freedom

This Saturday, a parade celebrating the Army’s 250th anniversary kicks off in Washington. It will include nearly 10,000 soldiers and dozens of helicopters, tanks and armored fighting vehicles. The 90-minute event is expected to cost $45 million — factoring in the roughly $16 million for anticipated damage to roads not accustomed to such heavy tracked vehicles.

In a recent interview, President Trump promoted the event, which also falls on his 79th birthday: “We have the greatest missiles in the world. We have the greatest submarines in the world. We have the greatest army tanks in the world. We have the greatest weapons in the world. And we’re going to celebrate it.”

Thing is — after 25 years in the Army, from West Point to Iraq — I (like everyone else who’s worn a uniform) can affirm that our equipment isn’t what makes us great. Our Army and all America’s armed services are made of men and women, not metal and wire. The gear always changes; the Americans who serve and sacrifice are the constant.

It’s not just the parade. Other recent events suggest the commander-in-chief could use a friendly nudge toward the right way to honor our military. On May 24, Trump gave a graduation speech at West Point with his red campaign hat on, veered into a five-minute story about avoiding “trophy wives,” blew off the traditional handshake with cadets by saying, “I’m going back now to deal with Russia, to deal with China” — and then flew straight to his golf club in New Jersey.

The next morning, Trump began with a Truth Social message: “HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY TO ALL, INCLUDING THE SCUM THAT SPENT THE LAST FOUR YEARS TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY.” Which made his next “weave,” during what’s typically a somber speech at Arlington National Cemetery, seem almost tame: “We have the World Cup and we have the Olympics…. Now look what I have. I have everything.”

Of course, neither is exactly the right tone to memorialize those who’ve fallen. (Who even says “happy” Memorial Day?)

But gaffes like this raise a far more important question: How should we honor our military? How ought civilians properly thank those in uniform, past and present?

It can be awkward. I know from experience. I was a 24-year-old lieutenant when I got home from my first yearlong tour in Iraq. I was wearing my camo uniform when someone loudly said, “Thanks for your service!” from about 15 feet away. I didn’t know what to do, so I nodded in response. I was embarrassed at the acknowledgment. Better men whom I served with didn’t come home.

I’m not the first to feel that feeling. Eighty years ago, nearly to the day, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower delivered an address in London just after the end of the Second World War. He said, “Humility must always be the portion of any man who receives acclaim earned in the blood of his followers and the sacrifices of his friends.” Anyone who’s served in real close combat knows full well that when you’re fortunate enough to get to come home, you can be proud, very proud of your service — but you never brag or boast.

So here’s the right way to think about honoring our military: We appreciate a modest acknowledgment — no more, never less — of our unique role in defending our country and way of life.

“No more” because we are not special. Soldiers aren’t movie superheroes — if we were, there would be nothing to honor because there’d be no risk. We come to service from among you. We’re the guy you sat next to in chemistry, the girl you played with on the playground. We’re not always victims, we’re not always villains, we’re not always valorous, and we’re not always victorious. We’re some blend of all these things. Even George Washington, arguably our greatest general, who won the war that mattered most and protected America when it was still in its crib — worried constantly about losing. He was scared because he was human, and so have been all those since who’ve worn an American uniform.

“Never less” because we are unique. We train to get over our fears to fight. We go where we’re sent, not where we choose. We trade soldiers’ lives for our nation’s protection, for objectives, for time, for military value. Nobody ever said this better than John Ruskin. “The soldier’s trade, verily and essentially, is not slaying, but being slain,” the English historian wrote in the 1800s. “Put him in a fortress breach, with all the pleasures of the world behind him, and only death and his duty in front of him, he will keep his face to the front; and he knows that this choice may be put to him at any moment.”

But just as we acknowledge this unique role, we in uniform must also equally appreciate those who make our service possible. For those in uniform aren’t the only ones in America who sacrifice. Imagine the parents who send their only daughter or son into combat — would anyone dare say they do not also risk everything?

Or other forms of service. My mother was a special education teacher in a poorer part of town and struggled for years to give a chance to otherwise forgotten kids. My father was among the first to join the Transportation Security Administration after 9/11. So I’ve seen civilians serving, even when it was hard.

There are some who misguidedly claim military members have a monopoly on service. This myopia is best captured by a bumper sticker shaped in a soldier silhouette: “Freedom Isn’t Free — I Paid for It.”

This claim is as flimsy as the sticker it’s printed on. It ignores those who also contribute to the fullness of freedom: journalists who free the truth, doctors who free us of disease, clergy who free our souls, teachers who free us of ignorance, lawyers who free the innocent, and so many more in society who silently serve every day. After all, each soldier is the direct result of this entire community. And while basic security may be necessary for the exercise of freedom, it’s certainly not sufficient to ensure “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” That takes a bigger American team.

It’s taken me two decades to figure out how to respond to “Thanks for your service.” I now say, “It’s been the greatest privilege — thank you for making it possible.”

That doesn’t cost $45 million or even 45 cents. All it should ever cost is a brief moment of direct eye contact, a few genuinely felt words — and never ever forget the handshake.

ML Cavanaugh is the author of the forthcoming book “Best Scar Wins: How You Can Be More Than You Were Before.” @MLCavanaugh

The seizure of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in international waters has not deterred other aid convoys from heading towards Gaza. Palestinian-American writer Ahmad Ibsais explains how humanitarian aid has become a politically charged weapon of war.

GRETA Thunberg has arrived on dry land and is to likely be deported after Israel seized the “Freedom Flotilla” stunt ship.

The climate campaigner, 22, alongside 11 other activists on board, is expected to appear in court on Tuesday morning having been taken to the Israeli port city of Ashdod.

10

10

10

Israel’s Foreign Ministry confirmed on X: “The ‘Selfie Yacht’ docked at Ashdod Port a short while ago.

“The passengers are currently undergoing medical examinations to ensure they are in good health.”

But lawyer Nariman Shehade Zoabi said they haven’t been able to contact the activists yet.

She told Expressen: “We demand information about the whereabouts of our clients and the right to meet them.”

Lawyer Zoabi added that Greta and the others would be taken to a “Givon prison” near the town Ramle where “illegal immigrants are detained” and there is a “court that can quickly decide on deportation”.

She is waiting in Ashdod with five others, and explained that the process of deportation could be fast.

Zoabi said: “Israel has no interest in detaining them and they themselves do not want to stay in the country.”

Israel accused the group who were aboard the boat of supporting Hamas terrorists who detonated Middle East mayhem by massacring 1,200 and kidnapping 251 hostages.

And all of those detained will be made to watch a screening of video footage showing innocents including children being slaughter by Hamas savages during the attacks.

The “selfie yacht” operated by the pro-Palestinian Freedom Flotilla Coalition was said to be “safely making its way to the shores of Israel”, Israel’s Foreign Minsitry said.

All passengers were safe and unharmed and activists handed sandwiches and water before the vessel docked at the southern Israeli port of Ashdod.

The boat was carrying a “tiny amount of aid” on board – which will be sent to Gaza.

Israeli defence minister Israel Katz said that he has instructed the Israeli Defence Forces to screen footage of the 7 October attacks as soon as they arrive.

The disturbing footage – titled “Bearing Witness” – shows innocent people being massacred and mutilated.

And all the footage was taken from the Hamas terrorists’ bodycams as they filmed their massacre.

The Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) said early on Monday that Israeli forces had boarded the charity vessel.

Shortly before the FFC statement, the Israeli Foreign Ministry posted a video on X showing the Israeli Navy communicating with the Madleen over a loudspeaker, urging it to change course.

“The maritime zone off the coast of Gaza is closed to naval traffic as part of a legal naval blockade,” a soldier said.

10

10

10

10

“If you wish to deliver humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, you are able to do so through the (Israeli) port of Ashdod.”

The campaigners had said they are hoping to “break the siege” and raise “international awareness” of the humanitarian crisis on the Gaza Strip.

But Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant issued a warning as the vessel entered the final stretch of its journey, saying: “You should turn back – because you will not reach Gaza.”

Thunberg, 22, has posted on social media with a Palestine flag and wearing a keffiyeh scarf while on the journey.

Travelling alongside her is Rima Hassan, a French member of the European parliament of Palestinian descent.

She has previously been barred from entering Israel due to her outspoken criticism of the country’s policies towards Palestinians.

Organisers claim the voyage is “a non-violent, direct action to challenge Israel’s illegal siege” – and is carrying essential supplies to a population at risk of famine.

Israel imposed a near-total blockade on Gaza in late 2023, following Hamas’s horror massacre on southern Israel on October 7.

Though some limited aid has been allowed in since last month, aid agencies claim it is nowhere near enough.

Ahead of the journey, Thunberg said through tears: “We are doing this because, no matter what odds we are against, we have to keep trying.

“Because the moment we stop trying is when we lose our humanity.”

CONTROVERSIAL CREW

The flotilla’s latest voyage follows a failed attempt in May, when another of its vessels was struck by two drones in international waters off Malta.

The group accused Israel of being behind the attack.

Despite the risks, activists aboard the Madleen have said they plan to enter Gaza’s territorial waters as early as Sunday.

The vessel’s controversial crew includes figures who have openly supported terrorist organizations and have made inflammatory public statements.

Brazilian activist Thiago Avila attended the funeral of slain Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, calling the terrorist a “beloved” leader and a “martyr”.

10

10

10

Avila said he was “very honoured” and “very happy” to attend, and described the funeral as something that “amazed him”.

He wrote that Nasrallah was an “important figure” who “inspired people all over the world”.

Also on board was Yasemin Acar from Berlin, who reportedly danced as Iranian rockets rained down on Israel and once told a white woman at a protest: “You’re a white person, you shouldn’t tell us what to do.”

French journalist Omar Faiad, of Al-Jazeera, sparked outrage for comparing the IDF to Nazis.

On X, he wrote: “The Israeli army resembles the Nazi army,” and claimed: “Israel is committing a new Holocaust in Gaza.”

Rima Hassan, meanwhile, previously tweeted:  “Kfir, Ariel, and Shiri Bibas were killed by an Israeli attack,” despite Hamas being responsible for their abduction and deaths.

She was also seen at a protest where demonstrators chanted: “We die for jihad.”

And it included included a London-based Palestinian named in Parliament in 2023 as being a London-based Hamas operative.

Zaher Birawi was at the launch of the Madleen and live streamed from the dock in Greece and is chair of the International Committee to Break the siege of Gaza.

Birawi, 62, has been photographed with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and runs UK-registered charity, Education Aid for Palestinians, which has raised more than £3 million since 2017.

Irish Game of Thrones star Liam Cunningham was also on the boat.

There was confusion and panic on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla on Tuesday night after a drone was spotted circling overhead, prompting the crew to issue a distress signal while sailing outside Greek territorial waters. The drone was later identified as belonging to the Hellenic Coastguard. The Gaza-bound mission continues undeterred, a month after another flotilla ship was bombed by a drone and set ablaze.

Did you know that women already control a third of the world’s private wealth— and that number is expected to soar past 50% in the next 5 years? But how can you be part of that growth?

Now You Know speaks with Cristina Jaeger, the founder of HerFinancialFreedom. Cristina’s mission is to close the gender gap in wealth and investing and help women gain financial independence. She shares tips on how women can meet their financial goals.

Critics, including US officials, are calling for the Freedom Flotilla Coalition’s new mission to fail, with twelve volunteers, including Swedish activist Greta Thunberg on board. The flotilla is trying to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

Just 40 countries representing 3.5 percent of the world’s population respect all civil liberties, a new study has found, warning that “democracy and human rights are under attack worldwide in a way we have not seen for decades.”

The Atlas of Civil Society report published by the German relief organisation Brot fur die Welt (Bread for the World) on Monday said only 284 million people living in “open” countries – including Austria, Estonia, the Scandinavian countries, New Zealand and Jamaica – enjoy protection of unrestricted civil rights and liberties.

The nongovernmental organisation defines a country as “open” if it allows people to form associations “without legal or practical barriers, demonstrate in public spaces, receive information and are allowed to disseminate it”.

Forty-two countries making up 11.1 percent of the world’s population are listed in a second category in which civil rights are classified as “impaired”. These include Germany, Slovakia, Argentina and the United States.

In these countries, the rights to freedom of assembly and expression are largely respected, but there are recorded violations.

‘Restricted, suppressed or closed’

“In contrast, 85 percent of the world’s population lives in countries where civil society is restricted, suppressed, or closed. This affects almost seven billion people,” the report found.

“Their governments severely restrict civil liberties and harass, arrest, or kill critical voices. This applies to 115 of 197 countries,” it added.

Several European countries appear in the “restricted” category, including Greece, the United Kingdom, Hungary and Ukraine.

Civil society is considered “oppressed” in 51 countries, including Algeria, Mexico and Turkey. In these countries, governments monitor, imprison or kill critics, and exercise censorship, according to the data.

Finally, Russia and 28 other countries are classified as “closed” and
characterised by an “atmosphere of fear”. Criticism of the government
or regime in these countries is severely punished.

Brot fur die Welt drew on data collected by the Civicus network of civil society organisations worldwide for its annual report covering 197 countries and territories.

Nine countries improved their freedom of expression ratings last year, including Jamaica, Japan, Slovenia, Trinidad and Tobago, Botswana, Fiji, Liberia, Poland and Bangladesh.

However, nine countries were downgraded from the previous year, including Georgia, Burkina Faso, Kenya, Peru, Ethiopia, Eswatini, the Netherlands, Mongolia and the Palestinian territory.

Dagmar Pruin, president of Brot fur die Welt, warned that “the rule of law, the separation of powers and protection against state arbitrariness are under threat or no longer exist in more and more countries.”

The lawsuit alleges the Trump administration’s move to cut federal funding to public broadcasting is a violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment.

National Public Radio (NPR) and three of its local stations have filed a lawsuit against United States President Donald Trump, arguing that an executive order aimed at cutting federal funding for the organisation is illegal.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court on Tuesday in Washington, DC by NPR and three local stations in Colorado — Colorado Public Radio, Aspen Public Radio and KUTE Inc – argues that Trump’s executive order to slash public subsidies to PBS and NPR violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Trump issued the executive order earlier this month, instructing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and other federal agencies “to cease Federal funding for NPR and PBS” and requiring that they work to root out indirect sources of public financing for the news organisations. Trump issued the order after alleging there is “bias” in the broadcasters’ reporting.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting spends roughly $500m on public TV and radio annually. PBS and NPR get part of their funding from federal grants: 17 percent and two percent, respectively.

“The Order’s objectives could not be clearer: the Order aims to punish NPR for the content of news and other programming the President dislikes and chill the free exercise of First Amendment rights by NPR and individual public radio stations across the country,” the lawsuit alleges.

“The Order is textbook retaliation and viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, and it interferes with NPR’s and the Local Member Stations’ freedom of expressive association and editorial discretion,” it said.

The White House’s executive order argued that editorial choices – including that NPR allegedly “refused to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story”, and that it ran a “Valentine’s Day feature around ‘queer animals’” – were some of the reasons it wanted to cut federal funding.

“This is retaliatory, viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment,” NPR CEO Katherine Maher said in a statement.

“NPR has a First Amendment right to be free from government attempts to control private speech as well as from retaliation aimed at punishing and chilling protected speech. By basing its directives on the substance of NPR’s programming, the Executive Order seeks to force NPR to adapt its journalistic standards and editorial choices to the preferences of the government if it is to continue to receive federal funding.”

The absence of PBS from Tuesday’s filing indicates the two systems will challenge this separately; PBS has not yet gone to court, but is likely to do so soon.

The US president’s attempts to dismantle government-run news sources like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty have also sparked court clashes.

The administration has battled with the press on several fronts. The Federal Communications Commission is investigating ABC, CBS and NBC News. And after The Associated Press refrained from calling the Gulf of Mexico “the Gulf of America”, as Trump directed, the administration restricted the news outlet’s access to certain government events.

NPR and three of its member stations filed suit in federal court Tuesday against President Trump‘s White House over the president’s executive order to block funding for public media.

Trump’s order called for an end to government dollars for the Corp. for Public Broadcasting, the taxpayer-backed entity that provides funding to NPR and PBS. He called the outlets “left wing propaganda.”

The suit says the May 1 action by Trump violated the 1st Amendment.

“The Order targets NPR and PBS expressly because, in the President’s view, their news and other content is not ‘fair, accurate, or unbiased,’” the legal brief said, according to an NPR report.

The suit also says that the funding — currently at around $500 million annually — is appropriated by Congress. The allocation is made two years in advance.

“Congress directly authorized and funded CPB to be a private nonprofit corporation wholly independent of the federal government,” Corp. for Public Broadcasting chief Patricia Harrison told NPR in a statement.

Harrison said that the Corp. for Public Broadcasting is not a federal agency subject to the president’s authority.

“The Executive Order is a clear violation of the Constitution and the First Amendment’s protections for freedom of speech and association, and freedom of the press,” NPR President and Chief Executive Katherine Maher said in a statement.

The order is one of a number of attempts by Trump to limit or intimidate institutions he does not agree with. Targets included law firms, universities and media companies such as CBS, which is being sued for $20 billion over a “60 Minutes” interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential campaign.

NPR filed the suit with three public radio outlets, including Denver-based Colorado Public Radio, Aspen Pubic Radio and KSUT which serves the Four Corners region of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah.

Both NPR and PBS have stressed that the bulk of the federal funding they receive goes to stations that provide local news and emergency alerts for their communities.

Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir – In a quiet laser clinic in Indian-administered Kashmir’s biggest city, Srinagar, Sameer Wani sits with his arm stretched out, his eyes following the fading ink on his skin.

The word “Azadi” (freedom in Urdu), once a bold symbol of rebellion against India’s rule, slowly disappears under the sting of the laser. What was once a mark of defiance has become a burden he no longer wants to carry.

As Sameer, 28, watches the ink vanish, his mind drifts to a day he will never forget. He was riding his motorbike with a friend when Indian security forces stopped them at a checkpoint.

During the frisking, one of the officers pointed to the tattoo on his arm and asked, “What is this?”

Sameer’s heart raced. “I was lucky he couldn’t read Urdu,” he tells Al Jazeera, his voice tinged with the memory. “It was a close call. I knew right then that this tattoo could get me into serious trouble.”

When he was younger, he said, the tattoo was a “sign of strength, of standing up for something”.

“But now I see it was a mistake. It doesn’t represent who I am any more. It’s not worth carrying the risk, and it’s not worth holding on to something that could hurt my future.”

Sameer is one of many young Kashmiris choosing to erase tattoos that once reflected their political beliefs, emotional struggles or identity. Once worn with pride, the tattoos are now being removed in growing numbers across the region – quietly and without fanfare.

While a trend to remove tattoos was already under way, the urgency has deepened since India and Pakistan – who have fought three wars over Kashmir since emerging as independent nations in 1947 – came to the brink of yet another war following the killing of 26 people in the scenic resort town of Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir last month.

New Delhi accuses Islamabad of backing an armed rebellion that erupted on the Indian side in 1989. Pakistan rejects the allegation, saying it only provides moral diplomatic support to Kashmir’s separatist movement.

Two weeks after Pahalgam, India, on May 7, launched predawn drone and missile attacks on what it called “terror camps” inside Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir – the most extensive cross-border missile strikes since their war in 1971. For the next three days, the world held its breath as the South Asian nuclear powers exchanged fire until United States President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire between them on May 10.

However, peace remains fragile in Indian-administered Kashmir, where a crackdown by Indian forces has left the region gripped by fear. Homes of suspected rebels have been destroyed, others have been raided, and more than 1,500 people have been arrested since the Pahalgam attack, many under preventive detention laws.

‘We feel it on our skin’

In such a tense atmosphere, many Kashmiri youth say they feel exposed – and more vulnerable to scrutiny over even the most personal forms of expression.

“Every time something happens between India and Pakistan, we feel it on our skin – literally,” Rayees Wani, 26, a resident of Shopian district, tells Al Jazeera.

“I have a tattoo of Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s name on my arm, and after the Pahalgam attack, I started getting strange looks at checkpoints,” he said, referring to the separatist leader who passed away at the age of 91 in 2021. The Hurriyat is an alliance of pro-freedom groups in Indian-administered Kashmir.

“Even my friends ask me uncomfortable questions. The media, police, and even the neighbours start looking at you differently,” Rayees added.

“I just wish people understood that a tattoo doesn’t define someone’s loyalty or character. We are just trying to live, not explain ourselves every day. I want to erase this as soon as possible.”

Arsalan, 19, from Pulwama recently booked a tattoo removal session. He did not share his last name over fears of reprisal from the authorities.

“People with visible tattoos – especially those hinting at past political affiliations – are suddenly worried they could be profiled, questioned – or worse,” he said.

To be sure, tattoo culture itself isn’t fading in Kashmir. Tattoo studios are still busy, especially with clients aged between 22 and 40, many of whom wait for hours to get inked. But the trend has shifted; instead of political or religious tattoos, people now prefer minimalistic designs, nature-inspired patterns, names or meaningful quotes in stylish fonts.

Some Kashmiris trying to get rid of tattoos say that’s part of their personal evolution and growth.

“For me, it was about being brave,” Irfan Yaqoob from Baramulla district told Al Jazeera. Now 36, Yaqoob got a slain rebel’s name tattooed on his left arm when he was a teenager.

“Back then, it felt like a symbol of courage. But now, when I look at it, I realise how much I have changed. Life has moved on, and so have I. I have a family, a job, and different priorities. I don’t want my past to define me or create trouble in the present. That’s why I decided to get it removed. It’s not about shame. It’s about growth,” he said.

Many reasons to remove tattoos

It isn’t just the security forces that are driving this move among many Kashmiris to get rid of tattoos.

For some, tattoos became painful reminders of a turbulent past. For others, they turned into obstacles, especially when they tried to move ahead professionally or wanted to align the inscription on their bodies with their personal beliefs.

Anas Mir, who also lives in Srinagar, had a tattoo of a sword with “Azadi” written over it. He got it removed a few weeks ago.

“People don’t clearly say why they are removing tattoos. I removed mine only because of pressure from my family,” the 25-year-old said.

“It’s my choice what kind of tattoo I want. No one should judge me for it. If someone had an AK-47 or a political tattoo, that was their choice. The authorities or government shouldn’t interfere. And yes, tattoo trends also change with time,” he added, referring to the Russian-made Avtomat Kalashnikova assault rifles, arguably the most popular firearm in the world.

One of the key reasons behind people removing tattoos is religion. In a Muslim-majority region, tattoos, especially those carrying religious or political messages, could often conflict with the faith’s teachings.

Faheem, 24, had a Quranic verse tattooed on his back when he was 17.

“At that time, I thought it was an act of faith,” he told Al Jazeera, without revealing his last name over security fears. “But later, I realised that tattoos – especially with holy verses – are not encouraged [in Islam]. It started to bother me deeply. I felt guilty every time I offered namaz [prayers] or went to the mosque. That regret stayed with me. Getting it removed was my way of making peace with myself and with my faith.”

Many others said they shared the feeling. Some visit religious scholars to ask whether having tattoos affects their prayers or faith. While most are advised not to dwell on past actions, they are encouraged to take steps that bring them closer to their beliefs.

“It’s not about blaming anyone,” said Ali Mohammad, a religious scholar in Srinagar. “It’s about growth and understanding. When someone realises that something they did in the past doesn’t align with their beliefs any more, and they take steps to correct it, that’s a sign of maturity, not shame.”

Another key factor driving tattoo removals is job security. In Kashmir, government jobs are seen as stable and prestigious. But having a tattoo, especially one with political references, can create problems during recruitment or background checks.

Talib, who disclosed his first name only, had a tattoo of a Quranic verse shaped like an AK-47 rifle on his forearm. When he applied for a government position, a family friend in law enforcement hinted it might be an issue.

“He didn’t say it directly, but I could tell he was worried,” said the 25-year-old. “Since then, I have been avoiding half-sleeve shirts. I got many rejections and no one ever gave a clear reason, but deep down, I knew the tattoo was a problem. It felt like a wall between me and my future.”

As the demand for tattoo removal rises, clinics in Srinagar and other parts of Indian-administered Kashmir are seeing a steady increase in clients. Laser sessions, once rare, are now booked weeks in advance.

Mubashir Bashir, a well-known tattoo artist in Srinagar who also runs a tattoo removal service, said: “After a popular singer’s death in 2022, the trend of AK-47 tattoos exploded,” Bashir said. Punjabi singer Sidhu Moose Wala, whose music often glorified guns, was killed in May 2022. Police blamed his death on an inter-gang rivalry.

“But now, especially after the Pahalgam attack, we are seeing more people coming in to erase those tattoos. The fear is real,” Mubashir said.

He estimated that tens of thousands of tattoos have been removed in the region over the past seven years, since 2019, when India abrogated Kashmir’s semi-autonomous status and launched a major crackdown, arresting thousands of civilians. “Some say the tattoo no longer represents them. Others mention problems at work or while travelling,” Mubashir said.

Laser tattoo removal isn’t easy. It requires multiple sessions, costs thousands of rupees and can be painful. Even after successful removal, faint scars or marks often remain. But for many Kashmiris, the pain is worth it.

Sameer, whose “Azadi” tattoo is almost gone, remembers the emotional weight of the process. “I didn’t cry when I got the tattoo,” he says. “But I cried when I started removing it. It felt like I was letting go of a part of myself.”

Still, Sameer believes it was the right choice. “It’s not about shame,” he says. “I respect who I was. But I want to grow. I want to live without looking over my shoulder.”

As he finishes another laser session, a faint scar is all that is left of the word that is Kashmir’s war-cry for freedom.

“I will never forget what that tattoo meant to me when I was 18,” Sameer says as he rolls down his sleeve. “But now, I want to be someone new. I want a life where I don’t carry old shadows.”

The resentencing hearing for brothers Erik and Lyle Menendez kicked off Tuesday morning with emotional testimony from family members, one of whom testified in court that they should be freed from prison for the shotgun killing of their parents more than 30 years ago.

Annmaria Baralt, often wiping away her tears, testified that the relatives of victims Jose and Kitty Menendez want a judge to give the brothers a lesser sentence than life without parole for the 1989 murders inside their Beverly Hills mansion.

“Yes, we all on both sides of the family say 35 years is enough,” she told Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic in a Van Nuys courtroom. “They are universally forgiven by both sides of their families.”

Baralt, whose mother was Jose Menendez’s older sister, said the family had endured decades of pain from the scrutiny of the murders.

“From the day it happened… it has been a relentless examination of our family in the public eye,” she said, beginning to cry. “It has been torture for decades.” She said the family was the butt of repeated jokes on “Saturday Night Live” and lived like outcasts who wore a “scarlet M.”

The Menendez brothers have been in prison for more than 35 years after being sentenced to life without the possibility of parole in the gruesome 1989 murders. The brothers bought shotguns with cash and opened fire as their mother and father watched a movie. Jose Menendez was shot five times, including in the kneecaps and the back of the head. Kitty Menendez crawled on the floor, wounded, before one of the brothers reloaded and fired a fatal blast, jurors heard at their two trials.

On the stand Tuesday, Baralt echoed the brothers’ justification for killing their parents — saying it was out of fear their father was going to kill them to cover up his past sexual abuse of the boys.

She told the judge that she believes they have changed and are “very aware of the consequences of their actions.”

“I don’t think they are the same people they were 30 years ago,” she said.

If Jesic agrees to resentence them, the brothers would become eligible for parole under California’s youthful offender law, since the murders happened when they were under 26. If the judge sides with Los Angeles Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman, they would still have a path to freedom through Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is weighing a clemency petition. Regardless, Erik and Lyle would still have to appear before the state parole board before they could walk free. Jesic on Tuesday emphasized that the bar to keep them from being resentenced is high, and that they would have to still pose a serious danger to the public.

Prosecutor Habib Balian spent the morning trying to punch holes in the brothers’ relatively clean reputations they’ve gotten behind bars.

Under cross-examination, Baralt admitted that she never thought her cousins were capable of killing their parents until they’d done it, and that prior to their criminal trial decades ago, Lyle Menendez had asked a witness to lie for him on the stand.

Nearly two dozen of the brothers’ relatives, including several who testified Tuesday, formed the Justice for Erik and Lyle Coalition to advocate for their release as interest in the case reignited in recent years. The release of a popular Netflix documentary on the murder, which included the unearthing of additional documentation of Jose Menendez’s alleged sexual abuse, helped fuel a motion for a new trial.

The family has become increasingly public in its fight for Erik and Lyle’s release after Hochman opposed his predecessor’s recommendation to re-sentence them. They have repeatedly accused Hochman of bias against the brothers, called for him to be disqualified from the case and alleged he intimidated and bullied them during a private meeting. Hochman has denied all accusations of bias and wrongdoing, and says he simply disagrees with their position.

Kitty Menendez’s brother, Milton, was the only member of the family opposed to Erik and Lyle’s release, but he died earlier this year. Kathy Cady, who served as his victims’ rights attorney, is now the head of Hochman’s Bureau of Victims’ Services, another point of aggravation for the relatives fighting for the brothers release.