The pattern is all too familiar. The Washington Post runs a story with a sensational claim: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered the killing of survivors of one of the first boat attacks back in September — a coup de grace or finishing shot that would constitute a war crime. The Post appears to have had only one source making the specific claim about Hegseth, but ran with the story. What followed was a line of politicians and pundits calling for the usual criminal charges, impeachments, and resignations. Then, various sources, including the New York Times, debunked the story.
When this story broke, some of us cautioned that the law was clear, but the facts were not. Yes, it is generally a war crime to intentionally kill or order a “double tap” strike for the sole purpose of killing the survivors at sea. The Nazis were charged with such heinous acts in World War II. However, such allegations are often difficult to resolve even after investigations in the “fog of war,” where decisions are made in seconds on a battlefield. This claim was being made with only the Post and a single source as “evidence.”
The Post claimed “Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. ‘The order was to kill everybody, one of them said.”
This is the same newspaper that won the Pulitzer Prize with the later debunked Russian collusion story — a scandal started by the Clinton campaign, which secretly funded the infamous Steele dossier.
Nevertheless, the airways were filled with experts stating categorically that a war crime was committed.
Notably, these claims were made over the Administration’s vociferous objections, which denied that any such order was given by Hegseth during the attack. Indeed, a later attack did involve survivors who were retrieved and then returned to their country.
The New York Times this week ran a multiple-source story saying that Hegseth gave no such order.
Putting aside the sensational and apparently false claim about Hegseth, the issue of the order by Admiral Bradley comes down to motivation. It is common in war to deliver a finishing blow on a vessel. It has been routinely done by many countries, including when survivors remain on board or near the boat. While countries must take reasonable measures to allow survivors to leave a sinking vessel, the demands of war often allow for a finishing shot to achieve a mission with personnel on or near the boat.
The first attack did not sink the boat in question, and Bradley ordered a second hit. If he did so to sink the vessel, he is likely within the laws of war.
Of course, reasonable people can question the overall policy and whether killing drug carriers is consistent with international law. However, that is not the specific claim raised in this controversy. The question is whether, in a military action, a second finishing shot can be delivered to complete a mission to sink a vessel. The answer is likely yes.
It is also worth noting the distinction between operations targeting boats and operations targeting people. Past presidents like Barack Obama have unilaterally ordered the killing of people abroad, including U.S. citizens. Presumably, if an attack on a targeted individual did not clearly kill that person, Obama would have ordered a second attack to finish him off.
That brings us back to the sudden appearance of this story about an attack in September. The Administration was hitting the Democratic members hard over their controversial video telling military personnel to refuse unlawful orders. Those members later admitted that they could not actually name such an order. While some have demanded sedition charges against the members, I have written that such a case would be legally unfounded and would certainly collapse immediately in court. This was protected speech, even though I disagreed with these members about posting the video.
As the heat over the video continued to rise, the Post suddenly had breaking news of an illegal order from Hegseth. You would have to be a complete chump to ignore the obvious timing and purpose of such a story. The fact that the Post would run to print with a single anonymous source made the story even more incredible. Yet, it did not matter. It was a fact too good to check for the Post and a long line of experts and pundits.
It still does not matter. We are living in a post-truth political environment where media outlets feed the demands of echo-chambered readers. It was true because they wanted it to be true. They wanted Hegseth watching survivors clinging to a boat and ordering the military “to kill everybody.”
The Congress is moving forward with investigations, and that is a good thing. We should be clear on the rules of engagement and confirm that the motivation was not to kill survivors in the water. However, the real lesson here is one that still has not been learned about the corrosive effect of political bias in the media.
Polls show trust in the media at an all-time low with less than 20 percent of citizens trusting television or print media. Yet, reporters and academics continue to destroy the core principles that sustain journalism and ultimately the role of a free press in our society. Notably, writers who have been repeatedly charged with false or misleading columns are some of the greatest advocates for dropping objectivity in journalism.
Indeed, the whole “Let’s Go Brandon” chant is as much a criticism of the media as it is President Biden.
There was always an obvious alternative explanation for the second strike in this story. The boat was clearly not destroyed by the first attack. Yet, in the midst of the sedition debate, there was a need for an illegal order as the six Democratic members struggled to give an example to support their public call. The Post supplied it like an actor walking in on cue at just the right moment. As we investigate the claim, it would be equally commendable for the media to look into its own role in this “double tap” story. Most citizens would likely agree that the media “rules of engagement” also warrant some review.
Tried dozens of online jobs, but nothing worked — until this. Now I earn $7K–$9K (USD) monthly from home. It’s real. Link’s below if you want in too≻≻≻
Here is how I am making 89>$ an hour… After been without work for 6 months, I started freelancing over this website and now I couldn’t be happier. After 3 months on my new job my monthly income is around 14k a month… Cause someone helped me telling me about this job now I am going to help somebody else…
Check it out for yourself >>
Here is how I am making 89>$ an hour… After been without work for 6 months, I started freelancing over this website and now I couldn’t be happier. After 3 months on my new job my monthly income is around 14k a month… Cause someone helped me telling me about this job now I am going to help somebody else…
Check it out for yourself >>
President Trump and Secretary of War, Hegseth goal is to protect the citizens from “Narco-Terrorist” that want to kill Americans with illicit drugs. Drugs that kill and estimated 100.000 citizens a year. This protest of stopping the flow of drugs into the United States just another political scam by Democrats, who appear not to care about the people or respect for law & order. The moral to the story is never trust or vote for a Democrat if you want America to continue to be land of liberty and freedom
Fundamental future “reforms” should be the goal here. Do any of us want a president (from the other party) with assassination authority to act without Congress and without the courts?
These illegal practices can cut both ways. Bad for Republicans and bad for Democrats.
Were weren’t calling these “assassinations” when Clinton was doing the same with narco-terrorists thirty years ago.
Weren’t calling these assassinations when Obama and Biden were doing it.
100,000+ dead Americans dead every year, and narco-terrorists operating in conjunction with the governments of the base countries they are coming from – and people want to suddenly pull on a righteous suit and now claim these are just random presidential assassinations.
When did Clinton fire missiles at civilian alleged traffickers outside of US territory again?
Trump apparently is now talking about American boots on the ground in Venezuela and talking about land wars, bypassing the authority of Congress to approve war.
Great distraction from the Epstein files;)
Rabble:
The MSM doesn’t seem to be talking about the Epstien files at all. Isn’t that strange? As soon as Congress and the Pres signed, they stopped talking.
Interesting, ain’t it?
Extra judicial and unconstitutional assassination programs are illegal regardless of whether Republicans or Democrats do it. Also for Christians, this violated your religious faith. Most important they are counter-productive to the United States.
Most targets could have been arrested or detained with little harm to any U.S. service member or allied forces.
In this case, the U.S. Coast Guard or U.S. Navy could have easily intercepted these boats in international waters, seized evidence and interrogated suspects leading to bigger targets.
Such small boats – if they were heading to USA at all – would have had to refuel about 20 times. Suspects could have been arrested at any of those 20 refueling stops. Such small boats with outboard motors would pose little risk (after being destroyed) to larger ocean vessels.
At minimum, in international waters, the U.S. Navy could rescue the survivors then sink the remains of the boat.
By the USA conducting illegal assassinations, the suspects are never confronted with any evidence or accusations against them.
It’s wrong and illegal whether a Republican or Democrat does it. The Republican-controlled Congress was bypassed entirely violating its Article 1 authorities.
Extra judicial and unconstitutional assassination programs are illegal regardless of whether Republicans or Democrats do it.
Why should we accept you get to define what those are? Particularly when you want to tie your definitions in with whatever Abrahamic faith you follow? Legal definitions in law don’t come out of which version of the Bible, or the Torah, or Marx that you prefer.
And do you have particular marine operations experience in international waters that we should trust you actually have some expertise in how it could easily be done your way?
Spent some time in the SEALS? The Coast Guard during Clinton’s shoot down/sink operations off the coast of Peru during his presidency where Coast Guard vessels and helicopters were doing that?
Thanks for laying it all out and connecting the dots. Unfortunately, few will see it.
Jon forgot Trump is a King and a bumbling one at that. He never destroyed anything in Iran. All made up, remember? And the Epstein files. Trump was caught with his pants down 79,000 times–with prepubescent girls, just like they reported. Plus, he colluded with Puddin Head Pukin, as did like Billy Bob Blythe, the poor fella who never did touch no young ladies. Why, for Pete’s sake, he bit his lip and promised and then made millions for speaking to his uranium rich red pals, thanks to Hillbilly.
We are racing headlong into self-destruction. Fact. Our enemies dance and sing even as our traitorous left wing media spreads crap like gobble gobble Goebbels.
We be in deep, deep doo-doo. Megyn Kelly will run for Pres just in time. No joke. Only she can save and perpetuate what Trump has accomplished.
The President is the commander and chief of the armed forces. He is in a war with drug cartels and intends to annihilate them. Congress can declare war if it chooses. The president will again lead that war.
It’s the Dept. of War.
Polysci — drug cartels as political government. What’s it closest to? Dictator or despot?
All Users
This article, as originally published, was truncated due to an technical error. The full article should be visible. If not try refreshing your browser.
PT, I just don’t share these dreams. Not at all, not a little, not an iota do I share these dreams of drug cartels as governments nor any other part or parcel.
RE:
“Notably, these claims were made over the Administration’s vociferous objections, which denied that any such order was given by Hegseth during the attack. Indeed, a later attack did involve survivors who were retrieved and then returned to their country”
Is this a fact?
“Is this a fact?”
Why are you gaslighting?
I”m a bit disappointed in this article, expecting some explanation for the title.
jal64
There was a technical problem that caused only about 20% of the ariticle’s content to be posted. We believe the error is fixed. If it is not fully visible try refreshing your browser.
What I find interesting is how quick the media is in leaving the Epstein story now that a couple of prominent Democratic names have been found in the files. THink the Pritzker’s of Illinois for one. One of the Pritzker family communicated often with Epstein even after his solicitation conviction. The current governor’s re-election campaign also solicited financial donations from Epstein. It would be interesting to compile a list of liberals and conservatives in from these files to see what perverts and idiots we have ruling us.
What’s interesting is
If you were a leader of a drug cartel and you came on this forum what would you say.
You would first say that the boats were just fishing boats. Then when that story fell through you would say that sinking the boats was illegal according to international law. Then when that story fell through you would say that survivors were being killed during a second attempt to sink the vessel. But before you would do all this you would recognize that there are people who post on this forum who are already saying it for you and you would wisely leave well enough alone. You would be correct in your assessment.
It does seem like the drug cartels, flush with cash, have paid several anonymous commenters to come on here and defend them.
oldmanfromkansas,,
I wonder at times if some or at least one of the anonymous comments are from either AI or from a paid troll (either domestic or foreign). The comments appear too consistently for them to be a human or at least a human with a purposeful life or job.
That thought certainly applies to the pro-Trump, anti-Democrat commentators who pound the keyboards in support of Putin and the American oligarchs.
Support of Putin? Proof? NONE
Dear Prof Turley,
The New York Times hasn’t debunked anything worthwhile since the Pentagon Papers.
And the NYT is not debunking anything here. “Hegseth ordered a Lethal Attack But not the Killing of Survivors, Officials say” reports the NYT. .. hardly a debunking.
To be clear, Sec. Hegseth 100% supports SOCOM operational combat officers who may have ordered the ‘finishing shots’ on the survivors during the ‘fog of war’. WH officials describe the lethal attacks as lawful acts of ‘self-defense’ in the ongoing combat operations in Caribbean international waters.
*evidently, DoD has a live feed of the entire operation.
In any case, there is no ‘declaration of war’ or ‘armed conflict’ in the warm waters of the Caribbean. Sec Hegseth has simply authorized military lethal attacks on unarmed, civilian boats [allegedly] smuggling narcotics, declaring them ‘narco terrorist’ subject to termination, in an ongoing global ‘war on drugs’.
**presumably, the same rules of engagement would apply to domestic narco consumers as well.
President Trump has additionally ordered closed the entire airspace of Venezuela, ostensibly the chief state sponsor of narco terrorism in the Caribbean region, and threatened war against that country in particular.
The sudden interest in U.S. military/DoD ‘extrajudicial’ killing, as Speaker Johnson points out, is telling. Allegedly, Obama kept a ‘kill list’ .. . after Cheney ‘took the gloves off’ and ‘we tortured some folks’.
I expect this, too, will wind up grist for the stone mills of partisan rage.
***’stupid rules of engagement’ . ..
Excellent. Nailed it. We must never forget that illegal drugs pouring into this land from boats, ships, jets, helicopters, trucks, cars, intestines, toothpaste, gas tanks, balloons, guns, and children and grandmothers and animals and super tunnels to name a few, are harmless. No one makes a dime on this silliness. And, no government in the Western Hemisphere is under the control of drug money. It doesn’t exist.
WAR! You know? WAR!
GREAT