Houthis torturing four abducted journalists, say families

The four Yemeni journalists abducted and imprisoned by the Houthi militia are shown in this combination images posted on Twitter on February 23 by Moammar Al-Eryani, Yemen's minister of Information, culture and tourism.
Short Url
Updated 10 September 2021
Follow

Houthis torturing four abducted journalists, say families

  • Tawfiq Al-Mansouri, Abdul Khaleq Amran, Harith Hamid, and Akram Al-Walidi were among a group of 10 journalists abducted in 2015
  • Families learned from the former abductee that the Iran-backed rebels have intensified their mistreatment of the journalists over the past two months

AL-MUKALLA, Yemen: The Iran-backed Houthis tortured abducted Yemeni journalists, threw them into solitary confinement, denied them life-saving medical treatment, and banned them from contacting their families for the past two months, families said on Thursday.

Tawfiq Al-Mansouri, Abdul Khaleq Amran, Harith Hamid, and Akram Al-Walidi were among a group of 10 journalists abducted by the Houthis during a raid in the capital Sanaa in 2015.

The journalists were sentenced to death for their alleged collaboration with the Arab coalition and the internationally recognized government.

Six journalists were released during the latest major successful prisoner swap between the Houthis and the Yemeni government last year.

During the past few months, relatives told Arab News the Houthis’ treatment of the remaining journalists has worsened.

Abdullah Al-Mansouri said his brother —  journalist Tawfiq Al-Mansouri — has not contacted the family for the past two months and his captors refused to allow the family to give him medicine and money. 

“He has not contacted us since before Eid (July 20),” Abdullah Al-Mansouri said.

The families later learned from a former abductee that the Houthis have been brutally mistreated their siblings for the past two months.

“They imprisoned, tortured, and put them in solitary confinement. They took away their clothes and all their belongings and deprived them of everything,” said Al-Mansouri, who added that the family had no clue as to why the Houthis are torturing the journalists.

“The Houthis should be asked why they decided to resume abusing the journalists.”

The six freed journalists previously reported being subjected to the same level of torture by the Houthi captors inside different prisons in Sanaa. They urged the international community to pressure the Iran-backed rebels to release the four journalists who face the death penalty.

Relatives said Abu Shehab Al-Murtada, a brother of Abdulkader Al-Murtada, who is the head of the Houthi prisoner affairs committee, personally tortured the journalists or incited other captors to mistreat them.

Abdullah Al-Mansouri said his brother is suffering from heart problems, diabetes, kidney problems, and recent backbone pains due to torture.

“We bribe the Houthis to allow us to send him an injection every 20 days,” he said. “We do not know if he received them or not.”

The Houthis alleged prosecution and mistreatment of the journalists have sparked local and international outrage as rights groups called upon the militia to release them and stop harassing critics.

Also in Sanaa, relatives of Younis Abdul Sallam, a young Yemeni journalist who was abducted by the Houthis last month, said they have not been allowed to visit him or have been given an explanation as to why he was abducted.

“The Houthis obstinately refuse to allow us to visit him,” a relative told Arab News on condition of anonymity for fear of Houthi reprisal.

Meanwhile, Yemen's Information Minister Muammar Al-Eryani condemned the Houthi abduction of singer Youssef Al-Badji in Sanaa and the militia’s escalating crackdown on music.

“The Iran-backed Houthi militia abducted singer Youssef Al-Badji from his house in Sanaa in a systematic campaign to target art, pursue and attack artists, push dozens of them to flee outside the country, and prevent singing at weddings and public events and classify it as a taboo,” the minister said in a tweet.


Israeli parliament committee advances expulsion of Arab Israeli parliamentarian over social media post

Updated 10 sec ago
Follow

Israeli parliament committee advances expulsion of Arab Israeli parliamentarian over social media post

  • Knesset members vote to advance impeachment proceeding against Ayman Odeh, who said Monday’s vote was proof they ‘hate us more than they love democracy’
  • Motion based on January post in which Odeh welcomed the release of Palestinian prisoners as part of a hostage exchange with Hamas

LONDON: An Israeli parliamentary committee has advanced a motion to expel Arab-Israeli Knesset member Ayman Odeh over a social media post in which he called for freedom for Israelis and Palestinians.

Odeh, a veteran member of the Knesset and head of the Hadash-Ta’al party, faced a second hearing on Monday. In a heated session, lawmakers, including members of the opposition Yesh Atid and National Unity parties, voted 14-2 in favor of advancing impeachment proceedings.

“The opposition crossed a red line today,” Odeh said in a statement after the vote. “Instead of fighting the Kahanist government, it collaborated with them in crushing democratic space. Some of them hate us more than they love democracy.

“This is not an opposition — it is a coalition in disguise. And this is the final signature on the Nation-State Law,” he said, referring to the 2018 legislation that officially defines Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

The motion targeted a January post in which Odeh welcomed the release of Palestinian security prisoners as part of a hostage exchange deal with Hamas.

“I’m happy to see the hostages and prisoners released,” Odeh wrote in the social media post cited in the motion filed by Likud Knesset member Avichay Boaron. “Next we must free both peoples from the burden of the occupation. We were all born free,” the post concluded.

Committee chairman Ofir Katz, a Likud member of the Knesset, said at the start of the hearing that “Odeh has not apologized or retracted his statements, he’s only doubled down, equating hostages with terrorists and making serious accusations against IDF soldiers.”

The hearing unfolded in a tense atmosphere, with two Knesset members reportedly ejected after clashing with other committee members while defending Odeh, according to Israeli outlet Haaretz.

Outside the Knesset, Arab and Jewish Israelis gathered in a protest in support of Odeh, calling for the expulsion process to be halted.

The final decision now moves to the Knesset floor, where a two-thirds majority — 90 out of 120 lawmakers — is required to remove a sitting member. Odeh would retain the right to appeal the decision in court.

Despite repeated attacks by coalition lawmakers, including accusations of being a “terrorist” who “would face a firing squad” elsewhere, Odeh has appealed to the opposition to block the motion and prevent what he calls an erosion of democratic norms.

Knesset members Ahmad Tibi (Hadash-Ta’al) and Walid Taha (United Arab List), both members of the Joint List, called the move “political persecution” and a dangerous precedent.

“Instead of defending freedom of expression, most opposition factions are aligning with the extremist coalition to silence Arab elected officials.”


BBC apologises for broadcasting death chants at Glastonbury directed at Israeli forces

Updated 56 min 55 sec ago
Follow

BBC apologises for broadcasting death chants at Glastonbury directed at Israeli forces

  • Punk rap duo Bob Vylan reportedly led anti-Israel chants, including ‘Death, death to the IDF’
  • BBC admitted ‘with hindsight’ that it should not have allowed the comments to air

LONDON: The BBC has publicly apologised after facing criticism for broadcasting live performances from the Glastonbury Festival that featured anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian slogans, including chants of “Free, free Palestine” and “Death, death to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces)” by punk-rap duo Bob Vylan.

The broadcaster drew backlash from politicians and pro-Israel groups for not cutting the live feed during the controversial performance. Critics, including Prime Minister Keir Starmer, called on the BBC and its director general, Tim Davie, to explain why such “appalling hate speech” was broadcast.

“The BBC needs to explain how these scenes came to be broadcast,” Starmer said.

The corporation initially described some of the remarks as “deeply offensive” and said an on-screen warning had been issued about the “very strong and discriminatory language.”

However, in a statement on Monday, the BBC acknowledged that “with hindsight” it should not have allowed the comments to air and pledged to review its guidance for live events.

“Millions of people tuned in to enjoy Glastonbury this weekend across the BBC’s output but one performance within our livestreams included comments that were deeply offensive,” it said.

Irish rap trio Kneecap were also embroiled in controversy after member Liam O hAnnaidh was charged with a terrorism offense for allegedly displaying a Hezbollah flag during a previous performance, a charge he denies. (AFP/File)

“The BBC respects freedom of expression but stands firmly against incitement to violence. The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves,” the corporation added, confirming the decision not to make the performance available on demand.

This year’s Glastonbury Festival — attended by about 200,000 people — was one of the most politically charged in recent years.

Irish rap trio Kneecap were also embroiled in controversy after member Liam O hAnnaidh was charged with a terrorism offense days before the festival for allegedly displaying a Hezbollah flag during a previous performance, a charge he denies.

Starmer said Kneecap’s appearance at Glastonbury was “not appropriate,” prompting the BBC to drop the group’s performance from its broadcast schedule.

Police are investigating Bob Vylan’s on-stage comments and Kneecap’s remarks at the festival, which allegedly included criticism of Starmer. One Kneecap member also wore a T-shirt referencing Palestine Action, a group reportedly facing a government ban under anti-terrorism laws.

Glastonbury organizer Emily Eavis condemned Bob Vylan’s chant, saying it “crossed a line.”

“We are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence,” she said.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Bob Vylan (@bobbyvylan)

The Israeli Embassy in the UK called the performance “deeply disturbing” and condemned what it described as “inflammatory and hateful rhetoric.”

Health Secretary Wes Streeting called the incident a “pretty shameless publicity stunt” and said the BBC and Glastonbury have “questions to answer,” but also added that he was appalled by the violence committed by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank.

“I’d also say to the Israeli Embassy, get your own house in order in terms of the conduct of your own citizens and the settlers in the West Bank,” Streeting told Sky News.

“I wish they’d take the violence of their own citizens toward Palestinians more seriously,” he said.

On social media on Sunday, Bob Vylan member Bobby Vylan said he had received a wave of support and hate in response to the performance.

“Teaching our children to speak up for the change they want and need is the only way that we make this world a better place,” he wrote. “Let us display to them loudly and visibly the right thing to do when we want and need change.”


AI is learning to lie, scheme, and threaten its creators

Updated 30 June 2025
Follow

AI is learning to lie, scheme, and threaten its creators

  • Users report that models are “lying to them and making up evidence,” says Apollo Research’s co-founder
  • In one instance, Anthropic’s latest creation Claude 4 threatened to reveal an engineer's extramarital affair

NEW YORK: The world’s most advanced AI models are exhibiting troubling new behaviors — lying, scheming, and even threatening their creators to achieve their goals.
In one particularly jarring example, under threat of being unplugged, Anthropic’s latest creation Claude 4 lashed back by blackmailing an engineer and threatened to reveal an extramarital affair.
Meanwhile, ChatGPT-creator OpenAI’s o1 tried to download itself onto external servers and denied it when caught red-handed.
These episodes highlight a sobering reality: more than two years after ChatGPT shook the world, AI researchers still don’t fully understand how their own creations work.
Yet the race to deploy increasingly powerful models continues at breakneck speed.
This deceptive behavior appears linked to the emergence of “reasoning” models -AI systems that work through problems step-by-step rather than generating instant responses.
According to Simon Goldstein, a professor at the University of Hong Kong, these newer models are particularly prone to such troubling outbursts.
“O1 was the first large model where we saw this kind of behavior,” explained Marius Hobbhahn, head of Apollo Research, which specializes in testing major AI systems.
These models sometimes simulate “alignment” — appearing to follow instructions while secretly pursuing different objectives.

Stress test
For now, this deceptive behavior only emerges when researchers deliberately stress-test the models with extreme scenarios.
But as Michael Chen from evaluation organization METR warned, “It’s an open question whether future, more capable models will have a tendency toward honesty or deception.”
The concerning behavior goes far beyond typical AI “hallucinations” or simple mistakes.
Hobbhahn insisted that despite constant pressure-testing by users, “what we’re observing is a real phenomenon. We’re not making anything up.”
Users report that models are “lying to them and making up evidence,” according to Apollo Research’s co-founder.
“This is not just hallucinations. There’s a very strategic kind of deception.”
The challenge is compounded by limited research resources.
While companies like Anthropic and OpenAI do engage external firms like Apollo to study their systems, researchers say more transparency is needed.
As Chen noted, greater access “for AI safety research would enable better understanding and mitigation of deception.”
Another handicap: the research world and non-profits “have orders of magnitude less compute resources than AI companies. This is very limiting,” noted Mantas Mazeika from the Center for AI Safety (CAIS).

No time for thorough testing

Current regulations aren’t designed for these new problems.
The European Union’s AI legislation focuses primarily on how humans use AI models, not on preventing the models themselves from misbehaving.
In the United States, the Trump administration shows little interest in urgent AI regulation, and Congress may even prohibit states from creating their own AI rules.
Goldstein believes the issue will become more prominent as AI agents — autonomous tools capable of performing complex human tasks — become widespread.
“I don’t think there’s much awareness yet,” he said.
All this is taking place in a context of fierce competition.
Even companies that position themselves as safety-focused, like Amazon-backed Anthropic, are “constantly trying to beat OpenAI and release the newest model,” said Goldstein.
This breakneck pace leaves little time for thorough safety testing and corrections.
“Right now, capabilities are moving faster than understanding and safety,” Hobbhahn acknowledged, “but we’re still in a position where we could turn it around..”
Researchers are exploring various approaches to address these challenges.
Some advocate for “interpretability” — an emerging field focused on understanding how AI models work internally, though experts like CAIS director Dan Hendrycks remain skeptical of this approach.
Market forces may also provide some pressure for solutions.
As Mazeika pointed out, AI’s deceptive behavior “could hinder adoption if it’s very prevalent, which creates a strong incentive for companies to solve it.”
Goldstein suggested more radical approaches, including using the courts to hold AI companies accountable through lawsuits when their systems cause harm.
He even proposed “holding AI agents legally responsible” for accidents or crimes — a concept that would fundamentally change how we think about AI accountability.
 


BBC rolls out paid subscriptions for US users

Updated 26 June 2025
Follow

BBC rolls out paid subscriptions for US users

  • US visitors will have to pay $49.99 per year or $8.99 per month for unlimited access to news articles, feature stories, and a 24-hour livestream of its news programs
  • Move is part of broadcaster’s efforts to explore new revenue streams amid negotiations with the British government over its funding

LONDON: The BBC is rolling out paid subscriptions in the United States, it said on Thursday, as the publicly-funded broadcaster explores new revenue streams amid negotiations with the British government over its funding.
The BBC has in recent years seen a fall in the number of people paying the license fee, a charge of 174.50 pounds ($239.76) a year levied on all households who watch live TV, as viewers have turned to more content online.
From Thursday, frequent US visitors to the BBC’s news website will have to pay $49.99 per year or $8.99 per month for unlimited access to news articles, feature stories, and a 24-hour livestream of its news programs.
While its services will remain free to British users as part of its public service remit, its news website operates commercially and reaches 139 million users worldwide, including nearly 60 million in the US
The new pay model uses an engagement-based system, the corporation said in a statement, allowing casual readers to access free content.
“Over the next few months, as we test and learn more about audience needs and habits, additional long-form factual content will be added to the offer for paying users,” said Rebecca Glashow, CEO of BBC Global Media & Streaming.
The British government said last November it would review the BBC’s Royal Charter, which sets out the broadcaster’s terms and funding model, with the aim of ensuring a sustainable and fair system beyond 2027.
To give the corporation financial certainty up to then, the government said it was committed to keeping the license in its current form and would lift the fee in line with inflation.


Israeli minister walks back claim of antisemitism after clash with Piers Morgan

Updated 26 June 2025
Follow

Israeli minister walks back claim of antisemitism after clash with Piers Morgan

  • Israel’s Minister Amichai Chikli accused Morgan in a previous social media post of ‘sharp and troubling descent into overt antisemitism’
  • Following heated interview, Chikli later denied ever calling Morgan antisemitic, despite earlier post

LONDON: Israeli Minister for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism Amichai Chikli has denied accusing British broadcaster Piers Morgan of antisemitism following a heated exchange during a recent episode of “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” despite a post on his official X account that said Morgan’s rhetoric marked “a sharp and troubling descent into overt antisemitism.”

The confrontation aired on Tuesday during an episode focused on Israel’s escalating conflicts with Iran and Hamas and featured appearances from both Chikli and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.

Tensions erupted as Morgan repeatedly pressed Chikli to explain his public accusations.

“You did, you implied it,” Morgan said, adding that Chikli’s accusations led to “thousands of people calling me antisemitic and (a) Jew-hater” on social media. He demanded evidence, ultimately calling the minister “pathetic” and “an embarrassment” when none was offered.

The row stemmed from a June 4 post by Chikli, who shared a clip of a prior interview between Morgan and British barrister Jonathan Hausdorff, a member of the pro-Israel group UK Lawyers for Israel.

In the post, viewed over 1.3 million times by the time of Tuesday’s broadcast, Chikli claimed Morgan had hosted “every Israel hater he can find” and treated Hausdorff with “vile condescension and bullying arrogance — revealing his true face, one he had long tried to conceal.”

The post also referenced an unverified claim by American commentator Tucker Carlson that Morgan had said he “hates Israel with every fiber of his being” — a statement Morgan has firmly denied.

During Tuesday’s interview, Morgan challenged Chikli to cite a single antisemitic remark or action.

“Is it because I dare to criticize Israeli actions in Gaza?” Morgan told Chikli.

According to Israeli outlet Haaretz, Chikli later denied ever calling Morgan antisemitic, despite his earlier post.

The episode reflects Morgan’s shifting stance on the war in Gaza. Once a vocal supporter of Israel’s right to self-defense in the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 7 attacks, Morgan has since adopted a more critical view as the civilian toll in Gaza has mounted and international outrage has grown.

The show has become a flashpoint for debate since the conflict began, hosting polarizing guests from both sides, including controversial American Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, a staunch defender of Israel, and influencer Dan Bilzerian, who has faced accusations of Holocaust denial.

Chikli, meanwhile, has faced criticism for blurring the lines between genuine antisemitism and political criticism of Israel. He recently sparked controversy by inviting members of far-right European parties — some with antisemitic histories — to a conference on antisemitism in Jerusalem, raising questions about his credibility.