How to spot a conspiracy theorist in seconds

Mike Lindell speaks to the media as he attends Donald Trump's rally in Kinston, North Carolina, U.S., November 3, 2024. REUTERS/Jonathan Drake

Matthew Rozsa

May 27, 2026 

ALTERNET

The Internet is full of conspiracy theorists who, knowing the stigma associated with the “conspiracy theorist” label, try to conceal their tendencies by seeming reasonable. Yet a new study reveals a simple tell that these conspiracy theorists have — and it may not be what you think.

“Exploratory linguistic analyses revealed that conspiracism was associated with greater use of conspiracy-related vocabulary (e.g., deception, government), a disproportionate use of sophisticated words, and increased syntactic complexity,” explained the authors of a recent article in the scientific journal PLOS One. “These results suggest that conspiracism may emerge more readily at the lexical level rather than through fully structured narratives. We discuss potential methodological and theoretical factors contributing to these unexpected results, including the roles of context, perceived relevance, motivation, and collective social dynamics. We also consider the possibility that conspiracism may not directly translate into conspiratorial narratives.”

In other words, conspiracy theorists like to gussy up their arguments with ornate language and seemingly-sophisticated forms of analysis, all of which serve to conceal from the public whether their ideas are provably connected to demonstrable facts.

“If so, we recommend comparative research on online vs offline conspiratorial writing to clarify whether conspiracy theories emerge spontaneously from genuine beliefs or are constructed strategically, detached from genuinely held beliefs,” PLOS One concluded.

To learn this, the study authors asked participants to watch an apocalyptic thriller, Leave the World Behind, which is notable for its ambiguous ending. When the nearly 400 study participants were asked to write essays interpreting the movie’s vague information, the scholars — using AI to break down the statistics — found that conspiracy theorists use complex language to make their ideas seem more credible. The use of this language, and the fact that it is consistently untethered to any kind of concrete evidence, is the tell.

“We were surprised that conspiratorial narratives did not emerge as we had predicted,” Alessandro Miani, a researcher in the Department of Psychology at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland and the study’s lead author, told PsyPost's Eric W. Dolan. “We preregistered the hypothesis that people higher in conspiracism would ‘fill the gaps’ of an ambiguous film with conspiratorial interpretations, and we ran two studies with two different conspiracy-belief scales. In both, the expected link between conspiracism and conspiratorial narrative content simply wasn’t there.”

This is not the first study to determine how cognitive processes influence people believing or not believing in conspiracy theories. In February 2024, The Conversation released a breakdown of numerous studies that traced individual thinking styles to one’s propensity to believe in conspiracy theories.

“Research shows that our thinking style can be predictive of susceptibility to conspiracy theories,” The Conversation explained. “The dual processing theory of cognitive style suggests that we have two routes which we can use to process information.”

The Conversation added, “One route is the fast, intuitive route which leans more on personal experiences and gut feelings. The other route is a slower, more analytical route which instead relies on elaborative and detailed processing of information.” Overall “what you tend to see is that people who are not necessarily smarter but who favour the more effortful, analytical thinking style are more resistant to conspiracy beliefs. For example, a British 2014 study found that those who scored highly for questions such as ‘I enjoy problems that require hard thinking’ were less likely to accept conspiracy beliefs.”

The article added, “It also found those who were less likely to engage in effortful thinking styles and more likely to use intuitive thinking showed a higher belief in conspiracy theories.”

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for AMERICAN CONSPIRACY

OPINION

'Pressure' shows why Eisenhower trusted scientists over blowhards —and why we should too

This photograph TR 207 comes from the collections of the Imperial War Museums., Public Domain

Matthew Rozsa

May 31, 2026

ALTERNET

At one point in “Pressure,” meteorologist James Stagg (Andrew Scott) explains to General Dwight D. Eisenhower (Brendan Fraser) that an impending storm will make it impossible for the Allied troops to successfully invade Normandy as planned. As he attempts to break down the meteorology, his competing scientist Irving P. Krick insists on rudely interrupting with his own ill-informed point-of-view. Eventually Stagg tells Krick what he — and the audience — needs to hear: That Krick is “a confident moron.”

With a single insult, Scott’s Stagg sums up both the chief lesson of “Pressure” and its primary pleasure as a source of entertainment. Much like a similar recent World War II-themed blockbuster, “Oppenheimer,” “Pressure” is at its core a story of hard-working, well-informed scientists fighting against arrogant ignorance. While the primary ignoramuses in “Oppenheimer” were political reactionaries and Krick is merely a blowhard, both emerge as antagonists because their hostility toward experts imperils the security and values of the free world.

Directed by Anthony Maras, who co-authored the script with David Haig based on the latter’s stageplay of the same name, “Pressure” follows Eisenhower, Stagg, Krick, Eisenhower’s secretary Kay Summersby (Kerry Condon) and Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery (Damian Lewis) in the days before the June 1944 Normandy invasion known today as “D-Day.” The Allies would be unusually dependent on favorable weather to win the battle, so Eisenhower demands to know what the weather will be. Krick, using so-called “analog” maps that rely on past weather conditions to predict future ones, anticipates sunny skies and clear weather. Stagg, by contrast, relies on sophisticated data collection to anticipate a jet stream will push a major storm into the area.


The main drama in “Pressure” therefore involves the clashing egos of Stagg and Krick (who are equally full of themselves) as well as their clashing intellects (in which Stagg is clearly Krick’s superior). Eisenhower is thus placed in the unenviable position of needing to figure out which one is more reliable. From this potentially dry premise, “Pressure” creates a deeply engaging and fast-paced work of art.

I am not alone in this assessment. Ali, a 13-year-old self-described “history buff” who lives near the Pennsylvania theater where I saw “Pressure,” was very enthusiastic, gushing about how much she enjoyed seeing history brought to life and explaining she chose “Pressure” because it was the only film in theaters that looked interesting. Seven other theatergoers echoed her view, and that was only a small sample of the (for a Friday matinee) surprisingly packed auditorium.


To be clear, “Pressure” does not get the history 100 percent correct. Retired meteorologist Glenn “The Hurricane” Schwartz, who worked for the eastern Pennsylvania NBC affiliate from 1995 to 2022, broke down several aspects of the history that the film missed. It does not mention “pioneering meteorologist” Sverre Petterssen, a key part of the team who Schwartz explained “confidently predicted a bad storm for the 5th. Petterssen literally ‘wrote the book(s)’ on weather forecasting that I actually had to use as a [meteorology] undergrad in 1972!" It overlooks Krick’s post-war disgrace, not even mentioning it in the ending credits text. As Schwartz explained, he interviewed Dr. Francis Davis, who served “on Krick's team. Amazingly, Krick bragged about his role in the D-Day forecast EVEN THOUGH HE WAS DEAD WRONG! Even Davis admitted as such in my 2002 interview. ‘....it didn't work out very well.’” He later added that "Krick was so controversial and his ‘analog’ methods were so criticized by the meteorological community that he was about to be the first person ever thrown out of the American Meteorological Society for violating their Code of Ethics. He resigned instead. His methods live on in the private company, Planalytics, which happens to be located in the [Philadelphia] area. And believe it or not, AI appears to use analogs to make their forecasts, which happened to beat the National Hurricane Center and ALL computer models last season."

For Eisenhower buffs, perhaps the most notable omission is the widely substantiated (but technically unconfirmed) affair between the general and Summersby. Shortly before her death, Summersby admitted that she had to "disguise as best I could the intimacy that had grown between General Eisenhower and me. It was better that way.” While that omission was arguably defensible during Eisenhower’s lifetime, it becomes considerably less so in a movie intended to accurately reflect their interactions. One does not need the steamy indulgences of Oppenheimer’s affair in “Oppenheimer” to at least get that part right.

Yet there is also much for history and science buffs to love about “Pressure.” When it comes to the fundamental contours of the plot, science, military strategizing and overall history, “Pressure” is accurate. In the words of Dr. Michael E. Mann, the Presidential Distinguished Professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, “weather forecasting back then, before the age of numerical weather forecasting (which began in 1950 courtesy of the ENIAC computer at my university, Penn) was fairly primitive. It mainly consisted of using printed out weather maps and the elementary approaches we teach students in introductory courses on meteorology, which consists of taking the surface features (highs and lows), estimating the upper level steering winds, and predicting where those lows and highs are going to end up days later (it’s called the ‘steady state’ approach to forecasting).”


Perhaps most notably, “Pressure” subtly but firmly establishes the link between ignoring science and supporting reactionary political structures. Speaking to the San Francisco Chronicle’s G. Allen Johnson, Fraser explained that “it is a story that speaks to us 80-some years later. We see soldiers deployed again. We ask ourselves why, and then we ask ourselves why compared to 1944. The reason for even fighting (World War II) at all was to end fascism. To partner with nations and allies, later to become NATO, NASA, civil rights. I could go on.”

Maras elaborated on the scientific point.

“Eisenhower had those magnanimous examples of leadership that I think the world could benefit from now,” Maras told Johnson. “He took seriously the points of view of experts. We live in a specialized world, and it’s less about what any leader in particular knows and it is more about having the wisdom of who to trust and why you trust them.”


Dr. Federico Finchelstein, University in Exile Research Professor and Professor of History at The New School for Social Research and Eugene Lang College, told AlterNet that this link is far from coincidental. Indeed, Eisenhower himself famously liberated many concentration camps during the Holocaust so that the Jewish community could prove the atrocities that happened, and explicitly recognized the junk science used by Nazis to rationalize their oppression.

“I can say that historically fascism has had an ambiguous relationship with science,” Finchelstein said. “It instrumentalized rational means to achieve irrational ends. Science per se was not a problem for them insofar as it did not contradict their unreason, their ideological irrational being. Current wannabe fascists, including the Trumpists, tend to do the same but they are even more anti-science and more irrational regarding their means.”

While Krick is not a fascist, his ignorance is part of the same erroneous line of thinking that informs the Allies’ fascist foes. They first come to a conclusion, then retroactively create a logic to support it. Good leadership requires following the facts, even when they are inconvenient and especially when they disprove one's own prejudices. As Eisenhower himself famously told President John F. Kennedy near the end of Eisenhower’s own administration, the Allies won because they had better meteorologists than the Germans.

As President Donald Trump attacks the reality of man-made climate change and slashes federal funding to science programs all over America, this message is both relevant and poignant. Eisenhower was a firm supporter of funding scientific research and education.


“Science education is not only crucial for students with science ambitions,” Schwartz explained. “It's important to understand the basics of how science works to responsibly argue about climate, for example. And scientific research is crucial for the advancement of any branch of science. Cutting observations, research, or efforts to improve forecasting would horrify Eisenhower today.”

Or as Mann told AlterNet, “Not only did Eisenhower understand the importance of embracing science; he understood the pernicious consequences of bigotry and the importance of fighting back against it.” Connecting that point to today, “look no further than the latest effort by Trump and the polluters that he represents (and their hired propagandists) to attack the work of the international climate science community by misrepresenting the latest findings regarding the threat of climate change.”

At one point I quoted Eisenhower to Mann as a way of explaining how the film’s message is relevant to the Trump era.

"High-quality professional personnel in science, engineering, teaching, languages, and other critical fields are necessary to our national security effort,” Eisenhower said in 1958. “Each year, nevertheless, many young people drop out of high school before graduation. Many able high school graduates do not go on to college. This represents a waste of needed talent."

Mann replied, “Right on the money.” If I had to summarize “Pressure” in four words, those are the ones I’d choose: “Right on the money.”

OPINION

Behind a Trump aide's surreal plan to shut down travel —and sink the U.S. economy

Markwayne Mullin wipes tears as he speaks about his son during testimony before a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 18, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci

Michael Signorile,

 The Signorile Report

May 31, 2026 


You may have thought the dog-killing Kristi Noem was the worst that the Trump administration could get for Homeland Security Secretary.

But here is former Oklahoma senator Markwayne Mullin and current DHS secretary, who doubled down last week on Fox on a threat to shut down Customs and Border Patrol processing of flights at major international airports located in “sanctuary cities”—in other words, cities that direct their local law enforcement not to engage in immigration and detention efforts by working with federal agents.

It’s not, however, just about working with local law enforcement on immigration. Mullen—and Trump—want cities and states to agree with them completely on mass deportation to the point of shutting down protest. We’ve been here before, when federal agents tried to shut down protests in Minneapolis and executed two American citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, in the streets.

Now they’re putting a gun to the heads of entire cities and states. Mullen was angry about a protest in New Jersey at a detention facility in Newark, where dozens of demonstrators—including U.S. Senator Andy Kim—were cruelly pepper-sprayed. Basically, Mullen wants the protests stopped, and if they’re not, he’ll stop the processing of travelers on flights into cities that don’t collaborate with Trump’s fascistic actions.

Though Mullen says CBP agents “process immigration,” CBP’s job at airports is actually to make sure only U.S. citizens or foreign visitors with visas—tourist visas, work visas, or permanent residency visas—are entering the country. They’re not “processing” anyone’s “immigration” but rather processing travelers arriving on international flights.

This could all be a lot of bluster, or the Trump regime may just be stupid enough to believe that by not processing visitors on international flights to certain cities—causing chaos and sending many flights to other cities while canceling many others—it will only economically harm blue cities in the blue states they’re targeting. That would be a gross misunderstanding of the global economic ecosystem. But then again, Trump and his aides didn’t think about that when it came to tariffs, so maybe they are in fact that stupid.

Airlines would be canceling flights, and havoc would play out all across America, affecting everyone in every red state as much as anyone in any blue state. An economy that is already teetering would come crashing down into a recession.

The U.S. Travel Association told PBS News that Mullin warned the group in a meeting that he is considering withdrawing CBP officers at the airports in question. The group immediately condemned this crazy scheme, as did all of the major airlines.

Even Trump’s own transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, wasn’t on the same page:
Duffy told a Congressional hearing earlier this week that…it would be a bad idea to start restricting travel based on political views. After all, at some point Democrats will be in charge and “you will all switch spots at one point — hopefully not too soon Mr. Chairman,” Duffy said.
“We have people from around the world and around the country that need to be able to fly into all different kinds of places. We shouldn’t shut down air travel in a state that doesn’t agree with our politics,” Duffy said.

This wouldn’t be the first time, however, that the Trump Transportation Department would be in conflict with Homeland Security. Back in February, the El Paso airport was shut down briefly after a dispute between the FAA (which is part of the Transportation Department) and DHS (and the Pentagon) when DHS and the Pentagon went ahead with testing high-energy, anti-drone laser technology at nearbly Fort Bliss against the FAA’s warnings, leading to the shutdown of the airport.

Airline trade groups warn that if Mullen moved forward, there would be a devastating economic impact, including disrupting billions of dollars in cargo shipments. We’d be back to the supply chain disruption of the pandemic—which drove inflation to 9%.

As Nick Miroff at The Atlantic reports, millions of passengers would also be stranded, and there would be a ripple effect all through the country, to airports in deeply red states.
Mullin’s proposal appears to reflect a thin grasp of global-travel logistics, as well as an inflated sense of the government’s ability to impose economic pain on specific cities, according to industry executives and former DHS officials I spoke with.

The U.S. airports where international travelers and cargo first arrive are often not their final destination. A German business traveler flying into JFK may be en route to a meeting in Cincinnati.

A Korean family landing at Los Angeles International Airport could be headed for Disney World. The proportion of economic pain imposed on sanctuary cities might be relatively small compared with the wider ripple effects on the U.S. travel industry.


A massive economic hit for the country—and global travel—but also for the GOP, as if the party doesn’t have enough problems heading into the midterms. On top of everything else, disrupting air travel domestically and internationally, upending cargo and deliveries in addition to vacations and business travel, would enrage voters. And then we could see the economy plummet as inflation spikes way higher than it has in recent months under Trump.


But this administration has done so much to harm itself and the GOP while thinking they’re only hurting their opponents that none of us should immediately assume it’s all a bluff.

Morning Joe tears apart top Trump official over scheme to cause 'economic paralysis'

Morning Joe, Image via Screengrab.

Alex Henderson

May 29, 2026

ALTERNET

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin is drawing vehement criticism for essentially threatening to halt international flights in and out of Democrat-controlled cities if they oppose President Donald Trump's immigration policies. And some of the criticism is coming from conservative MS NOW host Joe Scarborough, who had a scathing response to Mullin's threat during a Friday morning broadcast of "Morning Joe."

Mullin told Fox News that if "radical left Democrats" defied Trump's immigration policies, "we shouldn't be processing international flights into their cities." And Scarborough warned that if Mullin's idea were actually implemented, it would have dire consequences for the U.S. economy and international air travel.

Scarborough, a former GOP congressman, told fellow "Morning Joe" host Mika Brzezinski, "It makes your teeth hurt, the stupidity…. (Mullin) wants to…. totally screw up international commerce. I mean, it is really bizarre how backward these people are, and they are focusing on all the wrong things — which may be why the president has his lowest approval rating. Well, the lowest approval rating of any president, according to Gallup, since Richard Nixon in the midst of Watergate."


The Never Trump conservative continued, "Maybe he should get people in place that actually focus on the right things instead of these bizarre things like shutting down or disrupting flights at Newark (International Airport). It's just crazy."

A Fox News anchor pointed out that "pulling CBP (U.S. Customs and Border Protection) out of airports" in major cities run by Democrats "would effectively be the end of international travel into big airports like LAX, San Francisco, Boston Logan, JFK, Newark, Chicago, Philly, Seattle, many others."

Scarborough and Lemire emphasized that removing international flights from major U.S. cities would have dire economic consequences way beyond those cities.

Lemire told Scarbrough and Brzezinski, "It's like you saw the economic paralysis that came from the Strait of Hormuz closing and said, 'Oh, let's bring that home. Let's do some of that here.' Because…. it would have such impact beyond these handful of blue cities, these sanctuary cities the DHS wants to punish. Travel executives have warned the government about that. Others in the industry have. Even some Republicans have quietly expressed some reservations, like: look, this pain is not going to be limited to the handful of cities and states you want it to be. We're going to feel it around the country and beyond."

The MS NOW host continued, "So perhaps, Mika, they'll be talked out of this particular idea."

White House in chaos as they reverse Trump plan to 'eliminate' FEMA before storms hit

U.S. President Donald Trump with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis in Ochopee, Florida, U.S., July 1, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo

Matthew Rozsa

May 31, 2026 

ALTERNET

President Donald Trump’s decision to gut America’s emergency disaster response organization has left the United States vulnerable to upcoming natural disasters — and now Trump is scrambling, likely too late, to fix his problem.

Describing the decision of his past Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, to withhold billions in money from FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency), CNN’s Gabe Cohen reported that “Vice President JD Vance suggested it was FEMA’s inability to get money out the door that truly did her in. By the end of last year, FEMA was sitting on more than $15 billion in unspent funds, according to sources and internal figures reviewed by CNN. Lawmakers across the country, including many Republicans, were left fuming after months of asking for disaster money that had been awarded yet still awaited Noem’s signature.”

Cohen added that “during her 13 months running DHS, Noem, along with her de facto chief of staff Corey Lewandowski, waged war on FEMA, throttling operations, stalling payments, and driving out most of the senior leadership and by one count roughly 20% of the workforce. Amid the havoc, multiple sources told CNN the agency failed to make critical payments — from basic utilities to security operators that protect dangerous materials like anthrax.”

Realizing that America is now uniquely vulnerable because the upcoming summer will likely bring with it natural disasters from wildfires to tropical storms, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin is reportedly working frantically to reverse many of the budget cuts and bureaucratic red tape that Noem had implemented.

“Court records in a separate lawsuit show DHS coordinated much of the overhaul over dozens of chats on the messaging app Signal, some of which have been wiped, with lawyers raising concerns that evidence was destroyed,” Cohen reported. “In a remarkable turnaround, Trump has tapped Cameron Hamilton to lead FEMA — for the second time. In May 2025, Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL, was fired from his acting role atop the agency after telling lawmakers he didn’t support the administration’s plans to abolish FEMA. His exit accelerated an already chaotic effort to dismantle the agency — just as his return underscores the level of damage control the White House is now attempting.”

As one DHS official told Cohen about Hamilton, “If you’d asked me 11 months ago, I would have said it’s more likely we deport him than he gets that job.”

Later Cohen reported how “in May 2025, CNN reported that an internal review found FEMA was ‘not ready’ for hurricane season. Hamilton pushed back on efforts to degrade the agency but by then, plans to oust him were already in the works.”

He added, “Just hours before Hamilton was set to testify on Capitol Hill, he learned security was preparing to cut off his badge access. DHS told him it was a mistake; Hamilton believed his removal was imminent, three sources said.”

Last year it was reported that Noem vowed to “eliminate” FEMA, with Trump laying off hundreds of staff that focused on resilience and preparedness. At the time, this was reportedly motivated in large part by the administration’s determination to downplay the effects of man-made climate change. The president also signed an executive order requiring state and local governments to “play a more active and significant role in national resilience and preparedness” and ordered agencies to “streamline” their efforts to address disasters.

We Must Demand Coverage That Doesn’t Fan the Flames of War With China

Western media is trying to make it sound like war was China’s idea, when it’s the US that has been actively preparing for it for the last decade.

China’s President Xi Jinping (L) looks at US President Donald Trump as they attend a state banquet at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on May 14, 2026.
(Photo by Brendan Smialowski/ AFP via Getty Images)

Megan Russell
May 31, 2026

Common Dreams

This month, the world watched as US President Donald Trump wrangled up his bro-squad of capitalist billionaires and chartered them across the world to China. We watched in disbelief as the China-hating Trump administration paraded around Beijing gawking at beautiful ceilings and giant rose bushes. “China is beautiful,” Trump said.

All the while, the top US oligarchs met with Chinese officials, hoping to find openings they could us to slither into China’s large, booming markets and siphon off even more wealth that they most definitely don’t need. Fortunately, China just wasn’t that interested.



Amid Trump-Xi Meeting, US Coalition Urges Congress to ‘Prioritize Peace’ and End ‘Confrontational Posture’ With China





Even though nothing much came of the meetings, all the China hawks in Washington were on the edge of their seats, anxious that better relations with China would risk their favorite justification for raising the military budget to an unprecedented $1.5 trillion. But we need to prepare for war with China by 2025… no, 2027… wait, maybe 2030? Forever?

Mainstream media had a lot to say about the meeting. The Guardian was especially deceptive, with one article titled:






This is the kind of headline we’ve come to expect from outlets like the New York Post, whose credibility is on par with a spam email. In fact, they did have a similar article:






It’s not a huge surprise that Western media is trying to make it sound like war was China’s idea, when it’s the US that has been actively preparing for it for the last decade. It’s part of their strategy to use misleading headlines to stoke fear about China, so nobody pays attention to the war-antagonizing behavior of the United States.

When President Xi Jinping speaks about the “Thucydides Trap,” he is warning the US against treating war with China as inevitable and instead urging it to pursue diplomacy and cooperation. Many US policymakers, however, continue to frame China’s rise primarily as a military threat, expanding military posturing across the Asia-Pacific in an effort to preserve US dominance even at the risk of escalation.

It’s reported that Trump and Xi also talked at length about the US war on Iran. This conflict—as well as US military actions in Venezuela—is also tied to the broader US confrontation with China. Both countries possess major oil, gas, and critical mineral reserves and have become important economic partners to China. By targeting two of China’s key energy suppliers, the US is attempting to limit China’s access to the resources, while hoarding them for itself (and Israel).

The US war on Iran has been a disaster, which is one of the reasons Trump is in China, hoping for concessions. It’s not just energy dominance the US is worried about. While oil and gas prices are skyrocketing around the world, Iran has made an exception for Chinese oil tankers, which trade with Iran using the Chinese yuan. For decades, US global power has depended on the petrodollar system, which keeps global energy trade tied to the US dollar and gives the US enormous economic warfare abilities. But China’s continued purchase of Iranian oil using the yuan, along with growing efforts by countries across the Global South to trade outside the dollar system, threatens to weaken that dominance.

The global order is clearly shifting toward a more multipolar world. The question is whether the US will respond with diplomacy or attempt to preserve unipolar dominance through military confrontation with China. To prevent escalation, we must reject the idea that war between great powers is inevitable. And we must also demand media coverage that accurately and credibly covers the role the United States is playing in escalating tensions. That includes news outlets like The Guardian, which clearly prioritize painting China as the villain over credible and in-depth reporting.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Megan Russell
Megan Russell is CODEPINK's China is Not Our Enemy Campaign Coordinator. She graduated from the London School of Economics with a Master’s Degree in Conflict Studies. Prior to that, she attended NYU where she studied Conflict, Culture, and International Law. Megan spent one year studying in Shanghai, and over eight years studying Chinese Mandarin. Her research focuses on the intersection between US-China affairs, peacebuilding, and international development.
Full Bio >

Business leaders left waiting after Trump goes silent on promises from key event: report

Bennito L. Kelty
May 30, 2026 
RAW STORY


Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump shake hands at a state banquet at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, May 14, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci

Business leaders and industry groups are waiting for clarity and follow-up from the Trump administration on promises it made during the China summit earlier this month, according to new reporting.

The White House assured that a "board of trade" would help relieve Chinese and American tariffs, but it's still "ironing" out the plan, "a signal the clarity industry is searching for is unlikely to come all at once," Politico reported.

Ed Brzytwa, an executive for the Consumer Technology Association, said industry groups don't know what kind of products will see reduced tariffs. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer "hasn't been clear about it, neither have the Chinese," he told Politico.

Trump has "three and a half months to get this thing up and running," Wendy Cutler, a former senior U.S. trade negotiator, told Politico. She was looking ahead to Chinese leader Xi Jinping's upcoming visit to Washington in September.

"There will be pressure to show progress, given how few deliverables came out of this last summit meeting," Cutler said.

An anonymous White House official told Politico, "further details to come" on the plans that came out of the summit.

"The administration looks forward to engaging more with the business community on this historic policy that reflects our commitment to better manage trade between the U.S. and China," the official said, according to Politico.

There Is No Right Way for the State to Kill People

From noose to needle to nitrogen, our constant search for a more acceptable way to administer the death penalty is a story of failure—not moral progress.


A sign that reads “Stop State Killing” is seen during a vigil against the death penalty in front of the US Supreme Court on June 29, 2021 in Washington, DC.
Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

Furonda Brasfield
May 31, 2026

OtherWords

As a long-time death penalty abolitionist, I’ve often compared the death penalty in America to a train with no brakes: Once the machinery starts moving, it becomes extraordinarily difficult to stop.

But the real problem is that the train should never have been built.

Today, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Arkansas are experimenting with nitrogen gas executions, a method officials claim is more humane. But from noose to needle to nitrogen, our constant search for a more acceptable way to kill is a story of failure—not moral progress.

There’s no acceptable way to practice a form of state killing that, for Black Americans especially, has long been intertwined with terror.

History should make us skeptical whenever governments begin searching for new technologies to make killing appear more acceptable.

Take my home state of Arkansas. Within a year of becoming a state in 1836, Arkansas adopted laws establishing a racial hierarchy by which even civilian whites could dispossess or punish a Black person. These codes even designated certain offenses as capital crimes when committed by Black people but lesser crimes when committed by white people.

The message was clear: Some lives were worth less than others.

That message echoed through the decades that followed. Between 1877 and 1950, Arkansas recorded 493 documented lynchings—the highest per capita rate in the nation. In Arkansas and throughout the South, these killings were not hidden crimes. They were public spectacles—acts of terror meant to reinforce social hierarchy.

Eventually, lynching became politically unacceptable. But state killing did not disappear—it simply changed form. The spectacle moved behind prison walls, and the language became more clinical. But the act of killing remained the same.

George Hays, who served two terms as governor of Arkansas, wrote in 1927 that “if the death penalty were to be removed from our statute-books, the tendency to commit deeds of violence would be heightened owing to the Negro problem. The greater number of the race do not maintain the same ideals as the whites.”

Since the Civil War, Arkansas has executed nearly 500 people—and 68% of those executed were Black or Native American. This is not distant history. Black inmates make up about 50% or more of the state’s death row today, despite Black Arkansans comprising less than 16% of the state’s total population.

Nor is Arkansas an outlier. Nationally, over half the people on death row today are Black or Hispanic.

Modern executions are often carried out by lethal injection, presented as sterile and humane. The condemned is strapped to a gurney while witnesses sit behind glass and chemicals stop the heart. But as these chemicals become less available, Arkansas and some other states have replaced lethal injection with nitrogen gas executions.

They claim the method is painless, but it is death by suffocation. Even veterinarians are forbidden from euthanizing cats and dogs with nitrogen hypoxia because it takes too long to lose consciousness and amounts to torture.

History should make us skeptical whenever governments begin searching for new technologies to make killing appear more acceptable. During the Holocaust, Nazi Germany constructed gas chambers designed to turn mass death into a technical process. This process was bureaucratic, hidden from public view, and deemed “efficient.”

Today, the death penalty follows a disturbingly similar logic. Each generation promises that the newest method will finally make execution humane. The noose. The electric chair. The gas chamber. Lethal injection. Now nitrogen gas.

Yet the fundamental act has never changed. The state still kills. The train keeps moving. Even when jurors change their minds. Even when victims’ families plead for mercy. Stopping the train requires courage—especially from elected leaders who have the power to do it.

Our history tells us what happens when a society accepts killing as justice. The death penalty has evolved for nearly two centuries, but there is only one real measure of moral progress: not how we kill, but whether we finally choose to stop.


This column was distributed by OtherWords.

Furonda Brasfield
Furonda Brasfield is the director of leadership development for the US Campaign to End The Death Penalty and also leads the campaign’s Noose to Needle. She previously served as the executive director of the Arkansas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty.
Full Bio >

ICE Sued Over ‘Civil Rights Catastrophe’ at West Texas Concentration Camp

“The conditions here in this ICE tent camp in a desert are inhumane and cruel,” said one Cameroonian plaintiff in the suit. “No human being should ever have to go through this.”


This photo shows a view of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Camp East Montana detention center at Ft. Bliss in El Paso, Texas.
Photo by Corrie Boudreaux/El Paso Matter

Brett Wilkins
May 30, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

A group of legal advocacy groups on Friday sued US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal agencies and officials over “inhumane” conditions at the country’s largest concentration camp for immigrants detained during the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.

The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Texas, Texas Civil Rights Project, Human Rights Watch, and the law firm Farella Braun + Martel LLP filed suit against ICE, the Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, and associated officials, in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas in El Paso


‘What I Witnessed and Experienced Today Was Shameful,‘ Says US Senator Pepper Sprayed by ICE


The lawsuit was filed on behalf of four people seeking to represent a class action for all others held at Camp East Montana, a 60-acre facility located in the Chihuahuan Desert on the grounds of Fort Bliss, an Army base and the site of one of the concentration camps where Japanese Americans and Japanese nationals were imprisoned during World War II. Approximately 2,500 immigrants are being detained there.

The lawsuit documents accounts of what the ACLU called “horrific rights violations” at the facility, including:Severe medical neglect and disease outbreaks, including a months-long measles outbreak that infected at least 14 people;
Violent uses of force by officers against detained immigrants and coercive threats of deportation;
Excessive and arbitrary use of solitary confinement to punish people for requesting basic needs like medical care or hygiene;
Inadequate and rancid food that have caused detained people to lose extreme amounts of weight;
Exposure to dust storms through openings in tent walls that subjects people to respiratory disease; and
Dangerous and unsanitary living conditions in the tent camp, among other rights violations.

“These conditions are longstanding, pervasive, and well-documented, and defendants’ continued inaction in the face of known risks shows their deliberate indifference—not mere negligence—to detainees’ constitutional rights,” the lawsuit states.

At least three detainees have died at Camp East Montana, including Geraldo Lunas Campos, a 55-year-old Cuban who, according to witnesses, died after being handcuffed and placed in a chokehold by guards. The El Paso County Medical Examiner’s Office ruled Lunas Campos’ death a homicide by asphyxia.

Detained immigrants have reported beatings and sexual abuse, medical neglect, hunger and insufficient food, and denial of access to attorneys at the facility.

“The conditions here in this ICE tent camp in a desert are inhumane and cruel. No human being should ever have to go through this,” case plaintiff Gerald Akari Angye said in a statement Friday.

I have already experienced torture in my home country of Cameroon and I never thought I would experience such severely violent treatment by guards here in the United States of America,“ he continued. ”I have been beaten here and even today, I still have a brace on my hands and wrist. I am in pain and I am scared to be here.“

“No one deserves such cruel treatment,” Akari Angye added. “We are all humans and deserve to be treated like it.”

Kyle Virgien, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project, called Camp East Montana “nothing short of a civil rights catastrophe.”

“Since the day it opened, the facility has repeatedly made headlines for horrific rights violations and even the deaths of three detained people, yet ICE has still evaded accountability for its conduct,” Virgien added. “We’re suing to ensure that no other human being has to endure the inhumane treatment that the Trump administration has inflicted on our clients.”

Another case plaintiff, named in the suit as Navdeep, said, “It feels like we are just political pawns taken from our jobs and families and forced into a temporary tent that is not designed for human life.”

“We could die here, and it feels like no one here would care,” they continued. “With everything happening behind closed doors, I worry the people running this place might cover up the truth about a death or the other injustices that happen here.”

“It’s important for people to know the truth of what is happening here,” Navdeep added. “Being part of this lawsuit is important to me because many people are vulnerable or they become weak because of the conditions here. Even though we come from many different places, we are all human. I want to be a voice for everyone here.”

After receiving “numerous credible reports of torture, killing, and inhumane treatment” of detainees, 35 Democratic Texas state lawmakers earlier this year demand a probe into alleged abuses at Camp East Montana.

Democratic members of US Congress have also sounded the alarm over conditions at Camp East Montana. Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) has also called out profiteering by the private contractors running the camp.



Amentum Services Inc. took over operations from Acquisition Logistics LLC earlier this year. The latter was never registered to operate in Texas and the former “has a history of health, safety, and other violations of federal law,” according to the consumer advocacy watchdog Public Citizen.

The Trump administration is currently moving forward with a plan to convert industrial warehouses into more ICE concentration camps. The agency has already purchased or contracted for at least 11 warehouses in eight states as part of the $38 billion plan.

While some critics take exception to the concentration camp description, the ICE facilities fit the dictionary definition of the term. The US has a long history of operating concentration camps, with imprisoned peoples ranging from Indigenous tribes during the Trail of Tears and Long Walk to escaped and freed slaves—officially called “contraband” in the Civil War—to Filipinos, Okinawans, and Vietnamese during three different 20th century wars, to Japanese Americans and Japanese nationals during World War II.

“Germany’s concentration camps didn’t start as instruments of mass murder, and neither have ours; both started as facilities for people the government’s leader said were a problem,” talk show host and author Thom Hartmann wrote earlier this year for Common Dreams. “And that’s exactly what ICE is building now. History isn’t whispering its warning: It’s shouting.”

‘By This Logic, Any Protest Could Be a Conspiracy’: Conviction of Spokane ICE Protesters Raises Free Speech Concerns

“We were guinea pigs,” said the father of one of the convicted protesters. “They brought the swamp of Washington, DC, into our area to stop American citizens from exercising our rights that are guaranteed.”


A protestor with an American flag walks towards a police line during a protest against federal immigration arrests, on June 11, 2025 in Seattle, Washington. Protests against ICE raids have spread to cities across the nation after beginning in Los Angeles last weekend.
(Photo by Rio Giancarlo/Getty Images)

Stephen Prager
May 29, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

With the conviction of three anti-ICE protesters in Spokane, Washington on federal “conspiracy” charges Thursday, civil rights advocates and legal experts fear that the Trump administration may have just been handed a powerful tool to criminalize dissent.

Jac Archer, Justice Forral, and Bajun Mavalwalla II, nicknamed the “Spokane 3,” were indicted last year for their actions at a protest in June 2025, where they attempted to physically obstruct ICE agents from transporting two Venezuelan immigrants to an ICE processing facility in Tacoma.

Both of the men reportedly entered the US legally under a humanitarian parole program that had been terminated by the Trump administration, leading advocates to protest their detention.

As Spokesman-Review, a Spokane newspaper, described:
Protesters that day eventually began linking arms around vans and in front of agents’ cars. The event grew chaotic. ICE agents entered a crowd of people standing outside the facility’s parking lot gate and began grabbing people by the necks and arms, pushing them to the ground. Protesters also slashed tires of vans meant to transport the detainees.

But where such activity would usually lead to charges against specific protesters for discrete illegal actions like trespassing, property damage, or other public order offenses, the Department of Justice (DOJ)—as part of a nationwide effort to crack down on protests against ICE—charged nine protesters with “conspiracy to impede or injure officers,” even though no officers were actually injured during the protest.



Legal experts described it as a novel approach that wrapped many people involved in the protest into a single “conspiracy” regardless of whether they committed specific criminal acts.

“Usually if a protest gets out of hand and people are hurt or property is hurt, you see charges based on that,” Mary Fan, a former federal prosecutor and a University of Washington law professor, told The New York Times earlier this month. “They’re not going after people based on specific harm done. They’re stretching conspiracy charges to target protesters and people who organize protests.”

Facing pressure from the federal government to bring the case following a national memo sent from the DOJ to prioritize and publicize cases against ICE agents, then-acting US Attorney for Eastern Washington Richard Barker resigned last year rather than bring charges against the protesters.

He said at the time he was grateful he “never had to sign an indictment or file a brief that [he] didn’t believe in.” His successor, Stephanie Van Marter, however, did sign the order.

Six of the defendants pleaded guilty to the charges to avoid federal prison time. But Archer, Forral, and Mavalwalla chose to fight them, believing the case was part of an unjust attempt to criminalize their right to protest.

After a trial that lasted seven days, a jury found the three defendants guilty of conspiracy. But the defense has argued that the trial was marred by problems that rendered the verdict faulty.

As the Guardian explained:
In February, a federal judge ordered the release of a Venezuelan migrant whose transportation for deportation the protesters sought to block, ruling his arrest violated the constitution.

But the jury, drawn from conservative eastern Washington state, did not hear those facts at trial, thanks to rulings by Judge [Rebecca] Pennell. Pennell, a former federal public defender and appointee of the Democratic president Joe Biden, also ruled the protesters on trial could not use the First Amendment as a defense, though they were allowed to state their reasons for demonstrating.

Instead, the jury watched hours of law enforcement body camera video and heard from a parade of ICE agents... Jeremy Burlingame, an ICE agent who testified, had authored social media posts that called Black politicians “lying ghetto garbage” and transgender people “mentally ill.” He boosted a post showing ICE arresting a pregnant woman at gunpoint that called her a “pregnant invader.”

Federal prosecutors deemed the posts troubling enough to recall Burlingame to impeach him, despite the fact that he was their witness...

But Burlingame’s online posts, the lack of injury to ICE officers, and the absence of evidence showing communication between the three defendants prior to the protest were not enough to sway the jury.

The defendants now face potential sentences of up to six years in prison and a $250,000 fine. However, they are expected to appeal the verdict and have filed a rarely used motion allowing their attorneys to argue that no rational juror could find their clients guilty.

“I question whether justice truly was served by today’s verdict,” Barker told the Spokesman-Review. “This was the first conspiracy prosecution in Eastern Washington history under... a Civil War-era law dusted off to punish members of the Spokane community who stood up for two young men who were unlawfully detained by ICE.”

Video by KREM 2 News/Youtube

Looking beyond the details of the trial itself, many observers questioned the very premise of the DOJ’s prosecution.

Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown said from the start of the trial she believed it was “politically motivated.”

“It was meant to make an example out of people who disagreed with federal immigration policy,” she said.

City council member Sarah Dixit, who said she took part in the protest, said: “Based on the evidence that was shown, I personally didn’t see evidence of what they were accused of. Conspiracy is a charge that feels complicated to prove, and I don’t believe that the government made a strong case for that.”

Others expressed fear for the precedent that had been set. La Rond Baker, the legal director of the Washington ACLU, said the Trump administration “has a demonstrable history of using the Department of Justice to silence and punish its critics.”

The administration has pursued similar sweeping conspiracy charges against other groups of anti-ICE protesters around the country—including in Los Angeles, Broadview, Illinois, and North Texas.

“The verdict was painfully disappointing,” said Archer’s attorney, Carl Oreskovich. “I think it was an extraordinarily aggressive approach to prosecution of protests. And it certainly is going to chill people who want to utilize their First Amendment right to dissent against government actions that they don’t agree with.”

In a comment to The Guardian, Robert Chang, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine School of Law and executive director of its Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, said the verdict was “frightening.”

“By this logic, any protest could be a conspiracy,” he said. “The goal posts keep moving.”



Bajun Mavalwalla Sr., a retired US Army intelligence officer who served in Afghanistan, said his son—also a veteran of the same war—and the other two defendants were standing for “the freedoms that separate this country from the dictatorships.”

“People in Spokane and people in Eastern Washington need to understand that we were guinea pigs. That they brought the swamp of Washington, DC, into our area to stop American citizens from exercising our rights that are guaranteed,” the elder Mavalwalla said after his son was convicted.

“It was the whole point of the Constitution, the right to protest, the right to dissent, the right to assemble, all of those things are now in question because of this case,” he said. “My son has taken the brunt of the entire weight of the United States government onto their shoulders.”

France Asks Top Prosecutor to Probe Alleged Israeli Abuse of Gaza Flotilla Members

French nationals and people from dozens of countries who were abducted from the Global Sumud Flotilla say they were beaten, tortured, and sexually assaulted by their Israeli captors.
 

Global Sumud Flotilla member Meriem Hadjal speaks to the press after arriving at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris on May 22, 2026.
(Photo by Firas Abdullah/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
May 29, 2026
COMMON DREAMS


France’s government on Friday asked prosecutors to investigate Israel’s alleged mistreatment of French nationals aboard the last Global Sumud Flotilla, which was intercepted earlier this month in international waters while trying to break the illegal decadeslong Israeli blockade of Gaza.

“Based on ⁠a report I requested from our Consul General in Turkey—who informed me of sexual violence, exposure to the cold, beatings, and repeated humiliation of French nationals—all of these acts are likely to constitute criminal offenses,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said during an interview with France Inter, adding, “I decided yesterday to refer the matter to the public prosecutor.”



‘Way Out of Line’: 15+ Countries Slam Israel’s ‘Intolerable’ Abuse of Gaza Flotilla Abductees



‘Yet Another Act of Piracy’: Israel Raids Humanitarian Flotilla Bound for Gaza

The move follows France’s indefinite ban from its territory of far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who posted a video on social media showing him joyfully humiliating detained activists, journalists, and others who were mostly kneeling with their hands tied behind their backs and their foreheads forced to the ground following the May 18 interception of flotilla vessels off the coast of Cyprus and the abduction of all aboard.

“We cannot tolerate that French nationals can be threatened, intimidated, or brutalized in this way—all the more so by a public official,” Barrot said last week.

People from around 40 countries—including 37 French nationals—were seized from dozens of flotilla vessels and held in harsh conditions on what many of them called a “torture boat.”

According to Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF): “Detained humanitarians, doctors, and journalists were processed one by one through a darkened shipping container. Inside, groups of three to five soldiers systematically brutalized each person who came through the door while those waiting outside listened to the screams.”

French medical professional Meriem Hadjal said she was “subjected to torture” in the container, where at least one Israeli soldier allegedly sexually assaulted her.

“We were treated like animals,” Hadjal added, accusing her Israeli captors of “sadism.”



GSF said Tuesday that “legal proceedings are now active in Turkey, Italy, and Spain, with Italian prosecutors opening an investigation into kidnapping and sexual assault” of flotilla members.

Numerous national governments condemned Israel’s treatment of the flotilla abductees, including the United States. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said that Ben-Gvir “betrayed the dignity” of his nation, which receives billions of dollars in annual armed aid and diplomatic cover from the United States to carry out what many experts say is a genocidal war on Gaza.

Malaysia is reportedly preparing to initiate proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice over the abduction and alleged torture of its citizens, 29 of whom were aboard the flotilla. The ICJ is currently weighing a genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa and formally supported by nearly 20 nations.

“We will not remain silent, we will not stop. While the legal team gathers all documentation on violations of international law; they were kidnapped more than once, they were tortured,” Amirudin Shari, chief minister of the Malaysian state of Selangor, said during a homecoming ceremony for the flotilla members at Kuala Lumpur International Airport.

Israeli troops have physically and psychologically tortured past flotilla abductees. Dozens of members of the previous Global Sumud mission required medical attention for broken ribs, noses, and other injuries inflicted by Israeli forces. In 2010, Israeli troops killed nine activists aboard one of the first-ever Gaza flotillas, including Turkish-American teenager Furkan Doğan.

As some countries pursue justice for flotilla members, others have declined to act. In the United Kingdom, Zarah Sultana, who represents Coventry South for the socialist Your Party in Parliament, is demanding “urgent action” in the wake of abuse allegations made by British flotilla abductees.



“France is acting. Spain is showing leadership. Where is the UK government?” Sultana said Friday on X. “Nothing but a simp for Israel, a genocidal apartheid state.”

‘Ceasefire Is a Joke’: Israeli Soldiers Recount Ongoing Indiscriminate Killings in Gaza

“It was a jungle,” one soldier said. “After the ceasefire, the order was: If someone crosses the line, you shoot them.”

Relatives mourn as the body of a Palestinian killed in an Israeli attack is brought to al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, Gaza, Palestine, on May 28, 2026.
(Photo by Abdalhkem Abu Riash/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
May 30, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Israel Defense Forces soldiers interviewed for an article published Friday by The Associated Press described ongoing indiscriminate killing of Palestinians—including civilians—despite a purported ceasefire.

One IDF combat soldier told the AP that he saw his teammates “yelling in celebration” and “congratulating one another” after blowing up a vehicle driving near the ever-expanding so-called “yellow line” dividing the Gaza Strip into Israeli and Palestinian-controlled zones. The strike killed everyone inside the vehicle.

“It was a jungle,” the soldier said. “After the ceasefire, the order was: If someone crosses the line, you shoot them.”

The problem is, the yellow line is often unclear, invisible, and often shifts. It cuts through farmland, roads, neighborhoods, and areas where Palestinians live and work.



Nadav Weiman, an IDF veteran who is now the executive director of the veterans’ whistleblower group Breaking the Silence, told the AP that the military’s permissive shoot-to-kill policy has “created a reality where countless civilians have and are being killed for crossing invisible lines.”

One IDF soldier interviewed by the AP said “there was a general feeling that human lives are not valuable.” The soldier said his commanding officer told him it would be “too much work” to clearly mark the yellow line, and that Palestinians were supposed to somehow know where it was.

According to the AP, one soldier said that “sometimes snipers fired warning shots at people close to the line... but commanders told troops to do more to protect themselves. The soldier understood that to mean firing more lethal shots.”

“Soldiers shooting or ordering drone strikes don’t always know who’s crossing the line,” the AP reported, citing interviewed troops. “Although soldiers must provide coordinates and get approval from superiors before striking, it’s hard to give exact information as people are moving,” and soldiers reported colleagues “calling in coordinates based on a hunch or the last place they saw someone.”

IDF troops interviewed by the AP also described “a sense of confusion” and “a lack of clarity on rules of engagement around the yellow line.” Some commanders “paid lip service” to the ceasefire agreement that’s been in effect since last October, but in practice ignored it.

According to Gaza’s Government Media Office, Israel has violated the ceasefire more than 3,005 times, resulting in more than 900 Palestinians killed and nearly 2,800 others injured, despite the truce.

“To call it a ceasefire is a joke,” one IDF soldier told the AP.

Israel claims that the entire length of the yellow line is now clearly marked. However, as Common Dreams reported this week, the IDF has incrementally shifted the boundary deeper into Gaza, where Israel now controls more than 60% of the coastal strip. This has left Palestinians sometimes waking up to learn they’re in “open-fire zones” where they are subjected to being shot on sight.

Since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, Israeli forces have killed or wounded more than 250,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including thousands of people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath rubble. Israeli troops have previously described indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians, including children and aid-seekers.

While such killings have become less frequent since the ceasefire, some IDF soldiers dismiss the word as practically meaningless.

“We need to stop using this term,” one soldier told the AP, referring to the word ceasefire. “It’s not serving people that want to stop the war.”