backlash

WASHINGTON — The Department of Homeland Security drew backlash over an AI-generated social media post featuring a Sikh man facing off against a character made to look like Optimus Prime from the movie “Transformers.” The agency later deleted the image.

Posted Wednesday to the official X account for DHS, the image created by artificial intelligence depicted the “Transformers” character opposite a bearded man wearing a bandanna over his hair. The image, made to look like a movie poster, stated, “America for Americans.”

“Get off our roads, you don’t know how to drive Mr. Singh,” it continued.

The post was denounced as “racist propaganda” and “completely unacceptable.”

Other X posts by DHS that reference Transformers remain online.

Sikh Americans and elected officials condemned the image and accused the Trump administration of using racist imagery to stigmatize Sikhs while promoting its deportation campaign.

Hasbro, which owns the franchise, issued a statement saying the posts by DHS were made “without permission and do not represent the Transformers brand or Hasbro.”

Singh, which translates to “lion,” is the most common last name for Sikh men.

DHS said the post depicted Harjinder Singh, an Indian truck driver accused of causing a fatal crash last year that left three people dead after his 18-wheeler collided with their minivan in Florida. He has pleaded not guilty to vehicular homicide charges.

In photos released by DHS, Harjinder Singh wears similar clothes as the man in the now-deleted AI image.

In an emailed statement, a Homeland Security spokesperson, who did not identify themself, called criticism of the post “nonsensical drivel.” The spokesperson did not respond to a question asking why it had removed the post.

“Harjinder Singh is an illegal alien from India who should never have been in our country,” the statement said, adding that he had been granted a commercial driver’s license by California.

In its campaign against immigrant commercial drivers, the Trump administration has repeatedly pointed out Sikh and Indian truckers, who make up about 20% of that industry’s workforce.

The department recently cited California as a problem state that allows drivers who don’t speak sufficient English to obtain licenses. It also started a tip line asking members of the public to report truck drivers they suspect of being undocumented.

The press office of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, which shared the deleted image in its own X post, called the post “disgusting” and “racist propaganda.”

Noting that the Central Valley is home to a large Sikh community, Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) called the post “completely unacceptable” and said he’s glad it was removed.

“No American should be targeted because of their faith or their name,” Valadao wrote on X.

The Sikh Coalition noted that the DHS post comes as the country mourns the 25th anniversary of 9/11, after which Sikhs were targeted for hate crimes.

“We remain fearless in identifying as Sikhs — even when our government portrays us as enemies,” the coalition wrote on X.

HANFORD, Calif. — Darian Orduno bounced her baby boy on her chest, looking down at his thick black hair and bright eyes. What might pollution from a data center do, she wondered, to his growing lungs?

That question had brought Orduno, 25, to a community meeting opposing a possible data center here, and her fears, she said, likely would influence her vote in the midterm election too.

“I just had him, and now it’s concerning if he’s going to be able to grow up here,” Orduno said, or “if I’m going to have to relocate.”

As about 100 residents filed into a church for the meeting in late August, under a Central Valley sky hazy with air pollution, many shared the same worries — that a facility pitched for the local fairgrounds could further worsen the area’s air quality and strain its water supply.

Barbara Castle listens to speakers during a town hall meeting on a possible small-scale data center in Hanford.

Nationwide, such concerns are fueling a backlash to data centers from both the left and the right as tech companies flood the country with thousands of proposals for the facilities in nearly every state from California to Maine.

Data centers have become an unusually bipartisan flash point in the midterm elections, as candidates race to delineate policy platforms and respond to public opinion. The issue stands to influence swing voters and motivate turnout at the polls.

Here in the 22nd District, home to the state’s most competitive congressional race, how significantly the issue will affect voters’ decisions remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: Anxiety about data centers is mounting.

“It’s a national concern, it’s now a state concern, and now it’s bled into the local concern,” Hanford Mayor Mark Kairis said. “It’s a very emotionally charged issue right now.”

Residents in Hanford who oppose data centers say they are worried about the region’s air and water quality, concerns echoed by rural communities across the country.

Demand for data centers, which house the computer systems powering artificial intelligence and the internet, has surged as AI use has ballooned. As of April, more than 1,500 new data centers were in development across the United States, according to a Pew Research Center analysis, largely in rural areas.

The centers require intense cooling, which often demands high water and power use and creates the potential to affect the environment and to pass on utility costs to consumers. But they power technology that is becoming increasingly integrated into American business. They also create jobs, though with limitations.

Democrats see the data center uproar as fitting into their affordability messaging, and candidates generally agree data centers should be regulated, though their positions vary on how aggressively. For Republicans, whose party has backed AI innovation, responding to worsening public opinion has been trickier — particularly given President Trump’s championing of AI and data centers.

Vice President JD Vance on Thursday acknowledged negative polling on data centers but framed the issue as a question of American industrial dominance, saying the country can’t shy away from development. Earlier in the week, Trump asserted that the only reason communities should reject data centers is if they want to be “backwards and poor.”

The public may see data centers as a physical manifestation of AI advancement in general, said Camille Crittenden, executive director of the Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society, a University of California research center. Opposing data centers offers people a way to vent their broader concerns about the technology’s increasing dominance.

Priest Luke Martinez expresses concerns during the community meeting .

“This is a very specific focal point for a general anxiety about AI,” she said. “People see these data centers, and they’re thinking, ‘AI’s going to take my job.’”

The backlash from residents in the Central Valley to the possibility of even a small-scale data center demonstrates how acutely the issue has put many Americans on edge.

“It really is terrifying,” said Lucy Gomez, 57, of Hanford, a retired teacher. “I feel like we’re being guinea pigs when we don’t want to be.”

Increasing influence

Community anger about the facilities has prompted close attention from California lawmakers, who passed legislation in Sacramento on Monday to regulate energy use by the data center industry and impose other requirements.

California is home to the third-most data centers of any state, though it has experienced a relatively smaller new boom because of its high electrical prices and other factors. Still, 54 new facilities were in the works for the state as of April, according to Pew.

Hanford Councilwoman Kimber Regan speaks with Mayor Mark Kairis during the meeting. Hanford’s zoning ordinances do not allow data centers, but the city does not have jurisdiction over the county fairgrounds site where Global Stack is evaluating its proposal.

In Georgia and Pennsylvania, New York and Texas, Nevada and Virginia, the issue has become hot-button in elections at all levels. Ads about data centers run on the airwaves in states with key congressional races. Gubernatorial candidates jockey over it; both New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, put temporary moratoriums on new data centers.

A memo from the Republican senatorial campaign arm underscored how critical the question was becoming last month, when it warned AI companies that data centers could be the deciding issue in the close race between Ohio GOP Sen. Jon Husted and former Sen. Sherrod Brown, his Democratic challenger.

Data centers “are the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck,” said the memo, which was first obtained by Axios. “If he loses and data centers get the blame, politicians across the country will take notice — and they will not go near the next one.”

Sixty-one percent of Americans would oppose a data center being built where they live, a late August poll by the Economist and YouGov found.

Though Democrats and independents were more likely to oppose the centers, 47% of Republicans also said they would oppose it, and 52% of people who voted for Trump in 2024 said they believed construction of a new data center would increase their electrical bills.

Data centers encapsulate existing concerns among red and blue voters across the nation and in California about their quality of life and the influence of major tech companies, said Sonoma State University political science professor David McCuan.

“California has a lot of communities that have been struggling and trying to find a way forward, and the data center debate captures those voters’ frustrations,” McCuan said.

Political winds

The historic Bastille, which served as Kings County’s jail and sheriff’s office from 1897 until 1964, stands tall next to the courthouse in Hanford’s Civic Center Park.

The idea for a center on the Kings County fairgrounds is part of a broader pitch by developer Global Stack USA to boost the state’s emergency infrastructure by installing small-scale data centers, helipads and parking garages at fairgrounds around the state.

Global Stack Chief Executive Dan Kang said the goal was strengthening the state’s emergency response capabilities while helping fairgrounds financially. The company’s early materials envisioned operating 70 sites by 2030.

The company has not made any formal proposals, but in Kings and Tulare counties, the issue caught attention after fair officials agreed to allow Global Stack to evaluate their sites. The idea also prompted some residents to voice opposition in Ventura County last month.

The facilities would include what’s known as an edge computing data center, which typically is much smaller than traditional data centers and which Global Stack says would require lower utility use and no municipal water connection.

Concerns about water and energy use by data centers are legitimate, said Shaolei Ren, a UC Riverside engineering professor who studies AI. Centers like the one proposed by Global Stack do not guzzle water the way larger ones do, but they still can use extra power or generate air and noise pollution, Ren said.

In Kings County, the project potentially could benefit the fairgrounds as a long-term revenue source, said Dena Rizzardo, chief executive of the fair board, a state entity that would have final say over any proposal. Because fairgrounds are state property, local and county officials don’t have jurisdiction.

Kang said he is committed to working with local communities to ensure “any path forward reflects local needs and California’s broader resilience priorities.”

In the district’s congressional race, which could help decide control of the House in November, Democratic nominee Randy Villegas said he has been getting questions about data centers from voters. Last month, he released a set of policy points and called for a data center moratorium of at least a year to give Congress time to pass regulations.

Democratic congressional candidate Randy Villegas urged meeting attendees to lobby federal lawmakers to pass legislation regulating data centers.

“The advancement of technology … should not be an excuse to throw our communities under the bus,” Villegas said at the Hanford meeting, where he addressed the friendly crowd without identifying himself as a congressional candidate. A College of the Sequoias professor, he is attempting to unseat Republican Rep. David Valadao.

Valadao, in a statement to The Times, said data center construction requires a “responsible approach” that includes local input and ratepayer protections.

“Data centers play an important role in our economy and national security, but Central Valley families are already facing high electric bills and concerns about our water supply,” Valadao said. He did not answer questions about the proposal in Hanford.

Several attendees at the Hanford meeting, who ranged from Gen Z to elderly, said the issue would affect their midterm votes, though most said they already were leaning to the left.

Gomez, the retired teacher, was not happy with either party but planned to vote for Democrats because she viewed them as taking more action to protect public health than Republicans.

Ember Gomez listens to speakers while her father, Filiberto, looks on during the meeting. Filiberto Gomez said he was concerned a data center would affect children’s health.

Courtney Hawkins, 40, said the data center issue “absolutely” would carry weight in his votes.

“I believe that AI is good for propelling technology in general,” Hawkins said, “but I don’t believe we should be pursuing it without regulations and at the cost of the environment.”

Sept. 4 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Friday signed two executive orders aimed at strengthening the country’s ranching industry.

Trump has been facing criticism from beef producers since he waived tariffs on up to 300,000 metric tons of imported beef in an effort to ease rising costs as the nation heads into the midterm elections.

Trump’s first executive order directs the Interior Department to study removing gray wolves from the Endangered Species Act list, allowing ranchers to kill them on their properties. Gray wolves are a major threat to herds in the West.

The second executive order would allow ranchers to process their beef and sell directly to consumers, instead of going through USDA inspections.

“People have been asking for this change for decades, and we’re getting it done,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “This is the largest-ever government effort to change all federal rules and regulations necessary to support our ranchers and our farmers.”

Beef prices have risen this year due to drought and high feeding costs. The United States currently maintains the smallest herd since the 1950s.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association said it was “disappointed” by Trump allowing more foreign beef to flow into an industry already under severe stress.

“While America’s cattle producers share the goal of keeping groceries affordable for consumers, flooding the market with government-subsidized, below-market beef is not the way to rebuild the American cattle herd,” the association previously said in a statement.

“Cattle markets have already turned sharply lower this morning, to the detriment of farmers and ranchers.”

The hit Channel 4 true crime documentary series recently returned with a brand new special, but fans are still waiting for the second half to air.

Channel 4 has issued a fresh update on its beloved true crime series 24 Hours in Police Custody.

The long-running documentary series has amassed a devoted fanbase since its premiere back in 2014. It offers an unflinching look at police work in the UK and the lengths teams go to in order to bring criminals to justice.

After a months-long wait for new episodes, fans were finally informed they had a new two-part special to look forward to. That was The Ambush, which aired its first half just last week on Sunday night (August 30).

Many fans were left confused when the second part didn’t air the following evening on the Bank Holiday Monday, as a number of fans had expected the double bill to unfold over two nights. They were sadly mistaken, as the second part had always been scheduled to air exactly one week after part one, meaning it will be shown on Sunday, September 6.

Channel 4 has now directly addressed the legion of baffled fans with a cheeky post on its dedicated documentaries Facebook page. The broadcaster posted a series of screenshots of the flurry of remarks regarding the special episodes, including fans asking “Can’t find part two?” and “When is part two?”

The post was captioned: “POV you’re the Social Media Manager reading the comments on the new 24 Hours in Police Custody,” before clarifying exactly when fans can see the new episode. It added: “Watch part two of ‘The Ambush’ this Sunday at 9pm on Channel 4.”

Reacting to the post, many fans admitted they had been left confused and preferred watching both back-to-back. “I wish you’d air the episodes over two nights rather than have to wait a week,” one fan said accompanied by a crying emoji.

Another fumed: “Next time I’ll binge both on the day the second is released. I hate that wait!” Meanwhile a third series fan added: “I’d prefer not to wait a whole week. Had I known in advance I would have waited and watched them both at the same time. Still looking forward to it though.”

Yet another posted: “I’m waiting till Sunday to watch both and ignoring the spoilers,” as one vented: “Please listen to the feedback and NEVER again make us wait a week for part two!!! Consecutive days is long enough.”

24 Hours in Police Custody: The Ambush returns to Channel 4 on Sunday, September 6 at 9pm.

Critics argue that the administration’s arcade games prioritise entertainment over pressing issues like rising costs and foreign conflicts.

The White House’s unveiling of five arcade-style games on its website, each believed to be promoting a different policy of United States President Donald Trump’s agenda, has ignited backlash, with critics accusing the administration of prioritising entertainment over addressing rising living costs and the ongoing war on Iran.

Announced on Thursday, the games include “Build the Wall” where players run to capture little green figures before they reach a border wall; “Rio Run”, a Snake-style game in which players gather border crossers along a fence; “Supply Line”, in which players reject food items that fail to meet “Make America Healthy Again” standards; “Flappy Bill,” a Flappy Bird-style game in which a bald eagle carries legislation over the National Mall; and “Trump Savings Tycoon”, in which players catch flying cash and gold bars to “fill your kids’ Trump Accounts,” in reference to the administration’s child savings programme.

“Heating oil is near an all-time high but hey you can play Border Czar Tom Homan in a video game,” Senator Matt Lesser wrote on X.

Rights groups have also criticised the administration for the gaming website.

“Makes me sick. They’ve been playing games with people’s lives for years, now they’ve made a video game of what they’re doing,” Amerika Garcia Grewal, co-director of the Frontera Federation in Eagle Pass, Texas, told AFP news agency.

The game designers “have lost touch with what it means to be human and care for others”.

Adriana Jasso, programme coordinator for AMIGOS San Diego Community, who works at the border, said the arcade-style games showed a fundamental “lack of seriousness” from the administration.

“The cruelty, the extremity of the administration … is no longer surprising,” she said.

In recent months, Trump has faced mounting criticism over the economic toll of the war on Iran and his broader domestic agenda.

The conflict has kept the Strait of Hormuz closed for nearly six months, disrupting global supplies of oil and natural gas and fertiliser, and pushing US inflation above the Federal Reserve’s 2-percent target, according to reporting by Texas Public Radio.

Trump has also faced criticism over tariff policies that the Supreme Court partly struck down earlier this year, along with cuts to food assistance programmes and the expiration of Affordable Care Act tax credits, all of which economists say have compounded the squeeze on household budgets.

The White House, meanwhile, appeared unfazed, posting “CAN’T STOP WINNING” on X alongside a link to the games.

Others had previously voiced their opposition to the Met’s plan to commemorate Galliano.

Julie Menin, speaker of New York City Council, said, external: “After my numerous and lengthy meetings and conversations with the Met, I am pleased that they have agreed to not honour John Galliano.

“From the beginning, I have told them that I strongly disagreed with this decision, and at this rising time of antisemitism, it had served as a gut punch to the Jewish community.

“This is the correct decision, as the harm and pain this was causing was simply unacceptable.”

Meanwhile, Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, which aims to counter antisemitism, said that with antisemitism at “crisis levels”, honouring Galliano would be “misguided”.

“Even Galliano ultimately recognised what the Met should have done from the start,” he added. “This was the wrong move at the wrong moment. Timing matters.”

Galliano is regarded by some as one of the greatest fashion designers and returned to the fashion industry following his conviction, serving as creative director of Margiela for a decade until 2024.

Nquthu, South Africa – When Zwelibi Jack Ngubane died at the age of 105, he had already made one thing clear to his family: he wanted to be buried as a Muslim.

Hundreds of family and community members gathered for his funeral in Nquthu, a rural part of northern KwaZulu-Natal where Christianity and traditional African beliefs are dominant and Muslims are a tiny minority. Ngubane had converted to Islam late in life after observing the faith of his young grandson.

When he died, his family honoured his wishes. His funeral was conducted according to Muslim burial rites before he was laid to rest in the family burial plot in his village. For a community largely unfamiliar with Islamic burial practices, the funeral was a novelty.

But it wasn’t a controversy. That distinction has become increasingly important in South Africa.

In recent months, anti-Muslim rhetoric has become more visible online, intersecting with a heated national debate about immigration and anti-migrant movements. Posts have accused Muslims of attempting to take over South Africa, questioned their belonging in the country and accused Muslim organisations of using charity and poverty to convert Black South Africans to Islam.

One social media post complained that humanitarian organisation Gift of the Givers had been “getting on our nerves with their insistence on pushing their Muslim beliefs in South Africa”. Another claimed: “Most foreigners in South Africa are Muslim and if you look most countries experiencing war are Muslim countries not Christian ones.” Others have accused Muslims of “targeting poverty-stricken communities and converting them to Islam”.

But in the rolling hills and villages of Nquthu, the picture is different.

For Samukelisiwe Ngubane, her first encounters with Muslims came through Indian shopkeepers in a nearby town. “We have never had a problem. Some people are curious about what they [Muslims] do, but there have been no problems,” she told Al Jazeera.

When her brother, Khethukuthula Dlame, converted to Islam in 2012 as a teenager, it was hardly an issue. Dlame, now 26 and one of only a handful of Muslims known in his village, is familiar enough to his neighbours that his Islamic clothing is a source of teasing rather than hostility. One neighbour jokes that he wears a dress.

“In these communities, there’s harmony and respect. People really respect my religion,” he told Al Jazeera, standing alongside his grandfather’s gravesite.

The contrast raises a question: is South Africa experiencing a rise in Islamophobia, or is social media making a marginal phenomenon appear much larger than it is?

Muslims make up a small minority in South Africa. The country’s 2022 census counted less than one million Muslims, or approximately 1.6 percent of the population. South African Muslim leaders give higher estimates, with some putting the country’s Muslim population at between two million and five million people.

But Islam’s presence in South Africa stretches back centuries. Muslims came to the Cape through several routes, including enslavement and political exile, from parts of Asia and the Indian Ocean world under Dutch colonial rule from the 17th century. Muslims were already present at the Cape before the arrival in 1694 of Shaykh Yusuf of Macassar, a Muslim scholar and political exile.

Today, the community includes descendants of enslaved Muslims brought to the Cape centuries ago, South Africans of Indian ancestry whose families have lived in the country for generations, Black African Muslims, converts and more recent migrants.

Dlame believes attempts to mobilise people against Muslims are not primarily emerging from rural communities.

“The move to orchestrated hate towards Muslims is not at a community level. If you’re looking at people when they’re mobilising, it’s not people from the villages. It is people in cities and in hostels.”

“The people behind this understand the flash points. If you really want to cause divisions, you use tribal rhetoric and the people you mobilise and agitate are in hostels because the living conditions are not good.”

South Africa has repeatedly experienced outbreaks of xenophobic violence since the end of apartheid, with migrants from elsewhere on the African continent often bearing the brunt. The question is whether some of that anti-migrant rhetoric is also being directed at Muslims.

‘No widespread Islamophobia’

Thembisa Fakude, a South African political analyst and journalist who is Muslim, told Al Jazeera that fears of widespread Islamophobia are being overstated.

“I’ll argue that there is no widespread or any orchestrated, well-planned Islamophobia directed towards Muslims. We don’t have that.”

He acknowledges anti-Muslim rhetoric online, but argues that it should not automatically be interpreted as evidence that South African society itself has become Islamophobic.

“It’s true, but it’s not only South Africa. This is global … In South Africa, yes, it’s true. You find that there will always be bigots, you know, and others will be, you know, ultra-Zulu nationalist or ultra-nationalist.”

Fakude also argues that Muslim communities need to confront allegations of racism and exploitative labour practices within their own ranks rather than characterising every criticism as religious prejudice.

“It is a storm in a teacup. And I think what’s concerning me is this othering by Muslims wanting to position themselves as victims and taking this course by themselves. It’s extremely dangerous.”

What starts online does not always stay there

Muslim religious leader Moulana Sulaiman Ravat told Al Jazeera that, while ordinary South Africans are largely not Islamophobic, he is more cautious about what could happen next.

“At the same time, I think on the ground, South Africans in the main are not Islamophobic, and there’s a variety of indicators to substantiate that.”

But Ravat warns that online rhetoric can influence attitudes over time.

“I don’t think we can go to the other extreme. We must understand that there are certain global political realities, and the Islamophobia project aligns with those global agendas. And therefore, if we become complacent or nonchalant about it, what people are exposed to online could start impacting their psyche and how they think.”

Ravat argues that Muslim identity is sometimes being presented as evidence that a person is somehow less South African. For him, the premise is false.

“I would think I would say they are deeply religious and deeply patriotic, and there is no contradiction between the two.”

His own children, he said, are fifth-generation South African Muslims of Indian heritage.

“They don’t speak the language any more. They are as South African as anyone else.”

Two South Africas?

Back in Nquthu, Islam does not arrive through a social media algorithm. It arrives through a neighbour, where Dlame’s mother cooks a halal meal for this reporter and other guests. Earlier, at a community meeting, Dlame explained that Muslims, too, believe that Jesus was a prophet of God. Ordinary villagers listened attentively and joined in Zulu melodies in praise of God.

For now, the distance between the online conversation and life in communities such as Nquthu remains significant. But Ravat says that does not mean the possibility of deeper hostility should be dismissed.

“Better be proactive than reactive. It’s a global reality. It has been for the last 20 years. And the fact that it could increase in South Africa and could have serious consequences, you could argue, is unlikely but not impossible.”

Bogota, Colombia – Opposition politicians and migrant communities in Colombia have decried President Abelardo de la Espriella’s plan to launch a deportation campaign against foreign nationals living irregularly in the country.

De la Espriella unveiled the crackdown during a security council meeting on Sunday, ordering police to begin operations as soon as this week.

The policy is expected to primarily affect Venezuelans, by far the largest migrant population in Colombia.

It marks a stark departure from measures under previous administrations, which largely sought to create legal immigration pathways for those fleeing hardship in neighbouring Venezuela.

“I will not accept any illegal immigrants, wherever they come from,” said de la Espriella in a video shared on the social media platform X on Sunday evening. “They will have to leave and be deported. It is a political decision I am taking responsibility for.”

The far-right president – who was inaugurated earlier this month – said his government will first target those “committing crimes” and then those whose “status has not been regularised”.

While de la Espriella did not address any specific nationalities, some 95 percent of Colombia’s migrant population are Venezuelan, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental group.

Approximately 2.8 million Venezuelans reside in Colombia, making it home to the largest Venezuelan migrant community in the world.

While nearly 2 million have a Temporary Protection Permit (PPT) authorising them to live in the country, an estimated 500,000 lack permission to be in Colombia, according to migration authorities. Many of them were granted temporary permits that have since expired.

De la Espriella, a political outsider, pledged to tackle illegal immigration during his presidential campaign, his first bid for elected office.

The former lawyer has aligned himself with right-wing leaders such as US President Donald Trump, who initiated his own deportation campaign in the United States.

De la Espriella’s declaration on Sunday triggered uproar among opposition leaders, including leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda, who narrowly lost the presidency in a June run-off. He leads the Historic Pact, the largest party in Colombia’s Congress.

“Today, de la Espriella has added xenophobia to all the authoritarian, despotic and discriminatory traits of his policies,” Cepeda wrote on X.

Cepeda then accused de la Espriella of failing to protect Colombian deportees from the United States.

“De la Espriella is bold enough to target migrants from Latin American countries in Colombia, yet cowardly when it comes to protecting our fellow migrants in the United States,” he said.

Maria del Mar Pizarro, a Historic Pact congresswoman, also denounced de la Espriella’s plans in an interview with Al Jazeera. She questioned whether the deportation campaign was about security or discrimination.

“Foreign nationals who commit crimes must be prosecuted,” she said. “But persecuting and deporting someone — simply because their immigration status is not in order — is populism, not security.”

Given the porous nature of the roughly 2,200-kilometre (1,370-mile) land border between the two countries, Pizarro added that there is little to stop deported Venezuelans from returning to Colombia.

“Without border control, legalisation and intelligence efforts against criminal gangs, the government pays for the deportation, and the problem returns,” she said.

Venezuelan diaspora fears policy implications

De la Espriella has announced that the deportation operation will begin with a pilot programme in the coastal city of Barranquilla, which is home to an estimated 182,000 Venezuelans.

Members of the Venezuelan diaspora in the city, however, fear that the crackdown will feed into stereotypes about their community.

“We must not confuse irregular immigration status with criminality. They are two completely different things,” said Juan Carlos Viloria Doria, the vice president of Venezuelans in Barranquilla, a migrant advocacy organisation.

While he backed the need to prosecute those who commit crimes, he said the law should apply to everyone “independent of nationality”.

Viloria also noted that many migrants could face political persecution if deported back to Venezuela.

Experts at the United Nations and other human rights watchdogs have accused the Venezuelan government of “repressive” activities, including the arbitrary detention and torture of political dissidents.

“We have people who left because they believed their lives, their freedom, or their safety were at risk,” Viloria explained. “Added to that are the economic, social and humanitarian conditions that Venezuela still faces.”

Despite being home to the world’s largest petroleum reserves, Venezuela has suffered from a plummeting gross domestic product (GDP) and rampant hyperinflation in the past decade.

Critics of the governing United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) say it has presided over chronic economic mismanagement, funnelling oil profits to a small elite while underfunding public services.

The Venezuelan government, however, argues it has been constrained by US sanctions, which have affected oil revenue, trade and foreign investment.

Faced with Venezuela’s economic crisis and threats of political persecution, some 7.6 million citizens have left the country since 2014, according to the UN.

Ronald Vergara moved to Colombia in 2016 and founded Fundacion Hermanos Caminantes, a nongovernmental organisation that supports recently arrived migrants. He fears how de la Espriella’s crackdown may harm an already struggling community.

“It would truly be inhumane to deport people who came here to survive and to work – decent people, who account for the majority of us,” he told Al Jazeera.

Despite living in Colombia for 10 years, Vergara was only granted a Temporary Protection Permit a few months ago, due to delays in the system. He said that residing in Colombia without papers limited his opportunities.

“I always felt excluded. I was never able to get a job that paid a decent wage,” he explained.

Vergara also said he has seen cases where those who had a Temporary Protection Permit lost their legal status because their identity card was lost or stolen. Thousands of others are still waiting to be granted their papers, including his son.

“He’s 17 and about to graduate from high school, but he can’t graduate without the PPT,” said Vergara.

A departure from political tradition

De la Espriella’s announcement heralds a new era of anti-immigrant politics in Colombia, according to experts.

Since the Venezuelan migration crisis began, successive administrations in Bogota have responded by offering new arrivals assistance and opportunities for integration.

In 2017, for instance, then-President Juan Manuel Santos introduced a two-year temporary permit for Venezuelans called the Special Permit of Permanence and bolstered humanitarian assistance on the border.

His successor, right-wing leader Ivan Duque, severed relations with Caracas in 2019, closing the land border to vehicular traffic and suspending air travel. But he still offered migrants the chance to remain in Colombia by rolling out the PPT in 2021.

Most recently, Colombia’s first left-wing president, Gustavo Petro, presided over a thaw in bilateral relations with Venezuela and adopted a pro-migrant stance. His presidency ended this year, with de la Espriella’s victory.

Ronal Rodriguez, a spokesperson at the Venezuela Observatory, a research centre at Bogota’s Rosario University, said de la Espriella’s policies interrupt a years-long trend.

“Everyone had a favourable stance toward migration and, in particular, used language that promoted integration,” Rodriguez explained.

“Unfortunately, I believe that this ends – for the moment – with what President Abelardo de la Espriella is now saying.”

While the president has pledged a crackdown on irregular migrants, the full details of his deportation platform have yet to be revealed.

For Rodriguez, de la Espriella may yet back down from his bold declarations.

He hopes that the president will “reconsider and return to the Colombian government’s policy of integration”.

Secret Lives of Gypsy Wives star Trewley-Precious was left facing a huge dilemma in the series finale after being offered a six-figure deal

Trewley-Precious was forced to turn down a six-figure deal after facing a huge dilemma.

The Channel 4 star was faced with an agonising decision after being offered a huge amount of money to work with a weight-loss brand.

She was left torn between a potentially life-changing sum of money and staying true to the values she has built her public image around.

The emotional dilemma unfolded during the final episode of her reality series Secret Lives of Gypsy Wives as Trewley was approached with the opportunity to work with a major weight-loss company associated with injectable weight-loss treatments.

However, despite the huge financial incentive, Trewley admitted she was uncomfortable with the idea of promoting something she did not personally believe in.

Her manager Andrea explained that the company was a “big brand” which was already working with well-known celebrity names and said the proposed partnership could involve a “transformation process” for anyone considering weight-loss injections.

“There is potentially a lot of money involved in this kind of partnership,” her manager told her. Trewley immediately questioned whether the deal fitted with the image she had created for herself.

“First of all, I just don’t think it’d fit my brand. That’s not who I am,” she said. “If I lose weight, I’ll go to the gym. I wouldn’t get on there for my other drugs, so why would I feel like that? You’re talking about payment, what’s the payment?”

The answer left her stunned. Her manager revealed that the deal could be worth six figures over the course of a year. “What the f***? That’s real?” Trewley exclaimed. Her manager confirmed that it was.

But even with the staggering figure on the table, Trewley knew accepting the deal could come at a cost. “I can’t sell my soul out,” she said.

Her manager reminded her that she was trying to build a long-term career and that she needed to think carefully about the brands she associated herself with.

“I think in this industry, you have to be so mindful of who your audience is,” her manager told her. “And your audience are young women.”

For Trewley, however, the decision was not simply about money. She admitted that part of her was thinking about what the money could do for her family, particularly her mum. “There’s part of me, family wise, that’s like, I can support, I can provide,” she explained.

But she also knew that accepting the deal could mean compromising the message she had been putting out to her followers.

Speaking directly to the camera, Trewley admitted she felt trapped whichever decision she made. “If I take it, I always represent these curvy women and this and that, so it’s just going against what I stand for,” she said. “But then I also have… I’ve got to think about my mum and my family. I’ve got to provide.”

She added: “It’s just disheartening. I feel stupid either way. I feel stupid if I take it, and I feel stupid if I don’t.”

Unable to make the decision alone, Trewley decided to call her mum, Tina, for advice. She explained that she had been offered a controversial brand deal and revealed just how much money was involved. But Tina’s response was immediate. She told her daughter not to take it.

Even when Trewley explained that the deal was worth a huge amount of money, her mum remained firm. Tina questioned whether any amount of money was worth putting her health at risk.

The conversation became an emotional moment for Trewley, who broke down as she considered what turning down the opportunity could mean. The money could have changed their lives. But ultimately, her mum’s advice helped Trewley make her decision.

Trewley revealed that she would turn down the deal, making it clear that no amount of money was going to make her compromise her beliefs.

“My goal in life is to provide for my family and earn money off what I’m doing,” she explained. “But I’m not compromising. I’m not being bought for something I don’t believe in. I don’t care how much it is, I’m not doing it.”

The decision comes as Trewley continues to navigate life in the public eye. Her growing presence on social media and the way she presents herself has not always been welcomed by everyone within the Traveller community, with Trewley facing backlash over her move into the world of influencing and television.

For Trewley, that criticism has highlighted a much bigger question about her future. She has grown up with a traditional Traveller lifestyle, but is now building a public career that brings opportunities far beyond the life she knew growing up.

You can stream Secret Lives of Gypsy Wives on Channel 4

Aug. 22 (UPI) — The casting of Meghan Markle to play a role in the Netflix series The Gentlemen has been withdrawn amid intense backlash in Britain, it was reported Saturday.

The Duchess of Sussex had been in talks to return to acting when she and Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, return to Britain after living in California for the past six years.

She had been hoping to join the third season of the Guy Ritchie show The Gentlemen on Netflix.

But the casting was reportedly withdrawn.

“The backlash in the UK was so intense, it became untenable to go forward,” wrote Tina Brown, the former editor in chief of Vanity Fair and the New Yorker, in her Substack.

Markle, who starred in seven seasons of the legal drama Suits, stepped back from acting in 2018 after marrying Prince Harry.

It was reported this week that the couple is planning on returning to Britain within days.

They plan on living in a private residence outside London with Prince Archie, 7, and Princes Lilibet, 5, and have reportedly enrolled the children in a British school for the fall term.

The Sussexes, who stepped away from royal duties in 2020, will return as private citizens and are not expected to resume their previous roles.