Author: Human

Social media influencers Andrew and Tristan Tate will press for their release from a US jail as they fight the British government’s efforts to extradite them to face charges of rape, assault and facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation, the brothers’ lawyers told reporters on Monday.

Andrew Tate, 39, and Tristan Tate, 38, were arrested in Miami on July 18. Britain's Crown Prosecution Service said on July 19 it had brought new charges against the brothers relating to alleged offenses involving four alleged victims between July 2010 and August 2017.

The Tate brothers, both former kickboxers who have dual US and British citizenship, have denied any wrongdoing. They are being held in a federal jail in Miami as a US judge weighs Britain's extradition request.

The arrests marked a new chapter in the widening legal troubles for the brothers, who have built a large online following promoting their views on masculinity and wealth. Andrew Tate has previously described himself as a misogynist.

Andrew Tate and Tristan Tate had previously faced rape and human trafficking charges in Britain related to three alleged victims, the Crown Prosecution Service said. A British judge issued a warrant for their arrests in January 2024. They have not appeared in British court to enter a plea to those charges.

Britain is seeking to extradite the brothers to face both sets of charges.

Prosecutors with the Miami US Attorney's Office said in court papers that US Magistrate Judge Lauren Louis should keep the brothers detained because there was a risk they could flee and because they posed dangers to the community.

Joseph McBride, a lawyer for the Tate brothers, denied that the brothers were a flight risk, noting that they had attended their required court hearings in Romania, where they have been under criminal investigation since 2022 on human trafficking allegations.

"Innocent men don't flee from justice. Innocent men lean in to justice because justice vindicates them at the end of the day," McBride told reporters outside the federal courthouse in Miami after a status conference before Louis.

The brothers will file a legal motion seeking their release on bail by August 5, and a hearing over their bid for release will take place on August 13, defense lawyer Jacqueline Perczek said.

The legal process for determining whether the Tate brothers may be extradited could take months. Britain has until September 16 to submit its full extradition request to the State Department, US court records show.

Louis or any other judge who takes up the Tate brothers' case would be responsible for determining whether Britain has supplied enough evidence to provide probable cause that the brothers have committed the crimes of which they are accused, prosecutors said in court papers.

It would then be up to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to decide whether they should be extradited, the prosecutors said.

Rubio told reporters in Manila on July 22 that he did not expect to intervene in the case for now.

"There's no role for us to play at this moment or maybe ever," Rubio said.

Bahrain cannot claim state immunity to block a lawsuit brought in Britain by two dissidents who say its government hacked their laptops with spyware, the United Kingdom's Supreme Court ruled by a majority on Monday.

Saeed Shehabi and Moosa Mohammed allege Bahrain infected their computers with surveillance software called FinSpy around 2011, which allowed agents to monitor their work with political prisoners in the Gulf kingdom.

The men, who both live in Britain, sued Bahrain at London’s High Court in 2020, seeking damages for “psychiatric harm”.

Bahrain denies hacking Shehabi and Mohammed's laptops and has for several years sought to claim state immunity to defeat the lawsuit.

Bahrain’s assertion of state immunity was refused by London’s High Court in 2023 and then the Court of Appeal the following year, prompting an appeal to the UK’s highest court.

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed Bahrain’s appeal by a 3-to-2 majority, ruling that the alleged surveillance took place in Britain even if it was initiated from abroad.

This meant the alleged hacking came within the personal injury exception to state immunity under UK law and that Shehabi and Mohammed's case could proceed.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces a challenging search for a new prosecutor after Karim Khan was dismissed, against the backdrop of a US diplomatic campaign to undermine the court and a rise in states withdrawing from the institution.

On Monday, Chad became the fifth country to start the formal withdrawal process in recent months, following Venezuela, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger.

The African state's announcement came just days after 82 of the court's 125 member states voted to dismiss Khan for serious misconduct. That triggered an election process for a new prosecutor, but details still have to be hammered out, and a vote is not expected before the new year.

After Khan's removal from office, the court said it will continue to carry out its mandate.

"The ICC remains firmly committed to advancing accountability and delivering justice for victims of crimes that deeply shock the conscience of humanity," it said.

While the ICC member states consider the procedure to find Khan's replacement, the office of the prosecutor will be run by the current deputy prosecutors, Nazhat Shameen Khan from Fiji and Senegal's Mame Mandiaye Niang.

Court watchers say it may be hard to find a good replacement for Khan amid the US's ramped-up diplomatic campaign.

“Who is now going to want to nominate for a position that has such challenges, because they know they will automatically be sanctioned by the US,” Melanie O’Brien, professor of international law at the University of Western Australia, told Reuters.

Washington wants the ICC to drop its arrest warrants against Israeli leaders over Gaza and to stop investigating alleged crimes involving US troops. Officials told Reuters they were considering pressuring countries to withdraw from the court.

Chad announced its withdrawal on Monday, and late Friday Venezuela, where the ICC had been conducting investigations into allegations of crimes against humanity by the previous government, said it had started the formal procedure to withdraw. Both states accused the court of disproportionately focusing on non-Western states.

In early July, the court said three military-led African countries – Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger – formally started their withdrawal, which takes a year to go into effect.

The European Union and several of the court’s big backers, including the Netherlands and Japan, one of the court’s biggest financial contributors, have voiced support for the court and concern over the US position but have not announced any practical steps to shore up the institution.

In the coming months, the court's governing body, the Assembly of States Parties (ASP), is expected to set out the specific procedure for the election of a new prosecutor. Many legal commentators have criticized the process around Khan's removal for its lack of transparency.

The next election will be a litmus test, especially since earlier votes were criticized for facing a lot of political influence and last-minute changes of procedure, according to Ezequiel Jimenez Martinez, who wrote a book on governing the ICC.

“The ASP now needs to reassure stakeholders it has the stamina to support the court in its darkest hour and elect a prosecutor worth the office and role,” he told Reuters.

An Australian court on Monday rejected an appeal from right-wing leader Pauline Hanson to overturn a ruling that she racially discriminated against a Muslim senator by telling her to "piss off back to Pakistan."

The three-judge panel of the Full Federal Court of Australia unanimously upheld a 2024 ruling that the comment, addressed to Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi on social media, was unlawful and unprotected by free speech defenses.

"Today, justice has prevailed," Faruqi told reporters outside court. "Today's win is for every single person out there who has been told to go back to where you came from."

Hanson said in a statement she was disappointed in the outcome.

“My legal team and I will now closely review the decision in the coming days, with a view to commencing an appeal in the High Court of Australia,” she added. The High Court of Australia is the country’s final court of appeal.

Hanson, who leads the hard-right One Nation party, made the remarks in September 2022 after Faruqi posted on X/Twitter following the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

Faruqi wrote that she could not "mourn the leader of a racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonized peoples."

Hanson replied: “When you immigrated to Australia you took every advantage of this country… It’s clear you’re not happy, so pack your bags and piss off back to Pakistan.”

A judge in 2024 found Hanson's post breached Australia's laws against racial discrimination as it was reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate, and intimidate Faruqi, as well as Muslim Australians and people of color who had migrated to the country.

Hanson appealed the decision, arguing she did not breach the law and the law was in any case constitutionally invalid.

“We have 434 paragraphs of dismissing Pauline Hanson’s appeal, of confirming that indeed Pauline Hanson behaved in racism, Islamophobia, and hate,” Faruqi said.

Founded in 1997, One Nation was long seen as fringe but Hanson's ​hard line on immigration has ​drawn more support in recent ⁠polls.

At least three people were killed, and four were wounded during a shooting at Seattle Center in the early morning hours on Monday, according to The Seattle Times, citing the Seattle Fire Department.

Local media had earlier reported that there were two deaths and five wounded, including a two-year-old girl, a 23-year-old man, a 39-year-old woman, a 40-year-old woman, and a 56-year-old woman are among the wounded and were transported to the hospital.

Seattle Assistant Police Chief Tyrone Davis said one of the victims at the hospital did not survive their wounds, bringing the toll to three. He added that the four others in the hospital were now in stable condition.

Seattle’s Harborview Medical Center told CNN that it is receiving and treating victims of the shooting.

Multiple gunshots were heard at the site at around 6 p.m. local time on Sunday at the Bite of Seattle food festival. Davis announced that one suspect has been taken into custody while another remains at large, as of 10:50 p.m. local time.

The Seattle Police Department stated that officers responded to the scene and are investigating the incident after recovering two guns in the area. They are advising all residents to avoid the area.

A Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) spokesperson told ABC News that the agency has been made aware of the shooting.

One witness, who was attending the festival with his girlfriend, told The Seattle Times that he saw several victims on the ground and a body covered with a yellow sheet.

“It was just pure chaos,” the witness said, describing that after the gunshots began, festival attendees began trying to escape to safety.

Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson released a statement shortly after the incident, calling the Seattle Center shooting an "act of horrific violence."

“No one should have to weigh the risk of being shot before attending an event, gathering with friends, or experiencing their city,” she added. “Gun violence changes families forever. Its trauma reaches far beyond the people struck by bullets. In the days ahead, we will establish what happened and be transparent with the public about what we have learned.”

Washington Congresswoman Rep. Pramila Jayapal stated that she is closely monitoring the situation and has been in close contact with Wilson, as coordination with police continues.

“We ask that the public please stay away from the Seattle Center as there is still an active investigation happening at this time. We will provide updates as we have additional information,” Jayapal emphasized in a statement released on X/Twitter.

Governor of Washington Bob Ferguson also released a statement on X/Twitter, saying he's being briefed on the tragedy and that a SWAT team is on the way to the scene to assist.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed that Russia is seeking an additional 30,000 North Korean troops for its war.

"We also see Russia’s cooperation with North Korea. Russia wants to receive another 30,000 troops from North Korea," Zelensky said in his nightly address on Saturday. "Since June, preparations have been underway in Russia’s Voronezh region to receive them."

He also alleged that North Korea will transfer additional launchers for ballistic missiles to Russia.

“This is a threat not only to Ukraine. Russia is helping North Korea learn how to wage war, improve its weapons, and gain real combat experience in using them,” he said.

“All of this is a threat to everyone in Asia who is within range of North Korean missiles.”

Ukrainian intelligence estimates that Pyongyang has sent between 12,000 and 14,000 soldiers in 2024 to help Russia’s assault on Kursk.

As many as 6,000 of them have died since then, The Guardian reported in April, citing South Korean and Ukrainian intelligence.

Several international media outlets have reported that North Korea has also sent laborers to Russia to work in slave-like conditions.

One worker told the BBC that he was chaperoned from the airport to a construction site in far-eastern Russia by a North Korean security agent, where he worked 18 hours a day with only two days off per year.

Another worker said that his supervisors wouldn't allow him to check into a hospital after he gravely injured his face after falling four meters.

Notably, North Korea has not publicly stated the number of its troops lost in Russia, but Pyongyang’s supreme leader Kim Jong Un has mourned their losses.

"Ours is a heroic army … Our army has fully demonstrated its unique qualities. Such a result has cemented its appellation and reputation as the most powerful army in the world," Kim said in August, according to KCNA.

Kim "highly appreciated their feats of leading the combat units of our armed forces, which participated in the operations to liberate the Kursk Region of the Russian Federation, to victory," KCNA reported.

International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan’s dismissal after around two years of scandal for alleged sex and sexual harassment crimes is a seminal event.

There are large impacts, which can be called good news, bad news, and just a plain ugly mess. Among the pro-Israel coalition, there are generally two views about the ICC, both defining it as unfairly biased toward Jerusalem.

The first view is that the ICC should not exist, that it is an unsalvageable institution, and anything that can be done to bring it down should be pursued.

This crowd is on a high right now and views Khan’s fall as brilliant news. For them, it seems to prove everything they have argued about the ICC: that it is an alternately anti-Israel and anti-US or ivory-tower-style institution divorced from the realities of having to fight asymmetric warfare against terrorists and that it is filled with hypocrites.

The punchline is that Khan unfairly accused Israel of war crimes while he was perpetrating sex crimes himself.

This camp also believes that the entire ICC case against Israel rested on Khan trying to cover up his alleged crimes, and so they are hoping his fall will make it go away.

Then there is the second camp, which views the ICC as a reality that the Jewish state must deal with, like it or not, and believes that dialogue with the court, even if aggressive, is the best – albeit imperfect – strategy to handle the problem.

According to this view, it makes sense to attack Khan and the ICC for allegedly targeting Israel in order to cover up Khan’s alleged sexual crimes, but that is only a secondary defense.

The primary defense remains going after the substantive charges themselves.

These arguments break down into multiple tracks.

One is attacking the idea that the ICC can have jurisdiction when the UN Security Council does not recognize a state of Palestine as a full-fledged voting member and when the Oslo Accords explicitly prohibit outside interference in the parties resolving their decades-long dispute.

Another is claiming the ICC must stay out of the issue because Israel has its own legal system and rule of law, which is in the midst of around 100 criminal probes and over 3,000 disciplinary probes of its own soldiers for alleged violations.

Such arguments delayed the ICC from going after Israel in a criminal probe from 2009 until 2021 and delayed arrest warrants until spring to fall 2024.

There is still hope that such arguments will prevent indictments and any trial, and there is even stronger hope that it would be nearly impossible to convict under the criminal law standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” in such a trial.

This second camp is ready to fight this fight, knowing that much of the world is relatively ignorant about the arguments for and against the ICC and will generally accept it as an important moral body with which to contend.

Both camps believe that Khan, at minimum, rushed his final decision on Israel, at least partially to try to cover for the sexual allegations probe against him at the time, which bought him several additional months in office before the story burst forward fully.

This is because Khan was due to visit Israel to discuss its counterarguments to his allegations but canceled at the last minute, jumping on CNN instead, like a political campaigner, rather than filing a legal brief with the ICC like a standard apolitical prosecutor.

Also, both camps reject the false defense by Khan claiming that the sexual charges were trumped up by Israel to get rid of him.

His accuser is a Malaysian woman who is strongly in favor of prosecuting Israel and who herself tried to suppress the allegations from leading to a criminal investigation until the controversy leaked.

It definitely seems that Israel worked hard to raise scrutiny on the charges once they emerged, but Khan ultimately made his own bed here.

However, the two camps then split somewhat over the next question: if Khan had been pushed to the side in May for the sexual allegations probe, would the ICC have still gone after Israel?

The first camp probably thinks no, whereas the second camp probably thinks yes.

Whether the first or second camp is right about how best to handle the ICC as a challenge will continue to be hotly debated, but all evidence The Jerusalem Post gathered at the relevant times from both ICC and Israeli legal sources indicated that Israel would have faced war crimes charges or arrest warrants anyway.

Look at what has happened since Khan took indefinite leave in mid-May 2025.

When the ICC Prosecution filed its first brief after Khan’s suspension, responding to Israel on May 21, 2025, his deputy, Shameen Khan (no relation), signed the papers, meaning there was little internal debate.

If his subordinates had disagreed with his call, this would have been their moment to roll it back.

Also, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber itself endorsed Khan’s arrest warrants, albeit in a 2-1 split vote, making the warrants even less dependent on Khan as an individual.

One perplexing aspect of Shameen Khan’s role in all of this is that she comes from Fiji, which has an awful human rights record.

In fact, Shameen Khan, according to local coverage of Fiji developments, was fired from the country’s High Court in a dispute over political coups.

She was then out of public service for some years until she was plucked up again to serve on the UN Human Rights Council and from there to the ICC office.

Without getting deeply into which side Shameen Khan is on, the point is that she is no stranger to politics mixing in with law and comes from a country with a problematic version of democracy, all of which raises questions about how she will understand Israel’s complex context versus the Palestinians.

In any event, her decision to continue pursuing the Israeli arrest warrants showed that Khan’s extended leave from his position, and now his dismissal, did not free Israel from the ICC’s ongoing scrutiny.

After all of this, there was  – and might still – one way to freeze the ICC arrest warrants.

To date, the ICC has only issued public warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former defense minister Yoav Gallant, and three secret (leaked) warrants against Betzalel Smotrich, Itamar Ben-Gvir, and one still unnamed IDF official.

The ICC was able to issue these warrants because all of Israel’s 100 criminal probes and 3,000 disciplinary probes are against lower and mid-ranked soldiers.

On May 4, 2024, weeks before Khan made his fateful decision, former deputy attorney-general for international affairs Roy Schondorf said that the best way for Israel to mitigate the potential threat of war crimes allegations from the ICC would be to establish an independent state inquiry led by a former judge.

Schondorf led Israel’s efforts to defend itself against war crimes and the ICC for about 13 years, until mid-2022, and is still viewed as one of Israel’s top experts on the issue, having also served for over a decade as an IDF lawyer.

Essentially, Schondorf’s suggestion was to adopt the Turkel Commission model, which Israel used to successfully ward off ICC scrutiny after the 2008 to 2009 Gaza conflict, as well as the UN Goldstone Commission Inquiry, which subsequently examined alleged war crimes related to that conflict.

The Turkel Commission, led by former Supreme Court justice Jacob Turkel, evaluated Israel’s system for probing alleged war crimes and made several recommendations that eventually fundamentally altered the system, making it more aggressive, faster, and transparent in handling such probes.

Much of the Israeli legal community backed Schondorf’s recommendation, but Netanyahu disregarded it.

Many Israeli lawyers have also pressed for Israel to publish more of its probe results and do so more rapidly, as it did after past wars, but the Post has reported that various government parties have repeatedly delayed such publication.

The ICC has already damaged Israel’s reputation substantially. But opening such an inquiry before indictments are filed could still block such indictments permanently or delay them for years.

Until then, all of this is just plain ugly. The ICC has tarnished its reputation because of Khan’s alleged sexual violations and how the court handled them.

Israel’s reputation has been tarred and feathered, whether the prosecutor is Karim Khan or Shameen Khan.

And while Israel may have a one-up for a few news cycles due to Karim Khan’s scandal, the battle over the war crimes charges is ugly and is not likely to go away if Israel does not alter its strategies.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is seeking to keep the US Air Force’s A-10 Thunderbolt II flying through 2033. This is important because the iconic close air support platform does not have a unique replacement for some of the missions it performs.

A-10s played a role in supporting the rescue of the crew of an American F-15 that was downed over Iran in April. It has played a role in many major conflicts in the Middle East as an essential element of US Central Command’s arsenal.

US Congressman Abe Hamadeh introduced the Bolstering Recognition, Resurgence, Retention, and Remembrance of the Thunderbolt Act, known as the BRRRRT Act, on July 20. The bill is co-led by Representative Don Davis and has several cosponsors. Its name is a reference to the distinctive sound of the A-10’s cannon.

The legislation comes amid a long-running debate over the future of the A-10 and whether newer aircraft can adequately replace its close air support and combat search and rescue capabilities.

Lt. Col. Joel Bier, a retired US Air Force Weapons School instructor pilot with more than 2,500 hours in the A-10, argues that keeping at least 126 of the aircraft flying is important. The Air Force must also preserve the training, maintenance, and institutional knowledge that enable the A-10 community to perform its missions.

Bier was qualified as a Forward Air Controller (Airborne) and as a Rescue Mission Commander (Sandy 1) Instructor Pilot until his recent retirement, and he commanded at the squadron level. He now works as a contract pilot, independent consultant, and freelance author.

Bier served 21 years in the Air Force and began flying the A-10 in 2007 after graduating from the US Air Force Academy and completing his pilot training. He said efforts to reduce or retire the A-10 fleet repeatedly surfaced during his career.

The importance of the A-10 gained renewed attention after an American F-15 was lost during Operation Epic Fury. A-10 pilots took part in the effort surrounding the recovery of the aircrew. “When DUDE44 went down, there were A-10 pilots there at the beginning when they picked up the pilot and then A-10s led the second mission,” he said.

“The A-10 is a unique combination of man and machine,” he said. A-10 squadrons specialize in close air support and combat search and rescue, meaning their pilots develop deep expertise in missions that may receive less emphasis in other fighter communities.

After originally moving to fully retire the A-10 in 2026, the Air Force announced in April that it plans to keep A-10s flying through 2030. Current plans envision an active-duty squadron at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia and a reserve squadron at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. The BRRRRT Act would go further by requiring the Air Force to maintain the aircraft through 2033.

However, Bier argues that simply extending the retirement date does not solve the problem. He compared maintaining aircraft without the infrastructure behind them to keeping something alive without its vital organs. Training new pilots, maintaining depot-level support, producing spare parts, and preserving the Air Force Weapons School pipeline are all necessary if the remaining aircraft, around 100 of them, are expected to remain operational in numbers that matter and can contribute to overseas operations.

The A-10 depot at Hill Air Force Base, for instance, was shut down in January, Bier said. The Weapons School has also been affected as the Air Force moves toward retirement of the fleet. In April, the pilot training unit in Arizona graduated its last class, just weeks before the Air Force announced A-10s would fly through 2030. The BRRRRT Act seeks to preserve or restore some of this institutional backbone.

The numbers also matter. Previous legislation established a minimum inventory of 103 A-10s. Bier said supporters are now seeking 126 aircraft, enough to sustain operational squadrons while providing aircraft for testing, training and the Weapons School.

Without such numbers, the remaining force could face a punishing deployment schedule. Bier said Air Force plans could otherwise leave roughly 54 aircraft, insufficient to reasonably maintain deployments and training.

This debate is not new. The A-10 was developed after the Vietnam War as a dedicated close air support aircraft, designed around its powerful cannon and intended to operate close to ground forces. Its relatively low speed, maneuverability, survivability, and ability to operate from austere locations were designed for a potential confrontation with Soviet armored legions in Europe.

The US Air Force has considered retiring or replacing the aircraft for decades, as early as 1984 when A-10 production ended. Even after its excellent performance during the 1991 Gulf War showed it was still relevant, the Air Force increasingly favored multirole fighters that could conduct air superiority missions while also carrying out other tasks.

The A-10 nevertheless remained heavily involved in the post-September 11 wars. Bier deployed to Afghanistan in 2009, where he flew close air support missions from Kandahar.

He recalled one mission in which he scrambled after a helicopter was downed during fighting involving a US Army convoy. Without a Joint Terminal Attack Controller on the ground immediately available to direct fire, Bier worked directly with the convoy commander while coordinating with Apache helicopters. The A-10s remained overhead until a quick reaction force arrived.

Experiences such as these underpin the argument for retaining specialized close air support aircraft.

The larger question is what eventually replaces the A-10. The Air Force is investing heavily in advanced aircraft such as the F-35 and future F-47. However, Bier argues that an F-35 or another sophisticated fighter cannot simply become equally proficient at every mission the A-10s do without dedicated training.

There is also a cost calculation. Using an expensive new fighter for missions that can be performed by an existing A-10 may not always make sense. Bier compared buying high-end fighters for close air support to “using a Ferrari to mow your lawn.”

The BRRRRT Act therefore represents more than an attempt to preserve a historic and well-known aircraft that has performed well for fifty years. It raises a broader question about how the US military manages the transition from proven systems to future capabilities.

The A-10 will eventually leave service. The question is whether the close air support and rescue expertise built around it is maintained in a new platform and, if not, how these key roles will be performed by F-15s or F-35s.

Bier argues that the Air Force should maintain the aircraft and the ecosystem behind it until a replacement can actually perform those missions. The bill’s proposed 2033 deadline, he said, provides more time for industry to sustain production and maintenance while the military determines what comes next.

Family members of those murdered on 9/11 have launched a petition calling for New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani to be excluded from the 25th-year memorial events on account of his association with extremism and refusal to condemn antisemitism.

The petition was launched by Florida relator Giovanni Galante, whose girlfriend was among those killed by al-Qaeda terrorists on 11 September, 2001. It has now gathered over 5,000 signatures.

The petition says that concerns have been raised about Mamdani’s public positions, associations, and responses to rhetoric that many perceive as hostile to shared American values.

These positions include a perceived reluctance to "clearly and unequivocally condemn phrases such as 'globalize the intifada,' which many interpret as endorsing or normalizing violence," the petition reads.

It also cited Mamdani's support for, or associations with, individuals whose public statements or records are viewed by family members as dismissive of American institutions or insufficiently critical of extremist ideologies.

The petition notes that Mamdani’s own father penned a book shortly after 9/11 in which he argued that suicide bombers should be “understood as a feature of modern political violence rather than stigmatized as a mark of barbarism.” Mamdani has previously said that his father has been influential in shaping his views.

Mamdani has also praised Brooklyn Imam Siraj Wahhaj, who was named as an alleged co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and served as a character witness for the “Blind Sheikh,” who was convicted in 1995 of plotting terror attacks against the United States.

More recently, Mamdani appointed Ramzi Kassem, who previously represented Ahmed al-Darbi (convicted in an al-Qaeda tanker bombing plot), as New York City’s chief counsel.

The NYC mayor also endorsed candidates such as Aber Kawas, who described 9/11 as an attack “a couple of people did in the context of US capitalism, racism, white supremacy, and Islamophobia,” and who also expressed sympathy for Ahmed Ferhani, who pleaded guilty to plotting to blow up a Manhattan synagogue.

"For 9/11 families, this is not simply a public ceremony, it is a deeply personal day of mourning," wrote Galante. "The presence of individuals whose words or associations are perceived as conflicting with the solemn purpose of the event risks detracting from that focus and causing additional pain."

Given the concerns expressed, the families in the petition respectfully asked the organizers to "carefully consider whether Mr. Mamdani’s participation would align with the intention of the ceremony and the expectations of the families most directly affected by the tragedy."

"The 25th anniversary should remain centered on remembrance, unity, and an unambiguous rejection of the violence and extremism that defined that day. Ensuring that all participants reflect these principles is essential to preserving the integrity of the commemoration."

Several 9/11 survivors have commented on the petition.

"As a survivor of the WTC attack on 9/11 I believe that based on Mayor Mamdani's past performance in regard to Israel and radical Islamic terrorism that he should be barred from all WTC memorial ceremonies," wrote Craig.

Silverio wrote, "Many tears had shed on that day, but why was Mayor Mamdani’s own reason he cried? [Because] his aunt stopped taking the subway after September 11th because she did not feel safe in her hijab."

"Seeing 9/11 Live on the news while at my first Active Duty Duty Station, and subsequently deploying ISO OER in Afghanistan during rotation one, it is an affront to the memory of all who perished that day and in the following days while hunting the vile Islamic perpetrators that anyone who has voiced support for those despicable death cultists would be given a voice of any kind at that event," wrote Justin. "Shame on all who would put the relatives of those fallen in a position wherein they have to tell anyone they do not want these individuals at that ceremony."

Brian wrote that his brother David was murdered on 9/11 and that he is "incensed that a terrorist excuser is now Mayor, and outspoken sympathizer for terrorist perpetrators."

"He is disqualified from attending the 9/11 remembrance ceremony and ought be barred."

The Post reached out to Galante for comment.

Brazilian Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, eldest son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, on Saturday formally launched his bid to challenge President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in October’s election, showcasing support from Argentine President Javier Milei, an AI-generated message from his jailed father, and a video address from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Bolsonaro pledged tax cuts and a tougher stance on crime, and stressed his commitment to carrying forward his father's political legacy.

"Here is Bolsonaro's blood," he said in an emotional tone to supporters who waved green and yellow flags. The arena in Sao Paulo where he spoke was nearly full, but not quite.

Former President Jair Bolsonaro is currently under house arrest for his role in an attempt to overturn the election where Lula defeated him.

Milei delivered a fiery speech criticizing Lula and declaring that Bolsonaro can “save” Brazil from socialism. The Argentine president flew to Brazil the night before the event and met on Saturday with Sao Paulo Governor Tarcisio de Freitas.

"We will continue offering our testimony everywhere against the lies of socialism," Milei said.

Brazil's presidency did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment.

Former first lady Michelle Bolsonaro, Flavio's stepmother, also appeared via video message to offer her endorsement, in a speech addressed to women voters. The two recently reconciled following a public dispute that played out in videos exchanged on social media.

"Flavio, may God bless and protect your candidacy," she said in the video message.

In December, the senator secured his father's endorsement to run in this year's election. But his campaign lost its early momentum in May, after leaked messages linked him to jailed banker Daniel Vorcaro, whom he later acknowledged had financed a film about his father's political career.

Bolsonaro’s popularity was also dented by the dispute with Michelle Bolsonaro and by his close ties to US President Donald Trump, who has imposed tariffs on Brazilian goods.

A Datafolha poll released on Friday showed Lula leading Bolsonaro 48% to 43% in a runoff, up from 47% to 43% in June.

Flavio Bolsonaro has struggled to forge political alliances. Center-right parties have so far decided to stay neutral rather than endorse his candidacy.

Supporters at the launch event remained optimistic about his prospects.

"Brazil has to change. There were no scandals linked to Flavio Bolsonaro. This is coming from the left," said Leandro Aguilar, 44, a São Paulo resident who attended the event with his family.

Janete Rubio, 68, appeared highly emotional throughout the gathering, at times crying or else dancing to music while draped in Brazilian and US flags.

“Brazil is very rich, but it is being underestimated. Together, with the strength of the United States and the strength of Trump, we will succeed,” she said.