

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.
Advocates for over 5,000 victims of cholera in Haiti put the UN on notice that they intend to file suit in a national court if the UN continues its refusal to provide compensation for its negligence in introducing cholera to the country. Haiti's first cholera epidemic in over a century compounded the misery in a country reeling from the devastating 2010 earthquake that ravaged its already vulnerable health and sanitation system. As of this month, the epidemic has caused incalculable suffering - the death toll from cholera exceeds 8,100, and over 654,000 Haitians have been sickened.
Advocates for over 5,000 victims of cholera in Haiti put the UN on notice that they intend to file suit in a national court if the UN continues its refusal to provide compensation for its negligence in introducing cholera to the country. Haiti's first cholera epidemic in over a century compounded the misery in a country reeling from the devastating 2010 earthquake that ravaged its already vulnerable health and sanitation system. As of this month, the epidemic has caused incalculable suffering - the death toll from cholera exceeds 8,100, and over 654,000 Haitians have been sickened. Despite multiple scientific studies that have consistently attributed the cause of the outbreak of cholera in Haiti to UN troops from Nepal and the UN's negligent waste disposal system, the UN is claiming that it is immune from claims.
The Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti and theBureau des Avocats Internationauxsubmitted a claim on behalf of cholera victims for relief and reparations to the UN on November 3, 2011,requesting that the UN upgrade the national water and sanitation infrastructure, provide compensation to victims for their losses, and issue a public apology. For more than a year, the UN refused to formally respond to the claim. Finally, in a letter dated February 21, 2013, the UN dismissed these claims, asserting that they are "not receivable pursuant to Section 29 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations," and justifying immunity on the theory that "consideration of these claims would necessarily include a review of political and policy matters." Despite this assertion, the UN declined to provide any real legal justification for its avoidance of responsibility, which lawyers for the claimants characterize as flimsy. As advocates note, the negligent disposal of waste hardly constitutes "political and policy matters." In addition to claiming immunity, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has pointedly declined to accept or deny the UN's responsibility for introducing cholera to Haiti, despite the overwhelming scientific evidenceof its culpability.
For an institution whose mission includes upholding the rule of law and alleviating poverty, the UN's conduct in administering and overseeing its troops' "stabilization mission" in Haiti, known by its French acronym, MINUSTAH, has been deplorable. The Status of Forces Agreement between the UN and the Haitian government required the UN to institute a Standing Claims Commission to resolve civil claims against MINUSTAH troops. Despite the presence of MINUSTAH troops in Haiti since 2004, the UN never set up the Commission, depriving Haitians of any mechanism to redress grievances. The UN's refusal to accept responsibility for cholera occurs against a backdrop of impunity for misconduct perpetrated by MINUSTAH troops in Haiti, such as sexual misconduct, including Uruguayan soldierswhose sexual assault of a young man was recorded on video, and credible charges against Pakistani and Sri Lankan troops. Critics notethat the presence of MINUSTAH remains controversial among Haitians, and that the $648 million per year budget for the UN peacekeeping mission could instead be repurposed to fund two years of the cholera elimination initiative.
Aside from the legal imperative, the UN has a moral obligation to remedy the harm it caused in Haiti. In tacit recognition of its obligation to help ameliorate the devastating impact of the cholera epidemic, Ban Ki-moon vowed five months ago to "use every opportunity"to generate the resources necessary to end cholera in Haiti. Despite its laudatory pronouncement, fundraising efforts have yielded only a fraction of the necessary money to combat cholera, a shortfall exacerbate other failures in the flow of aid to Haiti - more than a third of the $5.4 billion that the international community pledgedfor reconstruction has not been paid. According to a report issued by Physicians for Haiti, the UN also refuses to implement the recommendations of its own experts to prevent a recurrence, despite the fact that three of the recommendations could be implemented at either no or minimal cost to the UN.
Advocates notified the UN in a response letterdated May 7 that if there was not progress toward a reasonable resolution of these claims, they will file suit in a national court, convinced that the law is on their side. As the UN evades responsibility, the economic and human costs of delaying remediation of the epidemic are incalculable, and cholera continues to inflict preventable suffering and deaths. Although cholera has receded temporarily, cases between November through February were higher than the same period last year. Moreover, the rainy season is looming, which typically ushers in a spike in cases. Experts note that a well-managed effort is required to completely eliminate the epidemic. Haiti's vulnerability to a epidemic emanating from water-borne disease was not a surprise, nor is the impoverished country's inability to vanquish cholera on its own. While the Haitian government lacks the institutional and financial resources to address this crisis, the UN has both the legal and moral obligation to provide reparations and to finance improvements to the weak health and sanitation infrastructure that impede the eradication of cholera on Haitian soil. This UN's response to the cholera crisis it caused demonstrates why a lawsuit is critical: both to force the UN to take the steps necessary to control the epidemic, and to set standards of accountability and deterrence, by making the price of future malfeasance unpalatable.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
Advocates for over 5,000 victims of cholera in Haiti put the UN on notice that they intend to file suit in a national court if the UN continues its refusal to provide compensation for its negligence in introducing cholera to the country. Haiti's first cholera epidemic in over a century compounded the misery in a country reeling from the devastating 2010 earthquake that ravaged its already vulnerable health and sanitation system. As of this month, the epidemic has caused incalculable suffering - the death toll from cholera exceeds 8,100, and over 654,000 Haitians have been sickened. Despite multiple scientific studies that have consistently attributed the cause of the outbreak of cholera in Haiti to UN troops from Nepal and the UN's negligent waste disposal system, the UN is claiming that it is immune from claims.
The Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti and theBureau des Avocats Internationauxsubmitted a claim on behalf of cholera victims for relief and reparations to the UN on November 3, 2011,requesting that the UN upgrade the national water and sanitation infrastructure, provide compensation to victims for their losses, and issue a public apology. For more than a year, the UN refused to formally respond to the claim. Finally, in a letter dated February 21, 2013, the UN dismissed these claims, asserting that they are "not receivable pursuant to Section 29 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations," and justifying immunity on the theory that "consideration of these claims would necessarily include a review of political and policy matters." Despite this assertion, the UN declined to provide any real legal justification for its avoidance of responsibility, which lawyers for the claimants characterize as flimsy. As advocates note, the negligent disposal of waste hardly constitutes "political and policy matters." In addition to claiming immunity, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has pointedly declined to accept or deny the UN's responsibility for introducing cholera to Haiti, despite the overwhelming scientific evidenceof its culpability.
For an institution whose mission includes upholding the rule of law and alleviating poverty, the UN's conduct in administering and overseeing its troops' "stabilization mission" in Haiti, known by its French acronym, MINUSTAH, has been deplorable. The Status of Forces Agreement between the UN and the Haitian government required the UN to institute a Standing Claims Commission to resolve civil claims against MINUSTAH troops. Despite the presence of MINUSTAH troops in Haiti since 2004, the UN never set up the Commission, depriving Haitians of any mechanism to redress grievances. The UN's refusal to accept responsibility for cholera occurs against a backdrop of impunity for misconduct perpetrated by MINUSTAH troops in Haiti, such as sexual misconduct, including Uruguayan soldierswhose sexual assault of a young man was recorded on video, and credible charges against Pakistani and Sri Lankan troops. Critics notethat the presence of MINUSTAH remains controversial among Haitians, and that the $648 million per year budget for the UN peacekeeping mission could instead be repurposed to fund two years of the cholera elimination initiative.
Aside from the legal imperative, the UN has a moral obligation to remedy the harm it caused in Haiti. In tacit recognition of its obligation to help ameliorate the devastating impact of the cholera epidemic, Ban Ki-moon vowed five months ago to "use every opportunity"to generate the resources necessary to end cholera in Haiti. Despite its laudatory pronouncement, fundraising efforts have yielded only a fraction of the necessary money to combat cholera, a shortfall exacerbate other failures in the flow of aid to Haiti - more than a third of the $5.4 billion that the international community pledgedfor reconstruction has not been paid. According to a report issued by Physicians for Haiti, the UN also refuses to implement the recommendations of its own experts to prevent a recurrence, despite the fact that three of the recommendations could be implemented at either no or minimal cost to the UN.
Advocates notified the UN in a response letterdated May 7 that if there was not progress toward a reasonable resolution of these claims, they will file suit in a national court, convinced that the law is on their side. As the UN evades responsibility, the economic and human costs of delaying remediation of the epidemic are incalculable, and cholera continues to inflict preventable suffering and deaths. Although cholera has receded temporarily, cases between November through February were higher than the same period last year. Moreover, the rainy season is looming, which typically ushers in a spike in cases. Experts note that a well-managed effort is required to completely eliminate the epidemic. Haiti's vulnerability to a epidemic emanating from water-borne disease was not a surprise, nor is the impoverished country's inability to vanquish cholera on its own. While the Haitian government lacks the institutional and financial resources to address this crisis, the UN has both the legal and moral obligation to provide reparations and to finance improvements to the weak health and sanitation infrastructure that impede the eradication of cholera on Haitian soil. This UN's response to the cholera crisis it caused demonstrates why a lawsuit is critical: both to force the UN to take the steps necessary to control the epidemic, and to set standards of accountability and deterrence, by making the price of future malfeasance unpalatable.
Advocates for over 5,000 victims of cholera in Haiti put the UN on notice that they intend to file suit in a national court if the UN continues its refusal to provide compensation for its negligence in introducing cholera to the country. Haiti's first cholera epidemic in over a century compounded the misery in a country reeling from the devastating 2010 earthquake that ravaged its already vulnerable health and sanitation system. As of this month, the epidemic has caused incalculable suffering - the death toll from cholera exceeds 8,100, and over 654,000 Haitians have been sickened. Despite multiple scientific studies that have consistently attributed the cause of the outbreak of cholera in Haiti to UN troops from Nepal and the UN's negligent waste disposal system, the UN is claiming that it is immune from claims.
The Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti and theBureau des Avocats Internationauxsubmitted a claim on behalf of cholera victims for relief and reparations to the UN on November 3, 2011,requesting that the UN upgrade the national water and sanitation infrastructure, provide compensation to victims for their losses, and issue a public apology. For more than a year, the UN refused to formally respond to the claim. Finally, in a letter dated February 21, 2013, the UN dismissed these claims, asserting that they are "not receivable pursuant to Section 29 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations," and justifying immunity on the theory that "consideration of these claims would necessarily include a review of political and policy matters." Despite this assertion, the UN declined to provide any real legal justification for its avoidance of responsibility, which lawyers for the claimants characterize as flimsy. As advocates note, the negligent disposal of waste hardly constitutes "political and policy matters." In addition to claiming immunity, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has pointedly declined to accept or deny the UN's responsibility for introducing cholera to Haiti, despite the overwhelming scientific evidenceof its culpability.
For an institution whose mission includes upholding the rule of law and alleviating poverty, the UN's conduct in administering and overseeing its troops' "stabilization mission" in Haiti, known by its French acronym, MINUSTAH, has been deplorable. The Status of Forces Agreement between the UN and the Haitian government required the UN to institute a Standing Claims Commission to resolve civil claims against MINUSTAH troops. Despite the presence of MINUSTAH troops in Haiti since 2004, the UN never set up the Commission, depriving Haitians of any mechanism to redress grievances. The UN's refusal to accept responsibility for cholera occurs against a backdrop of impunity for misconduct perpetrated by MINUSTAH troops in Haiti, such as sexual misconduct, including Uruguayan soldierswhose sexual assault of a young man was recorded on video, and credible charges against Pakistani and Sri Lankan troops. Critics notethat the presence of MINUSTAH remains controversial among Haitians, and that the $648 million per year budget for the UN peacekeeping mission could instead be repurposed to fund two years of the cholera elimination initiative.
Aside from the legal imperative, the UN has a moral obligation to remedy the harm it caused in Haiti. In tacit recognition of its obligation to help ameliorate the devastating impact of the cholera epidemic, Ban Ki-moon vowed five months ago to "use every opportunity"to generate the resources necessary to end cholera in Haiti. Despite its laudatory pronouncement, fundraising efforts have yielded only a fraction of the necessary money to combat cholera, a shortfall exacerbate other failures in the flow of aid to Haiti - more than a third of the $5.4 billion that the international community pledgedfor reconstruction has not been paid. According to a report issued by Physicians for Haiti, the UN also refuses to implement the recommendations of its own experts to prevent a recurrence, despite the fact that three of the recommendations could be implemented at either no or minimal cost to the UN.
Advocates notified the UN in a response letterdated May 7 that if there was not progress toward a reasonable resolution of these claims, they will file suit in a national court, convinced that the law is on their side. As the UN evades responsibility, the economic and human costs of delaying remediation of the epidemic are incalculable, and cholera continues to inflict preventable suffering and deaths. Although cholera has receded temporarily, cases between November through February were higher than the same period last year. Moreover, the rainy season is looming, which typically ushers in a spike in cases. Experts note that a well-managed effort is required to completely eliminate the epidemic. Haiti's vulnerability to a epidemic emanating from water-borne disease was not a surprise, nor is the impoverished country's inability to vanquish cholera on its own. While the Haitian government lacks the institutional and financial resources to address this crisis, the UN has both the legal and moral obligation to provide reparations and to finance improvements to the weak health and sanitation infrastructure that impede the eradication of cholera on Haitian soil. This UN's response to the cholera crisis it caused demonstrates why a lawsuit is critical: both to force the UN to take the steps necessary to control the epidemic, and to set standards of accountability and deterrence, by making the price of future malfeasance unpalatable.
Khalil's wife said that "officers in plain clothes—who refused to show us a warrant, speak with our attorney, or even tell us their names—forced my husband into an unmarked car and took him away from me."
The family of Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the United States now at risk of deportation because he helped lead pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University last spring, on Friday released a video of his recent arrest by U.S. Department of Homeland Security agents in New York City, which has sparked legal battles and protests.
"You're watching the most terrifying moment of my life," Khalil's wife, Noor, said in a statement about the two-minute video. "This felt like a kidnapping because it was: Officers in plain clothes—who refused to show us a warrant, speak with our attorney, or even tell us their names—forced my husband into an unmarked car and took him away from me."
"Everyone should be alarmed and urgently calling for the freedom of Mahmoud and all other students under attack for their advocacy for Palestinian human rights."
"They threatened to take me too, even though we were calm and fully cooperating. For the next 38 hours after this video, neither I or our lawyers knew where Mahmoud was being held. Now, he's over 1,000 miles from home, still being wrongfully detained by U.S. immigration," said Noor, whose husband is detained at a facility in Jena, Louisiana.
Noor, who is eight months pregnant, noted that "Mahmoud has repeatedly warned of growing threats from Columbia University and the U.S. government unjustly targeting students who want to see an end to Israel's genocide in Gaza. Now, the Trump administration and DHS are targeting him, and other students too."
"Mahmoud is clearly the first of many to be illegally repressed for their speech in support of Palestinian rights," she added. "Everyone should be alarmed and urgently calling for the freedom of Mahmoud and all other students under attack for their advocacy for Palestinian human rights."
Khalil, who finished his graduate studies at Columbia in December, is an Algerian citizen of Palestinian descent. He was living in the United States with a green card until his arrest on Saturday. In response to a filing by his legal team—which includes Amy Greer from Dratel & Lewis, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), and the Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility (CLEAR) project—a judge has temporarily blocked his deportation.
The ACLU and its New York arm have joined Khalil's legal team, and his attorneys filed an amended petition and complaint on Thursday. NYCLU executive director Donna Lieberman said that with the new "filing, we are making it crystal clear that no president can arrest, detain, or deport anyone for disagreeing with the government. The Trump administration has selectively targeted Mr. Khalil, a student, husband, and father-to-be who has not been accused of a single crime, to send a message of just how far they will go to crack down on dissent."
"But we at the NYCLU and ACLU won't stand for it—under the Constitution, the Trump administration has no basis to continue this cruel weaponization of Mr. Khalil's life," Lieberman added. "The court must release Mr. Khalil immediately and let him go home to his family in New York, where he belongs. Ideas are not illegal, and dissent is not grounds for deportation."
Samah Sisay of CCR reiterated those messages as the arrest video circulated on Friday, saying that "Mr. Khalil was taken by plainclothes DHS agents in front of his pregnant wife without any legal justification. Mr. Khalil must be freed because the government cannot use these coercive tactics to unlawfully suppress his First Amendment protected speech in support of Palestinian rights."
"Between his massive conflicts of interest across the healthcare sector and his endorsement of further privatizing Medicare, Oz would be a threat to the health of tens of millions of Americans," said one opponent.
Progressive watchdog organizations responded to the U.S. Senate Finance Committee's Friday hearing for Dr. Mehmet Oz by again sounding the alarm about the heart surgeon and former television host nominated to lead a key federal healthcare agency.
Since President Donald Trump announced Oz as his nominee for administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) last November, opponents have spotlighted the doctor's promotion of unproven products, investments in companies with interests in the federal agency, and support for expanding Medicare Advantage during an unsuccessful U.S. Senate run in 2022.
"Dr. Oz's career promoting dubious medical treatments and pseudoscience often for personal financial gain should immediately disqualify him from serving in any public health capacity, let alone in a top administration health post," Accountable.US executive director Tony Carrk said in a Friday statement.
"Dr. Oz's nomination is part of President Trump's grand plan to enrich his corporate donors and wealthy friends while the rest of us get higher costs, less coverage, and weakened protections."
In December, Carrk's group found that based on disclosures from Oz's 2022 run against U.S. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), the Republican doctor reported "up to $56 million in investments in three companies" with direct CMS interests—including Sharecare, which became the "exclusive in-home care supplemental benefit program" for 1.5 million Medicare Advantage enrollees.
A spokesperson said at the time that Oz has since divested from Sharecare. However, critics have still expressed concern about how the nominee's confirmation could boost Republican efforts to expand Medicare Advantage—health insurance plans for seniors administered by private companies rather than the government.
"As a self-interested advocate of privatizing Medicare at a higher cost and more denials of care for seniors, Dr. Oz is surely eager to enact the Trump-Republican budget plan to gut Medicare and Medicaid and jeopardize health coverage for millions of Americans—all to pay for more tax breaks for billionaires and price gouging corporations," said Carrk. "Dr. Oz's nomination is part of President Trump's grand plan to enrich his corporate donors and wealthy friends while the rest of us get higher costs, less coverage, and weakened protections—especially those with preexisting conditions."
As he faces Senate confirmation, remember that Dr. Oz: -Pushed Medicare privatization plans on his show -Owns ~$600k in stock in private insurers -Has ties to pyramid scheme companies that promote fake medical cures His main qualification to oversee CMS is loyalty to Trump.
— Robert Reich ( @rbreich.bsky.social) March 14, 2025 at 1:41 PM
Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, has been similarly critical of Oz, and remained so after senators questioned him on Friday, saying in a statement that "Mehmet Oz showed he is profoundly unqualified to lead any part of our healthcare system, let alone an agency as important as CMS."
"Between his massive conflicts of interest across the healthcare sector and his endorsement of further privatizing Medicare, Oz would be a threat to the health of tens of millions of Americans," Weissman warned. "Privatized Medicare Advantage plans deliver inferior care and cost taxpayers nearly $100 billion annually in excess costs."
"It is time for President Trump to put down the remote, stop finding nominees on television, and instead nominate people with actual experience and a belief in the importance of protecting crucial health programs like Medicare and Medicaid," he argued, taking aim at not only the president but also his billionaire adviser Elon Musk, head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency and, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the conspiracy theorist now running the Department of Health and Human Services.
Weissman declared that "Trump, Musk, and RFK Jr. fail to put the American people first as they seek to gut agencies and make dangerous cuts to health programs to fund tax cuts for billionaires. Oz indicated he would not oppose such cuts, bringing more destruction to lifesaving programs. Oz has no place in government and should be roundly rejected by every senator."
During a Friday exchange with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the committee's ranking member, Oz refused to decisively commit to opposing cuts to Medicaid. As the Alliance for Retired Americans highlighted, Oz kept that up when given opportunities to revise his answer by Sens. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.).
Other moments from the hearing that garnered attention included Oz's exchange with Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) about Affordable Care Act tax credits and Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) calling out the doctor for his unwillingness "to take accountability for" his "promotion of unproven snake oil remedies" to millions of TV viewers.
Betar—which the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League has blacklisted after comments like "not enough" babies were killed in Gaza—says it provided "thousands of names" for possible arrest and expulsion.
Betar, the international far-right pro-Israel group that took credit for the Department of Homeland Security's arrest of former Columbia University graduate student and permanent U.S. resident Mahmoud Khalil for protesting the annihilation of Gaza, claimed this week that it has sent "thousands of names" of Palestine defenders to Trump administration officials for possible deportation.
"Jihadis have no place in civilized nations," Betar said on social media Friday following the publication of a Guardian article on the extremist group's activities.
Earlier this week, Betar said: "We told you we have been working on deportations and will continue to do so. Expect naturalized citizens to start being picked up within the month. You heard it here first. Those who support jihad and intifada and originate in terrorist states will be sent back to those lands."
Betar has been gloating about last week's arrest of Khalil, the lead negotiator for the group Columbia University Apartheid Divest during the April 2024 Gaza Solidarity Encampment.
On Thursday, immigration officers arrested another Columbia Gaza protester, Leqaa Kordia—a Palestinian from the illegally occupied West Bank—for allegedly overstaying her expired student visa. Kordia was also arrested last April during one of the Columbia campus protests against the Gaza onslaught.
On Friday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said that Ranjani Srinivasan, an Indian doctoral student at Columbia whose visa was revoked on March 5 for alleged involvement "in activities supporting" Hamas—the Palestinian resistance group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government—used the Customs and Border Protection's self-deportation app and, according to media reports, has left the country.
Khalil and Kordia's arrests come as the Trump administration targets Columbia and other schools over pro-Palestinian protests under the guise of combating antisemitism, despite the Ivy League university's violent crackdown on demonstrations and revocation of degrees from some pro-Palestine activists.
U.S. President Donald Trump, who in January signed an executive order authorizing the deportation of noncitizen students and others who took part in protests against Israel's war on Gaza, called Khalil's detention "the first arrest of many to come."
The Department of Justice announced Friday that it is investigating whether pro-Palestinian demonstrators at the school violated federal anti-terrorism laws. This followed Thursday's search of two Columbia dorm rooms by DHS agents and the cancellation earlier this month of $400 million worth of funding and contracts for Columbia because the Trump administration says university officials haven't done enough to tackle alleged antisemitism on campus.
On Friday, Betar named Mohsen Mahdawi, a Palestinian studying philosophy at Columbia, as its next target.
Critics have voiced alarm about Betar's activities, pointing to the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League's recent designation of the organization as a hate group. Founded in 1923 by the early Zionist leader Ze'ev Jabotinsky, Betar has a long history of extremism. Its members—who included former Israeli Prime Ministers Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin—took part in the Zionist terror campaign against Palestinian Arabs and British forces occupying Palestine in the 1940s.
Today, Betar supports Kahanism—a Jewish supremacist and apartheid movement named after Meir Kahane, an Orthodox rabbi convicted of terrorism before being assassinated in 1990—and is linked to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party. The group has called for the ethnic cleansing and Israeli recolonization of Gaza. During Israel's assault on the coastal enclave, which is the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case, its account on the social media site X responded to the publication of a list of thousands of Palestinian children killed by Israeli forces by saying: "Not enough. We demand blood in Gaza!"
Ross Glick, who led the U.S. chapter of Betar until last month, told The Guardian that he has met with bipartisan members of Congress who support the group's efforts, naming lawmakers including Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and John Fetterman (D-Pa.). Glick also claimed to have the support of "collaborators" who use artificial intelligence and facial recognition to help identify pro-Palestine activists. Earlier this month, the U.S. State Department said it was launching an AI-powered "catch and revoke" program to cancel the visas of international students deemed supportive of Hamas.
Betar isn't alone in aggressively targeting Palestine defenders. The group Canary Mission—which said it is "delighted" about Khalil's "deserved consequences"—publishes an online database containing personal information about people it deems antisemitic, and this week released a video naming five other international students it says are "linked to campus extremism at Columbia."
Shai Davidai, an assistant professor at Columbia who was temporarily banned from campus last year after harassing university employees, and Columbia student David Lederer, have waged what Khalil called "a vicious, coordinated, and dehumanizing doxxing campaign" against him and other activists.
Meanwhile, opponents of the Trump administration's crackdown on constitutionally protected protest rights have rallied in defense of Khalil and the First Amendment. Nearly 100 Jewish-led demonstrators were arrested Thursday during a protest in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York City demanding Khalil's release.
"We know what happens when an autocratic regime starts taking away our rights and scapegoating and we will not be silent," said Sonya Meyerson-Knox, the communications director for Jewish Voice for Peace. "Come for one—face us all."