Wednesday, September 09, 2026

New York City releases post-9/11 air toxicity information kept secret for 25 years

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Tuesday announced the release of tens of thousands of documents detailing what city officials knew about toxic air after the September 11 attacks as the 25th anniversary approaches and thousands still suffer from related illnesses.





Issued on: 09/09/2026


By: FRANCE 24

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced on Tuesday the release of tens of thousands of documents showing the city did not disclose all it knew about air toxicity after 9/11.

The release comes ahead of the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks that killed 2,977 people in the United States, mostly in the collapse of the Twin Towers in New York.

In the years since, more than 9,400 have died from illnesses linked to their exposure to the area, according to a federal medical monitoring programme.

"These are documents that show what the city knew about the toxic air around Ground Zero, when they knew it, and how they acted to limit liability," the mayor told a news conference following the online release of 170,000 pages of documents on health concerns, air quality and the city's response to the attacks.

The release is part of an agreement with 9/11 Health Watch, a victims' advocacy group that had taken legal action to compel the city to make the documents public.

"For 25 years, four different Mayoral administrations kept from the public, the US Congress, and the City Council documents showing what the City actually knew about the danger of the toxic chemicals in Lower Manhattan and Western Brooklyn after the World Trade Center collapse, even as City officials continued messaging to the public that the air was 'safe and acceptable'," the group's director Benjamin Chevat said in a statement.

After the initial dust cloud that followed the collapse of the World Trade Center, months of pollution and lingering dust ensued, causing cancers that thousands of New Yorkers still suffer today.

Leaders 'lied'

When asked about the names of officials who had withheld information from the public, Mamdani said, "this goes across a multitude of those that New Yorkers have trusted."

"People got sick because the leaders they trusted lied and told them they were safe to breathe in toxic air."

Roughly 173,000 documents released Tuesday, and additional ones which will be published online in waves over the next 12 months, could implicate two former New York mayors.

They are Rudy Giuliani, in office at the time of the attacks, and then Michael Bloomberg, mayor from January 2002 to December 2013.

Some concern discussions Giuliani's administration had at the time about its legal liability and health risks, New York City's chief counsel Steven Banks said Tuesday.

Giuliani's spokesman did not return a request for comment.

Another document highlights information provided by Congressman Jerry Nadler during Bloomberg's tenure regarding concerns from residents of Lower Manhattan about the quality of the air they were breathing.

Bloomberg's team declined to comment.

On September 11, 2001, hijackers seized control of two planes that struck the two World Trade Center towers. A third hijacked jet smashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth, which seemed to be headed for the Capitol or the White House, crashed in woodland near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after passengers fought back and seized control.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)


Watchdog Thanks Mamdani for Release of 9/11 Air Quality Files Hidden From Public for Years

“People got sick because the leaders they trusted lied and told them they were safe to breathe in toxic air,” Mamdani said, announcing the release of 170,000 files.



New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani speaks during a press conference on the release of 9/11 related documents at City Hall on September 8, 2026 in New York City.
(Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Stephen Prager
Sep 08, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

A watchdog group representing 9/11 first responders and survivors applauded New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Tuesday as his administration released a trove of long-buried files that shed new light on how New Yorkers were misled about air quality and health risks in the wake of the terrorist attack.

“I want to thank Mayor Mamdani for being the mayor, after 25 years, who finally begins to answer the question, ‘What did the city know about the dangers from the toxic cloud at ground zero, and when did it know it?’” said Benjamin Chevat, a longtime advocate for programs to help survivors and first responders, who leads the group 9/11 Health Watch.

Days before the 25th anniversary of the attack that took nearly 3,000 lives, Mamdani’s office is releasing around 170,000 pages of records that were stored in a city office and kept from public view for more than two decades. The New York Times, which reviewed the documents prior to their release, said they contain “air quality reports, contamination records and correspondence among city officials.”

There is no definitive total of the number of people who have died as a result of health complications caused by the attack, but as Mamdani noted during a press conference on Tuesday, it has almost surely far surpassed the number killed in the attack itself.

“The devastating truth is that the suffering did not end once the smoke cleared and the dust settled,” Mamdani said. “For so many New Yorkers who lived, or worked, or studied near ground zero, and for the thousands of others who worked on the pile, recovering those we’d lost and clearing the rubble, that was only the beginning of years of hardship and illness.”

These survivors, he said, were forced to remember September 11, not just on its yearly anniversary, but “each time they take a struggling breath, each time they have to swallow a pill, each time another chemo dose is administered.”




The documents released by Mamdani’s office were uncovered following a yearslong fight between 9/11 Health Watch and New York City’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which initially claimed the files had gone missing.

Following pressure from the City Council and a lawsuit from 9/11 Health Watch, DEP later revealed that the files had been stored in 68 highly organized boxes in the agency’s possession, which fueled speculation about a cover-up by the city and led a New York City judge to rule that the city’s denial was “arbitrary and capricious.”

“For 25 years,” Chevat said, “four different mayoral administrations kept from the public, the US Congress, and the City Council documents showing what the city actually knew about the danger of the toxic chemicals in Lower Manhattan and Western Brooklyn after the World Trade Center collapse, even as city officials continued messaging to the public that the air was ‘safe and acceptable.’”

The first tranche, released on an online portal Tuesday, shows that while city and federal officials assured Americans that the air was safe to breathe, asbestos and other toxic chemicals were being detected at and around Ground Zero until at least July 2002, more than 10 months after the attacks. It also shows that analyses by the Environmental Protection Agency found carcinogens around lower Manhattan, in some cases above acceptable limits.

Also released was an October 2001 memo sent to former Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s deputy mayor, Robert Harding, showing that the then-mayor’s administration expected as many as 10,000 claims from plaintiffs harmed, including by toxic exposure, after public health advisories assured them it was safe to return to Lower Manhattan, and from first responders who had inadequate safety equipment.

The records also point to apparent efforts by the city to downplay the substandard air quality in order to ease the public’s fears about returning to business as usual following the attacks.

Documents show that even as test results revealed worrying levels of asbestos, city officials sought to massage those findings, avoiding the word “risk” in public advisories. Another document acknowledged that the city may have given residents a dangerous recommendation when it advised them to use wet mops and rags to clean up asbestos dust in their homes, a task that typically requires licensed crews.

The release of the files gives credence to the concerns raised at the time by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), whose district included ground zero.

“They knew about the air quality, and they essentially did nothing about it,” Nadler said of the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations in an interview with the Times last week. “I suspect that all they cared about was getting Wall Street reopened, and they didn’t give a damn about the health of the people down there.”

Mamdani’s release of the files comes as his opponents launch attacks against his Muslim identity and imply he bears sympathy with the al Qaeda jihadists who carried out the 9/11 attacks.

Over the weekend, Giuliani said in an appearance on the right-wing cable channel Newsmax that Mamdani should be banned from participating in the ground zero commemoration because the attack was carried out “in the name of the Muslim religion” and that the perpetrators “weren’t hiding it like Mamdani is trying to hide it.”

Mamdani has responded that he would attend multiple 9/11 remembrance events on Friday to support first responders and families who lost loved ones.

“I’m proud to be the mayor of this city. I love this city. I love this country,” he said. “What I want this week to be a focus on is the families whose loved ones were stolen from them 25 years ago in the horrific act of terror of September 11, and a focus also on the first responders who did everything they could.”

Mamdani said on Tuesday that his release of the files was part of an effort to do right by New Yorkers harmed by the shortcomings of the city’s response to the attacks.

“It would be one thing if the government had stood alongside survivors and provided them with everything they needed at every step of the way. And yet, we know that could not be further from what actually happened,” Mamdani said. “People got sick because the leaders they trusted lied and told them they were safe to breathe in toxic air.”

“Administration after administration has ignored those calling for answers and clarity, instead choosing to bury them in legal arguments and in red tape,” he continued. “We will do no such thing as we mark 25 years.”
Doctors Without Borders Says Trump Aid Cuts Fueling Humanitarian Catastrophe in Sudan

“War is driving Sudan’s needs; funding cuts are shrinking the response.”



Sudanese people fill cans with water at the Al-Afad camp for displaced people in the town of Al-Dabba, northern Sudan on November 21, 2025.
(Photo by Ebrahim Hamid/AFP via Getty Images)


Jake Johnson
Sep 08, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

The renowned humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders said Tuesday that the Trump administration’s destruction of the US Agency for International Development has contributed to the collapse of the war-torn nation’s healthcare system, forcing clinics to close and leaving millions of people without access to lifesaving treatment.

The organization, known internationally as Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), said the closure of USAID last year at the behest of President Donald Trump and the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, left many healthcare providers in Sudan “unable to find alternative funding to continue providing services,” leaving facilities with no option but to shut down in the midst of a worsening humanitarian catastrophe.


“War is driving Sudan’s needs; funding cuts are shrinking the response,” Muhammad Ibrahim, MSF’s head of mission in Sudan, said in a statement on Tuesday. “MSF’s work in Sudan is privately funded. But when funding disappears from other health services, clinics close, patients have fewer places to go, and pressure shifts to the facilities that remain, including ours.”

MSF said its hospital in Um Rakuba, a refugee camp in eastern Sudan, is now “the only lifeline left” for locals and refugees.

“The cuts here go well beyond healthcare,” emphasized Fabrizio Locuratolo, MSF humanitarian affairs manager. “Food rations are shrinking and protection programs are being dismantled, pulling away the last safety nets and leaving refugees completely exposed.”

The dismantling of USAID by Musk’s wrecking crew at the so-called US Department of Government Efficiency has already killed hundreds of thousands of people—most of them children—according to experts tracking the impacts on humanitarian aid around the world. Musk and the Trump administration have continued to deny that the aid cuts have killed any children.

A study published in The Lancet earlier this year estimated that the gutting of USAID—whose surviving programs were mostly transferred to the US State Department—could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by the end of the decade. The US Department of Agriculture took over USAID’s Food for Peace program—and subsequently omitted Sudan from the list of countries that would receive shipments of US grain.

MSF said Tuesday that “just as health providers faced the impending removal of US support, many European governments also reduced their assistance to people in Sudan.”

The results have been horrific. MSF said that “malaria and malnutrition cases are already rising despite limited rainfall, ahead of the peak of the rainy season—and we expect numbers to increase as the rain intensifies.”

“In August, our teams admitted 191 children under five with severe malnutrition to our inpatient feeding center, and nearly 22% also tested positive for malaria,” the group said Tuesday. “The UN reports that 825,000 children under five are expected to suffer severe acute malnutrition and 19.5 million people faced crisis-level hunger earlier this year. Yet the UN’s $2.87 billion response plan is barely 41 per cent funded, and 37 per cent of Sudan’s health facilities are estimated to be completely out of service.”

“As world leaders gather at the UN General Assembly, governments and institutional donors must protect funding for essential health services in Sudan and provide flexible transitional financing where facilities are at risk of closure,” the organization pleaded.
Critics Decry Trump HUD’s Proposed Rollback of Flood Protections for Low-Income Homes

One group said that the proposal “puts poor and working families that rely on HUD assistance at greater risk of danger, displacement, and homelessness.”



An aerial view shows homes submerged under floodwaters from the North Fork of the Kentucky River in Jackson, Kentucky on July 28, 2022.
(Photo by Leandro Lozada/AFP via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Sep 08, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Housing and environmental advocates on Tuesday condemned the Trump administration’s planned rollback of flood protections for federally funded housing, warning that the move will leave low-income households exposed to increasingly severe climate-driven flooding while shifting more costs to taxpayers.

In July, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) proposed rescinding key portions of the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS), a Biden-era policy that required federally financed projects in areas prone to flooding to account for current and future inundation risks.

Proponents of the move, which would strip a layer of federal flood requirements, argue that local governments know their flood conditions better than Washington bureaucrats.

However, the National Housing Law Project (NHLP), a San Francisco-based advocacy group, warned Tuesday that the proposal “puts poor and working families that rely on HUD assistance at greater risk of danger, displacement, and homelessness by reducing notification and mitigation requirements for homes that are vulnerable to flooding.”

NHLP called the move “part of the Trump administration’s attempt to dismantle the government programs that keep people housed, safe, and healthy.”

On Tuesday, NHLP submitted a comment to HUD noting that “flooding events have become more frequent and widespread, and put the health, safety, and livelihood of low-income families at risk.”

“Tenants displaced from federally subsidized housing face an even more acute crisis, because they often endure temporary or permanent loss of their housing assistance,” the group added. “Due to the personal and societal harm of extreme flooding events, HUD should work toward increasing the resilience of HUD-assisted properties. This proposed rule does the opposite.”

The proposed FFRMS rescission is part of the broader regulatory rollback that began during President Donald Trump’s first term. In 2017, Trump repealed Obama-era executive orders that had updated the federal flood standard for the first time since the Carter administration and established regulations meant to ensure that federally funded infrastructure projects were climate-resilient.

In March, Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies to identify and eliminate regulations deemed unnecessarily costly or burdensome to housing construction.

Responding to HUD’s proposed FFRMS rollback, Liz Zepeda, federal regulatory director at the Virginia-based legal advocacy group Southern Environmental Law Center, said in July that “it’s discouraging to see the federal government ignore climate science and put some of our most vulnerable communities at greater risk, especially as we head into hurricane season.”

“Reckless deregulation like this is why we need Congress to step up and pass reasonable emergency management policies,” Zepeda added.

In 2021, an NPR investigation revealed that, dating back to at least the Obama administration, the federal government sold homes it had previously purchased after repeated flooding to new buyers—often without adequately informing them about the properties’ flood histories and risks.

Historical data compiled by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show 45 billion-dollar flooding disasters between 1980-2024 that caused an estimated $215 billion in combined damages, adjusted for inflation. As the climate emergency worsens, the frequency and severity of such flooding have increased dramatically, from an average of 3.3 billion-dollar disasters in the 1980s, to 6.7 in the 2000s, to 23 in the 2020s.


A Shadow Hearing to Break the Blockade on Cuba Is Just the Beginning

“May we not remain silent at a time of injustice and what feels like a quiet genocide on the Cuban people. We will end this blockade. It’s the responsibility of Congress to do its darn job to end it,” said Rep. Delia Ramirez. It is also the responsibility of all people of conscience


(L-R) Rev. Robert Turner, Congresswoman Delia Ramírez (D-Ill.) Ms. Suzanne Adely, Mr. Felix Sharpe Caballero, and Congresswoman Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) pose.
(Photo via Congressional Progressive Caucus)

Jill Clark-Gollub
Sep 09, 2026
Common Dreams

On September 2, 2026, Democratic Congresswomen Delia Ramírez of Illinois and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota hosted a shadow hearing in Congress on “Breaking the Blockade: Reassessing the Moral and Legal Failures of US-Cuba Policy.” A shadow hearing, called by the minority party, has all the formalities of an official hearing of Congress. Four distinguished witnesses gave testimony about the current state of life in Cuba under the oil blockade imposed by the Trump administration in January, and additional coercive measures that have been steadily imposed since then.

Dr. Tania Zakrison of the University of Chicago Medical Center described a “humanitarian catastrophe” due to cumbersome licensing and state overcompliance with sanctions, which mean that supplies are not available to prevent loss of limbs in diabetes patients, for example, and that children and cancer patients are dying due to lack of medicines. The lack of oil to fuel the electrical grid and pump water has caused a severe water shortage. “One-third of the population now has no water at all and are digging into the ground to drink muddy, untreated water,” said Dr. Zakrison. This, coupled with a lack of supplies such as IV fluid bags, is contributing to the recent doubling of infant mortality; research clearly attributes the causality of thousands of excess child deaths to the blockade. Food production is down 60% since January. Doctors “are bearing witness to the preventable deaths that we in the US are causing.”

Rev. Dr. Robert Turner of Empowerment Temple in Baltimore, Maryland visited Cuba in July: “What I found was not a hostile, defeated, nor broken people. I found peaceful, loving, resilient, ingenious people surviving decades of a US embargo and now a blockade that has turned survival itself into a daily act of will.” Our government “has decided that disagreement over the political and economic system justifies collective punishment. That is more than reprehensible,” said Rev. Turner. “It is sinfully wicked and an abuse of the power God has allowed America to possess… What I saw was a constructed crisis, suffering manufactured by policy—our policy.”

Attorney Suzanne Adely, president of the National Lawyer’s Guild, listed several ways in which the US blockade of Cuba violates international law and is repeatedly condemned by the international community. Yet it escalates and is now accompanied by threats of illegal US military aggression. She stated: “The US justification—that Cuba poses an ‘extraordinary threat’ to national security—is legally untenable. A small island subjected to six decades of economic warfare cannot credibly threaten the United States. Likewise, Cuba’s designation as a ‘State Sponsor of Terrorism’ is arbitrary and politically motivated. It contradicts objective counter-terrorism criteria and ignores documented violations by other states, undermining the credibility of the list itself.”

“We have to talk about Cuba every single day until it becomes part of our algorithm.”

Ms. Adely indicated that while Cuba is under siege and being denied the right to sovereignty, the US is arguably committing crimes against humanity and possibly even genocide.

Felix Sharpe Caballero, a Cuban-American living in Detroit who frequently visits family on the island, said: “I testify at great peril. There is a lot of patent hostility in the Cuban-American community. But to be silent, would be a betrayal.”

Caballero continued: “The injustices perpetrated on the Cuban people today have reached the point, quite frankly, of genocide. We are using hunger, lack of medicine, electricity to cook and draw water, food, and basic hygiene products… on the Cuban people to achieve the economic overthrow of the Cuban government. There are 7,000 containers sitting across the world that are not being delivered to Cuba because of State Department activity. The United States of America has been fighting a proxy war on behalf of the Cuban American aristocracy in South Florida.”

Mr. Caballero has learned from his physician cousin in Havana what happens to babies in the NICU when the power goes out. As his voice cracked, he indicated that “some of those babies are not going to recover when the power comes back on.”

With six other members of her Progressive Caucus in attendance, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ore.), Chuy Garcia (D-Ill.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), and Omar, Congresswoman Ramírez concluded the session by saying, “This shadow hearing is just the beginning.” She urged the American people to raise the profile of this issue. “We have to talk about Cuba every single day until it becomes part of our algorithm.” Ramírez vowed to keep pressuring her colleagues to pass three key pieces of legislation:H.R.7521 and its companion S. 136, the United States Cuba Trade Act to lift the blockade.
Resolution 1056 to Annul the Monroe Doctrine, which advocates for “terminating all unilateral economic sanctions imposed through Executive orders, and working with Congress to terminate all unilateral sanctions, such as the Cuba embargo, mandated by law.”
H.Con.Res 106 to Stop Unauthorized Military Action in Cuba.

Congresswoman Ramírez’s concluding words were: “May we not remain silent at a time of injustice and what feels like a quiet genocide on the Cuban people. We will end this blockade. It’s the responsibility of Congress to do its darn job to end it.”

It is also the responsibility of all people of conscience to make sure that happens.

A video recording of the shadow hearing can be found here.



Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Jill Clark-Gollub
Jill Clark-Gollub is the coordinator of Americas Without Sanctions, a project of SanctionsKill.
Full Bio >




Trump’s Top Oil Stocks Have Made Him Up to $4.4 Million Richer During Iran War: Analysis

Trump growing richer off his own war leaves many Americans “wondering where national policy ends and private financial interest begins,” said one critic.



US President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with travel industry executives in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on September 2, 2026.
(Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Sep 09, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

An analysis published by CNBC on Wednesday estimates that President Donald Trump has grown millions of dollars richer thanks to the illegal war with Iran he launched more than six months ago.

CNBC calculated its estimate by examining the nine largest fossil fuel company holdings listed in the president’s annual financial disclosure, and found that their value increased by between $1.5 million and $4.4 million since the start of the war.

“Trump’s accounts reported purchases and at least 23 sales involving the nine companies through June 29, which is the most recent date Trump has disclosed any trades,” reported CNBC. “Because the filings do not disclose exact share counts, execution prices, or which shares were sold, the estimates do not represent realized profits or Trump’s precise current holdings.”

CNBC also found no evidence that Trump was making trades based on advanced knowledge of his own decisions.

Even so, the findings show that Trump has benefited financially from a war he started without any authorization from the US Congress.

Donald Sherman, president and CEO of government watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told CNBC that Trump growing richer off his own war leaves many Americans “wondering where national policy ends and private financial interest begins.”

Scott Greytak, deputy executive director of Transparency International US, told CNBC that shouldn’t be let off the hook even if he is not personally executing fossil fuel stock trades.

“[Trump] knows he is heavily invested in energy,” Greytak said. “Trump likely knows where his money is parked and would still see the upside when his administration’s actions send those [energy] stocks climbing.”

CNBC’s analysis of Trump’s gains due to the war might be overly conservative.

A report released last month by Democrats on the US Congressional Joint Economic Committee estimated the president’s wealth has increased by as much as $15.5 million since January thanks to his investments in oil and gas stocks.

While the war has driven up the values of fossil fuel companies, it has also hit US consumers directly in their wallets by raising the price of oil, diesel fuel, and gasoline.

The price of Brent crude surged back over $100 per barrel for the first time in weeks during Wednesday trading. Data published by the American Automobile Association on Wednesday shows that the average price of diesel fuel in the US hit another record high of $5.94 per gallon, while the price of gas increased to $4.22 per gallon.

According to the most recent estimate from Brown University’s Watson School for International Public Affairs, the Iran War has now cost Americans more than $101 billion in additional fuel expenses, averaging more than $776 per US household.

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump vowed that he would “cut the price of energy and electricity in half” over the span of just a year.
Jared Kushner's 'absolutely abhorrent' Ukraine proposal slammed by security expert

Bennito L. Kelty
September 7, 2026
RAW STORY


Jared Kushner, U.S. President Donald Trump's son-in-law, speaks while U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff listens during a joint news conference with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy (not pictured), amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine September 6, 2026. REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko

Comments by Jared Kushner about a possible "win-win" situation for Ukraine and Russia were slammed by an appalled national security expert.

During a Monday appearance on CNN, Alex Plitsas responded to Kushner's idea that Russia can get a win out of the war in Ukraine without infringing on territorial rights and sovereignty. Kushner suggested a "win-win" outcome while meeting with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Sunday as part of President Donald Trump's envoy, along with Steve Witkoff, to Ukraine and Russia.

"The sound bites that came out of Kyiv and Moscow from this trip, I'm sorry, were nothing short of embarrassing for the United States and were absolutely abhorrent," Plitsas said. "The idea that we should give in to Vladimir Putin's aspirations as part of this is absurd."

The weekend visit by Kushner and Witkoff marked the envoys' first trip to Kyiv since the war began, but no major breakthroughs were announced.

Plitsas said that Putin's troops have "killed hundreds of thousands across Ukraine" and noted "documented heinous war crimes, including raping and pillaging and hundreds of thousands dead." Those actions are meant to meet Putin's "aspirations to take the rest of the country," Plitsas explained.

"So while there's a recognition that there may have to be some territorial swaps, the language that is used in diplomacy is important," he said.

Plitsas also ripped into Witkoff for comments he made while meeting with Putin on Saturday. Witkoff said that he and Kushner plan to reminisce about his meeting with Putin after their retirements.

"The language that was used about what fond memories they would have of negotiations in Moscow, followed by the idea that Vladimir Putin's aspirations are valid to be taken into account, is absolutely absurd," Plitsas said. "I was actually pretty disgusted with what I heard."

Plitsas added, "It's the first time I've used that type of language to describe this, but this was embarrassing."

 

Cambridge University announces review after death of Jason Arday

04.09.2026,

Photo: Joe Giddens/PA Wire/dpa

The University of Cambridge has announced an independent review into its “decision-making and actions,” after the death of its former academic professor Jason Arday.

Arday, 41, resigned from his post as professor of sociology of education at the university after he faced intense scrutiny over accusations of plagiarism.

He was found “unresponsive” by family members at his home in Battersea, south London, on the afternoon of August 14, London Inner South Coroner’s Court heard last month.

Vice-Chancellor Professor Deborah Prentice said the time since his death “has been a period of profound sadness and reflection for the university.”

Prentice said “while nothing can undo the loss of Professor Arday, this review can help us better understand what happened.”

In a post on social media, the University of Cambridge said: “University Council took the necessary steps to launch an independent review into the university’s decision-making and actions, with a focus on identifying shortcomings and areas for improvement.”

The first part of the review will examine the “support, interventions and protections available to Professor Arday during the period prior to his death.”

The university said it will report within three months, “enabling recommendations for urgent action to be considered and implemented without delay.”

It will be led by Nazir Afzal, the former chief crown prosecutor for the North-West of England and current chancellor of the University of Manchester.

The university said the second part of the review “will consider the wider context of Professor Arday’s time at the university, including the recruitment of senior academic staff, mentoring and support arrangements.”

It would also examine “the university’s response to allegations of research misconduct, and the support available to academics who are subject to extraordinary public and media scrutiny.”

The University of Cambridge said it was appointing an independent external chair to lead this work and would establish an expert panel, “including individuals with lived experience, to advise the review.”

The second part of the review is expected to conclude within six months of the establishment of the panel.

Accusations of plagiarism were initially made against Arday, who became Cambridge’s youngest black professor in 2023, by academic Nathan Cofnas.

Cofnas, who has advocated for “race realism,” was suspended from his post at Ghent University last month.

Organizers said more than 30,000 people attended a vigil for Arday in Trafalgar Square, central London, after his death.

Speakers criticized the press coverage of Arday. Labour Member of Parliament Diane Abbott said he had been the subject of a “vicious” and “bitter” campaign, and Lord Simon Woolley described it as a “public execution” and a “lynching.”

In a video message, Prentice said: “I am conscious that Professor Arday’s death has deeply affected black staff and students, as well as our neurodiverse community.

“There has also been an unacceptable rise in racist, hateful, and abusive attacks on our staff and students in online forums and on social media.”

Afzal said: “I am honoured to have been asked to lead part one of this important independent review.

“At its heart is a person, a family and a community who have been profoundly affected by Professor Arday’s death.

“It is important that we approach this work with both rigour and humanity.

“My responsibility will be to listen carefully, examine the evidence thoroughly and understand what support, interventions and protections were available to Professor Arday in the period before his death.

“We must be willing to ask difficult questions, including whether more could and should have been done."

Mafia boss arrested for murder of neo-fascist Lazio Ultra leader

09.09.2026  dpa

Photo: Alessandro Fucarini/IPA via ZUMA Press/dpa

Seven Mafia members have been arrested in Rome, more than seven years after the murder of Lazio ultra boss Fabrizio Piscitelli.

They are suspected of having ordered and organized the murder of Piscitelli, also known as Diabolik, the Carabinieri announced in a statement on Wednesday.

Among those arrested is Michele Senese, the boss of the Senese clan, one of the most powerful Mafia groups in the Italian capital.

Piscitelli was killed in 2019 in a Rome park with a shot to the head.

The 53-year-old was sitting on a bench when a man wearing sunglasses and disguised as a jogger approached him and shot him. The murder caused a major stir in Italy.

Investigators believe that Mafia boss Senese authorized Piscitelli's killing. The murder is said to have been organized by Leandro Bennato, who leads a criminal gang together with his brother.

The alleged gunman was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2026, but was acquitted by the Court of Appeal earlier this year.

The authorities suspect that a power struggle over the lucrative drug trade was the motive.

Piscitelli, who was involved in drug dealing alongside his role as leader of a neo-fascist 'ultra' group supporting the Roman football club Lazio, is said to have increasingly distanced himself from the directives of the dominant Senese clan.

Senese wanted to send a message with the murder and act as a deterrent to maintain his power.

At the time, Piscitelli was regarded as Rome's best-known football ultra. His group, the Irriducibili (meaning 'The Unbreakable'), was notorious for its far-right members.

 The group made headlines with banners mocking the victims of the Holocaust. It was dissolved in 2020.

Raising the Altalena: Netanyahu digs up sunken 1948 arms ship in ‘pre-election stunt’

ANALYSIS

A ship carrying arms for a right-wing militia, the Altalena was sunk 78 years ago off the coast of Tel Aviv at the orders of Israel’s founders. The discovery of its wreckage last week has given the country’s right-wing government ammunition to target the left and attempt to redirect the campaign for legislative elections in October.


Issued on: 31/08/2026 

The Altalena on fire after it was struck by a shell off the coast of Tel Aviv, on June 22, 1948. © Wikimedia Creative Commons

Eight decades after driving a fledgling Israel to the brink of civil war, the Altalena has suddenly resurfaced in the run-up to elections widely regarded as the most consequential in the nation’s history.

An arms-smuggling ship, the Altalena was sunk off the coast of Israel in 1948 after a deadly confrontation between the country’s nascent army and the right-wing Irgun militia, led by Menachem Begin. It has served as a foundational symbol for the Israeli right ever since.

The discovery of the ship’s wreckage on August 24 was hailed as a breakthrough in a joint statement by Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu and hardline National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, both members of the far-right Jewish supremacist party Otzma Yehudit.

“At 12:30am, at a depth of 503 metres, west of the coast of Israel, the Altalena ship was located intact – 78 years after that painful and seminal event that shook the young State of Israel,” said Eliyahu. The discovery closes a “historic chapter in one of the most painful and formative events in the history of Israeli society", added Ben-Gvir.


Smoke billows from the Altalena after it was struck by a shell. © Wikimedia Creative Commons

Seemingly side-stepped by his allies’ announcement, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rushed to join in the celebrations.

“For me, and I am certain for you as well, citizens of Israel, this is an emotional moment, a defining moment,” Netanyahu, whose Likud party was founded by Begin, said in a video clip. The ship “will be a tangible symbol for our generation and generations to come".
Civil war averted

The Altalena set sail from the French port of Marseille in June 1948, loaded with some 5,000 rifles as well as 450 machine guns and carts of ammunition destined for the Irgun – a militant organisation known for targeting Palestinians as well as British colonial authorities.

“The aim of the Irgun members in France was to bolster their forces in Palestine – both in terms of weapons and manpower – ahead of the looming war against neighbouring Arab countries,” said Israeli historian Yoav Gelber, a professor emeritus at the University of Haifa.

But the recent establishment of the State of Israel, just weeks earlier, had changed the situation on the ground.


The provisional government set up by David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, decided to disband the various clandestine militias and create a single army. The Haganah, the main paramilitary force prior to the establishment of Israel, ceased to exist as an independent organisation and became the core of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

While the Irgun was also ordered to disband, its representatives in Paris decided to press ahead with the Altalena’s mission.

Upon learning of the shipment, Ben-Gurion demanded that the ship and its cargo be handed over to the fledgling Israeli army. The prime minister wished to assert his authority and prevent the emergence of any rival paramilitary force.

Begin, however, requested that part of the weapons be allocated to Irgun units in Jerusalem.

Talks soon collapsed and Israeli forces opened fire at Ben-Gurion’s orders. Sixteen Irgun members and three soldiers were killed, before Begin asked his fighters to surrender with words that would become famous: “There will be no civil war with the enemy at our gates.”

The wreckage of the Altalena seen from the beach in 1948. © Wikimedia Creative Commons

Damaged by a shell, the ship remained visible off the coast for nearly a year, before being towed out to sea and sunk in 1949.

Decades later, the deadly confrontation remains one of the most sensitive episodes in Israeli history, said Ofira Gruweis Kovalsky, a historian at the University of Haifa. “The incident could have escalated into a civil war, but Begin helped prevent such an outcome,” she explained.

Blaming the left

The Altalena standoff brought face to face the two political blocs that would go on to shape the young state.

“Ben-Gurion accused members of the right of stoking violence and attempting a coup, while the right accused the left of seeking to physically eliminate its political opponents,” said Gruweis Kovalsky.

Begin eventually became prime minister in 1977, signaling the rise of the nationalist right and the decline of Ben-Gurion's socialist camp. Decades later, the discovery of the ship’s wreckage “brings the confrontation between the Israeli right and left back to the forefront of public debate", added Gruweis Kovalsky.

Begin’s political heir, Netanyahu has long been a fixture of annual memorial ceremonies for those killed on board the Altalena. When the wreckage was finally located, he was quick to pay tribute to the Irgun fighters who, in his view, helped stave off a civil war and secure Israel’s independence.

The prime minister also took the opportunity to denigrate his political opponents and “reopen the bitter wound” over Ben-Gurion’s decision to fire on the ship, wrote the Times of Israel.

In his video message, Netanyahu said Israel’s founding leader had made a “tragic decision to open fire” on the ship while it was “bringing essential weapons to our fighters in the War of Independence".

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu attends an event marking the centenary of Menachem Begin's birth, on July 21, 2013. © Uriel Sinai, AP

The dig at a symbol of the Israeli left was a calculated move ahead of legislative elections on October 27, argued local daily Haaretz.

Netanyahu has “found the perfect time to find the Altalena", read an editorial in the left-leaning newspaper. “With elections approaching, all means are justified to get a headline, and all the more so if it involves a hot potato like the Altalena, a ship carrying weapons to the Irgun militia that has served as a vehicle for right-wing incitement against the left for almost 80 years.”

Haaretz added: “'Finding' the Altalena shortly before the most fateful election in the country's history provides excellent fuel for continuing the incitement against the 'left', and serves the false narrative cultivated by the right and enthusiastically promoted by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”

Writer Amotz Asa-El was equally scathing in an op-ed published by the Jerusalem Post, arguing that, “Netanyahu’s plan to raise the Altalena wreck is designed to revive a political myth, redirect Israel’s election debate and evade judgment over his own record.”
A midsummer media stunt

One key witness to the infamous shipwreck has spoken out against renewed attempts to politicise the issue.

Renowned historian Saul Friedlander, a specialist of the Holocaust, was 15 years old when he boarded the Altalena, alone in his family to have survived World War II. A member of Habonim, a Zionist youth movement close to Ben-Gurion, he was attempting to emigrate to Israel.

“The memory of the Altalena must not be used today for election propaganda by the most extreme camp – the descendants of the hot-headed men of that period, who through their actions effectively defied Menachem Begin’s will,” Friedlander wrote in an op-ed, stressing that Begin had committed to disbanding the Irgun and integrating its members into the IDF.

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu lays a wreath at a memorial for the Altalena, at Nahalat Yitzhak cemetery in Tel Aviv, on May 26, 2021. © Jack Guez, AFP

As well as weaponising the Altalena’s memory, Netanyahu has promised to “raise it from the depths of the sea so that it can serve as a tangible symbol for our generation and generations to come".

Experts, however, have cast doubt on the feasibility of recovering the wreck.

“Salvaging the Altalena, which weighs about 18,000 tons and is apparently partially embedded in the clay seabed, would be an extraordinarily complex and costly operation that cannot be carried out with the means currently available in Israel,” Ehud Galili, a maritime archaeology expert at the University of Haifa, said in an interview with Haaretz.

Gelber, the historian, said such promises amounted to little more than a publicity stunt.

“The current Israeli government is carrying out numerous senseless actions, and this is one of them, just like so many others,” he said. “No one will recover the wreckage, and Netanyahu will forget all about it once the elections are over.”

He added: “It’s part of the election campaign: a media stunt in the middle of the summer – traditionally a quiet period – and a sign of the fragmentation of Israeli society.”

This article was adapted from the original in French.
UAE leader warned Netanyahu of Hamas attack days before October 7, says report

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced strong backlash from opposition leaders on Tuesday after a report published by Haaretz newspaper said UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan warned Netanyahu that Hamas was planning a major operation days before the attacks on October 7. The report alleges that Netanyahu failed to inform security chiefs.



Issued on: 08/09/2026 
By: FRANCE 24


Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses lawmakers in the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem on November 10, 2025. © Ohad Zwigenberg, AP

Israeli opposition leaders on Tuesday called Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unfit to serve after a report that the United Arab Emirates had warned him before the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack.

Haaretz newspaper, in a report excerpted from a forthcoming book by its reporters, said UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan spoke to Netanyahu a week and a half before the attack and told him that Hamas was planning a major operation.

Netanyahu's office called the report by the left-leaning newspaper "an absolute lie" and denied he spoke to the Emirati leader at that time.

Gadi Eisenkot, a former military commander who has emerged as Netanyahu's top rival in upcoming October 27 elections, accused the long-serving prime minister of evading responsibility for security lapses and resorting to "pathetic" excuses, such as saying he was not woken up soon enough on the morning of the attack.


Cover image: El primer ministro israelí, Benjamin Netanyahu, ofrece una rueda de prensa tras el acuerdo entre Estados Unidos e Irán en Jerusalén, el 15 de junio de 2026. © Reuters/Ronen Zvulun
04:20


"Netanyahu received dozens of warnings for October 7 and ignored them all. He is unfit," Eisenkot wrote on X.

Naftali Bennett, a former prime minister also running in elections, said Netanyahu "bears personal and direct responsibility" for the deaths on October 7, the deadliest attack in Israeli history.

"Netanyahu cannot continue to serve in his position for even one more minute," Bennett said.

Haaretz said that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, later killed by Israel, had warned a former Palestinian official that the militants were preparing "a terrifying operation" which he described as an "earthquake".

READ MORENetanyahu gave a ‘victory to Hamas’ by rejecting US-backed Gaza peace plan

The former Palestinian official relayed the message to an Emirati advisor, who passed it on to the Emirati leader who then called Netanyahu, according to the newspaper.

The UAE normalised ties with Israel in 2020 as part of the US-brokered Abraham Accords under President Donald Trump's first administration.

Netanyahu sees close ties with the UAE as a key achievement.

The newspaper, quoting mostly anonymous sources, said that Netanyahu replied calmly to the warning.

Netanyahu for years had sought to preserve the status quo with Hamas, which would receive funding via Qatar with an understanding the Islamist group was more interested in self-preservation than a devastating war with Israel.

Hamas on October 7 stormed into Israel in a rampaage that included mass killing at a music festival.

The attack killed 1,221 people, according to an AFP tally based on official Israeli figures. The militants also dragged into Gaza some 251 hostages, 44 of them already dead.

The massive Israeli offensive in response has left most of Gaza in ruins and killed 73,658 people, according to the Gaza health ministry, which is under Hamas authority and whose figures are considered reliable by the United Nations.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

Netanyahu to sue Haaretz over report UAE warned him about Hamas attack

09.09.2026

Photo: Tomer Neuberg/Jna Press/Nexpher via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa

By Cindy Riechau , dpa

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday announced that he will sue the left-liberal newspaper Haaretz over its story claiming the Emirati president warned him in autumn 2023 about a large-scale Hamas offensive, saying he has instructed his lawyers to file a defamation lawsuit. 

Haaretz said it stands by its story, adding that Netanyahu had sent a warning letter ahead of the libel suit the paper said was directed at it and journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval over the story.

Netanyahu, on X, said there had been no conversation between him and the Emirati president between early September and October 7, 2023. Netanyahu's office had previously denied the report.

Haaretz wrote that Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed called the Israeli prime minister from the presidential palace in Abu Dhabi a week and a half before October 7, 2023 and spoke with him for 45 minutes. 

In the conversation, he is said to have warned Netanyahu that the then leader of the Islamist Hamas terrorist organization, Yahya al-Sinwar, was planning a large-scale offensive against Israel.

The report said three senior foreign government representatives were informed about the content of the phone call. The source named was an adviser to the Emirati president who was familiar with the conversation.

Haaretz also reported that Netanyahu did not inform Israel's security chiefs despite the personal warning and did nothing with the information.

The Emirati president urged Netanyahu to take the situation seriously and prepare for an attack, the report said. To his surprise, Netanyahu reacted "relatively calmly" and assured him Israel was "prepared for any scenario."

The Times of Israel also reported, citing an Emirati source familiar with the matter, that the Emirati president is said to have warned Netanyahu by phone only days before the Hamas massacre that the terrorist organization was planning a large-scale attack on Israel.

The United Arab Emirates said it did not want to comment on media reports and speculation about conversations between heads of government.

Report comes ahead of key Israeli election

The report is also sensitive because of Israel's upcoming parliamentary election on October 27. Netanyahu's statement said the "false story" was "part of the left's election campaign."

His critics, meanwhile, accuse him of failing to take personal responsibility for the massacre almost three years ago and of supporting conspiracy theories claiming members of the military allegedly knew about Hamas' plans for the attack but did not inform Netanyahu.

According to opinion polls, neither Netanyahu's camp nor that of his opponents can expect an absolute majority in the election.