Connect with us

News

Men fighting in Ukraine forced to separate from their families

Published

on

Men fighting in Ukraine forced to separate from their families

Hiya, OnPolitics readers!

It is St. Patrick’s Day. ☘️ Irish Taoiseach (or Prime Minister) Micheál Martin started celebrations a day early with President Joe Biden at a gala in Washington, D.C., however the good occasions had been sadly reduce quick when Martin examined constructive for COVID-19.

The Irish chief was in Washington attending the Eire Funds, an annual dinner selling diplomacy between the U.S. and Eire, when he obtained his constructive take a look at outcome.

Biden and Martin had been set to debate the deepening relationship between their two nations and their united response to the Russia-Ukraine Struggle. Biden is Irish-American.

The president spoke on the occasion however didn’t have shut contact with Martin, in accordance with White Home spokesperson Chris Meagher. It’s unclear how Martin’s analysis will have an effect on the White Home’s plans for the vacation.

Advertisement

It is Amy and Chelsey with right this moment’s prime tales out of Washington.

Ukrainian males say goodbye to households, brace for struggle

Thousands and thousands of ladies and kids who’ve fled Ukraine to flee the relentless shelling from Russian troops have been compelled to separate from male members of the family left behind to defend the nation.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

US defence secretary Lloyd Austin withdraws plea deals for accused 9/11 plotters

Published

on

US defence secretary Lloyd Austin withdraws plea deals for accused 9/11 plotters

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

US defence secretary Lloyd Austin has withdrawn plea deals reached earlier this week with the accused mastermind behind the September 11 2001 terror attacks and two accomplices, an extraordinary about-face in politically charged cases that have dragged on for years.

The brief memorandum published on Friday came just two days after the Pentagon announced Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin Attash and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi had reached deals with the head of the military tribunal in Guntánamo Bay. The three men had been held at the US military base in Cuba for nearly two decades, where they faced the death penalty.

Austin also revoked the authority of retired Brigadier General Susan Escallier, who oversaw the Guantánamo war court, to enter into the agreements with the three prisoners, reserving such power for himself. Escallier was appointed to her post in 2023.

Advertisement

“I have determined that in light of the significance of the decision to enter into pre-trial agreements with the accused in the above-referenced case, responsibility for such a decision should rest with me as the superior convening authority under the Military Commissions Act of 2009,” Austin wrote in the memo addressed to Escallier.

“Effective immediately, I hereby withdraw your authority in the above-referenced case to enter into a pre-trial agreement and reserve such authority to myself. Effective immediately, in the exercise of my authority, I hereby withdraw from the three pre-trial agreements that you signed on July 31, 2024” in the cases in question, the memo stated.

The agreements reached on Wednesday had prompted a fierce backlash from Republicans, who accused the Biden administration of negotiating with individuals accused of taking part in a terror attack that killed nearly 3,000 people and dramatically altered US domestic and foreign policy.

The party’s Senate leader Mitch McConnell called the decision “a revolting abdication of the government’s responsibility”. It had also led to some criticism from the families of those who died on September 11, when attackers crashed planes into the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania.

A lawyer for Mohammed did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

The exact terms of the three men’s original pleas were not disclosed by the US government, but they were expected to plead guilty and avoid a full trial. The proceedings had been mired in legal and ethical controversy over the length of the defendants’ custody without trial and instances of torture.

Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the attacks, was captured in 2003 in Pakistan, and held at CIA prisons before being sent to Guantánamo Bay, where a military detention facility was opened during the administration of George W Bush to house prisoners captured during the US’s “war on terror” following the September 11 attacks. The agency has since been found to have subjected him to waterboarding, a form of torture, at least 183 times.

A report by a Senate select committee in 2014 found that “internal CIA records describe the waterboarding of [Khaled Sheikh Mohammed] as evolving into a ‘series of near drownings’”.

Harrowing accounts of such techniques sparked a fierce debate within the US over the legality of cases against Mohammed and other prisoners, and the ongoing litigation became a deeply divisive topic in Washington.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Defense secretary revokes plea deal with accused 9/11 plotters

Published

on

Defense secretary revokes plea deal with accused 9/11 plotters

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin nullified the plea deal with the defendants accused of plotting the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Alex Wong/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Alex Wong/Getty Images

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin revoked a plea agreement reached earlier this week with three accused plotters of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, including the alleged mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

The previous agreements exchanged guilty pleas from the men for sentences of, at most, life in prison.

Austin relieved the senior official in charge of military commissions, Brig. Gen. Susan Escallier, from her oversight of the case, saying in an order released Friday evening, “in light of the significance of the decision … responsibility for such a decision should rest with me.” The cancellation of the agreement effectively makes it a capital case again.

Advertisement

The previous plea agreements with the Pentagon, announced Wednesday, had been a partial resolution for a case that had dragged on for almost 20 years, and was unlikely ever to go to trial.

Reaction to the plea deals had been mixed; While some victim family members saw them as closure, many family members of the nearly 3,000 people who died in the Sept. 11, 2001, want the 9/11 defendants put to death.

Brett Eagleson, who was 15 when his father died in the World Trade Center collapse, sent NPR a statement issued by a group called 9/11 Justice that said it was “deeply troubled by these plea deals,” calling them the product of “closed-door agreements where crucial information is hidden without giving the families of the victims the chance to learn the full truth.”

Republican lawmakers expressed dismay at the agreements: among them, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who introduced legislation intended to nullify it.

“Giving a plea deal to the terrorist masterminds behind 9/11 is disgraceful and an insult to the victims of the attack,” he said.

Advertisement

Austin’s decision throws the case back into limbo.

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading

News

The Court Filing

Published

on

The Court Filing

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
elements: severity and purpose.
“620
police brutality.”
619
These elements serve to distinguish true torture from “mere
The first inquiry is severity. The D.C. Circuit explained, “The critical issue is
“621
the degree of pain and suffering that the alleged torturer intended to, and actually did, inflict upon
the victim. The more intense, lasting, or heinous the agony, the more likely it is to be torture.”
The court gave “sustained systematic beating” and “tying up or hanging in positions that cause
extreme pain” as examples of “extreme, deliberate and unusually cruel practices” that meet the
severity requirement of torture. 622 It is permissible to infer the intent to cause pain from the facts
of the abuse. 623 Courts have characterized treatment milder than that at issue here as torture.
624
(note) [hereinafter TVPA]. TVPA, like § 2340, draws its definition from CAT. See Price, 294
F.3d at 92.
619
Price, 294 F.3d at 92; Warmbier v. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, 356 F. Supp.
3d 30, 46 (D.D.C. 2018) (“To establish torture, the plaintiffs must show that the conduct was
sufficiently severe and purposeful.”).
620
Price, 294 F.3d at 93.
621 Id.
622 Id. at 92-93 (quoting S. Exec. Rep. No. 101-30, at 14 (1990)); see also Fritz v. Islamic
Republic of Iran, 320 F. Supp. 3d 48, 80 (D.D.C. 2018) (“And, on the other extreme, we know,
for example, that ‘sustained systematic beating… and tying up or hanging in positions that cause
extreme pain’ clearly cross the line.” (quoting Price, 294 F.3d at 93)).
623
Fritz, 320 F. Supp. 3d at 82.
624 See, e.g., Allan v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49541 (D.D.C. Mar. 25,
2019) (describing punches, kicks, sexually assaults, slaps, stress positions, refusal of access to food
and water, denial lavatories, mock executions, threats, and imprisonment in apartments, garages,
and basement prisons as torture).
Filed with TJ
15 May 2019
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Appellate Exhibit 628 (AAA)
Page 187 of 1205

Continue Reading

Trending