SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Visitors look at Mount Rushmore National Monument on July 02, 2020 near Keystone, South Dakota. President Donald Trump is expected to visit the monument and speak before the start of a fireworks display on July 3. (Photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images)
President Donald Trump's planned July 3 fireworks ceremony at Mount Rushmore is facing sustained criticism over its risks to public health and the environment and is being rebuked as "an attack on Indigenous people."
A crowd of 7,500 people is estimated for the gathering at the South Dakota mountain carving, where public health guidelines to contain the coronavirus won't be enforced.
"We told those folks that have concerns that they can stay home, but those who want to come and join us, we'll be giving out free face masks if they choose to wear one," Republican South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem told Fox News Monday. "But we won't be social distancing."
Costs for the pyrotechnics will be footed by state taxpayers.
Among the voices in the chorus of criticism over the event comes from the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE), with the group citing the risk of wildfires and spread of Covid-19.
"Trump is dead set on having his fireworks show in the midst of high fire danger and the pandemic that is surging across the country," Michael Beasley of FUSEE said in a Thursday statement. "This is just another example of how frontline workers and first responders--in this case wildland firefighters--are treated like expendable props for the amusement of Donald Trump and his fans."
"While communities across the country have rightly and responsibly cancelled their local fireworks shows in order to reduce the spread of Covid-19 and to prevent wildfire ignitions, Trump arrogantly forges ahead with his phony display of patriotism that will needlessly put firefighters and citizens at extra risk," added Beasley. "The best thing we can hope for is that it rains on Trump's charade."
Phil Francis, chair of the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, expressed similar concern, calling the event "ill-advised and unsafe, particularly as we continue to grapple with the ongoing impacts of Covid-19."
"The National Park Service decided years ago to end this program for very good reasons," said Francis, pointing to "enormous and detrimental impacts on employees and routine operations that affected the overall quality of visits prior to, during, and after the event."
"There was measurable pollution of groundwater which has gradually been improving since the cessation of the event in 2009," he added. "Abnormally dry conditions in the Black Hills means that the risk of a devastating and expensive wildfire is even higher than usual."
Yet the National Park Service appears to have downplayed the risks.
As Adam Federman reported last week for Sierra Magazine and Type Investigations, the effects on the pandemic were left out entirely and safety risks removed from final drafts of the NPS environmental analysis of the event. From Federman's reporting:
According to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, two earlier drafts of the environmental analysis for the event, from December 2019 and January 2020, included a four-page section on "human health and safety." But in the final version, which was released in February and approved in April, that section had been removed from the document--a potential violation of federal law that could leave the department legally vulnerable.
Among the draft recommendations were that the crowd size be limited to 2,000. "None of these concerns or recommendations are included in the final environmental assessment." Further, Federman wrote,
The drafts noted that "conditions have steadily deteriorated" across the Black Hills National Forest and that a major fire would "severely impact" the ecology of the region, including surface vegetation and old-growth trees.
That text does not appear in the final version of the assessment. Instead, the assessment concludes that a fireworks display "would contribute minimally to wildfire risk" in the area, if mitigation measures, such as prescribed burns and tree thinning, are followed.
Tribal leaders, who've long denounced the monument in and of itself as an homage to racist federal policies--including theft of the land Mt. Rushmore sits on--also voiced sharp concern over Trump's visit to the site.
Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Nation Harold Frazier said he'd happily remove the monument on his own, as "Lakota see the faces of the men who lied, cheated, and murdered innocent people whose only crime was living on the land they wanted to steal." And Oglala Sioux president Julian Bear Runner said Trump "doesn't have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time," and warned that the event is "going to cause an uproar."
The Indigenous Environmental Network released a statement Friday in solidarity with tribal leaders calling for removal of the monument and expressing outrage over the presidential event.
"President Trump's Fourth of July visit to Mt. Rushmore is a continuation of Indigenous resilience and history being erased from national dialogues. This spectacle is nothing more than a reminder that settler colonialism is alive and well," said the network.
"Make no mistake, this visit is an attack on Indigenous people," wrote Nick Tilsen, president of NDN Collective and a citizen of the Oglala Lakota Nation.
In his Friday op-ed at NBC News, Tilsen described Mt. Rushmore as "a monument to white colonizers carved by a Ku Klux Klan sympathizer into land stolen from us by the U.S. government in 1877."
Referring to the president's ultimately rescheduled Juneteenth rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Tilsen said Trump "is taking his campaign from the site of one of the United States' most horrific acts of racism to another place with long histories of oppression and state-sanctioned violence."
"In the midst of a national reckoning on race, the hypocrisy of Mount Rushmore must be interrogated and denounced," Tilsen said, adding, "If you truly care about fighting our country's racist history, now is not a day to be silent."
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
President Donald Trump's planned July 3 fireworks ceremony at Mount Rushmore is facing sustained criticism over its risks to public health and the environment and is being rebuked as "an attack on Indigenous people."
A crowd of 7,500 people is estimated for the gathering at the South Dakota mountain carving, where public health guidelines to contain the coronavirus won't be enforced.
"We told those folks that have concerns that they can stay home, but those who want to come and join us, we'll be giving out free face masks if they choose to wear one," Republican South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem told Fox News Monday. "But we won't be social distancing."
Costs for the pyrotechnics will be footed by state taxpayers.
Among the voices in the chorus of criticism over the event comes from the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE), with the group citing the risk of wildfires and spread of Covid-19.
"Trump is dead set on having his fireworks show in the midst of high fire danger and the pandemic that is surging across the country," Michael Beasley of FUSEE said in a Thursday statement. "This is just another example of how frontline workers and first responders--in this case wildland firefighters--are treated like expendable props for the amusement of Donald Trump and his fans."
"While communities across the country have rightly and responsibly cancelled their local fireworks shows in order to reduce the spread of Covid-19 and to prevent wildfire ignitions, Trump arrogantly forges ahead with his phony display of patriotism that will needlessly put firefighters and citizens at extra risk," added Beasley. "The best thing we can hope for is that it rains on Trump's charade."
Phil Francis, chair of the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, expressed similar concern, calling the event "ill-advised and unsafe, particularly as we continue to grapple with the ongoing impacts of Covid-19."
"The National Park Service decided years ago to end this program for very good reasons," said Francis, pointing to "enormous and detrimental impacts on employees and routine operations that affected the overall quality of visits prior to, during, and after the event."
"There was measurable pollution of groundwater which has gradually been improving since the cessation of the event in 2009," he added. "Abnormally dry conditions in the Black Hills means that the risk of a devastating and expensive wildfire is even higher than usual."
Yet the National Park Service appears to have downplayed the risks.
As Adam Federman reported last week for Sierra Magazine and Type Investigations, the effects on the pandemic were left out entirely and safety risks removed from final drafts of the NPS environmental analysis of the event. From Federman's reporting:
According to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, two earlier drafts of the environmental analysis for the event, from December 2019 and January 2020, included a four-page section on "human health and safety." But in the final version, which was released in February and approved in April, that section had been removed from the document--a potential violation of federal law that could leave the department legally vulnerable.
Among the draft recommendations were that the crowd size be limited to 2,000. "None of these concerns or recommendations are included in the final environmental assessment." Further, Federman wrote,
The drafts noted that "conditions have steadily deteriorated" across the Black Hills National Forest and that a major fire would "severely impact" the ecology of the region, including surface vegetation and old-growth trees.
That text does not appear in the final version of the assessment. Instead, the assessment concludes that a fireworks display "would contribute minimally to wildfire risk" in the area, if mitigation measures, such as prescribed burns and tree thinning, are followed.
Tribal leaders, who've long denounced the monument in and of itself as an homage to racist federal policies--including theft of the land Mt. Rushmore sits on--also voiced sharp concern over Trump's visit to the site.
Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Nation Harold Frazier said he'd happily remove the monument on his own, as "Lakota see the faces of the men who lied, cheated, and murdered innocent people whose only crime was living on the land they wanted to steal." And Oglala Sioux president Julian Bear Runner said Trump "doesn't have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time," and warned that the event is "going to cause an uproar."
The Indigenous Environmental Network released a statement Friday in solidarity with tribal leaders calling for removal of the monument and expressing outrage over the presidential event.
"President Trump's Fourth of July visit to Mt. Rushmore is a continuation of Indigenous resilience and history being erased from national dialogues. This spectacle is nothing more than a reminder that settler colonialism is alive and well," said the network.
"Make no mistake, this visit is an attack on Indigenous people," wrote Nick Tilsen, president of NDN Collective and a citizen of the Oglala Lakota Nation.
In his Friday op-ed at NBC News, Tilsen described Mt. Rushmore as "a monument to white colonizers carved by a Ku Klux Klan sympathizer into land stolen from us by the U.S. government in 1877."
Referring to the president's ultimately rescheduled Juneteenth rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Tilsen said Trump "is taking his campaign from the site of one of the United States' most horrific acts of racism to another place with long histories of oppression and state-sanctioned violence."
"In the midst of a national reckoning on race, the hypocrisy of Mount Rushmore must be interrogated and denounced," Tilsen said, adding, "If you truly care about fighting our country's racist history, now is not a day to be silent."
President Donald Trump's planned July 3 fireworks ceremony at Mount Rushmore is facing sustained criticism over its risks to public health and the environment and is being rebuked as "an attack on Indigenous people."
A crowd of 7,500 people is estimated for the gathering at the South Dakota mountain carving, where public health guidelines to contain the coronavirus won't be enforced.
"We told those folks that have concerns that they can stay home, but those who want to come and join us, we'll be giving out free face masks if they choose to wear one," Republican South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem told Fox News Monday. "But we won't be social distancing."
Costs for the pyrotechnics will be footed by state taxpayers.
Among the voices in the chorus of criticism over the event comes from the Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE), with the group citing the risk of wildfires and spread of Covid-19.
"Trump is dead set on having his fireworks show in the midst of high fire danger and the pandemic that is surging across the country," Michael Beasley of FUSEE said in a Thursday statement. "This is just another example of how frontline workers and first responders--in this case wildland firefighters--are treated like expendable props for the amusement of Donald Trump and his fans."
"While communities across the country have rightly and responsibly cancelled their local fireworks shows in order to reduce the spread of Covid-19 and to prevent wildfire ignitions, Trump arrogantly forges ahead with his phony display of patriotism that will needlessly put firefighters and citizens at extra risk," added Beasley. "The best thing we can hope for is that it rains on Trump's charade."
Phil Francis, chair of the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, expressed similar concern, calling the event "ill-advised and unsafe, particularly as we continue to grapple with the ongoing impacts of Covid-19."
"The National Park Service decided years ago to end this program for very good reasons," said Francis, pointing to "enormous and detrimental impacts on employees and routine operations that affected the overall quality of visits prior to, during, and after the event."
"There was measurable pollution of groundwater which has gradually been improving since the cessation of the event in 2009," he added. "Abnormally dry conditions in the Black Hills means that the risk of a devastating and expensive wildfire is even higher than usual."
Yet the National Park Service appears to have downplayed the risks.
As Adam Federman reported last week for Sierra Magazine and Type Investigations, the effects on the pandemic were left out entirely and safety risks removed from final drafts of the NPS environmental analysis of the event. From Federman's reporting:
According to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, two earlier drafts of the environmental analysis for the event, from December 2019 and January 2020, included a four-page section on "human health and safety." But in the final version, which was released in February and approved in April, that section had been removed from the document--a potential violation of federal law that could leave the department legally vulnerable.
Among the draft recommendations were that the crowd size be limited to 2,000. "None of these concerns or recommendations are included in the final environmental assessment." Further, Federman wrote,
The drafts noted that "conditions have steadily deteriorated" across the Black Hills National Forest and that a major fire would "severely impact" the ecology of the region, including surface vegetation and old-growth trees.
That text does not appear in the final version of the assessment. Instead, the assessment concludes that a fireworks display "would contribute minimally to wildfire risk" in the area, if mitigation measures, such as prescribed burns and tree thinning, are followed.
Tribal leaders, who've long denounced the monument in and of itself as an homage to racist federal policies--including theft of the land Mt. Rushmore sits on--also voiced sharp concern over Trump's visit to the site.
Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Nation Harold Frazier said he'd happily remove the monument on his own, as "Lakota see the faces of the men who lied, cheated, and murdered innocent people whose only crime was living on the land they wanted to steal." And Oglala Sioux president Julian Bear Runner said Trump "doesn't have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time," and warned that the event is "going to cause an uproar."
The Indigenous Environmental Network released a statement Friday in solidarity with tribal leaders calling for removal of the monument and expressing outrage over the presidential event.
"President Trump's Fourth of July visit to Mt. Rushmore is a continuation of Indigenous resilience and history being erased from national dialogues. This spectacle is nothing more than a reminder that settler colonialism is alive and well," said the network.
"Make no mistake, this visit is an attack on Indigenous people," wrote Nick Tilsen, president of NDN Collective and a citizen of the Oglala Lakota Nation.
In his Friday op-ed at NBC News, Tilsen described Mt. Rushmore as "a monument to white colonizers carved by a Ku Klux Klan sympathizer into land stolen from us by the U.S. government in 1877."
Referring to the president's ultimately rescheduled Juneteenth rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Tilsen said Trump "is taking his campaign from the site of one of the United States' most horrific acts of racism to another place with long histories of oppression and state-sanctioned violence."
"In the midst of a national reckoning on race, the hypocrisy of Mount Rushmore must be interrogated and denounced," Tilsen said, adding, "If you truly care about fighting our country's racist history, now is not a day to be silent."
"This isn't shared sacrifice—it's class warfare," said one policy expert.
Congressional Democrats and policy experts blasted U.S. President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers' recently signed megabill on Monday in response to a new nonpartisan analysis about its varied impacts on American households.
U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) requested the report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
The analysis "confirms that the deeply unpopular One Big Ugly Law is also deeply unfair. It rips food and healthcare from children, veterans, and seniors, hurting the most vulnerable among us in order to enact massive tax breaks for billionaire donors," Jeffries said in a statement. "The American people deserve better than this cruel Republican budget scam."
"Hardworking families pay the biggest price while billionaires reap the reward."
The CBO said last month that the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act would add $3.4 trillion to the national deficit and cause at least 10 million people to lose health insurance over the next decade—though the latter figure ticks up when accounting for other GOP attacks on healthcare.
The agency said Monday that under the GOP law, the richest 10% of households are set to see $13,600 more annually, mainly attributable to tax cuts. Meanwhile, the poorest 10% will lose about $1,200 per year, mostly due to "reductions in in-kind transfers," such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). CBO estimates that roughly 4 million Americans, including 1 million children, will see significant cuts to food aid due to the law's new restrictions.
"Trump and congressional Republicans continue to falsely claim that their Big, Ugly Betrayal of a bill is a windfall for working families. In reality, hardworking families pay the biggest price while billionaires reap the reward," declared Merkley. "It is truly unfathomable that Trump and Republicans in Congress are championing a bill that gives the top 10% $13,600 more per year—while the least affluent 10% will lose $1,200 per year. This is families lose, and billionaires win."
Also noting the projected losses and gains for the bottom and top 10% of households, Brendan Duke, senior director for federal budget policy at the progressive think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), said that "this isn't shared sacrifice—it's class warfare."
As Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst on CBPP's food assistance team, detailed on social media Monday:
Slashing federal funding for SNAP and imposing those costs on most states will eliminate or reduce SNAP benefits for about 300,000 people in a typical month, CBO estimates. And 96,000 kids will also lose free school meals when they're cut off SNAP.
But the impacts could be far greater than CBO projects if more states slash SNAP—or opt out of the program altogether—in response to the deep cut in federal funding. The risk of these drastic cuts would increase during recessions, when state budgets are more strained.
CBO also estimates that 2.4 million people will be cut off SNAP by the dramatic expansion of SNAP's existing harsh, ineffective, and red tape-laden work requirement. Research consistently shows this policy doesn't increase employment or earnings. It just takes food away from people...
But the harm of the work requirement won't be limited to the 2.4 million adults who will be cut off SNAP. When this policy cuts an adult off SNAP, it also dramatically reduces food benefits for everyone else in the household—including kids, seniors, and people with disabilities.
The megabill will also end SNAP eligibility for tens of thousands of immigrants with a lawful status based on humanitarian need, including refugees, people granted asylum, and certain survivors of labor or sex trafficking. Again, many of those losing food assistance are children.
"Bottom line: At a time when low-income families are increasingly struggling to afford groceries, the Republican megabill means millions of them will soon be losing some or all of the help that they need to put food on the table," Bergh added.
With the president waging a tariff war on the rest of the world, polling released earlier this month shows that Americans are having a hard time with the costs of necessities, including groceries, and are stressed about it. The advocacy group Unrig Our Economy recently launched an interactive tool to help Americans see exactly how much the price of essentials has gone up in their state under Trump and Republican control of Congress.
"Prices keep rising, and American families are struggling. So what are President Trump's Republicans doing to help? They passed a law that will make things worse by stealing from working families to give billionaires a tax break," Boyle said Monday. "This nonpartisan report confirms the GOP's Big, Ugly Law is a total betrayal of the middle class. I won't let the American people forget who sold them out."
While the analysis is new, Schumer stressed that GOP lawmakers knew what they were doing when they passed the legislation.
"Today, yet another nonpartisan analysis of Trump and Republicans' 'Big, Ugly Betrayal' lays out the cold hard facts: While multimillionaires get $300,000 per year in tax breaks, the least wealthy will lose $1,200 a year," he said. "The reality is Republicans knew this when they passed it. They just don't care. They sold out American families all to line the pockets of their billionaire donors and special interests."
"Your current practices leave women vulnerable to life-altering violence," the lawmakers said. "It's past time to act."
Citing "horrifying" incidents in which masked men impersonating U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents kidnap and assault women, more than 30 Democratic congresswoman on Monday demanded that ICE officers clearly identify themselves while conducting enforcement activities.
"All our lives, we are taught to fear masked men in unmarked vehicles. We learn we should run from such men to avoid being kidnapped, sexually assaulted, or killed," 33 members of the Democratic Women's Caucus (DWC) wrote in a letter led by Reps. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas), and Nydia Velásquez (D-N.Y.) to Trump administration officials including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, and "border czar" Tom Homan.
"Yet, ICE is increasingly conducting raids and arrests in masks [and] plain clothes, without visible identification or badges, using unmarked vehicles—tactics that cause confusion, terror, and mistrust among the public," the letter continues. "These tactics invited perpetrators of violence against women to take advantage of the chaos by impersonating masked ICE agents in order to target and sexually assault women."
DWC Members sent a letter calling out recent cases of people impersonating ICE to abuse women. We demand DHS and ICE wear visible identification to stop enabling impersonators.Women deserve to be safe. We’ll keep fighting.
[image or embed]
— Democratic Women’s Caucus (@demwomencaucus.bsky.social) August 11, 2025 at 1:04 PM
Reports of masked men—and in one case, a woman—impersonating federal officers began emerging shortly after President Donald Trump returned to the White House and ordered a mass deportation campaign that senior adviser Stephen Miller said aims to arrest at least 3,000 people per day. Since then, there have been reports of impostors abducting and subsequently sexually assaulting, robbing, or extorting women in states including Maryland, New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
"This cannot continue and must be addressed immediately," the DWC letter insists. "The Democratic Women's Caucus is committed to defending the rights of all women and girls to live in safety. We call on the department to recognize this pervasive issue and to take immediate action."
"We demand that ICE agents visibly and clearly identify themselves when conducting immigration enforcement activities to stop enabling impersonators who leverage women's uncertainty and fear of immigration consequences to rape, harass, and abuse them," the congresswoman wrote.
"Your current practices leave women vulnerable to life-altering violence," the letter adds. "It's past time to act. Just like local police officers, ICE agents must be required to wear visible and clear identification to ensure their safety, better protect women, and deter impersonators. Finally, impersonators must be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law and this violence must be denounced by this administration."
In a bid to unmask federal agents, Velázquez in June introduced the No Masks for ICE Act, which would ban agents from wearing facial coverings during enforcement actions and require them to wear clothing displaying their name and agency affiliation.
House lawmakers led by Reps. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) in June also introduced the No Secret Police Act, which would require all Department of Homeland Security and other federal law enforcement officers to show their faces and clearly display their badges and identification when detaining or arresting people.
Similar legislation—the Visible Identification Standards for Immigration-Based Law Enforcement (VISIBLE) Act of 2025—was introduced last month in the U.S. Senate by Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.).
Also in July, upper chamber lawmakers led by Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Tim Kain (D-Va.) proposed the similar Immigration Enforcement Identification Act.
States including California, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee have also introduced or plan to propose legislation banning masked agents and requiring clear identification.
"When agents of the federal government are operating like masked militias, we've crossed a dangerous line by turning immigration enforcement into a paramilitary secret police force that should shock the nation's collective conscience," New York state Sen. Patricia Fahy (D-46), who last month introduced the Mandating End of Lawless Tactics (MELT) Act, said at the time.
"This goes beyond immigration enforcement; it's intimidation and it echoes authoritarian regimes, not the United States of America," Fahy added.
"This massacre and Israel's media blackout strategy, designed to conceal the crimes committed by its army for more than 21 months in the besieged and starving Palestinian enclave, must be stopped immediately."
The international advocacy group Reporters Without Borders on Monday called on the United Nations Security Council to convene an emergency meeting following the massacre of six Palestinian media professionals in an Israeli strike on the Gaza Strip.
Al Jazeera reporters Anas al-Sharif and Mohammed Qreiqeh, camera operators Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal, and Moamen Aliwa, and independent journalist Mohammed al-Khaldi were killed Sunday in a targeted Israel Defense Forces (IDF) strike on their tent outside al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.
The IDF claimed that al-Sharif—one of the most prominent Palestinian journalists—"was the head of a Hamas terrorist cell," repeating an allegation first made last year. However, independent assessments by United Nations experts, the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) concluded that Israel's allegations were unsubstantiated.
Investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill warned last year that the IDF's portrayal of al-Sharif and other Palestinian journalists as Hamas members was "an assassination threat and an attempt to preemptively justify their murder" for showing the world the genocidal realities of Israel's U.S.-backed war.
"Tonight Israel murdered the bravest journalistic hero in Gaza, Anas al-Sharif," Scahill said Sunday on social media. "For nearly two straight years, he documented the genocide of his people with courage and principle. Israel put him on a hit list because of his voice. Shame on this world and all who were silent."
Al Jazeera condemned Sunday's massacre as "a desperate attempt to silence the voices exposing the impending seizure and occupation of Gaza."
RSF issued a statement accusing the IDF of killing the six men "without providing solid evidence" of Hamas affiliation, a "disgraceful tactic" that is "repeatedly used against journalists to cover up war crimes."
The Paris-based nonprofit noted that Israeli forces have "already killed more than 200 media professionals"—including at least 19 Al Jazeera workers and freelancers—since the IDF began its annihilation and siege of Gaza in retaliation for the October 7, 2023 attack led by Hamas.
These include Al Jazeera reporter Ismail al-Ghoul and photographer Rami al-Rifi, who were killed in a targeted strike on the al-Shati refugee camp in July 2024 following an IDF smear campaign alleging without proof that al-Ghoul took part in the October 7 attack. The IDF claimed that al-Ghoul received Hamas military training at a time when he would have been just 10 years old.
"RSF strongly condemns the killing of six media professionals by the Israeli army, once again carried out under the guise of terrorism charges against a journalist," RSF director general Thibaut Bruttin said in a statement. "One of the most famous journalists in the Gaza Strip, Anas al-Sharif, was among those killed."
"This massacre and Israel's media blackout strategy, designed to conceal the crimes committed by its army for more than 21 months in the besieged and starving Palestinian enclave, must be stopped immediately," Bruttin continued. "The international community can no longer turn a blind eye and must react and put an end to this impunity."
"RSF calls on the U.N. Security Council to meet urgently on the basis of Resolution 2222 of 2015 on the protection of journalists in times of armed conflict in order to stop this carnage," he added.
Israel's latest killing of media professionals sparked international condemnation. On Monday, Stéphane Dujarric, a spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, called for an investigation into the massacre, saying that "journalists and media workers must be respected, they must be protected and they must be allowed to carry out their work freely, free from fear and free from harassment."
Recognizing the possibility that he would become one of the more than 61,500 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in Gaza since October 2023, al-Sharif, like many Palestinian journalists, prepared a statement to be published in the event of his death.
"This is my will and my final message. If these words reach you, know that Israel has succeeded in killing me and silencing my voice," he wrote. "I urge you not to let chains silence you, nor borders restrain you. Be bridges toward the liberation of the land and its people, until the sun of dignity and freedom rises over our stolen homeland."
"Make my blood a light that illuminates the path of freedom for my people and my family," al-Sharif added.
Since October 2023, RSF has filed four complaints with the International Criminal Court—which last year issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes—requesting investigations into IDF killings of journalists in Gaza and accusing Israel of a deliberate "eradication of the Palestinian media."
The six journalists' killings came as Israeli forces prepared to ramp up the Gaza invasion with the stated goal of occupying the entire coastal enclave and ethnically cleansing much of its Palestinian population.
The Gaza Health Ministry said Monday afternoon that at least 69 Palestinians, including at least 10 children and 29 aid-seekers, were killed in the past 24 hours. An IDF strike on Gaza City reportedly killed nine people, including six children. Five more Palestinians also reportedly died of starvation in a burgeoning famine that officials say has claimed at least 222 lives, including 101 children.