
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.
"These waivers have nothing to do with our national security, and everything to do with sucking up to Vladimir Putin," said US Sen. Richard Blumenthal.
President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order that waived new sanctions on Russia that were set to take effect thanks to bipartisan legislation signed into law by the president last month.
Trump justified the decision by claiming the sanctions waiver "is in the national interests of the United States," without offering further details. The president said he submitted a report to Congress elaborating on his reasons for waiving the sanctions.
A Friday report in The New York Times described the waiver as "another economic lifeline to Russian President Vladimir V. Putin," as the sanctions had been designed "to target Russian officials, oligarchs, and financial institutions" and "squeeze the financial lifelines sustaining Russia’s war against Ukraine."
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy condemned the sanctions waiver, and urged US lawmakers and voters to speak out against the US president's actions.
"It is important that everyone in America... sees what is really happening," Zelenskyy wrote in a Saturday social media post. "At a time when the Russians have carried out such a massive attack on our energy sector, a decision was unfortunately made in America to completely disregard the [sanctions law], which was supposed to impose truly effective pressure on Russia to bring this war to an end."
Zelenskyy emphasized that the sanctions package could still do a lot of good, but "it needs to actually work, and every voice in support of it matters."
Trump in recent weeks has been pressuring Ukraine to stop its attacks on Russian energy infrastructure in a bid to lower global prices of gas and diesel, both of which have skyrocketed in recent months because of the president's illegal war with Iran.
In addition to pressuring Ukraine, Trump also struck a deal with Russia to import diesel into the US, drawing a bipartisan rebuke from lawmakers who accused the president of funding Putin's war machine.
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) ripped Trump's decision to waive the Russia sanctions in a Friday social media post.
"Trump’s latest surrender to Putin again betrays our Ukrainian partners," Beyer wrote, "and defies clear congressional intent of legislation designed to punish Russia for its illegal war of aggression."
Beyer also pointed to flaws in the sanctions bill that he said gave Trump too much discretionary power to not only waive sanctions on Russia, but to impose further tariffs on US allies.
"Congress must fix this flawed law," he said, "to stop Trump from capitulating to Putin and ensure that it truly supports Ukraine."
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) on Saturday slammed Trump's sanctions waiver as "beyond irresponsible."
"What part of enforcing a law passed 86-11 by the Senate does the President and his advisors not understand?" Tillis asked. "It's unconscionable that this administration is capitulating to a Russian dictator who illegally invaded Ukraine and butchers innocent civilians every single day."
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who co-authored the sanctions law with the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said Trump has shown "that he stands on the side of a bloodthirsty thug and the enablers of Russia's war machine and against the majority of Americans, their representatives in both houses of Congress, and our European allies."
"These waivers have nothing to do with our national security, and everything to do with sucking up to Vladimir Putin," Blumenthal added. "I hope my Republican colleagues will join me in condemning this craven, cowardly action."
"You mean the footage of the Israeli terrorists beating her up isn't clear enough?" one critic sardonically asked.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced blistering criticism Friday after his office published a statement casting doubt on the circumstances surrounding a brutal attack earlier in the day by settlers in the illegally occupied West Bank that left an American journalist hospitalized.
"The facts surrounding the confrontation near Abu Falah, during which Washington Post photojournalist Heidi Levine was allegedly assaulted, remain unclear and are under investigation," Netanyahu's office said on social media.
As Common Dreams reported, Levine—a 63-year-old Jewish American by birth who has reported from war zones including Afghanistan, Kosovo, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, and Syria—was covering Palestinian farmers desperately trying to harvest their olives when around 80 masked settler colonists descended upon them.
Armed with rocks, clubs, sticks, assault rifles, and the self-assured belief that their deity figure promised them all the land that was once ruled by Jewish kings millennia ago, the settlers set fire to the olive trees that are the backbone of Palestine's rural economy and a literal symbol of Palestinians' rootedness in their homeland.
The assailants fired guns and threw rocks at the olive harvesters, reportedly wounding at least two Palestinians. While documenting the attack, Levine—who, like other journalists killed or wounded by Israel, was clad in a helmet and a blue vest clearly marked "PRESS"—was set upon by settlers, knocked to the ground, and kicked dozens of times while her equipment was stolen.
"Israel unequivocally condemns violence against anyone—Jews, Arabs, Christians, or journalists," Netanyahu's office claimed. "Those responsible will be held accountable."
"But serious questions remain," the statement continued. "Reports indicate some 200 Arabs and far-left activists confronted approximately 40 Israeli youths. Footage shows masked individuals on both sides hurling objects, amid reports of fireworks fired at Jewish youths. Other footage appears to show Levine knocked down and immediately helped to her feet by the same unidentified individual."
"The investigation must establish the facts, including who initiated the violence," the office added. "We will not allow disputed incidents to be exploited to demonize the hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Jewish residents."
The colonization of the occupied Palestinian territories by Jewish settlers—many of them non-Israelis who are availing themselves of the ethnosupremacist and apartheid policy of allowing any Jew to live in a land whose Palestinian inhabitants have been ethnically cleansed from it for nearly 80 years—is inherently illegal under international law.
Washington Post executive editor Matt Murray pushed back on Netanyahu's statement on social media, saying: "To be clear: Some facts are neither in dispute nor unclear. Our photographer was clearly marked as press. She was clearly beaten. These are not partisan or risible statements, but indisputable. We urge a thorough investigation and accountability."
International observers also criticized Netanyahu's statement.
"They are actually trying to justify an American WaPo journalist being severely beaten by a mob of settler terrorists," US commentator Krystal Ball said on social media, using the syllabic abbreviation for the Post.
Irish journalist Barry Malone responded to Netanyahu's post on X, saying: "Hi. There's video. It's clear."
US physician Amira Dalton said, "Israel lies and then calls you an antisemite for calling out their lies."
The X account Israel Exposed, which has more than 400,000 followers, sardonically asked, "You mean the footage of the Israeli terrorists beating her up isn't clear enough?"
The Israeli veterans' group Breaking the Silence said that "you can see the settlers who attacked Heidi Levine, a journalist for The Washington Post. But what you can’t see is the state behind them: a state that funds them, arms them, and, above all, grants them near-total impunity for their actions. This violence does not happen in a vacuum. Israel enables it."
While Lt. Col. Ariella Mazor, chief international spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces, claimed the military had sent battalions to the West Bank to contain the outbreak of violence, eyewitnesses said the IDF was involved in the attack on Abu Falah.
“The army did nothing to stop the settlers," Israeli journalist Oren Ziv, who was present during the attack, told The Washington Post.
That's because Israel's far-right government is unapologetically seeking to "finish the job of 1948," as Netanyahu once put it—a reference to the ethnic cleansing of more than 750,000 Palestinians during the creation of the modern Israeli state—and take all of Palestine.
"The entire land is ours," Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said earlier this month, in the lead-up to Israel's October 27 elections."This is our country."
Last month, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich vowed to do in the West Bank "what we did in Gaza," where three years of genocidal annihilation have left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead or wounded, nearly 2 million people forcibly displaced, and an estimated 70% of the territory under Israeli control.
According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, at least 1,138 Palestinians—at least 250 of them children—have been killed by Israeli soldiers and settlers in the West Bank since October 2023.
At least nine Americans have been killed by Israeli settlers and security forces in the West Bank since January 2022, including journalists, human rights activists, and Palestinian Americans visiting relatives.
Despite claims by Israel that perpetrators of such attacks will be held accountable, impunity is the general rule.
“Sadly, none of them will be prosecuted,” Levine said of her attackers. “I am sure of it.”
Multiple US senators demanded that Israel bring Levin's assailants to justice.
"The continued lack of accountability for settler violence in the West Bank has allowed attacks on innocent people, including multiple Americans, to go unanswered, and it is eroding what should be a strong alliance between the US and Israel," Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) said on social media. "Prime Minister Netanyahu isn't doing nearly enough to stop the violence."
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) also took to social media after Friday's attack, writing, "Today, another American citizen and journalist was brutalized by Israeli settlers attacking Palestinians in the West Bank."
"This repeated violence and brazen impunity for attacks against Americans and Palestinians alike are unacceptable," he added. "When will [President Donald] Trump and [Secretary of State Marco] Rubio DO SOMETHING?"
"If she was Israeli, this image would be front-page news," said one observer.
A Palestinian toddler watched, screaming in horror, as her mother was burned alive in an Israeli airstrike on their Gaza City home early Wednesday that left the wounded girl orphaned—and received almost no coverage in US corporate media.
Reem Asaad Awad was killed when an Israeli helicopter attacked her family's apartment in the Rimal neighborhood at approximately 3:48 am local time Wednesday, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights reported.
Trapped inside the burning apartment was Awad's daughter, Maryam Ahmed Ghanem, whose age has been reported as between 2 and 4 years old. Prominent Palestinian author Mosab Abu Toha said family friends confirmed the child was born in February 2024.
Palestinian journalist Ali al-Jaafrawi witnessed and recorded the immediate aftermath of the strike.
"There are children are screaming alive inside," al-Jaafrawi is heard saying as he approached the building.
"I went up to the apartment. There were flames everywhere," al-Jaafrawi told Al Jazeera. "I went in despite the fire and smoke and heard a little girl screaming inside. I went in, found her, and rescued her immediately. I carried her and handed her to people so they could take her to hospital."
"I went back to rescue others and to document what happened, but I suffocated and lost consciousness because of the thick smoke," he added. "I saw a woman on fire inside the apartment."
Photos and video recordings show Ghanem being treated for injuries, including burns, at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, which is struggling to operate after much of the facility was destroyed or damaged by Israeli forces, who besieged and raided the complex multiple times since October 2023.
Abu Toha, who saw Ghanem in the hospital, said the child "kept repeating the same heartbreaking words: 'I want my mum. My body hurts. There was a lot of fire.'"
Ghanem—whose father, Ahmad Ghanem, was reportedly killed by Israeli forces early in their genocidal assault—has joined the ranks of the more than 56,000 Gaza children who have lost at least one of their parents in the war, according to the United Nations Children's Fund.
"Reem and Ahmad had waited four years to conceive Maryam," Abu Toha wrote. "Four years of waiting and hoping to bring a child into this world. Ahmad never lived to see his daughter’s face. Reem lived long enough to watch her little girl grow for two-and-a-half years before she was burned alive in front of her. Now Maryam is an orphan, fighting to survive her horrific burns."
Ghanem's grandfather told Middle East Eye that the child and her mother "did nothing wrong."
"They were sleeping quietly at night," he said. "There was no one in the apartment except the two of them."
Israel said it is investigating the strike, which it claimed—without providing evidence—targeted a member of Hamas.
Dismissing a nominal yearlong ceasefire during which at least 1,500 Palestinians have been killed and over 5,000 others wounded by Israeli attacks, the grandfather said that "honestly, there is no security."
"I fear for my family," he added. "All people are afraid, not just me. There is still assassination, war, hunger, poverty, and destruction... Nothing has changed."
The horrific footage of the strike's fiery aftermath evoked imagery from earlier in Israel's onslaught, including video of a 7-year-old girl trying to escape an inferno caused by bombing that killed dozens of Palestinians—among them her mother and siblings—and a teenager photographed burning alive after Israeli forces bombed a tent encampment.
Some observers noted the almost complete absence of US media reporting on the story, with the apparent exception of CBS News, which published video of the burning apartment in a Facebook Reel.
"This little girl watched her mother be burned alive in Gaza. If she was Israeli, this image would be front-page news. But Israel can kill Palestinians in the most horrific ways without generating any headlines," US historian, author, and political analyst Assal Rad said on social media.
"Video has been circulating all day; you can hear the little girl cry and see her engulfed in smoke," Rad said in a separate post. "I can’t find headlines in Western media *because* the story is horrific. They want you to forget."
The Washington, DC-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a statement calling on members of Congress "to condemn Israel for burning a Palestinian mother alive while her daughter watched in Gaza."
“The horrific video of a little girl surrounded by fire as her mother burns to death in their home exemplifies the reality of Israel’s genocide in Gaza," CAIR said. "We cannot comprehend how any political leader with a conscience could continue to fund the sheer cruelty of the Israeli government and the war criminals who carry out its orders."
"Members of Congress must condemn this atrocity and demand an immediate end to all US support for Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza," the group added.
The US has provided Israel with tens of billions of dollars in armed aid, as well as diplomatic cover, including repeated vetoes of a series of United Nations Security Council ceasefire resolutions, throughout the three-year annihilation of Gaza, which has left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead or wounded.
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, weighed in on the attack on Bluesky.
"I have reached the limits of my ability to put words to pure evil," he wrote. "Once again, Israel burned another family in Gaza alive. But the image of the... daughter in the family watching the rest of her family die in the flames will haunt me for the rest of my life."
"But," Parsi added, "will it haunt Israel?"
"We can't sleepwalk into a decision this consequential. The law gives Congress the power to review and block a deal like this, and the Senate will now have the chance to fulfill its statutory responsibility before it's too late."
US Sens. Ed Markey and Jeff Merkley on Thursday continued to push back against President Donald Trump's proposed nuclear energy agreement with Saudi Arabia, setting up a vote on legislation that could block the deal before it takes effect.
"Giving Saudi Arabia access to US civilian nuclear energy technology without ironclad protections to make sure it doesn't provide a foundation for a nuclear bomb is unacceptable," declared Merkley (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who co-chairs the Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group with Markey (D-Mass.).
Under Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act, Congress has 90 days of continuous session to review the deal. The pair of senators introduced a joint resolution of disapproval, on which the Senate is set to vote after November 29. The JRD would need to pass both GOP-controlled chambers by veto-proof majorities to actually block the agreement.
I refuse to let the U.S. sleepwalk into a dangerous nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia. The law gives Congress the power to review and block a deal like this.@markey.senate.gov and I are making sure the Senate fulfills that responsibility before it’s too late.
[image or embed]
— Senator Jeff Merkley (@merkley.senate.gov) October 15, 2026 at 12:37 PM
The senators are alarmed that Trump's agreement lacks a "gold standard" provision barring Saudi Arabia from reprocessing spent fuel or enriching uranium. They are also alarmed that the proposal doesn't require allowing International Atomic Energy Agency investigators to confirm that the nation is not trying to develop a nuclear weapon.
"It is essential that nations pursuing civilian energy programs agree to the 'gold standard' of restrictions on fuel reprocessing and enrichment and rigorous inspections to ensure that a nuclear energy program doesn't become a covert nuclear weapons program," Merkley argued. "We can't sleepwalk into a decision this consequential. The law gives Congress the power to review and block a deal like this, and the Senate will now have the chance to fulfill its statutory responsibility before it's too late."
The details of the agreement have concerned not only progressive senators, but also nuclear nonproliferation experts.
"The US-Saudi nuclear deal is about megatons, not megawatts. Trump should not be sharing nuclear bomb technology with a nation that US intelligence says may want nuclear weapons," said Markey. "This deal is the starting gun for a Middle East nuclear arms race. Congress must reject it."
The introduction came roughly a month after Markey and Merkley partnered with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for another JRD designed to block a $5 billion conventional weapons sale to Saudi Arabia, which includes over 10,000 joint direct attack munition guidance kits and a similar number of "dumb bombs" that can be combined to create precision weapons.
"I am deeply concerned by the kingdom's human rights abuses, the security of the region as the war in Iran rages on, and the proxy war that is escalating between Iran and Saudi Arabia in Yemen," Markey said at the time. "Further escalation in the Saudi-Iran proxy war will worsen an already dire humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen and risks setting off a nuclear arms race between Iran and Saudi Arabia."
One policy analyst wrote sardonically that the administration doesn't "want to remind voters before the midterms of the mass killing of schoolchildren on the first day of Trump's glorious war."
The Pentagon is reportedly planning to withhold until after the midterm elections the completed findings of its investigation into a devastating US strike on an elementary school in southern Iran, which killed more than 150 people—including 120 children—on the first day of President Donald Trump's illegal and deeply unpopular war.
Bloomberg reported on Thursday that "top Pentagon officials have expressed their intention to hold off on releasing an internal report into the attack" on Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab until after next month's midterms "at the earliest." The internal assessment is believed to have been effectively complete for months, and preliminary findings reported in early March determined that American forces hit the school with a Tomahawk missile due to "outdated" targeting information.
According to Bloomberg, Pentagon investigators "discovered that flawed intelligence, outdated imagery, and an overreliance on AI contributed to the attack," which is regarded as one of the US military's worst atrocities against civilians in decades. Trump brushed off the massacre in remarks to reporters in June, saying: "Mistakes are made. War is nasty."
Ryan Costello, policy director at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), said in a statement that "the refusal to come clean about the attack on Minab is not just a shameful exercise to dodge accountability for a horrific war crime; it is actively risking these errors being repeated again."
"As the administration has dodged accountability on Minab and [a deadly strike on a sports hall hours later], it has engaged in further attacks that may be war crimes, including the bombing of a civilian home on Qeshm Island that killed a family and the bombing of a wedding party in Kuhestak that killed five, including two children," said Costello. "Ensuring these tragedies don’t repeat starts with accountability on Minab.”
International policy analyst Brian Finucane wrote sardonically that the Pentagon doesn't "want to remind voters before the midterms of the mass killing of schoolchildren on the first day of Trump's glorious war."
Bloomberg's reporting came as CNN published a story detailing internal US "strike plans" that include possibly dropping the so-called "mother of all bombs" on Iranian energy infrastructure.
The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB) is the largest nonnuclear bomb in the US arsenal. In 2017, Trump became the first US president to deploy the weapon, authorizing the military to drop it on Afghanistan.
Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, warned that using the bomb against Iran would risk "triggering another major escalatory spiral, potentially including Iranian attacks on critical regional energy infrastructure, with consequences for global markets and the US economy."
"This only reinforces the fundamental problem: Trump has no viable military solution to the Iran conflict," Toossi wrote. "Is he looking for one spectacular strike to project strength and declare victory? Or is he prepared to plunge the US into an even deeper, potentially endless war that could devastate the rest of his presidency, legacy, and the economy?"
Costello of NIAC said that "the Trump administration’s threats to commit war crimes in Iran cannot be normalized."
"President Trump acts on many of his threats, necessitating more urgent action to bring this illegal war of choice to a definitive end," he added.
"Senate confirmation processes and financial disclosures exist to ensure that qualified individuals are appointed and carry out their official duties with integrity. Kushner is not an exception."
A government watchdog on Wednesday filed a lawsuit aimed at blocking Jared Kushner from serving as a top American foreign policy official while lacking confirmation from the US Senate.
In a complaint filed with the US District Court for the District of Columbia, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) alleged that Kushner, who is President Donald Trump's son-in-law, is engaged in "unlawful exercise of government power."
Even though Kushner has been given the role of an informal "envoy," the lawsuit contends that he has been tasked with major responsibilities, such as negotiating an end to Russia's war against Ukraine, that under the Constitution should require Senate confirmation.
"Kushner is one of President Trump’s go-to foreign policy negotiators," the complaint explains. "He represents the United States in the highest profile global conflicts... He negotiates directly with foreign leaders. He fills a crucial and continuing role in shaping and implementing the country’s foreign policy during President Trump’s second term."
Even as Kushner oversees such highly consequential diplomatic efforts, the lawsuit continues, he is still working as a private businessman operating an investment firm that has received billions of dollars in investments from the sovereign wealth funds of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
"The interplay and overlap between his government role and private business interests present a heightened risk of financial conflicts of interest," the complaint says. "Nonetheless, Kushner continues to exercise significant government power while circumventing the very protections put in place to guard against such conflicts."
Kushner has also been appointed in a manner that has helped him completely evade "transparency and conflict-of-interest obligations, including the filing of public financial disclosures during the appointment process," the lawsuit says.
The complaint urges the court to order Kushner to file financial disclosures and, if it finds him in violation of the US Constitution's appointments clause, bar him from continued government service.
CREW president Donald K. Sherman said the lawsuit is necessary to ensure that Kushner is not using US foreign policy as a vehicle for self-enrichment.
"Senate confirmation processes and financial disclosures exist to ensure that qualified individuals are appointed and carry out their official duties with integrity," Sherman explained. "Kushner is not an exception. He cannot simply opt out and expect the public to simply take him at his word.”
The September 1 strike, which killed five women and children and wounded more than 70 other Iranians, is but one of several civilian massacres during Trump's illegal war of choice.
More than 70 House Democrats on Tuesday sought answers and accountability from the Pentagon regarding a likely US strike on a September wedding gathering in southern Iran that killed five civilians—all women and children—and wounded over 70 others.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Reps. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), and Jason Crow (D-Colo.) led 74 lawmakers in demanding an explanation for the September 1 bombing in Kuhestak and details of what the Trump administration is doing to protect Iranian civilians.
“We demand urgent answers regarding the United States’ role in this strike, why the strike proceeded given the clear risk of significant civilian harm, and what steps the [US Department of Defense] is taking to prevent further civilian casualties in Iran,” the lawmakers wrote.
The strike occurred at approximately 9:30 pm local time while preparations were underway for the wedding of the daughter of a local fisher.
According to witnesses interviewed by The Associated Press, around 150 women and children were gathered at the Mallahi family compound. The celebration was following a regional tradition in which women and men gather separately. The bride and groom had not yet arrived, and the main celebration had not begun. A bomb struck the room where dinner would have been served.
Four initial fatalities—two women and two children—were identified by Iranian authorities and human rights groups: 50-year-old Zarkhatoun Taheri, 43-year-old Kolsoum Malahi Najandnia, 16-year-old Mohammad Mallahi, and 4-year-old Amir Mohammad Karimi. A fifth victim, 22-year-old woman Asiyeh Molainejad, died in a hospital on September 3.
Weapons experts concluded the blast was likely caused by a direct hit from a US munition. The Pentagon has not publicly accepted responsibility for the strike, which remains under investigation.
"This incident is regrettably among the latest in a string of civilian casualty incidents arising from the US-led war in Iran," the lawmakers wrote in their letter. "This includes a strike at the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab, Iran, on the first day of the war that killed a reported 175 civilians, including 120 children."
The United Nations' Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran said it found “reasonable grounds" to believe that the Minab school strike constituted a war crime.
"While it has been reported that a preliminary investigation by the department found that the US military was responsible for the strike, over six months later the department has still not publicly acknowledged responsibility for the strike nor released the findings of its investigation," the lawmakers' letter notes.
"Similarly, reporting and independent analysis indicate that US forces were responsible for a strike at a youth sports hall in Lamerd, Iran, that killed 21 civilians, including 7 children, on February 28. While the department has denied responsibility, analysis by weapons experts found that the damage pattern is consistent with that of an American Precision Strike Missile," the lawmakers continued, referring to Lockheed Martin's next-generation surface-to-surface ballistic missile.
Hegseth, who advocates “maximum lethality” for US forces, has expressed disdain for what he called “stupid rules of engagement” designed to minimize civilian harm. He has overseen the dismantling of efforts meant to mitigate wartime harm to civilians—hundreds of thousands of whom have been killed in US-led wars during this century, according to experts.
“Maximum lethality," combined with AI-powered systems allowing for exponentially faster and more numerous target selection, has raised concerns that have been underscored by actions including US-backed Israeli massacres in Gaza and Lebanon, and US airstrikes in Iran, where tens of thousands of people have been killed or wounded during more than seven months of President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice, according to Iranian government figures.
The Washington, DC-based National Iranian American Council (NIAC) welcomed the lawmakers’ intervention, arguing that Iranian civilians must not be treated as expendable casualties of war.
“The lives of Iranian civilians cannot be treated as an acceptable cost of war,” NIAC president Jamal Abdi said in a statement. “These are families, children, and entire communities whose lives have been irreversibly altered by a military campaign that Congress never authorized."
“Credible allegations of unlawful attacks on civilians demand independent investigations, full public disclosure of the findings, and accountability for any violations of international humanitarian law,” Abdi added. “The Trump administration cannot be permitted to wage an unauthorized war in defiance of US and international law while evading responsibility for its devastating human consequences.”
"Washington's extrajudicial murders of alleged drug smugglers: not just grossly immoral and flagrantly illegal, but a ridiculous failure on their own terms."
US President Donald Trump has bombed dozens of boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean over the past 13 months, killing more than 230 people, but "record supplies of cocaine still arrive in the US, Europe, and as far away as Australia every day, cheaper and purer than they've been in decades," The Wall Street Journal reported late Tuesday.
After speaking with scholars of the cocaine trade and law enforcement officials across four continents, the Journal's Juan Forero detailed how "Colombian navy divers are detecting greater use of 'parasites'—metal modules packed with cocaine that traffickers bolt onto the hulls of freighters preparing to steam out of this country's largest Pacific port."
"Deep in the Amazon, smugglers have shifted shipments east, hiding drugs on boats moving through the rainforest's vast river network," he noted. "And on Colombia's long coast, crews evade US military airstrikes by hugging the shoreline in the exact same speedboats the Americans are targeting."
"In Europe, the influx is overwhelming authorities. The drugs arrive on container vessels, smaller boats from way stations in Africa, and semi-submersible vessels that cross the Atlantic to rendezvous with ships near Portugal or Spain," the journalist added, pointing out that cocaine prices have dropped in both the United States and Europe.
Since Trump began bombing the alleged drug boats last year, his administration has argued his deadly campaign is both necessary to stem the flow of illicit drugs and lawful because the US is purportedly at war with cartels. Critics, including Democrats in Congress, legal experts, and human rights groups, have condemned the strikes as murders.
The Journal's reporting isn't the first to highlight the initiative's apparent failure. It follows a July article from The Washington Post about a Drug Enforcement Administration analysis concluding the campaign "had failed to affect the supply or price of cocaine in the United States, and had led traffickers to diversify beyond go-fast boats and to avoid international waters, opting instead for larger boats and hemming close to coastlines, where US forces are less likely to open fire."
Sharing the latest article on social media Wednesday, writer Jesse Walker wrote, "Washington's extrajudicial murders of alleged drug smugglers: not just grossly immoral and flagrantly illegal, but a ridiculous failure on their own terms."
Journalist Glenn Greenwald similarly said: "As was completely predictable (and predicted), Trump's policy of bombing speed boats near Venezuela and Colombia has killed hundreds of people while having no success in impeding the flow of cocaine into the US. In fact, reports the WSJ, cocaine is more plentiful, purer, and cheaper in the US than ever, in part because of these bombings. At some point, will people realize that the justifications they're given for US bombings and wars are almost always—always—lies?"
"If Musk is going to... assist Putin's invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine's allies should sanction Starlink, X, and Tesla," said one expert.
The Ukrainian government on Tuesday night said that its access to the SpaceX-owned Starlink satellite internet service was throttled, prompting critics to question the wisdom of depending on any company owned by far-right billionaire Elon Musk.
According to a Wednesday report in The New York Times, Ukrainian officials suspect that orders to restrict their access to Starlink "had come from Washington," as President Donald Trump has been pressuring the country to stop attacking Russian energy infrastructure ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Musk, who was Trump's single biggest donor in the 2024 presidential campaign, has spent at least $276 million since July to help Republicans maintain their congressional majorities.
In a Wednesday social media post, Ukrainian military expert Serhiy Beskrestnov revealed that Ukrainian military forces "have not received any warnings about this restriction" to Starlink, which he said "has led to the failure of several missions."
"Obviously, this action cannot be a coincidence," Beskrestnov added, "and is related to the current political situation."
As noted by the Kyiv Independent on Wednesday, Ukraine depends on Starlink for "several military applications including operating its mid-strike campaign in Russian-occupied Ukraine, as well as interceptor drones that defend against Russia's new jet-powered attack drones."
The sudden restrictions on Starlink drew the ire of Polish Foreign Affairs Minister Radosław Sikorski, who directly called out Musk in a social media post.
"Hey, Elon Musk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again?" Sikorski asked. "As your European customers, we are watching you."
Ian Bond, deputy director of the Center for European Reform think tank, wrote that the sudden Starlink restrictions "should set off a siren in every defense ministry in Europe."
"There needs to be much more urgency about developing autonomous capabilities," Bond added, "not subject to US caprices, for early warning of attacks, countering ballistic missiles, communicating with forces or controlling offensive weapons."
Gideon Rachman, chief foreign affairs commentator for the Financial Times, expressed a similar view, arguing that "the Starlink restriction over Ukraine is a perfect illustration of the danger of relying on US technology."
Steve Peers, professor of EU law and human rights law at Royal Holloway, University of London, argued that democratic nations must start viewing Musk and his companies as geopolitical adversaries.
"If Musk is going to (in effect) assist Putin's invasion of Ukraine," wrote Peers, "Ukraine's allies should sanction Starlink, X, and Tesla."
Nicholas Grossman, professor of international relations at the University of Illinois, pointed out that he has been calling for governments to end their dependence on Musk and his companies for the last three years.
"The problem is too much power, especially for an enemy of democracy," Grossman wrote.
Grossman also took a shot at former President Joe Biden's administration for not taking Musk's threat to democracy seriously, as it continued to award SpaceX lucrative contracts even as its owner used his vast fortune to power Trump's 2024 comeback.
"Big mistake," he wrote.
Defense Minister Israel Katz has bragged that Israel was destroying "not one house at a time," but "the entirety of those villages."
When Israel and Lebanon reached a ceasefire in April, the Israel Defense Forces' systematic destruction of villages in southern Lebanon was supposed to halt. Instead, it was just getting started.
Israeli forces have largely leveled 48 of the roughly 60 villages and towns in occupied southern Lebanon, a New York Times investigation published Monday revealed, fueling fears that Israel intends to permanently prevent displaced residents from returning.
Rather than collateral damage from military attacks, the razing of Lebanese villages since April has largely been carried out through controlled demolitions by Israeli forces.
Nearly all the villages destroyed have been majority Shia—the sect from which Hezbollah draws much of its support—while those containing Christian, Druze, and Sunni Muslims have largely been spared.
In July, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz acknowledged that Israel had destroyed at least 24 historic Lebanese villages, describing it as punishment for their residents.
“Twenty-four Lebanese villages that were hundreds of years old—with Shiite residents who acted as enemies [of Israel] on behalf of Hezbollah and threatened our borders and our residents—we destroyed all of the buildings.”
“Not one house at a time," he emphasized. "The entirety of those villages—their demolition has been completed.”
Since March, Israel's military campaign has displaced at least 1.1 million Lebanese civilians, while its forces have entrenched themselves in an occupied swath of southern Lebanon extending as far as eight miles from the border.
Roughly 270,000 people remain barred from returning home. Many have no homes to return to. In many villages, homes, roads, utilities, and public facilities no longer function.
The Times found that Israeli forces have also burned about 16,500 acres of land—roughly 11% of the total occupied area—since the April ceasefire, including farmland and olive groves. Meanwhile, thousands of trees have been bulldozed.
As this life-sustaining infrastructure has come down, Israel has erected what appear to be the fixtures of a long-term military occupation: satellite imagery shows at least three new Israeli military outposts have been at least partially built since the ceasefire began, alongside new roads connecting them to Israeli territory.
The US-brokered ceasefire expressly prohibited "offensive military operations against Lebanese targets, including civilian, military, and other state targets, in the territory of Lebanon" except in cases where it was necessary to take defensive measures against planned, imminent, or ongoing attacks.
Israel's military told the Times it received no directive “to carry out widespread damage to structures or to demolish villages" in southern Lebanon. “The IDF operates in the security zone in southern Lebanon with the aim of removing threats posed by the Hezbollah terrorist organization to the residents of Israel and to IDF troops," it added.
Israeli officials have suggested that the occupation of southern Lebanon will continue indefinitely. Katz said last month that Israel "will not withdraw from the security zone" until Hezbollah disarms.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has suggested that some of the Christian villages would like to be annexed into Israeli territory. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, meanwhile, renewed his call last month for Israel to extend its borders north to the Litani River, which encompasses most of the Lebanese territory it currently occupies.
Israel has said it has razed entire villages to destroy Hezbollah military infrastructure and prevent fighters from returning to the area near the Israeli border.
Janina Dill, a professor of global security at the University of Oxford, has said using mass destruction to carry out this objective was "manifestly illegal" under international law, which says that destroying civilian property without an imperative military necessity can constitute a war crime.
"It’s deeply implausible that imperative military necessity applies to every house in a particular village," she told the Financial Times in August.
Volker Türk, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, said in July that Israel was engaging in the "wholesale destruction" of civilian homes, adding that "demolition of this type raises huge flags about compliance with international humanitarian law.”
"In large parts of southern Lebanon, Israel’s ‘everybody-leave’ orders were followed by ‘don’t-come-back’ orders," said Kristine Beckerle, Amnesty International's deputy regional director for the Middle East and North Africa in June. "Israel’s forced displacement and prevention of return of tens of thousands of civilians from southern Lebanon amounts to unlawful transfer, which is a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention and thus a war crime."
"You can't authorize the potential killing of 300 civilians... and still tell the public we did everything we could to avoid harming innocent people," said one veteran.
Former Israeli military and intelligence personnel affirmed that rules for targeting confirmed and alleged Hamas members in Gaza were dramatically loosened after the October 7, 2023 attack, allowing strikes expected to kill hundreds of Palestinian civilians to target even low-ranking members of the Palestinian resistance group, according to a report published Monday.
In a paywalled article published by Haaretz, Israel's oldest daily newspaper, Yaniv Kubovich gathered testimonies from former Israel Defense Forces intelligence personnel that add to the body of evidence from Israeli whistleblowers, military officials, and investigative journalists documenting how the IDF expanded its targeting practices during its devastating US-backed annihilation of Gaza, which has killed or wounded more than 250,000 Palestinians in the coastal exclave over the past three years.
One change described by some of those interviewed by Kubovich was "the opening of the intelligence apparatus to untrained personnel."
"People arrived at military intelligence who weren't from the unit, reservists who'd never even served in intelligence, brought in from all sorts of places," said one veteran, identified as "A."
"They sat in the Targeting Directorate looking for the most insignificant targets, the small fry, so they could kill them," A added. "Anyone displaying Hamas symbols on Facebook or identifying themselves as Hamas was marked as a target. Some were Hamas members, some were fighters too, but they really were small fry."
Another veteran, "D," who was assigned to a strike cell—units that coordinate drone and other aerial attacks—said: "Suddenly, the IDF was striking even the lowest of the low indiscriminately, and everyone had forgotten about conserving ammunition. We were striking Hamas drivers. That's how far it went."
Kubovich wrote that "a recurring theme in the accounts is the gap between a target's importance, the scale of the strike and the civilian toll deemed acceptable."
For example, on October 31, 2023, IDF warplanes dropped 2,000-pound "bunker-buster" bombs supplied by the United States on the densely populated Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza in order to kill one Hamas commander, Ibrahmi Biari.
"We knew Biari was underground, beneath several large buildings, but we couldn't pinpoint which building he was under," said D. "So they chose several buildings that were still occupied and decided to bring down all the buildings above the tunnel he was in. We didn't initiate an evacuation because it was important to kill him before he could get away."
A, who was also involved in the mission, said the decision to bomb the buildings was referred to the IDF chief of staff for approval, since intelligence officials estimated that there would be hundreds of civilian casualties. The IDF calculated that roughly 100 people would be killed or wounded in the proposed attack.
"We couldn't get any more intelligence to pinpoint his exact location," said veteran D. "They told us, 'He's killing soldiers right now. We have to strike him,' out of concern for the troops on the ground, and in the end the strike was approved. They really wanted to kill this guy."
Hamas said that 400 people were killed or wounded in the attack.
"Among other things, we relied on figures coming from Hamas, which we considered relatively plausible, even if they weren't 100% accurate," veteran A told Kubovich. "As time went on, we realized the death toll was around 250. I remember being stunned that we were bringing down several densely populated buildings, killing and injuring hundreds of people, to kill a battalion commander who, just a few weeks earlier, hadn't even been someone we were supposed to gather intelligence on."
The UK-based civilian casualty monitor Airwars said that at least 126 civilians, including 69 children, were killed in the attack, which wiped out whole families.
"You can't authorize the potential killing of 300 civilians for a battalion commander, or the killing of 20 civilians for every Hamas truck driver, and still tell the public we did everything we could to avoid harming innocent people," Nadav Weiman, executive director of the IDF veterans' group Breaking the Silence, told Kubovich.
Referring to the Jabalia massacre, D said: "I can't say this particular strike is what really messes with my head. What's much harder for me is the system of strike after strike after strike, with collateral damage running into dozens of people, sometimes hundreds. Being part of a system like that bothers me more than taking part in any particular strike."
The veterans' accounts raise further questions about Israel's repeated assertions that its military operations have been conducted in accordance with international humanitarian law, which requires parties in armed conflicts to distinguish between civilians and combatants and prohibits attacks expected to cause excessive civilian harm relative to the anticipated concrete and direct military advantage.
Those claims stand in stark contrast with statements by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials, who began calling for the genocidal destruction of Gaza and its 2.2 million people in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023.
Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant—his former defense minister who ordered the “complete siege” of Gaza, explaining that “we are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly"—are currently fugitives from the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where they are wanted for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder and forced starvation.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also in The Hague, is currently conducting a genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa and formally supported by more than 15 nations. While a ruling in the case isn’t expected until at least 2029, a United Nations commission of inquiry, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, and other experts—including many Israeli and international Jewish academics, jurists, human rights campaigners, and others—have already concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
The new Haaretz investigation adds to the body of reporting on Israel's loosened rules of engagement and their disastrous implications for Gaza civilians, including a December 2024 New York Times exposé involving interviews with over 100 IDF soldiers and veterans, Israeli officials, dozens of airstrike victims, and experts on the law and conduct of war.
Kubovich's revelations also come as the documentary NAZA, directed by Israeli journalists and filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, brings testimony from Israeli military and intelligence insiders to international audiences. The film features 24 anonymized insiders describing the surveillance, artificial intelligence-assisted targeting, and military procedures used during the assault on Gaza.
IDF veteran testimonies are consistent with earlier investigations into the IDF's use of artificial intelligence to generate targets at extraordinary speed, often with limited human scrutiny.
In April 2024, Abraham reported for +972 Magazine and Local Call that the military used an AI system called Lavender to identify suspected Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives. The investigation found that the IDF initially authorized officers to accept civilian casualty estimates of up to 15 or 20 people for each low-ranking alleged militant targeted, and more than 100 civilians for certain senior Hamas officials.
“The IDF bombed them in homes without hesitation, as a first option,” one intelligence officer told the outlets. “It's much easier to bomb a family's home. The system is built to look for them in these situations.”
The investigation also found that officers were permitted to rely on Lavender's recommendations without thoroughly checking the underlying intelligence.
Former IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi has also acknowledged the enormous human toll of the war.
“This is not a gentle war; we took the gloves off from the first minute,” Halevi said during a September 2025 speech to residents of Ein Habor, adding that “not once” has any legal authority “limited” his wartime conduct.
Implicitly confirming Gaza Health Ministry casualty figures—which then stood at around 220,000 Palestinians killed or wounded—Halevi said that “over 10%” of Gaza’s population of approximately 2.2 million had been "killed or injured” since October 2023.
In August 2025, Abraham and Emma Graham-Harrison, The Guardian's senior international affairs correspondent, revealed that classified IDF intelligence data suggested that 5 in 6 Palestinians, or 83% of people, killed by Israeli forces through the first 19 months of the war were civilians.
Current and former IDF troops have accused their own of deliberately shooting Palestinian civilians, including children, sometimes out of sheer boredom. Palestinian and international volunteer medical professionals have also described what they say is the deliberate shooting of Gazans, including children, more than 21,500 of whom have been killed by Israeli bombs and bullets—with more victims added to that grim total with every passing day.