SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The answer to the question is this: No.
At 9:49 pm on Sunday evening, President Donald Trump posted an AI-generated image (previously shared months ago online by MAGA zealot Nick Adams and others) that depicts him as a healing Jesus Christ-like figure.
Like the president himself, the image is absurd on its face. It is also deeply concerning in terms of the deranged narcissism it represents—not to mention the timing as Trump drags the nation and the world further into ruin with his illegal war of choice against Iran.
Let the record show that Trump is neither holy nor a healer. He's an unrepentant war criminal and a billionaire enemy to the working class.
We asked an AI image generator to create a picture of "Trump as a war criminal" but the response was "an error occurred." But that's okay. Every real picture of Trump is a picture of a war criminal and a deceitful, lying, crude, and greedy man. We decided to use one of those instead.

That's better. Though, honestly, no more enjoyable to look at.
One of the worst Western US snow droughts of the century—exacerbated by a historically warm winter and a record-shattering March heatwave—has experts increasingly worried about wildfire and water supply risks heading into the spring and summer months.
On Wednesday, the California Department of Water Resources reported "no measurable snow" recorded at Phillips Station in the Sierra Nevada range. Because there was some visible snow already on the ground, DWR is calling this the second-lowest April measurement on record.
The agency said this is "a stark indicator of how record‑hot March temperatures and high‑elevation rain have erased the Sierra Nevada snowpack months ahead of schedule."
"The combination of warm storms and unusually hot temperatures rapidly melted what remained of this year’s already sparse snowpack," DWR added. "Statewide, the snowpack is now just 18% of average for this date, according to the automated snow sensor network."
DWR Director Karla Nemeth said that “it feels like we skipped spring this year and dropped straight into a summer heatwave."
“What should be gradual snowmelt happened suddenly weeks ago," Nemeth added. "We’re seeing fewer, warmer storms and shorter wet seasons. Future water supplies will depend upon our ability to capture water when it’s available and manage it more efficiently.”

Jeff Mount, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California’s Water Policy Center, told the San Francisco Chronicle on Wednesday: "It didn’t snow where we needed it to snow, and where it did snow, it didn’t stick. This is going to be an ugly summer."
Oregon's iconic Crater Lake is experiencing its lowest snow water equivalent levels on record for this time of year, according to the National Weather Service.
In Colorado, US Department of Agriculture (USDA) data show the statewide snowpack is at just 26% of median levels as of Thursday.
“This year is on a whole other level,” Colorado State University climatologist Russ Schumacher told The Guardian. "Seeing this year so far below any of the other years we have data for is very concerning."
Last week, the Denver Board of Water Commissioners declared Stage 1 drought restrictions, a move that seeks to reduce water use by 20%.
“The snowpack within Denver Water’s collection system has deteriorated significantly and continues to decline,” said Nathan Elder, Denver Water’s manager of water supply. “Snowpack levels in both basins are now the lowest observed in the past 40 years, with accelerated melting underway. The conditions we are experiencing are unprecedented, and we need customers to save water to protect the supply we have right now.”
April measurements of alpine snowpacks—which are sometimes described as water savings accounts—typically indicate peak levels of water that, with spring warming, melt into reservoirs, rivers, and other bodies that help hydrate the West during the parched summer and fall months.
“March is often a big month for snowstorms,” Schumacher said. “Instead of getting snow we would normally expect we got this unprecedented, way-off-the-scale warmth.”
“This year has the potential of being way worse than any of the years we have analogues for in the past,” he added.
As University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources climate scientist Daniel Swain explained last week:
Meteorologically speaking, March 2026 will go down in the record books as the warmest March on record for at least a third, and possibly half or more, of the continental United States. But even more remarkable is the ~10 day window of peak heat during this truly exceptional March heatwave—when many, if not most, locations across the western two thirds of the United States in a broad swath stretching from the Pacific Coast in California eastward past the Mississippi River broke their all-time March monthly heat records. The margin by which March heat records were shattered was so wide that more than a handful of locations also broke their all-time April heat records, and in a few locations even tied or broke their May heat records!
“Beyond the conspicuous ‘weirdness’ of it all, the most consequential impact of our record-shattering March heat will likely be the decimation of the water year 2025-26 snowpack across nearly all of the American west," Swain warned. "The toll wrought on our 'water tower in the sky' is nothing short of shocking."
I agree. This event has been meteorologically astonishing, and its impacts will be felt long after it ends in terms of record low snowpack, sharply increased wildfire risk, and extreme low watershed runoff/streamflow into summer and beyond.
[image or embed]
— Daniel Swain (@weatherwest.bsky.social) March 25, 2026 at 2:25 PM
The National Interagency Fire Center is among those projecting above-normal fire risk throughout the American West in the coming months.
“Unless there’s a major change in the weather patterns and we somehow pull out some sort of miracle springtime precipitation, we’re looking at an extended fire season,” Joel Lisonbee, senior associate scientist at the Cooperative Institute for Research at the University of Colorado Boulder, told The Guardian.
In addition to the risk of drought and wildfire, low water levels threaten wildlife, including California's flagging salmon runs—which are also imperiled by Trump administration actions including habitat disruption caused by water flow manipulation.
“No sooner do we start to gain a little ground back in rebuilding our salmon runs, the federal Bureau of Reclamation is destroying them again,” Vance Staplin, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Association, told The Sacramento Bee last week. "These fish are in big trouble if the bureau doesn’t relent very soon.”
Scientists have long warned that planetary heating driven by human burning of fossil fuels will result in longer and more frequent snow droughts. One 2020 study showed how the Western United States is fast becoming a "global snow drought hot spot," with the length of such dry spells increasing by 28% between 1980 and 2018.
“Climate change is going to result in a lot of these extreme events worsening,” Clark University climatologist Abby Frazier told The Guardian on Thursday. "It is heartbreaking to see it all playing out as we have predicted for so long. The changes we have teed up for ourselves are going to be catastrophic.”
An analysis published Wednesday by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities found that millions of low-income Americans have stopped participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ever since President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law last year.
According to CBPP's analysis, SNAP participation declined by 6% between July 2025 and December 2025, with 2.5 million fewer Americans receiving benefits.
CBPP estimated that millions more will be dropped from SNAP benefits in the coming months as states adjust their budgets to remain in compliance with the law.
"Starting in 2027, most states will have to pay between 5% and 15% of SNAP benefit costs, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars a year in many states," explained CBPP. "The magnitude of the cost shift... may incentivize states to take drastic measures to reduce their payment error rates quickly and cut program costs, even if it means delaying or improperly denying benefits to eligible people."
In total, concluded CBPP, "we estimate that 4 million people in a typical month will lose out" on SNAP benefits "once the changes are fully implemented."
CBPP published a separate analysis focusing specifically on Arizona, where SNAP participation has already fallen "far more than anticipated," while warning that other states could soon see similarly steep participation drops as they rush to comply with the law.
The GOP budget law contained roughly $186 billion in cuts to SNAP over the span of a decade, which came from expanding work requirements, shifting some of the cost of the program to the states, and restricting benefit increases. As a result, millions of Americans became vulnerable to losing their benefits.
Leor Tal, campaign director at Unrig Our Economy, pointed to CBPP's analysis as an example of the GOP waging class warfare on behalf of rich donors.
“SNAP is a lifeline for working Americans nationwide," Tal said. "Now, that lifeline is being ripped away from millions because Republicans in Congress decided that giving tax breaks to billionaires and waging war are more important than protecting food for families. No family should have to worry about putting food on the table, but congressional Republicans have made sure that millions will.”
Poll after poll shows that support for Israel and political candidates' associations with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group that poured more than $100 million into the 2024 elections, are toxic for the Democratic Party.
One of the most closely watched Democratic primary elections last month was significantly swayed toward US Senate candidate James Talarico in Texas when he spoke out against the US arming Israel.
And the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) own suppressed autopsy of the 2024 election found that the Biden administration's support for Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza harmed then-Vice President Kamala Harris' efforts to win over some voters.
But the mounting evidence that voters want candidates to shift away from the party's decadeslong alliance with Israel wasn't enough on Thursday to convince a DNC panel to approve a resolution condemning the "growing influence" of dark money and corporate spending in Democratic races, particularly by AIPAC.
The committee's resolutions panel killed the motion, which called for "robust" campaign finance transparency, at its spring meeting in New Orleans.
“The use of massive outside spending to support or oppose candidates based on their positions regarding international conflicts or foreign governments raises concerns about undue influence over democratic debate and policymaking, potentially constraining elected officials’ ability to represent the views of their constituents,” reads the resolution, which was submitted by Allison Minnerly, a DNC member from Florida.
The resolution was voted down weeks after organizations linked to AIPAC accounted for $22 million in super political action committee spending in Illinois' US House primaries.
Margaret DeReus, executive director of the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project, said the vote shows that "Democratic leadership is asleep at the wheel when it comes to one of the biggest existential threats to the party."
"AIPAC’s extreme agenda for unconditional weapons funding to Israel is deeply out of step not just with most Democrats, but with the majority of the American people," said DeReus. "We know DNC officials conducting their unreleased post-2024 autopsy found President [Joe] Biden’s support for Israel cost Democrats votes in the last presidential election and paved the way for [President] Donald Trump to ascend to the White House. Party leadership needs to wake up.”
In a memo to the DNC resolutions committee ahead of the vote, the IMEU Policy Project stressed that "the vast majority of Democratic voters agree Israel is committing genocide and support ending weapons to Israel."
"Democratic elected officials face intense pressure from AIPAC to not align with their voters and most voters across the country," wrote the group.
Resolutions like the one Minnerly put forward, said DeReus on Thursday, are "entirely in step with the vast majority of Democratic voters."
Progressive advocate Brian Tashman wrote that "as Israeli settlers carry out violent pogroms, Israeli soldiers shoot children in Gaza in the head, Israeli warplanes bomb apartment buildings in Beirut, and Israeli leaders try to sabotage the Iran ceasefire, the pro-Israel lobby still demands total support for Israeli war crimes."
The global anti-poverty group Oxfam International warned this week that US President Donald Trump’s decision to slash foreign aid by more than half could kill nearly 10 million people by the end of the decade.
Responding to new data released Thursday by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) showing the largest annual drop in the history of official development assistance, Oxfam said “wealthy governments are turning their backs on the lives of millions of women, men, and children in the Global South.”
The OECD released preliminary data on international aid that was provided last year by member countries of the organization's Development Assistance Committee (DAC), finding the largest annual drop in the history of official development assistance.
OECD member countries provided $174.3 billion in aid last year, according to the new data, representing 0.26% of the countries' combined gross national income.
In 2024, the countries sent $215.1 billion, or 0.34% of their gross national income to developing countries, including across the Global South—helping to provide nutritional assistance and healthcare initiatives among other programs.
US foreign aid spending dropped by 56.9% after Trump dismantled the US Agency for International Development, cut smaller aid programs, and pushed Congress to rescind previously approved foreign assistance.
"At a time when aid cuts are already driving instability and fostering greater inequality, government donors are cutting life-saving aid budgets while financing conflict and militarization."
Overall, wealthy OECD countries provided 23.1% less in foreign aid last year than they did in 2024—a greater decline than what the Institute of Global Health in Barcelona projected in February when it released a study in The Lancet, evaluating the impact of development assistance funding declines around the world.
The institute found that aid cuts in 2025 alone, which it assumed would represent a 21% decrease in funding, would lead to 695,238 excess deaths. If cuts continued at the same rate, an estimated 9,416,417 people could die of preventable diseases like malaria and AIDS, starvation, and other impacts by 2030.
The drop in foreign aid spending would suggest even more people could be killed by the cuts over the next four years.
“We are in a time of increasing humanitarian needs; strong pressures on the poorest and most fragile countries; and facing growing global uncertainties and massive insecurity," said Carsten Staur, chair of the OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC), which compiled the data. "In this situation, the world needs more ODA, not less—to help fight extreme poverty, improve resilience, and mobilize more private resources."
Trump's cuts helped make Germany the largest provider of development assistance for the first time ever, providing $29.1 billion to countries in need. The US sent $29 billion while the United Kingdom provided $17.2 billion, Japan sent $16.2 billion, and France sent $14.5 billion. All five of the top ODA providers reduced their foreign aid spending, accounting for 95.7% of the total decline.
Eight out of the DAC's 34 member countries either maintained or increased their development aid spending, and four countries—Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, and Sweden—exceeded the United Nations' target of spending 0.7% of their gross national income on ODA.
Didier Jacobs, development finance lead for Oxfam, emphasized that while "recklessly" cutting foreign aid, "the Trump administration has been preparing to ask Congress for tens of billions in additional funding for bombs, ammunition, and other military equipment relating to its unlawful war against Iran."
"At a time when aid cuts are already driving instability and fostering greater inequality, government donors are cutting life-saving aid budgets while financing conflict and militarization. Cuts from donors including Germany, France and the UK will be felt by the world’s poorest," said Jacobs.
In addition to slashing military spending instead of crucial foreign aid, he said, "there are other ways to find tens of billions, such as by taxing the $2.84 trillions of dollars that the super-rich hide in tax havens.”
"Governments must restore their aid budgets," he said, "and shore up the global humanitarian system that faces its most serious crisis in decades."
New information published Friday by the New York Times further suggests that the US military may have lied when it tried to pin the blame for a February airstrike that killed 21 people in Iran on the Iranian government, with evidence indicating that the US carried out the attack with a new missile designed to inflict maximum casualties.
While much of the world knows about the February 28 massacre of around 175 children and staff at the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in Minab—and about how President Donald Trump initially blamed Iran for the slaughter—the strike that hit a sports hall and playground in Lamerd on the same day, the first day of the war, received far less media coverage.
Munitions experts and the Times concluded that US-made Precision Strike Missiles, or PrSMs—pronounced "prism"—struck the residential area of the southern Iranian city. Developed by Lockheed Martin, PrSMs are airburst weapons, exploding above their targets and blasting 180,000 lethal tungsten pellets in every direction. Video footage of the Lamerd strike shows multiple airbursts.
Pete Hegseth's Defense Dept appears to be caught in a lie.It involves deaths of 21 people (including at least 5 children), injuring 110 in Lamerd, Iran with sports hall and school.By a U.S. missile (PrSM) never before used in combat.NYT sources include: 3 US officials!1/
[image or embed]
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) April 10, 2026 at 5:48 PM
The Times verified the identities of 21 people killed in the strike. At least five victims were children, the youngest of them just 2 years old. Helma Ahmadizadeh, 10, and Elham Zaeri, 11, were attending volleyball practice at the sports hall when it was bombed. Helma survived the strike with no visible injuries. However, she told her coach that she felt something enter her body. A medical examination at a local hospital revealed a small object in her body. She subsequently died.
"A young boy, Ilia Khatami, was killed alongside his coach, Mahmoud Najaf," the newspaper said. "The Times confirmed their deaths, and the death of a second boy, Abdul Mosavar Rahmani, who was from Afghanistan."
The 2-year-old, Avina Barzegar, was mortally wounded by a small object while she was playing outside her home. Video posted on Telegram shows her being treated in a local hospital before she died.
Local officials said 100 other people were injured in the attack.
Pentagon officials previously denied US responsibility for the attack following the March 29 publication of a Times investigation that used video analysis to identify PrSMs as the missiles used in the strike. US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesperson Capt. Tim Hawkins issued a statement on March 31 calling reports that the US carried out the attack "false" and suggesting that weapon used in the strike was an Iranian Hoveyzeh cruise missile.
The Times' latest analysis is "based on new video footage of detonations, new photo evidence of the damage, a missile-trajectory assessment, and the perspectives of multiple experts, including three US government officials."
Findings include distinctive damage patterns consistent with tungsten pellet dispersion from a PrSM airburst, the discovery of a third detonation site consistent with a PrSM, a strike trajectory indicating the missile was launched from where US forces are based, and the sports hall's proximity to an Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps base. The Minab girls' school is also located very close to an IRGC base.
Critically, Iran does not have any missiles in its arsenal that function in a similar manner to PrSMs.
“The problem is that CENTCOM chose as an alternative a very identifiable missile,” Amaël Kotlarski, who leads the weapons team at the defense intelligence firm Janes, told the Times. "And the Hoveyzeh’s distinct features aren’t seen in the video."
Shahryar Pasandideh, another military analyst consulted by the Times, said "there is no public information to suggest that Iranian cruise missiles, including the Hoveyzeh, are equipped with an airburst fuse, let alone an airburst fuse and pre-formed tungsten pellets."
After the Minab massacre, Trump claimed that Iran had somehow acquired a US Tomahawk missile and used it to blow up the school.
An earlier investigation by the BBC Verify also concluded that the Lamerd strike was carried out using US PrSM missiles.
VIDEO | According to a report from BBC Verify, video evidence and expert assessment suggest a US Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) was likely involved in an attack on a sports hall in Lamerd, southwestern Iran on 28 February. The attack killed at least 21 people, including… pic.twitter.com/alZ25dVMl6
— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) March 29, 2026
More than 3,000 people have been killed over 42 days of US and Israeli strikes on Iran, according to medical officials there. This figure reportedly includes over 1,300 civilians, hundreds of whom are women and children.
The fight seemingly isn't over, with a spokesperson for the president pledging that he will "refile this powerhouse lawsuit," which critics have called part of his war on free speech.
A Florida-based federal judge on Monday dismissed President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal over its reporting on a "bawdy" birthday letter the Republican allegedly gave to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump denies writing the letter or drawing the outline of a naked woman around the text. He sued the journalists behind the July report—Joseph Palazzolo and Khadeeja Safdar—and the newspaper, plus its parent company News Corp, chief executive Robert Thomson, and founder Rupert Murdoch.
The US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform subsequently subpoenaed the Epstein estate for all materials that now-imprisoned co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly compiled for the dead financier's birthday book, including the letter attributed to Trump—and in September, the panel published those documents online.
US District Judge Darrin P. Gayles, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, found on Monday that Trump's "complaint fails to adequately allege actual malice." However, Gayles also gave Trump the opportunity to amend his filing within the next two weeks.
While The Wall Street Journal did not immediately respond to CNN's request for comment, a spokesperson for Trump's legal team said in a statement that the president intends to continue the case.
"President Trump will follow Judge Gayles' ruling and guidance to refile this powerhouse lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and all of the other defendants," the spokesperson said. "The president will continue to hold accountable those who traffic in Fake News to mislead the American People."
CNN noted that despite the legal battle, "the 95-year-old Murdoch has maintained a cozy if complicated relationship with the president, including multiple meetings at the White House in recent months."
The suit over the birthday letter to Epstein—whom Trump was publicly friends with in the 1980s and '90s until a reported falling out in the early 2000s—is just part of a sweeping effort by the president and his political enablers "to undermine and chill the most basic freedoms protected under the First Amendment," as the advocacy group Free Press put it in a December analysis.
In addition to the Journal case, examples included Trump's legal battles with the BBC and The New York Times, the White House taking control of the presidential press pool, the administration blocking The Associated Press from the Oval Office over its refusal to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, ABC temporarily suspending late-night host Jimmy Kimmel following comments from Trump's Federal Communications Commission chair, and the Pentagon's legally contested media policy.
Such attacks continue. Last month, as the costs of his unconstitutional war on Iran mounted, Trump floated "treason" charges against media outlets that he accused of reporting false information about the conflict.
"It’s one more episode in this whole downward spiral into which we’ve been dragged,” said Spain's foreign minister.
Contrary to President Donald Trump's claim that "other countries will be involved" in imposing a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz after ceasefire talks ended over the weekend without a deal with Iran, North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries on Monday made clear they did not plan to join Trump's effort as the news of the blockade sent global oil prices skyrocketing once again.
“We are not supporting the blockade," British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told the BBC Monday before the closure began at 10:00 am Eastern time. “It is in my view vital that we get the strait open and fully open, and that’s where we’ve put all of our efforts in the last few weeks, and we’ll continue to do so."
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan called for the Strait of Hormuz to be reopened through diplomatic means, while Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles told Al Jazeera that Trump's decision to block ships “entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas" in the strait "makes no sense."
"It’s one more episode in this whole downward spiral into which we’ve been dragged,” said Robles, who along with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has vehemently condemned the US and Israel's decision to go to war with Iran and has refused to involve Spain's military assets in the conflict.
Starmer called the closure of the strait "deeply damaging" and said that this week the UK and France will convene a summit "to advance work on a coordinated, independent, multinational plan to safeguard international shipping when the conflict ends."
US Central Command said Monday that US forces “will not impede freedom of navigation for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz to and from non-Iranian ports," appearing to step back from Trump's original Sunday statement, which he reiterated Monday on Fox News, that he would impose a "complete blockade" on the key trade waterway.
The news of the blockade came after Iranian negotiators accused Vice President JD Vance of acting in bad faith in the high-level ceasefire talks and Vance claimed Iran would not comply with US demands regarding nuclear development.
The two-week ceasefire deal that was announced last Tuesday—just before a deadline Trump had imposed, saying the US would obliterate Iran's "whole civilization" unless the government struck a deal—sent oil and gas prices tumbling blow $100 per barrel, but prices rose again after Trump's new threat of a blockade.
Brent crude prices were at $102.52 per barrel on Monday, a 7.7% increase, while US crude also rose nearly 8% to $104.02. The UK's wholesale gas contract for the month of May rose by 11.7%.
About 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies passed through the Strait of Hormuz before Iran effectively closed the waterway after the US and Israel began the war, as well as major shipments of fertilizer.
Priyanka Sachdeva, a senior market analyst at the broker Phillip Nova, told The Guardian that "the market reaction" to Trump's threat "underscores a simple but powerful reality: Hormuz risk is not theoretical; it is structural, and it is real.”
“In today’s environment, every barrel of risk added to oil markets carries an inflation price tag for the global economy," Sachdeva said.
Trump's threat of a blockade included any ship that has paid Iran a toll to pass through the strait since the Middle Eastern country began its blockade, with the president accusing Iran of "extortion."
At Responsible Statecraft, Kelley Beaucar Vlahos wrote on Sunday that under Trump's threat, the US is now planning to block "major allies."
"The Philippines is a treaty ally and gets 98% of its energy resources through the strait," Vlahos wrote. "A Japanese vessel carrying liquefied natural gas reportedly passed through the strait two weeks ago."
Sarang Shidore, director of the Global South program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said the US blockade "is another step toward a might-makes-right world."
"Illegalities are being heaped on top of illegalities. The attack on Iran that started this war was compounded by Tehran's seizure of the Strait of Hormuz. Washington's blockade of the strait has further upped the ante," said Shidore.
An adviser to Iranian Supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei said that Iran has "large, untouched levels" to fight back against a US blockade, while Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of the Iranian Parliament, said that Americans will soon "be nostaligic for $4-$5 gas."
At The Conversation, international law professor Donald Rothwell of Australian National University wrote that Trump's blockade would "certainly" imperil the fragile temporary ceasefire while roiling international markets.
"In purely legal terms, if the US imposes a blockade then the ceasefire is over and hostilities have resumed," wrote Rothwell.
The Trump administration's boat strikes have now killed at least 168 people, according to NPR.
The United States military has killed five more people suspected of drug smuggling in the latest boat bombing operation that many international law experts consider to be acts of murder.
In a Sunday social media post, US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) announced it had "conducted two lethal kinetic strikes on two vessels" that it had deemed to be run by "designated terrorist organizations." As with the dozens of other boat bombings the Trump administration has conducted since last September, the military did not provide evidence that the vessels were involved in drug trafficking.
"Intelligence confirmed the vessels were transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific and were engaged in narco-trafficking operations," SOUTHCOM said. "Two male narco-terrorists were killed, and one narco-terrorist survived the first strike. Three male narco-terrorists were killed during the second strike."
SOUTHCOM said that it had alerted the US Coast Guard to conduct a search and rescue operation of the lone survivor of the two strikes, although it provided no further details of his well-being.
According to NPR, the US has now killed at least 168 people with its strikes on suspected drug boats, which began in September and have since continued despite being denounced by human rights organizations such as Human Rights and Amnesty International.
Brian Finucane, senior adviser with the US Program at the International Crisis Group, took note of the latest boat strike by remarking, "The lawless killing spree at sea continues."
A coalition of rights organizations led by the ACLU last year sued the Trump administration to demand it release documents that provide legal justification for its boat-bombing campaign.
The groups said that the Trump administration’s rationales for the strikes deserve special scrutiny because their justification hinges on claims that the US is in an “armed conflict” with international drug cartels akin to past conflicts between the US government and terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda.
The groups argued there is simply no way that drug cartels can be classified under the same umbrella as terrorist organizations, given that the law regarding war with nonstate actors says that any organizations considered to be in armed conflict with the US must be an “organized armed group” that is structured like a conventional military and engaged in “protracted armed violence” with the US government.
Before President Donald Trump's Pentagon began conducting the lethal boat strikes last year, drug trafficking in international waters was treated as a criminal offense, with law enforcement agencies and the US Coast Guard intercepting boats suspected of carrying drugs and arresting suspects.
Trump's bombings of boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific have been called "extrajudicial killings" by advocacy groups including Amnesty International.