‘Aid influencers’ are being accused of exploiting Nepal flood victims to boost social media followers, as organisations explore new ways to raise awareness and funds for relief efforts. Al Jazeera’s Nicolas Haque reports.
Published On 18 Sep 202618 Sep 2026
Share
FT. MEADE, Md. — A man initially accused of being a high-profile Al Qaeda figure and who was tortured in CIA custody appeared Thursday at a hearing to review his detention at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he has been held for 20 years without charges.
A U.S. government official said Abu Zubaydah, who wore a neatly trimmed beard and glasses, had “probably” served as one of Osama bin Laden’s most trusted facilitators. The roughly 20-minute hearing offered rare visibility into the secretive military court proceedings of a suspect who had been tortured at CIA black sites during the U.S. war on terrorism and whose case still has not been resolved 25 years after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Zubaydah’s unidentified government-assigned representative and his private attorney, Annika Conrad, both acknowledged he had known Bin Laden, the 9/11 mastermind. But they said Zubaydah was never a member of the militant group that Bin Laden founded.
Conrad argued that Zubaydah poses no security threat to the United States and that it can no longer justify his detention. She said Zubaydah should be approved for transfer out of Guantanamo, which would kick off a multiyear process that includes finding a country to accept him.
Conrad said Zubaydah is prepared to accept a range of security measures, including continuous monitoring. Conrad said he has the financial and personal support of his family, has rejected any extremist views “and simply wants to live a life of peace.”
She also argued that a chief military prosecutor for U.S. military commissions, which oversees the 15 men still held at Guantanamo Bay, has said it is unlikely that Zubaydah will be charged. The Office of Military Commissions declined to comment.
Zubaydah’s attorney said the most the government can offer is a “probable association” to Bin Laden after more than two decades and noted that Zubaydah declined a direct request from Bin Laden to work for Al Qaeda.
Conrad also cited the torture that Zubaydah experienced, describing him as “a greatly injured man” who lost his left eye and his ability to write in English and “frequently struggles to recall words.”
Zubaydah’s detention is being reviewed by a U.S. government panel of senior defense, intelligence and homeland security officials. The Periodic Review Board was created under the Obama administration to evaluate prisoners and determine whether they could be released without posing a threat to national security.
The review panel issued no immediate ruling Thursday. A live video feed of the unclassified portion of his hearing at Guantanamo was made available to reporters at Ft. Meade, an Army base in Maryland.
Detainees are not permitted to speak at their review hearings, and Zubaydah sat in silence next to his attorney and the government representative. Dressed in a gray suit jacket and patterned gray tie, he often pressed his left index finger to his left temple or fidgeted with something in his hands. A worn-looking book sat in front of him.
Zubaydah’s lawyers, Conrad and Ahmed Almudallal, said in a statement before the hearing that he may never face charges.
“For the first time in over two decades, the military’s chief prosecutor believes it is unlikely our client will ever be charged,” the attorneys said. “This is a major change in circumstances that warrants he be cleared for transfer.”
Almudallal and Conrad said Zubaydah has “no intent to engage in violence against the United States in the future.”
“Now, at 55 years old, he’s eager to reconnect with his family and live out the rest of his days as a free person,” they said. “Twenty-four years in prison plus being ‘patient zero’ in the U.S. government’s torture program has been punishment enough.”
Zubaydah was thought to be a high-ranking member of Al Qaeda when he was captured in Pakistan in 2002. A Palestinian born in Saudi Arabia, Zubaydah was tortured abroad before being transferred to Guantanamo in 2006.
The U.S. later dropped the claim that Zubaydah was one of the most senior figures in Al Qaeda, although it has continued to regard him as a security risk. Zubaydah’s lawyers have repeatedly said over the years that he was not an Al Qaeda member and point to waterboarding and other harsh treatment he experienced in the early 2000s.
Zubaydah was the first person in the CIA’s detention and interrogation program after 9/11 and subjected to what is now widely viewed as torture. He was held at CIA black sites in Poland and Lithuania, according to the European Court of Human Rights.
Zubaydah was waterboarded more than 80 times in a month at one point and confined over 11 days in a coffin-size box, among a raft of other mistreatment, a Senate report found.
In 2022, the Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit by Zubaydah, who was seeking testimony from two former CIA contractors as part of an investigation into his treatment when he was held in Poland. The court rejected his case because the government said it would expose state secrets, despite much of the information having been widely reported.
In January, a lawyer for Zubaydah said the British government had agreed to pay a “substantial sum” to settle a lawsuit that said U.K. intelligence agencies were complicit in his torture. Attorney Helen Duffy said the confidential settlement was symbolically and practically significant for the “intolerable suffering” that Zubaydah endured.
A British parliamentary committee found in 2018 that U.K. security and intelligence services were aware Zubaydah was being tortured but continued to provide questions for the CIA to ask him without seeking assurances of his condition.
Finley writes for the Associated Press.
OLIVIA Attwood has hit back after being accused of lying about her successful booze brand.
This summer the Love Island legend, 35, launched her range of Savano canned cocktail drinks.
However, there had been some criticism of her involvement, after Olivia called the company her “baby”.
But not taking this lying down, the successful businesswoman has now hit back and set the record straight.
“My brand, Savano, my baby. It was acquired by my partners, it existed as Tom Savano, and then with me, we relaunched it,” Olivia told her fans in her latest Instagram video.
“We remarketed it, we renamed it, we repackaged it, and we developed signature flavours. For example, my Moscow Mule. Guys, do you even understand how many Moscow Mules I had to drink to get that right? And it’s perfect.”
Read more on Olivia Attwood
“With me as the majority stakeholder and my team working seven days a week on my baby, in a matter of months, we have made Savano a household name.”
Meanwhile, despite this upset, Olivia has had a good week and is riding high after her NTA appearance with boyfriend Pete, 37.
The new couple went down a storm when they presented an award at the glitzy bash, marking their first live TV appearance together.
Olivia and Pete have been friends for eight years, but earlier this year their connection turned romantic.
The new couple had been trying to keep their relationship under wraps for months, but recently hard launched their new love.
Since going Instagram official, Olivia and Pete have been giving fans snippets about their romance.
The duo were first spotted together in March kissing during a night out at rooftop bar Flute.
Their smooch came just weeks after Olivia’s split from husband Bradley Dack became public.
After months of speculation, Pete then hard-launched their romance with a loved-up black and white shot in July.
KATIE Price’s fans are convinced she’s photoshopped her latest social media photo as she posed in a skimpy outfit.
The former glamour model, 48, shared a picture of herself wearing a fluorescent yellow lace-up bodysuit.
Katie put her slim figure on display as she posed for snaps alongside a fan at Yours bar in Manchester.
The star showed off her tanned and heavily tattooed legs, but some eagle-eyed followers spotted a blunder with the photo.
Fans pointed out that Katie’s right arm looked unusually long.
One wrote: “Her arm is about 10ft long.”
A second said: “Arm extensions.”
A third commented: “Well noticed, now I can’t unsee it.”
“What’s really weird is that her foot is about 10 arms,” a fourth added.
The Sun revealed last week how Katie had finally ended her seven-month marriage to Dubai-based Lee, 43, after learning the extent of his financial deceit.
During their short-lived relationship, the former glamour model had two tattoo tributes to him.
As well as having his name inked on her hand Katie also etched the words ‘owned by Lee’ on her ribs.
Following her split from Peter Andre in 2009, the mum-of-five waited just a few weeks before inking a black cross through his name on her wrist, so it shouldn’t be long before she’s keen to get rid of every trace of Lee.
To have just the words on her ribs lasered off, Katie is looking at between eight and 10 painful sessions which could set her back upwards of £2,500.
Katie had Lee’s name tattooed on her hand days into their whirlwind romance in January.
She later revealed the shocking words ‘owned by Lee’ on her ribs in August.
The Sun revealed this week how the final straw for Katie came when she discovered Lee had just £2.22 in his crypto bank account – not the £37million he had promised.
The anti-immigration Reform UK party said two of its senior officials had stepped down on Friday, following allegations that they were secretly filmed appearing to discuss ways to circumvent UK electoral laws on foreign donations.
The far-right party, whose popularity has soared in the past two years, is already embroiled in several other funding scandals involving its leader Nigel Farage. On Friday, it announced an internal probe into the latest case, which was brought to light by a Channel 4 investigation.
list of 3 itemsend of list
Reform is currently holding its annual party conference in Birmingham, central England.
Here’s what we know about the foreign funding claims and how they could affect British politics.
Channel 4, an independent broadcaster, aired footage of senior Reform officials Dan Jukes and James Orr meeting with undercover reporters who were posing as prospective Reform backers from the United States.
In one instance during the programme, which was broadcast on Thursday night, footage was shown of Jukes appearing to talk about a proposal for Reform to receive a 500,000-pound ($675,000) donation from one of the men, who was presenting himself as an American financier, through his son, who he said lives in the UK.
The “son” was actually another journalist from investigative group Verbatim, which recorded the exchange.
In separate footage, Orr appeared to discuss a plan for the US donor to fund opinion polls for Reform UK rather than donating the money directly.
He told the undercover reporter that “we just don’t have British-resident donors, British entities, that would support us”.
During the investigation, Verbatim reported that Reform officials arranged for the US donor to pay more than 30,000 pounds ($40,500) to fund three opinion polls, without disclosing the source of the funds.
Channel 4 said it had verified the findings from Verbatim, an offshoot of the Centre for Climate Reporting.
Under UK electoral law, political parties may only accept donations from British voters or UK-registered businesses. Donations from individuals or organisations based overseas are strictly forbidden.
In a statement on Friday, a UK Electoral Commission spokesperson said political parties must report all “permissible donations” they accept exceeding 11,180 pounds ($15,120) and all “impermissible donations” exceeding 500 pounds ($676).
“Parties are responsible for ensuring their internal processes and controls are fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said. “Information about any potential attempt to evade the controls on donations is for the police to consider.”
Following the programme’s broadcast, Reform initially issued a statement denying any wrongdoing and claiming the allegations were a hoax.
In a later statement, however, the party said it was conducting an internal probe and that Orr and Jukes had stepped down pending its outcome.
Orr, the party’s policy head, said he had agreed to step down temporarily and would “cooperate fully” with the investigation.
Jukes, Farage’s long-term aide, denied any wrongdoing but said he had “stepped back from politics in order to clear my name”.
Farage accused the undercover journalists of “entrapment” and told broadcaster LBC, “they got a couple of our contractors to say things that perhaps should not have been said”.
“And as a result of that, you know, they have been removed this morning. And yeah, you know, I’m not happy about it,” Farage said.
“The party has broken no laws, the party has not taken any dodgy money or anything like that whatsoever,” Farage insisted.
It remains to be seen. The UK’s ruling Labour Party has written to the police asking them to investigate possible criminal offences.
The Metropolitan Police said it was aware of the allegations in the broadcast and would assess any information provided to them.
This does not amount to the formal launch of an investigation.
The latest donation scandal is another blow for Reform, which has seen its place as the UK’s most popular party slip in opinion polls in recent months.
Last year, polling by YouGov suggested that Reform had become the most popular political party, and would likely win a UK general election if one had been held then. At that point, Labour was trailing far behind in the polls – projected to win just 27.3 percent of parliamentary seats, compared with Reform’s 41.7 percent. The former ruling Conservative Party stood at just 7 percent.
But a poll this week by YouGov showed Reform now tied with the UK’s left-wing Labour Party with 23 percent support each. The Conservatives have caught up with 20 percent.
This is not the first funding scandal Reform has grappled with, either. In July, Farage dramatically stepped down as Member of Parliament for Clacton amid allegations, also revealed in the UK media, that convicted fraudster George Cottrell, 32, recruited and paid three staff to work on Farage’s social media before the 2024 general election and has continued to allow Farage to use a five-storey Georgian townhouse he rented near Buckingham Palace.
Farage ultimately re-won his seat in Clacton at a by-election but still faces the prospect of a parliamentary inquiry into undeclared funding of 5 million pounds ($6.7m) from Thailand-based billionaire and crypto investor Christopher Harborne, who paid for Farage’s personal security before he announced his candidacy in the 2024 general election. So far, Farage denies all wrongdoing.
This week, Farage told the BBC that the parliamentary inquiry was unfair. He said there was a “wilful attempt, and it’s gone on now for months, to say that everything to do with Reform, that every individual involved with Reform is somehow a crook”.
This is evidence of “the establishment in a very coordinated way fighting back”, he claimed.
However, Justin Fisher, professor of political science at Brunel University of London, told Al Jazeera Reform’s latest donation scandal would further hurt Farage’s standing both within and outside his party, and could cost Reform votes in the next elections.
“If this was an isolated incident, then Reform would probably be able to brush it off,” said Fisher. “But it comes on top of serious questions about a donation to Nigel Farage, and a donation to Reform which allegedly had overseas links. This all contributes to a narrative which Reform is having great difficulty avoiding.”
Pro Football Hall of Fame running back Emmitt Smith has been accused of taking part in a scheme that allegedly scammed $2.5 million from a Native American investment firm.
In a lawsuit filed Monday in Delaware’s Court of Chancery, a tribal owned and operated economic developmental agency for the North Carolina-based Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians claimed the former Dallas Cowboys superstar, his longtime business partner David Mosley and their real estate development and renewable energy company 4 13 Solutions Inc. borrowed the money, did not use it for its intended purpose and have not paid it back.
According to the lawsuit, Smith and Mosley convinced the tribal agency, Kituwah LLC, to help their company acquire a proposed solar energy farm in Texas.
“By using false projections and data, misrepresenting the level of interest and potential investments from other investors, making promises that they had no intention of fulfilling, and relying on the participation of other coconspirators, Smith and Mosley induced Kituwah to form a joint venture with their company, 4 13 Solutions, and to loan $2.5 million to the joint venture,” the complaint states.
“Smith and Mosley promised to use the funds to acquire an interest in a renewable energy project in Texas (‘Project Exodus’), transfer that interest back to the joint venture, and ultimately repay Kituwah’s money. But instead, they took the money and used it to improperly pay Wilson Holdings, with whom they had partnered on other ventures.”
Smith, Mosley, 4 13 Solutions, Wilson Holdings and its principal owner, Darrel Wilson, and the group’s joint venture firm, Jabez 4 10 LLC, were named as co-defendants. Representatives for Smith, Mosley and 4 13 Solutions did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The loan came due on Feb. 1, 2024, according to the complaint, and remains unpaid despite numerous efforts to collect. Smith is accused of fraudulent inducement and breach of fiduciary duty. Seeking the return of its investment as well as interest and other costs and expenses, Kituwah says it is owed more than $3 million.
“Moreover, despite 4 13 Solutions’ representation that Project Exodus would be up and running by the end of 2024, Kituwah has not seen any evidence that Project Exodus has made any meaningful progress towards completion,” the lawsuit states.
“Kituwah commenced an investigation. It has determined that 4 13 Solutions’ representations were part of Smith’s and Mosley’s scheme to cheat Kituwah out of $2.5 million dollars. Instead of using the loan proceeds to acquire Project Exodus as promised, 4 13 Solutions used the $2.5 million to pay Wilson Holdings, apparently for money that Wilson Holdings had previously invested. Essentially, like a Ponzi scheme.”
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has found that the networking technology company Cisco may have violated the civil rights of Middle Eastern and Muslim employees amid a wave of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim comments on internal messaging platforms at the company.
In June, the EEOC, which is tasked with enforcing the US’s anti-discrimination laws, said Cisco subjected its employees to a hostile work environment, according to a letter of determination obtained by Al Jazeera.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The letter, which was first reported by Politico Pro, stemmed from a complaint filed with the EEOC in December 2024 by a group of Cisco employees called “Bridge to Humanity” (B2H), who had been voicing concerns that the company’s technology was provided to the Israeli military for use in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.
Several months earlier, the group of employees had sent a separate open letter calling on the San Jose, California-based company to stop providing its technology to the Israeli government. The document was signed by more than 1,700 of the company’s more than 86,000 employees.
In its December complaint filed with the EEOC, the employees alleged that Cisco had removed the open letter from an internal site and that it was “under review”, and that subsequently, many of the signatories were harassed. Among the allegations was a remark that one employee had told another to “quit living”.
The employees also alleged that Cisco had not responded to their complaints until they created a 76-page report cataloguing the hate comments they had been subjected to in an internal messaging group called Connected Jewish Network.
The report, which was provided to Cisco’s Employee Relations and Ethics offices, according to documents made public by The Guardian, outlined the waves of hate comments. In one of these, from November 2023, an unnamed employee had said that “Israeli passersby killed 2 members of a Palestinian family in Jerusalem this morning, and I for one am extremely grateful.”
“These Cisconians have, among other things, repeatedly glorified violence, joked about sending people to their deaths, likened Palestinians and those with opposing viewpoints to animals, labeled Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims as murderous, violent terrorists, joked about respecting a person’s gender identity,” the 76-page report said. It added that the Connected Jewish Network was not even a “safe space for all of our Jewish colleagues”.
The EEOC’s determination said that the company had retaliated against one unnamed staffer for “her involvement in pro-Palestine efforts by terminating the individual”.
The employees’ complaint with the EEOC was filed by Legal Aid at Work, a nonprofit legal services organisation.
“The EEOC’s determination is particularly significant because it appears to be the first time in any legal context where a governmental or judicial finding has sided with Big Tech workers who have collectively organised to fight for corporate accountability around their employers’ sales of their technology to Israel,” Christopher Ho, director of the national origin and immigrants’ rights programme at Legal Aid at Work, told Al Jazeera.
Advocacy groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) praised the decision.
“The EEOC’s finding is an important step toward accountability and a reminder that federal civil rights protections apply equally to Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, and other employees who speak out about Palestine,” civil rights managing lawyer Jeffrey Wang at CAIR’s San Francisco Bay-area chapter said in a statement.
“Employers have a legal responsibility to address harassment and discrimination fairly and consistently. Workers should not have to fear retaliation or a hostile work environment because of their religion, national origin, or association with protected communities.”
According to reporting by The Guardian, although the EEOC issues its determination in June, the agency’s mediation with the company has “not gone anywhere”.
Legal Aid at Work told Al Jazeera that it has also submitted a complaint against Cisco to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the California Labor Commissioner.
“[The complaints] allege, respectively, that Cisco unlawfully interfered with our clients’ federally protected right to engage in concerted activity to improve working conditions, and unlawfully interfered with their right to engage in political activities that is protected by the California Labor Code. Both these complaints are still pending at the respective agencies,” Ho said.
Al Jazeera reached out to the EEOC for comment.
“Under federal law, both charges filed with, and charge inquiries made to the EEOC are confidential. The EEOC can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any charge or charge inquiry,” an EEOC spokesperson said.
Cisco did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.
Aug. 25 (UPI) — A man is facing federal charges for forging the signature of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and impersonating a federal agent.
Joshua M. Culver was indicted Friday in the Northern District of Indiana on four counts of falsely impersonating an officer of the United States and one count of forging the signature of a judge and court seal.
He was arrested in Colorado and has been assigned a public defender there.
The indictment alleges that Culver identified himself as a National Security Agency agent on at least two occasions in September 2025. He allegedly did so at the Tippecanoe County Sheriff’s Office trying to get information about the location of a family member. The indictment also alleges that he made phone calls to someone at their employer threatening them and accusing them of breaking the law.
In January 2026, Culver allegedly claimed to be a “Special Master enforcing orders of the United States Supreme Court” to get a Lake County, Ind., judge to dismiss criminal cases and judgments against him.
He’s accused of forging Roberts’ signature and using a counterfeit seal on an order in September that told a Grant County, Ind., court to drop theft charges against him.
