A former Green Beret who spread a debunked story about a young Gazan boy is now running for Congress as a Green Party candidate in North Carolina, and the fallout from that episode is shaping how voters and media view his bid.

Anthony Aguilar, 25, a former Green Beret and contractor with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, rose to attention after accusing Israeli forces of killing a five-year-old he said was seeking food. That claim was later shown to be false when the foundation located the child alive and evacuated him from Gaza, but the accusation had already been amplified by major media figures. Now Aguilar is running as a Green Party candidate, pitching himself as an alternative to the two-party system.

The original allegation painted a vivid and emotional picture intended to turn public opinion against Israel and the humanitarian group he worked with. It had clear propaganda value given global scrutiny of the Israel-Hamas war and the quick international rush to judgment by some organizations. That narrative spread fast, and voices on cable news helped ensure it reached a wide audience before the facts were checked.

Aguilar showed still images of the boy taken from his bodycam footage, approaching him and another contractor holding bags of food. He claimed to have had a heartfelt moment with Abboud when the boy kissed his hand and face, thanking him for the food. 

He then said he heard shots fired after the boy left, and when he arrived on the scene, he claimed to have seen Abboud and others dead on the ground, having been shot by IDF soldiers. Aguilar told Dialogue Works that the boy took a “shot to the torso, a shot to the leg — dead.”

The former Green Beret told conflicting accounts of the incident, claiming on July 29th the boy was murdered right outside of the GHF aid site Secure Distribution Site-1 (SDS), before telling MSNBC on August 2nd it occurred outside SDS-2, and finally deciding it actually happened outside of SDS-3, which he told Dialogue Works.

Those inconsistencies matter in a political context. Eyewitness testimony can be vital, but when a witness changes location details multiple times and the central claim proves false, it raises questions about credibility and intent. Republicans and others skeptical of media narratives will point to the episode as an example of how quickly misinformation can influence opinion and policy debates.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation conducted an investigation and actively searched for the boy after the allegation circulated, acting out of concern for his safety. They eventually found Abboud alive and arranged his evacuation from Gaza, undermining Aguilar’s central claim. For critics, this sequence shows how a single dramatic assertion can do outsized political damage before basic verification occurs.

Aguilar has not recanted the broader conclusions he draws about Israel, and he now calls the Gaza situation genocide while positioning himself as a progressive alternative in American politics. That stance is part of his campaign pitch to voters who want what he calls a choice outside the two-party system. His rhetoric appeals to a segment of the electorate frustrated with establishment politics and big-money donors.

But running for office after spreading high-profile misinformation carries political risk, and conservative voters will use the episode to question his judgment and reliability. Opponents can—and likely will—frame his campaign as rooted in a willingness to deploy dramatic, unverified claims for attention. That matters in a swing state like North Carolina where credibility and clarity about foreign policy can sway independent voters.

As he campaigns, Aguilar blends progressive populism with international outrage, promising to fight for policies he says are life-or-death for ordinary people. “I stand with the 62% of Americans who want a choice outside the two-party establishment,” Aguilar said. “By running as a Green, I can fight for the solutions people are literally dying for — like healthcare as a human right and an end to endless war—solutions the billionaire donors will not stand for.”

Voters will have to weigh his personal story and activist credentials against the record of a high-profile false allegation and shifting accounts. In a political environment that prizes authenticity and accountability, the episode will likely follow Aguilar through debates and ad cycles. For Republicans and other critics, it’s a clear-cut case of a candidate whose judgment on a crucial international episode undermines his broader campaign claims.