#Fact Check: Viral Footage from Bangladesh Incorrectly Portrayed as Immigrant March for Violence in Assam.

Executive Summary

Amid the ongoing tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran, a video circulating on social media claims that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was seen running after Iran launched an attack on Israel. However, research by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the video has no connection with the current tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran. In reality, the clip dates back to 2021, when Netanyahu was rushing inside Israel’s parliament to cast his vote after arriving late.

‍

Claim:
‍

On the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the video on March 5, 2026, claiming that Netanyahu had fled and gone into hiding due to fear of Iran. The post included inflammatory remarks suggesting that Iran had demonstrated its power and that Netanyahu had abandoned his country out of fear.

• https://x.com/KarishmaAziz_/status/2029336686602404218?s=20 
• https://archive.ph/AMZPu 
  ‍

‍

Fact Check

‍

To verify the authenticity of the video, we extracted several keyframes and conducted a reverse image search on Google. During the research, we found the same video on the official X account of Benjamin Netanyahu, posted on December 14, 2021. In the post, Netanyahu wrote in Hebrew, which translates to,“I am always proud to run for you. Photographed half an hour ago in the Knesset.”

• https://x.com/netanyahu/status/1470499097303998471?s=20 

‍

‍

‍

Further research also led us to a Hebrew news website where the same video was published.

• https://www.kikar.co.il/political-news/407728 
  ‍

‍

According to the report, voting in the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) continued throughout the night, and an explosives-related bill was passed by a very narrow margin. At the time, opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu was in his room inside the Knesset building. When he was called for the vote, he hurried through the parliament corridors to reach the chamber in time to cast his vote.

‍

Conclusion:

Our research found that the viral video is unrelated to the ongoing tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran. The footage is from 2021 and shows Benjamin Netanyahu rushing inside the Knesset to participate in a parliamentary vote after being called in at the last moment.

‍

Introduction

‍

If we look at the concept of scams, they have existed for as long as human societies have. A few decades ago, it was quite common to see scams being carried out in the form of fake landline calls, forged documents or persuasive salesmen. And ‘trust’, being the fundamental aspect of human interaction, has been at the forefront of such interactions. This ‘trust’ factor has been consistently exploited by nefarious individuals all over the world through various acts of deception and a plethora of fraudulent activities. 

‍

As the years have gone by, the very same scamming methods have simply shifted mediums. They have transitioned from the geographies of markets and doorsteps to the virtual world of smartphones and digital devices. The senior citizens of today are sitting at a juncture where they come equipped with the ‘habits’ and ‘understanding’ of the offline world. And this is why in today’s technologically driven and fast paced digital environment, they are being targeted via ‘unfamiliar’ digital mediums and tactics, making them highly susceptible to cyber frauds and online scams.  

‍

Back in the simpler days, it wasn’t too difficult to catch the whiff of a scammer. One could pick up on their practiced speech patterns, spot their overly polished and formal tone or their sheepish body language and even notice the minute inconsistencies in their statements. This back-and-forth communication would take place in real time, over phone calls and even face to face. 

‍

But the scenario today is worse. Since our reliance on digital devices has expanded at an unparalleled pace, it has become all the more difficult to distinguish between what’s fake and what’s genuine. All of a sudden, our entire essential daily activities have become encompassed in the realm of the digital world, ranging from banking, shopping, healthcare to everyday communication. And to further exacerbate the situation, today’s scammers have quietly adapted to this newfound circumstance, as they hide behind screens.

‍

Fake messages or emails can be easily mistaken for being ‘real’ in the current modern digital age. Especially for senior citizens, this shift is presenting a serious challenge. They are being forced to evaluate authenticity and legitimacy through links, messages and apps that basically all look familiar. For example, the logo in an online correspondence might seem to be genuine or its language might look official and credible. At first glance, even the format or the layout of an email or a message may seem familiar enough to not raise any suspicion. This is the point where the danger lies. When there are no warning signs, no rude tones, no spelling errors and no weird behaviour. It becomes very difficult for people to tell what’s real and what’s a trap, especially for the seniors. And in that brief period of confusion, scammers manage to fool people into divulging personal information, clicking dangerous links or even parting with their hard-earned money.

‍

What makes the senior population so vulnerable?
‍

Trapped in the Convenience of Digital Dependence

‍

As the senior population embraces the new and sophisticated digital tools of today, alongside they are also risking their exposure to the online world of cyber security risks and cyber criminals. New devices such as smartphones and tablets do offer unprecedented convenience but they also come with various underlying dangers. Modern technology has made everyday tasks quite easy. Smartphone based UPI applications, bank applications and even online healthcare platforms have simplified life not just for the elderly, but for everyone across society. But many senior citizens may not be as well versed with the usage of these technologies and the digital risks they carry. They may get influenced easily or they may not exercise the same level of caution as the younger generations (who have literally grown up being surrounded by the dynamics of technology). This ‘familiarity gap’ adds up to the vulnerability of seniors. Without any prior visible warning signs they can easily end up getting exposed to online scams, fraudulent transactions and data misuse.

‍

Cybercriminals’ Goldmine: Cash-rich Seniors

‍

Although a person’s vulnerability towards becoming a target or a victim of a cyber crime is mostly shaped by their circumstance and not by age alone. But still, from the point of view of a cyber criminal, senior citizens do seem to be the perfect victims. Most of them are retired and financially sound with lifetime savings, consistent pensions, accumulated assets and anticipated income streams. As they enjoy their solid financial footing, they may not keep a regular check on their online banking accounts and financial records. This ‘financial ease’ can inadvertently make them more prone to cyber crimes, especially when they are simultaneously getting increasingly dependent on digital tools. This lack of oversight may allow suspicious activities or fraudulent transactions to go unnoticed and sometimes even lead to huge losses of money. This is where digital literacy comes in. Keeping the seniors well informed on the safe usage of the internet can significantly lower their chance of getting intertwined in an online scam. It has therefore become crucial to promote and encourage regular account checks, setting up of alerts and foster awareness regarding common online threats that can help seniors safeguard their hard-earned resources. 

‍

India itself witnessed an increase of 86% from the years 2020 to 2022 in cyber crime cases related to senior citizens. 

‍

Targeting the Psychological Aspects: Panic, Overwhelm, Manipulation and Isolation

‍

Senior citizens are often at an age and stage in life where their routines slow down and the general pace of life shifts towards a gentler rhythm. Thought processes may not be as swift as they used to be, some may even experience mild cognitive decline and many live alone or away from their children or immediate support systems. Research also shows that aging can lead to low memory function which in turn can increase an individual’s susceptibility to digital traps such as phishing emails and financial abuse. According to a comprehensive analysis of senior fraud victims, it has been noted that victimisation increases with advancing age. There are significant associations between fraud victimisation and human cognitive factors, such as: diminished executive functioning, reduced ability of the brain to process information and even impairments in comprehending complex everyday information.

‍

Cybercriminals, who are aware of these soft spots, deliberately exploit the seniors’ psychological and mental space. They strategically deploy methods that create confusion and cognitive overload. They may create a fictitious scenario depicting some kind of ‘urgency’ and use the elderly’s ‘panic response’ to their advantage. They may create false warnings of a blocked bank account, a missed or delayed medical update or inform them of a sudden (but fake) legal issue. They aim at creating a situation of ‘overwhelm, anxiety and severe distress’. And it is common knowledge that when fear encapsulates an individual, the process of rational decision making deeply gets affected. In this scenario elderly victims often fall for the cyber criminals’ malicious antics and end up complying with them without actually verifying their intent and authenticity. 

‍

The senior population of the current times was raised in an era where they were rarely taught to question authoritative figures. This is where ‘manipulation’ steps in. The concept of manipulation thrives on the sense of ‘authority, power, position and trust’. Cyber fraudsters use this mechanism and convincingly impersonate government representatives, senior bank officials, healthcare providers, etc. They may project credibility and legitimacy by using authoritative sounding language, creating a sense of power over the victim and manipulating them. 

‍

Another important factor that scammers leverage to their advantage is ‘isolation’. A lot of seniors live alone or just with their spouse, with no immediate support systems nearby. They navigate and tread their daily routines on their own, trying hard to adapt to the dynamic digital world.  This life of solitude or isolation leaves them in a vulnerable state. They may not even have someone to talk to, or get a second opinion, or even guidance regarding some suspicious online activity that they may be experiencing. This state of isolation combined with their limited digital competence creates the perfect stance for a cybercriminal to manipulate these individuals.

‍

Understanding this psychological dimension has become critical to prevent cyber crimes amongst the elderly. Proper awareness campaigns, reassurance, encouragement of think-and-verify habits can reduce the occurrence of such scams and protect our senior citizens.

‍

Clickbait Cures, Bogus Health Remedies and Expensive False Hopes 

‍

It is a known fact that for most senior citizens, their health ranks highest in the list of their priorities. They are always on the lookout for information regarding treatments, medications, dietary supplements and even wellness programs. In an effort to live a healthy and fuller life in this digital age, unknowingly, senior citizens can become easy targets for cybercriminals.

‍

The internet is flooded with eye-catching headlines, ads and clickbaits that promise quick relief and miracle cures. Their wordings may appear like: ‘miracle joint and arthritis relief’, ‘reverse diabetes in seven days’, ‘secret anti-ageing formulas that doctors won’t divulge’, etc.  These promises seem all flashy and shiny, but the reality is generally painful. Elderly people can easily get attracted to such ads. Scammers use reassuring language that instantly appeals to the seniors’ attention and their emotions. They create fake doctor profiles or publish fabricated patient reviews with overly dramatised testimonials and false research. In order to seem authentic, some scammers may even use the names and logos of respectable health institutions and organisations such as the ‘World Health Organisation’. They claim to sell products like miracle pills, teas, devices, virtual health services, etc., all at extremely high prices along with pressure inducing statements such as: ‘offer ends tonight’ or ‘only 20 spots left’. 

‍

When the elderly fall for this scam and end up paying the amount, either the promised product doesn’t turn up or it proves to be completely ineffective. In worst case scenarios, it may even harm the user’s health. These bogus health products are not regulated by any health association or authority. They may contain unsafe ingredients, incorrect dosages and other toxic substances that can severely impact the elderly’s health. An adverse reaction can take place or an existing medical condition may worsen. What begins as a hopeful step towards better health can eventually lead to loss of finances, physical harm and a deep sense of disappointment and hurt.

‍

Sharing of card details, Adhaar numbers, insurance and medical reports on fake websites can further lead to identity theft and other dangerous  cyber crimes.

‍

Protection starts with simple habits. And here families have a big role to play. Making our senior citizens aware of this scenario is the first step. Education brings along ‘awareness’, and with awareness comes ‘caution and confidence’. Teaching the seniors to be wary of any warning signs, to not share any personal or financial details online and to make sure to consult a doctor first before starting any new treatments, are a few ways that can definitely help in reducing the risk of such scams. 

‍

Risky Digital Routines: Overexposure and Oversharing 

‍

The senior citizens of today are heavily invested in their daily digital routines. They stay virtually connected through various messaging apps (such as WhatsApp), they eagerly curate and maintain their digital identities on online platforms (such as Instagram and Facebook) and they regularly use emails to share messages, articles and forwards within their social circles. Many of us have seen it in our own family groups, that the seniors are the most enthusiastic lot. They are the first to send in their morning salutation messages, photos and other daily updates. This eagerness reflects both their genuine commitment towards staying in touch and also the pure joy that they derive from being active members of these online communities. It is important to understand that these platforms don’t just serve as mere communication tools for them. Beyond messaging and sharing of updates, these online spaces offer a sense of community, belongingness and self-expression to the elderly. 

‍

But these everyday digital routines can cause an overexposure to the virtual world which further creates opportunities for scammers. Clicking on unfamiliar links, downloading unknown softwares and giving quick responses to alerts and notifications (without first identifying the source), are a few examples of how seniors end up getting embroiled in risky situations. At the same time, online oversharing of personal details such as addresses, birthdays, travel plans, family updates, phone numbers, even investment plans, etc., can seem to be quite harmless on the face of it. But all of this information builds a goldmine for the scammers. They may be able to piece it together and use it to send highly convincing phishing emails, create fake online offers or even impersonate a loved one. 

‍

Senior citizens also tend to take online messages at face value. AI generated videos, images, false news, etc., are all generally shared under the garb of sensational claims or urgent warnings and are therefore easily assumed to be true, especially by the elderly. They may not even take a minute to factcheck the information and instead may forward it to ten other people in their circle. 

‍

The above risks can significantly be reduced by practicing safer digital habits. Seniors should be mindful in their digital usage. Pausing and thinking before clicking on a link, fact checking a piece of news, using strong privacy settings and trusted apps, etc., can help protect both their personal data as well as their digital wellbeing. 

‍

Silent Suffering: Shame, Underreporting and Systemic Gaps

‍

Research suggests that senior citizens do not always report a cybercrime. This can be due to shame, self blame, ridicule, fear of being judged as incompetent and a general opinion that even if they report it, nothing will come out of it. They may feel embarrassed about getting deceived, believing that they should have known better. This may create an emotional burden which further amplifies underreporting. Informing their family members or just reaching out for some help can seem like a mammoth task for them. 

‍

Existing institutional gaps in our systems compounds this silent suffering. While there are law enforcement and consumer protection agencies in place, but the first step, which is the ‘reporting mechanism’, can seem to be inaccessible or too overbearing for the seniors. These systems may not have a very proactive outreach and can fail to tackle the distinct set of challenges faced by the seniors (such as clear guidance on scams or support for recovering lost funds).  

‍

This combination of ‘shame, underreporting and weak system support’ creates a dangerous cycle. Senior citizens are left as open prey, exploited and repeatedly targeted without sufficient help or any recognition for their plight. 

‍

The Way Forward

‍

Society has to first acknowledge and identify the inimitable vulnerabilities of the seniors. This cycle can be broken by developing information drives that are specially tailored for the seniors. Moreover, along with family involvement, user friendly reporting channels and stronger protections from fraudulent online practices, seniors can see a ray of hope.

‍

Targeted training programs, senior friendly cybersecurity workshops and courses can be a starting point. Teaching them about password creations, safe browsing tactics, phishing recognition and specific mentor-led sessions can empower them with the basic understanding of the online world. 

‍

Being able to navigate the digital world with adequate competence and confidence, and without the fear of exploitation, is ultimately what every senior citizen needs. 

‍

References

‍

• https://www.staysafeonline.org/articles/why-do-scammers-target-older-adults
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12074955/
• https://cybersecurityasia.net/rise-cyber-crime-targeting-older-adults/
• https://news.ufl.edu/2024/06/older-adults-vulnerable-to-scams/
• https://oklaw.org/resource/why-are-older-people-vulnerable-to-scams
• https://www.crimrxiv.com/pub/g7u4rb9v
• https://www.norc.org/research/library/majority-of-older-adults-experience-cyber-abuse-in-their-lifetim.html
• https://www.sbigeneral.in/blog/cyber-insurance/cyber-tips-and-tricks/how-senior-citizens-can-avoid-internet-scams

‍

When your digital identity becomes raw material for someone else’s imagination, who really owns your face?

On July 7, 2026, Meta launched Muse Image, the first standalone image-generation model developed by Meta Superintelligence Labs under Alexandr Wang. Positioned as a competitor to OpenAI’s GPT Images 2.0 and Google’s Nano Banana 2, the launch highlights Meta’s growing ambitions in the generative AI race. Yet beneath the technical advancements lies a far more consequential question than what AI can create, but about who gets to decide what it creates with?

That ambition of generative AI comes with a cost, and one of Muse Image's most controversial design choices is its integration with Instagram, which allows public profiles to become creative references for AI-generated images. Users can tag public Instagram accounts in prompts and generate AI images inspired by that person’s publicly available content. Meta presents this as a new form of personalization and creativity. However, critics argue that the feature transforms years of personal photographs into a massive library of AI-ready human identities, where non-action automatically becomes permission. The concern is not just that AI can generate realistic images. The concern is that consent itself is being manipulated in a way.

‍

 The opt-out system most users never asked for

Muse Image operates through Meta AI’s integration with Instagram. A user can reference a public Instagram profile in a prompt, allowing the system to generate images influenced by that person’s existing content and likeness. Under the default arrangement, the person whose profile is being referenced may not necessarily approve the generation beforehand.

Meta does provide users with controls to restrict this functionality. The setting exists under Instagram’s “Sharing and reuse” options, where users can disable permissions related to the use of their posts and reels with Meta’s AI features. But the larger issue is the direction in which responsibility flows. Instead of requiring active permission before someone’s likeness becomes available for AI-generated content, the burden is placed on individuals to discover the feature, understand the implications, locate the setting, and disable it. In a digital environment where users already navigate endless privacy menus, cookie banners, and terms of service agreements, expecting meaningful awareness from billions of people becomes unrealistic. Consent that depends on finding the exit door is very different from consent that begins with a choice.

‍

A guide for opting-out

One way of opting out is to have a private account. As verified, Meta does not encroach on private accounts as of now for image-generation.

But if you have a public account, here are the steps that can be followed to secure yourself from Meta’s Muse automatic consent:

On your profile, tap the menu bar which is on the top right (≡), you will enter into ‘setting and activity’, after that you will see an option of ‘sharing and refuse’ and then disable the options under it, namely- Allow people to reuse your content on Instagram and with AI features at Meta. Notably, the changes made will be only for your future content not the already existing content on your public profile.

‍

 Why “public” does not mean “available for anything”

The debate around Muse Image highlights a deeper misunderstanding at the center of modern digital platforms: the difference between visibility and reuse. When someone makes an Instagram account public, they are generally making a decision about the audience. They are allowing others to view their photos, discover their profile, or engage with their content. That decision was never traditionally understood as permission for their face, appearance, personal moments, or identity markers to become reusable components in AI-generated media. A photograph posted online has context. It represents a specific moment, purpose, relationship, or expression. Generative AI changes that equation because it separates identity from context. A person’s likeness can be extracted from its original context and placed into entirely new situations created by someone else. Muse Image does not just expand who can see your content. It expands what can be done with it. That distinction is what scales the problem for every public user on the app. The privacy implications become significantly larger because of Instagram’s global reach. With billions of users worldwide, even a small percentage of affected public accounts represents an enormous number of people. Many public profiles do not belong to celebrities, influencers, or creators who intentionally operate as public brands. They belong to students, professionals, small businesses, artists, photographers, and everyday users who simply chose visibility within a social network.

For years, platforms encouraged people to share more, build audiences, and maintain a public digital presence. Now, the meaning of that public presence is changing after the fact. The question becomes: should a decision made years ago to share photos socially automatically extend into permission for generative AI systems built years later?

There is also a catch while opting out. Changing these settings only protects your content from being used in future AI generations,  it does not undo anything that has already happened. Any AI images previously created using your public profile will remain unaffected. Essentially, the opt-out works as a shield for what comes next, not a reset button for what has already been created.

‍

 A familiar pattern in the AI era

Muse Image reflects a broader pattern emerging across the technology industry. New AI capabilities are introduced at massive scale, participation becomes the default, and individual control arrives afterward through settings that many users may never find. The same debates that once surrounded targeted advertising, data collection, and algorithmic profiling are now moving into a far more personal territory, the human identity itself. Faces are not ordinary data points. Unlike a username, password, or preference setting, a person cannot simply replace their appearance once it has been widely replicated.

Technical solutions such as AI watermarking and content labels may help identify generated material, but they address authenticity after creation. They do not answer the question of whether the generation should have happened in the first place.

‍

 Innovation cannot replace consent

The technological progress behind Muse Image is significant. Better image generation, improved text rendering, and more personalized creative tools represent genuine advances in artificial intelligence. But capability alone cannot determine acceptability. The future of AI will not only depend on how realistic images become, how powerful models become, or how quickly companies can deploy new features. It will also depend on whether people feel they have meaningful control over their own digital identities. Muse Image is therefore more than another AI product launch. It represents a defining question for the next phase of the internet: Will our online presence remain something we control, or will it become something others can generate?

‍