Uncensored Free Speech Platform

Pentagon relocates Havana Syndrome team, raising victim concerns
Who benefits from this decision?

EXCLUSIVE — Two Department of War memorandums seen by the Washington Examiner show that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has relocated a “Cross Functional Team” managing the so-called “Havana Syndrome” or “Anomalous Health Incidents” concern. The CFT has been moved from the powerful office of the Undersecretary of War for Policy to the Office of the Undersecretary of War for Research and Engineering. The development follows reporting by the Washington Examiner last December that the War Department was preparing to make just this move.

Numerous sources continue to tell the Washington Examiner that they fear this move will weaken the CFT’s support for victims, its analytical independence, and undermine evidence-based efforts that indicate some AHIs are consequences of Russian intelligence service activity. Specifically, the employment of novel pulsed microwave weapons. CBS News reported last week that Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) wrote to Hegseth, warning that this move would damage efforts to support AHI victims.

As the Washington Examiner noted last year, “Hundreds of subsequent [AHI] incidents have been reported globally by American diplomats, intelligence officers, and military personnel. AHI symptoms include dizziness, auditory disruption, traumatic brain injury, and loss of gait. Some victims have suffered serious disabilities and premature death. There is even circumstantial evidence that former President George W. Bush may have been a victim.”

Following Hegseth’s sign-off on this relocation, the CFT will now fall under the leadership of Undersecretary Emil Michael and the day-to-day leadership of Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of War for Critical Technologies Peter Highnam. While Highnam has appointed himself as the CFT’s new director, he does not have direct experience on this problem and is already managing other high priority research areas. Alongside his “scaled directed energy” focus, Highnam’s office is focused on applied artificial intelligence, hypersonics, quantum and battlefield information dominance, contested logistics, and biomanufacturing. Multiple sources fear the CFT will be deprioritized among these other concerns. Two sources added that Highnam has referred to AHI victims as “damaged.”

In one memo seen by the Washington Examiner, Highnam states that “Effective immediately, the Anomalous Health Incidents Cross Functional Team will transition to the Office of the Undersecretary of War for Research …

'GOP' House candidate admits she's actually a progressive in viral video: 'Telling people the truth'
How is this acceptable?

A video is going viral of a congressional candidate in North Carolina admitting she is truly a "progressive" even though she is running as a Republican. 
"Are you trying to trick people?" Katie Barr, who is running in North Carolina's 14th Congressional District, was asked on a podcast called "The Hometown Holler." 
"If you go on the campaign website, above the fold as they call it, is like, 'I'm not a real Republican.' Like, I am telling people the truth. I knock on a door and say, ‘I am running in the Republican primary, but I am not a Republican, I am a progressive,’" Barr responded. "I can't claim a Democrat anymore."
She added that her goal is not "to pull a fast one," claiming she is just "being dead honest with people about what I would do if I win."
SUSAN COLLINS SHRUGS OFF ATTACKS BY DEMOCRATS AND TRUMP, SAYS MAINE VOTERS ‘DON’T VOTE PARTY LINE'
On Nov. 6, Barr filed paperwork to challenge incumbent Rep. Tim Moore, R-N.C., to represent the state's 14th Congressional District. 
Barr states on her website's home page that she is running as a Republican because it's "the only way to kick these corrupt cowards out of office." She claims that Republicans have "rigged the maps" to ensure they will come out victors "every time."
"The general election has already been decided. So - the primary is the only competition for this job," Barr's website explains.
FOREIGN BILLIONAIRES FUNNEL $2.6B TO US ADVOCACY GROUPS TO INFLUENCE POLICY, WATCHDOG REPORT CLAIMS       
Barr reiterated that she has been "honest" about who she is and how she plans to govern "from the start" in a statement to Fox News Digital.
"Tim Moore is terrible for the voters of district 14," Barr continued. "He’s getting rich off of his position while voters struggle.  And Tim rigged this district to make sure he’d stay in office despite it all. That’s wrong. I’m running so voters have a real choice."
While Barr has faced criticism online over her maneuver, with critics calling the move cheating and describing it as shameful, at least one conservative critic doesn't think it is as big of a deal as some are making it out to be. 
"I hate to burst the outrage bubble, but she's not making a big secret out of this. It's her whole schtick, and it's front and center on her campaign website," said Second Amendment activist Cam Edwards, on X, in response to the viral video of Barr.

Kamran Balayev: London’s justice heritage is one to be defended
Who's accountable for the results?

Kamran Balayev is an international legal and policy expert, business leader, and former London mayoral candidate.

London’s most profitable export is not a product. It is a place.

Each year, international businesses deliberately choose English law, London courts, and London-seated arbitration to resolve disputes that can run into the hundreds of millions, sometimes billions. This is forum shopping at its most sophisticated: parties comparing legal systems as if they were infrastructure, and paying a premium for the one they trust most. For the UK, that premium is both a source of revenue and a form of quiet national influence.

The scale of this choice is striking. The Commercial Court reports that around 75 per cent of its work is international, a proportion that has remained broadly stable. But “international” understates what is happening in practice. An independent review of 262 judgments delivered by the London Commercial Courts between April 2023 and March 2024 found that 68 per cent of litigants were non-UK parties, drawn from 84 different countries; the most internationally diverse year on record.

A national court serving litigants from 84 countries is not merely domestic. It is global legal infrastructure. That global pull rests on something unusually old, and unusually modern in function.

England’s courts have institutional continuity stretching back almost 900 years, to the royal courts that emerged in the late 12th century. English common law began to crystallise in the same period, developing incrementally through judicial reasoning rather than comprehensive codes. Over time, that method produced what commercial parties value most: predictability without rigidity, adaptability without arbitrariness, and judgments that explain not just what the law is, but why.

As Lord Mansfield famously observed in the 18th century: “The law of England is the law of merchants.” That insight remains true. English law became the governing law of choice for cross-border contracts even when neither party was British – and London became the natural venue for resolving disputes arising from them.

This is reflected in the work London attracts. The Commercial Court generally handles claims valued at £8 million and above, while the London Circuit Commercial Court typically deals with disputes in the £1-8 million range. Arbitration amplifies the effect. London remains the world’s leading arbitration seat: the 2025 Queen Mary / White & Case survey ranks it first globally, with 34 per cent preference, ahead of Singapore and Hong Kong. The LCIA alone registered 362 referrals in 2024, 95 per cent international, involving parties from over 100 jurisdictions.

One heavyweight arbitration can generate extraordinary economic activity. Specialist counsel, …

Is Union Power Growing in Mamdani’s New York?
Am I the only one tired of this?

Log In

Email *

Password *

Remember Me

Forgot Your Password?

Log In

New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access

Skip to content Skip to footer

Is Union Power Growing in Mamdani’s New York?

Magazine

Newsletters

Subscribe

Log In

Search

Subscribe

Donate

Magazine

Latest

Archive

Podcasts

Newsletters

Sections

Politics

World

Economy

Culture

Books & the Arts

The Nation

About

Events

Contact Us

Advertise

Current Issue

Society

/

StudentNation

/ February 11, 2026

Is Union Power Growing in Mamdani’s New York?

Following the Mamdani administration’s talks with the CUNY faculty union, three professors have returned to class after losing their jobs for their pro-Palestine activism.

Mohamad Rimawi

Share

Copy Link

Facebook

X (Twitter)

Bluesky Pocket

Email

Ad Policy

A protester at a rally for the “Fired Four” at the City University of New York.

(Professional Staff Congress-Professional Staff Congress-CUNY)

This story was produced for StudentNation, a program of the Nation Fund for Independent Journalism, which is dedicated to highlighting the best of student journalism. For more StudentNation, check out our archive or learn more about the program here. StudentNation is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation. If you’re a student and you have an article idea, please send pitches and questions to [email protected].

In the midst of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, protests erupted across American universities, galvanizing students and faculty alike. The City University of New York was no exception. Last May, the administration called in the New York City Police Department to crack down on a student-led encampment and protest at Brooklyn College, and the following month, four adjunct professors lost their jobs for participating in the demonstration. The group earned the moniker of the CUNY “Fired Four.” Now, after a devoted campaign of grassroots union organizing, three of the professors are finally being reinstated.

The decision comes after Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s administration held talks with the Professional Staff Congress, the union that represents over 30,000 CUNY faculty members, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to speak on it publicly.

James David, president of the PSC, lauded the news as a “major victory” but cautioned that it is “not complete” in a press release on January 26. “It is important both in terms of restoring these harmed colleagues to their jobs and repudiating the administration’s callous disregard for the academic judgment of faculty, for First Amendment protected speech, and for academic freedom.”

It is unclear if Mamdani’s intervention is what ultimately moved CUNY. But the professors’ reinstatement, long-advocated for by the PSC, points to the resurgence of union power in the city. “It’s a reminder of how crucial it is, especially right now in this time with resurgent McCarthyism and fascist repression, to be part of a union,” said Corinna Mullin, the only one of the Fired Four who has come forward publicly. “And not just any union, a fighting union and a …

I Fled the US to Escape the Security State. Instead, It Followed Me.
Who's accountable for the results?

Log In

Email *

Password *

Remember Me

Forgot Your Password?

Log In

New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access

Skip to content Skip to footer

I Fled the US to Escape the Security State. Instead, It Followed Me.

Magazine

Newsletters

Subscribe

Log In

Search

Subscribe

Donate

Magazine

Latest

Archive

Podcasts

Newsletters

Sections

Politics

World

Economy

Culture

Books & the Arts

The Nation

About

Events

Contact Us

Advertise

Current Issue

Activism

/ February 11, 2026

I Fled the US to Escape the Security State. Instead, It Followed Me.

My recent detention at Heathrow shows that the architecture of state repression knows no borders.

Momodou Taal

Share

Copy Link

Facebook

X (Twitter)

Bluesky Pocket

Email

Ad Policy

Momodou Taal at a pro-Palestinian encampment at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY, Thursday, April 25, 2024.
(Heather Ainsworth / AP)

After I was forced to leave the United States, I thought that my days of being targeted by government security agencies were over. I couldn’t have been more wrong.

Just before 9 pm on Wednesday, January 21, I landed at the British Airways terminal at London’s Heathrow Airport. I was flying in from Cairo for what was my fourth visit since I left the US. I was headed to Birmingham. It hadn’t even been a year since I had been forced to leave the United States after sustained political pressure connected to my activism in support of Palestine. I am a British citizen; I assumed that returning to the UK, my “home,” would mean stepping outside the reach of the security state. Instead, within minutes of landing at Heathrow, I found myself back inside it.

I was met immediately after stepping off the plane by three officers in civilian clothing. I hadn’t even reached customs yet. They asked my name and took my passport from me. When I asked why I was being stopped, one of them said bluntly, “You’re being detained under Britain’s terrorism laws.” He went on to explain that, under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, I had no right to remain silent, and that refusing to answer questions could itself lead to a minimum three-month prison sentence.

The irony was hard to miss. I was evidently being stopped for using my voice, and in the moment I most wanted to remain silent, it was the one thing I couldn’t do.

Current Issue

March 2026 Issue

I was escorted to a processing facility where my phone and laptop were taken, my bags searched, and my body examined. Officers took my fingerprints and palm prints, swabbed my DNA, and photographed me from every angle. One of them told me I could technically refuse, but added that a senior officer could compel compliance at a police station if I did not cooperate. Exhausted from travel and aware of how little choice I really had, I assented.

They offered me a phone call. When they rang a friend, they would say only that I was “safe” but “being detained,” refusing to explain why. The unknown is what caused great anxiety to my friends and family. What was meant to reassure instead caused panic, leaving people close to me imagining the worst while I waited alone in a small, windowless room.

When the questioning …

What Peter Thiel Saw in Jeffrey Epstein
Who's accountable for the results?

Log In

Email *

Password *

Remember Me

Forgot Your Password?

Log In

New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access

Skip to content Skip to footer

What Peter Thiel Saw in Jeffrey Epstein

Magazine

Newsletters

Subscribe

Log In

Search

Subscribe

Donate

Magazine

Latest

Archive

Podcasts

Newsletters

Sections

Politics

World

Economy

Culture

Books & the Arts

The Nation

About

Events

Contact Us

Advertise

Current Issue

Economy

/ February 11, 2026

What Peter Thiel Saw in Jeffrey Epstein

In the extensive correspondence between the Silicon Valley venture capitalist and the late pedophile, both men expressed a deep aversion to democracy.

David Futrelle

Share

Copy Link

Facebook

X (Twitter)

Bluesky Pocket

Email

Ad Policy

Peter Thiel brandishes $100 bills at the Bitcoin 2022 conference.
(Eva Marie Uzcategui / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

It’s easy enough to understand the appeal of Jeffrey Epstein to some in the late pedophile’s vast circle of friends and quasi-friends. The scientists whom Epstein collected like so many Beanie Babies were charmed less by his supposedly witty repartee than by his money; some no doubt were also more titillated than horrified by the stories of his private life. Others in his circle, like Donald Trump and Woody Allen, shared his appreciation for women and not-yet women “on the younger side,” as Trump put it in a now-infamous New York magazine profile of his skeevy partying buddy.

But at first glance, it seems harder to explain the five-year friendship of Epstein and tech investor extraordinaire Peter Thiel, which began in 2014, long after Epstein’s pedophilic tendencies were widely known. Still, Thiel is all over the Epstein files; the two exchanged more than 2,000 messages over the years and met on multiple occasions. Epstein would ultimately invest some $40 million in venture capital funds managed by Valar Ventures, a firm cofounded by Thiel.

You might think that Thiel, who fancies himself a sort of philosopher king of the tech set, would find himself irritated by Epstein’s intellectual playacting. Epstein surrounded himself with academics in hopes that some of their intellectual glamor would stick to him. But what really interested him wasn’t ideas; it was sex, and he was known to regularly interrupt the conversations of his pet scientists with the query “What does that got to do with pussy?” (Needless to say, this is not a question Thiel, the first uncloseted gay speaker at a Republican National Convention, spends much time pondering.)

Thiel, whatever his deficiencies as a thinker, at least does the reading. He regularly pauses his ongoing pursuit of money to issue long and earnest disquisitions on the state of the world filled with learned references to dark philosophers like Leo Strauss and Carl Schmitt, the infamous Nazi apologist who’s undergoing a troubling revival on the groyper-infested MAGA right.

As their email exchanges make plain, Epstein and Thiel shared many of the same obsessions. Both had a certain disdain for the quotidian responsibilities that come with living in a society, like paying taxes: Epstein offered his clients advice on tax …

Vance warns Iran that 'another option on the table' if nuclear deal not reached
Is this competence or optics?

Vice President JD Vance warned Iran that there is "another option on the table" if the regime does not make a nuclear deal with the U.S.
Vance made the statement while speaking to reporters before boarding Air Force Two on Tuesday. A reporter referenced President Donald Trump's musings about potentially deploying a second aircraft carrier strike group to the Middle East.
"How confident are you in going the diplomatic route? Do you think that is still going to be successful or are we leaning more towards a military strike?" the reporter asked.
"The president has told his entire senior team that we should be trying to cut a deal that ensures the Iranians don't have nuclear weapons," Vance responded.
TRUMP, NETANYAHU TO MEET AT WHITE HOUSE IN HIGH-STAKES TALKS ON IRAN, GAZA PLAN
"But if we can't cut that deal, then there's another option on the table. So I think the president is going to continue to preserve his options. He's going to have a lot of options because we have the most powerful military in the world. But until the president tells us to stop, we're going to engage in these conversations and try to reach a good outcome through negotiation," he continued.
Vance went on to downplay pushes for regime change in Iran, saying a removal of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's regime would be up to "the Iranian people."
He said the Trump administration's only focus is preventing the current Iranian regime from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
NIKKI HALEY URGES TRUMP TO MAKE IRAN ACTION A 'LEGACY-DEFINING MOMENT' BEFORE LEAVING OFFICE
Vance's comments come a day before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to meet with Trump at the White House on Wednesday, with Iran expected to take center stage in the meeting.
In a phone interview with Axios, the president said Tehran "very much wants to reach a deal," but warned, "Either we make a deal, or we’ll have to do something very tough — like last time."
IRAN PUSHES FOR FRIDAY NUCLEAR TALKS IN OMAN AMID RISING TENSIONS WITH US FORCES: SOURCE
Netanyahu, speaking before departing Israel for Washington, said he intends to present Israel’s position. 
"I will present to the president our concept regarding the principles of the negotiations — the essential principles that are important not only to Israel but to anyone who wants peace and security in the Middle East," he told reporters.
U.S. and Iranian officials resumed talks in Oman this week for the first time since last summer’s 12-day war. The United States continues to maintain a significant military presence in the Gulf, a posture widely viewed as both deterrence and …

Trump’s “Board of Peace” Is Part of a Sordid Anti-Palestinian History
This isn't complicated—it's willpower.

Log In

Email *

Password *

Remember Me

Forgot Your Password?

Log In

New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access

Skip to content Skip to footer

Trump’s “Board of Peace” Is Part of a Sordid Anti-Palestinian History

Magazine

Newsletters

Subscribe

Log In

Search

Subscribe

Donate

Magazine

Latest

Archive

Podcasts

Newsletters

Sections

Politics

World

Economy

Culture

Books & the Arts

The Nation

About

Events

Contact Us

Advertise

Current Issue

World

/ February 11, 2026

Trump’s “Board of Peace” Is Part of a Sordid Anti-Palestinian History

The refusal of those who have held power over Palestine to acknowledge the grievances and aspirations of its indigenous Arab people isn’t new.

James Zogby

Share

Copy Link

Facebook

X (Twitter)

Bluesky Pocket

Email

Ad Policy

Donald Trump at the “Board of Peace” meeting during the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22, 2026.
(Fabrice Coffrini / AFP via Getty Images)

When President Donald Trump convened his so-called Board of Peace in Davos, Switzerland, a key item on the agenda was to endorse his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s extravagant (and, I might add, detached from reality) plan for a “New Gaza.” The rendering of Kushner’s scheme shows it to be more of a luxury resort for wealthy tourists than the foundation of a just future for the Palestinian victims of Israel’s genocide. But since the raison d’être of the Board of Peace was supposed to be dealing with the aftermath of Israel’s war on Gaza, the conversation, by necessity, had to address the needs of hundreds of thousands of now-homeless Palestinians.

Thus, Kushner presented a proposal for a model Palestinian community—the “New Rafah”—he intends to build to house Palestinians in Gaza. The plans for this New Rafah have been circulated since the meeting. Everything is covered: how Gaza’s economy will run, how its educational and health systems will create a new generation of hale and non-ideological Palestinians, and how the “new cities” will be laid out, function, and be governed. And everything has been calculated down to how many teachers, doctors, judges, religious leaders, and laborers will be needed per capita in each community.

If Kushner were preparing an owner’s manual for a complex piece of machinery or the instructions for installing and operating new software, this plan might seem flawless. But Palestine isn’t a video game, and Palestinians are human beings, not Lego pieces to be assembled, as per the instructions. Like every other people on earth, Palestinians have emotional ties to their homes and families, and memories of the personal and collective injustices they have endured. This failure to consider the fullness of Palestinian humanity is the fatal flaw that will either stop the New Rafah before it begins or cause it to unravel soon afterward.

The refusal of those who have held power over Palestine to acknowledge the grievances and aspirations of its indigenous Arab people isn’t new. In fact, it has defined their history.

For example, in 1919, when the British Lord Balfour was presented with the findings of the US-commissioned survey of Arab …

Discussion Thread: Congressional Sessions, Hearings, and News Conferences on February 11th, 2026
This is performative politics again.

Topline of Today's Notable Events:
Before the US House Judiciary Committee: Attorney General Pam Bondi is scheduled to testify on a range of subjects starting at 10 a.m. Eastern.

On the floor of the US House: After a procedural vote failed in the House Tuesday night (217 to 214), votes to block various Trump-imposed tariffs are expected to take place as early as today's House session, scheduled to start at 11 a.m. Eastern. These votes are expected to take place while, per C-SPAN, "The House will consider the SAVE America Act, which requires proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote and photo identification to vote in federal elections."

In the US Senate: Per C-SPAN, "The Senate will continue work on Homeland Security Department funding legislation. Current DHS funding is set to expire Friday at midnight." This session is scheduled to start at 2 p.m. Eastern.

News and Analysis
Politico: GOP revolt sinks effort to block votes on Trump’s tariffs

Roll Call: Bondi to face criticism over Epstein disclosure law at House hearing

NBC: Backlash to Trump emboldens Democrats on DHS and ICE as partial shutdown looms

Live Updates
Text-based live update pages are being maintained by the following outlets: AP, NBC, The Guardian, Huffington Post, and The New York Times.
Where to Watch
All start times below are in US Eastern.
C-SPAN: Democratic Women's Caucus News Conference on Epstein Files (9 a.m.)

C-SPAN: Attorney General Pam Bondi Testifies Before House Judiciary Committee (10 a.m.) (See also this stream from the PBS NewsHour if YouTube is you prefer YouTube.).

C-SPAN: Deputy Secret Service Dir. & Other Federal Officials Testify on Shutdown Impact on DHS Funding (10 a.m.)

C-SPAN: U.S. House of Representatives - February 11, 2026 (11 a.m.)

C-SPAN: Senate Session - February 11, 2026 (2 p.m.)

C-SPAN: High-Ranking Military Officials Testify on Quality of Life (3 p.m.)

The three House Republicans who bucked Trump on tariffs
This is performative politics again.

A House GOP bid to block future votes on President Donald Trump’s tariffs until the end of July failed on Tuesday after three House Republicans joined Democrats in blocking the procedural measure.

Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY), Don Bacon (R-NE), and Kevin Kiley (R-CA) each bucked the president on his emergency tariffs, bringing the final vote to 217-214.

The procedural rule, if passed, would have kept the House from striking down any tariff policy for the next five to six months.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) argued any such vote should wait until the Supreme Court weighs in on Trump’s national emergency declaration used to justify his tariffs. Given the case’s significance, a decision likely won’t come down until the end of June or the beginning of July.

Massie and Bacon have been particularly outspoken about tariffs as they relate to Congress’s constitutional authority over the matter.

A frequent critic of Trump, Massie argued Congress is required under federal law to allow a floor vote on national emergencies within 15 days of being declared by the president. Johnson’s measure would have altered the definition of a single legislative day to last several months.

“The vote tonight was to subvert the Constitution and the 1976 National Emergencies Act by literally saying a day is not a day,” Massie wrote on X.

Explaining his vote against the rule, Bacon said tariffs have been a “net negative” for the economy that significantly taxes American consumers, manufacturers, and farmers.

“Article I of the Constitution places authority over taxes and tariffs with Congress for a reason, but for too long, we have handed that authority to the executive branch,” Bacon posted on X. “It’s time for Congress to reclaim that responsibility. I also oppose using the rules votes to legislate. I want the debate and the right to vote on tariffs.”

Meanwhile, Kiley was largely opposed to the rule because the tariff provision was included in an otherwise unrelated bill.

“I think that, you know, it doesn’t really make sense to put something on the floor that’s not going to pass,” Kiley said, per Roll Call. “A rule is meant to bring a bill to the floor, set the parameters for debate. It’s not meant to smuggle in unrelated provisions that expand the power of leadership at the expense of our members.”

After the rule failed, the House Rules Committee convened to exclude the tariff language. The rule was intended to start a debate on three unrelated bills.

Last year, House …