Who is shooting mortars at police in Paris?
— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) December 31, 2024
Who is burning cars?
We need to realize that Paris is no longer Paris and France is no longer France and adjust our policies to align with what France is today. https://t.co/ARIxYnyf9u
They blamed it on a "Stutter."
— Byron Donalds (@ByronDonalds) December 30, 2024
They blamed it on "Russian Disinfo."
They blamed it on "Cheap-Fakes."
They hid him at every opportunity.
They scripted every public event.
They denied the Hur Report findings.
They sent him on vacation for 570 days.
They brazenly lied to you FOR… pic.twitter.com/ovnQtFsX8t
Remember when almost every legacy media outlet lied that Biden was “sharp as a tack” right before the Presidential debate where it was obvious he had dementia?
— Kekius Maximus (@elonmusk) December 30, 2024
Well, they’re still lying just as much now. https://t.co/gyKBBsRfSN
With the passing of former US President Jimmy Carter, former Israeli envoy to Washington Yoram Ettinger discussed the tragic mistakes Carter made, many of which still affect the Middle East today.
Ettinger recalled, "President Jimmy Carter strongly supported the Ayatollah regime's takeover of Iran. In 1978, Carter and his advisors concluded that the Persian Shah, America's Gulf policeman, was obsolete, and they believed Ayatollah Khomeini, who was in exile in Paris, would suit the US as he was anti-Communist and anti-Soviet."
Ettinger added, "Carter went so far as to declare—ten days before Khomeini landed in Tehran—that US intelligence determined Khomeini would be an Iranian Gandhi. He also claimed Khomeini had no desire to spread the revolution outside Iran, would focus on tractors rather than tanks, and be a loyal envoy for the interests of the free world."
"These evaluations were the fruits of delusions of a reality that didn't match the Middle Eastern reality," Ettinger said, noting that "Carter's approach also characterized his stance on the Palestinian issue and influenced the development of the peace agreement with Egypt."
Regarding the peace agreement, Ettinger discussed how Carter's insistence on including a national home for the Palestinians, potentially a Palestinian state, nearly derailed the agreement: "Carter is credited with bringing Israel and Egypt to a peace agreement. While neither Carter nor the US initiated or were the central figures in this process, Carter's alternative worldview, seeing the Palestinian issue as central to the Arab-Israeli conflict, led him to push for the Palestinian question to be at the core of the peace negotiations between Israel and Arab states."
"He didn't want an Israeli-Egyptian conference but an international one, which would grant roles to the Soviet Union and a veto to extremists in the Arab world. Israeli PM Begin and Egyptian President Sadat rejected this, so the direct initiative eventually led to a significant rapprochement between Israel and Egypt. Of course, the US played an important role, given Egypt's demands, which only the US could meet. Still, it's crucial to remember that the idea of a Palestinian state emerged due to President Carter, despite Sadat not considering it significant for Egypt," Ettinger explained.
The fact that both sides opposed this led to the Palestinian issue not becoming part of the peace agreement.
Ettinger highlighted Zbigniew Brzezinski's influence on Carter, noting how Brzezinski co-authored the Brookings Report, suggesting that a Palestinian state should be a prerequisite for an Israeli-Arab peace agreement. This perception, Ettinger stated, still guides members of the institute today.
"Carter's involvement in the peace agreement nearly collapsed the negotiations due to his insistence on establishing a Palestinian state," Ettinger reiterated, also recalling Carter's statements suggesting Hamas' intent for peace.
This perception, held by many in the Washington establishment due to the State Department's influence, is marked by continued failure in the Middle East since 1948 - failures that have reflected on Carter as well.
Asked if these failures contributed to Carter not being re-elected, Ettinger responded that Carter's perspective also impacted domestic issues, dragging the Democratic Party far left and contributing to his defeat by Republican Ronald Reagan, significantly influencing the rise of conservative views in America.
"Carter's election victory occurred amid Vietnam War discontent and anger at American leadership, following the brief Ford presidency after Nixon's resignation, and Americans saw Carter's election as a beacon of hope. It was a call which unfortunately he didn't fulfill," Ettinger noted.
Ettinger stressed the fundamental change Carter initiated in the Middle East, turning Iran from America's Middle Eastern policeman into a major enemy, fostering terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering, advanced weaponry, and more worldwide. Carter, though not solely responsible, gave substantial backing to the Ayatollah regime.
Ettinger describes how Khomeini won Carter's trust, sending peaceful messages, which Carter accepted, and restraining the Iranian military's response. Khomeini exploited this restraint to succeed in his mission, leading to the Tehran hostage crisis.
Ettinger concluded by saying, "Carter's legacy is crucial, especially considering how it still impacts perceptions in Israel towards the US State Department."
by Ruthie Blum
It’s hard to imagine The New York Times stooping any lower than usual in its coverage of Israel’s defensive war in Gaza. Yet the Gray Lady seems to have managed to outdo itself on this score once again.
Its latest hit job took the form of a lengthy news feature on Thursday, titled “Israel Loosened Its Rules to Bomb Hamas Fighters, Killing Many More Civilians.”
The article, marked by as many bylines as anonymous sources, attempted to lull readers with a neat trick: using the Israel Defense Forces’ self-imposed “purity of arms” doctrine, a stricter code of ethics than that of any other military in history, to highlight the Jewish state’s allegedly unacceptable behavior on the battlefield.
The subhead perfectly encapsulated the chutzpah: “Surprised by Oct. 7 and fearful of another attack, Israel weakened safeguards meant to protect noncombatants, allowing officers to endanger up to 20 people in each airstrike,” it read. “One of the deadliest bombardments of the 21st century followed.”
The piece began with mention of an order that was issued on the day of the Hamas massacre, which “granted mid-ranking Israeli officers the authority to strike thousands of militants and military sites that had never been a priority in previous wars in Gaza.”
This directive, which the NYT took credit for revealing, gave the IDF more leeway to “pursue not only the senior Hamas commanders, arms depots and rocket launchers that were the focus of earlier campaigns, but also the lowest-ranking fighters.”
Sounds reasonable, considering the magnitude of Hamas atrocities and terrorist infrastructure in the Strip. Yet, the Times didn’t see or present it that way.
No, it gasped that IDF officers were now provided the authority, in each strike, “to risk killing up to 20 civilians.” This, said the Times, meant that Israeli troops “could target rank-and-file militants as they were at home surrounded by relatives and neighbors, instead of only when they were alone outside.”
Last week, the Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court held an in-depth discussion – two years after the event –– late, on the seriousness of the offense committed by Temple Mount activist Tom Nissany on Hanukkah 5783 (Dec. 2022). The police indicted Nissany on “entering the checkpoint with sufganiyot,” and “after being asked to get rid of them, staying and arguing with the police. Later, he tried to pass through with stickers and a sign that were forbidden to bring into the Temple Mount.”
The indictment included no fewer than 27 prosecution witnesses.
Nissany and another activist, former Likud MK Yehuda Glick, were also accused of not moving “at the pace of the accompanying policeman and in a unified group during the tour of the compound. They stopped at every moment to take pictures, despite the warnings of the policeman who accompanied the group.”
Glick was also accused of “breaking away from the group, wandering around in the nearby grove, and even trying to climb the Dome of the Rock.” Also, “after the policemen ordered him to return to the group’s route, Glick told them: ‘I pay you a salary, I am your boss.'”
Glick and Emmanuel Brosh were accused of sitting down at the entrance to the mountain and blocking it, in protest at being prevented from entering the compound.
The defense attorneys protested having to appear in court to justify acts that could not be classified as crimes.
“It’s not so clear how this is a crime,” said attorney Eitan Lehman, who represents Nissani. “We don’t think that breaking away from the group is a crime. Photographing the place is not a crime. We will submit a request to see the rules, and on what they are based.”
The lawyers submitted to the court a video of the “blocking incident,” which clearly showed the entrance to the mountain was not blocked by Nissani and Brosh, and their sitting there did not disturb anyone.
They also argue selective enforcement, because “in much more obvious cases of roadblocks” in the past two years – by left-wing activists protesting against Knesset legislations, for example – the police looked on with indifference and did not bother to prosecute anyone.”
Attorney Lehman also addressed the sufganiyot affair, suggesting it was “the funniest accusation. Is distributing donuts to people a crime? Many people brought sufganiyot on Hanukkah two years ago and distributed them to the police and ascenders to the Temple Mount throughout that morning. Of course, in the trial, we will question the police officers who decided that the defendant could not distribute sufganiyot. It’s true that he argued with the officers because he wanted to distribute sufganiyot, but arguing with police officers is not a crime.”
As to the charge of not keeping pace with the accompanying officer, Attorney Yitzhak Bem, representing Glick, argued “The defendant is charged with not walking at a pace that satisfied the police on the Temple Mount that day. He is disabled, a victim of hostilities following an assassination attempt on his life, and has lost more than half a lung. I’d like to see these policemen trying to run without half a lung.”
On October 29, 2014, Yehudah Glick delivered a speech at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem. According to an eyewitness, a man on a motorcycle with a “thick Arab accent” approached Glick as he was loading equipment into his car after the conference. The man confirmed Glick’s identity before shooting him four times in the chest and fleeing the scene on his motorcycle.
Despite sustaining serious injuries, Glick survived the assassination attempt and was rushed to Shaare Zedek Medical Center for treatment. Later, Glick recounted that the assailant had apologized before opening fire, saying, “I’m very sorry, but you’re an enemy of Al-Aqsa. I have to.”
Judge Anat Greenbaum-Shimon asked the police to rethink the charges and postponed the next hearing so that she could “have a talk with the prosecution,” in the hope that she would succeed in getting the police down from the treetop.
The police representatives at the hearing refused to take the hint, and so another hearing in the crucial case of smuggled sufganiyot was scheduled for early February.
Sufganiyot-Gate is far from over.
Incidentally, during the court hearing on December 23, 2022, following the arrest of Tom Nissani, police representative Anan Zaida claimed that “there is a rule prohibiting the bringing of doughnuts into the Temple Mount in order to prevent provocations.”
The Beyadenu movement pointed out that while police were bravely fighting illegal sufganiyot, a huge Hamas banner praising terrorists was unfurled on the Temple Mount:
As what’s left of the Biden administration winds down, I’d like to offer an end-of-days reminder: Joe Biden wasn’t just a terrible president.
His Attorney General Merrick Garland was an equally terrible leader of the Department of Justice.
Garland, you may recall, was nominated for the Supreme Court by President Barack Obama to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died suddenly a few months before the 2016 election.
Republicans sat on Garland’s nomination, maintaining that the seat should be filled by a new president.
We were told that this was hideously unfair and partisan, especially because, as the Obama administration and its friendly media repeatedly assured us, Garland was a moderate, a nonpartisan straight shooter, a person with a first-rate judicial temperament: honest, just, fair and wise.
Garland didn’t get the seat, which wound up being filled by Neil Gorsuch. Four years later, when Joe Biden came into the Oval Office after Donald Trump’s (first) term, he nominated Garland to be his attorney general.
Consolation prize? Perhaps.
But Garland went on to spend his entire time as AG demonstrating to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear that he is anything but honest, just, fair and wise.
Let me be clear (to use an Obama phrase): Garland has been a dishonest, unfair, partisan hack. And none too wise, either.
As Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) told the AG in hearings about the FBI’s war on political opponents, “Thank God you are not on the Supreme Court.”
Those hearings involved Garland’s inexplicable decision to hurl federal law-enforcement resources at parents who spoke against critical race theory and unpopular transgender policies at school-board meetings.
In response to a letter from the left-leaning National School Boards Association, which described those meetings with lurid language but scant evidence of any real threats, Garland ordered the FBI and the Department of Justice into action against these “domestic terror” threats.
It turned out the Biden White House was talking to the National School Boards Association about the matter before its letter was even sent, the Washington Free Beacon reported, raising questions of collusion between the administration and outside “activists.”
The FBI also infiltrated traditional Catholic congregations — all while leftist groups were promoting riots and terror in cities across America, unhindered by the feds.
Garland’s Justice Department showed less pity to grandmas praying outside of abortion clinics than to actual domestic terrorists who were inciting riots and trying to burn federal buildings.
Biden’s AG has also presided over the absurd “lawfare” prosecutions of Trump. He approved the FBI SWAT raid on Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago, where agents pawed through Melania’s underwear and left bogus classified-document covers lying around so as to produce photos that gave the false impression that Trump had, well, left classified documents lying around.
To add to the outrage, special prosecutor Jack Smith, who Garland sicced on Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents, had to admit to the court that his office had . . . mishandled those very classified documents, mixing them up in ways that disadvantaged Trump’s defense lawyers, then falsely representing that the documents were exactly as they had been received.
Garland prosecuted former Trump official Peter Navarro and former Trump advisor Steve Bannon for contempt of Congress, sending both to jail for months
But when Garland himself was held in contempt of Congress, he did not, surprisingly, bring charges against himself, or appoint a special prosecutor to objectively investigate.
Garland was charged with ignoring a congressional subpoena regarding its probe of Biden family business dealings.
Hey, ignoring a congressional subpoena is what he jailed Navarro and Bannon for! That doesn’t sound very judicious or fair.
Well, no surprise. Garland just followed the lead of Obama’s attorney general and “wingman,” Eric Holder, who also let himself off the hook when charged with contempt of Congress.
In a bid to polish up Biden’s rusted image, The Washington Post on Sunday reported on the president’s private complaints that Garland should have been faster to prosecute Trump, so that he could have staged a “politically damaging trial before the election.”
Funny, as I recall Trump had a lot of trials before the election — and they all seemed to drive his approval levels up, not down.
In any case, this seems like an admission, as law professor Ann Althouse observed, that “Biden intended to use the Justice Department to destroy his political adversary!”
Indeed. That now seems to have been Garland’s role throughout this administration, which — in the name of “protecting democracy” and our institutions — has only undermined our democracy and corrupted our institutions.
That’s Biden’s sorry legacy. And Merrick Garland’s, too.
Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee and founder of the InstaPundit.com blog.
A top Palestinian leader told The Post he expects that President-elect Donald Trump will “destroy Iran,” which will cause remaining Hamas influence to crumble.
Hamas has been decimated by Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip, but in the West Bank the terror group has been rising up against the Palestinian Authority, which is run by the rival Fatah party.
The Palestinian Authority is supported by western governments including the US, and Hamas and other Islamist groups accuse it of cozying up to Israel.
Palestinian security forces have been cracking down in particular at refugee camps in the West Bank town of Jenin, where more than a dozen extremist gunmen stole two PA government vehicles earlier this month, parading them around while waving Hamas and ISIS flags.
“We are confronting Hamas’ ideology. Our problem is with Hamas’ link to regimes outside Palestine,” Mohammad Hamdan, Secretary General of the PA’s ruling Fatah party told The Post, referencing Iran in particular.
But Hamdan said he expects Trump’s return to the White House will lead to the jihadists’ defeat.
“We see that Trump and the ruling government in Israel are planning to destroy Iran, so Hamas [followers] will have no other choice than to become Palestinian,” the Fatah leader predicted.
The PA has killed at least three extremist militants in Jenin since the Dec. 6 incident as it pledges to either arrest or eliminate all participants.
The Post spoke with Hamdan and several other top PA leaders in Nablus, about an hour south of Jenin, on Dec. 19.
Hamas took over the Gaza Strip after defeating Fatah in a 2006 election. The terror group’s brutal rule included an Islamist crackdown in the Palestinian territory and repeated incursions into Israel.
It culminated with the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel in which terrorists killed 1,200 people and took more than 250 hostage.
Fatah, the US and Israel have a shared goal in fighting Hamas, which includes the destruction of the state of Israel as a founding principle.
“Hamas rejects international legitimacy, meaning UN resolutions,” Hamdan said.
“The world cannot accept a situation where a party does not accept international resolutions.”
In interviews with The Post, Palestinian Authority leaders condemned the growth of Israeli settlements in the West Bank — but acknowledged Israel’s right to exist.
Hamdan also said Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas “still supports realistic relations with the Americans in order to achieve the aspirations of the Palestinians.”
However, he also expressed strong skepticism of US policy in the Middle East — and blamed the rise of Islamic extremism on American foreign policy.
“Look what happened in Syria. First, the US declared the rebels to be al Qaeda, and then [last week] an American delegation visited Syria,” he said. “And the one before that, when the Americans struck deals with the Taliban in Afghanistan.”
“We as Palestinians believe that most of these extremist Islamic groups are produced by America by its effort to create a new Middle East,” the secretary general claimed.
A senior Israeli official told The Post that the PA’s opposition to Hamas could further provide leverage for peace talks.
“There could be a historically unprecedented opportunity for the PA” to strengthen its grasp on the Palestinian territories, the official said.
The Palestinian Authority has been floated as one option to govern the Gaza Strip once the war ends.
However, the official said, the Palestinian Authority would need to “stop the corruption” and cease “funding terrorism” on Israeli settlers to “participate in day-after talks” about Gaza’s post-Hamas governance.
“I still prefer [the PA] to radical Islamists,” the official noted.
"The attack against me in the past 24 hours by the opposition, along with its media, has broken records when it comes to lies and cynicism, and it is truly not an easy challenge," Sa'ar began his remarks.
Referring to the media quoting his past comments against being part of a government with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Sa’ar said, "They are broadcasting archive footage from two election campaigns ago, showing me saying that I won’t sit with Netanyahu. They announce that I will support the ‘draft-dodging law.’ And all of this under the guise of moral sanctity on their lips and an obsession with ousting Netanyahu in their hearts, as if we haven’t gone through the hardest year in our history. And it’s all fake after fake after fake."
"I'll make it easy for you," Sa'ar continued. "Your pressure to bring down the government, which is dealing with enormous challenges in the security and diplomatic fields, will not succeed. Your campaign against me and my family will not achieve its goal. I am proud to be part of the decision-making that has strengthened Israel’s security and restored Israel’s image of power in the region and the world. I dedicate day and night to representing Israel in the best way possible."
"I have proven that I know how to fight when needed, pay enormous prices when needed, resign when I believe in it, give up any position, including the prime ministership, and not hang on to my seat—more than any other public servant," he said.
He expressed regret over his resignation from the government last March, saying, "When I resigned from the government last March due to a real disagreement on the war and on the ability to influence decision-making, I was a hero (for an hour) in their eyes. In hindsight, it was a step I would have avoided."
"So now I will disappoint you even more: I am a rightist. I have been one all my life, and I will remain one. I am committed to Israel’s victory (the concept you recklessly mocked in the studios) in the most decisive fight in its history from seven fronts – that’s how I was and that’s how I will remain. I am committed to the value of military service in the IDF and to the serving public – that’s how I was and that’s how I will remain."
"In a choice between politics and patriotism – for me, patriotism will always prevail. But the people of October 6th will always prefer the wars of the Jews."
On the handling of the war, he said, "Prime Minister Netanyahu is leading a historic campaign in a way that even the most honest of his greatest rivals admit is changing the face of the Middle East. Even now, we still face existential challenges. Who do you want to deal with them? Lapid? Do you want me to dedicate my life to hating Netanyahu, which you have become addicted to, at the expense of the future of the state and our children? Keep wanting. I will dedicate my life to our survival in this tough and violent space."
In conclusion, Sa’ar wrote, "All the attacks on me only strengthen me in the path I have chosen: to lead the diplomatic campaign as Foreign Minister and to strengthen the government in managing the security campaign in the crucial forums. I will never return to October 6th."
The comments come a day after it was reported that Sa'ar will rejoin the Likud party in the coming days.
However, MK Sharren Haskel, currently a member of Sa'ar's party, is not expected to join him in the process, and will instead run independently.
Sa'ar joined the Netanyahu government at the end of September, as a minister without a potfolio and a Cabinet member.
He received the Foreign Ministry after then-Defense Minister Yoav Gallant was fired and his portfolio given to then-Foreign Minister Israel Katz. With Sa'ar's party, the coalition rose from 64 to 68 Knesset seats.
Sources close to the Houtis, deny that they were targeting DIN, they were targeting the Cellphone Store in Ramat Beit Shemesh Alef that refuses to get a Badatz Hashgacha!
The serious incident in Bnei Brak, in which a 23-year-old yeshiva student was stabbed in the Kiryat Herzog neighborhood – Bechdrei Chadarim – has resurfaced the phenomenon of marginalized youths in the city, which has intensified in recent times in the quiet neighborhood in the north of the city. Residents who spoke to "In the Ultra-Orthodox Quarters" express concern over the increase in cases of violence, and claim that the phenomenon has become a real threat.
Yaakov, a resident of the street where the incident took place, said in a conversation with "In My Ultra-Orthodox Rooms": "They walk around here at night, screaming, throwing bottles and harassing the residents. We've been complaining for a long time, but no one is doing anything. Now it's no longer just noise, it's an injury to a young man. It was only a matter of time before it came to human life."
According to the residents, some of the youths who roam around the city at night are involved in vandalism, theft and fights. "We are used to Bnei Brak being the city of the Torah, not a city of crime," said Rivka, a resident of the neighborhood. "Today I'm afraid to let the children leave the house in the evening."
According to Moshe, a longtime resident of the neighborhood, the stabbing of the yeshiva student was the culmination of the escalation that has been going on for many months: "Just two weeks ago, windows were broken near my house. Before that, we saw them cursing and threatening passersby. It used to be rare, but today it happens almost every night."
Some of the residents who spoke to B'Hadrei Haredim point an accusing finger at the police, which they say is not doing enough to eradicate the phenomenon. "The police's response comes too late, and even then they arrest two or three boys and release them within a few hours," says Haim, a father of four. "There is not enough punishment here to make them think twice before destroying property or harming people."
"A stabbing is not just another 'incident,'" Haim adds. "It's a sign that what has been until now – noise and breaking of property – is becoming much more dangerous. If it is not dealt with immediately, it could end in a bigger disaster. We are not asking too much – only to restore peace and security to the neighborhood. We can't live in fear in our city."
The Israel Police said in response: "The Israel Police is constantly working proactively to increase the security of the residents while maintaining continuous contact with the local authority. Upon receiving a report about the incident, police officers arrived at the scene quickly, conducted searches and opened an investigation that is still underway in order to reach the truth."
The incident began after a group of marginalized youths gathered in the street and created a noise late at night. A resident of the neighborhood asked the boys to stop the noise, but they responded by breaking his car with iron bars.
At the same time, the yeshiva student, who is not connected to the incident, passed by. Suddenly, one of the boys approached him and started punching him. During the attack, when the student tried to retreat, he felt a sharp pain and realized that he had been stabbed.
Medical teams from MDA and United Hatzalah gave the young man first aid at the scene and evacuated him to Beilinson Hospital in Petah Tikva, suffering from a penetrating wound and his condition is described as moderate. At the hospital, the doctors had to operate on him due to the serious injury.
President Joe Biden reportedly wanted the Department of Justice to target then-former President Donald Trump for prosecution far sooner and more aggressively than it did, and regrets naming Merrick Garland as Attorney General.
The report, published in the Washington Post on Saturday, echoes reporting nearly three years ago by the New York Times, which suggested in 2022 that Biden was frustrated with the slow pace of Garland, a “ponderous judge.”
The Post noted:
In private, Biden has also said he should have picked someone other than Merrick Garland as attorney general, complaining about the Justice Department’s slowness under Garland in prosecuting Trump, and its aggressiveness in prosecuting Biden’s son Hunter, according to people familiar with his comments.
…Ron Klain, Biden’s incoming chief of staff, pushed for Garland. He stressed that Garland — a federal judge with a sterling reputation for independence and fairness — would show Americans that Biden was rebuilding a department badly shaken by Trump’s political attacks.
Biden was persuaded, and some Democrats believe the decision had devastating results. Had the Justice Department moved faster to prosecute Trump for allegedly seeking to overturn the 2020 election and mishandling classified documents, they say, the former president might have faced a politically damaging trial before the election. (Others blame the Supreme Court and a Trump-appointed judge in Florida for repeatedly siding with the former president and delaying the cases; the Justice Department declined to comment.)
The Biden White House claimed throughout his presidency that it was not politicizing the Department of Justice, and was in fact depoliticizing it. Democrats claimed that the department had been politicized by then-Attorney General William Barr, who refused to release grand jury materials related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into so-called “Russia collusion.” Barr noted that it was against the law for him to release grand jury materials.
The Post omits one of the other reasons Garland was picked: he had been blocked from confirmation to the Supreme Court by Republicans in 2016, and his appointment was seen as a consolation prize, as well as a strike at the GOP.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of The Agenda: What Trump Should Do in His First 100 Days, available for pre-order on Amazon. He is also the author of The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency, now available on Audible. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
An Islamic regime agent tried to attack an Iranian woman for not wearing hijab. But she bravely defended herself! pic.twitter.com/xiPsoktGzO
— Dr. Maalouf (@realMaalouf) December 30, 2024
GS1, an international non-profit that maintains the global standard for barcodes, says they will be replaced by a new square version capable of storing much more information about products. Anne Godfrey, chief executive of GS1 UK, said almost half of British retailers have already updated their tills to accommodate the new codes. 'This has been in the works for some time, but Covid really accelerated it,' she said. 'During the pandemic, everyone got used to pointing their phones at QR codes in pubs and restaurants to access the menu.'
'Increasingly, QR codes that bring up bits of information are already appearing on the front of many products. Very soon we will say goodbye to the old-fashioned barcode and every product will just have one QR code that holds all the information you need.' Traditional barcodes can only hold seven pieces of very basic information — a product's name, manufacturer, type, size, weight, colour and, most importantly, its price.
They have become so crucial to the daily running of most supermarkets that it has become impossible to purchase a product unless it has a barcode on it. When they are scanned at the till, the number on the barcode is matched to an enormous database of products to ensure customers are charged correctly. The new QR codes contain much more information about products, such as their ingredients, any allergens they contain and even recipe suggestions, that can be accessed by consumers via their smartphones.
Mrs Godrey said: 'The old barcodes do what they say on the tin — they go beep, tell you the price and get you out of the store. But today's consumers want much more information about the products they buy. The next generation of barcodes will give greater power to the consumer. Retailers will have to upgrade or get left behind.' Barcodes were invented by US science graduates Norman Joseph Woodland and Bernard Silver in the late 1940s, but didn't appear in shops until decades later.
The first barcoded product ever scanned was a pack of Wrigley's Juicy Fruit gum at a supermarket in Ohio in 1974. They arrived in the UK in 1979, first used on a box of teabags at a shop in Spalding, Lincolnshire. Since then, GS1 has registered barcodes for more than 200million products around the world.
Though they are basic by today's standards, no two barcodes are the same. The lines on a barcode could be rearranged to register up to ten trillion different products. A study commissioned by GS1 found that 96 per cent of leading UK retail executives expect to see another retail technology transformation.
It also found that 46 per cent of retailers have already upgraded their checkout technology to accommodate QR codes, and another 52 per cent will do so over the coming year. GS1's new codes are currently being tested in 48 countries, including at Morrisons supermarkets in the UK. Many leading brands including PepsiCo, Proctor & Gamble, L'Oreal, Amazon and US grocery giant Walmart are already on board.
A full international roll-out of the new QR codes is expected to be complete by 2027. Mrs Godfrey said: 'The invention of the barcode is one of the great, untold stories in the history of our modern world. It is more frequently used than Google. We won't celebrate the death of the humble barcode, but it is time to say a long goodbye to it.'
