Saturday, September 14, 2024

 

The ‘feral 25-year-olds’ making 

Kamala Harris go viral on TikTok

- - -

After Tuesday night’s debate, as former president Donald Trump worked the reporters in the spin room in Philadelphia, Vice President Kamala Harris’s TikTok team was busy appealing to a different crowd.

In the digital “war room” at campaign headquarters in Wilmington, Del., they hit the button on their pièce de résistance shortly after midnight: A six-second video that mocked Trump’s performance by showing his lectern inhabited by a laughably dramatic “Dance Moms” star. “I thought I was ready to be back. I thought I was stronger than this but obviously I’m not,” she lamented. “I wanna go home.”

Viewed more than 7 million times, the video was produced by a small TikTok team - all 25 and under, some working their first jobs - given unfettered freedom to chase whatever they think will go viral. Over the past eight weeks, Harris’s social media team has helped supercharge her campaign, harnessing the rhythms and absurdities of internet culture to create one of the most inventive and irreverent get-out-the-vote strategies in modern politics.

They have trolled Trump inside his own social network, Truth Social. They have made viral memes out of bags of Doritos and camouflage hats. In 2016, a single Hillary Clinton tweet might have required 12 staffers and 10 drafts; today, many of Harris’s TikTok videos are conceived, created and posted in about half an hour.

“This campaign empowers young people to speak to young people,” said Parker Butler, the 24-year-old director of Harris’s digital rapid response content, a team that watches all of Trump’s speeches and can blast a clip onto social media at a moment’s notice. “And we’re here to put in the work.”

Trump also has leaped forcefully into social media, seeing it as critical to grabbing voters’ attention in an age of mass distraction. But while Trump has posted attacks on Harris’ intelligence, warnings of economic “disaster” and grim polemics about how America’s “FUTURE IS AT STAKE” - “We’re a nation in decline,” he says in one video, holding handcuffs aloft. “Nobody is safe. Absolutely nobody” - the Harris team has adopted a more playful approach, chasing virality with snarky, upbeat and oddball content delivered at internet speed.

Trump’s team has occasionally worked to mimic Harris’s online energy, but with darker memes. This week, Trump’s Truth Social account posted AI-generated images showing him saving cats from a crowd of dark-skinned men - a reference to the false claims that Haitian immigrants in Ohio are eating pets, which Trump repeated on the debate stage. In other images, cats hold up signs reading “Don’t Let Them Eat Us. Vote for Trump!” and “Kamala Hates Me.”

Harris’s “digital rapid response” team, as it’s called, is active on every major social platform, posting family photos on Facebook, hours-long speeches on YouTube and Spanish-language calls to action on WhatsApp. On debate night, they hosted live-streamed watch parties on Twitch, walloped Trump’s untruths on Threads and X, and hyped Harris’s most fiery lines on Instagram and TikTok. Minutes after she claimed Trump rallygoers leave “his rallies early out of exhaustion and boredom,” her team posted the clip with the caption, “Holy s--- 🔥🔥🔥 She just cooked him,” following up with a photo of Harris in a kitchen, smiling.

“They really run it like a fan account,” said Rachel Karten, a social media consultant who writes Link in Bio, a newsletter about online culture. “It’s not like it’s coming from a campaign. It’s like: We talk like you. Even the caption is like: ‘You have to watch this.’”

The online rollout has helped Harris circumvent the tough questions and uncertainties of the traditional political press, allowing her to reach millions of voters who turn to social media as a news source. By the time Harris sat for her first big TV interview as the Democratic nominee, she had already appeared in dozens of social media videos, giving direct-to-camera monologues about Roe v. Wade, chatting on the phone with the Obamas and talking with her running mate Tim Walz about “White guy tacos” and the guitar skills of Prince.

The approach seems to be paying off. The Harris campaign has gotten 100 million more views than Trump on TikTok, despite having half as many followers, according to an analysis of data from Zelf, an online measurement firm.

It’s also gotten under Trump’s skin. He posted a Truth Social video this month saying his campaign had “the greatest social media program in history” and that any claims of Harris’s online success were “misinformation”: “She’s not even a small fraction of what we do. But that’s the way they do it, they lie.” He has also, without evidence, accused her team of paying for fake followers. The Harris campaign responded, “Rent free” - as in, how they’re living, inside his head.

Campaign officials say the digital operation has seen success beyond social media. To some supporters, it’s a big reason the 59-year-old politician is generating interest among young voters.

“That’s kind of like what charisma is today: Can you land well on the internet?” Colton Wickland, 27, said at a rally in Milwaukee last month.

- - -

‘Create the news’

Though only a small fraction of her campaign’s 250-person digital operation, Harris’s social media team is by far its most visible part, running all her accounts and watching for trend-worthy moments they can spotlight in real time.

Deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty, who has described them as a pack of “feral 25-year-olds,” said the campaign started developing the strategy last year, worried voters had forgotten who Trump was and that the campaign needed “a voice that was more aggressive and hard-hitting” to remind them.

The team faces minimal content-approval checks and “barring objection, we’re gonna go. Everything goes on a five-minute warning,” Flaherty said. “You just gotta trust your people. Our f---up ratio [is as low] as if there were 19 layers of approval.”

A 13-person rapid-response team keeps a shared calendar of all major political events for both Republicans and Democrats and monitors them in shifts to ensure “we are never not watching,” said Butler, the team’s manager. When an eye-catching moment happens - like when Trump said immigrants had “poisoned” the country - the team races to post a clip of it on social media, working shifts that sometimes go past midnight.

“Campaigns are not just responding anymore,” Butler said. “Our job is to create the news.”

Each of the team’s social media “strategists” specializes in an individual platform, catering to its audience, subculture and slang. One strategist, for instance, is solely responsible for Facebook, where Butler said content for baby boomers thrives.

Lauren Kapp, 25, heads the five-person TikTok team. Every day, she wakes around 6:30 a.m. and starts scrolling the video app so she can be ready for their daily 9 a.m. meeting, when the team breaks down what’s trending that day.

A few years ago, Butler and Kapp were both fresh graduates of what Kapp called “the covid class.” Butler, a high school debate champ in Texas during Trump’s presidency, graduated from American University in 2020 and landed work as a video editor for Biden’s campaign. Kapp, who struggled to find a job as a political correspondent after leaving University of California, Berkeley, was hired by the Democratic National Committee as a “vertical video producer” after building a midsize TikTok following under the username “Poli Sci Princess.”

Earlier this year, both shifted from the Democrats’ online operation to the Biden-Harris team, where their job is not to mimic the cinematic editing and high production values of traditional campaign ads but instead to behave like typical TikTok users: reposting other people’s videos, sharing memes and sound bites, and reacting to major news moments, such as the particularly spicy dig Walz took at Vance during a speech in Philadelphia (“omg Tim Walz WENT THERE”).

They’ve “stitched” Trump into clips that tee him up as a punchline and split-screen his comments on abortion alongside the mobile game “Subway Surfers” - a common TikTok tactic for keeping overstimulated viewers’ attention. One post ranked photos of Walz by “aura points,” TikTok slang for a measure of coolness. (Enjoying a state-fair ride with his daughter, Hope, was “+23958 aura.”)

The team records and edits the videos on their phones before sending them over Slack to Butler, who typically reviews and signs off in less than 15 minutes. It can look freewheeling, but the team treats its content strategy like a science. Kapp said she won’t use any TikTok “trending sound” - the short audio clips that users can apply to their own videos - if it’s been used in more than 200,000 videos. “People get bored very easily,” she said.

After the Democratic convention, Kapp had just gotten home from Chicago and was trying to think of ways to emphasize Trump’s links to the conservative policy doctrine Project 2025 when she opted for a wild juxtaposition: a niche TikTok meme of dolphins and rainbows. The single-image post is now one of their most popular pieces of content, with more than 7 million views. Trump’s campaign copied it a few days later.

“You wouldn’t anticipate a political campaign to do it, which is what contributed to the virality of it,” she said.

TikTok is one of the world’s most popular social apps, with 170 million U.S. accounts, and roughly 40 percent of its American users said they use it to keep up with politics or current events, a Pew Research Center survey found last month; Trump’s campaign employs a TikTok team of its own.

For Harris, there’s an awkward hurdle, however: The Biden administration is currently defending in court a potential nationwide ban of TikTok, arguing the Chinese-owned app is a national security threat. Harris’s team uses TikTok on phones with nothing else installed to abide by a federal prohibition of the app on government-owned devices.

The campaign’s online engagement has skyrocketed during the Harris era. On TikTok, their “like-to-view” ratio, a measure of viewer engagement, went from about 10 percent during the Biden months to 25 percent, Kapp said.

And though campaigns dating back to former president Barack Obama have taken social media seriously, the Harris team’s big innovation has been letting a new wave of Generation Z innovators take control, said April Eichmeier, an assistant professor who studies political communication at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota.

“The under-25 group right now has never known a world without digital media,” she said. “They know how things land on TikTok because that’s their culture.”

The team’s seemingly frenetic and amateurish output conceals a sophisticated strategy, said Lara Cohen, a former executive at X who led some of its top partnerships with media operations and influencers. Each viral video helps them sneak into nonpolitical spaces and reach voters who are undecided or otherwise tuned-out.

“Great ideas die with too long an approval process,” said Cohen, now an executive at the creator-service company Linktree. “Someone’s going to be too worried to do something edgy. And they’re clearly not afraid of that.”

- - -

‘Oh he’s mad lol’

As the campaign’s social media experimentation has exploded, the lines between its online and offline presence have blurred. TikTok-style monologues have appeared in TV ads. Candidate selfies in field offices have appeared, from multiple angles, on Instagram. The campaign’s $40 camouflage “Harris Walz” hat has shown up not just in TikTok videos but on the head of Harris’s stepdaughter Ella Emhoff.

Harris and Walz, too, have tried their best to be omnipresent. During the convention, Harris played a name-that-song quiz with a social media show and told another creator that her favorite Chicago food was an Italian beef sandwich. Walz recently appeared on the short-video show “Subway Takes,” in which comedians offer their most controversial or raunchy opinions; Walz extolled the value of home-gutter management.

The goal, campaign staffers said, has been to humanize the candidates in a bitterly contentious race. After a Harris fundraising email said she’d coped with Trump’s 2016 election victory by scarfing down “a family-sized bag of nacho Doritos,” leading one Fox News guest to complain it was not “the response of an elite leader,” Walz’s X account posted a video showing him grabbing her a bag between campaign stops. “Every attack on her only seems to make her more relatable,” one viral Threads post said.

Rather than characterize Trump as a generational threat, Harris’s operation has often worked to cast him as an “unhinged and unserious man” and the butt of a big joke. Last month, when Trump suggested he might back out of this week’s debate, the team layered his video clips with the sound of a chicken. And where previous campaigns were reluctant to amplify Trump’s attacks, the Harris campaign has repeated them verbatim to mock or defang them alongside quips like “Oh he’s mad lol.”

Harris’s team has gone on the offensive inside Trump’s Truth Social, using their 350,000-follower account to needle Trump about his crowd size. Beyond just laughs, one campaign aide said a goal of the account is to rattle and enrage Trump inside his online safe space. After the debate, Harris’s team posted Fox News clips calling Trump’s performance a “train wreck.”

Trump’s campaign has derided Harris’s strategy as juvenile, with a spokesman saying anyone who thinks “using emojis is some cutting-edge message technique … [is] severely out of touch with reality.”

On TikTok, however, Harris’s team has proved so popular that people claiming to secretly run the account has become a meme in itself. To show it’s in on the joke, the campaign posted a video featuring Harris’s husband, Doug Emhoff, who - when asked who runs the account - dryly replies: “It’s obviously me.”

The real test will come in November, when the election shows whether sway on social media can produce real-world power. With less than two months until Election Day, Harris’s TikTok has shown a pivot toward more substantive fare, including a multipart series laying out Trump affiliates’ links to Project 2025.

They’ve also worked to capitalize on a new sense of hope among Democrats. One video, built on a trending clip of poignant music typically used for scenic vistas and sunsets, features a voice-over - “Oh, I wasn’t sad, I just needed a …” - then cuts to a buoyant DNC crowd cheering near an American flag.

“They’ve basically created this digital [fandom] of her,” Cohen said. “It sounds corny, but the most successful people online are the ones who feel unfiltered and authentic and real. That’s what people rally around.”

- - -

Dylan Wells contributed to this report.

400% increase in voter registration after Taylor Swift endorses Kamala Harris #shorts  

 Can Taylor Swift win the US election for Kamala Harris? | BBC Americast

   

 Taylor Swift has endorsed Kamala Harris - but what difference is it likely to make, in terms of persuading the undecideds, and getting new voters registered? BBC Americast also looks back at the history behind celebrity endorsements from Frank Sinatra’s backing of JFK to Bruce Springsteen and Ronald Reagan, what motivates a star to back a politician? When does an endorsement backfire? Justin Webb, Sarah Smith and Marianna Spring speak to Tyler Foggatt, a senior editor at The New Yorker magazine. Subscribe here: http://bit.ly/1rbfUog For more news, analysis and features visit: www.bbc.com/news #TaylorSwift #KamalaHarris #BBCAmericast

 

Russia’s RT Network Working Directly With Kremlin To Spread Disinformation, US Says

Screenshot of RT website


By 

(RFE/RL) — The United States on September 13 said the Russian news outlet RT is taking orders directly from the Kremlin and working with Russian military intelligence to spread disinformation around the world to undermine democracies.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the United States has gathered new evidence that exposes cooperation between RT and four other subsidiaries of the Rossia Segodnya media group, and it intends to warn other countries of the threat of the disinformation.

In addition to RT, Rossia Segodnya operates RIA Novosti, TV-Novosti, Ruptly, and Sputnik, but the announcement on September 13 focused largely on RT. The outlet, formerly known as Russia Today, has previously been sanctioned for its work to allegedly spread Kremlin propaganda and disinformation.

It was the focus of an announcement last week by the U.S. Justice Department, which warned Americans about Russia’s attempts to influence the 2024 presidential election. The State Department and Treasury Department also issued warnings last week about Rossia Segodnya and its subsidiaries and announced sanctions, but Blinken and other officials who briefed reporters at the State Department on September 13 said they wanted to stress the global nature of their warnings.

“The actions we are exposing today and the actions we exposed last week do not incorporate the full scope of Russia’s effort to undermine democracies — far from it,” Blinken said. “Russian disinformation to subvert and polarize freedom-loving societies extends to every part of the world.”

He said the State Department will launch a diplomatic campaign to share the evidence that the United States has uncovered on RT’s expanded capabilities and urge other countries to act.

Britain and Canada will join the United States in launching the campaign to rally allies and partners around the world to address “the threat posed by RT and other machinery of Russian disinformation and covert influence,” he said.

Each government will decide on its own how to respond, but Washington will urge every ally and partner “to start by treating RT’s activities as they do other intelligence activities by Russia within their borders,” Blinken said.

n addition to the diplomatic campaign, the United States announced new sanctions on three entities and two individuals for operating Russia’s covert global influence operations, Blinken said.

Blinken warned in particular about Russia’s attempts to influence the upcoming presidential election in Moldova.

He said RT and its employees for years have coordinated directly with the Kremlin to support Russian government efforts to influence previous elections, and its efforts this year likely will be aimed at causing protests to turn violent, he said.

“We believe RT will almost certainly leverage its expanded capabilities to coordinate with Russian intelligence services to try to manipulate the outcome of Moldova’s upcoming election,” he said.

Blinken also described what he said is a large online crowd-funding program in Russia to provide support and military equipment to Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine. The operation aims to fund such things as sniper rifles, night-vision equipment, drones, radio equipment, and diesel generators.

“The program is out in the open, but what is hidden is that the program is administered by the leaders of RT,” he said.



RFE RL

RFE/RL journalists report the news in 21 countries where a free press is banned by the government or not fully established.

FREEDOM (PRIVATE PROPERTY) VS DEMOCRACY

stairs file illusion photo

Smashing The Western Illusion Of Democracy – OpEd


By 

By Finn Andreen

In these politically turbulent times, the “illusion of democracy is fading worldwide” as one pundit wrote recently. There is a growing sense in the West that “democracy” is not working well, but there is not yet a full and clear recognition of that fact. Michel Maffesoli, honorary professor at the Sorbonne in Paris, has been saying already for several years, that “the end of the democratic ideal is manifesting itself.” Signs of this can be seen in the problematic elections that have taken place in his native France and other Western countries. 

The “ideal” or “illusion” of democracy comes from widespread misconceptions about this political system, despite clear misgivings from the most illustrious political thinkers of the past. The most important misconceptions about democracy are that elected representatives are generally loyal and disinterested, and that the electorate is generally informed and rational with regard to politics.

David Hume wrote in his famous Essays (1777) that democracy cannot be “representative” because all societies are “governed by the few.” Sociologist Robert Michels then defined, in his ground-breaking work on political parties (1911), what he called the “iron law of oligarchy,” methodically showing that all mature organizations, without exception, become oligarchic (i.e., ruled by minorities). 

For the early democratic movements of the 19th century, representative democracy was generally not perceived as truly democratic; the Athenian model was the ideal. As Robert Michels noted, it was only when the practical impossibilities of direct democracy on a large scale became evident, that the concept of political representation gained legitimacy. Over time, this concept became synonymous with “democracy.”

Montesquieu considered in The Spirit of the Laws (1739) that the main justification for the representative system is not only that the average person does not have the time or the interest to engage in political life, but that he is incompetent to do so. Tocqueville warned in Democracy in America (1835) that one of the potential threats to democracy is that people can become so absorbed by the pursuit of economic opportunities that they lose interest in politics. 

Indeed, the majority has neither the interest nor the motivation to get deeply involved in politics. Voters implicitly understand that their vote is just a small drop in an ocean of ballots and will, by itself, make no difference in the election outcome. It has also been argued by some that not only do voters lack the interest and motivation, they also lack the time and the capability of thinking rationally about politics, as political theorist James Burnham summarized in his essential work, The Machiavellians(1943):

The inability of the masses to function scientifically in politics rests primarily on the following factors: the huge size of the mass group, which makes it too unwieldy for the use of scientific techniques; the ignorance, on the part of the masses, of the methods of administration and rule; the necessity, for the masses, of spending most of their energies on the bare making of a living, which leaves little energy or time for gaining more knowledge about politics or carrying out practical political tasks; the lack, in most people, of a sufficient degree of those psychological qualities—ambition, ruthlessness, and so on—that are prerequisites for active political life.

Though these insights about political representation have long been known, they have been suppressed in order to maintain the illusion of majority rule. “Democracy” has such a positive connotation in the Western value system that it is understandably difficult for most people to accept that they do not “rule” in any meaningful sense. This reality is all the more difficult to grasp since some policies from the ruling minority do, and even must, consider majority public opinion to some extent. If pressed, most people would nevertheless admit that though they have elected “representatives,” they actually have no real say over several areas (e.g., foreign, monetary, and trade policy), even though these areas impact their lives greatly. 

The Inherent Instability of All Political Systems

Though the illusion of democracy is slowly fading in the West, it is not so much because of a realization of the truths presented above. Rather, it is because representative democracy, like all political systems, is inherently unstable. It has long been known that conditions constantly change, to paraphrase Heraclitus, but it is not widely understood that political systems are ill-suited for this basic reality. Though democracy might sometimes seem to work well, the never-ending economic, social, demographic, and technical changes to society make such impressions short-lived. 

Regardless of the political system, the power balance at any given time between state and society, and between the ruling minority and the ruled majority, is constantly disrupted by such changing conditions. The seemingly inexorable increase in state interventionism has a negative impact on wealth-creation and private property, forcing socialization, and leading to a rise in political tensions. When the state becomes more bureaucratic, it fails to keep up with a changing society, and thereby destabilizes the power balance. Further, political tensions also arise if the ruling minority pushes a political agenda that disregards or even antagonizes the majority. 

Democracy, in particular, is subject to constant swings of political tensions due to its inherent lack of fairness: the losing side of an election (more than half in plurality systems) is not represented. As Gustave de Molinari wrote, democracy “insist[s] that the decisions of the majority must become law, and that the minority is obliged to submit to it, even if it is contrary to its most deeply rooted convictions and injures its most precious interests.” Voting phenomena like Duverger’s Law and Arrow’s paradoxtend to soften Molinari’s stark description but, by distorting election results, they hardly make them more representative or more fair.

When the state’s size and power is limited (i.e., statist interventionism in society is weak), the state’s record as defender of property rights would naturally be considered more important than whether or not the majority is democratically represented. Conversely, when the state’s power is extensive (i.e., the state is strongly interventionist), whether at a national or supranational level, the majority surely has high expectations from democracy since the direction of society hangs, grotesquely, on the decisions of its executive and legislative branches. 

A Necessary Reduction of State Power

It is possible then to conclude that a limitation of state power is necessary in order to reduce political tensions in society and to introduce much-needed stability, regardless of whether or not the political system is considered “democratic.” This requires a decentralization of decision-making and a reduction of the role of the state, by strengthening the free market and individual rights. The result would be a freer society, able to adapt more naturally and harmoniously to the changing conditions. Thus, what is needed is “more freedom” rather than “more democracy.”

Unfortunately, the illusion of democracy has led the majorities in the West to conflate democracy with freedom. This is a significant mistake because democracy is no guarantee for freedom, even if majority rule were possible. On the contrary, when concessions to the majority have been made, such as welfare spending through fiscal redistribution, these have had deleterious effects on society and reduced economic freedom. As Tocqueville said, “I dearly love liberty and respect for rights, but not democracy.”

Considering the misconceptions about political representation that have been presented here, it is high time to fully smash the illusion of democracy in the West and substitute freedom for democracy as the highest political goal to attain and to protect.





MISES

The Mises Institute, founded in 1982, teaches the scholarship of Austrian economics, freedom, and peace. The liberal intellectual tradition of Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) and Murray N. Rothbard (1926-1995) guides us. Accordingly, the Mises Institute seeks a profound and radical shift in the intellectual climate: away from statism and toward a private property order. The Mises Institute encourages critical historical research, and stands against political correctness.

 

Malaysia: Al-Arqam, The Sect Implicated In A Child Abuse Scandal – Analysis


The sealed-off gate outside a welfare home – one of 20 homes raided by police and from where children were rescued – is seen in Kajang, Malaysia, Sept. 12, 2024. Photo Credit: S. Mahfuz/BenarNews

By 

By Iman Muttaqin Yusof and Ili Shazwani Ihsan

Al-Arqam, a banned Islamic sect in Malaysia, is in the spotlight again after 402 children – including some as young as 1 – were rescued from welfare homes during police raids on Sept. 11. Many of these minors are believed to have been trafficked as well as physically and sexually abused, authorities said.

At least 159 people have been arrested in connection with the case. The 20 homes where the raids occurred were linked to Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings (GISBH), a company founded by al-Arqam members.

Malaysia banned the sect 30 years ago over allegations that it promoted a deviant form of Islam, the faith practiced by the Malay Muslim majority. 

But what exactly is al-Arqam, and why does its shadow linger despite its ban decades ago?

What is al-Arqam?

Al-Arqam was founded in 1968 by Ashaari Muhammad as a spiritual movement focusing on self-sufficiency, discipline, and an Islamic utopia. By the 1980s, it had gained tens of thousands of followers not only in Malaysia but in neighboring Indonesia, Thailand, and Brunei. The sect was banned in 1994. 

At its peak, al-Arqam operated a range of businesses, from agriculture to publishing and even restaurants, amassing wealth reportedly worth millions of U.S. dollars. 

“We had our own food products, owned schools and ran a few businesses,” Shamsul Mohd Noor, a former al-Arqam member, told BenarNews. “It started as a religious outreach movement, initially focused on addressing issues of Islamic theology. 

“It was more centered on education and personal development. Its strength lay in promoting fardhu kifayah – collective responsibilities – within the Muslim community,” said Shamsul, who joined the group in the 1980s. 

Who was al-Arqam’s founder?

The late Ashaari Muhammad was a charismatic leader who envisioned creating a self-sufficient Islamic community. In his sermons, he promoted the idea of returning to a “purer” form of Islam. 

Ashaari – known among his followers as “Abuya” or “father” – had four wives and reportedly as many as 40 children, before he died of a lung infection in 2010. 

Why was al-Arqam banned?

The Malaysian government officially banned al-Arqam in 1994 due to what was seen as its deviant religious teachings, messianic claims by sect leader Ashaar, and its perceived threat to national unity. 

Ashaari was once arrested under the  nation’s Internal Security Act.

“Ashaari’s teachings were considered wrong because they contradicted fundamental Islamic principles,” Shukri Ahmad, dean of the School of Language, Civilization and Philosophy at Universiti Utara Malaysia, told BenarNews. 

“For example, claiming to communicate with the Prophet [Muhammad] is a common trait among deviant movements. When a leader is seen as infallible, and everything they do is considered correct, something is clearly wrong.”

What is the link between Global Ikhwan and al-Arqam?

Despite the ban, al-Arqam’s influence persisted through new organizations, the most prominent being GISBH, the company connected by police to the welfare homes targeted in this week’s raids. 

Founded by people loyal to Ashaari Muhammad’s teachings, including one of his wives, GISBH continued promoting self-reliance and economic independence, much like al-Arqam did. The company now operates businesses across 20 countries in sectors such as agriculture, retail, and education.

The raids of the welfare homes have raised concerns about the company’s ties to al-Arqam’s ideology after authorities recovered writings by Ashaari during the operations. Allegations of child abuse and poor conditions in the shelters had prompted an investigation, with 49 reports linked to GISBH between 2011 and 2024, some from former members.

GISBH has denied any connection to the shelters and the accusations of child abuse, saying the claims were an attempt to tarnish its reputation. 

Now what? 

Police will take DNA samples from the 402 rescued children, whom authorities say are not orphans as previously claimed, but the children of Global Ikhwan members placed in welfare homes for indoctrination.

Authorities are investigating allegations of indoctrination, and a 19-year-old preschool employee linked to GISBH has been charged with four counts of child abuse and neglect.

Malaysia’s religious authorities, including the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS), continue to monitor GISBH closely. JAIS reaffirmed the 1994 fatwa that branded al-Arqam and its affiliated groups as deviant.



BenarNews

BenarNews’ mission is to provide readers with accurate news and information that reflects the complex and ever-changing world around them. With homepages in Bengali, Thai, Bahasa Malaysia, Bahasa Indonesia and English, BenarNews brings timely news to its diverse audience. Copyright BenarNews. Used with the permission of BenarNews
CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

US pharmacy chain Walgreens agrees to pay $106M to settle charges

Justice Department alleges Walgreens submitted false claims to Medicare, Medicaid, other federal health care programs between 2009 - 2020


Övünç Kutlu |14.09.2024 - TRT/AA

Walgreens


ISTANBUL

American pharmacy store chain Walgreens agreed to pay $106.8 million to resolve allegations it billed the US government for prescriptions never dispensed, the Justice Department said Friday.

The US government alleged that Walgreens submitted false claims for payment to Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health care programs between 2009 and 2020 for prescriptions it processed but that were never picked up by beneficiaries.

It argued that Walgreens instead restocked and resold the prescriptions to someone else without reversing the claim submitted to the government, collecting payment twice on the prescriptions.

It claimed the company, as a result, received millions of dollars for prescriptions it never provided to health care beneficiaries.

"Millions of Americans rely on the promise of federal healthcare through programs like Medicare and Medicaid," US Attorney Alexander Uballez for the District of New Mexico said in a statement. "Fraudulently billing for prescriptions which are never dispensed endangers the integrity of these critical programs. We are committed to guarding the public’s investment in our health from private corporations."
The Grenfell report: who was at fault?

The inquiry into Britain's worst residential fire since the Blitz has taken seven years, and uncovered an extraordinary range of failings



Menana Jabari (left), who lost her daughter and grandchildren in the Grenfell Tower fire, looks at a wall displaying pictures of the 72 people killed in the blaze, at a press conference at the Royal Lancaster Hotel in London following the publication of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry
(Image credit: Justin Tallis / AFP / Getty Images)


By The Week UK
published 29 minutes ago


"The simple truth," said the Grenfell inquiry chair, retired judge Martin Moore-Bick, is that the deaths of 54 adults and 18 children in Grenfell Tower in west London "were all avoidable, and those who lived in the tower were badly failed over a number of years, and in a number of different ways, by those who were responsible for ensuring the safety of the building and its occupants."


How did the fire start?


At 00.54 on 14 June 2017, Behailu Kebede called the London Fire Brigade, because a fire had broken out in his kitchen in Flat 16, on the fourth floor of the tower – caused by a malfunctioning fridge-freezer. The first fire engine was on the scene by 00.59; a "relatively modest" kitchen fire had been put out by 01.21. But by then the fire had broken out of the kitchen window, where it spread shockingly fast: by 01.27 it had reached the roof of the 24-storey building. By around 04.00, it had reached all sides of the tower.

Why did the fire spread so fast?

The "principal" reason is that, during renovations in 2015-2016, Grenfell's fireproof concrete shell was clad in combustible aluminium composite material (ACM): Reynobond 55 PE, made by Arconic out of two thin sheets of aluminium with a flammable polyethyelene core. Particularly when used not as flat panels but folded into "cassette form" so it could be hung from rails, the polyethyelene core "burns fiercely".

Playing a smaller but still crucial part was combustible insulation – installed between the cladding and the concrete wall. The insulation mostly used was RS5000, a polyisocyanurate foam made by Celotex (which releases toxic gas when it burns), with some made by Kingspan. Because of all this, "compartmentation" – the principle that fires should not be able to spread from flat to flat – failed catastrophically.

Why were combustible materials used on a tower block?


Initially, the architects, Studio E, wanted to use non-combustible zinc panels, but they chose ACM under pressure over costs from the Tenant Management Organisation, part of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC), which owned Grenfell; it saved £293,368 on a £9.2m refurbishment. As to why it was possible to use dangerous cladding at all, the inquiry found that "one very significant reason" was "systematic dishonesty on the part of those who made and sold the rainscreen cladding panels and insulation products": Arconic, Celotex and Kingspan "engaged in deliberate and sustained strategies to manipulate the testing processes, misrepresent test data and mislead the market".


Why wasn't this stopped?


The regulators weren't good enough. The Arconic and Kingspan products were certified by the BBA, a privatised certification body. The BBA was found both "incompetent" and willing to accommodate clients instead of insisting on rigorous standards. Other building-product regulators and government bodies were similarly incompetent.


It was an extraordinary chain of regulatory failure, running all the way to Whitehall. The building control section of RBKC, the council, "did not properly scrutinise the design or choice of materials", and waved through cladding that did not comply with building regulations on fire safety. The council's Tenant Management Organisation, which ran the building, never completed an approved fire-safety strategy. Key fire-protection measures, such as working fire doors, were lacking.

How did central government fail?


On numerous occasions before the fire, the then Department for Communities and Local Government was given clear warnings about the dangers of ACM cladding and other combustible materials being used in high-rise blocks: there had been a series of cladding fires, dating back to 1991, notably one that killed six at Lakanal House in London in 2009, which led to a public warning from the coroner. The department failed to act; failures reached back decades, but under David Cameron's coalition it was understaffed, and ministers' "deregulatory agenda" meant that "even matters affecting the safety of life were ignored, delayed or disregarded". One relatively junior civil servant, Brian Martin, was given overall responsibility for fire-safety measures, with little supervision. "I ended up being the single point of failure in the department," he tearfully told the inquiry.

What about the architects and the builders?


The inquiry found that the architect Studio E, which led the renovations, bore a "very significant responsibility" for the disaster. It was "cavalier" and in many respects did not "meet the standards of a reasonably competent architect". The two main contractors, Rydon and Harley Facades, were also culpable. "Everyone involved in the choice of the materials to be used in the external wall thought that responsibility for their suitability and safety lay with someone else." Studio E instructed a consultant, Exova, to prepare a fire-safety strategy for the refurbished building. It was never finished, and Studio E failed to ensure that it was completed.

And the fire brigade?


On 14 June, firefighters of the London Fire Brigade "displayed extraordinary courage and selfless devotion to duty", the inquiry found, but they were "faced with a situation for which they had not been properly prepared". It issued a "stay put" order, on the basis that compartmentation of the fire would work: residents were told to stay in their flats. This wasn't reversed until 02.47, about an hour after it should have been. There was also no coherent evacuation strategy.


In addition, on the night, firefighters' radio systems failed and the control room was overwhelmed. Behind all this were "serious" and "systematic" failings on the part of management. The Lakanal House fire had already exposed shortcomings in the service's ability to fight fires in high-rises; it was aware of the potential dangers of cladding fires; but it failed to prepare.
NAKBA 2.0

Israel Arrested 10700 Palestinians in West Bank, Jerusalem since 7 October

September 14, 2024


Israeli occupation forces have conducted a large-scale arrest campaign since Wednesday, with at least 40 Palestinians detained across the occupied West Bank by yesterday morning. Among those arrested were a patient receiving treatment in a hospital and several former prisoners.

The arrests were primarily concentrated in the Hebron and Tubas governorates, with others reported across the majority of the West Bank, according to a joint statement from the Palestinian Prisoners Club and the Commission of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs.

Organizations dedicated to prisoners’ rights have been unable to verify the full extent of the arrests due to the ongoing military operations by occupation forces in the Tulkarm and Tubas governorates, including their respective refugee camps.

Since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood operation on 7 October 2023, and amid the ongoing genocide and comprehensive aggression against the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank, Israeli occupation forces have arrested more than 10,700 Palestinians in the West Bank, including Jerusalem.

The occupation forces continued to escalate their arrest campaigns in the West Bank, a systematic policy aimed at suppressing any rising resistance. These arrests are also a key component of the collective punishment policy frequently employed by the occupation in its targeting of Palestinians.

Shortlink for this post: https://daysofpalestine.ps/?p=56621