Sen. John Fetterman on Tuesday urged President Donald Trump “to immediately fire” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem after federal agents killed two citizens in Minneapolis this month during an immigration enforcement operation.
“Americans have died,” Fetterman (D., Pa.) said in a statement. “She is betraying DHS’s core mission and trashing your border security legacy.”
The senator’s call for Noem’s firing comes after federal agents killed two Americans during the Minneapolis operation. On Saturday, a Border Patrol agent shot and killed Alex Pretti, an intensive care nurse at a VA hospital. An ICE agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old poet and mother, on Jan. 7.
Fetterman referenced Noem’s predecessor, Alejandro Mayorkas, who served under former President Joe Biden and faced impeachment by the Republican-led House in 2024 amid a backlash over increased border crossings under Biden.
Sen. Andy Kim (D., N.J.), who also voted for Noem, joined the growing chorus of Democrats calling for Noem to step down on Tuesday. The South Jersey lawmaker has previously called the vote a mistake.
Fetterman’s plea to fire Noem comes a day after he called for the withdrawal of federal agents from Minneapolis. And it comes as the U.S. Senate is poised to vote this week on funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees both ICE and the Border Patrol.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats would vote against it, which could trigger a partial federal government shutdown.
About 150 protesters gathered outside Fetterman’s office in Philadelphia in the snow on Tuesday to urge him to join the effort, but the senator said on Monday that he will never vote to shut down the government. He also argued that doing so would not pull the $178 billion dedicated to DHS through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which he did not support.
“I would like him to listen and actually represent us, because that’s his job,” said James Pierson, 42, an Exton resident attending the demonstration.
Fetterman suggested pulling the DHS bill from the package of bills under consideration by the Senate this week rather than another shutdown vote.
“I reject the calls to defund or abolish ICE,” he said. “I strongly disagree with many strategies and practices ICE deployed in Minneapolis, and believe that must change.”
Composer Philip Glass has joined the list of artists, musicians and performers pulling back from previously scheduled engagements at the Kennedy Center, withdrawing his anticipated Symphony No. 15: Lincoln from the National Symphony Orchestra, which was to perform the world premiere this coming June.
“After thoughtful consideration, I have decided to withdraw my Symphony No. 15 Lincoln from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts,” Glass wrote in a statement provided to the Washington Post. “Symphony No. 15 is a portrait of Abraham Lincoln, and the values of the Kennedy Center today are in direct conflict with the message of the Symphony. Therefore, I feel an obligation to withdraw this Symphony premiere from the Kennedy Center under its current leadership.”
Glass, who will turn 89 at the end of this month, is a celebrated and influential American composer, who was awarded the Kennedy Center Honors in 2018. Though often credited as a pioneer of 20th-century minimalism, Glass’s music ranges from intimate piano études and chamber works to sprawling symphonies and ambitious, experimental operas such as Einstein on the Beach, Satyagraha and Akhnaten, about historical figures.
Symphony No. 15: Lincoln was co-commissioned by the Kennedy Center and the NSO, and has already been subject to several delays: It was originally scheduled to premiere in March 2022 and was later postponed to October 2022. This season, the piece was restored to the NSO’s calendar as a centerpiece of the Kennedy Center’s ongoing “250 Years of Us” programming.
Its withdrawal comes amid a wave of cancellations by artists and performers, prompted by the addition of President Donald Trump’s name to the center (as well as to the building’s facade), or attributed to scheduling conflicts or financial strains. It also lands against a backdrop of reputational crisis at the center, a stretch of politically charged changes (like Trump himself hosting the Kennedy Center Honors) that has been met with a sharp decline in ticket sales and an apparent audience boycott over the politicization of the nonpartisan venue.
Glass’s letter arrives 188 years to the day after Abraham Lincoln delivered his 1838 Lyceum Address, from which Glass adapts two movements of the symphony’s libretto — along with Lincoln’s Autobiographical Sketch of 1859, his Farewell Address of 1861 and assorted other writings and correspondence. (Baritone Zachary James was slated to sing the premiere performance in June, on a program led by conductor Karen Kamensek.)
“I think there is no American subject matter more interesting than Abraham Lincoln,” Glass told me in 2022 about the Symphony No. 15, then still in progress. “I read him almost like I would a writer, not a politician or someone in government. There’s a beautiful music to his writing.”
The withdrawal mars a long history between Glass and the center. And while it’s highly unusual for a composer to withdraw a work from a commissioning body as an act of protest, the composer’s work has responded to contemporary politics in the past.
In 2015, Washington National Opera, which this month parted ways with the Kennedy Center, gave the world premiere of an expanded version of Glass’s opera Appomattox, which draws a musical through line from the Civil War to the civil rights movement through the voices of Lincoln, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Lyndon B. Johnson and others.
Glass and playwright Christopher Hampton revised the opera (which premiered in 2007) in response to a 2013 decision by the Supreme Court that invalidated key elements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
“It’s almost like a photojournalist approach to opera,” Glass told The Post at the time, “where the material is changing while you’re writing it.”
Trump officials have ordered national parks to remove dozens of signs and displays related to climate change, environmental protection, and settlers’ mistreatment of Native Americans in a renewed push to implement President Donald Trump’s executive order on “restoring truth and sanity to American history.”
Park staff have interpreted Trump’s directive — which seeks to scrub federal institutions of what it calls “partisan ideology” and remove any content deemed to “disparage Americans past or living” — to include any references to historic racism and sexism, as well as climate change and LGBTQ+ rights. Last week, that included the removal of an exhibit at the President’s House in Philadelphia that focused on George Washington’s ownership of enslaved people.
A visitor on Thursday looks at the site where explanatory panels from an exhibit on slavery were removed from the President’s House in Philadelphia.
In a new wave of orders this month, Trump officials instructed staff to remove or edit signs and other informational materials in at least 17 additional parks in Arizona, Texas, Colorado, Utah, Montana, and Wyoming, according to documents reviewed by the Washington Post. The documents also listed some removals ordered in August and September.
The Interior Department said in a statement it was implementing Trump’s executive order.
“All federal agencies are to review interpretive materials to ensure accuracy, honesty, and alignment with shared national values,” the statement said. “Following completion of the required review, the National Park Service is now taking appropriate action in accordance with the Order.”
Among the national parks targeted in the new removal orders are some of the country’s most iconic: Grand Canyon, Glacier, Big Bend, and Zion.
The removal orders include descriptions of how climate change is driving the disappearance of the glaciers at Glacier National Park and a wayside display at the Grand Canyon referring to the forced removal of Native Americans.
The administration’s broad attempt to suppresstrue stories “should offend every American,” said Kristen Brengel, senior vice president of government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association.
Brengel emphasized that Park Service staffers are acting on administration orders. “Everyone understands this history,” she said. “It’s not debatable, but they’re being forced to select stories because they think the administration will threaten their jobs if they don’t.”
Here are details on some of the changes being ordered at national parks.
Grand Canyon National Park
Staff at a Grand Canyon visitor centerin Arizona removed part of an exhibit after flagging potentially problematic passages to the national park system’s leadership in D.C., according to documentation reviewed by the Post.
The passages included text stating that settlers “exploited land for mining and grazing” and that federal officials “pushed tribes off their land” to establish the park.
The park also removed references to cattle ranchers “carelessly overgrazing” the land, tourists “foolishly” leaving trash in the park and entrepreneurs who “profited excessively” from tourism.
Trump officials have yet to take action on several other items, including a video about Native American history.
Park staff suggested fixes that would remove a reference to a federal policy that prevented Native Americans from using body and face paint, as well as references to their ancestors’ “misery, suffering,” and “loss.”
Roadside displays on climate change, pollution and mining were also flagged for possible removal.
Glacier National Park
In response to frequent inquiries from visitors about the potential disappearance of the famous glaciers at Montana’s Glacier National Park, staff created signs and other resources to answer those questions, said Jeff Mow, who retired as superintendent of the park in 2022.
The administration flagged one brochure for removal or changes that shows images of glaciers retreating and explains that human-caused climate change is a factor in their likely future disappearance. A video that refers to the disappearance of the glaciers was also ordered removed or changed.
Also flagged was a sign at the park’s gift shop that says: “Climate Change Affects National Parks and the Treasures They Protect.”
“We’re whitewashing or we’re taking out all those sort of not-so-nice stories that have occurred in our nation’s history,” Mow said.
Another informational display to be removed or changed describes the park’s issues with air pollution. The administration paused air-quality monitoring at national parks last year.
Other signs talk about the increasing fire risk at the park, as well as a nearby dam that “flooded two lakes within the park.”
“As the nation’s storyteller of natural and cultural history, the National Park Service takes great pride” in telling these stories, Mow said. “This process of being edited — it’s like taking a torpedo in the bow.”
Big Bend National Park
The signs slated for removal at Big Bend National Park along the Texas-Mexico border do not reference the topics, such as climate or Native American history, that have typically attracted the attention of Trump officials.
Instead, of the nearly 20 signs flagged for not conforming with the new policy, many deal with geology, prehistoric history, fossils and other seemingly uncontroversial scientific or historical topics. The removal orders do not spell out what’s wrong with the signs.
Some of the displays are in Spanish and English, while others talk about cooperating with Mexico on modern preservation efforts.
Big Bend’s submission for the administration’s review says, “These wayside exhibits describe natural features, but emphasize ‘matters unrelated to the beauty, abundance, or grandeur of said natural feature.’” Although it flagged the materials for review, the park said it did “not advocate changing these wayside exhibits.”
Even so, Trump officials decided the displays did not conform with administration policy and ordered them changed or removed.
“This is not something that the National Park Service should be blamed for,” said Bob Krumenaker, superintendent of Big Bend until 2023. “They are being told they have to do these things. And my hope is they’re saving these exhibits for when things change so they can put them back up.”
Other parks
The administration also targeted less famous parks. One sign slated for removal at Bent’s Old Fort National Historic Site in Colorado described key figures in the site’s history and included references to the forced removal of a Native tribe, a family’s slave ownership and another historic figure who had a miscarriage.
At Hubbell Trading Post National Historic Site in Arizona, a panel on Ganado Mucho, a Navajo leader known for settling disputes with ranchers, is also listed for changes or removal.
The documentation reviewed by the Post also included new details on removals and changes that were ordered last year.
At Arizona’s Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, descriptions of destructive grazing practices and the accelerating rate of warming since 1850, as well as a booklet that talks about endangered turtles and Sonoran pronghorn, were ordered changed or removed.
Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming was ordered to remove or change a panel about Gustavus Cheyney Doane that said he participated in the U.S. Army massacre of Piegan Blackfeet Native Americans, including women, children and the elderly.
At Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument in Montana, exhibit text that described the United States being “hungry for gold and land” and breaking promises to Native Americans was ordered changed or removed.
Another text describing how U.S.-run boarding schools for Indigenous children “violently erased cultural identities and language” was also deemed not to comply with Trump’s policy.
Brengel of the National Parks Conservation Association said the Trump administration’s efforts to sanitizeAmerican history runs counter to the mission of the park system.
“We are capable of hearing about our tragedies and our victories, and this systematic erasure should concern everyone in our country,” she said.
Temple’s hopes of beating Charlotte on Saturday seemed lost in the third quarter’s closing seconds. The Owls were trailing by 26 points, and they looked far from the team that had beaten South Florida just four days earlier.
But something changed. A technical foul against Charlotte guard Princess Anderson with 17 seconds left in the third quarter seemed to be the catalyst of the Owls finding some momentum.
Temple coach Diane Richardson found a lineup that worked and stuck with it through the final frame as the Owls mounted a furious comeback. They chipped away at the 49ers’ lead and were within one possession in the final three minutes. Temple took its first, and only, lead with three seconds remaining, when guard Tristen Taylor made two free throws to put her team up, 83-82.
Charlotte’s halfcourt heave at the buzzer fell short, giving Temple (9-10, 3-4 American Conference) a spot in history. The Owls’ 26-point comeback was the largest in program history and tied for third-largest in NCAA women’s basketball history.
“It showed the resilience we had; it showed we weren’t giving up,” Richardson said. “They just rallied together, not looking at the score, and executed. I’m really proud of them.”
The Owls also showed resilience in their previous game against South Florida on Jan. 20, when they overcame a 10-point second-half deficit to snap a three-game skid.
Aside from a much larger deficit vs. Charlotte, Temple looked disengaged on defense and was getting outworked for rebounds. The energy that helped push the Owls past South Florida was nonexistent for 30 minutes on Saturday — until their fourth-quarter lineup took the court.
Richardson played Taylor, guards Kaylah Turner, Savannah Curry, and forward Saniyah Craig for all 10 minutes and forward Felicia Jacobs for nine minutes. Those five ignited spark the Owls’ comeback.
Jacobs and Curry came off the bench and made an impact, which Richardson has been wanting to see in conference play. Jacobs recorded three rebounds and was a team-best plus-23 in her minutes, while Curry made two three-pointers.
“That’s why you saw subs,” Richardson said. “The people on the bench have to fight for minutes and they’ve got to show some kind of impact when they get in there to prove they are worthy of the minutes. They’ve been doing that all week.”
While Jacobs and Curry made an impact, the comeback was powered by Taylor, who had the best game of her career.
Taylor was playing well before the fourth quarter. She had 15 points and three assists through 30 minutes, but she took her game to another level in the final 10 minutes.
Temple’s Tristen Taylor made the game-winning free throw against Charlotte on Saturday.
Taylor poured in 17 points and made all six of her field-goal attempts, three of which were three-pointers. She also assisted on three of the other four made baskets in the quarter. When Temple needed her most, Taylor stepped up in the final minutes.
She scored the Owls’ final 10 points and made the biggest play of the game to set herself up for the go-ahead free throws. Turner missed a jump shot, but Taylor soared in for the offensive rebound and was fouled on her putback attempt. Taylor made both free throws to close out Charlotte and finished with a career-high 32 points on 10-for-13 shooting from the field.
“I think I went 50% from the free-throw line last game,” Taylor said. “I’ve been in the gym shooting free throws a lot this week, and I feel like when I stepped up there, I didn’t have any nerves just from practicing and being confident all week.”
Despite winning, the Owls failed to play a complete game through four quarters, and it nearly cost them against Charlotte. Next up, Temple has a road test on Wednesday night (8 p.m., ESPN+) against first-place Rice (17-3, 9-0).
Richardson knows her team can’t wait until the fourth quarter to play.
“They’re playing really great basketball, but I think we’re playing good basketball right now, too,” Richardson said. “So we’ve got to go in there on their home court, and we’ve got to play Temple basketball from the top to the finish.”
Prominent Republicans and gun rights advocates helped elicit a White House turnabout this week after bristling over the administration’s characterization of Alex Pretti, the second person killed this month by a federal officer in Minneapolis, as responsible for his own death because he lawfully possessed a weapon.
The death produced no clear shifts in U.S. gun politics or policies, even as President Donald Trump shuffles the lieutenants in charge of his militarized immigration crackdown. But important voices in Trump’s coalition have called for a thorough investigation of Pretti’s death while also criticizing inconsistencies in some Republicans’ Second Amendment stances.
If the dynamic persists, it could give Republicans problems as Trump heads into a midterm election year with voters already growing skeptical of his overall immigration approach. The concern is acute enough that Trump’s top spokeswoman sought Monday to reassert his brand as a staunch gun rights supporter.
“The president supports the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens, absolutely,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters.
Leavitt qualified that “when you are bearing arms and confronted by law enforcement, you are raising … the risk of force being used against you.”
Videos contradict early statements from administration
That still marked a retreat from the administration’s previous messages about the shooting of Pretti. It came the same day the president dispatched border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota, seemingly elevating him over Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino, who had been in charge in Minneapolis.
Within hours of Pretti’s death on Saturday, Bovino suggested Pretti “wanted to … massacre law enforcement,” and Noem said Pretti was “brandishing” a weapon and acted “violently” toward officers.
“I don’t know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign,” Noem said.
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, an architect of Trump’s mass deportation effort, went further on X, declaring Pretti “an assassin.”
Bystander videos contradicted each claim, instead showing Pretti holding a cellphone and helping a woman who had been pepper sprayed by a federal officer. Within seconds, Pretti was sprayed, too, and taken to the ground by multiple officers. No video disclosed thus far has shown him unholstering his concealed weapon -– which he had a Minnesota permit to carry. It appeared that one officer took Pretti’s gun and walked away with it just before shots began.
As multiple videos went viral online and on television, Vice President JD Vance reposted Miller’s assessment, while Trump shared an alleged photo of “the gunman’s gun, loaded (with two additional full magazines!).”
On Tuesday, Trump was asked if he agreed with Miller’s comment describing Pretti as an “assassin” and answered “no.” But he added that protesters “can’t have guns” and said he wants the death investigated.
“You can’t walk in with guns, you just can’t,” Trump told reporters on the White House lawn before departing for a trip to Iowa.
The National Rifle Association, which has backed Trump three times, released a statement that began by casting blame on Minnesota Democrats it accused of stoking protests. But the group lashed out after a federal prosecutor in California said on X that, “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you.”
That analysis, the NRA said, is “dangerous and wrong.”
FBI Director Kash Patel magnified the blowback Sunday on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo.” No one, Patel said, can “bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple.”
Erich Pratt, vice president of Gun Owners of America, was incredulous.
“I have attended protest rallies while armed, and no one got injured,” he said on CNN.
Conservative officials around the country made the same connection between the First and Second amendments.
“Showing up at a protest is very American. Showing up with a weapon is very American,” state Rep. Jeremy Faison, who leads the GOP caucus in Tennessee, said on X.
Trump’s first-term vice president, Mike Pence, called for “full and transparent investigation of this officer involved shooting.”
A different response from the past
Liberals, conservatives and nonpartisan experts noted how the administration’s response differed from past conservative positions involving protests and weapons.
Multiple Trump supporters were found to have weapons during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Trump issued blanket pardons to all of them.
Republicans were critical in 2020 when Mark and Patricia McCloskey had to pay fines after pointing guns at protesters who marched through their St. Louis neighborhood after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. And then there’s Kyle Rittenhouse, a counter-protester acquitted after fatally shooting two men and injuring another in Kenosha, Wisconsin, during the post-Floyd protests.
“You remember Kyle Rittenhouse and how he was made a hero on the right,” Trey Gowdy, a Republican former congressman and attorney for Trump during one of his first-term impeachments. “Alex Pretti’s firearm was being lawfully carried. … He never brandished it.”
Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor who has studied the history of the gun debate, said the fallout “shows how tribal we’ve become.” Republicans spent years talking about the Second Amendment as a means to fight government tyranny, he said.
“The moment someone who’s thought to be from the left, they abandon that principled stance,” Winkler said.
Meanwhile, Democrats who have criticized open and concealed carry laws for years, Winkler added, are not amplifying that position after Pretti’s death.
Uncertain effects in an election year
The blowback against the administration from core Trump supporters comes as Republicans are trying to protect their threadbare majority in the U.S. House and face several competitive Senate races.
Perhaps reflecting the stakes, GOP staff and campaign aides were reticent Monday to talk about the issue at all.
The House Republican campaign chairman, Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, is sponsoring the GOP’s most significant gun legislation of this congressional term, a proposal to make state concealed-carry permits reciprocal across all states.
The bill cleared the House Judiciary Committee last fall. Asked Monday whether Pretti’s death and the Minneapolis protests might affect debate, an aide to Speaker Mike Johnson did not offer any update on the bill’s prospects.
Gun rights advocates have notched many legislative victories in Republican-controlled statehouses in recent decades, from rolling back gun-free zones around schools and churches to expanding gun possession rights in schools, on university campuses and in other public spaces.
William Sack, legal director of the Second Amendment Foundation, said he was surprised and disappointed by the administration’s initial statements following the Pretti shooting. Trump’s vacillating, he said, is “very likely to cost them dearly with the core of a constituency they count on.”
The federal commission seeking personal contact information for faculty and staff at the University of Pennsylvania has accused the school of engaging in an “intensive and relentless public relations campaign” to avoid complying with the subpoena.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in a court filing Monday, defended its subpoena seeking potential witnesses and victims of antisemitism at the university and said therequest is not unusual forsuch investigations. The commission is seekingemployees’ names, home addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses to further an investigation it began in 2023 over the school’s treatment of Jewish faculty and other employees regarding antisemitism complaints following Hamas’ attack on Israel.
The commission’s request has spurred a backlash from student and faculty groups, including Penn’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors and the Penn Faculty Alliance to Combat Antisemitism, arguing that the information should not be turned over. Penn has refused to provide the information, prompting the EEOC to file the lawsuit in November.
Penn’s response to the lawsuit, along with filings by other groups,“forecast highly speculative and deeply nefarious outcomes should the EEOC’s subpoena be enforced,” the commission said. “This dark prognosticating has been predictably (and immediately) reported in national, local, and campus outlets.”
The university, in a filing earlier this month, said the commission’s request was “disconcerting” and “unnecessary” and could pose a threat to employees.
“The EEOC insists that Penn produce this information without the consent — and indeed, over the objections — of the employees impacted while entirely disregarding the frightening and well-documented history of governmental entities that undertook efforts to identify and assemble information regarding persons of Jewish ancestry,” the university wrote in its filing.
The commission argued in response that Penn’s assertion of potential danger to employees is “untethered from both the law and the reality of these proceedings.”
“The EEOC seeks only to investigate allegations of serious, widespread antisemitic harassment in Respondent’s workplace,” the commission argued.
The commission, the group said, is only seeking information on faculty and staff “who complained of antisemitic harassment, who belonged to Jewish affinity organizations, or who worked in the Jewish Studies Program.” They could have knowledge of potential problems, the commission said.
Penn can provide the contact information without listing the employees’ organizational affiliations, the commission said.
Penn did not immediately comment on the latest EEOC filing.
Penn has said it provided over 900 pages of materials to the commission and offered to send notices to all employees about the EEOC’s request to hear of antisemitism concerns with the commission’s contact information, so they could reach out themselves if interested in participating.
But the commission called that offer “unworkable” and said it “would undermine the integrity of the agency’s investigation.”
“Messages from EEOC to employees filtered through an employer always risk creating confusion, fear, and mistrust among recipients,” the commission said.
That path could increase the possibility of retaliation against employees for cooperating with the investigation, the commission argued.
The university has challenged the validity of the EEOC’s charge, asserting that the commission has not identified a “single allegedly unlawful employment practice or incident involving employees.” It also “does not refer to any employee complaint the agency has received, any allegation made by or concerning employees, or any specific workplace incident(s) contemplated by the EEOC,” the university said.
While EEOC complaints typically come from those who allege they were aggrieved, this one was launched by EEOC Commissioner Andrea Lucas, now chair of the body, on Dec. 8, 2023, two months after Hamas’ attack on Israel that led to unrest on college campuses, including Penn’s, and charges of antisemitism. It was also just three days after Penn’s then-president, Liz Magill, had testified before a Republican-led congressional committee on the school’s handling of antisemitism complaints; the testimony drew a bipartisan backlash and led to Magill’s resignation days later.
Lucas, according to the EEOC complaint, made the charge in Penn’s case because of “probable reluctance of Jewish faculty and staff to complain of harassing environment due to fear of hostility and potential violence directed against them.“
The commission in its filing Monday said its practice is within itsregulations.
“This charge alleges a time frame, an unlawful employment practice (hostile work environment), the individuals potentially affected by that alleged unlawful employment practice (Jewish employees), and the publicly available sources,” the commission said.
The commission also criticized Penn’s concerns about potential leaks of employees’ contact information through the EEOC, noting the data breach that occurred at Penn last year, exposing employees’ information.
“Its concerns about the security of EEOC’s IT systems are disingenuous,” the commission said.
In the month since Philadelphia Councilmember Jeffery Young introduced a bill banning residential development around the former Hahnemann University Hospital, 824 apartments have been permitted in the area.
The latest zoning permits include 163 units at 1501-11 Race St., which were issued Monday. Brandywine Realty Trust purchased the former Bellet Building office tower in 2021 for $9.7 million.
Brandywine did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It is not clear whether Brandywine is seeking to develop the apartments or to just secure permits to preserve the option for a future buyer.
Last week, zoning permits were issued for 300 units at 300-304 N. Broad St., known as Martinelli Park, the last piece of the former Hahnemann Hospital site that has yet to be sold. The last bid for the site came from the HOW Group, which offered $5.5 million and planned multifamily housing there. But the sale did not go through.
Attempts to reach Hahnemann’s representatives were unsuccessful. It is likely the permits are being secured to preserve the property’s value.
A City Council Rules Committee hearing on Young’s bill is scheduled for Feb. 3.
The rush for permits began on Dec. 24, two weeks after Young introduced his bill, when the Dwight City Group received a zoning permit for 222-48 N. Broad St. to builda 361-unit apartment building.
When “an overlay is placed like this … even though we have our zoning permit already from one of the buildings, the message that it sends is that this area is closed for business,” Judah Angster, CEO of Dwight City Group, said at a January meeting of the Philadelphia Planning Commission.
He said the project now includes 90,000 square feet for commercial use, which would be dedicated to local small businesses.
Why does Young want to ban housing?
Young’s bill would create a new zoning overlay covering the area “bounded by the north side of Race Street, the east side of North 16th Street, the south side of Callowhill Street, and the west side of North Broad Street.”
This covers the former Hahnemann campus, which included seven medical buildings, a parking garage, and some surface lots. The hospital dated to the 19th century and had been operating from this location for 90 years before its bankruptcy.
A handful of other buildings are in the proposed overlay as well, including a PHA apartment building and a homeless shelter.
What once was the Hahnemann campus sprawls over nearly six acres, centered on Broad Street along the Vine Street Expressway, comprising seven medical buildings, a parking garage, and surface lots.
Young said that he wanted to ban new homes from the site to preserve job opportunities in the city, hopefully prompting the reuse of the site for office, medical, or educational use.
At the Planning Commission meeting, the bill was largely discussed as Young’s effort to force developers to meet with him over their plans. The Hahnemann site is zoned with Philadelphia’s most flexible land use rules, which means that under normal circumstances, residential conversions would not require neighborhood meetings or political approvals.
“I look forward to continuing dialogue that brings community stakeholders to the table for this important section of Center City,” Young said in an email Tuesday.
Dwight Group has said that it is having productive conversations with Young.
The legislation is considered by some legal experts as a blatant use of spot zoning, when a change in land use rules is targeted to a limited geography. Such legislation is often introduced to help or hurt a particular project.
“In my time as a zoning lawyer for 27 years, I don’t think I’ve seen a greater example of illegal spot zoning,” Matt McClure, head of law firm Ballard Spahr’s land use practice and a lawyer for developer Dwight City, said the January meeting. “It is targeted at a particular property, targeted around a certain transaction that was talked about. It’s just illegal.”
Hahnemann University Hospital has been closed for more than six years, and attempts to preserve medical and educational uses in its former buildings so far have faltered. Most are still vacant.
Is this actually an honest-to-goodness turning point in the war for the soul of America? Monday night, the deny-everything-admit-nothing Trump regime surprised observers by revealing that violence-provoking Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino has been sent home from Minneapolis and may even be retiring. That’s a giant win for the power of everyday people resisting, but turning around the battleship of tyranny will still take much more work.
Corporate America may pay a steep price for its cowardly ICE neutrality
Protesters gather Friday at Target’s corporate headquarters in Minneapolis.
One of the many remarkable and lasting ideas the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. placed into the national conversation was the concept of something he called “negative peace.”
Although the phrase began appearing in the writings of the civil rights leader in the late 1950s, King made the idea famous in his 1963 “Letter From Birmingham Jail,” where he was locked up for fighting segregation in Alabama’s largest city. He was annoyed by a letter from eight local white clergymen, titled a “Call for Unity,” that begged King to end a civil disobedience crusade for racial integration and seek progress through negotiations and the courts.
When an aide smuggled the newspaper into King’s cell, he began furiously scribbling his response in the margins of the ad before writing more on any scrap of paper he could find. His key passage argues that the white moderate was a greater threat to Black freedom than the KKK, because he was someone “more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice,” and who wants African Americans to wait for a “more convenient season.”
Flash-forward 63 years, and the grand pooh-bahs of U.S. capitalism have learned nothing from this. On Sunday, 60 major corporations based in Minnesota — feeling caught in the crossfire of the federal immigration raids tearing apart Greater Minneapolis and the growing resistance movement — issued a cowardly and pathetic call for a negative peace to reduce the tensions.
The open letter that was released through the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce was signed by the CEOs or equivalents of almost every major Gopher State brand that you could think of — including Target, 3M, General Mills, Hormel, UnitedHealth (yes, that UnitedHealth), and all five major sports franchises. Some of these firms are beginning to see real economic fallout from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and protest activities, which have kept some frightened Black and brown workers at home and triggered a large general strike last Friday.
The letter reads little differently from the Birmingham ministers’ “Call for Unity.”
“With yesterday’s tragic news” — a vague, bloodless reference to the 10 shots fired by federal officers into a 37-year-old intensive care nurse named Alex Pretti — “we are calling for an immediate deescalation of tensions and for state, local and federal officials to work together to find real solutions,” the letter states. It notes that Minnesota business leaders have been in touch with Gov. Tim Walz, the Donald Trump White House, and others in pleading for what it hopes would be a solution to the state’s crisis.
Pretti is never mentioned in the letter. Neither is Renee Nicole Good, the 37-year-old mother of three who was gunned down behind the wheel of her family SUV by an ICE agent as she attempted to drive away from a confrontation. In fact, ICE is never mentioned, nor are the federal agency’s most outrageous tactics, such as the seizure of a 5-year-old boy as “bait” to detain him and his father, or dragging a barely dressed Hmong refugee who is a U.S. citizen out of his home in frigid weather.
The entire letter is remarkable not for what it says — since it says very little beyond praying this whole mess somehow goes away so they can go back to making money without thinking about such dreadful things — than for what it doesn’t say.
There is no condemnation of the murders of two U.S. citizens who did nothing beyond legally monitoring the federal officers and their activities while on public streets. There is no condemnation of the ICE tactics in seizing hardworking migrants with no criminal records who are the backbone of the Minnesota community. There is nothing about what MLK would have called “positive peace” — a desire for real justice.
That’s probably because positive peace requires bold choices and displays of real courage — qualities that modern corporate America seems to have misplaced in a giant warehouse somewhere.
Exhibit A would have to be Target, the large national retailer that, with its hundreds of stores and its name slapped on the NBA’s Timberwolves’ arena, is now to many Americans the corporate face of Minnesota. Under pressure from demonstrators, including more than 100 clergy who protested outside Target’s Minneapolis headquarters on Friday, the retailer still said nothing — before the tepid group letter — about the ongoing ICE raids, or why agents have been allowed to stage operations in its parking lots and even inside stores.
There’s a bleak history here. In 2020, Minnesota became the epicenter of the fight for racial justice when the Minneapolis police murder of George Floyd was captured on video. That time, the state’s CEOs not only expressed moral outrage but pledged to spend heavily on diversity initiatives. Five years later, the local news site Racket reported many of these firms had backtracked, and that barely a third of the pledged $550 million had been spent.
This time, the business leaders just want the “tension” to disappear. That’s not so easy. Just ask Target. Its early 2025 move to end its diversity initiatives as Trump took office sparked calls from Black leaders for a boycott that has cut into store traffic and lowered Target’s stock price. It seems that moral surrender actually does have a price.
Also on Sunday, the team chaplain for the Timberwolves — ironically, one of the teams that signed onto the corporate letter — issued a personal statement with loud echoes of the “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” calling out any churches that had prayed that morning for peace and unity but not for justice.
“Peace is what the powerful ask for when they don’t want to be interrupted,” Matt Moberg wrote in a short piece that went viral on social media, adding, “Unity that refuses to name violence is just loyalty to the ones holding the weapons.”
This wouldn’t be the first time corporate America misread the room. Sunday’s statement suggested a continued deer-in-the-headlights reaction from the shock of Trump’s return to office — even as the CEOs ignore not just the power of the Target boycotts but the recent success of economic justice campaigns against firms from Disney to Avelo Airlines, not to mention the solidarity that drove the Minneapolis general strike.
Already, there is growing talk of a national general strike or expanded boycotts by millions of citizens who are also consumers, and who are both furious over the Good and Pretti murders and now flabbergasted by the corporate cone of silence. America’s business leaders don’t understand that cowardice has a steep cost attached.
Yo, do this!
There’s no better writer about the long fight for social justice in America than historian Heather Ann Thompson. Her searing 2016 book about the 1971 Attica prison uprising — Blood in the Water — won a well-deserved Pulitzer Prize, and locals were thrilled when it was reported that the next book from Thompson, who taught for a while at Temple, would be on the 1985 MOVE bombing. Instead, she has taken a detour. Her Fear and Fury: The Reagan Eighties, the Bernie Goetz Shootings, and the Rebirth of White Rage is out today. I just downloaded the audiobook, and cannot wait to listen.
It’s Academy Award season, and so — hopelessly snowed in on Sunday — I took a family break from football (!) to rent a movie … from 2009. Given my obsession with 1960s rock and roll radio, it’s weird that I’d never seen Pirate Radio, a fictional homage to the U.K.’s government-defying offshore radio stations of the British Invasion era that stars the late Philip Seymour Hoffman. The plot can be muddled at times, but it’s maybe the best movie soundtrack ever!
Ask me anything
Question: Why do Dem Leaders want to save ICE, when nobody really else does? What’s the motivation? — @keynesaddiction.bsky.social via Bluesky
Answer: I wonder this, too. Both ICE and the current crew at U.S. Customs and Border Protection have been simmering for far too long in a toxic, unredeemable culture that cannot be reformed. What’s more, the shocking abuses on display in Minnesota and two killings have now convinced a plurality of U.S. voters that ICE should be abolished. Still, I can understand the Democrats’ bind, since at the moment the party has no other political leverage beyond the ability to block most Senate legislation with the filibuster. It might be best to push hard for as much as can be done in 2026, while running in the midterms on a platform of abolishing ICE when they gain power on Capitol Hill.
What you’re saying about …
LOL — remember that whole Greenland thing? It feels like that was five years ago, but some of you had some good responses on dealing with Trump’s bluster about an American takeover, even if things have temporarily cooled down. Tom Desmond said the Europeans “need to quit pretending that they can ‘manage’ him through flattery and soft words. Instead, they need to apply threats — i.e., whatever tariffs he imposes on Europe over Greenland they will return against the U.S. three-fold.” Jo Parker said Congress needs to reassert its powers over tariffs and declaring war, but “With the spineless [Dave] McCormick and [John] Fetterman representing us, I’m not sanguine that such actions will take place, however.”
📮 This week’s question: Things are coming to a head in Congress over funding for ICE and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Should Democrats make a deal for ICE reforms, such as unmasking and requiring arrest warrants, or must they push for bigger concessions, or even abolishing ICE? Please email me your answer and put the exact phrase “ICE funding” in the subject line.
Backstory on the day (a) Fetterman spoke out
U.S. Sen. John Fetterman and his wife, Gisele Barreto Fetterman, await the arrival of President Joe Biden at Philadelphia International Airport in July 2024.
I must confess that keeping up with the downward spiral of Pennsylvania’s Democratic Sen. John Fetterman since he took office in 2023 can get tiresome. At first, Fetterman’s rightward tack seemed largely a function of his zealous support for Israel, which caused him to wave off allegations of war crimes by Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing government. Soon, others pointed to his health woes — hospitalizations for a stroke and depression, among other things — as he endorsed more and more Trump-flavored ideas.
Amid mounting outrage over Trump’s aggressive immigration raids, Fetterman made some comments that had his growing legion of critics wonder if the senator’s real heart issue was whether he had one. “ICE performs an important job for our country,” the Democrat posted on X last July, adding that any calls to abolish the agency were “inappropriate and outrageous.” Even after the Jan. 7 ICE killing of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis, Fetterman’s middle-of-the-road stance was this: “Secure the border. Deport all the criminals. Stop targeting the hardworking migrants in our nation.” In the immediate aftermath of Saturday’s killing of Alex Pretti by federal agents, even Pennsylvania’s GOP Sen. Dave McCormick had called for a congressional investigation before Fetterman said anything.
On Sunday night, though, Fetterman issued a heartfelt and moving statement. Well, a Fetterman did.
“For more than a decade, I lived undocumented in the US,” the senator’s wife, Gisele Barreto Fetterman, a native of Brazil, posted on X. “Every day carried the same uncertainty and fear lived in my body — a tight chest, shallow breaths, racing heart. What I thought was my private, chronic dread has now become a shared national wound. This now-daily violence is not ‘law and order.’ It is terror inflicted on people who contribute, love, and build their lives here. It’s devastatingly cruel and unAmerican.” Her post ended with an emoji of a broken heart.
Sen. Fetterman finally issued a statement nearly a day later. He called for “an immediate end” to the ICE operations in Minnesota, adding, “It has become an ungovernable and dangerous urban theatre for civilians and law enforcement that is incompatible with the American spirit.” But Fetterman still disappointed critics of Trump’s immigration policy, insisting that while he wants ICE reforms, he still supports the embattled agency, and won’t join other Democrats in shutting down the federal government if those reforms aren’t happening.
Pennsylvanians thought they were getting a progressive voice and a moral leader when they elected Fetterman in 2022. It feels now like we elected the wrong Fetterman.
What I wrote on this date in 2010
It was only 16 years ago, but at the dawn of the 2010s, there was still a robust conversation about how to save the traditional journalism outlets— especially newspapers — that had flourished in the 20th century. On Jan. 27, 2010, I criticized an idea coming from Apple that a new kind of $1,000 iPad, nicknamed “the Jesus tablet,” would fix everything. I wrote: “To survive, we need to change our whole worldview — finding ways to encourage more dialogue with readers and more community involvement so that local readers feel they have a stake in this thing. And we also need to do a better job at the thing we claim to be already good at — real journalism that makes a difference.”
On the national beat, there’s no bigger story than the fallout from the inhumanity of the Trump regime’s mass deportation policies. In my Sunday column, I looked at the other way people are dying in ICE’s reign of terror: inside the growing network of squalid and overcrowded jails and detention camps. The death rate in these facilities so far in 2026 is already 10 times higher than it was in the last year of the Biden administration. Over the weekend, I quickly shifted gears and turned a planned column about faith leaders in Minneapolis and an America yearning for morality into a lament over the shocking ICE murder of a 37-year-old observer, Alex Pretti. The contrast between good and evil in America has never been more stark.
The many tentacles of the mass deportation story stretch well beyond Minneapolis and other hot spots like Maine, including stepped-up ICE enforcement activity here in Philadelphia since Trump returned to office. The Inquirer’s veteran immigration reporter, Jeff Gammage, has drilled deeply into the human stories on the front lines here. Written with colleague Michelle Myers, this week’s installment was both poignant and infuriating. A local family of four is returning to Bolivia after the dad — the prime caregiver for his 5-year-old son, being treated at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia for brain cancer — has stopped fighting his deportation after five months in ICE detention. As his family prepares to leave, the child’s future in a South American country with substandard medical care is highly uncertain. Old-school beat reporting like this is what local community journalism is all about. You support this vital work when you subscribe to The Inquirer.
By submitting your written, visual, and/or audio contributions, you agree to The Inquirer’s Terms of Use, including the grant of rights in Section 10.
LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration has not shied away from sharing AI-generated imagery online, embracing cartoonlike visuals and memes and promoting them on official White House channels.
But an edited — and realistic — image of civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong in tears after being arrested is raising new alarms about how the administration is blurring the lines between what is real and what is fake.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s account posted the original image from Levy Armstrong’s arrest before the official White House account posted an altered image that showed her crying. The doctored picture is part of a deluge of AI-edited imagery that has been shared across the political spectrum since the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by U.S. Border Patrol officers in Minneapolis
However, the White House’s use of artificial intelligence has troubled misinformation experts who fear the spreading of AI-generated or edited images erodes public perception of the truth and sows distrust.
In response to criticism of the edited image of Levy Armstrong, White House officials doubled down on the post, with deputy communications director Kaelan Dorr writing on X that the “memes will continue.” White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson also shared a post mocking the criticism.
David Rand, a professor of information science at Cornell University, says calling the altered image a meme “certainly seems like an attempt to cast it as a joke or humorous post, like their prior cartoons. This presumably aims to shield them from criticism for posting manipulated media.” He said the purpose of sharing the altered arrest image seems “much more ambiguous” than the cartoonish images the administration has shared in the past.
Memes have always carried layered messages that are funny or informative to people who understand them, but indecipherable to outsiders. AI-enhanced or edited imagery is just the latest tool the White House uses to engage the segment of Trump’s base that spends a lot of time online, said Zach Henry, a Republican communications consultant who founded Total Virality, an influencer marketing firm.
“People who are terminally online will see it and instantly recognize it as a meme,” he said. “Your grandparents may see it and not understand the meme, but because it looks real, it leads them to ask their kids or grandkids about it.”
All the better if it prompts a fierce reaction, which helps it go viral, said Henry, who generally praised the work of the White House’s social media team.
The creation and dissemination of altered images, especially when they are shared by credible sources, “crystallizes an idea of what’s happening, instead of showing what is actually happening,” said Michael A. Spikes, a professor at Northwestern University and news media literacy researcher.
“The government should be a place where you can trust the information, where you can say it’s accurate, because they have a responsibility to do so,” he said. ”By sharing this kind of content, and creating this kind of content … it is eroding the trust — even though I’m always kind of skeptical of the term trust — but the trust we should have in our federal government to give us accurate, verified information. It’s a real loss, and it really worries me a lot.”
Spikes said he already sees the “institutional crises” around distrust in news organizations and higher education, and feels this behavior from official channels inflames those issues.
Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor at UCLA and the host of the Utopias podcast, said many people are now questioning where they can turn to for “trustable information.” “AI systems are only going to exacerbate, amplify and accelerate these problems of an absence of trust, an absence of even understanding what might be considered reality or truth or evidence,” he said.
Srinivasan said he feels the White House and other officials sharing AI-generated content not only invites everyday people to continue to post similar content but also grants permission to others who are in positions of credibility and power, like policymakers, to share unlabeled synthetic content. He added that given that social media platforms tend to “algorithmically privilege” extreme and conspiratorial content — which AI generation tools can create with ease — “we’ve got a big, big set of challenges on our hands.”
An influx of AI-generated videos related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement action, protests and interactions with citizens has already been proliferating on social media. After Renee Good was shot by an ICE officer while she was in her car, several AI-generated videos began circulating of women driving away from ICE officers who told them to stop. There are also many fabricated videos circulating of immigration raids and of people confronting ICE officers, often yelling at them or throwing food in their faces.
Jeremy Carrasco, a content creator who specializes in media literacy and debunking viral AI videos, said the bulk of these videos are likely coming from accounts that are “engagement farming,” or looking to capitalize on clicks by generating content with popular keywords and search terms like ICE. But he also said the videos are getting views from people who oppose ICE and DHS and could be watching them as “fan fiction,” or engaging in “wishful thinking,” hoping that they’re seeing real pushback against the organizations and their officers.
Still, Carrasco also believes that most viewers can’t tell if what they’re watching is fake, and questions whether they would know “what’s real or not when it actually matters, like when the stakes are a lot higher.”
Even when there are blatant signs of AI generation, like street signs with gibberish on them or other obvious errors, only in the “best-case scenario” would a viewer be savvy enough or be paying enough attention to register the use of AI.
This issue is, of course, not limited to news surrounding immigration enforcement and protests. Fabricated and misrepresented images following the capture of deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro exploded online earlier this month. Experts, including Carrasco, think the spread of AI-generated political content will only become more commonplace.
Carrasco believes that the widespread implementation of a watermarking system that embeds information about the origin of a piece of media into its metadata layer could be a step toward a solution. The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity has developed such a system, but Carrasco doesn’t think that will become extensively adopted for at least another year.
“It’s going to be an issue forever now,” he said. I don’t think people understand how bad this is.”
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Iran’s bloody crackdown on nationwide protests has killed at least 6,159 people while many others still are feared dead, activists said Tuesday, as a U.S. aircraft carrier group arrived in the Middle East to lead any American military response to the crisis. Iran’s currency, the rial, meanwhile fell to a record low of 1.5 million to $1.
The arrival of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier and guided missile destroyers accompanying it provide the U.S. the ability to strike Iran, particularly as Gulf Arab states have signaled they want to stay out of any attack despite hosting American military personnel.
Two Iranian-backed militias in the Mideast have signaled their willingness to launch new attacks, likely trying to back Iran after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened military action over the killing of peaceful protesters or Tehran launching mass executions in the wake of the demonstrations.
Iran has repeatedly threatened to drag the entire Mideast into a war, though its air defenses and military are still reeling after the June war launched by Israel against the country. But the pressure on its economy may spark new unrest as everyday goods slowly go out of reach of its people — particularly if Trump chooses to attack.
Ambrey, a private security firm, issued a notice Tuesday saying it assessed that the U.S. “has positioned sufficient military capability to conduct kinetic operations against Iran while maintaining the ability to defend itself and regional allies from reciprocal action.”
“Supporting or avenging Iranian protesters in punitive strikes is assessed as insufficient justification for sustained military conflict,” Ambrey wrote. “However, alternative objectives, such as the degradation of Iranian military capabilities, may increase the likelihood of limited U.S. intervention.”
Activists offer new death toll
Tuesday’s new figures came from the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, which has been accurate in multiple rounds of unrest in Iran. The group verifies each death with a network of activists on the ground in Iran.
It said the 6,159 dead included at least 5,804 protesters, 214 government-affiliated forces, 92 children and 49 civilians who weren’t demonstrating. The crackdown has seen over 41,800 arrests, it added.
The Associated Press has been unable to independently assess the death toll given authorities cutting off the internet and disrupting calls into the Islamic Republic.
Iran’s government has put the death toll at a far lower 3,117, saying 2,427 were civilians and security forces, and labeled the rest “terrorists.” In the past, Iran’s theocracy has undercounted or not reported fatalities from unrest.
That death toll exceeds that of any other round of protest or unrest there in decades, and recalls the chaos surrounding Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.
The protests in Iran began on Dec. 28, sparked by the fall of the Iranian currency, the rial, and quickly spread across the country. They were met by a violent crackdown by Iran’s theocracy, the scale of which is only starting to become clear as the country has faced more than two weeks of internet blackout — the most comprehensive in its history.
Iran’s U.N. ambassador told a U.N. Security Council meeting late Monday that Trump’s repeated threats to use military force against the country “are neither ambiguous nor misinterpreted.” Amir Saeid Iravani also repeated allegations that the U.S. leader incited violence by “armed terrorist groups” supported by the United States and Israel, but gave no evidence to support his claims.
Iranian state media has tried to accuse forces abroad for the protests as the theocracy remains broadly unable to address the country’s ailing economy, which is still squeezed by international sanctions, particularly over its nuclear program.
On Tuesday, exchange shops offered the record-low rial-to-dollar rate in Tehran. Traders declined to speak publicly on the matter, with several responding angrily to the situation.
Already, Iran has vastly limited its subsidized currency rates to cut down on corruption. It also has offered the equivalent of $7 a month to most people in the country to cover rising costs. However, Iran’s people have seen the rial fall from a rate of 32,000 to $1 just a decade ago — which has devoured the value of their savings.
Some Iranian-backed militias suggest willingness to fight
Iran projected its power across the Mideast through the “Axis of Resistance,” a network of proxy militant groups in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iraq, and other places. It was also seen as a defensive buffer, intended to keep conflict away from Iranian borders. But it has collapsed after Israel targeted Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon and others during the Gaza war. Meanwhile, rebels in 2024 overthrew Syria’s Bashar Assad after a yearslong, bloody war in which Iran backed his rule.
Yemen’s Houthi rebels, backed by Iran, have repeatedly warned they could resume fire if needed on shipping in the Red Sea, releasing old footage of a previous attack Monday. Ahmad “Abu Hussein” al-Hamidawi, the leader of Iraq’s Kataib Hezbollah militia, warned “the enemies that the war on the (Islamic) Republic will not be a picnic; rather, you will taste the bitterest forms of death, and nothing will remain of you in our region.”
The Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, one of Iran’s staunchest allies, refused to say how it planned to react in the case of a possible attack.
“During the past two months, several parties have asked me a clear and frank question: If Israel and America go to war against Iran, will Hezbollah intervene or not?” Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Kassem said in a video address.
He said the group is preparing for “possible aggression and is determined to defend” against it. But as to how it would act, he said, “these details will be determined by the battle and we will determine them according to the interests that are present.”
