On Thursday, October 1, health workers, patients, and activists protested Palantir’s role in the National Health Service (NHS) at more than 40 locations across England. Their demonstrations were part of a global week of action demanding that governments cut ties with the spy-tech firm over human rights and privacy concerns.
Rallies took place in front of Palantir’s London headquarters, as well as in Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Sheffield and many more cities.
“Palantir’s tools are used by the Israeli military in Gaza and by ICE to track and surveil migrants in the US,” campaign groups – including Just Treatment, Health Workers for a Free Palestine, Medact, and Global Justice Now – stated. “A company profiting from human rights violations has no place in the NHS or in any of our public services.”
Palantir’s track record opposes core health values
Palantir currently holds a £330 million (approximately USD 436 million) NHS contract and has rolled out the service’s Federated Data Platform (FDP), managing sensitive patient data. The project has drawn criticism from virtually every group involved in the NHS: data workers say it lags behind local systems; patients share privacy and data ownership fears; and health workers insist Palantir’s record opposes the very values their profession embodies.
“I cannot stay true to that [Hippocratic] oath and tolerate Palantir continuing to profit from, and grow its malign business model through an NHS contract,” said physician Rhiannon Osborne from Medact at Thursday’s rally. “Every pound we give them helps to legitimize and sustain human rights abuses and erosion of democratic rule of law across the world.”
A central concern is the company’s support for Israel throughout the genocide in Gaza. “When we strive to save every possible life, they champion their ability to kill and celebrate their role in the repeated war crimes committed by Israel – including unprecedented deliberate attacks on the doctors, nurses, and paramedics I worked with,” pediatric neurologist Omar Abdel-Mannan stated. “No moral government should tolerate their involvement in our NHS or indeed any of our public services.”
Campaigners repeated calls for Prime Minister Andy Burnham to end the contract as soon as possible. Under an exit clause in the original agreement, that moment could arrive as early as February 2027. Campaigners and several commissions are pressing the government to notify Palantir of its intention to withdraw ahead of this date.
“The government only has two months to say no to Palantir and the momentum is all with us,” Good Law Project activists said at the rally in London. “All the energy is to say no to Palantir, say no to their global human rights abuses, say no to their crap technology that doesn’t work and get Palantir out of the NHS.”
Unions back appeal to bar Palantir from public sector contracts
Calls to break Palantir’s grip on public services resonate beyond Britain. On September 28, more than 120 groups and unions called upon European governments and the European Commission to “scrap all existing public sector contracts with the US tech company Palantir.” As reported by the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU), the appeal seeks to end current agreements and bar the firm from future public contracts. It also urges governments to develop “alternative data solutions compatible with public service,” echoing NHS data workers’ recommendations.
“Palantir’s ramping up of ‘war-related’ support for Israel during the genocide in Gaza and the apparent disdain of its leadership for democracy are just two clear signs that this company serves the interests of the rich and powerful, not the general public,” said Tim Bierley of Global Justice Now. “Yet it has been allowed to embed dubious technologies across our public services, giving it access to sensitive data and creating worrying new technical dependencies.”
“The UK must work with other countries to end dependence on companies involved in human rights abuses, and end the outsourcing of the public sphere to a dangerous class of big tech oligarchs.”
People’s Health Dispatchis a monthly bulletin published by thePeople’s Health MovementandPeoples Dispatch. For more articles and subscription to People’s Health Dispatch, clickhere.
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Oct. 02, 2026.It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.
An analysis published Friday by Democracy Docket warned that “tens of thousands” of voters across the US face “risk of disenfranchisement” thanks to actions being taken by the United States Postal Service.
The analysis, written by veteran election reporter Jim Saksa, points to a new USPS policy known as Regional Transportation Optimization (RTO) that “will eliminate evening mail pickups from post offices more than 50 miles away from a regional processing facility, most of which are located in major urban areas.”
For people who live in these areas, ballots sent on Election Day will be postmarked and delivered at least a day later than in previous election years, thus making it ineligible to be included in final election tallies.
“In every state, a day’s delay in delivery means that if mail voters wait until the last day or two before the election to mail their ballot,” Saksa explained, “they could be disenfranchised.”
Saksa reported that this policy is currently active in “about 42.5% of all ZIP codes” in the continental US, and is scheduled to eventually take effect in around 70% of all ZIP codes. No additional ZIP codes are expected to be added between now and election day.
Saksa also said that voters concerned about their ballots not being counted should deliver them in person to their local post office, where they can ask an employee to postmark it.
President Donald Trump has tried for the last several months to use USPS to meddle with states’ mail-in voting systems.
In March, the president signed an executive order that instructed the United States Postal Service to not deliver ballots in any states that have not given the federal government access to their voter lists.
The US Supreme Court last month rejected Trump’s efforts to interfere with mail-in voting, allowing states to continue sending ballots to voters as they’ve done in past elections.
Even with the Supreme Court loss, however, the president’s repeated attacks on voting by mail has had a major impact on the 2026 midterm elections.
An NBC News poll released in September showed that just 23% of Democratic voters said they planned to vote by mail this year, a double-digit drop from 2024 when 34% of Democrats said they were voting by mail.
In an interview with Politico published Thursday, Quentin James, founder and president of The Collective Political Action Committee, said Black voters have been expressing concerns about sending in their ballots for fear that Trump will order USPS to not deliver them.
“I think there’s confusion,” James said. “We know that the president has spent six months talking about changing the rules regarding mail-in voting, and a lot of folks are concerned about their ballot being secure.”
Indivisible co-founder Leah Greenberg also told Politico that her group is “absolutely hearing concern” about the mail voting process this year.
“But more importantly,” Greenberg added, “what we’re hearing is people trying to figure out what they can do and how they can organize locally in order to protect elections.”
In late September, Israeli media reported that Netanyahu’s government intends to adjust access to key routes in the central West Bank. It plans to reopen Route 463 to settler-only traffic in the governorate of Ramallah and Al-Bireh.
Yisrael Gantz, the leader of the Yesha Council (an umbrella organization representing Israeli municipal councils across Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the Jordan Valley) confirmed that plans to reopen the road received preliminary approval and funding.
Preparations are also underway by the Israeli military to complete “the security, legal, and logistical” steps required to reopen the route (also known as Wallerstein Road).
History of the road
The road was paved in 1994 under the directions of Pinchas Wallerstein, a founder of the settlement movement, to connect the illegal settlements of Beit El (north-east of Ramallah and Al-Bireh) and Dolev (north-west of Jerusalem).
However, following the outbreak of the Second Intifada in 2000, the Israeli army barred Israeli people from using the road for security reasons. They also placed a locked iron gate on its end near Ein Qiniya village, northwest of Ramallah.
Why has the reopening of the route raised concerns among Palestinians in the West Bank?
Experts argue that Israel’s move will impact not only the governorate itself, but the entire occupied West Bank because of its central location, major metropolitan status, and role as a commercial hub.
To understand the repercussions of the route reopening, BreakThrough News spoke with Jamal Jumaa, a Palestinian activist, expert on Israeli settlement and apartheid-related issues, and coordinator of the Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign (Stop the Wall).
Aside from dividing the governorate’s northern and southern halves, Jumaa noted that reopening the road is dangerous because it will block the center of Ramallah and Al-Bireh from two-thirds of its villages, which are situated to the west.
The prominent Palestinian activist added that when Israel builds such roads for settler traffic, it fences them off on both sides and prohibits the use of adjacent lands. The Israeli authorities consider those lands a buffer zone, citing the security of the settlers as their reason.
“This entails setting up military towers and checkpoints. The road will cut off continuously inhabited Palestinian villages north-west and south-west of Ramallah. Therefore, we are talking about the establishment of roughly four military checkpoints along the road,” he continued.
Jumaa pointed out that the road will complicate the life of Palestinians by restricting their access to vital healthcare and education facilities, including the Istishari Arab Hospital, Birzeit University, and the Arab American University.
He also noted that the intended reopening of the road “is part of dividing and dividing more Palestinians from each other.”
On the political level, Jumaa suggested that the road “hits the heart of the West Bank, which gives a clear signal to the Palestinian Authority that it has no sovereignty over anything.”
It is worth noting that since its establishment, the Palestinian Authority has designated Ramallah and Al-Bireh as a de facto administrative capital. Yet, this has not prevented the Israeli authorities from fragmenting and isolating the governorate by establishing illegal settlements, military outposts, checkpoints, and gates.
Another tanker has been struck in the Strait of Hormuz, bringing the number of vessels reported hit in the strategic waterway since Sunday to at least six. UK Maritime Trade...
QUANG NGAI, Vietnam — When diesel prices in Vietnam hit an all-time high in March, Vo Huu Viet, a fisherman with more than 30 years at sea in Quang Ngai province in Central Vietnam, did something he rarely does. He stayed on shore. “The catch is simply not enough to make up for the labor of four men,” Viet said. Docking the aging wooden boat he inherited from his father means he, his wife, his crew and their families had to do other work, such as hauling heavy goods for other people, to make ends meet. Viet was hardly alone. In fishing ports around Vietnam, thousands of boats stayed docked for months as the fuel crisis made sea-bound trips unprofitable. The hike in fuel prices, fishers told Mongabay, didn’t just raise the cost of diesel — it raised the cost of everything else that supports a fishing boat, from ice to food. From March 1 to April 21 of this year, fishing activities around Vietnam fell 18.9% compared with the same time last year, from the nonprofit vessel-tracking platform Global Fishing Watch. For energy-intensive trawlers, the drop was 31%. As fuel prices spiked in Vietnam, fishing boats spent fewer hours on the water. Graphic by Andrés Alegria/Mongabay. Fuel is not the only pressure. Declining fish stocks — the result of years of unsustainable and illegal fishing, compounded by climate change — along with international pressures to tighten fishing enforcement and the growing presence of Chinese vessels add to the strain. The…This article was originally published on Mongabay
Three seafarers have died and two remain missing after a rescue boat capsized during an emergency response from the South African emergency towing vessel Umkhuseli. The incident occurred Wednesday, September 30,...
Global shipping is not running short of ships. The bigger problem is that a growing share of them are getting caught in congestion. Roughly 12% of global container ship capacity...
Donald Trump se dit parfaitement serein quant aux éventuelles menaces que présente l’IA pour l’humanité et réaffirme que des garde-fous freineraient son développement.
Dans un entretien approfondi accordé à Time Magazine et publié le 1er octobre, le président américain a par ailleurs fait part de son estime envers le directeur général d’Anthropic, Dario Amodei, après un récent dîner partagé. Donald Trump a salué l’intelligence du dirigeant et remarqué que ses positions réelles différaient de l’image qu’en donnaient les médias.
Mi-juin 2026, l’administration Trump avait ordonné à Anthropic de suspendre l’accès à ses modèles les plus avancés, invoquant des préoccupations de sécurité nationale liées à d’éventuelles vulnérabilités de contournement des garde-fous (jailbreak), avant de revenir sur cette décision environ un mois plus tard.
« Je l’ai beaucoup apprécié, lui et sa femme, a déclaré Donald Trump à Time Magazine. C’est un type très intelligent. Peut-être un peu différent de ce que je pensais. Vraiment un peu différent. Mais non, il comprend. »
Donald Trump a organisé le 29 septembre une réunion à la Maison-Blanche avec plusieurs grands dirigeants de l’IA, dont Dario Amodei. La rencontre a débouché sur la signature d’un cadre volontaire axé sur l’autorégulation du secteur et la surveillance interne.
Le président reste cependant opposé à la mise en place de garde-fous gouvernementaux pour l’IA, affirmant qu’ils freineraient son développement et permettraient à la Chine de dépasser les États-Unis. Donald Trump a indiqué à Time Magazine que son rempart contre les laboratoires d’IA résidait dans l’action répressive du Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) et du département de la Justice américain.
« Écoutez, pour moi, si vous cherchez à vous faire réguler, on peut vous forcer à fermer boutique, a-t-il précisé. Maintenant, il faut être responsable de soi-même, et il n’y a pas tant de gens qui comprennent ce qui se passe. »
« C’est quelque chose de nouveau, très différent de ce que les gens ont jamais vu auparavant, a encore ajouté Donald Trump. Mais mon approche, c’est qu’on gagne largement face au reste du monde, et je veux continuer à gagner. »
Time Magazine relève que 71 % des citoyens américains s’opposent à la construction de data centers, tandis que 57 % estiment que l’IA fera plus de mal que de bien. Donald Trump a qualifié à plusieurs reprises les inquiétudes autour de l’IA de mystification.
Dans l’entretien, il a juré que les data centers « rapportent une fortune » et permettront de réduire les impôts. Il a également suggéré pour finir que le gouvernement américain pourrait entrer au capital d’Anthropic ou d’OpenAI, à l’image de l’accord conclu avec Intel.
Saudi Arabia is planning an offensive against Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen, with options being considered including a coastal push to secure the Red Sea shipping route or an assault on multiple fronts, regional and Western officials told Reuters.
The Group of Seven nations and its partners are to release as much as 100 million barrels of emergency oil and diesel stocks amid pressure from the Trump administration to quell rising fuel prices.
The Pentagon is deploying an additional aircraft carrier and 10,000 sailors and Marines to the Persian Gulf, according to a US official, a move that gives American commanders more options if President Donald Trump chooses to escalate attacks on Iran.
A few years ago, Sebastian Barry—whose collected literary works, drawn from family history and lore, offer “a loser’s history of 20th-century Ireland”—announced that the final novel in his series would tackle the relationship between his parents. “The declaration seemed to set the table for a feast of disclosure,” writes Giles Harvey, who spoke with Barry for more than a year as the novel took shape. But the feast never arrived. The “career-spanning profile” Harvey once suggested to Barry becomes a study of abuse, memory, and revelation—one Barry’s forte, and now, perhaps, his greatest struggle.
Barry and I corresponded for the next year and a half, during which the novel appeared to be on course. Then, in July of last year, he sent me a surprising email. Something had happened in the time since his father died, Barry explained. “Where there was once a great need to proclaim aloud,” he wrote — neglecting to specify just what it was he’d felt the need to proclaim — Barry now found himself in a different state of mind. “A matter I thought so urgent and in need of saying” had come to seem better served by a “strange new beneficent silence.”
The U.S. Coast Guard has intercepted a vessel carrying fuel to Cuba after an international enforcement operation found large quantities of fuel concealed inside the ship’s ballast tanks. The Coast Guard...
When CofE bishops in London read in a Left-wing rag that anti-small boat activists were attending church, they immediately released a statement. Where are all the statements about Left-wing activists, wonders Julian Mann.
Florida lawyer Jalal Shehadeh is convinced that the warrantless seizure of his cell phone by federal agents at the Newark International Airport after he returned from Palestine this September was not random.
Shehadeh, a Miami-based attorney and Palestinian rights advocate, was held for several hours for a secondary inspection and had his phone seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) after he refused to allow federal agents to search it.
“It’s just a wildly invasive thing to do to somebody with no individualized justifiable basis to do it,” Shehadeh told Truthout.
He suspects federal authorities targeted him for his activism. The lawyer is involved in a legal complaint against a federal judge in Florida over the judge’s anti-Palestinian statements.
Shehadeh is one of several Palestinian rights advocates who have been detained and had their personal devices searched by CBP while returning to the U.S. from international travel since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza in October 2023.
Other similar cases include Amir Makled, a lawyer from the Detroit area who was representing University of Michigan students involved in pro-Palestine activism, journalist Max Blumenthal, and Osama Abu Irshaid, the executive director of American Muslims for Palestine (AMP).
Jenin Younes, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), which filed a legal motion earlier this week demanding the return of Shehadeh’s phone, said CBP appears to be escalating phone searches against opponents of President Donald Trump’s agenda.
“Common sense tells us that they are targeting people who have pro-Palestine views,” Younes told Truthout.
She stressed that the searches are illegal. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects “persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
Younes said the “border exception” that allows searches to ensure that no illegal items are brought into the country should not apply to phones.
Younes, a civil liberties attorney, said the authors of the Constitution would have certainly opposed giving the government blanket authority to search people’s phones without cause.
“Law enforcement can search shipping vessels coming into the Boston harbor to make sure that they don’t have contraband. That’s a totally different thing from searching the contents of people’s smartphones,” she said. “I don’t think the framers would have thought that you could read the papers of somebody coming into the country in their suitcase, and likewise, a smartphone, which has so much more personal information.”
The case of Shehadeh and other Palestinian rights supporters targeted for searches at the border has reignited the debate over the application of constitutional protections at ports of entry.
Shehadeh said that when he was stopped at Newark on September 17, CBP officers only conducted a “cursory” search on his bags because they did not appear to be interested in physical items.
“They are looking for our thoughts,” he said. “They’re looking to see what I’m thinking. They want to see who I’m messaging. They want to see what WhatsApp groups I am part of.”
The lawyer, who has Global Entry for expedited border crossing, said he was flagged by name for secondary inspection and led to a waiting room. He was asked general questions about his travels, work, and family before the agents asked to search his phone.
Shehadeh objected to allowing the officers to go through his device, citing the attorney-client privileged information on the phone. The agents kept him waiting and subjected him to another round of questioning as they took the case to a supervisor. As the clock ticked, the Florida-based lawyer missed his connecting flight to Miami.
Eventually, he was informed by an officer that CBP would take his phone and let him go. “I told them, ‘I just want to be very clear. I am not giving you permission, consent to search my phone, and I’m not giving any other arm of this agency or anybody else consent to search my phone,’” he said.
The cell phone still has not been returned.
Shehadeh told Truthout that if the goal of the episode were to deter his activism for Palestinian rights, it would not succeed.
“It will not move our advocacy work an inch. Literally, it will have no impact. If anything, it will fuel the importance of doing more of this work,” he told Truthout. “But when it comes to travel, I’m going to be much more careful about what my phone situation will be.”
The Trump administration has been cracking down on Palestinian rights activism, including through a deportation campaign targeting non-citizen students who participated in protests against the war on Gaza.
Shehadeh warned that the administration is creating a new norm of weakened constitutional rights that many people may take for granted.
“This search is a perfect example of that. Protection against search and seizure is one of those things that comes out of our Constitution that really empowers citizens to know you will not have government intrusion,” he said.
“What this administration is doing is chipping away at the rights of Americans — of all Americans. But sadly, Arabs, Muslims, and minorities tend to be the first victims of these abuses. But they’re certainly not going to be the last ones.”
Abu Irshaid of AMP said the government is turning border crossings into a “hunting ground for individuals it wishes to target” for political retaliation or to gather information about constitutional protected activity.
Abu Irshaid has sued the government, alleging that the repeated searches he has been subjected to at the airport, along with the seizure of his phone, amount to illegal discrimination.
A federal judge ruled in his favor in July, declaring that the government violated Abu Irshaid’s rights with the searches.
Some activists are pinning their hopes on a case before the Supreme Court, Anibowei v. Blanche, that could determine whether the Fourth Amendment applies to the electronic devices of U.S. citizens travelling internationally.
CBP argues that only a tiny fraction of travelers, less than one-half of one percent, are subjected to a device search. But official statistics show an uptick in such searches since Trump returned to the White House.
In 2024, federal officers inspected the devices of 47,047 travelers. The numbers increased to 55,318 last year. Of those inspections, 13,590 targeted U.S. citizens in 2025, compared to 10,541 a year earlier.
In January, CBP released a memorandum outlining its regulations and authorities around searching travelers’ personal devices. The document stressed that people at ports of entry have diminished privacy rights and that phone searches are essential “to identify and combat a wide range of illicit activities.”
A basic search, one where the officer goes through the phone manually, can be conducted “with or without suspicion.”
The bar is higher for carrying out an advanced search, which includes copying and analyzing the content of the phone through an external device. It requires “reasonable suspicion of activity in violation of the laws” enforced by CBP. But there appears to be a loophole. An advanced search can still be conducted “in the absence of individualized reasonable suspicion when there is a national security concern.”
The directive does not provide details on what constitutes a “national security concern” to enable an advanced search.
Officers can only search the device itself and may not access information stored remotely. That’s why they must disable the external connectivity of the phone, according to the memorandum.
The directive gives officers the authority to seize a device and keep it even after the traveler leaves the airport, which is what happened to Shehadeh. According to the memorandum, CBP could effectively keep his phone indefinitely. The agency is allowed to hold on to the device for a period of five days, which can be extended by 15 days and subsequently by seven days in increments without specified limits.
As of Thursday, CBP has kept Shehadeh’s phone for 14 days, meaning the agency has applied at least one extension to its hold on the device.
In response to Truthout’s request for comment, a CBP spokesperson told Truthout that the likelihood of a search at a port of entry “remains exceedingly rare” but did not answer specific questions about Shehadeh’s case, including why the agency is still holding on to his phone.
“U.S. Customs and Border Protection has statutory authority to conduct border searches of electronic devices for all persons entering or departing the United States, regardless of citizenship, to enforce laws addressing terrorism, child exploitation, drug- and human-smuggling, visa fraud, and national security threats,” the CBP spokesperson said.
In the face of the U.S.’s ever-expanding definition of “national security threats,” which now seem to include lawyers, journalists, and activists who have advocated for the rights of Palestinians, are now living in fear that border stops are being used as a form of intimidation.
“What is most disturbing is that many of these aggressive government actions target activists whose only ‘offense’ is criticizing Israel’s violations against Palestinians,” Abu Irshaid told Truthout in a statement.
A Personal Connection
As a reporter, I try to stay out of the stories I am telling. But my personal experience with being stopped and searched after returning to the U.S. from international travel is too relevant for this article to withhold.
After returning to Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C. from a trip to Lebanon in February 2025, I was detained for nearly five hours and faced similar treatment as Shehadeh.
CBP officers asked me intrusive questions relating to my work as a journalist and political leanings in my family’s hometown in Lebanon, which had been targeted by Israeli bombardment in the war.
After a brief search of my bags, a CBP officer asked me to hand my phone and unlock it. I initially refused. The federal agent handed me a piece of paper stating that CBP has the lawful ability to search electronic devices. When I highlighted that the flyer reflects CBP policy, not the Constitution, the officer threatened to seize both my phone and computer indefinitely if I didn’t hand the phone in.
CBP took the phone after pressuring me to write down its passcode and kept me waiting for around two hours before handing it back — with a disclaimer that they couldn’t “process” it because the system was down. They eventually let me go. Throughout the hours-long ordeal, the officers did not allow me to contact my family member who was waiting to pick me up at the airport.
I have traveled outside the country twice since then and have been flagged for secondary inspection on the way back each time, albeit without a device search. At the advice of press freedom experts, now I travel internationally with an alternative phone that does not contain sensitive personal or professional information.
Amazon committed more than $1 billion over the next five years to support communities hosting its data centres in a bid to address mounting opposition to AI infrastructure.
Amazon Web Services CEO Matt Garman announced the investment in an essay defending data centre development, arguing the buildout is needed for the US to remain competitive in the global AI race.
“Data centres bring considerable tax revenue, positive economic impact, large numbers of good jobs, education programs and other benefits to the communities where they’re built,” he wrote.
The new programme will fund education, workforce training, local hiring, energy upgrades, water and energy preservation projects and grants for local initiatives. Amazon added local communities will help determine how the funding is used.
The company said it expects to connect more than 300,000 students to free degree programmes in data centre communities over five years. It also plans to expand its network of training centres, alongside grants for energy efficiency upgrades targeting more than 300 schools and community buildings and over 30,000 homes.
Amazon also pledged to stop using nondisclosure agreements with government agencies involved in its data centre projects, explaining it would publish annual information on energy consumption, water use and efficiency.
Losing ticket Data centre expansion has been facing growing backlash across the world over power demand, water consumption, land disruption, noise and environmental impact. In July, New York became the first US state to introduce a one-year moratorium on the construction of hyperscale facilities requiring 50 megawatts of power or more, citing environmental concerns, pressure on the energy grid and costs for residents.
Garman warned data centre moratoriums could leave the country behind in the global AI race. “If these measures are enacted, the US could be writing its own losing ticket to this race, and the consequences would last generations,” he said.
He also pushed back against concerns over water consumption, electricity prices and emissions from backup generators, describing several commonly cited claims as “myths”, “misinformation and outright lies”. He explained direct data centre water consumption accounts for about 0.5% of total US industrial water use and that backup generators remain idle 99.9% of the time.
New details—including debunked footage at the heart of the official narrative—have shattered the Flydubai FZ1073 “terror attack” story. What’s left isn’t a clear picture of a foiled hijacking. It’s a trail of contradictions, convenient timing, [...]
Login
