phlebotomist hiring philippines
South Korea lifts president's martial law decree after lawmakers reject military ruleNews digest: Primitive premier blows up at mediaDon’t Expect to see Folding Apple Devices Anytime SoonStock market today: Wall Street gains ground as it notches a winning week and another Dow record
None
BOSTON (AP) — Two men, including a dual Iranian American citizen, have been arrested on charges that they exported sensitive technology to Iran that was used in a drone attack in Jordan that killed three American troops early this year and injured dozens of other service members, the Justice Department said Monday. Read this article for free: Already have an account? As we navigate through unprecedented times, our journalists are working harder than ever to bring you the latest local updates to keep you safe and informed. Now, more than ever, we need your support. Starting at $14.99 plus taxes every four weeks you can access your Brandon Sun online and full access to all content as it appears on our website. or call circulation directly at (204) 727-0527. Your pledge helps to ensure we provide the news that matters most to your community! BOSTON (AP) — Two men, including a dual Iranian American citizen, have been arrested on charges that they exported sensitive technology to Iran that was used in a drone attack in Jordan that killed three American troops early this year and injured dozens of other service members, the Justice Department said Monday. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? BOSTON (AP) — Two men, including a dual Iranian American citizen, have been arrested on charges that they exported sensitive technology to Iran that was used in a drone attack in Jordan that killed three American troops early this year and injured dozens of other service members, the Justice Department said Monday. The pair were arrested after FBI specialists who analyzed the drone traced the navigation system to an Iranian company operated by one of the defendants, who relied on technology funneled from the U.S. by his alleged co-conspirator, officials said. “We often cite hypothetical risk when we talk about the dangers of American technology getting into dangerous hands,” said U.S. Attorney Joshua Levy, the top federal prosecutor in Massachusetts. “Unfortunately, in this situation, we are not speculating.” The defendants were identified as Mahdi Mohammad Sadeghi, who prosecutors say works at a Massachusetts-based semiconductor company, and Mohammad Abedininajafabadi, who was arrested Monday in Italy as the Justice Department seeks his extradition to Massachusetts. Prosecutors allege that Abedininajafabadi, who also uses the surname Adedini and operates an Iranian company that manufactures navigation systems for drones, has connections to Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard. They allege that he conspired with Sadeghi to circumvent American export control laws, including through a front company in Switzerland, and procure sensitive technology into Iran. Both men are charged with export control violations, and Abedini separately faces charges of conspiring to provide material support to Iran. A lawyer for Sadeghi, a naturalized U.S. citizen who was arrested Monday in Massachusetts, did not immediately return an email seeking comment. U.S. officials blamed the January attack on the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, an umbrella group of Iran-backed militias that includes Kataib Hezbollah. Three Georgia soldiers — Sgt. William Jerome Rivers of Carrollton, Sgt. Breonna Moffett of Savannah and Sgt. Kennedy Sanders of Waycross — were killed in the Jan. 28 drone attack on a U.S. outpost in northeastern Jordan called Tower 22. In the attack, the one-way attack drone may have been mistaken for a U.S. drone that was expected to return back to the logistics base about the same time and was not shot down. Instead, it crashed into living quarters, killing the three soldiers and injuring more than 40. Tower 22 held about 350 U.S. military personnel at the time. It is strategically located between Jordan and Syria, only 10 kilometers (6 miles) from the Iraqi border, and in the months just after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel, and Israel’s blistering response in Gaza, Iranian-backed militias intensified their attacks on U.S. military locations in the region. Following the attack, the U.S. launched a huge counterstrike against 85 sites in Iraq and Syria used by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and Iranian-backed militia and bolstered Tower 22’s defenses. ____ Tucker and Copp reported from Washington. AdvertisementThe decision by special counsel Jack Smith, who had fiercely sought to hold Mr Trump criminally accountable for his efforts to subvert the 2020 election, represented the end of the federal effort against the former president following his election victory this month despite the election-related cases and multiple other unrelated criminal charges against him. The move, announced in court papers, marks the end of the Justice Department’s landmark effort to hold Mr Trump accountable for what prosecutors called a criminal conspiracy to cling to power in the run-up to his supporters’ attack on the US Capitol on January 6 2021. In court papers, prosecutors said the Justice Department’s position “is that the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated”. Mr Smith’s team emphasised that the move to abandon the prosecutions, in federal courts in Washington and Florida, was not a reflection of their view on the merits of the cases but rather a reflection of their commitment to longstanding department policy. “That prohibition is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Government stands fully behind,” the prosecutors wrote in Monday’s court filing in the election interference case. The decision was expected after Mr Smith’s team began assessing how to wind down both the 2020 election interference case and the separate classified documents case in the wake of Mr Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris. The Justice Department believes Trump can no longer be tried in accordance with longstanding policy that says sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted. Mr Trump has cast both cases as politically motivated and has vowed to fire Mr Smith as soon as he takes office in January. The 2020 election case brought last year was once seen as one of the most serious legal threats facing the Republican as he vied to reclaim the White House. However, it quickly stalled amid legal fighting over Mr Trump’s sweeping claims of immunity from prosecution for acts he took while in the White House. The US Supreme Court in July ruled for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, and sent the case back to US District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine which allegations in the indictment, if any, could proceed to trial. The case was just beginning to pick up steam again in the trial court in the weeks leading up to this year’s election. Mr Smith’s team filed a lengthy brief in October laying out new evidence they planned to use against him at trial, accusing him of “resorting to crimes” in an increasingly desperate effort to overturn the will over voters after he lost to President Joe Biden.
Google’s Gemini 2.0 May Signal the Future of AI Agents
Georgia QB Carson Beck out with arm injury in SEC championship game
Why does red wine cause headaches? Our research points to a compound found in the grapes’ skinMUSC showcases up-right MRI
Gonzaga lands Virginia transfer G Jalen Warley
In 1977, the sitcom Happy Days launched its fifth season with a time-honored TV trope, sending its motley cast of characters on vacation. Scouted by Hollywood producers, Fonzie ( Henry Winkler ) and the cast fly to L.A. where the Fonz auditions to become the next James Dean . But while in Cali he is also (randomly) challenged by a local to jump over a shark on water skis (which he does). The ridiculousness of the plot line later caused two University of Michigan students to coin the phrase "jumping the shark" and create the website jumptheshark.com , which called out the point in a creative project where the storyline charges past the point of relevance and believability into something outlandish. Because in what semi-realistic world is a Milwaukee greaser vaulting a shark on water skis? To raise a similar question: in what semi-realistic world is a gladiator vaulting from one ship to another in a flooded version of the Roman Coliseum while fully grown (and voracious) sharks swim nearby? In the sequel to a Best Picture-winning film, apparently. 🤩 📺 SIGN UP for Parade's Daily newsletter & get the scoop on the latest TV news & celebrity interviews delivered right to your inbox 🤩 🎥 I'm of course referring to Gladiator II , which has been teasing fans with its Jaws -meets- The Hunger Games -style gladiatorial battle since the trailer dropped. The original Gladiator , which won five Oscars following its release in 2000, saw the sacked Roman general Maximus ( Russell Crowe ) seeking vengeance on the new emperor Commodus ( Joaquin Phoenix ) for murdering his wife and son. Now, over two decades later (in the film and real life), the story picks back up with Maximus' son Lucius Verus ( Paul Mescal ) following a similar journey. At the end of Gladiator , Lucius is sent away from Rome by his mother Lucilla ( Connie Nielsen ), fearing that he will be murdered by power-hungry politicians. As the sequel begins, Lucius is living in the African kingdom of Numidia (modern-day Algeria) with his wife, when the Romans, led by Marcus Acacius ( Pedro Pascal ) siege the city as part of Rome's eternal (and largely inexplicable) land grab. Lucius' wife is killed and Lucius is dragged to Rome as a slave to begin his training as a gladiator. Meanwhile back in the capital, Lucilla has remarried Marcus Acacius and the empire is ruled by a pair of brothers (both of whom need to head back to Sephora to get their foundations re-matched to their skin tone). Geta ( Joesph Quinn ) is the slightly more hinged of the pair, with Caracalla ( Fred Hechinger ) becoming overly attached to his pet monkey seemingly due to some sort of STI that's eroding his brain. The brothers are hosting a gladiator festival. Lucius is competing. His mom is watching. He wants to murder her new husband. Various action sequences ensue. Related: Everything You Need to Know about the 2024 Oscars, Including the Winners Paramount Pictures On the whole, Gladiator II sticks closely to the plot of Gladiator in the standard "requel" format we've seen used in films like Scream (the fifth one), Jurassic World and Twisters . Requels, however, work best when either a) the original wasn't that great to begin with ( Top Gun: Maverick , Mad Max: Fury Road ), or b) the new film makes some big changes ( Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle , Creed ). It's much more difficult to create a new classic when you're working from a beloved piece of IP—the Terminator , Jurassic Park and Indiana Jones reboots all being obvious examples. The path set before Gladiator II , therefore, was fraught from the start. The original Gladiator is an astonishing feat of not only directing and acting but also craftsmanship. Not only does it hold up marvelously, but it was filmed in that glorious window in the late '90s where action scenes were still almost completely created using practical effects and CGI was just brought in to touch things up. Outdoing the original would be a Herculean task. That's probably why the project has been in development since 2001, with director Ridley Scott relaying updates every few years. At one point Crowe was set to return and battle his way back from purgatory; at another Chris Hemsworth was set to lead. The final form of the sequel, however, is mostly the original with Crowe's role split between Mescal and Pascal and Phoenix's given to Quinn and Hechinger. Gladiator II is basically the Shein dupe of Gladiator , where everything is just a little shittier than the original. From the opening naval battle, shoddy Marvel-esque CGI drags down the artistic quality of the film, while none of the leads are quite as starkly drawn (via the script or acting) as their original counterparts. The only moments that veer off from the original are the outlandish action sequences, like the aforementioned shark battle, a Coliseum face-off with a rhinoceros, and a scuffle with the most wackadoo set of CGI monkey/humanoid creatures I've ever seen. While I'm not going to be a stickler for historical accuracy (several historians quit working on the original Gladiator , and I can't imagine they returned for this one), I wish the movie had either stuck with the (sort of) serious tone of the original or gone full camp. Gladiator II instead seems conflicted as to whether it's aiming to be The Fast and the Furious or Saving Private Ryan . Related: 33 Academy Award Contenders for 2025 You Need to Watch Paramount Pictures Firmly on the Vin Diesel side of the rubric, however, is Denzel Washington , playing the gladiator-trafficking Macrinus. Macrinus is the bisexual menace that Carrie Bradshaw warned us about, strutting around Rome flaunting cleavage, munching on grapes and swindling senators out of their estates. Washington, channeling Lady Gaga in House of Gucci , seems to be the only cast member informed by Scott of the movie's tone. A scene involving Washington and a severed head is easily the film's best, and he seems poised for another Oscar run. On the Saving Private Ryan side of things, Scott is returning to this "Rome as a metaphor for the American dream" idea that creeps up briefly in the original. However, due to Gladiator II 's end game, this idea that Rome was a beautiful democracy that has been tarnished by greed appears in a more earnest way. Historically this grafting seems dubious, but based on the fact we just saw a man name a monkey as Roman consul, the abrupt turn into modern American politics just seems a little silly. And also given how often straight men think about the Roman Empire , I doubt we need them believing that's the historical golden era we should be aiming to emulate. Overall, Gladiator II is a fun ride and worth watching. Sure the action sequences jump the shark, but perhaps the film should have done even more shark-jumping. I just wouldn't recommend rewatching Gladiator in the leadup. It's sort of like how you shouldn't do a taste test between gluten free cookies and the real deal. Let your foggy memory make up for the gap in quality. Rating: B- Related: The Best Movies of 2024 (So Far)