Indian MPs express concern over terror attack in Boulder, Colorado; Shashi Tharoor says ‘terror has no place'
By News Desk Published on June 2, 2025, 08:32 IST
Members of the Indian MPs' delegation have expressed concern over the recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, which occurred on Monday.
Senior Congress leader and Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor posted on social media that the delegation learned about the incident 'with concern' and expressed relief that there was no loss of life reported in the attack.
'Members of the Indian MPs' delegation learned with concern about the terror attack in Boulder, Colorado today. We are relieved there was no loss of life,' Tharoor wrote on X (formerly Twitter).
He further added that the Indian delegation stands in agreement with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's view that 'terror has no place' in either country.
'We all share Secy of State @SecRubio's view that 'terror has no place' in our countries,' Tharoor added.
The Boulder incident has drawn swift condemnation, though US authorities are still investigating the full details of the attack.
Indian leaders have consistently expressed solidarity with the US on counter-terrorism efforts, and today's statement reinforces this shared stance.
News desk at BusinessUpturn.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
9 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump formally asks Congress to claw back approved spending targeted by DOGE
WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House on Tuesday officially asked Congress to claw back $9.4 billion in already approved spending, taking funding away from programs targeted by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. It's a process known as 'rescission,' which requires President Donald Trump to get approval from Congress to return money that had previously been appropriated. Trump's aides say the funding cuts target programs that promote liberal ideologies. The request, if it passes the House and Senate, would formally enshrine many of the spending cuts and freezes sought by DOGE. It comes at a time when Musk is extremely unhappy with the tax cut and spending plan making its way through Congress, calling it on Tuesday a 'disgusting abomination' for increasing the federal deficit. Here's what to know about the rescissions request: The request to Congress is unlikely to meaningfully change the troublesome increase in the U.S. national debt. Tax revenues have been insufficient to cover the growing costs of Social Security, Medicare and other programs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the government is on track to spend roughly $7 trillion this year, with the rescission request equaling just 0.1% of that total. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at Tuesday's briefing that White House budget director Russ Vought — a 'well-respected fiscal hawk,' she called him — would continue to cut spending, hinting that there could be additional efforts to return funds. 'He has tools at his disposal to produce even more savings,' Leavitt said. A spokesperson for the White House Office of Management and Budget, speaking on condition of anonymity to preview some of the items that would lose funding, said that $8.3 billion was being cut from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development. NPR and PBS would also lose federal funding. The spokesperson listed specific programs that the Trump administration considered wasteful, including $750,000 to reduce xenophobia in Venezuela, $67,000 for feeding insect powder to children in Madagascar and $3 million for circumcision, vasectomies and condoms in Zambia. Members of the House Freedom Caucus, among the chamber's most conservative lawmakers, are calling on House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to immediately bring the rescissions package to the floor 'for swift passage.' 'We will support as many more rescissions packages the White House can send us in the coming weeks and months,' the group said in a press release. 'Passing this rescissions package will be an important demonstration of Congress's willingness to deliver on DOGE and the Trump agenda.' The White House's request to return appropriated funds is meant to comply with the 1974 Impoundment Control Act. That law created the process by which the president can formally disclose to Congress the appropriated money it intends to not spend. Congress then has 45 days to review and approve the request. Bobby Kogan, senior director of federal budget policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, said in an emailed statement that the Trump administration was already 'illegally impounding additional funds,' as withholding money has 'always been illegal without explicit Congressional approval.' On CNN on Sunday, Vought insisted that the Trump administration was complying with the law, but it simply had a different view of the law relative to some Democrats. 'We're not breaking the law,' Vought said. 'Every part of the federal government, each branch, has to look at the Constitution themselves and uphold it, and there's tension between the branches.'
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom, Elon Musk and Marjorie Taylor Greene agree on this one thing
SAN FRANCISCO — California Gov. Gavin Newsom and fellow Sacramento Democrats are finding themselves in an awkward yet convenient alliance with MAGA-world figures against President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' Just days after leaving the administration, Elon Musk took his opposition to the extreme over Trump's mega budget and reconciliation package, posting on X Tuesday that he 'just can't stand it anymore' with what he called the 'disgusting abomination' that is 'this massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill.' His outburst had Newsom, a frequent sparring partner, chiming in with agreement. 'Couldn't have said it better myself,' the governor responded to Musk. The vote of support from Newsom marks the latest turn in the rocky relationship between him and Musk, who enjoyed a favorable relationship with the governor while growing many of his companies within the state, but had become a regular target of criticism from the blue state leader during his time at the White House. Musk's post, meanwhile, encouraged Republican critics of the reconciliation package like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to quickly echo his outrage as well. But Newsom also found himself in agreement with conservative firebrand Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) on Tuesday over a particularly thorny provision of the bill: a 10-year ban on the enforcement of AI state regulation introduced by her fellow House Republicans. The Georgia lawmaker threatened to vote against the bill if it returns to the House with the moratorium still included — presenting a potential headache for GOP leadership, who could barely scrounge up the votes the first time. The package is being considered in the Senate, where the measure may not survive scrutiny under the upper chamber's Byrd rule, meant to strip out measures that have no impact or only a negligible one on the budget. 'I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there,' Greene posted on X. 'We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous.' Newsom, who previously expressed fears about overregulating California's booming AI industry, has said he is concerned the moratorium will be 'overcorrecting in the other direction federally.' Four Democrats from the California Legislature joined a letter to Congress from state lawmakers on Tuesday morning to oppose the moratorium on state AI laws, only to see their criticisms echoed by Greene hours later. 'Given the long absence of federal action to address privacy and social media harms, barring all state and local AI laws until Congress acts threatens to setback policymaking and undermine existing enforcement on these issues,' they wrote as part of a bipartisan coalition of 260 state lawmakers. 'We respectfully urge you to reject any provision that preempts state and local AI legislation in this year's reconciliation package.'
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
It's Rand Paul and Elon Musk vs. Donald Trump Over the 'Big Beautiful Bill'
The intra-Republican fight over the future of a major tax and borrowing bill intensified on Tuesday, as President Donald Trump lashed out and former White House favorite Elon Musk offered a sharp criticism of the proposal. The whole thing played out, as today's political dramas so often do, in a series of posts on social media. Trump slammed Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) in a Tuesday morning post on Truth Social that accused the senator of having "very little understanding" of the so-called Big Beautiful Bill (BBB), which the House passed last week. The bill would extend the 2017 personal income tax cuts and includes a number of new tax and spending provisions. Trump wrote that the bill is a big "WINNER." He may see it that way, but every independent assessment of the package says it will add at least $3 trillion to the long-term deficit (and potentially as much as $5 trillion). That means the bill is doing the opposite of what Trump vowed to do in March during his speech to Congress, when he promised to balance the budget. The prospect of that increased borrowing is at the root of Paul's objections. In a post on X, Paul seemingly responded to Trump's criticism by showing that he understands exactly what the BBB would do. "The math doesn't add up," Paul wrote. "I'm not supporting a bill that increases the debt by $5 [trillion]. I refuse to support maintaining Biden spending levels." Paul reiterated his view on the bill: He wants to extend the 2017 tax cuts, but in such a way that does not add to the deficit. In his posts on Tuesday, Paul added that "at least 4 of us in the Senate feel this way." Four GOP votes against the bill would be enough to block its passage through the Senate. Musk, who officially departed from his role in the White House last week, jumped into the debate to criticize the bill. "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination," Musk wrote. "Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R–La.), who shepherded the BBB through the House last week, told The Hill that Musk was "terribly wrong" to criticize the bill. Other conservatives suggested that Musk was motivated more by the loss of tax credits that benefit Tesla than by genuine concern about the deficit. Musk's motivations might not be pure, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. In a follow-up post on X, he wrote that "Congress is making America bankrupt." No lies detected there—and the BBB will make that situation worse. Musk and Paul are at least living in reality. The White House, meanwhile, has resorted to trying to discredit the independent entities that have scored the bill. On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) of engaging in partisan politics by saying the BBB would add to the deficit—echoing a criticism that Johnson made last week. That's a rather absurd allegation, considering the current director of the CBO is Phillip Swagel, a Republican who previously worked in the Bush administration and at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. Math is not a conspiracy against Trump. The president and his supporters are free to disagree with the likes of Musk and Paul, but they should stop lying about the budgetary impact of the BBB and should admit that they support higher levels of borrowing. Then we could have an intellectually serious debate over the bill, instead of whatever this is. In the meantime, give credit to Musk and Paul for holding the line on fiscal responsibility. Few of their fellow Republicans are willing to do that these days. The post It's Rand Paul and Elon Musk vs. Donald Trump Over the 'Big Beautiful Bill' appeared first on
