A European naval force is en route to help a ship that was hijacked by pirates off the coast of Somalia, as another vessel narrowly escaped a similar attack, with piracy surging again in the region.
The European Union’s Operation Atalanta said on Friday that its assets were “close” to the Hellas Aphrodite, a Malta-flagged tanker which was seized by pirates the previous day.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
The attackers used machineguns and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) to board the vessel.
In its statement on Friday, Operation Atalanta said it was “ready to take the appropriate action and to respond respectively to this event”.
The rescue attempt comes amid fears for the safety of the 24 mariners on board the Hellas Aphrodite, which was carrying gasoline from India to South Africa when it came under attack.
Tracking data showed that the ship was more than 1,000km (620 miles) off the Somali coast, according to The Associated Press news agency.
The private security firm Ambrey said Thursday’s assault appeared to have been carried out by the same group of Somali pirates who recently captured an Iranian fishing boat, which they have subsequently been using as a base for their operations.
As the EU naval force neared the Hellas Aphrodite on Friday, the British military’s UK Maritime Trade Operations centre (UKMTO) said another vessel had been unsuccessfully targeted by pirates on Friday.
In an alert published on X, UKMTO, which urged ships in the area to “transit with caution”, said the captain of a liquified natural gas tanker reported a boat approaching its stern, 528 nautical miles (equivalent to about 980km) southeast of Eyl, Somalia.
“The small craft fired small arms and RPGs towards the vessel,” it said, noting that the larger ship escaped by increasing its speed.
After piracy off the Somali coast peaked in 2011 with 237 attacks, the threat receded as a result of international naval patrols and the strengthening of the Somali government.
When Liberia announced late last month that it would temporarily host Salvadoran national Kilmar Armando Abrego García on “humanitarian grounds” if he were deported by the Trump administration for a second time, the West African country was broadcasting its unique history as a haven for Black migrants fleeing racism and economic servitude in the United States.
According to the Liberian government, the decision to welcome Abrego García, who was unlawfully deported from the United States in March only to return under a court injunction in June, follows its “longstanding tradition of offering refuge to those in need”.
Liberia was once a semi-autonomous territory funded in part by the Washington, DC-based American Colonisation Society (ACS) comprising powerful white men who viewed free Blacks as a threat to slavery and saw emigration (deportation) as the only solution to dispose of them. Its founders – repatriates from the US and Caribbean who joined recaptives (Africans rescued aboard illegal slave ships) from the Congo River basin – rebuffed ACS largesse and declared the country independent in 1847.
The free and formerly enslaved Blacks who founded Liberia were not unlike Abrego García, who has become an international symbol of the dangers of presidential overreach. They, too, were pawns in white America’s bid to “make America white again” – as if it ever were just white – through the framing of Black and brown bodies as undesirable, threatening and therefore disposable.
But the similarities end there. America once deported migrants of colour to Liberia, but not like this.
Although Trump’s impetus for mass expulsions – anti-migrant racism – aligns with the anti-Black bigotry of ACS agents who had deportationist sensibilities, Black people who opted to settle in Liberia did so primarily of their own volition. In fact, many paid for their emigration to West Africa in the 19th century.
America’s proposed deportation of Abrego García to Liberia in the 21st century would be neither voluntary nor defensible, especially since he has explicitly requested relocation to Costa Rica instead. His high-profile case represents a litmus test for upholding due process and respecting human rights under Trump-era MAGA mania. By agreeing to host Abrego García, Liberia has not only subjected itself to legal wrangling but also compromised its humanitarian credibility despite making vague assurances about consulting “relevant national and international stakeholders”.
It is the latest country in Africa – a continent previously described in pejorative terms by Trump – to cave in to the first felon-in-chief’s coercive tactics. The irony is that, as a convict himself, Trump, too, would be deported if he were a migrant of colour.
Africa a ‘dumping ground’ for deportees from America
The vast majority of countries under pressure to receive deportees from America are African. Eight men arrived in South Sudan in July after the majority-conservative US Supreme Court authorised their expulsion. As weeks of court disputes ensued thousands of miles away, nationals of Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, South Sudan and Vietnam were held under American military guard in a converted shipping container in Djibouti.
Flights carrying other Black and brown deportees to Africa have followed in quick succession. In mid-July, after “months of robust high-level engagements”, five convicts from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen were banished to the small, landlocked kingdom of Eswatini in Southern Africa. Shortly after, in mid-August, seven deportees arrived in the post-genocide central African country of Rwanda, which has in recent years positioned itself as an outpost for migrants expelled from Euro-America.
Deportation to third countries in Africa – or anywhere else for that matter – without due process is clearly a violation of human rights, even if the United States justifies ridding itself of alleged criminals by any means. Before enlisting Liberia’s cooperation most recently, the White House had been aggressively courting countries as diverse as Uganda, Libya, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau and Mauritania to host Abrego García. All of them are in Africa, and heads of state from the latter three countries attended Trump’s US-Africa summit held in July.
It appears the carrot of possibly benefiting from American commercial diplomacy followed the stick of accepting its deportees. But not all countries in Africa have complied when urged to do so. For instance, Nigeria – considered West Africa’s regional powerhouse – refused to kowtow to Trump, citing national security concerns. If a powerful ally can snub Washington’s request, why would its continental neighbours acquiesce?
What’s in it for Liberia – and Africa?
Although negotiations between the Trump administration and African governments have been largely shrouded in secrecy, countries that opt to take in deportees surely must be leveraging this diplomatically to secure concessions of their own, including the removal of US visa bans, the elimination of punishing tariffs, and the extraction of critical minerals for profit to power American technology ambitions.
Liberia appears to have been rewarded for its compliance. Following bilateral meetings held in October between American Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Liberian Foreign Minister Sara Beysolow Nyanti, Washington announced that, effectively immediately, it would extend the validity of certain non-immigrant visas issued to Liberians from one to three years with multiple entries permitted. This was a privilege Monrovia granted American citizens, but reciprocal arrangements were halted during Liberia’s protracted armed conflict from 1989 to 2003. Since Liberia has one of the highest US visa rejection rates in the world, the new extension policy may have been an allowance for agreeing to host Abrego García.
Washington’s inclusion of Monrovia in the much-touted US-Africa summit held this July may have been prompted by Liberia’s signing of a concession and access agreement with American mineral exploration company Ivanhoe Atlantic. Pending legislative approval, the 1.8 billion-dollar agreement would enable Ivanhoe to export Guinea’s iron ore using Liberia’s rail corridor. US companies have a chequered history in Liberia, though, so the concession has generated worthy speculation about its feasibility.
Despite the faulty assumption that Liberia has a “special relationship” with the United States, America’s contempt for the West African nation knows no bounds. The US was one of the last countries to recognise Liberia’s independence – in 1862. American companies Firestone and LAMCO pillaged Liberia’s rubber and iron ore for decades with the complicity of local elites. US Assistant Secretary of State Herman Cohen dismissed Liberia as being of “no strategic interest” when war ravaged the country in the 1990s. And Trump asked Liberia’s President Joseph Boakai where he learned to speak “such good English” during a cringeworthy White House exchange in July.
Washington’s recent proposal to deport Abrego García to Monrovia is the latest blunder in US-Liberia relations.
If Trump were alive in the 1800s, he probably would have found affinity with deportationists of the American Colonisation Society. But we’re no longer in the 19th century. As a country that “historically extended protection and goodwill to individuals and communities needing assistance”, Liberia would do well to remember that it is a sovereign nation whose policy decisions must not be shaped by the whims of racist white men.
Amid accusations of genocide, Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces say they have agreed to a humanitarian pause in the war with the country’s army. The group took over the city of el-Fasher in Darfur on October 26, after a devastating 19-month siege. Sudan’s army has so far not responded to the truce proposal.
Who: Tottenham Hotspur vs Manchester United What: English Premier League Where: Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, London When: Saturday at 12:30pm (12:30 GMT) How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 09:30 GMT in advance of our live text commentary stream.
The weekend’s Premier League action begins in north London where sixth-placed Tottenham Hotspur welcome eighth-placed Manchester United.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Provisional second place in the table is up for grabs in a grudge game for Ruben Amorim’s United side after Spurs beat them 1-0 in last season’s Europa League final to prevent the Red Devils from playing in the Champions League this season.
While the hosts are seeking to bounce back from a home defeat by Chelsea last weekend, the visitors are unbeaten in their last four Premier League matches – a sequence that includes a 2-1 win over champions and archrivals Liverpool, as well as last weekend’s battling 2-2 draw away at Nottingham Forest.
Frank ‘happy’ with Spurs response to Chelsea defeat
Following an insipid defeat to Chelsea last weekend, Spurs have now lost three Premier League games at home this season. Their record at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium over the last 12 months is even worse – they have won just four out of 20 home league games, drawing four and losing 12.
Tottenham did at least get a boost in midweek as Spurs thrashed Copenhagen 4-0 at home to record their biggest win since manager Thomas Frank took charge.
Frank was reluctant to point to the victory over a team from his native Denmark as a turning point after a difficult spell of one win in five, but it lifts the mood before Saturday’s visit from Manchester United.
“We talk a lot about that bounce-back mentality because in life and football there will be setbacks,” he said.
“Every team will experience that and it’s how we react to that to come out after a bad game or a bad spell and come back to it. That’s part of a good team. I’m very happy with the response the players came with.”
Van de Ven makes amends with wonder goal
Micky van de Ven got back in favour with Frank as the Tottenham defender’s stunning solo goal during the rout of Copenhagen drew comparisons to Lionel Messi.
Van de Ven and Djed Spence were forced to apologise to Tottenham boss Frank this week after they ignored his plea to applaud fans following Saturday’s loss to Chelsea.
But Van de Ven retained his place in the starting lineup and produced a moment of magic, running over half the length of the pitch before delivering a clinical finish to score.
“It seems like we had Lionel Messi turned into Micky van de Ven, roaring down from his own goal all the way to the other end and scored a fantastic goal,” Frank said.
“I think he’s our top scorer in all competitions, so he can keep going.”
Van de Ven celebrates after scoring Tottenham’s third goal against FC Copenhagen on Tuesday [AFP]
‘We are a better team’
United will not need motivation against Spurs, having lost all four games they played against Tottenham last season.
When asked how United had changed since the Europa League final, Amorim replied: “First of all, the characteristics of the players. So, we are a better team, we play better, we understand the game better. I think we are more confident.
“We reached that final confident that we could win because we were doing well in Europe, but in this moment we play with a different confidence.
“We manage the moments of the game better. But if you remember that game, they have that shot on the goal, they won the game.
“So, I expect a different game, that we can play better, but also to have a little bit luck to help us to win the game.”
Amorim celebrates after United beat Brighton last month [Phil Noble/Reuters]
Amorim hits back at Ronaldo criticism
Cristiano Ronaldo, who won eight trophies at United, said this week that United were “not in a good path” after a wretched season in which the Red Devils finished 15th, and warned that Amorim was “not going to do miracles” at Old Trafford.
Amorim, who took over from Erik ten Hag in November 2024, hit back by urging fans and pundits alike to look forward rather than dwell on the past.
“Of course, he has a huge impact in everything he said,” Amorim said on Thursday.
“What we need to focus [on] is in the future. We know that we as a club made a lot of mistakes in the past, but we are trying to change that. So let’s not focus on what happened. Let’s focus [on] what we are doing now.
“We are changing a lot of things in the structure, the way we do things, the way we want the players to behave. We are doing that and we are improving.”
Head-to-head
The two clubs have faced each other 204 times, with United winning 96 of those games, Tottenham winning 57 and 51 ending as draws.
Despite doing the league double over Man United last season, Spurs have only won four of their last 12 Premier League games against the Red Devils, with three of their last five victories coming at Old Trafford.
As well as beating United 1-0 in the Europa League final last season, Spurs also won a wild League Cup quarterfinal 4-3 at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.
The last time United beat Spurs was back in October 2022, when goals from Fred and Bruno Fernandes gave the Red Devils a 2-0 win at Old Trafford.
Tottenham Hotspur’s team news
Spurs could be missing as many as 10 players for United’s visit, with James Maddison, Dejan Kulusevski, Dominic Solanke, Radu Dragusin, Yves Bissouma, Ben Davies, Archie Gray and Kota Takai all ruled out through injury.
Winger Mohammed Kudus is a doubt after he missed the win over Copenhagen with a knock, potentially opening the way for Brennan Johnson to start on the right.
Midfielder Lucas Bergvall is unlikely to feature due to concussion protocols following a blow to the head that forced his substitution against Chelsea last weekend.
Tottenham’s predicted starting lineup
Vicario; Porro, Romero, Van de Ven, Spence; Bentancur, Palhinha, Sarr; Johnson, Richarlison, Simons
Manchester United’s early team news
United’s only reported injury concern is with centre back Lisandro Martinez, who has returned to training after being sidelined since February with a knee injury but is still regaining full fitness.
Harry Maguire returned to the bench for United’s 2-2 draw at Nottingham Forest last weekend after recovering from a knock, so Amorim could recall the defender or stick with Leny Yoro in the back three.
Dozens of people have been rushed to hospital after an explosion at a mosque in a school complex during Friday prayers in the Indonesian capital Jakarta.
Almost since PolitiFact’s 2007 founding, it has been covering Representative Nancy Pelosi, who announced her retirement, effective in January 2027.
We first fact-checked the former House speaker on August 25, 2008, when she characterised then-presidential candidate Barack Obama as a state legislator with a history of bipartisanship, a claim we rated Half True. In all, we have rated Pelosi’s statements 56 times on Truth-O-Meter, with a median rating of Half True.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Political analysts consider Pelosi, 85, one of the most effective legislative leaders in recent US history. With small margins, Pelosi was mostly able to keep her caucus united behind legislative goals on healthcare, the environment and other issues.
Her ability to raise money for Democrats was one reason she remained as minority leader when she lost her speaker’s gavel after the 2010 midterms and ascended again to speaker in 2018, when the Democrats won the majority. Pelosi lost the speakership when the GOP won the chamber in 2022. She left her leadership position but remained as a rank-and-file member.
Pelosi was known for her effectiveness outside the public eye – in Capitol cloakrooms and private dinners. Republicans targeted her sometimes awkward rhetorical style in front of television cameras, combined with her representation of one of the nation’s most liberal districts, in San Francisco.
On the internet, Pelosi has been falsely accused of being drunk (many, many times); of spending extravagantly on her hair; of falling; of crying in public; of being arrested; of palling around with drug kingpin El Chapo; of calling Americans stupid; of being expelled from the House; of being divorced by her husband; of being arrested and disappeared by US marshals; of committing treason; and of being executed.
When a hammer-wielding intruder attacked her husband, Paul, in their home in 2022, conspiracy theories flourished, fanned by President Donald Trump and others, including that the entire episode was a “false flag” event.
Here’s a rundown of memorable Pelosi moments in recent fact-checking history.
Pelosi v Trump: Ripped speech, policy fights, January 6
Pelosi and Trump have a long-running rhetorical feud. When a reporter asked Trump about Pelosi’s retirement announcement hours after she made it, Trump called her “an evil woman”.
In 2018, Trump falsely said Pelosi “came out in favour of MS-13”, the criminal gang. Pelosi had criticised Trump for using the term “animals” during an immigration meeting, but she hadn’t said anything positive about MS-13.
In 2020, after Pelosi dramatically ripped up a paper copy of Trump’s State of the Union address from her seat behind the president, Trump said: “I thought it was a terrible thing when she ripped up the speech. First of all, it’s an official document. You’re not allowed. It’s illegal what she did. She broke the law.”
We rated that False. Pelosi ripped up her own duplicate copy of Trump’s address, not the official version sent to the National Archives under the Presidential Records Act, so it would not have been illegal to destroy it.
Pelosi earned a Mostly True for saying in 2017 that Trump’s first-term tax bill “would have cut his taxes by $30 million in 2005”.
But she earned a False in 2020 for saying Trump is “morbidly obese”. Trump had told reporters that he was taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19, an approach that mainstream doctors called dubious; she said it was not a sound idea for someone “in his, shall we say, weight group”. Even if Trump was fudging his official height and weight, he would have needed to be substantially heavier to meet a level of morbid obesity.
The pair’s most bitter exchanges revolved around January 6, 2021, the day Trump supporters stormed the Capitol as Congress formally counted the 2020 electoral results. Rioters entered Pelosi’s office and called for her as they marched through the Capitol.
Trump has repeatedly said he requested “10,000 National Guardsmen” to provide security at his supporters’ January 6, 2021, rally, but that Pelosi “rejected it”. As early as February 28, 2021, we rated that False. In subsequent fact-checks, we found no new information to support Trump’s assertion about Pelosi and National Guard troops.
Pelosi played a central role in landmark healthcare legislation
One of her biggest policy legacies is the enactment of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, which was Obama’s top policy priority in 2009. The bill dominated the early political debate of his presidency, and Pelosi, as speaker, had a key role in securing Democratic support for Obama’s vision.
Pelosi accurately discussed some policy differences between Democratic and Republican healthcare bills, such as the Democratic proposals’ protection for people with a preexisting condition.
But we also found truth in one Republican criticism involving the bill – that Pelosi had said Democrats “have to pass their terrible healthcare bill so that the American people can actually find out what’s in it”. That was close to what Pelosi really said, though that Republican Party of Texas’s synopsis ignored her comments about why the legislation made her proud.
Pelosi was a star fundraiser, but we found one of her money claims misleading
Between 2000 and 2024, Pelosi raised $86.6m for her campaign committee and an additional $51m for her leadership political action committee, according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit that tracks campaign finance information.
Despite her fundraising prowess, she exaggerated in 2017 when describing Wall Street money raised by Republicans and Democrats. She said: “Wall Street comes out en masse with its money against House Democrats every election.” But she had cherry-picked three campaign cycles in which Republicans held the House majority while ignoring election cycles in which the Democrats were in control, including two in which Pelosi was speaker. We rated the statement Mostly False.
Pelosi’s False statements
Pelosi’s four False ratings included:
Her 2010 blog post saying that then-House Minority Leader John Boehner “admits ‘we are not going to be any different than we’ve been’” by returning to “the same failed economic policies” that “wrecked our economy”. We found that Boehner had been talking specifically about social issues, not the economy, and that the video clip she shared removed that context from Boehner’s statement.
Her decision in 2011 to promote a chart showing Obama had “increased the debt” by 16 percent, compared with his predecessor, President George W Bush, who had increased it by 115 percent. The chart included a major calculation error, ignored different lengths of presidential tenure and cherry-picked the most favourable measure.
Her 2016 claim that until shortly before her statement, China and Russia had “never voted with us at the UN on any sanctions on Iran”. We found eight Security Council resolutions over a decade threatening, imposing or continuing sanctions against Iran in which Russia and China approved.
Her 2019 statement that a voter-roll purge in Wisconsin would mean that more than 200,000 registered Wisconsin voters would be prohibited from voting. We found that a purge could have potentially removed more than 200,000 people from the voting rolls, but they would not be “prohibited” from voting; anyone could re-register, including on Election Day.
That one time we fact-checked Pelosi in real time
We once fact-checked Pelosi in person, on television, in real time. And this time, it wasn’t on policy.
In 2018, this reporter was president of the Washington Press Club Foundation, which mounts an annual black-tie congressional dinner. Pelosi has been a frequent guest speaker at the event, and that year, she began her remarks by thanking members of the head table, including “President Louis Jacobson of FactCheck.org”.
I interrupted her. “Actually, PolitiFact.” As the audience laughed, Pelosi quickly pivoted.
