&w=3840&q=100)
'Will say nothing more': US official to Pak journalist over Pahalgam attack
Responding to a question from a Pakistani journalist from ARY News, Bruce said, 'I am not going to be remarking on it. I appreciate this, and perhaps we will come back to you with another subject. I will say nothing more on that situation. The President and the Secretary have said things, as have the Deputy Secretary; they have made their positions clear. I will not continue with something of that manner.'
Expressing condolences for those who lost their lives, Bruce said that the US prays for those who lost their lives in one of the deadly attacks since the 2019 Pulwama attacks. Condemning the attack in Pahalgam's Baisaran valley, Bruce reiterated President Donald Trump's and Secretary Marco Rubio's stance. She stated clearly that the United States stands with India and has strongly condemned all acts of terrorism.
On April 23, a day after the deadly attack in Pahalgam, Donald Trump condemned the terrorist attack and called Prime Minister Narendra Modi to express his condolences for the victims of the attack. Thanking Trump for his support, PM Modi asserted that India is determined to bring the perpetrators to justice.
Several other world leaders have also condemned the attack and dialled up PM Modi, extending their support to India in its fight against terrorism.
The United States strongly condemns the terrorist attack in Kashmir. Nothing can justify such a heinous act killing tourists and civilians. Our thoughts are with those who have lost their loved ones. We continue to monitor the situation and call for perpetrators to be held…
— State_SCA (@State_SCA) April 22, 2025
Modi's response to terror attack
On April 24, PM Modi addressed a public meeting in Bihar's Madhubani and asserted that India will pursue the terrorists to the end of the Earth. He also added, 'Today, on the soil of Bihar, I say to the whole world – India will identify, trace, and punish every terrorist and their backers. We will pursue them to the ends of the Earth. India's spirit will never be broken by terrorism.'
India's response to the Pahalgam attacks
Following the attack on civilians in Pahalgam's Baisaran Valley, India downgraded its diplomatic ties with Pakistan, after The Resistance Front (TRF), a proxy group for Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), claimed responsibility for the attack. India also suspended the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan and shut the Attari border for all movement.
NYT under fire for Pahalgam terror coverage
Earlier today, The New York Times was criticised by the United States House Foreign Affairs Committee for its coverage of the Pahalgam attacks. The New York Times has been called out for its 'mischaracterising of the nature of the attack'.
Downplaying the nature of the attack, The New York Times used 'militants' in its headline for the terrorist attack, the responsibility of which was claimed by a proxy group of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Rahul Gandhi told you so in 2018': Congress on ED summoning Anil Ambani; attacks PM Modi
NEW DELHI: With ED summoning industrialist Anil Ambani for alleged loan fraud involving a massive sum, Congress hurled a "Rahul told you so" barb at BJP, asking whether PM Narendra Modi would answer the allegations made by Rahul Gandhi during the row over the Rafale purchase seven years ago. Congress spokesperson and MP Manickam Tagore reposted on X Rahul's post from 2018 in which he had slammed the awarding of the Rafale offsets contract to Anil as cronyism by Modi, saying "the PM and Anil Ambani jointly carried out a Rs 130,000 crore surgical strike on Indian defence forces... you betrayed India's soul." Tagore said, "Then, many laughed, few believed. Now, ED has summoned Anil Ambani in a Rs 17,000 crore loan fraud case, days after raids on his premises. The same Anil Ambani whose debt-ridden firm was picked for the Rafale offset deal - replacing HAL. Will Modi answer now?"
Hindustan Times
34 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Nate Raymond Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order -U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Indian Express
34 minutes ago
- Indian Express
India rejects UK report alleging ‘transnational repression'
India Friday categorically rejected as 'baseless' a British parliamentary report that named it among countries engaged in 'transnational repression' in the UK. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said the allegations stemmed from 'unverified' and 'dubious sources' predominantly linked to proscribed entities and individuals. 'We have seen the references to India in the report and categorically reject these baseless allegations,' said MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal. 'These claims stem from unverified and dubious sources, predominantly linked to proscribed entities and individuals with a clear, documented history of anti-India hostility,' he said. Jaiswal said the 'deliberate reliance on discredited sources calls into question the credibility of the report itself'. The report made by the British Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights listed India along with China, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Bahrain, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates as countries allegedly engaging in 'transnational repression' in the UK. The report titled 'Transnational repression in the UK' was made public on July 30. Some of the details related to India cited in the report were provided by Sikhs for Justice, a pro-Khalistan organisation banned in India under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and other UK-based Sikh groups.
