5
#000000
#FFFFFF
War & Peace
'Power of the Purse': Schumer Indicates Democrats Will Defund Trump's Illegal Iran War
"We are going to end the war."
Nov 04, 2026
Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer on Wednesday indicated that his party will defund President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran when it takes over as the majority next year.
While speaking with reporters, Schumer (D-NY) was asked how Democrats planned to end the war, which Trump launched without congressional authorization in February.
"We are going to end the war," said Schumer. "We already have some Republicans who have joined us in ending the war. And the Founding Fathers had the power of the purse as one of the ways of deterring a president who does war without the consent of the American people."
Q: How are Democrats going to end the war?SCHUMER: The Founding Fathers had the power of the purse as one of the ways of deterring a president who does war without the consent of the American people https://t.co/UZdb601W7h
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 4, 2026
Democrats on Tuesday secured majorities in the US House of Representatives and the Senate, and Democrats will have at least 54 members in the congressional upper chamber.
Earlier this year, four Republicans in the Senate—Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)—voted with the vast majority of Democrats to pass a war powers resolution aimed at compelling Trump to end the Iran War.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the lone Democrat to oppose the measure.
While Cassidy and Collins will leave office at the end of this year, a full majority in both chambers of Congress will enable Democrats to go beyond passing war powers resolutions and cut off funding for the US Department of Defense until Trump agrees to wind down the conflict.
Schumer's remarks on defunding the war came shortly after Vice President JD Vance posted a message on social media acknowledging that voter dissatisfaction with the war, and the subsequent rise in energy prices caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, were the major reasons for Republicans' defeat.
"The reason we lost is the war," Vance wrote. "The president himself said so last night. If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost."
Vance's statement also earned the endorsement of Donald Trump Jr., who may or may not have understood that it was an implicit criticism of his father's decision-making.
"Every word of this," the president's eldest son—who, along with Vance, may run for the White House in 2028—wrote in response to the vice president.
Keep Reading
Show Less
With 74% of Voters Saying Iran War Was Big Factor in Midterms, Dems Urged to Become Peace Party
"Will Democrats finally get it?" asked one progressive expert. "Americans are tired of war. They want a new foreign policy."
Nov 04, 2026
Nearly three-quarters of Americans who voted in Tuesday's midterm elections said that President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice on Iran was a significant factor in their vote, a figure that opponents of US militarism said underscored the need for the Democrats to become a true anti-war party.
According to NBC News exit polling, 74% of voters called the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran a "crucial" or "major" factor in their vote, with Democrats winning 63% of people who responded that way. Meanwhile, 63% of voters said the Trump administration made the wrong decision in taking military action against Iran, compared with 37% who said it was the right decision.
"There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is," Vice President JD Vance said Tuesday in a lengthy social media post. "One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true."
"But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone," the vice president continued. "The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night."
Indeed, Trump acknowledged that the war harmed Republicans, telling Fox News, "I think a part of it was Iran," but nevertheless defended the 35-week military campaign, insisting that "people understood the importance of what I've done with Iran."
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Trump was similarly unapologetic, declaring: "I did the right thing. I would have done it again."
Numerous observers contended that Tuesday's results offered an opportunity for Democrats to do more than simply capitalize on Republican mistakes.
"Among other things, this is an absolute rebuke of the war in Iran. Democrats would be wise to heed that lesson and truly become the anti-war party," said commentator Ben Rhodes—who, while serving as a senior national security adviser to then-President Barack Obama, supported US intervention in countries including Iraq, Libya, and Syria, as well as Obama's wider drone war campaign.
Geopolitics scholar Van Jackson opined on social media that "if Democrats remain the party of the national security state, they will lose everything in 2028. If they become the anti-war party, they’ll consolidate this wave with the presidency."
A Wednesday analysis on the libertarian site Reason by Matthew Petti argued that Democrats now have an opportunity to exercise Congress' constitutional power over the war, including by withholding military funding.
Petti noted that Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told Fox News last week, "The House and the Senate should stop the funding for any further actions in the Iran War," just like "we did to stop the Vietnam War."
However, Petti cautioned that Democratic electoral victories usually don't lead to anti-war foreign policy.
"Party leadership that is willing to attack Republicans' execution of the war may not share a principled anti-war commitment," he wrote, recalling how Democrats who swept the 2006 midterms over public anger with the Iraq War but then struggled to use their control of both chambers of Congress to end it.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) wants his party to cut off funding for Trump's war and said Democrats can do so by demanding explicit restrictions on war spending as a condition of supporting the fiscal year 2027 government funding bill that expires next month.
"Right now, the continuing resolution goes through December 11," Van Hollen told The Lever on Tuesday. "And my view is that Democrats should not advance spending to continue to fund this war."
"The Vietnam War ended only when Congress defunded it," he added. "This is an illegal war, and we need to make sure that taxpayer monies are not used to continue an illegal war."
Institute for Middle East Understanding executive director Margaret DeReus pleaded on social media, "For the love of all that is good, Democrats, do not squander this."
"The voters have given you a mandate. Use it. Be the party of working people. Be the anti-war party. Be the anti-corruption party," she added. "We cannot go back to business as usual."
Matt Duss, a former top aide to US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who serves as executive vice president at the Center for International Policy, noted that "Trump ran and won as an anti-war candidate in 2024 because Democrats left that lane wide open for him."
"Voters have just brutally punished him and the GOP for breaking that promise. Will Democrats finally get it?" Duss added. "Americans are tired of war. They want a new foreign policy."
Keep Reading
Show Less
In Election Day Stunt, 'Serial Liar' Trump Deceitfully Says US to End Israel Aid
"This is where Section 219 of the NDAA comes in," said one observer. "They’re going to transfer all of the aid behind closed doors and cut it from the appropriations process."
Nov 03, 2026
President Donald Trump on Tuesday claimed the United States would end its annual military assistance to Israel by the end of the year, a dubious announcement made on Election Day as Republicans face mounting backlash over their support for the Israeli government's genocidal assault on Gaza.
In a phone interview with Fox News' Brian Kilmeade, Trump said he had reached a deal with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu months ago to end the roughly $4 billion in annual assistance Washington provides Israel under a 2016 agreement with the Obama administration.
"They’re fine with it because they’ve become a very successful country," Trump said of Israel. "They don’t need it. And we won’t be paying anymore."
The president also admitted to political motivations, complaining about criticism from Democrats like Michigan US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed.
"Why should we suffer the slings from lunatics like an El-Sayed when they don't need it?" Trump asked, calling American aid a "bad talking point."
But it's not just Democrats. An increasingly vocal faction of Trump's own MAGA movement has been arguing that spending billions of taxpayer dollars on arming Israel is fundamentally incompatible with the president's stated "America First" agenda.
A March Pew Research Center survey found that 57% of Republicans under 50 viewed Israel unfavorably as prominent right-wing figures like commentator Tucker Carlson, reporter Megyn Kelly, and former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) amplify anti-Israel views amid an ongoing genocide in which more than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed and wounded.
The timing of Trump's announcement raised eyebrows, coming on the morning of the midterm elections. Commentators opined that the announcement appeared aimed at undercutting criticism from progressive Democrats and the president's own disaffected supporters.
Skepticism is also rooted in the fact that US military assistance to Israel technically cannot end by the end of the year.
First, the current US-Israel military assistance memorandum of understanding, signed under then-President Barack Obama in 2016, provides $38 billion over 10 years, including $33 billion in foreign military financing and $5 billion for missile defense. The MOU runs through September 2028, not December 2026.
Netanyahu faces an uncertain political future after indecisive parliamentary elections last month, and as The Times of Israel noted Tuesday, he has discussed phasing out American assistance, but over a decade—not abruptly ending it this year.
Second, Section 219 of the House-passed fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act would establish a United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, coordinating joint research, development, testing, and industrial cooperation in areas including missile defense, drones, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity. The highly contentious provision would significantly integrate the two countries' defense industries and institutionalize cooperation.
"The announcement that Trump is cutting off US aid to Israel is false hype to make US voters think Trump cut off the spigot," said AIPAC Tracker, which tallies how much money politicians have taken from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "The reality is Trump and Congress are trying to replace aid with [a] military tech merger."
Similarly, Section 622 of the separate fiscal year 2027 Intelligence Authorization Act would compel the president to "expand and enhance intelligence sharing" with Israel, explicitly stating that such sharing shall generally "not be suspended, reduced, or otherwise materially limited," with certain exceptions.
Perhaps most importantly, Trump's own comments suggest that the announcement would not end the flow of American weapons to Israel. When Kilmeade pressed him on whether he meant military hardware or financial assistance, Trump replied: "I'm giving in any way you want to define it. You can consider it barter. You can consider it military aid or cash."
Furthermore, nothing suggests that the US is abandoning its fundamental support for Israel, despite it being the only country that United Nations experts and others say is simultaneously committing genocide in Gaza as well as occupation, colonization, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid in the West Bank.
If you believe that Trump is really cutting off aid to Israel on Bibi's recommendation, I have a $5,000 Trump dividend to sell you as well as shares of Melania's memecoin
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) November 3, 2026 at 6:03 AM
Skepticism over Trump's claim abounded Tuesday, with the Washington, DC-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) noting that US arms sales to Israel will not end.
"Let's be clear. Selling American weapons to a foreign government engaged in war crimes is just as immoral and illegal as giving those weapons away for free," CAIR asserted. "Because federal law prohibits providing weapons to foreign militaries engaged in human rights abuses, ending free military aid is not enough. Our nation must completely stop arming and otherwise enabling the Israeli government's unjust wars and crimes against humanity."
Defense analyst William Hartung said in a statement that Trump's announcement "may be less than meets the eye."
"While the timing is a slap in the face [to] Netanyahu, coming as he struggles to form a coalition that would keep him in power, it may not ultimately change the amount of US tax dollars flowing to Israel, because Congress is considering a measure that would open the way to joint US-Israeli arms development across a wide range of areas," said Hartung.
The IMEU Policy Project said in response to the announcement that “President Trump is a serial liar who has announced over $20 billion in weapons giveaways to Israel since taking office."
"He and other politicians realize our taxpayer funding for Israel is a liability," the IMEU Policy Project continued. "That's why he and his allies in Congress are at this very moment trying to advance legislation to conceal support for Israel by integrating Israeli weapons companies into the Pentagon."
"This is a bait and switch that would result in Americans funding Israeli weapons makers in record amounts," the group added.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Deeply Alarming': Hours Before Midterm Elections, Trump Bombs Iran's Qeshm Island
"There is still a chance to prevent another catastrophe, but that window may be closing. We cannot afford to let this war escalate further."
Nov 03, 2026
The Trump administration launched a new bombing attack on Iranian territory Monday night, striking Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz on the eve of the US midterms amid mounting fears of a massive post-election assault.
The Wall Street Journal was first to report the strikes, which a US official characterized as a "defensive measure" in response to Iran's use of surface-to-air missiles against American forces that have been waging an illegal war of aggression against Iran since February. The Journal noted that "in one instance on Monday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fired a surface-to-air missile at a US jet fighter, which fired back in self-defense."
The US military did not publicly announce the attack on Qeshm Island, which came hours before American voters were set to head to the polls to decide whether President Donald Trump's party should remain in control of Congress. The Journal reported that the Trump administration has "purposefully" been keeping its recent campaign of smaller-scale strikes on Iran quiet "so as not to signal any intention of resuming major combat operations."
Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran's deputy foreign minister, said Tuesday that "Iran is prepared for any scenario" and stressed that the country "retains its right to legitimate self-defense until the military aggression has been brought to a complete and permanent end."
Last month, Trump vowed—falsely, given Monday's strikes—that the US would "not be attacking Iran at any time prior" to the midterms and that the two sides were engaged in "productive discussions."
Vice President JD Vance asserted Monday that he and Trump "both feel really good about the prospect of potentially coming to a negotiated settlement" to end the massively unpopular and destructive war with Iran.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said late Monday that "after eight months of an illegal war, there was finally some hope that a diplomatic agreement might be within reach and this war could end through negotiations rather than spiral into the violent scenarios being threatened after the midterm elections."
"But these deeply alarming revelations suggest we may be heading in precisely the opposite direction," Abdi said of the Qeshm Island strikes and other recent attacks on Iran. "Every day that Congress fails to intervene is another day this administration is allowed to wage an unauthorized war, conceal its military operations, and gamble with millions of lives. Congress must immediately demand answers, oppose further military action, and use its power to cut off funding for this unauthorized war. Americans must raise their voices and demand that their representatives act now. There is still a chance to prevent another catastrophe, but that window may be closing. We cannot afford to let this war escalate further.”
The latest US strikes came days after Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) warned that the Trump administration was considering an "insane" plan to resume major attacks on Iran following Tuesday's midterm elections.
If the plan is carried out, Murphy said, "it will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
Murphy, whose remarks were based on information he and other lawmakers received during a classified briefing, did not specifically warn that Trump is considering the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. But concerns about such a grave escalation grew over the weekend after far-right commentator Tucker Carlson—who has vocally criticized the president's decision to wage war against Iran—claimed that the Trump administration "may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran."
"Whether these allegations reflect serious military planning or reckless posturing, the very possibility of a US nuclear attack on Iran is an unconscionable horror," NIAC said in response.
Keep Reading
Show Less
To Avoid 'Unconscionable Horror,' Trump Called to 'Unequivocally Rule Out' Nuclear Attack on Iran
"Congress must urgently intervene to prevent further escalation and bring an end to this devastating war before an already horrific conflict becomes an irreversible catastrophe."
Nov 02, 2026
US President Donald Trump, who has long sought the Nobel Peace Prize while bombing various countries, is under pressure to rule out launching a nuclear attack on Iran after former Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported Sunday night that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pushing for one.
"The target would be Pickaxe Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program," Carlson wrote on social media. "No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike."
The US midterm election is on Tuesday, and according to Carlson, "close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7... To his credit, he's hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made."
However, Netanyahu "is cornered and desperate," Carlson noted. "After last week's election results, he can't form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations, and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war."
Responding to Carlson's post, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said that "whether these allegations reflect serious military planning or reckless posturing, the very possibility of a US nuclear attack on Iran is an unconscionable horror. After eight months of devastating war, Iranian Americans are once again being forced to wait in terror as the Trump administration reportedly weighs another catastrophic escalation at the urging of Benjamin Netanyahu."
"NIAC demands that President Trump immediately and unequivocally rule out any use of nuclear weapons against Iran," the group asserted. "Congress must urgently intervene to prevent further escalation and bring an end to this devastating war before an already horrific conflict becomes an irreversible catastrophe."
The group's policy director, Ryan Costello, stressed that such an attack "would be an unimaginable catastrophe in its own right, and the radioactive plume of a blast could extend hundreds of miles and reach major population centers, depending on yield and wind direction. Isfahan province alone, where Pickaxe is, is home to more than 5 million Iranians."
"The Trump administration would also have to consider the ramifications of breaking the nuclear taboo in a war of aggression," he continued, suggesting that the US and Israel using such weapons could spur similar action by the other nuclear-armed nations: China, France, India, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United Kingdom.
Would Russian President Vladimir "abstain from using nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Trump had dropped a nuclear weapon in Iran?" Costello wondered. "It would be a new, far more dangerous world."
While people across the ideological spectrum expressed alarm, some dismissed Carlson's lengthy post.
However, Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim highlighted that "Tucker is extremely well sourced in the Trump administration and shouldn't be ignored if this is what he's being told," and fellow journalist Pablo Manríquez agreed.
Pushing back against one skeptic, Andrew Day, senior editor at The American Conservative, pointed out that recently "Trump threatened to 'annihilate' Iranian civilization and unleash 'military terror' not seen since World War II. Those statements are plausibly implicit nuclear threats. Now Trump is finding that conventional weapons don't force Iran's capitulation. Concern is warranted."
Iran's government was already preparing its people for a possible US nuclear attack, and last Friday, more than 200 global civil society groups implored Congress to stop Trump from using such weapons in a bid to end the illegal war that he and Netanyahu launched at the end of February.
"In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened to ‘hit Iran hard’ after the US midterm elections next week," wrote members of the Back From the Brink Coalition. "On October 15, President Trump stated that he would not use nuclear weapons against Iran. But frequent, abrupt changes of policy have become a staple feature of his presidency, and the single statement that he will not use nuclear weapons stands against a string of threats to do just that."
Even if Trump opts not to use nuclear weapons, there are mounting global concerns about his next steps. After being briefed on the administration's military schemes behind closed doors, US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) declared last week that "their plan is insane."
The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that "America's Gulf allies are steeling themselves for a heavy US bombardment of Iran that they expect to trigger a vicious cycle of retaliation against their own economic and civilian infrastructure as early as this week."
Keep Reading
Show Less
As 'Freezing Winter' Looms, Amnesty Slams Russian Attacks on Ukraine's Energy Infrastructure
"This is an illegal campaign, carried out with flagrant disregard for the rules of war, and appears to be designed to create unlivable conditions for Ukrainian civilians."
Nov 02, 2026
As Russia continues to strike energy infrastructure in neighboring Ukraine over 4.5 years into a full-blown invasion, Amnesty International on Monday sounded the alarm over such attacks, with winter weather approaching.
"The Russian Federation is once again implementing a large-scale campaign against Ukrainian energy and heating infrastructure ahead of a freezing winter, including attacks far from the frontlines of conflict," said Scott Edwards, who directs the human rights group's Crisis Response Program, in a statement.
"These attacks on essential infrastructure are creating a deadly situation for civilians, who directly suffer the consequences," he continued. "This is an illegal campaign, carried out with flagrant disregard for the rules of war, and appears to be designed to create unlivable conditions for Ukrainian civilians."
Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine in February 2022, and just over a year later, the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for his arrest. The following year, the ICC also ordered the arrests of various Russian military leaders for allegedly directing attacks on Ukrainian electrical infrastructure.
"Under international humanitarian law, electricity and heating installations are civilian objects unless and for such time as they meet the strict definition of a military objective," Amnesty explained. "Even where an installation constitutes a military objective, attacking forces must comply with the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution."
"Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, launching indiscriminate attacks, or carrying out attacks expected to cause excessive civilian harm in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated can constitute war crimes," the group highlighted. Both Putin and the Russian Ministry of Defense "have made public statements announcing intentional attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure."
Last winter, Russia "carried out at least 423 attacks on electricity infrastructure and 74 strikes on heating facilities," Amnesty detailed, citing the United Nations. "These attacks caused rolling outages affecting millions of people and interrupted heating for hundreds of thousands as temperatures fell below -20°C. The resulting loss of electricity, water, and heating disrupted healthcare and education, and also disproportionately harmed older people, persons with disabilities, women, and families with children."
Amnesty's statement came a day after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on the social media platform X that "overnight alone, our energy infrastructure came under Russian attack in four regions: Dnipro, Vinnytsia, Zhytomyr, and Khmelnytskyi."
"Substations, transformers, and power lines that supply electricity to our people's homes were targeted," Zelenskyy noted. "Repair crews are working everywhere. As of now, hundreds of thousands of families remain without power."
"Massive Russian attacks on Ukraine's other critical infrastructure are also continuing unabated," he wrote. "This past week Russia has launched 1,940 attack drones, more than 1,580 guided aerial bombs, and 44 missiles of various types against Ukraine, including 36 ballistic missiles."
The president added that "the intensity of the strikes is extremely high, and the Russians are trying to take maximum advantage of the shortage of ballistic missile interceptors," expressing a need for "Patriot missiles to America, Europe, and other partners who can help."
As Reuters reported Sunday:
On Friday, Russia said Ukraine had resumed strikes on its oil refineries and accused Kyiv of ignoring a request from US President Donald Trump to stop such attacks, which Trump has blamed for raising the cost of diesel before US midterm elections next week.
Ukraine says it supports a full ceasefire on energy targets, including its own battered power grid, but that Moscow is unwilling to agree to this.
Last month, shortly after signing a bipartisan bill targeting Russian revenue from fossil fuel exports, Trump controversially waived sanctions against Russia and struck a deal on diesel, while also blaming Zelenskyy for high US diesel prices—which are tied to Trump and Israel's illegal war on Iran. Trump is also waging war on the ICC, over its warrants for Israeli leaders.
Amnesty—which has forcefully spoken out against Trump's attacks on the tribunal—said Monday that all parties to the conflict in Russia and Ukraine "must respect the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution and protect civilians and civilian objects."
"States supporting accountability mechanisms must provide the expertise and resources needed to effectively investigate allegations of violations, secure evidence, and identify suspected perpetrators, including commanders and senior officials who may bear responsibility," the group continued. "All states must urgently act to protect the functioning of the ICC and should execute arrest warrants when and where they can."
Edwards added that "whatever the motives behind the Kremlin's plan to make life unbearable for civilians, it is criminal and cannot be tolerated. World leaders seeking to end this conflict must immediately use their leverage to minimize any potential harm to civilians, before another intentional humanitarian catastrophe begins with the arrival of winter."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Kafkaesque': London Cops Allow 'I Support Genocide' Sign, Arrest 320 Palestine Action Protesters
"You can't make this up," said one critic, who noted that in the UK, "you can openly cheer for mass murder, but you can't protest against it."
Nov 02, 2026
British police on Saturday arrested 325 people outside the US Embassy in London—almost all of them supporters of the banned peace group Palestine Action—while allowing at least one demonstrator to hold a sign reading "I support genocide."
Metropolitan Police said 320 of the people arrested at the demonstration organized by the group Defend Our Juries were apprehended for showing support for a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act. Many of those taken into custody were holding placards reading, "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action."
Meanwhile, video posted to social media showed a Met officer allowing a woman to hold a sign with the deliberately provocative message, "I support genocide, I oppose Palestine Action."
It was the largest mass arrest of Palestine Action supporters since Prime Minister Andy Burnham took office following the resignation of former Prime Minister Keir Starmer—both members of the Labour Party.
"The Kafkaesque UK laws adopted under the Starmer [government] to appease Israel are such that you'll get arrested for terrorism if you hold a sign saying, 'I support Palestine Action.' But if you hold a sign saying 'I support genocide, I oppose Palestine Action,' then you'll be fine," said Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the US-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
The arrested protesters are charged under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which carries a punishment of six months' imprisonment for carrying the signs.
Among those arrested Saturday were 94-year-old human rights lawyer Margaret Owen, who was also apprehended outside September's Labour Party conference in Liverpool for holding a sign supporting Palestine Action. According to reporting, Owen is Jewish.
"This is truly dystopian," UK Green Party Leader Zack Polanski said in response to Owen's arrest Saturday. "Not in our name."
"Israel killed eight people, including a child, in Gaza this weekend as they continue their genocide," Polanski noted in a separate social media post on Monday. "After a weekend of arresting pensioners for protesting against this horror, Labour has [put] Israel far above serving our local communities."
More than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since the Hamas-led attack of October 2023. That figure includes over 74,000 Palestinians killed, including upward of 21,500 children.
Undaunted, Owen was reportedly arrested again on Monday along with other members and supporters of the peace group No More Bloody Wars, who blocked an entrance to Royal Air Force-Lakenheath, a military base used by the US Air Force.
Rev. Bill White, 72—who also held a sign at Saturday's protest reading, "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action"—told The Guardian that he had "hoped for better" from Burnham's government.
“This is the right thing to do," White said of the protest. "There’s a bad law, and it is wrong to criminalize people that are trying to prevent genocide,” he added. “How can I not be here?”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said Saturday that the "overzealous response outside the US Embassy today only serves to further expose how far authorities in the UK will go to appease American interests."
"Israel’s war crimes that have caused death and injury to thousands could not happen without the US’ approval," the spokesperson added.
Saturday's crackdown came as Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori prepared to challenge the ban before the UK Supreme Court starting on Wednesday. The lower High Court found the proscription unlawful in February, finding violations involving the government's own policy and free expression protections. The Court of Appeal overturned that decision in June, prompting Ammori's appeal.
The Palestine Action ban took effect in July 2025 after members of the group damaged warplanes on the Royal Air Force base at Brize Norton.
On Monday, members of another UK direct action group, People Against Genocide, broke into a factory in Tring, Hertfordshire owned by the Texas-based arms manufacturer Ultra Intelligence and Communications—which reportedly supplies UAV Tactical Systems, a subsidiary of Israeli weapons-maker Elbit Systems—and smashed equipment with hammers. Three people were reportedly arrested.
According to Novara Media, Monday's action "was timed to coincide with the 109th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, a statement issued by the British government in 1917 that is widely seen as laying the foundation for the colonization and ethnic cleansing of Palestine."
Keep Reading
Show Less
As Trump Renews Iran Threats, Dems Reminded They Can 'Block War Funding' Regardless of Election Outcome
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026."
Nov 01, 2026
As President Donald Trump and Iranian officials traded threats over the weekend, and with the Trump administration reportedly considering renewed attacks against an underground complex it claims is a nuclear site—which Iran denies—critics of the illegal US-Israeli war on the Middle Eastern country called on Democrats to take decisive action to end the conflict after the midterm elections, in which the party could take control of one or both chambers of Congress.
The nonprofit group Just Foreign Policy (JFP) was among those pointing to comments from last week by US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who said members of Congress recently attended a confidential briefing about possible strikes on Iran after the midterms—a plan whose details he called "insane."
As Common Dreams reported Friday, Iranian officials are taking steps to prepare the population for a potential US nuclear attack, which Trump has threatened multiple times since launching the war in February. He went to war with the preemptive aim of defending Israel from Iran's retaliation if the Israeli government waged an attack on its own, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned the US and Israel on Saturday against renewing attacks, saying they would be met with "geographically unrestricted" retaliation. He expressed hope Sunday that "that there is rationality on the other side to prefer diplomacy to other paths."
But with government funding expiring December 11, including money for the US Department of Defense "that is illegally bombing and blockading Iranian civilians," said JFP, "Democrats can block war funding" before the new year.
"Senate Democrats must not send another dollar to [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth's War Department unless the US stops the illegal war that is harming 90 million Iranian civilians and 300 million US drivers," said JFP, referring to the skyrocketing gas prices that have resulted from the conflict. "No excuses. Not another dollar for this illegal war."
JFP referred to Murphy's comments at the Middle East Institute last Wednesday, where he said Democrats in Congress must "use our spending power to end the war."
"I imagine what will happen is that there will be a continuing resolution after the election, and we'll push off the budget until January or February of next year," said Murphy. "And then if Democrats are in charge, we will essentially say we want to fund the Department of Defense, but we are not going to fund the Department of Defense if it's funding this war. And so there will have to be some provision in the bill that denies any funding to be used for the continuation of a war against Iran that's making us less safe and costing billions to American citizens."
JFP emphasized that even if Democrats don't win a majority in Congress in Tuesday's elections, Democratic senators would be able to block the continuing resolution that would keep the war funded into February, because Republicans with their current majority would need seven Democrats to join them in supporting the funding.
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026," said JFP. "Democrats do NOT need to win or wait. Murphy's approach here means Democrats would agree to fund the Iran war for months or years to come."
"If Democrats win a big blue wave rebuke of this patently unconstitutional war, and Trump comes out of the midterms escalating it, Democrats should move to block it and impeach him over it," said another commentator. "Voting to enable it would be a corrupt abdication."
Al Jazeera reported Sunday that Iran was continuing negotiations with the US through Qatari mediators, "but it does not have the slightest optimism about Trump’s intentions even for a moment,” according to a security source.
“We think that there may be different voices in the US, but experience has shown that the US president and his circle are succumbing to the temptations of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and the warmongering extremists who support him,” the source said. “For this reason we are obliged to maintain our focus on being fully prepared for a decisive and punitive defense against any aggression and crime by the United States and Israel.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump Plan to Deport Afghan Immigrants, Refugees Condemned as 'Sickening'
"The consequences could be prison, torture, or worse," said one human rights defender.
Oct 30, 2026
The Trump administration is preparing to deport more than 150 Afghan immigrants and refugees to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan via Pakistan, a move that drew fierce condemnation Friday from a range of critics—including human rights defenders and Democratic US lawmakers—who warned that such expulsions would place many of the deportees' lives in grave danger.
The New York Times reported that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has transferred Afghan detainees from facilities around the country to Louisiana in preparation for a chartered deportation flight expected to leave as soon as Monday.
The administration reportedly intends to send the Afghans to Pakistan, whose government would then expel them across the border into Afghanistan, where the Taliban has ruled since the US withdrew from the country in defeat over five years ago.
According to the Times, those slated for deportation include relatives of people who aided the US military invasion and occupation and at least one gay man. Both categories of people would face possible execution or severe persecution by the Taliban.
"Five years ago, Americans watched Afghans cling to planes to escape the Taliban. On Monday, our government plans to charter one back to their persecutors' hands," Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of refugee resettlement organization Global Refuge, said in a statement Friday.
"For the people on that manifest, the consequences could be prison, torture, or worse," she added. "For their families here, some of whom served alongside US servicemembers, it means losing a loved one without knowing whether they'll ever hear from them again."
Vignarajah implored the Trump administration to halt or reverse the plan before the flight departs.
"Pakistan is patently unsafe for Afghans," she said. "Its own government has made that clear by hounding them out of the country by the millions. Deporting Afghans into that crackdown is a deliberate decision to put them in harm's way."
Since 2023, Pakistan's government has expelled more than 2.7 million Afghans, according to Global Refuge, and has vowed to remove approximately 1.5 million who remain in the country regardless of their immigration status. The United Nations has documented killings, arbitrary detention, and torture of people associated with Afghanistan's former US-backed government and security forces.
The Taliban has also systematically stripped Afghan women and girls of the rights they gained during the US invasion, banning them from secondary schools, universities, and most employment, while imposing sweeping and draconian restrictions on their lives.
"Individuals returned to Afghanistan face grave, systematic dangers, including arbitrary detentions, executions, public flogging, and retaliatory violence," the group Human Rights First said Thursday. "Women and girls face severe restrictions on basic freedoms, including systematic denials of education, employment, and public speech."
Several Democratic US lawmakers, including Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, decried the planned deportations.
"We made a promise to our Afghan allies—that after aiding and protecting our troops during the conflict in Afghanistan, America would not abandon them," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). "This administration is betraying that promise, deporting them to potential torture and death."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) posted: "While he hopes nobody is watching, Trump greenlit the expulsion of more than 150 Afghans back to Taliban rule, where they will face almost certain persecution, torture, or worse. Accountability for Trump’s cruel immigration agenda cannot come soon enough."
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) also weighed in, writing on social media, "Our Afghan allies risked everything to help the United States."
"Now Trump plans to send their relatives back to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan," he added. "Repaying their sacrifice with betrayal is shameful and will make it much harder for America to secure assistance in future conflicts."
Keep Reading
Show Less
UN Rights Office Says Gaza Expulsion 'Nightmare' Worsens as Israel Expands Occupation
“Those displaced before the announcement of a ceasefire have little to no prospect of return to the areas they fled."
Oct 30, 2026
Israel's expanding military occupation of Gaza is accelerating the forced displacement of Palestinians, with the United Nations human rights office warning Friday that an already catastrophic humanitarian situation is further deteriorating as Israeli forces seize more territory and squeeze Gaza's population into an ever-shrinking area.
"Concerns of ethnic cleansing in Gaza endure as Israeli forces continue to push Palestinians into an ever-smaller fraction of the territory, causing recurrent displacement while destroying the remaining civilian infrastructure and attacking displacement sites," the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said in a new report.
The publication details the displacement crisis as a worsening "nightmare," documenting how Israel's expanding control, military operations, and restrictions on Palestinian movement are undermining any prospect of a return home for hundreds of thousands of people uprooted during the genocidal assault on the territory, now in its fourth year.
"Palestinians in Gaza are surrounded by Israeli forces from all sides that continue to push them inwards with the stated aim of increasing the Israeli military deployment area to 70% of Gaza’s territory," the report continues.
"The relentless contraction of space available to civilians comes with new displacement drivers in areas adjacent to Israeli forces’ deployment lines, commonly known as the 'yellow line,'" OHCHR added.
According to OHCHR:
Over the past two weeks, the UN Human Rights Office... has documented the westward expansion of Israeli military deployment areas triggering new displacement of Palestinians in Al-Shujaiyeh, Gaza City, and in eastern Al-Bureij, eastern Deir-al-Balah, and eastern Al-Maghazi, Middle Gaza. In Al-Shujaiyeh, Israeli forces’ westward push came with at least two Israeli attacks reported on displacement encampments, and detonations of the few buildings left standing in the area, with the reported use of explosive robots.
According to reports... an Israeli drone dropped munitions on tents sheltering displaced families at Al-Shujaiyeh junction near the so-called yellow line on October 25, setting tents on fire... The Palestinian Ministry of Public Works and Housing in Gaza said the fire displaced 200 families comprising 800 people, most of them women, children, and elderly persons.
All told, nearly 2 million Palestinians have been forcibly displaced during Israel's genocidal retaliation for the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023—most of them multiple times.
“The nightmare of displacement in Gaza is both acute and chronic,” Ajith Sunghay, who heads OHCHR's Palestine division. “Those displaced before the announcement of a ceasefire have little to no prospect of return to the areas they fled, most of which are inaccessible because they fall beyond the so-called yellow line. And they continue to be displaced again and again.”
That's apparently Israel's plan. Israeli authorities have stated that they intend to expand their military deployment to encompass 70% of Gaza's territory. To keep Gazans from returning home, Israeli forces have apparently been treating the area beyond the yellow line as a "kill zone," shooting any man, woman, or child who crosses the invisible boundary.
A United Nations-mandated commission of inquiry on Monday issued a report accusing Israel of crimes against humanity in the occupied Palestinian territories—including extermination, rape, and torture—while also affirming that Israel’s genocide continues in Gaza, despite the nominal yearlong ceasefire.
“There must be an end to this suffering," Sunghay stressed Friday. "This is the fourth year of displacement for most Palestinians in Gaza, the fourth winter in tents too flimsy to withstand the rain, and they are still under fire through it all. Let this be the last.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
200+ Global Groups Implore Congress to Prevent Trump Nuclear Attack on Iran
"The use of even a single nuclear weapon in Iran would destroy a taboo that has held since Nagasaki, with unimaginable consequences for all humanity."
Oct 30, 2026
As Iran's government takes steps to prepare the nation's people for a possible US nuclear attack, more than 200 global civil society groups on Friday implored Congress to act to stop President Donald Trump from using doomsday weapons to end his illegal 228-day war of choice that he's been unable to win by conventional means.
"In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened to 'hit Iran hard' after the US midterm elections next week," the groups—who are members of the Back From the Brink Coalition—said in a statement to congressional lawmakers. "On October 15, President Trump stated that he would not use nuclear weapons against Iran. But frequent, abrupt changes of policy have become a staple feature of his presidency, and the single statement that he will not use nuclear weapons stands against a string of threats to do just that."
As the statement noted:
On April 7, he declared, “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” On May 18, he posted an [artificial intelligence]-generated image of himself pushing a red button with nuclear explosions appearing on monitors behind him. On June 8, he threatened Iran, warning that “we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again.” On September 20, he told a reporter, “My question is, if and when do I blow the entire nation up?” Speaking at the [United Nations] on September 23, he asked, “Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly?”
"We cannot discount these as idle threats," the coalition stressed. "The use of even a single nuclear weapon in Iran would destroy a taboo that has held since Nagasaki, with unimaginable consequences for all humanity. The US president should not have the unchecked authority to launch nuclear war."
"We call on the United States Congress to act now to assert its constitutional role as the only branch of government empowered to declare war—and to make clear that it does not authorize or condone the use of nuclear weapons in Iran," the statement concludes.
Despite passing various authorizations for the use of military force, Congress has not declared war since World War II. Since that conflict—which ended with the US waging the only nuclear war in history—the United States has attacked dozens of nations.
The 1973 War Powers Resolution, passed as the US killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians during the Vietnam War, was an attempt to check presidents' powers to wage war without congressional authority. However, only a small handful of war powers resolutions have been passed by the full Congress—most recently this year, ordering Trump to end hostilities against Iran—and none have succeeded in stopping any military action.
Democratic members of Congress have expressed alarm at the specter of a Trump nuclear war on Iran. Hinting at the possibility, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Thursday at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC that he was recently briefed on "what the war plan would be if we restarted military operations" after the midterms, as threatened by the president.
"I will just say this, their plan is insane," Murphy continued. "It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
"The plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that will be devastating for our security interests," he added.
Meanwhile, Iran is stepping up preparations for a resumption of US-Israeli attacks, including nuclear strikes. The government is currently holding a "Civil Defense Week" focused on "public preparedness, protecting people and national assets, and ensuring government support for the continuity of essential services," according to state-run Press TV.
Earlier this week, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC)—which is not one of the groups listed on Friday's statement—said that "Trump’s continued threats to annihilate an entire civilization and unleash even more destructive weapons are unconscionable. There is no military solution to this crisis, and another round of attacks would only deepen the suffering of civilians and risk igniting an even wider regional war."
“The Trump administration must change course and should invest in the multilateral regional diplomacy that is underway rather than continuing its destabilizing threats to renew attacks," the group continued. "Congress must also act to prevent further unauthorized military action when it returns after the upcoming election."
"There is still a path away from disaster," NIAC added, "but it requires choosing negotiations over confrontation.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy