fundraising campaign and even offered specific narratives and phrases to be used on social media,” the report said.
Joe Burton a professor of international security at Lancaster University, said companies were acting irresponsibly by rapidly releasing AI models as open-source tools.
He questioned the efficacy of LLMs’ safety protocols, adding that he was “not convinced” that regulators were equipped to enforce the testing and verification of these methods.
“The factor to consider here is how much we want to regulate, and whether that will stifle innovation,” Burton said.
“The markets, in my view, shouldn’t override safety and security, and I think — at the moment — that is what is happening.”