

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.

An investigation by Amnesty International has revealed that three men killed in a U.S. military air strike in March after being targeted as "Al-Shabaab terrorists" were in fact civilian farmers with no evidence of links to the armed group.
Disturbingly, the organization has also learned that, despite being informed in May of its flawed assessment of at least one of the men as a fighter, the U.S. military's Africa Command (AFRICOM) failed to contact his relatives to investigate further. Between them, the men left behind 19 children.
"It's bad enough that the U.S. Africa Command appears not to know who its air strikes are actually killing and maiming in its secretive war in Somalia. But it's reprehensible that AFRICOM offers no way for those affected to contact it and has failed to reach out to the families of victims after its version of events was called into question in this case," said Abdullahi Hassan, Amnesty International's Somalia Researcher.
"This is just one of many cases of the U.S. military wantonly tarnishing large parts of the Somali population with the 'terrorist' label. No thought is given to the civilian victims or the plight of their grieving families left behind."
Air strike in Abdow Dibile
Between 3 pm and 4 pm on March 18, 2019, a U.S. air strike hit a Toyota Surf SUV near the hamlet of Abdow Dibile, around 5km from Afgoye in Somalia's Lower Shabelle region. The three men traveling in the vehicle were farmers returning from their farms to their homes in Mogadishu and Leego and Yaaq Bariwayne in Lower Shabelle.
The impact destroyed the vehicle, instantly killing the driver, Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim (46), and one passenger, Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey (30).
A man who was a close friend of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim visited the scene the next morning and described the aftermath: "Abdiqadir's body was completely destroyed but I recognized... his face that was burnt...I also recognized his watch which was hanging from the front side of the car." A woman who visited the scene told Amnesty International that Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey "were both burnt beyond recognition and cut into pieces."
A third man traveling in the vehicle, Abdiqadir's half-brother, Mahad Nur Ibrahim (46), was very badly burnt and died in a hospital in Mogadishu almost three weeks later. Medical records seen by Amnesty International listed his cause of death as cardiac arrest after suffering sepsis and burns over more than 50% of his body. There is no evidence that AFRICOM attempted to engage with him before he died.
An AFRICOM press release on March 19 alleged the victims were "three terrorists," without citing any evidence. It also stated AFRICOM "was aware of reports alleging civilian casualties," and would review any relevant information about the incident.
However, in May, a journalist writing for Foreign Policy provided AFRICOM with evidence that Ibrahim Mohamed Hireywas a civilian and passed on contact information for his relatives. But to date AFRICOM has not reached out to them.
Amnesty International shared further information about the case with AFRICOM in August, but AFRICOM has refused to back down on its claim that the three men were "terrorists", stating: "This airstrike was conducted against lower level al-Shabaab members to decrease morale ahead of Somali Army operations... Specifically, information gathered before and after the strike indicated that all individuals injured or killed were members or affiliates of al-Shabaab". AFRICOM did not provide any evidence for its claim or indicate that it will be investigating further. It has not changed its position on any cases in Somalia that Amnesty International has brought to its attention to date.
Amnesty International interviewed 11 people - in person and remotely - about the March 18 strike, including family members, those who visited the scene, and staff at Hormuud Telecom, a company where one of the men also worked.
The organization also assessed media reports, U.S. government statements, vehicle purchase records, official IDs, medical records and videos and photographic evidence of the scene of the attack and injuries sustained by the victims.
Everyone the organization spoke to was adamant that none of the men was a member of Al-Shabaab. Also, Al-Shabaab did not prevent the relatives of those killed from collecting and burying their remains, which the armed group generally does when its own fighters are killed.
AFRICOM's reporting on the strike and correspondence with Amnesty International raise serious questions about its intelligence-gathering and its targeting of what it claimed were "affiliates" of Al-Shabaab, which may have violated international humanitarian law.
At least two dozen civilians killed or injured
To date, Amnesty International has documented six cases where U.S. air strikes are believed to have resulted in civilian casualties - killing a total of 17 people and wounding eight.
On March 20 this year, the organization's ground-breaking report, The Hidden US War in Somalia, published reams of evidence to counter AFRICOM's repeated claims until then that its operations in Somalia had resulted in "zero civilian casualties". Just over two weeks later, on April 5, AFRICOM admitted to its first-ever civilian casualties in Somalia, stating that Amnesty International's work had prompted it to review its records. Six months later, AFRICOM has not shared any update on the status or outcome of that review.
U.S. air strikes in Somalia surged in early 2017, after President Trump signed an executive order declaring the south of the country an "area of active hostilities." Since then, AFRICOM has used drones and manned aircraft to carry out at least 131 strikes in the country.
The attack in Abdow Dibile is one of 50 strikes the U.S. military has admitted to in Somalia so far this year (up to mid-September). This outstrips the 47 strikes in 2018, and the 34 strikes carried out in the last nine months of 2017.
"This is yet another crushing injustice - three civilian men died agonizing deaths while their families are left questioning why the U.S. military targeted and killed them. It is also potentially unlawful and raises questions about how seriously AFRICOM takes its obligations under international law," said Daphne Eviatar, Amnesty International's Director of Security with Human Rights.
"The U.S. government must ensure thorough, impartial investigations into all credible allegations of civilian casualties are carried out, with accountability for those responsible for violations and reparation made to the victims and survivors. It can start by establishing an accessible mechanism for Somalis to safely report civilian casualties of U.S. military operations."
In the middle of the afternoon on March 18, 2019, a U.S. air strike hit a vehicle carrying three civilian men near the hamlet of Abdow Dibile, approximately 5km southwest of Afgoye, Lower Shabelle. The vehicle was carrying three men - Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey (30), a farmer; Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim (46), a farmer and employee of Hormuud Telecom (Hormuud), a telecomunications company; and his half-brother Mahad Nur Ibrahim (46), also a farmer. The vehicle was destroyed and Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey were killed instantly. Mahad Nur Ibrahim was badly burnt and taken to a hospital in Mogadishu, where he later died. US Africa Command (AFRICOM) acknowledged responsibility for the strike and referred to the deceased as being "terrorists" and "lower level members of Al-Shabaab".
Testimonies and other evidence gathered by Amnesty International indicate that the three men in the vehicle were civilians and none were members of Al-Shabaab.
In researching this strike, Amnesty International interviewed 11 people, including family members, Hormuud Telecom staff, and three individuals who visited the scene after the attack. Amnesty International also analyzed media reports, U.S. government statements, medical records, vehicle purchase records, official ID, satellite imagery, and videos and photographs of the scene of the attack and of injuries sustained by the victims.
Al-Shabaab controls much of Lower Shabelle, including the area around Abdow Dibile, although in recent months Somalia government forces have regained control over several key towns in the region, including Sabiid, Barire and Awdheegle. According to residents interviewed by Amnesty International, while Al-Shabaab members come and go in the area around Abdow Dibile, they do not have a permanent presence in the hamlet.
On March 18, 2019, Abdiqadir and Mahad Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey were travelling towards the hamlet of Abdow Dibile from the village of Muuri, Lower Shabelle, in a white Toyota Surf SUV. They had been visiting their farms near Muuri that day, as they often would, and were returning from the farms to their respective homes in Mogadishu, Leego and Yaaq Bariwayne. Between 3 and 4pm, when the vehicle was approximately 750m north of Abdow Dibile, it was hit and destroyed by a munition launched by a U.S. aircraft.
A friend of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim, living in Mogadishu, told Amnesty International that he learned on the night of the attack of his death from a relative of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim. Early the following morning, the friend left Mogadishu and travelled to Abdow Dibile. At around 8am he arrived in the hamlet where he found Mahad Nur Ibrahim, badly burnt but alive, inside a vehicle bound for hospital. Amnesty International also viewed photographs of these injuries. Mahad Nur Ibrahim told his friend that the three men had been travelling from their farms near Muuri, when their car was struck. Shortly after they spoke, Mahad Nur Ibrahim was driven to Digfeer hospital in Mogadishu, approximately 30km away. "Mahad later succumbed to his injuries and died in a Mogadishu hospital," the friend told Amnesty International. According to hospital records viewed by Amnesty International, Mahad Nur Ibrahim died on 6 April 2019. The records state that the cause of death was cardiac arrest, after suffering from sepsis and burns on more than 50% of his body.
The friend described to Amnesty International what the scene of the attack looked like when he arrived, and how he identified the two victims whose bodies remained at the scene. On arrival, he found Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey's body cut into pieces and lying near the wreckage, after local people had removed him from the back of the vehicle. Amnesty International reviewed photographs that appear to show Ibrahim's burnt head and torso.
The friend and relatives of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey buried the two men in Abdow Dibile on Tuesday March 19.
An elder in the Wadalaan Gorgaate clan and distant cousin of Abdiqadir and Mahad Nur Ibrahim explained that the families of the men received no support from the Somalia or U.S. government after losing their loved ones:
"No one apologized or even asked us about their death. We came together as a family after their death, but we just could not give them any support. We left it to God. We don't know what actually happened and why they were killed, maybe it was a mistake. We would like justice to be served and the families of the deceased supported."
Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim was a father of eight. He owned electric generators supplying the village of Leego in Wanlaweyn district, Lower Shabelle, and farmed land near Muuri, in Afgoye district. He was also the head of Hormuud's Leego office. Mahad Nur Ibrahim was a father of four. Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey was a father of seven. In addition to farming, he leased out farm equipment and ran a business transporting foodstuff between Mogadishu and Muuri. Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey previously lived with his family in Muuri, but they fled to Mogadishu five years ago due to the conflict between Biyamal and Habargidir clans.
Amnesty International interviewed family members, neighbors, and colleagues of the victims, all of whom unequivocally stated that the men were not members of Al-Shabaab.
All 11 people Amnesty International spoke to were adamant that the three men were civilians. "He was not Al-Shabaab" a relative of Mahad Nur Ibrahim explained. "He owned a truck and he transported charcoal to Mogadishu. Al-Shabaab banned charcoal business in Leego and Lower Shabelle so he was not doing much in the past two years. He wanted to invest in the farms with the help of his brother, but both were killed while coming back from the farms."
A Habargidir clan elder and relative of Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey was also clear on this point: "I can confirm before anyone that Ibrahim was a civilian and not an Al-Shabaab guy". Another relative concurred: "He was a civilian, he was not member of Al-Shabaab. If he were Al-Shabaab we would not have run away from the Biyamal-Habargidir conflict. We were basically IDPs in Mogadishu with Ibrahim supporting us. I don't know why he was targeted. It was a clear aggression."
According to a fellow employee at Hormuud who Amnesty International interviewed, as well as relatives, Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim had worked for Hormuud for over a decade and was also not an Al-Shabaab member. Those who knew the men questioned why they had been killed. "I don't know why [Abdiqadir's] car was targeted but I think it was a mistake," a friend said. "The three people who were killed in that car were farmers and not members of Al-Shabaab".
In addition to the testimonies, there is additional circumstantial evidence which indicates that the deceased were civilians. Al-Shabaab did not treat the three men as if they were members of the armed group. Families of the victims were not prevented from recovering the bodies and taking the injured to hospital. Testimony gathered throughout Amnesty International's research in Somalia has consistently shown that Al-Shabaab will collect and bury their dead themselves, often before they permit civilians back into the area. Additionally, Mahad Nur Ibrahim was transported from Abdow Dibile to government-controlled Mogadishu, where he was treated at Digfeer hospital, a civilian facility, where it would have been relatively easy for Somalia government forces to question or arrest him.
In a press release published on March 19, 2019, US Africa Command (AFRICOM) stated that the previous day, March 18, 2019, U.S. forces conducted an airstrike "in coordination with the Federal Government of Somalia's continued efforts to weaken al-Shabaab" in the "vicinity of Awdheegle," Lower Shabelle. AFRICOM claimed it assessed that three "terrorists" were killed in the strike. It went on to confirm however, "we are aware of reports alleging civilian casualties resulting from this airstrike. As with any allegation of civilian casualties we receive, U.S. Africa Command will review any information it has about the incident, including any relevant information provided by third parties."
According to media reports, AFRICOM was presented with the contact details of Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey's family in May 2019. Amnesty International understands that the family have not been contacted by U.S. authorities in relation to the attack that killed their relative.
Amnesty International wrote to AFRICOM on August 19, 2019 presenting details of the allegation that the three victims of the attack were civilians, and seeking its response. AFRICOM replied on September 18, 2019, stating:
"In coordination with the Federal Government of Somalia, U.S. Africa Command did conduct a precision-guided airstrike that corresponds to the time and location of this allegation. This airstrike was conducted against lower level al-Shabaab members to decrease morale ahead of Somali Army operations.
Pursuant to our thorough assessment procedures, we determined that U.S. Africa Command is not likely to have caused the civilian casualties alleged on 18 March 2019. Specifically, information gathered before and after the strike indicated that all individuals injured or killed were members or affiliates of al-Shabaab. We have not received any new or additional information that contradicts this information."
Further, AFRICOM stated:
"To date, U.S. Africa Command has only received an allegation of a civilian casualty with respect to the driver of the vehicle - there have been no other allegations that the additional two passengers were civilian. Based on detailed methods and a body of multi-intelligence reporting, to include the actions observed from the vehicle, U.S. Africa Command arrived at reasonable certainty the vehicle and its occupants were al-Shabaab and actively supporting al-Shabaab operational activity."
Amnesty International also wrote to the Somalia government on September 20, presenting the details of the allegations. At the time of publishing, the government had not replied.
Amnesty International's evidence above indicates that, regardless of its intention, U.S. forces failed to undertake necessary measures to ensure that they were targeting fighters directly participating in hostilities and not civilians. Contrary to AFRICOM's assessment, there is significant evidence that the deceased are civilians and were killed unlawfully. Failure to take feasible precautions that are necessary to verify that a target is a military objective is in itself a violation of international humanitarian law and can result in indiscriminate attacks. Indiscriminate attacks in which civilians are killed or injured can constitute war crimes.
The description by AFRICOM of those killed in this attack as "members or affiliates of Al-Shabaab" [emphasis added] is concerning. As Amnesty International explains in-depth in its March 2019 report, The Hidden US War in Somalia: Civilian casualties of US air strikes in Lower Shabelle, the US military appears to be applying an overly broad concept of who is targetable. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, individuals suspected of membership in armed groups must not be targeted on the basis of "abstract affiliation, family ties, or other criteria prone to error, arbitrariness or abuse." AFRICOM's response to Amnesty International suggests that U.S. forces may have targeted these men on the basis of criteria that do not conform to the requirements of international humanitarian law. Amnesty International's concern about the arbitrary nature of targeting based on supposed Al-Shabaab membership is compounded by the reference to targeting on the basis of the vague notion of "affiliation." In response to a request by Amnesty International, the US Department of Defense previously refused to explain how it determines affiliation to Al-Shabaab, stating that this would "jeopardize the intelligence process which we gather that information [sic]". Based on Amnesty International's findings in this and previous cases, we fear that the term "affiliates of al-Shabaab" may be used by the U.S. military to describe any military-aged male who is unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity of a suspected Al-Shabaab fighter at the time of a U.S. strike. This would be an unlawful practice that could amount to targeting civilians who are not directly participating in hostilities.
In the context of a non-international armed conflict, only individuals who are directly participating in hostilities may lawfully be targeted. Direct attacks against the civilian population and individual civilians not directly participating in hostilities are prohibited and constitute war crimes. Further legal analysis, including regarding what constitutes direct participation in hostilities, can be found in chapter four of The Hidden US War in Somalia.
Further, there is strong evidence to call into question the "detailed methods" and "body of multi-intelligence reporting" that the U.S. military used in this strike. In its press release the day after the attack, AFRICOM claimed to have killed three people. But at that time only two were dead, the third still alive and would soon be in Digfeer hospital. The U.S. has not corrected this error in further statements. Additionally, if the U.S. was confident Mahad Nur Ibrahim was an Al-Shabaab operative, then there was also ample opportunity to arrest him in hospital after the strike. That the U.S. post-strike intelligence assessment was not sufficient to correctly note the number killed, nor the location of the third victim of the strike, speaks to the quality of the U.S. intelligence and the degree to which it should be trusted to correctly identify and categorize members of Al-Shabaab.
U.S. and Somalia authorities must ensure an independent, impartial, and thorough investigation is conducted into this attack. They should also ensure that anyone responsible for violating international humanitarian law is held accountable, compensate the victims' families, and implement an effective mechanism to ensure a safe and accessible means for people to self-report civilian casualties from military operations.
This extended press release is available at: https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/u-s-military-shows-appalling-disregard-for-civilians-killed-in-somalia-air-strike
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
"Congress has a singular opportunity to respond swiftly and effectively to these warning shots before true catastrophes occur."
A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers in the US House of Representatives on Wednesday released a joint letter urging congressional leaders to take immediate action to regulate the artificial intelligence industry.
The group, led by Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), urged leaders in both parties to "urgently advance legislation" to mitigate the risks posed by AI to critical US infrastructure.
The lawmakers pointed to the fully autonomous cyberattack launched by OpenAI agents against machine learning company Hugging Face as a turning point for the development of AI, arguing that it showed the technology has already become dangerous enough to "have profound implications for economic and national security."
"Congress has a singular opportunity to respond swiftly and effectively to these warning shots before true catastrophes occur," the lawmakers wrote. "The House of Representatives could and should immediately take up legislation that would strengthen AI oversight, security, and transparency."
In a Wednesday social media post, Beyer emphasized that "recent cyberattacks involving AI agents and growing warnings from leaders and researchers at the companies developing this technology make clear" that the dire risks posed by AI are no longer in the realm of science fiction.
"We cannot wait for disaster to strike," said Beyer. "We need to act now to protect the American people and ensure AI advances safely and responsibly."
In addition to Beyer, the letter was signed by Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Scott Franklin (R-Fla.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), Gabe Amo (D-RI), Valerie Foushee (D-NC), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas).
The lawmakers' letter comes just days after President Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) dismissed calls for regulating AI.
During a Sunday interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Johnson said that “Congress is obviously less qualified” to write rules for AI development “than the people who are pushing this frontier to know the ins and outs of it.” Johnson then insisted that any effort to regulate AI needs to be “a partnership with the industry itself, with the corporations that are doing this."
Despite poll after poll showing the US public is opposed to runaway AI and the unregulated data center buildout that the tech industry is demanding, Trump wrote in a Monday social media post that his personal intellect was sufficient to keep the world safe from the dangers surrounding AI.
“The only control or ‘guardrails’ that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT,” Trump wrote, “and the USA has that, in spades!”
The GOP leaders' dismissal of AI risks occurred shortly after multiple industry insiders warned last week that the technology being developed could end human life within the decade.
"The Ed Sheeran debacle will be seen as a turning point in pop culture complicity" with Israel, said one Palestinian-American writer, who described it as "a clear 'South Africa moment.'”
Singer Ed Sheeran hoped to sidestep controversy by letting rapper Macklemore be removed from his tour over his pro-Palestine remarks. Instead, he's sparked what one writer said could be a "turning point" for how pop culture engages on the issue of Israel and Palestine.
Sheeran responded to the backlash on Tuesday by claiming he was helpless to stop Macklemore’s ouster, which followed the intervention of the pro-Israel New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, who rallied other NFL venue owners to bar Sheeran's Loop Tour if the “Thrift Shop” rapper continued to perform.
Pro-Israel groups petitioned for Macklemore to be removed from the tour after a performance earlier this month in which he said, “Free Palestine,” and performed his song “Hind’s Hall." The song refers to anti-Israel protests at Columbia University in 2024 and is dedicated to the 5-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab, who was killed by Israeli forces. She was one of more than 20,000 children who have been killed as part of Israel’s military campaign there, according to a UN commission.
But the other four openers said they would not abide what they viewed as elites' political censorship of an artist speaking out against what human rights groups have described as a genocide in Gaza and an occupation of the West Bank that is considered illegal under international law.
Each one of the artists announced on Tuesday that they would no longer tour with Sheeran.
“Artists must not be silenced when they speak up for the oppressed," said the Grammy-winning singer-songwriter Finneas, who has vocally supported the plight of Palestinians for several years. "I stand with Palestine and its people."
The Irish singer Aaron Rowe likewise withdrew from his upcoming shows with Sheeran, though he acknowledged he did not "take the decision lightly."
"Ed has been a friend to me and has changed my life. I could never thank him enough for this," Rowe wrote on Instagram. "But as Irish people, we know all too well about genocide, forced famine, and violent occupation."
“I cannot stand by and allow billionaires to use their position of power to silence the rightful voices of those who speak up against Israeli genocide and who highlight the savage murder of children,” he continued. “I would lose all respect for myself to carry on as normal.”
The Danish pop band Lukas Graham also dropped from the tour, with frontman Lukas Forchhammer writing that artists "should be able to speak about war, about civilians being killed, about children who deserve to grow up. Wherever they live. Whatever flag flies over them."
Forchhammer addressed Kraft, a multibillionaire, who gloated after the fact about having Macklemore blackballed and denounced his expressions of support for Palestinians as "hate speech."
"Money doesn’t give you the right to own the conversation," Forchhammer wrote. "Nobody’s bank balance should decide who gets to speak or which suffering we’re allowed to acknowledge.”
The Irish folk group Beoga—which helped to found the Irish Artist for Palestine Movement—was even more direct, calling out Kraft’s extensive history of donating to pro-Israel groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which has spent over $100 million attempting to influence the current election cycle, and supporting efforts to punish those who boycott Israeli products.
"It's important that everyone knows that the real enemy is the Zionist lobby. They have worked tirelessly to silence artists who want to speak freely about a genocide happening before our eyes, for fear of retribution," Beoga wrote. "Research how much Robert Kraft has done to fight the [Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions] (BDS) movement. That will give you a sense of what we've all been up against."
"Up the workers. Free Palestine," the group's message concluded.
The exodus of Sheeran’s openers came as momentum built behind a “boycott” of his music spearheaded by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, a group based in Ramallah in the West Bank, that helped to cofound the BDS movement.
The group called on Sheeran to "cancel his now compromised US tour" and said until then, artists, audience, and crew members should "boycott it."
In response to Sheeran's explanation that he prefers not to publicly take sides on controversial political issues despite having opinions, the group noted his estimated net worth of more than $500 million and his massive platform as one of the world's most recognized musicians.
"As South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu famously said, 'If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor,'" the group said. "Sheeran had an opportunity to take a stand in solidarity with Palestinians, like millions of other British and Irish citizens have done, and refuse to cave to the pressure... He has so far failed to meet this ethical duty. But it is not too late to reverse course."
Some Western politicians have joined the backlash and amplified calls for a boycott.
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), considered a likely presidential candidate in 2028, told a reporter she'd be changing the radio station if Ed Sheeran's music were to come on.
"When you see what Robert Kraft did to line up all the stadiums to censor speech in that one specific way, it's become clear it's not just about one music artist or two music artists," AOC said. "This is about how just a handful of stadium owners and the elite can prevent an entire massive issue, in this case, the genocide in Gaza."
"But it doesn't stop there," she continued. "It could be speaking out about AI. It could be speaking out about any issue, that you can now just get a handful of stadium owners to ensure that an entire person's career can be jeopardized if they speak out about any issue."
Zarah Sultana, a member of the UK Parliament and co-founder of the left-wing Your Party, added that the artists who left Sheeran's tour are "on the right side of history."
“At this rate, Ed Sheeran is going to end up with Boy George opening for him,” she joked on social media, referring to the singer who released a song this summer in support of Israel's assault on Gaza. “No one deserves to be subjected to that.”
Backlash against Sheeran has expanded across the entertainment industry as well, with performers including the children's entertainer Ms. Rachel and popular musicians Kehlani, Tones and I, Zara Larsson, PinkPantheress, and others rallying in support of Macklemore.
And as the music news site Consequence of Sound reported, even some of Sheeran's hardcore fans are revolting. Three prominent Sheeran fan accounts on X, which boast nearly 50,000 followers put together, spoke in solidarity with Macklemore and encouraged Sheeran to use his platform to take a stand, with some vowing to stop covering his tour until he does.
"We hope that Ed can... reflect on everything that happened and understand that, in the face of certain injustices, remaining silent or trying not to choose a side is also a stance," wrote the Brazilian account @EdSheeranBrCom, which has more than 45,000 followers.
Ali Abunimah, the Palestinian-American journalist who co-founded The Electronic Intifada, said in a social media post that he believed that "the Ed Sheeran debacle will be seen as a turning point in pop culture complicity" with Israel, which has seen public support in the US crater since 2023, to the point where Americans, especially younger ones, now say they sympathize more with Palestinians than Israelis.
Likening it to the massive cultural boycott movement against apartheid during the 1980s, Abunimah said the cultural revolt against Sheeran was "a clear 'South Africa moment.'”
"Today’s tragedy underscores the grave risks faced by families living in these structures and the urgent need for safer alternatives," said one UN official.
Nearly three years of Israeli bombardment in Gaza have left tens of thousands of Palestinians with no choice but to live in an estimated 2,000 buildings that have been severely damaged, and the danger of such precarious living conditions was starkly illustrated early Wednesday morning when an apartment building in Gaza City collapsed, killing at least 21 people and trapping dozens beneath rubble.
Rescuers reported that at least eight children were among those killed when the bombed-out building fell down onto adjacent tents that were also housing forcibly displaced Palestinians.
More than 10 families had been living in the building, which had four apartments on each floor and became even more vulnerable to collapse as damp autumn weather arrived in recent weeks.
"There are approximately 400 buildings at risk of collapse," Alessandro Mrakic, head of the United Nations Development Program's Gaza office, told Reuters. "And we know that these buildings will collapse, especially now with the upcoming winter."
Rescuers reported hearing people calling out beneath the rubble, but the search-and-rescue operation has been made more difficult by a lack of machinery, Mrakic said.
Heavy machinery is among many items that Israeli authorities restrict from entering Gaza, claiming that they'll be used by Hamas.
"There are actually people are digging with their bare hands," Mrakic told Reuters. "We need to prepare [for more deaths]."
Adequate tents and mobile homes are also blocked from entering Gaza, reported Drop Site News, contributing to families' reliance on severely damaged buildings for shelter.
When asked by The Guardian whether they were afraid to live in the building, survivors of the collapse said: “Yes, we are afraid, but where can we go? This is better than staying out on the street.”
At least 25 people were confirmed as injured and hospitalized on Wednesday.
"Across Gaza, people are living in hundreds of damaged structures assessed as unsafe, for lack of better options," said Ramiz Alakbarov, the UN humanitarian coordinator for the occupied Palestinian territories. "Today’s tragedy underscores the grave risks faced by families living in these structures and the urgent need for safer alternatives. No one should have to risk their life simply to find a safe place to shelter."
"I call for urgent approvals for the entry of heavy machinery, specialized equipment, engine oil and fuel needed for search-and-rescue operations," said Alakbarov. "Tents, tarpaulins, and other nonfood items must also reach the most vulnerable communities in the next four weeks. Every possible effort must be made to save lives, protect people from further harm, and provide families with safer places to live. Every minute counts."
Videos and images circulating on social media showed rescue workers desperately trying to pull people from the rubble, and the spokesperson for Gaza's Civil Defense, Mahmoud Basal, carrying a child wrapped in a scarf stained with blood.
At least 20 people, mostly women and children, have been killed after a six-story residential building collapsed in Gaza City.
Extensive efforts are underway to rescue dozens of civilians missing under the rubble of the building, which had previously been damaged by Israeli… pic.twitter.com/gqHSgfKUEp
— PALESTINE ONLINE 🇵🇸 (@OnlinePalEng) September 16, 2026
More than 90% of housing units in Gaza have been destroyed by Israel since October 2023, when it began its assault on Gaza in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack. More than 73,000 Palestinians have been killed, including thousands of children, journalists, healthcare workers, and humanitarian workers—while Israel and its allies, including the US government, have persisted in claiming the military operation is targeting Hamas fighters.
Attacks have continued in Gaza despite a ceasefire that was brokered last October, and families have become increasingly desperate to find housing after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the Israel Defense Forces to take over 70% of Gaza in violation of the ceasefire deal.
The building collapse came as it was reported that the Trump administration was preparing to send Israel tens of thousands of 2,000-pound bombs.
"If I were him, I wouldn't debate me either," said Democratic US Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed.
Democratic US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed on Tuesday ridiculed Republican rival Mike Rogers after he skipped out on a town hall event hosted by FOX 2 Detroit.
Shortly after the event, a reporter asked El-Sayed what he thought of "the elephant in the room, or lack thereof," in reference to Rogers' absence.
"The elephant was not in the room," the Michigan Democrat replied. "The elephant decided that they did not want to be in the room. The elephant cowarded out."
Reporter: The elephant in the room tonight, or lack thereof—
El-Sayed: No, the elephant was not in the room. The elephant decided that they did not want to be in the room. The elephant cowarded out. Although the elephants were all in the room in Dallas.
It’s wild to me that… pic.twitter.com/cd9OYD5smM
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 16, 2026
El-Sayed noted that Rogers was able to attend President Donald Trump's midterm convention in Dallas last week, even as he skipped out on a chance to talk directly with Michigan voters.
"It’s wild to me that this guy is more interested in going to speak for, what, six minutes and 48 seconds in Dallas," he said, "than he is to have 60 minutes with Michiganders here in Detroit. But it tells you who he is. He’s a coward."
El-Sayed then expressed mock empathy for his Republican opponent.
"[Rogers] knows that the minute he and I have to actually share the same stage and share podiums, he's not going to have much to say," he said. "Because at the end of the day, I'm going to hold him accountable to his record, which is awful on all the things... If I were him, I wouldn't debate me either."
A reported then asked El-Sayed if he bought Rogers' excuse for not being at the event.
"He's probably at a corporate fundraiser," he replied. "What was his excuse? He's in Florida? He got stuck in Dallas? He's in all the places that are not Michigan? What's his excuse, I don't even know what it is."
In an interview with CBS News Detroit published Wednesday, Rogers defended his decision to skip the event, and pointed out that his campaign had never agreed to attend.
The Michigan Republican also reiterated his concerns about Fox 2 Detroit Roop Raj, whom he alleged is biased against his campaign.
"When you have someone who's already picked their candidate," said Rogers, "you can't have a two-on-one event in a TV studio."
El-Sayed and Rogers are both scheduled to take part in two debates in October.
"We need to pump the brakes until we have rules in place to stop this technology from doing grave harm," says Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen. "And that includes instituting mandatory safeguards and a comprehensive testing regime."
A new poll released Wednesday shows that nearly two out of three Americans believe there is "certain" to "moderate" risk that artificial intelligence could wipe out human society, a finding that backs up other surveys showing deep anxiety among the US voting public with a technology that so far has escaped government oversight or meaningful regulation.
According to Politico, which conducted the survey, "63% of Americans say AI could destroy humanity one day. And nearly half of Americans favor pausing development of more advanced AI models—48%—compared with 31% who favor continued development."
The findings, the news outlet noted, "signal an emerging tech-skeptical realignment of American politics with consequential midterm and presidential elections looming" and arrive just a day after a major symposium in Washington, DC brought together experts and lawmakers who say action must be taken before its too late.

In a separate Associated Press poll published Wednesday, US voters also expressed their concerns about the negative environmental impact of the AI industry, including the massive buildout of data centers that serve as the main infrastructure for the computing capacity needed by the major tech firms, including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta, SpaceX, and others.
AP reports that while Democrats are more concerned overall about the environmental impacts of AI, large segments of independents and Republicans share those sentiments.
"About two-thirds of Democrats," AP reports, "say they are 'extremely' or 'very' concerned about how AI will affect the environment, the poll found, up from about half in 2025. By contrast, about half of independents and about 4 in 10 Republicans are highly concerned about the environmental impact of AI."
Broader consensus emerged on data centers, the outlet noted, with about 60% of all voters—regardless of partisan affiliation—supporting limits on new data centers and sharing concerns about the impact such facilities will have on local water supplies and electricity prices.

The new survey data from both AP and Politico comes amid a high-profile debate in Washington, DC that has emerged over recent weeks and months as grave warnings—including from experts within the industry—tell of a technology that demands much more government control and public accountability.
At a forum on Tuesday billed as "The Pro-Human Assembly"—headlined by progressive champion Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and far-right former Trump advisor Steve Bannon—technological experts, AI industry insiders, watchdogs, and lawmakers advocated for a much more robust and critical response to the issue.
“Despite living in a so-called democracy, the public has had virtually no input into the AI revolution that is transforming the world in which they live,” Sanders said during his remarks at the event.
“Congress, under both Democratic and Republican control, has been asleep at the wheel, and we now have a president whose ignorance regarding this issue is truly embarrassing," added Sanders. "Virtually all of the decisions regarding the development of AI have been made by a handful of the richest people in the world... whose chief goal is to achieve even more wealth and more power than they already have, no matter what the impact their work has on ordinary people."
In a video posted to social media on Tuesday, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) also demanded a shift in Congress, which has for too long stood idly by as the AI industry lobby plowed tens of millions of dollars into shaping the terms of debate on Capitol Hill and bankrolling political campaigns.
"The ongoing AI threat has been enabled by political corruption," Van Hollen warned in his post.
The ongoing AI threat has been enabled by political corruption.
The Trump admin isn't asleep at the wheel; their refusal to address these risks is part of an implicit deal.
We should pump the brakes on frontier AI development & confront a corrupt system that's endangering us… pic.twitter.com/B9KPOgHrdY
— Senator Chris Van Hollen (@ChrisVanHollen) September 16, 2026
"The people building this technology are concerned about the loss of human control," Van Hollen said. "We need to pump the brakes until we have rules in place to stop this technology from doing grave harm. And that includes instituting mandatory safeguards and a comprehensive testing regime."
"This should not be a partisan issue," he continued. "The impact of AI on our collective future, on our safety, on our security, on our economy, and on our shared humanity—but be the type of risk that brings us all together."
While blasting Trump's recent comments dismissing concerns about AI dangers as "a hoax" to be ignored, Van Hollen said what can't be ignored is how the industry and its financial backers have used their outsized wealth and power to create the current situation in which AI has avoided serious oversight.
"The Silicon Valley big-wig investors and tech oligarchs that have bankrolled Donald Trump back into the White House didn't do it because they all became MAGA overnight. They did it because there was an implicit deal. In return for their support and funding his vanity projects, like his obscene ballroom, they wanted something in return: a free hand on AI policy."
Progressive political journalist David Sirota said Van Hollen's message was spot on.
"Van Hollen absolutely nails it," said Sirota. "He explicitly says AI oligarchs should be held civilly and criminally liable under existing laws, and he points out that the AI crisis is a crisis of corruption. This is the message."
"You don't have healthcare or a living wage," said one critic who lamented the proposed $2.8 billion, taxpayer-funded transfer, "but hey, more war crimes!"
The Trump administration is preparing to send Israel tens of thousands of 2,000-pound bombs, The Washington Post reported Tuesday—a move that would rank as the largest single sale of the highly destructive munitions, which the Israel Defense Forces have used in some of the deadliest US-backed airstrikes on Gaza and Lebanon.
According to the Post, the proposed $2.8 billion package includes 20,000 MK-84 bombs and 20,000 BLU-117 bombs, as well as 20,000 I-2000 penetrator warheads. The munitions would be purchased with US taxpayer funds through the Foreign Military Financing program. The proposal has been informally presented to congressional committees that review major arms transfers.
The MK-84 is among the largest conventional bombs in the US arsenal. The Post reported that its blast can propel metal fragments thousands of feet, penetrate thick concrete and metal, and create large craters.
“If Hezbollah or whoever is in a building, an MK-84 will bring down the whole building," Trevor Ball, a former US Army explosive ordnance disposal technician, told the Post.
Following the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) loosened rules of engagement to effectively allow the killing of an unlimited number of civilians when targeting even a single low-ranking Hamas member in an airstrike.
Combined with the utilization of cutting-edge artificial intelligence technology to select targets at a far faster rate than humans alone could, IDF use of 1,000- and 2,000-pound bombs has contributed heavily to the staggering casualty toll in Gaza, where officials say that more than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded since October 2023.
That month, Israeli forces struck Gaza's Jabalia refugee camp with such munitions, killing at least 126 Palestinians in a bid to assassinate a single Hamas commander.
Michael Lynk, who served as the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories from 2016 to 2022, said early in the war that “the scale of Palestinian civilian deaths in such a short period of time appears to be the highest such civilian casualty rate in the 21st century."
In December 2023, University of Chicago military historian Robert Pape called Israel's bombing "one of the most intense civilian punishment campaigns in history.”
Classified IDF intelligence data leaked last year revealed that 5 in 6 Palestinians killed by the IDF through the first 19 months of the US-backed war were civilians.
Israel continues to kill Palestinians with US-supplied 2,000-pound bombs, despite a nearly yearlong supposed ceasefire. Last week, the IDF reportedly massacred two young girls and their parents when it bombed their home in northern Gaza.
A South Africa-led case backed by nearly 20 nations that is currently before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accuses Israel of genocide in Gaza. The International Criminal Court has also issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in the strip, including murder and forced starvation.
“[President] Donald Trump is sending bombs paid for by American taxpayers to a government led by a wanted war criminal—all while the Netanyahu government continues to bomb Gaza and Lebanon, and block justice and accountability for Americans killed on its watch,” US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said Tuesday, according to the Post. “This is not putting Americans first. We will work to stop it."
Israel denies all accusations against it. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders and supporters have repeatedly claimed that the IDF is the "world's most moral army."
The IDF has also dropped 2,000-pound bombs in Lebanon. In September 2024, it launched a massive strike on Beirut's southern suburbs that killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and destroyed multiple residential buildings. Analyses subsequently indicated that US-made 2,000-pound bombs were likely used in the attack.
In another IDF strike on Beirut the following month, at least 22 people were killed and more than 115 wounded. Human Rights Watch and a former US military explosives expert identified remnants from the attack as coming from a US-made Joint Direct Attack Munition guidance kit compatible with MK80-series bombs weighing between 500 and 2,000 pounds.
The United States has nevertheless supplied Israel with thousands of the weapons during both the Biden and Trump administrations. Reuters reported in June 2024 that the Biden administration had sent Israel more than 10,000 2,000-pound bombs since the October 2023 Hamas-led attack, along with thousands of other munitions.
In May 2024, then-President Joe Biden paused delivery of a shipment containing 1,800 2,000-pound bombs and 1,700 500-pound bombs amid concerns that Israel could use them during its assault on Rafah, where more than a million displaced Palestinians were sheltering, and where the ICJ ordered Israel to immediately halt its offensive and prevent genocidal acts. Israel ignored the order.
That pause became a rare instance in which Washington explicitly withheld a major category of offensive weaponry from Israel over concerns about civilian casualties. Trump reversed the policy almost immediately after returning to office in January 2025, ordering the release of the withheld 2,000-pound bombs.
When asked why, Trump replied: “Because they bought them.”
But with American taxpayers often footing the bill for such transfers, critics again lashed out at the practically unconditional US support for Israel.
"We don’t have universal healthcare because our government prioritizes money for bombs," leftist commentator and activist Sabrina Salvati said Tuesday on social media, lamenting that the "$2.8 billion bomb sale [is] going to Israel to slaughter more babies."
Author and leftist podcaster Wajahat Ali also took to social media to blast the proposed transfer, writing: "Congrats, MAGA. Trump is using our money to give bombs to Israel to kill civilians."
"You don't have healthcare or a living wage," he added, "but hey, more war crimes!"
"The federal government should be protecting our national parks, not parceling them out behind closed doors to benefit the wealthy and politically connected," said one campaigner.
Hundreds of advocacy groups and members of Congress on Tuesday called on President Donald Trump's administration to reject a proposal to hand over part of Yosemite National Park in California to a private developer.
The Washington Sun—formerly known as NOTUS—revealed late last month that federal staffers were under political pressure to keep working on a possible land swap for a quarter-mile strip of the famed park with "a company that, through a web of limited liability companies, is operated by real-estate developer and investment firm Kingsbarn Realty Capital."
California's Democratic US senators, Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, partnered with two other Democrats from the state, House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Jared Huffman and Congressman Jim Costa, to spearhead a Tuesday letter to Trump's interior secretary, Doug Burgum, about the future of the park.
Yosemite "is a cornerstone of the National Park System and is one of California's crown jewels," wrote the bipartisan group of over 150 lawmakers. "We are extremely concerned that the Department of the Interior is considering selling off portions of the park to private development, and we strongly oppose the proposed land transfer."
According to the Sun, the developer owns 83 acres west of the park and wants "to build a short road connecting the property to one of Yosemite's central thoroughfares," providing "the land exceptionally rare private access to a park that is otherwise almost entirely buffered by national forests."
The lawmakers noted similar previous efforts that were blocked in court and argued that "at its core, this proposal appears to provide a private benefit at the expense of land that belongs to all Americans."
"This transaction does not seek to expand public access to Yosemite, improve visitor services, or address transportation deficiencies in park access," they emphasized. "Rather, this land exchange seeks to merely cut down on driving time for a select few on private property. Any decision to relinquish public land to private ownership should be supported by a clear and compelling public benefit, not merely the economic interests of a private party."
"We were alarmed that the Department submitted to Congress a proposal to use money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) authority to facilitate this exchange. That fund exists to acquire and protect public lands for the benefit of the American public—not sell them off to corporate developers," the lawmakers wrote, noting that a Senate subcommittee has not agreed to move forward.
The lawmakers also pointed out that "in response to inquiries from Congress, the department indicated that it has not identified any land to be exchanged for the parcel of Yosemite National Park that the department is seeking to sell to the private developer. This gives further credence to the notion that this exchange is not being done in the public interest, but rather solely to benefit a private developer."
"Public lands belong in public hands. Protection of public lands is a bipartisan issue, overwhelmingly supported by the American people from all walks of life," they concluded. "We oppose any effort to privatize, sell off, give away, or otherwise undermine the continued existence of public lands, in Yosemite or across the country. We ask that you honor congressional objections and abandon this effort to sell off a piece of Yosemite National Park."
Separately on Tuesday, a coalition of over 150 advocacy organizations—led by the Center of Biological Diversity—sent a similar letter to Burgum.
"Trump wants to carve off a chunk of Yosemite so a private equity firm can turn it into a playground for billionaires," said Laiken Jordahl, national public lands advocate at the center. "The federal government should be protecting our national parks, not parceling them out behind closed doors to benefit the wealthy and politically connected. If Yosemite can be chopped apart, no national park in America is safe."
The center was joined by groups including the American River Conservancy, California Environmental Justice Coalition, Greenpeace USA, Public Citizen, Public Lands Conservancy, Save Our Parks, Sierra Club, and Yosemite Rivers Alliance.
The coalition described Yosemite as "sacrosanct—the cradle of American conservation, and the first land the federal government protected purely for its scenic value," and warnd that "ceding national park land to a developer sets a dangerous precedent: America's parks are for sale to whomever has the money and power to take them."
Highlighting that "Kingsbarn CEO Jeff Pori is a donor to Trump's campaign... and the firm is represented by politically connected lawyer Lanny Davis," the groups stressed that "deals like this undercut the public's faith in government."
"In your confirmation hearing," the coalition reminded Burgum, "you said 'we need to support and protect every single inch' of our national parks. Yosemite is invaluable, and no portion of it should end up on Kingsbarn's ledger. We expect you to keep your promise and to abide by your statements to Congress."
One critic said his comments made clear that "Patel’s leadership at the FBI has been plagued by inappropriate politicization, rampant mismanagement of funds and resources, and a lack of regard for public safety."
The US Senate Judiciary Committee's Tuesday oversight hearing for the Federal Bureau of Investigation covered a wide range of topics, from alcoholism and bestiality to a snorkeling tour of Pearl Harbor and President Donald Trump's persistent but baseless claims that he won in 2020—and FBI Director Kash Patel came under fire for bolstering the Republican's election lies.
Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) pointed out that just a few days ago, Trump said: "We had a rigged election, as you know. It was totally rigged. Because I won three times. I didn't win twice. I won three times."
The senator then asked Patel if he agreed with Trump's declaration that he won the 2020 election. Although the president's attempts to abuse the US courts to cling to power affirmed his loss, the FBI director responded that "there are many ongoing investigations surrounding that matter, so I'm not gonna comment on it and stylize the evidence."
After giving Patel another opportunity to answer, which the agency leader used to effectively repeat his response, Welch highlighted the FBI's January raid of an election hub in Fulton County, Georgia—which critics, at the time, condemned as an ominous signal that Trump and his allies would do whatever they could to interfere with this November's midterms.
Welch stressed that the raid occurred despite two recounts in Georgia following the 2020 contest—including one by hand, which showed that Trump lost the state by 11,779 votes—"and no investigation has found any evidence of wrongdoing."
Patel refused to even confirm that there haven't yet been any related indictments, saying, "That matter is ongoing."
Asked by Welch if he would promise to "not in any way interfere in the will of the American people when they go to the polls" this November, Patel said, "I pledge unequivocally that I will not participate in your charade of lies," and signaled that FBI agents would be present at some polling stations for the midterms.
Welch also cited Trump's claims that this year's elections are rigged if Republicans lose and Democrats can only win if they cheat. The senator asked Patel if he agreed with the latter, and the bureau chief again refused to comment on what he called "ongoing investigations."
Watch the full hearing below:
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement that "while under oath today, Kash Patel peddled dangerous conspiracy theories and misinformation in order to appease Donald Trump's ego."
"His cowardly statement supporting Trump's claim that the only way Democrats could possibly win in November is if the party cheats is particularly rich given Trump's attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election and his more recent offer to pay $5k to each American if his own party wins the upcoming election," she continued.
"These sycophantic statements and his testimony throughout the hearing make it clear that Patel’s leadership at the FBI has been plagued by inappropriate politicization, rampant mismanagement of funds and resources, and a lack of regard for public safety," she added. "With Patel at the helm of the agency, dedicated career officers have been dumped over loyalty tests, child predators have been protected, and taxpayer dollars have been wasted going after Trump's personal enemies. Every day Patel remains in charge of the FBI is a day too long."
In addition to Welch, several other Democrats had testy exchanges with Patel throughout the hearing—including Sen. Cory Booker (NJ), who blasted the director as an "incompetent lackey" and said: "He's like an 18-year-old kid who wants to join a fraternity that he could never be a member of, doing keg stands and chugging with friends. He's an embarrassment to the agency and wouldn't qualify even to be an FBI agent."
"When authorities abuse the criminal justice system to silence lawful expression, they undermine the rule of law for everyone," said Human Rights Watch.
Amnesty International on Tuesday joined Turkish and other global human rights advocates urging the Justice and Development Party government of longtime President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to end its persecution campaign against Türkiye's LGBTQ+ community and immediately free the scores of activists arrested during the ongoing crackdown.
Police in Istanbul detained at least dozens more demonstrators outside the Çağlayan Courthouse on Tuesday as the protesters demanded the release of the more than 60 people arrested across 15 provinces during and after recent raids on LGBTQ+ rights groups.
Turkish Justice Minister Akın Gürlek said the operation, dubbed "My Family Is Safe," targeted 162 people, nine organizations, and 13 businesses.
“We will show no tolerance for any criminal organization targeting the institution of the family, the future of our youth, and social order,” Gürlek declared at the start of the operation.
More than 180 websites and social media accounts belonging to LGBTQ+ organizations and activists, journalists, media outlets, and others have been blocked or restricted, including Amnesty International Türkiye’s X account.
“This appalling escalation in Türkiye’s crackdown amounts to a full-scale assault on LGBTI rights and those who defend them," Amnesty International deputy regional director for Europe Esther Major said Tuesday in a statement. "The relentless raids, arrests, and demonization of LGBTI people under the spurious guise of ‘protecting the families’ demonstrates why defending LGBTI rights in Türkiye is more important than ever."
“This sweeping crackdown, in which scores of people have been arrested, has nothing to do with protecting families and everything to do with further harming and stigmatizing a community that has battled decades of discrimination and intimidation," Major added.
“This appalling escalation in Türkiye’s crackdown amounts to a full-scale assault on LGBTI rights and those who defend them."
Amnesty is one of dozens of groups that signed a declaration calling on the Turkish government to "stop criminalizing LGBTI+ organizations and human rights defenders."
Human Rights Watch (HRW) noted Monday on social media that "the arrests are allegedly for offenses such as 'obscenity,' prostitution, and drug use, effectively conflating defense of LGBT rights with criminal conduct—all under the pretext of a government campaign to 'protect families.'"
"In fact the arrests have nothing to do with making families safer," HRW said. "Instead, they weaponize the rhetoric of 'family values' to pursue discrimination, stigma, and state repression. Everyone in Türkiye should be concerned: When authorities abuse the criminal justice system to silence lawful expression, they undermine the rule of law for everyone."
"The government should end its crackdown on LGBT rights groups, immediately release detained activists, and end discriminatory targeting of LGBT people and their advocates," the group added.
At the United Nations, Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders Andrea Bolaos Vargas said on Sunday that she was "deeply concerned by reports of mass raids and detention of LGBTIQ+ human rights defenders across Türkiye, alongside searches of LGBTIQ+ associations and seizure of digital equipment."
"I urge the authorities to ensure the immediate release of all those detained solely for their legitimate human rights work and to guarantee that LGBTIQ+ defenders and associations can exercise their rights without criminalization, intimidation, or reprisals," she added.
Turkish rights groups and activists were the first to condemn the crackdown. A coalition of more than 110 women's groups issued a joint statement against the arrests, noting they came on the anniversary of the September 12, 1980 military coup and subsequent evisceration of human rights.
"Today, on the anniversary of September 12th, we woke up with reports of the arrest of activists and independent rights defenders from LGBTI+ associations for the LGBTI+ movement," the groups wrote. "These operations are nothing more than the actual implementation of efforts to criminalize LGBTI+ organizing."
"It is not a crime to make and organize policies on gender identity and sexual orientation," they continued. "As women, we are against these operations, which are carried out under the name of 'keeping the family safe.'"
“We know that pressures on our bodies, our lives, our identities, and the right to organize are part of the same authoritarian politics," the groups added. "Let our detainees be released immediately, and the raids on LGBTI+ organizations, access barriers, and criminalization policies be put down. We, as women's organizations, are in solidarity with the LGBTI+ movement; we will not give up our joint struggle against male-dominated and authoritarian policies!"
Numerous officials in Western nations also condemned the crackdown, including Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner Michael O'Flaherty, who on Tuesday asserted that “mere references to ‘family values’ or ‘protection of children’ cannot serve as legal justification for human rights restrictions."
Leftist Barcelona Mayor Jaume Collboni said Monday: “I condemn the unacceptable wave of pressure targeting LGBTI+ people and organizations in Türkiye. We demand that these operations be terminated immediately and that everyone who has been detained will be released."
"We will not take a step back from defending civil rights in the face of attacks on LGBTI [people] in Türkiye and around the world," he added. "Barcelona will always be with [them]."
“Mere references to ‘family values’ or ‘protection of children’ cannot serve as legal justification for human rights restrictions."
Under Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP), Turkey has undergone a major shift from relative tolerance of LGBTQ+ public life toward increasingly systematic state repression.
While homosexuality—which was decriminalized by the Ottoman Empire in 1858—remains legal, the government has increasingly used restrictions on assembly, speech, civil society, and public expression to marginalize LGBTQ+ people. The AKP is currently weighing proposals that could criminalize LGBTQ+ identity and activism outright.
Erdoğan has repeatedly demonized LGBTQ+ people, especially during elections, during which he has used homophobia in his appeals to an overwhelmingly Muslim electorate.
As one protester outside Çağlayan Courthouse told The Associated Press on Tuesday, “We are going through a period where there is an attempt by the ruling power to portray LGBT+ people as the cause of every problem in this society."
"The need for responsible cryptocurrency regulation remains," said one anti-corruption advocate.
The US Senate voted not to advance a major cryptocurrency bill on Tuesday, heeding warnings from critics that it would fail to regulate the volatile financial asset effectively and would allow President Donald Trump to continue profiting lavishly from it with little oversight.
Earlier reports indicated that crypto industry darling Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) was trying to rally enough Democrats to support the GOP-led Digital Asset Market Clarity Act to get the 60 votes necessary to break the filibuster.
But by Tuesday afternoon, even Gillibrand herself had jumped ship. In what turned out to be a 50-49 vote against the legislation, she joined every other member of the Democratic caucus to vote against the Clarity Act. So did four Republicans—Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), and Thom Tillis (NC).
Democrats who voted against the legislation said that a revised version presented by Republicans on Sunday failed to meet their demands for rules to prevent Trump and other high-ranking officials from profiting from their cryptocurrency ventures while in office.
In 2025, Trump reported roughly $1.4 billion in crypto-related income, including hundreds of millions from his family’s crypto exchange World Liberty Financial (WLF) and from sales of his $TRUMP meme coin.
"President Trump, his children, and his Cabinet are making billions of dollars in the crypto space, in part from bilking everyday Americans out of their hard-earned money," said Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) in a post to social media. "I cannot in good conscience vote for any legislation that codifies that behavior from public officials."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who negotiated the bill's ethics language with Tillis, said in a statement that "instead of spending their time twisting themselves into knots to appease President Trump, Republicans should have worked more closely with Senate Democrats to craft a bill that could pass with strong ethics provisions.”
Reuters reported in August that crypto-aligned super political action committees have spent nearly $190 million during this election cycle to support industry-friendly candidates.
"It’s no secret that they are seeking to ram a bill through Congress based upon not the merits of the bill, but the threat that they will spend even more money in elections against people who vote against it,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who voted against the bill.
Ella Fanger, corporate power policy adviser for the progressive activist group Demand Progress, said in a statement that Democrats "dodged a bullet by refusing to go along with the dangerously weak bill that Trump and the crypto industry have asked for," though she questioned why Gillibrand was advocating for the measure up to the last minute, "particularly at a time when she is claiming to oppose Trump's corruption."
The Clarity Act is stalled for now and likely won't be revived until after the November midterms. But Scott Greytak, deputy executive director of Transparency International US, said that "the need for responsible cryptocurrency regulation remains."
"Before bringing it back, Congress must confront two fundamental failures of the legislation," he said in a statement. "First, it must stop President Trump—and future presidents and other public officials—from profiting from the crypto industry while shaping and enforcing its rules. President Trump’s crypto interests make the stakes clear: Public officials who write or enforce the rules for crypto shouldn’t be allowed to cash in on it."
"Second, Congress must ensure that law enforcement can follow the money wherever it moves," he continued. "Unless the bill applies strong anti-money laundering and sanctions rules across the crypto market, scammers, drug cartels, terrorist financiers, sanctions evaders, and corrupt officials will exploit the weakest parts of the system to move and hide their money."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), one of the Clarity Act's most outspoken critics, said, “Let’s make sure that we do not pass a crypto bill that will let Donald Trump continue to rake in billions of dollars in crypto profits while working families across this country struggle to deal with higher prices and an economy that gets worse by the day."