

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.

By concealing the fate and whereabouts of thousands of political dissidents who were forcibly disappeared and secretly executed in prison 30 years ago, Iranian authorities are continuing to commit crimes against humanity, said Amnesty International in a damning report published today.
The report Blood-soaked secrets: Why Iran's 1988 prison massacres are ongoing crimes against humanity calls on the UN to set up an independent investigation into the mass enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings which have gone unpunished for three decades.
"These blood-soaked secrets from Iran's past continue to haunt the country to the present day. This report unravels the web of denials and distortions that the Iranian authorities have perpetuated over 30 years, both at home and internationally, to hide the truth that they forcibly disappeared and systematically killed thousands of political dissidents within a matter of weeks between late July and early September 1988," said Philip Luther, Research and Advocacy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.
"The fact that to this day the Iranian authorities refuse to acknowledge the mass killings, tell relatives when, how and why their loved ones were killed and identify and return their bodies, means that the enforced disappearances are continuing today. This has inflicted torturous suffering on victims' families. Until Iran's authorities come clean and publicly reveal the fate and whereabouts of the victims, these crimes against humanity are ongoing."
For 30 years, families of victims have been denied the right to bury their loved ones and mourn their loss. Those who dare to seek truth and justice have faced relentless harassment, intimidation, arbitrary arrest and detention, as well as torture and other ill-treatment. Further suffering has been caused by the desecration and destruction of mass grave sites.
Meanwhile, individuals responsible for these crimes against humanity have evaded justice and in some cases those involved have held and continue to hold powerful positions in Iran today. More recently, after further evidence of what happened emerged, the mass killings have been celebrated in the country and those involved hailed as heroes.
"Instead of continuing their cruel attacks against families, the Iranian authorities should be ensuring their right to truth, justice and reparation - including returning victims' bodies and identifying remains by allowing professional exhumations of mass graves and DNA analysis," said Philip Luther.
For this report, Amnesty International gathered testimonies of more than 100 family members and survivors from across Iran and examined hundreds of documents from the organization's own historical archives; reports, memoirs and other written materials from survivors and Iranian human rights groups; and statements from the UN and Iranian authorities. It also crosschecked lists containing the names of thousands of victims and examined victims' death certificates, many of which deceptively give no explanation or cite "natural causes" as the cause of death. The organization's research reveals the shocking national scale and geographical spread of the mass killings, identifying at least 32 cities across Iran where these atrocities took place.
1988 prison massacres
The report describes how, in late July 1988, the authorities put prisons on lockdown across the country and suspended family visits without giving any reasons. Over the following weeks at least 5,000 political dissidents were extrajudicially executed in a co-ordinated effort to eliminate political opposition. This was on the orders of at least one secret fatwa issued by the then Supreme Leader of Iran, Rouhollah Khomeini, which followed an armed incursion into Iran by the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), an outlawed opposition group based in Iraq.
Across Iran, groups of prisoners were rounded up, blindfolded and brought before committees involving judicial, prosecution, intelligence and prison officials. These "death commissions" bore no resemblance to a court and their proceedings were summary and arbitrary in the extreme. There was no possibility of appeal at any time.
Prisoners were asked questions such as whether they were prepared to repent for their political opinions, publicly denounce their political groups and declare loyalty to the Islamic Republic. Some were asked cruel questions such as whether they were willing to walk through an active minefield to assist the army or participate in firing squads
They were never told that their answers could condemn them to death. Some thought they were appearing before a pardon committee. Often, they only discovered they were to be executed minutes before they were lined up before a firing squad or nooses were put around their necks.
Most of the victims were serving prison terms issued years earlier. Some had been detained for years without trial, and some had already completed their sentences but were due to be released. Most had been imprisoned because of their political opinions and peaceful activities such as distributing leaflets and attending demonstrations.
The majority of the victims were affiliated with the PMOI, but hundreds of prisoners affiliated with leftist political organizations and Kurdish opposition groups were also executed.
Key figures involved in the killings
Many of the officials who participated in the "death commissions" in 1988 have held, and in some cases continue to hold, positions of power in Iran today. In particular, the report compiles evidence showing that the following officials participated in the "death commissions":
In August 2016, an audio recording was leaked of an August 1988 meeting in which some of the key officials from the Tehran "death commission" are heard discussing its harrowing work. In response to the publicity sparked by this revelation, Iranian leaders have openly celebrated the events of 1988, glorifying the purge and describing those responsible as worthy of receiving "medals of honour".
These statements follow a three-decade long campaign of misinformation in which the authorities have downplayed the scale of the killings and demonized the victims as a "few terrorists".
"The grotesque distortion of the truth about these heinous crimes, coupled with the clear lack of remorse displayed by those with blood on their hands, is sickening. All individuals involved in committing and concealing these crimes must be brought to justice in fair trials that exclude the death penalty," said Philip Luther.
Need for international action
Families and survivors have been grossly failed by the UN and international community. The lack of condemnation from the UN Commission of Human Rights at the time and the failure of the UN General Assembly to refer the situation to the Security Council emboldened Iran's authorities to continue to deny the truth and inflict torture and other ill-treatment on the families.
"The abject failure of the UN and international community to pursue truth and justice for the atrocities committed by Iranian authorities has had catastrophic consequences not only on survivors and victims' families but also on the rule of law and respect for human rights in the country. Iran's authorities must no longer be allowed to shield themselves from accountability for their crimes against humanity," said Philip Luther.
"With no prospects of justice for victims inside Iran, it is even more crucial that the UN establishes an independent, impartial and effective international mechanism to help bring those responsible for these abhorrent crimes to justice."
This statement and the report are both available at: https://www.amnestyusa.org/iran-committing-crimes-against-humanity-by-concealing-fate-of-thousands-of-slaughtered-political-dissidents
Amnesty International is a global movement of millions of people demanding human rights for all people - no matter who they are or where they are. We are the world's largest grassroots human rights organization.
(212) 807-8400“They may have won this race, but we have changed the narrative about what kind of city Minneapolis can be,” Omar Fateh said.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey fended off a challenge from democratic socialist Omar Fateh to secure a third term by winning enough support in the second round of the city's ranked-choice voting system.
City election officials declared Frey, a Democrat, the winner Wednesday morning after tabulating second- and subsequent-choice votes. Frey won 42% of first-choice votes, followed by Fateh with 32%, former pastor DeWayne Davis with 14%, and entrepreneur Jazz Hampton with 10%.
Fateh—a Democratic state senator and son of Somali immigrants—congratulated Frey on his victory.
“They may have won this race, but we have changed the narrative about what kind of city Minneapolis can be,” he said. “Because now, truly affordable housing, workers’ rights, and public safety rooted in care are no longer side conversations; they are at the center of the narrative.”
Thank you, Minneapolis!While this wasn’t the outcome we wanted, I am incredibly grateful to every single person who supported our grassroots campaign. I’ll keep fighting alongside you to build the city we deserve. Onward.
[image or embed]
— Omar Fateh (@omarfatehmn.com) November 5, 2025 at 10:03 AM
Frey said in a statement Wednesday, “From right now through my final seconds as mayor, I will work tirelessly to make our great city a place where everyone, regardless of who you are or where you come from, can build a brilliant life in an affordable home and a safe neighborhood."
Fateh’s campaign drew comparisons with that of New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, another progressive state lawmaker and democratic socialist who was bombarded with racist, Islamophobic, and xenophobic hate by prominent right-wing figures. Like Mamdani, Fateh hoped voters would focus on his record of serving his constituency in the state Legislature.
Among the dozens of bills authored by Fateh were a successful proposal to fund tuition-free public colleges and universities and tribal colleges for students from families with household incomes below $80,000, including undocumented immigrants, and another measure that exempted fentanyl test strips from being considered drug paraphernalia.
Fateh was also the chief state Senate author of a bill that would have ensured that drivers on ride-hailing applications like Uber and Lyft were paid minimum wage and received workplace protections. Although the bill was approved by both houses of the state Legislature, it was vetoed by Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Gov. Tim Walz, sparking widespread outrage among progressives.
Initially chosen over Frey by state DFL delegates, Fatah's endorsement was rescinded in August by state party officials, sparking widespread outrage from progressives including Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who condemned the "inexcusable" move, which she chalked up to "the influence of big money in our politics."
One social media user wrote that the hedge fund executive Bill Ackman "went from acting like Mamdani was going to import ISIS to extending a friendly handshake… in like six hours."
After his resounding election victory on Tuesday night, New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani's most prominent billionaire antagonist immediately pivoted to kiss the ring of the man he has spent the last more than half-year portraying as an existential threat to the city and the country.
Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman poured over $1.75 million into the mayor's race with a laser focus on stopping Mamdani, whom he often ambushed with several-thousand-word screeds on his X account, which boasts nearly 2 million followers. He accused Mamdani—a staunch critic of Israel—of "amplifying hate" against Jewish New Yorkers, while suggesting that his followers (which happened to include many Jewish New Yorkers) were "terror supporters."
Meanwhile, the billionaire suggested that the democratic socialist Mamdani's "affordability" centered agenda, which includes increasing taxes on corporations and the city's wealthiest residents to fund universal childcare, free buses, and a rent freeze for stabilized units, would make the city "much more dangerous and economically unviable," in part by causing an exodus of billionaires like himself.
In turn, Mamdani often invoked Ackman's name on the campaign trail, using him as the poster boy for the cossetted New York elite that was almost uniformly arrayed against his candidacy. In one exchange, Mamdani joked that Ackman was "spending more money against me than I would even tax him."
After Mamdani's convincing victory Tuesday night, fueled in large part by his dominant performance among the city's working-class voters, Ackman surprisingly did not respond with "the longest tweet in the history of tweets" to lament the result as some predicted. Instead, he came to the mayor-elect hat in hand.
"Congrats on the win," he told Mamdani on X. "Now you have a big responsibility. If I can help NYC, just let me know what I can do."
Many were quick to point out Ackman's near-immediate 180-degree turn from prophecizing doom to offering his help to the incoming mayor.
"This guy went from acting like Mamdani was going to import ISIS to extending a friendly handshake… in like six hours," noted one social media user.
But Mamdani graciously accepted the billionaire's congratulations when asked about them on Wednesday's "Good Morning America."
"I appreciated his words,” Mamdani said. "I think what I find is that there is a needed commitment from leaders of the city to speak and work with anyone who is committed to lowering the cost of living in the city—and that’s something that I will fulfill."
As Bloomberg and Forbes noted, Ackman was just one of many on Wall Street and from the broader finance world who came to kiss the ring.
Ralph Schlosstein, a co-founder of the investment fund BlackRock, Inc., pledged to work with Mamdani despite their different politics: "I do care deeply about the city, and I’m not going anywhere, whoever the mayor is. I’m going to do whatever I can to help him be successful," he said.
Another former BlackRock executive, Mark Kronfeld, said: "Is it a dystopian, post-apocalyptic environment because Mamdani has won? No."
Crypto billionaire Mike Novogratz even credited Mamdani with "tapping into a message that’s real: that we’ve got a tale of two cities in the Dickensian sense," and asked if the incoming mayor could "address the affordability issue in creative ways without driving business out."
But while Mamdani has left the door open to business, he has made it clear that he will not allow them to commandeer his work at City Hall.
After his victory, he called on his base of largely small-dollar donors to resume their financial support for him in order to fund "a transition that can meet the moment of preparing for January 1.”
He announced that this historic all-female transition team will include at least one renowned titan of economic populism, the trust-busting former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, as well as other progressive city administrators with backgrounds in expanding the social safety net and public housing.
"I’m excited for the fact that it will be funded by the very people who brought us to this point," Mamdani said, "the working people who have been lost behind by the politics of the city."
One critic warned a Trump win “will cement a precedent that expands his power as executive in a dangerous and unprecedented way.”
As the US Supreme Court on Wednesday began hearing arguments on the sweeping powers claimed by President Donald Trump to impose tariffs on foreign goods, many critics warned that the court would create a "presidency without limits" if it ruled in his favor.
In April, Trump unveiled unprecedented tariffs on nearly every nation in the world using powers granted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law passed in 1977 that allows the president to regulate international commerce during major emergencies such as wars.
Many Trump critics believe that using this law as the legal foundation of a global tariff regime is a gross abuse of the law's original intent, and are urging the Supreme Court to shut it down.
Brett Edkins, managing director of policy and political affairs at Stand Up America, warned that granting the president this level of authority over the taxation of imported goods would "open the door to broader abuses of power" by emboldening Trump to usurp even more authority from the US Congress.
“We’re already dangerously close to a presidency without limits," he said. "It’s time for the right-wing majority on the court to stand up for our Constitution and serve as a check on Trump’s power, starting with this case."
Josh Orton, president of progressive legal advocacy organization Demand Justice, also said that the tariff case before the Supreme Court "is about far more than an economic debate or a trade-law dispute," given its implications for the separation of powers laid out in the US Constitution.
"Trump is demanding that the court hand him raw power over the economy," said Orton. "If Trump wins here, he won’t just raise costs on American families. He will cement a precedent that expands his power as executive in a dangerous and unprecedented way—letting any president unilaterally rewrite trade law, punish certain industries, harm consumers, or leverage international allies for personal gain."
Leor Tal, campaign director at the progressive advocacy coalition Unrig Our Economy, argued that the Supreme Court wouldn't even need to hear the case on the Trump tariffs if Congress reasserted its authority given under the US Constitution to levy taxes.
“As the Supreme Court hears a case with implications for whether Americans can afford groceries, school supplies, and more, people will remember that Republicans in Congress could end these disastrous tariffs today and should have done so a long time ago," she said. “These tariffs are nothing more than a tax on working Americans, and Republicans in Congress have voted time and again to keep them in place... Republicans in Congress must act immediately to repeal Trump’s tariffs and finally put working people first."
During Wednesday's hearing on the tariffs case, conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch raised concerns about allowing the president to usurp congressional powers in perpetuity by issuing emergency declarations that Congress must then vote to revoke before it can resume its duties outlined in Article I of the US Constitution.
"So Congress, as a practical matter, can't get this power back once it's handed it over to the president," Gorsuch remarked. "It's a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's elected representatives."
Sauer tried to counter this by pointing to former President Joe Biden agreeing in 2023 to sign bipartisan legislation ending the national health emergency caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
Gorsuch, however, countered that this only occurred with the president's consent, and that it would otherwise take a supermajority to end a declared emergency if the president elected to veto the congressional resolution.
Gorsuch: So congress as a practical matter, can't get this power back once it's handed it over to the president.. one way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's elected representatives. pic.twitter.com/secLyWMX7H
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 5, 2025
Justice Sonia Sotomayor also grilled Sauer on concerns about separation of powers, and she noted that the Constitution explicitly delegates taxation powers to Congress.
"It's a congressional power, not a presidential power, to tax," she said. "You want to say tariffs are not taxes, but that's exactly what they are. They're generating money from American citizens, revenue."
Justice Sotomayor asks about tariffs being a kind of tax on Americans and compares President Trump's emergency tariff Executive Orders to President Biden's student loan forgiveness policy and a hypothetical climate emergency. pic.twitter.com/nD0MYgVjv3
— CSPAN (@cspan) November 5, 2025
Ahead of the Supreme Court hearing this week, Trump posted a frantic message on his Truth Social platform warning justices that his power to unilaterally impose tariffs was a matter of "life or death" for the United States.
""With a Victory, we have tremendous, but fair, financial and national security," he claimed. "Without it, we are virtually defenseless against other countries who have, for years, taken advantage of us."
Meanwhile, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said on social media Wednesday that "Trump’s tariffs are sending small businesses to an early grave."
"Trade authority begins and ends with Congress," the senator added. "I’ll keep battling to rein in Trump’s tariff madness and protect small businesses, farmers, and families."