Family of Boulder suspect arrested by immigration officers
Immigration authorities have arrested the wife and children of the man suspected of carrying out Sunday's attack in Boulder, Colorado, US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said on Tuesday.
Mohammed Sabry Soliman, 45, has been charged with attempted murder, assault and possession of an incendiary device after a dozen people were injured at a march calling for the release of Israeli hostages.
"We are investigating to what extent his family knew about this heinous attack, if they had knowledge of it, or if they provided support to it," Noem wrote on X.
Officials say Mr Soliman shouted "Free Palestine" as he threw two petrol bombs into the crowd. He also faces a federal hate crime charge.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Existing prison locations might be only politically palatable sites for a new facility
Signs stand at the entryway to a Sept. 26, 2024, public forum hosted by Neighbors Opposed to Prison Expansion, which was working to upend South Dakota's plans for a new men's prison in Lincoln County. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight) South Dakotans are being held prisoner by their indecision about where they want to build their next prison. After all the debates and accusations, it's hard to know what to think about the project. It's difficult not to be cynical watching lawmakers get all hopped up about spending $600 million. We're supposed to think that's a bargain because the original plan called for spending $850 million. So even at more than half a billion dollars, there are concerns about the new place being built on the cheap. Much of this consternation originates in the way the prison project was initially handled during the Kristi Noem administration. Neighbors of the Lincoln County project weren't made aware that state land in their county was under consideration until plans were announced for the new prison. When they found out about it, their concerns didn't matter to Noem, who was known for a my-way-or-the-highway approach to getting what she wanted. That initial secrecy in the governor's office led to so much protest from neighbors, and so much rancor in the Legislature, that the original site is now deemed too politically toxic to host the prison. Prison group stuck between local opposition and limited space As a taxpayer, and as a lifelong believer that government should be conducted in a transparent manner, it has been heartening to watch Gov. Larry Rhoden's Project Prison Reset work group conduct public meetings as they have struggled to figure out the best, most politically palatable solution to South Dakota's prison problem. It certainly hasn't been pretty, but it has been a lesson in transparent government. The work group has conducted a series of hearings about the project site. When they finally make a decision, they should hold some more hearings, this time to figure out how South Dakota managed to invest more than $50 million in the original prison site without having the official OK from the Legislature. Because officials jumped the gun, taxpayers are left with $50 million in plans and infrastructure improvements that may never be used for a prison and possibly never be used at all. The work group has yet to decide what the best location is for the new prison. Many sites have been considered, but the three still standing are locations in Mitchell and Worthing or sites where the Department of Corrections already has prisons or land in Sioux Falls and Springfield. While the Worthing site may be, well, worthy, it's also in Lincoln County. The opposition of Lincoln County residents has already killed one viable prison site. It may be in the best interests of the work group to consider that the toxicity at the original site extends to the entire county. Like the original Lincoln County site, most other sites in the state, no matter how viable, run the risk of upsetting the project's neighbors as well as those folks who just like to be upset about something. There is already a not-in-my-back-yard movement in Mitchell, reminiscent of what happened in Lincoln County. 'They didn't tell us about it until after the fact,' Mitchell resident Barbara Stadler told South Dakota Searchlight at a recent community forum, in reference to Mitchell city leaders' initial pitch to the Project Prison Reset task force. The work group runs the risk of inspiring that kind of response with any new prison site they consider. That leaves the group with the choice to build new prison facilities on sites already run by the Department of Corrections. It's hard for neighbors to make a NIMBY complaint about a new prison project when the prison is literally already in their backyard. As consultants have explained, building on or near current prison facilities is not the best choice. It may, however, be the most palatable choice for South Dakotans and the choice most likely to earn the endorsement of the Legislature.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Questions From the Bomb Shelter
Some dreams do come true. At night, I dream of the rising screech of sirens across Jerusalem, of running to a bomb shelter, of thinking wildly about my grown children elsewhere in Israel dashing through dark streets for safety as missiles whoosh overhead. I dream of distant booms that I hope are interceptions and not direct hits on apartment buildings. I wake to a chorus of sirens and to the harsh clack of the army's Home Front Command app on my phone, announcing how many minutes we have to seek cover. Outside, running to the shelter, I see the red flash of rocket engines overhead and their long white trails, and I hear far-off explosions. After the all clear, I get texts from my children: 'Safe.' News flashes appear of buildings hit in other cities by Iranian missiles that evaded interception, and of the search for the wounded and dead. I do not sleep again. Until dawn, I ask questions about why this is happening: Are the reasons we have been given for war true; can we possibly trust the people who gave those reasons; how in the world will this end? Life is a warped jigsaw puzzle: The pieces of the normal and the abnormal do not fit together. The small grocery on the next street seems fully stocked; the air-conditioning works in my apartment; faucets give water. The streets have not been this quiet since the pandemic lockdowns. I take morning runs through my untouched neighborhood, with my map app set to show public bomb shelters. Sometimes a workout ends with a sprint for cover. A news site shows pictures of an apartment building in another town: The 'before' image looks like my building, a 1950s housing project; 'after' shows savaged concrete and the gaping squares of what were people's homes. Everyone I know is sleepless because of the nighttime attacks. People who do not have bomb shelters or the reinforced rooms required by regulation in newer buildings camp out with friends or family members, if they can. Leaving Israel is virtually impossible, because all flights out have been canceled. In WhatsApp groups, friends trade long lists of suggestions for dealing with stress: dance and laugh with your family, breathe slowly, don't scarf sweets, stop doomscrolling war news an hour before bedtime (who are you kidding?). I receive a text message purporting to be from the Israeli military warning that terrorists will target bomb shelters, so people should stay away from them. A news item cautions citizens to ignore such digital warfare. As a journalist, I get repeated emails from the military censor, reminding me that the location of direct hits cannot be published, lest it help the enemy aim better. Some people work from home; some are not working. Many are serving in the reserves, as they have, off and mostly on, since the other war started more than 600 days ago. The Israelis killed by missiles get less coverage, my daughter points out, than if they'd been killed in terror bombings during the Second Intifada. The dead in Tehran are only a number. The dead in Gaza—our soldiers, many more Palestinian civilians—have mostly been relegated to back pages. Mass protests demanding that Israel's government reach a deal with Hamas for the release of our hostages and the end of the war have stopped, because a missile could hit a crowd. Iran is the news. That the unfinished war in Gaza has now barely become background is, itself, a reason to begin asking questions. On June 12, media reports said a nighttime meeting of senior ministers would be held to discuss hostage-deal negotiations. Afterward, it emerged that the announced topic was a ruse, a diversion aimed at Iran. In reality, the ministers moved from the normal meeting room to a bunker, where they approved the attack. Or, I ask: Is this new conflict itself a diversion from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's war in Gaza, where he has promised but cannot deliver 'absolute victory'? At 3 a.m. on June 13, sirens woke everyone in Israel. The Houthis again, I assumed. Just another single missile from Yemen that would be intercepted within 10 minutes, as has happened often over the past months. My wife and I ran for shelter, where we learned from news bulletins that Israel was bombing Iran. And yet, no missiles had been fired at Israel. The messages on the Home Front Command app, we realized once we had caught our breaths, warned only that we must be ready for Home Front Command instructions in case of an attack. This was strange, as people around me noticed. Sirens normally sound only when missiles are on their way, when danger is immediate. At a press conference that first day, the army spokesperson explained that the aim was that citizens would 'be alert and attentive' to instructions. This may be the full explanation. But trust in this government has been so strained that I consider other possibilities. I find myself wondering whether the oddly timed alert had a political origin, meant to create the sudden solidarity and support for fighting that sweeps a country when war begins. At the outset of the Iran campaign, that support appeared to materialize. A survey conducted from the third to the fifth day found that 70 percent of Israelis favored the offensive. Prominent commentators repeated and expanded on Netanyahu's explanation: that 'within a short amount of time' Iran could build nuclear weapons. 'The knife is at [our] throat,' one columnist wrote. 'Israeli intelligence has uncovered the fact that Iran has begun the process of the 'breakthrough'' to creating a bomb. I cannot dismiss this evaluation. If it's true, it's nightmarish. What if one of those warheads that hit Tel Aviv were nuclear? But, lacking our own sources of data, we journalists cannot verify or challenge this claim. Governments publish or leak intelligence for political purposes, which may not require that what is made public offers a complete or true picture of what secretive agencies have uncovered. And even when an intelligence community is convinced of its conclusions, it can be mistaken. Americans need only recall the lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003. Israeli espionage obviously penetrated Iran to an extraordinary extent, as shown by the ability to locate Iranian generals. But this doesn't mean its evaluations of Iranian intent are accurate. The U.S. assessment that Iran was not on the verge of building a bomb is at least as questionable. Regardless, the attack on Iran is under way. How long can Israel, already exhausted by the Gaza war, keep fighting on a new front? Would Netanyahu, who rejected Barack Obama's diplomatic agreement to stop Iran's nuclear effort, accept a new one? Without an accord, how long would it take Iran to rebuild, and create a nuclear weapon? Iran's air defenses have failed. Its stock of ballistic missiles did not deter Israel. For Tehran, a nuclear deterrent may have just grown all the more attractive. This danger did not end with the U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear sites, including the deep-underground Fordo facility. Arms-control experts have warned that Iran already had a significant supply of highly enriched uranium, and Tehran has now threatened to withdraw openly from the Non-Proliferation Treaty. I am turning over these questions not just because they are the unanswerable anxieties of war but because we Israelis have so many reasons to distrust the man who has led us here. Perhaps no one said it better than Benjamin Netanyahu himself, back in 2008. At that time, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was under police investigation even as he was exploring peace talks with Syria. Netanyahu challenged Olmert's motives in a television interview: 'We're talking about a prime minister who is up to his neck in investigations, and who doesn't have a public and moral mandate to decide such fateful matters for the state of Israel. There's a real concern … that he will make decisions on the basis of his personal interest in political survival and not the national interest.' The same is now true of Netanyahu, who has refused to leave office despite being indicted in three corruption cases in 2019. His trial has dragged on for five years, and the prosecution finally began cross-examining him early this month. Because of the war with Iran, though, courts are holding only urgent hearings and the trial is on hold. Since the Hamas attack of October 7, Netanyahu has resisted public pressure for a judicial inquiry into the catastrophe. Last week, his government just barely survived a coalition crisis. These conditions hardly inspire confidence in his decision to drag the country into a potentially calamitous war.
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
Russia: Other nations ready to supply Iran with nukes after U.S. strike
President Donald Trump is joined by his national security team in the Situation Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on Saturday, June 21, 2025, as U.S. bombers executed strikes on the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear infrastructure. Photo via The White House/UPI | License Photo June 22 (UPI) -- In the wake of President Donald Trump's strike on Iran's nuclear sites Saturday, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said Sunday that "a number of countries" are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear weapons. Gen. Dan Caine said at a Pentagon press conference Sunday that measuring the damage at the sites would take time but that an initial assessment indicates that all three sites sustained "severe damage and destruction." He revealed that the mission involved 75 precision-guided munitions, including 14 GBU-57 bunker-busters. "Do you remember that the operation was beginning, I promised you that Iran's nuclear facilities would be destroyed, one way or another. This promise is kept," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on social media, revealing that the strike was carried out by the United States in "full coordination" with the Israeli Defense Forces. While Israeli and American authorities have indicated major damage at Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan, Iranian and Russian authorities have indicated only minor damage to Iran's capabilities for nuclear enrichment. "What have the Americans accomplished with their nighttime strikes on three nuclear sites in Iran?" Medvedev questioned in a post on social media. "The enrichment of nuclear material -- and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons -- will continue. A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads." Medvedev said Iran's political leadership has survived despite Israel's apparent pursuit of a regime change and may have "come out even stronger." Like Russia, Iran ally Pakistan is armed with nuclear weapons but said Thursday that it had not yet received requests for any military assistance from Iran while expressing alignment with its neighbor. It has since condemned the U.S. attack on Iran. "The unprecedented escalation of tension and violence, owing to ongoing aggression against Iran, is deeply disturbing. Any further escalation of tensions will have severely damaging implications for the region and beyond," Pakistan's Foreign Ministry said in a statement Sunday. Sa'eed Iravani, Iran's ambassador and permanent representative to the United Nations in New York, has called for an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council, Iranian state media reported Sunday. Iran is calling for the Security Council to rebuke the United States, which is a permanent member of the UNSC. The Russian Foreign Ministry also released a statement condemning the strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, calling them a violation of international law and the United Nations charter. It called the attack a "substantial blow to the global non-proliferation regime built around the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons." "They have significantly undermined both the credibility of the NPT and the integrity of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) monitoring and verification mechanisms that underpin it," the Russian Foreign Ministry said. China's Foreign Ministry likewise said the United States had violated the U.N. charter and international law as it called for Israel to reach a ceasefire "as soon as possible." "China stands ready to work with the international community to pool efforts together and uphold justice, and work for restoring peace and stability in the Middle East. A Telegram account affiliated with the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps said Sunday that satellite images show Iran had evacuated everything from the Fordow site 48 hours before the US attack and moved it to a safe location. "This image shows a large number of trucks that had quickly evacuated enrichment materials, equipment and other supplies from the Fordow site," the post reads. "It is clear that Trump's failed and dramatic attack not only did not damage the underground Fordow facilities, but the site was empty." Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director-general of the IAEA, said Sunday he will call an emergency meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors on Monday after the American strike. He said Iranian nuclear officials had not recorded an increase in off-site radiation levels. "As of this time, we don't expect that there will be any health consequences for people or the environment outside the targeted sites," Grossi said. "We will continue to monitor and assess the situation in Iran and provide further updates as additional information becomes available." In apparent criticism of the United States, Grossi said he had "repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities should never be attacked." He called for Israel and the U.S. to stop their "hostilities" against Iran so that the IAEA's "vital inspection work" in Iran could continue. Meanwhile, the IRGC-affiliated Telegram channel said Sunday that Iran struck Israel's Ben Gurion Airport, as well as a biological research center that reportedly housed research into biological warfare, among other military targets. "This time, sirens sounded after the precise hits, throwing the enemy off balance," the statement said. "We announce that the main parts of the capacity of the Islamic Republic of Iran's armed forces in this sacred defense have not yet been put into operation." Meanwhile, Israel's war against Gaza continues. The Gaza Health Ministry said Sunday that the death toll has risen to 55,959 people while medical facilities are facing blood shortages. The WAFA news agency reported Sunday that Israeli forces reportedly detained at least 26 Palestinians in the West Bank on Sunday after conducting overnight raids.
