Talk of regime change resonates with Iranians fleeing across border

7 hours ago Share Save Andrew Harding BBC News Reporting from Agarak, Armenia-Iran border Share Save

BBC A steady stream of Iranians have fled on foot across the border into Armenia in recent days

"People want regime change," said Mariam, a pensioner, as she collapsed into the back of a taxi with her husband. The couple had just dragged their heavy suitcases across a bridge over the fast-flowing Aras River that marks Iran's remote northern border with the small nation of Armenia, in the southern Caucasus region. "I've walked a long way and I'm tired. The mood in Iran is not so good, but not so bad either. Of course, people are worried, but life continues. Supermarkets, shops, banks all work. She said that Israel and the US wanted "regime change... but I don't know if they'll succeed, or whether the religious fanatics (in Tehran) will hold their ground. We will see." The border point offers a small window into Iran itself, at a time when the internet there is disrupted, and most foreign journalists are banned. But it is worth noting that a lot of the people who did talk to us were dual nationals, with American, German and other passports. In that sense they offer only a very partial snapshot of the public mood in Iran. People we met generally supported the idea of regime change – an idea floated by President Trump after the US said it hit three Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend. But Iran's leaders still have their supporters in the country, and even among those who oppose them opinions differ about the US-Israeli bombing of their country.

At the busy Agarak border crossing, gusts of hot, dusty wind swirled around the police cars, taxis, and passing trucks, as a steady stream of people emerged from Iran, on foot, from behind a long, barbed wire fence overlooked by watchtowers. In a bitterly contested legacy of the Soviet era, Russian troops still patrol parts of the border here. The crossing itself is ringed by jagged, barren mountains and, along the river's edge, by a narrow strip of lurid green farmland. A Canadian diplomat, waiting to offer support to fellow citizens, said he had counted 80 people arriving in the space of one hour. That rate appeared, anecdotally, to be increasing on Monday but it hardly amounted to an exodus.

Vehicles moved in both directions. Many of those leaving declined to speak to us, citing concerns about their families' security inside Iran. Alenoosh, 63, who said she was born in Iran to Armenian parents but grew up in Paris, said she felt that "time is up for the regime". "Everybody is afraid and everybody has had enough of the regime," she said. "In front of my house there was a lot of bombing. A lot of people are on the move. There's traffic. They don't know where to go, where to be safe." A family of Canadian-Iranians told us they'd spent the previous night at a resort on the Caspian Sea and painted a picture of a troubled, but vast country in which many areas appeared undisturbed by the conflict.

Did Trump have the legal authority to strike Iran?

1 hour ago Share Save Jake Horton & Lucy Gilder BBC Verify Share Save

BBC

Since US President Donald Trump ordered strikes on several nuclear facilities in Iran over the weekend, Democrats as well as lawmakers from his own party have questioned his legal authority to do so. Republican Congressman Thomas Massie said on X that the strikes were "not Constitutional", and another Republican Congressman Warren Davidson wrote "it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional". But Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson defended the president, saying he "evaluated that the imminent danger outweighed the time it would take for Congress to act" and that there's "tradition of similar military actions under presidents of both parties". BBC Verify has asked legal experts whether Trump's actions were in line with the Constitution or whether he should have consulted Congress first.

What does the Constitution say about military action?

There are two parts of the US Constitution that are relevant here: Article I and Article II. Article I specifically lists the ability "to declare war" as one of Congress' powers. However, Article II - which lays out the president's powers - says that "the president shall be Commander in Chief of the Army", and sources at the White House have told the BBC they see this as the rationale for the strikes on Iran. Constitutional experts have said that Article II give the president the authority to use military force in certain circumstances. The circumstances aren't specifically laid out in the Constitution - but they have been subsequently interpreted to include "actual or anticipated attacks" or to "advance other important national interests" according to experts at the Council for Foreign Relations. These interests could include the prevention of nuclear proliferation - which Trump administration said was their justification for the strikes on Iran. Four constitutional experts told BBC Verify that Trump had some authority under these circumstances to order the military strikes. "The short answer is yes, he did have the authority here," says Claire Finkelstein, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. "There is a long standing practice of presidents engaging in isolated military engagements without congressional approval."

The White House President Trump was joined in the Situation Room by senior members of his admistration

Another constitutional law expert, Jessica Levinson at Loyola Marymount University, said the president has limited authority to authorise air strikes as long as it "doesn't begin to resemble a war, and there is no clear definition of when that occurs". However, Andrew Rudalevige, a professor of government at Bowdoin College, told BBC Verify he didn't believe Trump had the authority to launch the latest strikes as there wasn't "a sudden attack to repel". Although Article I gives Congress the power to declare war, the provision has rarely been used. The last time Congress evoked this power was in 1942 after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor during the Second World War. Before this point it had been used on just 10 occasions since 1812. And experts also told us that presidents using their authority to order military actions without getting approval from Congress has become more common. John Bellinger, who was a legal adviser in the White House under President George W Bush, said: "Over the last several decades, Congress has acquiesced more and more in presidential uses of military force for a variety of purposes without congressional authorisation." "Congress and the courts have effectively negated the requirement of a declaration," Jonathan Turley, a conservative constitutional expert, told BBC Verify.

What have other presidents done?

President Barack Obama authorised airstrikes in Libya without requesting permission from Congress, which his administration justified under Article II, as was the case for the mission to kill Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan in 2011. And during Trump's first term in office, he ordered the killing of Iranian military officer Qasem Soleimani without congressional approval. Democratic President Bill Clinton launched strikes in the Balkans in the 1990s without prior approval, and more recently, Joe Biden did the same when hitting Houthi targets in Yemen as well as in Syria during his presidency.

Getty Qasem Soleimani was killed in 2020 by a US airstrike

"This authority has been repeatedly used by presidents throughout our history," said Mr Turley. "History and precedent favours Trump in this action." Speaker Johnson cited examples by previous administrations when defending Trump, saying: "Presidents of both parties have acted with the same commander in chief authority under Article II." "President Obama went on an eight month campaign bombing Libya to take down the regime there. I never heard a Democrat balk about any of that, and suddenly, now this, they're just up in arms."

What about other laws?

What we know about Iran's attack on US base in Qatar

5 hours ago Share Save Share Save

Video shows air defences over Qatar as Iran attacks US base

Sean Seddon & Gabriela Pomeroy BBC News

Iran has launched missiles at a US military base in Qatar, in what it said was retaliation for American strikes against its nuclear sites over the weekend. Witnesses reported hearing loud bangs in the sky above the capital, Doha, while videos showed bright flashes in the sky as air defence systems attempted to intercept missiles. It is the latest escalation in a conflict involving Iran, Israel and the US which has seen tensions in the Middle East soar to unprecedented levels in recent days. Here is what we know.

What did Iran target and why?

Iranian missiles targeted the largest US military base in the Middle East, Al-Udeid, in what it said was a response to the US bombing three of its nuclear programme facilities on Saturday evening. Al-Udeid is home to the US military's headquarters for all air operations in the region. Some British military personnel also serve there on rotation. Iran launches missiles at US base in Qatar in response to strikes The attack was first confirmed by Iranian state media, and later by the military. A statement from the IRGC, the most powerful branch of the Iranian military, said that "Iran will not leave any attack on its sovereignty unanswered", and added: "US bases in the region are not strengths but vulnerabilities." The US had previously warned Iran not to respond to its strikes on nuclear facilities and urged leaders in Tehran to agree to a diplomatic end to hostilities in the region. There were differing reports about how many missiles were fired. Iran said six, the US said 14, and Qatar was reported by Reuters as saying 19 - all of which, it added, were intercepted. No one has been reported killed or injured. In the hours before the attack, both the US and UK had advised their citizens in Qatar to "shelter in place". About 8,000 US citizens live in Qatar, according to the State Department, as well as several thousand British citizens.

What was said after the attack

It became apparent soon afterwards that Iran had given warning that it was preparing to launch missiles. Three Iranian officials quoted by the New York Times said that Tehran had told Doha of its intentions, as a way to minimise casualties. In his first comments in the aftermath, President Donald Trump thanked Iran "for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured". He branded the attack "very weak" - no Americans were harmed and very little damage was done, he said. "They've gotten it all out of their system," he added and said there was now a chance for "peace". Nevertheless, a spokesman for Qatar's foreign ministry said the attack was a "surprise" and a "flagrant violation of its sovereignty", and added that Qatar "was one of the first countries to warn against the dangers of Israeli escalation in the region". Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei meanwhile said that Iran did not harm anyone in the attack but that his country would not "submit to anyone's violation". "We have not violated anyone, and we will in no way accept being violated by anyone. We will not submit to anyone's violation; this is the logic of the Iranian nation," he said on X (as translated by BBC Persian).

What were the signs that the attack was imminent?

There were indications on Monday that the US suspected Iran was preparing to launch missiles into Qatar. Hours before the attack, Qatar said it was temporarily closing its airspace, shortly after the US and UK told citizens in Qatar to "shelter in place". Those warnings did not give a clear indication an attack was imminent: the US said it issued the order "out of an abundance of caution", while the UK said it was following the lead of the Americans. However, around an hour before the attack, the BBC learned of "a credible threat" to the base. Separately, some US media outlets quoted anonymous US officials as saying Iranian missile launchers had been positioned for a potential launch towards Qatar. Flight tracking websites showed planes had already started diverting to other airports before the launch. According to Flightradar24, there were 100 flights bound for Doha shortly before missile launches were detected. Hamad International Airport is one of the world's top 10 busiest for international traffic, with around 140,000 passengers passing through per day. Other countries in the region, including Bahrain and Kuwait, also closed their airspace for a brief period.

How did we get here?

Labour MPs mount major bid to block benefits changes

2 hours ago Share Save Chris Mason, Jack Fenwick & Joshua Nevett Political editor, political correspondent & political reporter Share Save

EPA

At least 80 Labour MPs are supporting a fresh effort to block the government's planned changes to the benefits system, the BBC has been told. The MPs have signed an amendment that would give them an opportunity to vote on a proposal to reject the welfare reform bill in its entirety. Dozens of Labour MPs have expressed concerns about the plans to cut disability and sickness-related benefits payments to save £5bn a year by 2030. Ministers have attempted to soften the impact of the welfare changes, but many Labour MPs remain discontented with the package of benefits reforms.

The welfare reform bill - called the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - will include proposals to make it harder for disabled people with less severe conditions to claim personal independence payment (Pip). The amendment, which has been seen by the BBC, notes "the need for the reform of the social security system" before outlining reasons why the bill should be rejected. The reasons it lists for thwarting the bill include the number of people the plans are expected to push into relative poverty, a lack of consultation, and an inadequate impact assessment on the consequences on the jobs market and on people's health. It is known as a reasoned amendment, which is a parliamentary mechanism which allows MPs to record their reasons for objecting to a bill. If the reasoned amendment is selected by House Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle, and the majority of MPs vote in favour of it, the bill will not be allowed to continue its passage through Parliament. While the success of the amendment is not assured, the level of support for it among Labour MPs indicates the extent of the potential rebellion facing ministers.

A list of the Labour MPs who have signed it – which, the BBC has been told, includes 10 Labour select committee chairs – is expected to be published on Monday evening. It is understood that many members of the left-wing Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs have not yet had the opportunity to sign it, which may mean the number of signatories heads beyond 100 in the coming days. This number of Labour opponents to the government's welfare plans could be enough to inflict defeat on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer in the House Commons, were all the opposition parties to oppose the plans too. The government has a working majority of 165 in the Commons, meaning that 83 Labour MPs would need to oppose the bill to force a parliamentary defeat. Earlier, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said she did not want to alert Labour to her plans before the welfare reform bill was voted on. A senior Conservative source said the shadow cabinet would be discussing whether to help the government vote through the welfare reforms when they meet on Tuesday morning. It is thought about half the amendment's signatories so far are from the new intake of Labour MPs – those elected at the general election last year. The vote on the government's bill is currently due to take place a week tomorrow – on Tuesday 1 July.

'Taken so much grief'

UK vows to spend 5% of GDP on national security by 2035

1 hour ago Share Save Share Save

EPA

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to meet a new Nato target to spend 5% of the UK's GDP on national security by 2035. At a Nato summit in the Netherlands, 32 member countries including the UK are expected to agree the 5% goal, with 3.5% to go on core defence and the remaining 1.5% on defence-related areas such as resilience and security. The split target is aimed at placating US President Donald Trump, who has urged Nato allies to spend more, while giving cash-strapped EU countries flexibility over how they meet the target. Downing Street has argued measures on energy and tackling smuggling gangs could be classified as security spending.

Speaking ahead of the two-day summit, Sir Keir said the UK had to "navigate this era of radical uncertainty with agility, speed and a clear-eyed sense of the national interest". "After all, economic security is national security, and through this strategy we will bring the whole of society with us, creating jobs, growth and wages for working people."

Nato (the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) is made up of 32 member countries who agree to defend each other if attacked. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and Trump's re-election as US president last year, members of the organisation have faced increased pressure to boost their defence spending. Countries had been expected to spend at least 2% of their national income - or GDP - on defence, although last year, only 23 hit that target - an increase from three in 2014. In January, Trump said 2% was "not enough" and that Nato allies should be spending 5%. And speaking last year before his re-election, he said he would "encourage" aggressors to "do whatever the hell they want" to European allies who don't pay their way. In February, Sir Keir set out plans to increase the UK's defence spending, as opposed to national security spending, to 2.5% by April 2027 and expressed a "clear ambition" to reach 3% by 2034 if economic conditions allowed. On Monday, the government said it expected to reach the target of spending 4.1% of GDP on national security by 2027. The 1.5% element of the 5% Nato target is for what is described as "resilience", such as border security and protection against cyber attacks. For the UK, this latter element is expected to be met by the year after next, with core defence spending reaching 2.6% by then. Getting core defence spending to 3.5% isn't expected until 2035 – two general elections away – and Downing Street hasn't said how it will be paid for. Alongside the spending commitment, the government published its National Security Strategy which said the UK needed to be more "competitive and robust" in science, education, trade and frontier technology. It also sought to stress that investment in defence would be felt "directly in the pockets of working people" pointing to new jobs that would be created.

RAF flight evacuates British nationals from Israel

2 hours ago Share Save André Rhoden-Paul BBC News Share Save

Getty Images

The RAF has evacuated 63 British nationals and their dependants from Israel as the country continues to exchange fire with Iran, the foreign secretary has said. The flight left Tel Aviv on Monday afternoon, taking vulnerable Britons and their immediate family to Cyprus, from where they will be taken to the UK. A British national was also injured in Israel during an Iranian missile attack, David Lammy said. In a statement to MPs, Lammy repeated his plea to Iran to return to the negotiating table following the US's strikes on its nuclear programme.

He said: "My message for Tehran was clear, take the off ramp, dial this thing down, and negotiate with the United States seriously and immediately. "Be in no doubt, we are prepared to defend our personnel, our assets and those of our allies and partners." Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran would not accept aggression "from anyone under any circumstances".

The RAF A400 aircraft departed Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport with 63 passengers, made up of British nationals plus their immediate family, who are eligible to travel, Lammy said. The BBC understands the UK's Chief Rabbi, Sir Ephraim Mirvis, is one of the passengers returning to the UK after being evacuated from Israel by the RAF. The Foreign Office said further flights would be based on demand and the security situation. British nationals still in Israel have been urged to register their presence with the UK government. Downing Street said "around 1,000" people had asked for a seat on an evacuation flight – a quarter of the 4,000 who have registered their presence in Israel or the Occupied Palestinian Territories with the Foreign Office. Israeli airspace has been closed - leaving thousands of British nationals stranded - since the conflict started earlier this month when Israel attacked nuclear sites in Iran, prompting Tehran to respond with missile strikes.

SWNS British nationals and their families were flown to Cyprus from Israel

British citizen Gabriella Somerville, 58, told PA news agency that the situation is "really difficult" as she tries to find a way to leave Israel. She said she had registered and paid for a British evacuation flight, but had heard no updates. "We've been here 10 days now and most other countries have had secure coaches to get to the border with Egypt or Oman or Jordan," she said. "Yet we were told by the Foreign Office to make our own way to the borders. "I really feel for the people out here now. It's really difficult, we've been going down to shelters for 10 days and we're living out of packed suitcases but with no communication." Elsewhere, British nationals in Qatar were advised to shelter in place on Monday evening, shortly before Iran launched missiles at the US al-Udeid Air Base near Doha. The advice was later lifted following the attack. All UK military personnel in Qatar were accounted for, the BBC understands, and there were no injuries or casualties as a result of the attack, according to the Qatari government. The airspace over the country was closed temporarily and flights grounded. A BBC News employee at Doha airport said he had got on a plane headed for Bangladesh on Monday afternoon, but the plane's journey was then delayed and its passengers removed and made to wait at the airport.

Portrait allegedly damaged by visitor taking selfie

7 hours ago Share Save Danny Fullbrook Culture reporter Share Save

Claudio Giovannini/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock The painting will be returned to the exhibition when it is restored

A 18th-century oil painting has allegedly been damaged after a museum visitor tripped while taking a selfie. Florence's Uffizi Gallery said a tourist fell backwards while trying to "make a meme in front" of a portrait of Ferdinando de' Medici, Grand Prince of Tuscany, by Anton Domenico Gabbiani. The museum explained the damage could be repaired quickly but director Simone Verde warned restrictions on visitor behaviour could be imposed in the future. He said in a statement: "The problem of visitors coming to museums to make memes or take selfies for social media is rampant.

"We will set very precise limits, preventing behaviour that is not compatible with the sense of our institutions and respect for cultural heritage," he added. The portrait was on display as part of an exhibition called Florence and Europe: Arts of the Eighteenth Century at the Uffizi. According to the gallery the visitor has been identified by the police and reported to the judicial authorities. The exhibition, which was made up of about 150 art works, is now closed until 2 July following the incident. The painting will be repaired in the interim so it is ready to go back on display. The exhibition will then run, as originally planned, until 28 November.

The heatwave of last week is over and while it will feel fresher on Monday for many parts of the UK, it's likely to be just a temporary lull.

Those cooler conditions over the next day or so will bring a mixture of sunny spells and occasional blustery showers.

However, the heat will build quickly on Wednesday across central and south-eastern areas of England with temperatures heading back up into the high twenties.

By the end of the week a few locations across eastern England may even experience another heatwave.

Wreck of sunken $30m yacht Bayesian to be examined

Watch: Sunken British superyacht raised from seabed

Their bodies were retrieved by divers several days later.

Mr Lynch and his teenage daughter were among seven passengers and crew who died when the Bayesian was knocked over by sudden extreme winds and sank within minutes.

The yacht, which belonged to the British tech entrepreneur Mike Lynch, has finally been recovered in a complex $30m (£22.2m) operation to allow Italian prosecutors to inspect the wreck as part of their ongoing investigation.

The wreckage of the Bayesian superyacht is now on dry land in Sicily after being lifted from the seabed and carried on a slow final journey from the spot where it sank in a storm last summer, killing seven passengers and crew.

Other smaller vessels in the same area that day survived the storm intact, leaving experts struggling to understand why the luxury yacht was affected so badly.

At the time, prosecutors in Sicily announced a criminal inquiry into potential manslaughter and negligent shipwreck, describing its outcome as "completely unpredictable".

They made clear that recovering the Bayesian itself would be essential.

Now the yacht is out of the water, experts for the prosecution will be able to examine the physical evidence and start to come up with some answers.

The salvage operation began in May, but was quickly struck by fresh disaster when one of the divers was killed in an underwater explosion.

The entire operation involving dozens of experts had to be paused.

The diving team was then replaced by remote-controlled submersibles for safety, delaying the process.

Fixing straps around the hull, or the main body of the vessel, was also tougher than anticipated.

But last week the salvage team, managed by TMC Maritime, finally cut the giant, 72m aluminium mast off the yacht, allowing the hull to right itself under water.

Raising it 50m to the surface was then a delicate three-day operation with regular checks for any fuel spills or other pollution.

Prosecutors wanted the remains of the superyacht kept as intact as possible.

It was only on Sunday, dangling from a giant floating crane with multiple straps beneath its belly, that the Bayesian was ready to be carried the 16km (10 miles) or so towards shore.

On Monday morning, it was lowered into a metal cradle in the port of Termini Imerese where the wreckage, now grey and battered, will be left to dry out before any formal inspection or forensic tests are conducted.

In the meantime, salvage teams will retrieve the giant mast and the rigging from the seabed and do a final sweep for any other materials that may help the enquiry.

Mr Lynch, a tech entrepreneur sometimes dubbed "Britain's Bill Gates", was last summer acquitted of fraud charges in the US and the trip around Sicily with family and friends was planned as a celebration.

In the early hours of 19 August his luxury yacht was anchored just offshore near the port of Porticello, when the storm hit.

There has been endless speculation about why the Bayesian sank ever since: whether doors were closed in time and what other steps the crew took and how quickly.

Three crew members including the captain are under investigation.

But the Italian prosecution team have remained tight-lipped about their work. Last year, in their only comments to press, they said they would explore whether the accident was due to human error or potential design flaws on the yacht.

"Only after analysing the wreck will we understand what happened, where the water came in, whether there was enough water to cause the ship to sink or whether some other factor was involved," prosecutor Raffaele Cammarano stressed at the time.

An interim report last month by British maritime investigators, MAIB, found that the Bayesian - with its enormous single mast - was vulnerable to very high wind speeds.

The report suggested neither the owner not the crew were aware of this.

Statements given to its authors also suggested that all the relevant hatches and doors had been shut as the storm built.

The report was conducted for safety purposes - avoiding future disasters at sea - not for any criminal prosecution.

Killer whales 'massage' each other using kelp

8 hours ago Share Save Victoria Gill Science correspondent, BBC News Share Save

Watch: Killer whales use kelp to ‘massage’ each other

Orcas in the North Pacific have been seen "massaging" each other - rubbing pieces of kelp between their bodies. Using drones, researchers filmed the animals selecting and biting off the kelp, then placing the tube-shaped piece of seaweed onto the back of another whale. The scientists think the massages might have a health or hygiene function, but they also believe they are a form of social bonding. The findings, published in the journal Current Biology, appear to be an example of tool use in killer whales - with the animals fashioning a tubular piece of seaweed and using it for a specific, planned purpose.

Victoria Gill The Center for Whale Research team have special permits to study the whales up close

"Let's call it a kelp massage," explained Prof Darren Croft from the University of Exeter and the Center for Whale Research in Washington State. "They're using the kelp to rub between themselves." During 12 days - between April and July 2024 - of studying a population of orcas known as the Southern Residents in the coastal waters off Washington State, the team recorded 30 bouts of kelp massage. "We see it multiple times per day," lead researcher, Dr Michael Weiss from the CWR, told BBC News. "When we get a drone over these animals, we're going to see at least one pair of whales doing this." This could be a marine version of what is known as allogrooming in primates. Many monkeys and apes groom other members of their groups - spending hours picking through fur, cleaning and removing parasites. The researchers have dubbed this behaviour as "allokelping". Physical touch in animals, Prof Croft explained, "is really important for building and maintaining social relationships. "And these killer whales are incredibly social animals," he added.

Center for Whale Research, NMFS Permit 27038 Drones have provided a new perspective on the killer whales' lives

US says Kilmar Ábrego García will 'never go free' after judge orders his release

6 hours ago Share Save Ana Faguy BBC News Share Save

Reuters

The Trump administration said a Salvadoran man who was mistakenly deported and then brought back to the US on criminal charges will "never go free" on American soil, even though a judge ordered his release. Kilmar Ábrego García was deported in March as part of an immigration crackdown. Government officials said he was removed in error, but they were unable to bring him back. Earlier this month, he was sent to the state of Tennessee, where the justice department charged him with human smuggling. The judge overseeing the case said on Sunday that Mr Ábrego García should be released from custody while he awaits trial. But she noted immigration officials would still have the power to detain him.

"Kilmar Abrego Garcia is a dangerous criminal illegal alien," Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, said in a social media post on Monday. "We have said it for months and it remains true to this day: he will never go free on American soil." The department oversees immigration enforcement. Judge Barbara Holmes said in an opinion on Sunday that "the government failed to prove" that Mr Ábrego García endangered any minor victim, was a flight risk or might attempt to obstruct justice. She also wrote that once the Justice Department released him, immigration officials would probably take Mr Ábrego García into custody as they work to remove him from the country. In a federal indictment filed in early June, the government accused Mr Ábrego García of participating in a trafficking conspiracy over several years to move undocumented migrants from Texas to other parts of the country. The charges, which date back to 2016, allege he transported undocumented individuals between Texas and Maryland and other states more than 100 times. He has pleaded not guilty.

Watch: Kilmar Abrego Garcia back in US, says attorney general

U2 guitarist The Edge becomes Irish citizen

U2's The Edge and Bono performing in 2017 in New Jersey

U2 guitarist David Howell Evans, known as The Edge, has become an Irish citizen at a ceremony in County Kerry.

The 63-year-old was born in Essex in England, and is the child of Welsh parents, but has lived in Ireland since he was one.

Sporting a tricolour clip on his lapel, the musician had Irish citizenship conferred on him in Killarney and said it was a "a monumental day" for all involved.

He is among about 7,500 people who are making a declaration of fidelity and loyalty to the Irish state and becoming Irish citizens on Monday and Tuesday.

Brothers jailed after machete attack on policeman

4 hours ago Share Save Brian Farmer BBC News, Bedfordshire Reporting from Luton Crown Court Share Save

Bedfordshire Police Humar and Hannan Mahmood left their victim with a stab wound to the chest

Two robbers have been jailed after attacking an off-duty police officer with a machete who confronted them while out shopping. Brothers Hannan Mahmood, 20, and Humar Mahmood, 19, attacked PC Darren Attwood in a pedestrianised area in Luton town centre on Saturday, 2 November. The pair, both of Belmont Road in the town, admitted assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, robbery, possession of a bladed article in a public place, and dangerous driving. They were jailed for seven years each at Luton Crown Court and Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley hailed PC Attwood's "bravery".

Judge Allison Hunter said PC Attwood, who works for the Met Police, needed to be commended - and gave him a High Sheriff's Award and the sum of £500. Children were in the area when the "highly dangerous" attack took place, she added.

The attack, in daylight on a Saturday in the town centre, was captured on CCTV

Barrister Jonathan Mole, prosecuting, told the judge the two brothers were armed with machetes and had robbed a man of his dirt bike, which was worth about £1,000. Mr Mole said PC Attwood identified himself as a police officer when he approached the pair.

CCTV footage from the town centre was shown in court as well as footage of the victim recounting events while in hospital. Humar Mahmood could be seen to produce a machete and swing it at PC Attwood. As he backed away, the brothers then rode towards him before riding off, having left the officer with a stab wound to the chest.

Nicky Schiller/BBC The off-duty officer suffered injuries to his chest during the confrontation in front of Luton Town Hall

PC Attwood said he did not know at the time the pair had committed a robbery. The Met officer said he had photographed the brothers and pulled down some plastic barriers in front of their bikes in an attempt to stop them escaping and he felt "lucky to be alive". Describing the attack, former soldier PC Attwood said: "I felt one [blow] on my arm. "The second one [said] 'just... kill him' and I thought 'this is not ideal' [but] I cannot let [them] get away." Pc Attwood said after the hearing: "There is a saying that the police are never off duty and in my case at this time, that was true."

The judge heard the brothers had previous convictions - Humar for wounding and knife offences; Hannan for robbery and assault. Hannan had been given a nine-month custody sentence in 2024 and had been released on licence when he attacked PC Attwood.

Bedfordshire Police PC Darren Attwood was praised for his action while he was off-duty and out shopping

Barrister Kevin Molloy, for Humar, said his client's behaviour could be a reaction to bullying suffered at school. He told the judge: "The violence was in an attempt to get away rather that just attacking someone for the sake of it." Mr Molloy said Humar had taken "responsibility" by pleading guilty. Marcus Rickard, for Hannan, said PC Attwood had been "heroic" and there was no doubt the brothers behaviour was "appalling". He said Hannan had also suffered "horrific" bullying at school and been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Mr Rickard said Hannan was a "very conflicted young man" but added: "There is a good person in there."

Sir Mark said: "PC Attwood's actions demonstrated the very best of policing – bravery, dedication, a commitment to service and a passionate drive to protect people. "All of us at the Met are incredibly proud to call him a colleague." Det Insp Caeva Taylor, from the Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Major Crime Unit, said his "bravery" helped her team gather evidence: "PC Attwood risked his life to protect the public."

People evacuated from tower after major fire spread

Just now Share Save Lynette Horsburgh & Jonny Humphries BBC News, Manchester Share Save

Kiyan Beasant The fire at Hotspur House in Manchester spread to a neighbouring building

A fire that broke out at a landmark Manchester city centre building - causing it to partly collapse - spread to a neighbouring tower block. Embers from the blaze at Hotspur House reached 1 Cambridge Street, resulting in the evacuation of residents from the building, Greater Manchester Fire And Rescue Service (GMFRS) told the BBC at the scene. However, it added the fire was no longer being treated as a major incident. Anyone who has nowhere to go is set to be put up overnight by Manchester City Council. The fire at the former printing press building broke out at about 17:00 GMT, forcing the cancellation of all trains through Manchester Oxford Road station.

The fire service urged the public to stay away from the area and said 20 fire engines from across Greater Manchester were on the scene. A spokesperson said the blaze had spread to three floors of Hotspur House, and aerial units had been used to bring the fire under control. The spokesman added: "The two apartment blocks at number 1 Cambridge Street have been evacuated. "A cordon is in place on Cambridge Street and we ask that the public stay away from the area. "Residents nearby should keep doors and windows closed due to smoke in the area." Footage taken at the scene showed parts of Hotspur House had collapsed. National Rail said all lines were blocked and warned that services running through the station may be cancelled or delayed until 21:00 BST. It said rail replacement buses were running for Northern customers from Manchester Oxford Road at 18:20 BST and 18:25, calling at all stops to Warrington Central. There have been no further updates on disruption to rail services.

JMG Press Part of the former Hotspur Press appears to have collapsed due to the fire

Major fire breaks out in Manchester city centre

Buses were also leaving Warrington Central at the same times, calling at all stops to Manchester Oxford Road. A bus will depart Manchester Oxford Road at 19:00, calling at all stops to Earlestown. TransPennine Express said rail replacement buses had been requested for the following routes: Manchester Piccadilly to Liverpool Lime Street in both directions

Manchester Piccadilly to Preston in both directions East Midlands Railway said it had bus replacements services on standby at Warrington Central, Stockport and Sheffield. TransPennine Express said customers at Liverpool Lime Street could use their ticket at no extra cost to travel on TransPennine Express services to Manchester Victoria. It also advised customers at Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Oxford Road to use the free Transport for Greater Manchester bus link to Manchester Victoria, where they could change for connecting services towards Liverpool.

Catherine Adams The fire at the former Hotspur Press printing works is close to Manchester Oxford Road railway station

The fire-hit building, also known as Medlock Mill, closed as a printing site in 1996. Developer Manner's plan to regenerate the historic building into a 36-storey student tower was given planning permission in May 2024. However, it recently redesigned its proposals and they will now be submitted to Manchester City Council, the Local Democracy Reporting Service said earlier this month.

X The fire broke out in the former Hotspur Press building in Manchester city centre

Listen to the best of BBC Radio Manchester on Sounds and follow BBC Manchester on Facebook, X, and Instagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.

Hugo Boss wants Liverpool pet store to change name

18 hours ago Share Save Jenny Coleman BBC News, Liverpool Share Save

BBC Ben McDonald was told by Hugo Boss he could not call his company Boss Pets

An online pet health supplies shop has received a legal letter from Hugo Boss over its name. Ben McDonald, from Bootle on Merseyside, set up Boss Pets in February, but this month received the letter from the designer brand demanding he stop using the word, which is widely used in the area to suggest something is great. Mr McDonald said his "whole world collapsed" after being told he faced the potential legal battle over concerns people might think the companies were linked. A spokeswoman for Hugo Boss said: "We are aware that the English word 'boss' is one that is commonly used."

She added that "nevertheless, it's our responsibility to monitor and protect our brand rights globally and address unclear cases where needed". "When we became aware of the registration, we have approached the business owner as the intended registration represents an overlap with our trademarks. "As an international fashion company, we need to – like any other corporation – take measures to protect our existing trademark rights. These measures apply to both of our brands, BOSS and HUGO." She said the firm "only approaches third parties where an overlap with our existing trademark rights occurs, and as a matter of principle we always seek for a dialogue in favour of an amicable solution for both sides".

Why a Bootle pet store can't say it's 'boss'

Mr McDonald's own lawyers have argued that the firm, a pet health supplies business, was operating in an entirely different sector, using a commonly used term, and that there was no likelihood of confusion. Mr McDonald, who described himself as "just a lad from Bootle", said he had been given 10 days to take down his website or face legal action. He said he had spent "every spare penny" on his new website for his pet-related products. His lawyer Francis McEntegart said Mr McDonald did not have a case to answer and was accusing the clothes retailer of bullying his client. "My client is a small local business that is just starting out selling pet wellness products, it's not going to interfere with the profits of Hugo Boss in any way."

More pets being put down due to rising vet bills, BBC told

26 minutes ago Share Save Jim Connolly BBC News Investigations Myranda Mowafi BBC News Share Save

BBC Avril has avoided taking her Cavachon Dougie to the vet due to the cost and now regrets it

Pet owners are increasingly having their sick animals put down or they are delaying taking them for treatment to avoid spiralling vet bills, vets and animal charities have warned. Some animal lovers are giving up pets to rehoming centres, while others have decided not to own any more in the future due to high costs, the BBC has been told. Many veterinary surgeons and nurses say treatment prices have been pushed up after big corporations have bought up practices. The British Veterinary Association (BVA) said the cost of care had increased for a variety of reasons and fees reflected the prices businesses needed to charge to remain financially viable and open.

Hundreds of pet owners have contacted Your Voice, Your BBC News, with concerns over vet bills. Avril told us about her dog Dougie after File on Four Investigates revealed the "constant pressure" some vets felt to generate income. The 12-year-old Cavachon has a heart condition, but Avril says she has had to cut back on vet appointments as prices have risen every year.

Now Dougie has gone deaf and Avril worries his condition may have got worse because she cut back on follow-up appointments due to the cost. She said she's gone through "a lot of soul searching", adding that at times she worries not taking him is to blame. "At least I'm still hanging in there and get to keep him," she said, but added she felt "desperately sorry for those people who have given up their pet".

Caroline also got in touch after paying more than £4,500 to treat her 19-year-old cat Ozzie when she was diagnosed with a brain tumour. The bill was so expensive she could not afford to cremate Ozzie after the cat died - so instead she brought her home and buried her in the back garden.

For Caroline losing Ozzie was like losing a member of the family

She said the cost of treating Ozzie, who died in 2022, was so high it has put her off owning another pet. "I'm currently in my early 60s and I don't want to be 10 years down the line having to find £4,500," she said. "I don't want the emotional upset of possibly not being able to afford it and then having to ask for somebody to rehome the cat as well." Animal welfare charity Blue Cross warned increased treatment costs are a "ticking time bomb" for the welfare of pets. "Access to affordable vet care has reduced and we're seeing more animals not getting the treatment they need and even being relinquished because their owners can no longer afford to keep them," said Paul Manktelow, director of veterinary services for the charity. Blue Cross runs a fund for people who can't afford emergency care and it's seen a 264% increase in applications in the past year, going from 1,319 in 2023 to 4,807 in 2024.

The BBC has spoken to 25 veterinary surgeons, nurses and industry insiders working for a range of companies and the majority blamed higher vet bills on big companies buying up practices. One said life became "hellish" when their practice was taken over. Another said a regional manager bought them a cake when they hit their financial targets, which "went down badly" with staff, who were busy and covered in animal blood and urine at the time.

Only one person did speak to us publicly because others feared never working again. Locum vet Dr Callum Ladell, who has worked at more than 250 practices, says public trust in vets has been lost and he is seeing fewer clients bringing in their animals for treatment because they are expecting a big bill. "We're having cases come in, having been left for months and months, and normally, it ends up being euthanasia - putting an animal to sleep - because they can't afford the bill and because it works out cheaper than fixing them," he told the BBC.

The British Veterinary Union in Unite (BVU) - which represents workers in the industry – says people are increasingly choosing to euthanise their pets due to cost pressures, even when there are other medical options available. A survey of 10,000 cat owners by the charity Cats Protection found 58% did not visit the vet as often as they would like, with cost described as the biggest barrier.

Dr Ladell said he treated a friend's cat, called Elvis, who suffered a wound to his leg in May. He sedated the cat, cleaned out the wound and stitched it up at a cost of £93.19. This didn't include his clinical time, which he estimated would have added £300 to the bill. The cat later opened up the wound – making it larger - and this time, Dr Ladell took him to the practice at which Elvis was registered, which is owned by the corporate chain CVS.

The case notes and final bill, which have been seen by the BBC, showed vets treated the cat under full anaesthetic, removed tissue, reopened the wound, flushed it out, put a drain in and stitched it up. The bill came to £1,074.54. Dr Ladell didn't criticise the quality of care received but said he feels more cost-effective treatment could have been done with an equally good outcome, particularly if the owner was not someone who could afford more than £1,000 for this "gold standard" service.

Elvis is now doing well

CVS, which owns around 500 veterinary practices across the UK and Australia, said the two procedures were not comparable. A spokesperson said: "It would be incorrect for us to comment publicly on an individual case as we are bound by confidentiality rules. It would also be unprofessional for us to compare the high-quality treatment we offer with another member of the veterinary profession, particularly if the level of surgical intervention is very different." In 2013, only 10% of vet practices in the UK were owned by large corporate groups.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said six large corporate vet groups - IVC Evidensia, CVS, Medivet, Pets at Home, Linnaeus, and Vet Partners – now account for 60% of the market. Bills for pet owners have risen as corporate ownership has increased - by more than 60% - between 2015 and 2023, figures from the CMA show. This is almost double the rate of inflation or the increase in vet salaries over that time.

The CMA is currently investigating whether a lack of competition in the veterinary sector has contributed to soaring prices. Seven vets at practices owned by IVC Evidensia told File on Four Investigates they were monitored and subject to targets set by the company. One said he and his colleagues were encouraged to compete against other practices owned by IVC over the number of certain procedures they carried out on animals, through what the company called "clinical challenge milestones". IVC said the health and welfare of animals was always its first priority and stressed these "clinical challenge" targets weren't financial but designed to improve the clinical care of pets. The selected procedures, it says, are all carefully chosen because they are essential to ensuring a prompt diagnosis and stabilisation of emergency patients.

Caroline buried Ozzie in her garden after using her savings on the cat's treatment

Corporate vet chains have said there are a variety of reasons why vet costs have increased – including advances in treatments, rising running costs and demands from pet owners for higher standards. The CMA has put forward suggestions of changes designed to make veterinary services more affordable – including price caps on medicines, prescriptions and other services like cremations. The British Veterinary Association (BVA), the vet union BVC and veterinary staff all agree regulation of the industry needs to be updated.

However, the BVA said the CMA's proposed remedies may have the "unintentional consequence of reducing consumer choice and potentially increasing vet fees". "If owners are concerned about cost, speak to your vet because they will always prioritise the welfare of the animal in their care and work closely with owners to find treatment plans that work for their circumstances," said British Veterinary Association president Dr Elizabeth Mullineaux. The CMA was due to publish its final report towards the end of the year, but that's been delayed by three to six months due to the volume and complexity of feedback from vets on its proposed changes.

Americanswers… Has Trump triggered all out war in the Middle East? Americanswers… Has Trump triggered all out war in the Middle East?

Fast bowler Josh Tongue said there is no situation in which England would see a draw as a good outcome from their thrilling first Test against India at Headingley.

England will begin the fifth day on 21-0, 350 runs adrift of a target of 371. If the hosts pull it off, it would be their second-highest successful pursuit in a Test and the second-best on this ground.

Under captain Ben Stokes, England have made clear their aversion to drawing Tests. Only one of England's previous 36 matches since Stokes became skipper three years ago has ended in a draw - and that was because almost two days of the third Ashes Test at Old Trafford in 2023 were lost to rain.

There is a mixed forecast in Leeds on Tuesday, potentially complicating England's run chase.

But, asked if there was any scenario where a draw would become a good result, Tongue said: "No. Just go for the win. That's the clear message in the changing room."

England developed a habit for run chases in the early days of Stokes' captaincy - they successfully pursued 378 to beat India at Edgbaston in 2022.

Headingley, with a reputation for extraordinary finishes, also has a history of teams winning batting last, a history that persuaded Stokes to win the toss and field in this match despite supreme conditions on day one.

Six totals in excess of 250 have successfully been chased at Headingley, more than any other venue in the world apart from the Melbourne Cricket Ground in Australia.

Four of those Leeds chases have come in the past eight years, including the Stokes-inspired overhauling of 359 to beat Australia in an Ashes classic in 2019.

Manchester United have submitted an improved bid of more than £60m for Brentford striker Bryan Mbeumo.

This month United had a bid rejected for the 25-year-old of £45m plus up to £10m in add-ons.

Talks over the Cameroon forward, who would become the club's second signing of the summer, are due to continue this week.

Following the £62.5m capture of Matheus Cunha from Wolves, United are keen to further strengthen Ruben Amorim's squad before they return for pre-season training on 7 July.

New Tottenham manager Thomas Frank was keen to be reunited with Mbeumo, while there has also been interest in the forward from other Champions League clubs.

Sources have suggested Brentford would want at least the same fee as Wolves have received for Cunha before they agree to the sale of a player who still has a year left on his contract.

It was national selector Luke Wright who said at the start of June that Archer could be available for the second India Test, suggesting he is in England's thoughts for this summer, nevermind a potentially box-office reunion against Australia in the Ashes in the winter.

He did not take the new ball for Durham, instead replacing another former England Test bowler in Ollie Robinson after six overs, with Durham 9-0.

From his first delivery - with England bowling coach Neil Killeen in attendance - Archer appealed for caught behind down the leg side but the umpire was unmoved.

While Archer's opening spell of four wicketless overs for 11 runs was accurate, it was a pacey second spell 45 minutes after lunch that caught the eye.

Archer had Durham left-hander Gay fending from in front of his helmet on a slow pitch, another lively bouncer followed to Will Rhodes in his next over and in his third he had a loud lbw appeal against Gay turned down.

Archer, who was the quickest bowler on show in a match that also featured Robinson, Durham's England bowler Matthew Potts and Australia international Gurinder Sandhu, would not be denied.

He went fuller to Gay from round the wicket with the second ball of his next over, found a hint of inswing and trapped the Durham opener in front.

After the umpire's finger was raised, Archer celebrated with a beaming smile - the wicket his first in whites since he dismissed Jordan Cox in a match against Kent on 14 May 2021.

He continued for a further two overs and was cruising to the crease by the end.

When he beat right-hander Colin Ackermann outside off stump he bent double in frustration mid-pitch. It was the final ball of an impressive six-over spell.

Britain's Emma Raducanu has praised Wimbledon for doing "an amazing job" to prevent a man who had been stalking her from buying tickets for this month's championships.

As first reported by the BBC, the All England Club's security measures spotted the man had been red-flagged, and blocked his attempt to enter the public ballot.

The man followed Raducanu to four successive tournaments in February and the 22-year-old was left in tears when she caught sight of him in the stands at the Dubai Tennis Championships.

He was later given a restraining order by Dubai police, and his name circulated among the tennis authorities.

"Wimbledon and everyone did an amazing job. I got a notification, the police contacted me and told me everything was OK," Raducanu told BBC Sport in her first comments on the issue.

"I know that I am not the first athlete to go through this, and I probably won't be the last - not just as an athlete, but females in general."

KL Rahul hits 137 whilst Rishabh Pant adds 118 as India make 364 in their second innings, setting England 371 to win the opening Test at Headingley, with the home side closing on 21-0 at stumps on day four.

MATCH REPORT: England v India first Test - day four

Available to UK users only.