SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
us department of defense
US Strike on Iranian School Came After Commanders 'Bypassed Warnings' About Outdated Target Info
Sources told CNN that warnings were ignored due to "expediency."
Jul 07, 2026
US military commanders "bypassed warnings" indicating that their database of strike targets inside Iran was badly out of date shortly before launching a deadly attack on an Iranian primary school in the city of Minab, according to a Tuesday report from CNN.
Three sources told CNN that senior military officials received messages informing them that the intelligence behind the target list had been gathered years ago and "needed to be re-vetted."
Regardless, the proposed Iranian targets were added to a strike list shortly before the US launched an attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School, killing more than 150 schoolchildren along with over a dozen teachers.
Two of CNN's sources said senior commanders ignored the warnings out of "expediency," as they did not want to significantly delay providing target lists during the outset of the war, which Trump illegally launched in February without any authorization from the US Congress.
For months, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has repeatedly dodged questions about the strike on the school, insisting that he didn't want to comment on an ongoing Pentagon investigation.
However, one of CNN's sources said that US military officials "knew within days how the mistake happened," as the school was targeted based on "obviously old info."
CNN noted that old satellite images showed the school once belonged to the same compound as an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facility. However, as recently as 2016, images showed "that a fence had been erected to separate the school from the rest of the base, and that a separate entrance to the school had been built."
Rutgers Law School Professor Adil Haque, noting that intelligence on many of the targets was more than a decade old, called the US decision to proceed with attacks "inexcusable."
The US Department of Defense has still not released its investigation into the bombing, drawing criticism from Palestinian-American policy analyst Yousef Munayyer, who reacted to the CNN report by describing the US military as being "quick to bomb, slow to investigate."
The slow pace of the investigation has also drawn criticism from Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.
During a May congressional hearing, Smith grilled Adm. Brad Cooper about why the US hasn't taken responsibility for the school strike despite clear evidence that it was at fault.
"In the past, when we’ve had these type of mistakes, they’ve been quickly acknowledged," Smith said, "even if a further investigation is necessary to figure out prevention methods."
Smith also criticized Hegseth for showing a "callous disregard for any sort of rules of engagement or protecting of civilian life" during his tenure as defense secretary.
Last month, President Donald Trump brushed off responsibility for the strike on the school, stating that "mistakes are made" and "war is nasty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Crimes Against Humanity': US Murders 2 More People in Pacific Ocean Boat Bombing
The latest killing came a day after a Democratic senator revealed that "the presence of narcotics on the boat has never been a targeting criteria" in the boat bombings.
Jun 04, 2026
The Trump administration killed two more people in a boat bombing in the eastern Pacific Ocean Wednesday, bringing the total number of people killed in the operation human rights experts have condemned as an "extrajudicial killing" spree to at least 207.
"The Trump administration’s lawless killing spree at sea continues," said Brian Finucane, senior adviser at the US program at the International Crisis Group. "The term for premeditated killing outside of armed conflict is murder—and there is no armed conflict here."
As with previous announcements of the lethal boat strikes, at least 63 of which have now been carried out by the US military in an operation the Trump administration has insisted is stopping drugs from reaching the US, US Southern Command presented no evidence Wednesday night when it said the victims were "two male narco-terrorists" and that the boat was "engaged in narco-trafficking operations."
Finucane noted that "even if there were an armed conflict, there’s no indication these supposed 'narco-terrorists' are lawful targets."
President Donald Trump has claimed the US is in an armed conflict with drug cartels in Latin America, and that the Caribbean and eastern Pacific are a legitimate battleground where the conflict has played out. But a number of victims have been identified as fishermen, and families have filed legal complaints against the US over the killings.
After the bombings began in September, Vice President JD Vance all but publicly admitted that the operation would put innocent people at risk, joking at a rally that he "wouldn’t go fishing right now in that area of the world."
The US in the past has treated drug trafficking as a criminal issue, in accordance with international law. A top military lawyer warned the Pentagon last August, just before the operation began, that carrying out the boat bombings could put top officials as well as rank-and-file service members at risk of being held criminally liable.
"Over 200 people killed so far, some who seem likely to have died agonizing deaths by drowning after clinging to wreckage for hours, with no trials, and without a single piece of evidence released to the public of their guilt or of any intent to smuggle drugs to the United States," said Aaron Rechlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.
The latest boat bombing came a day after US Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) revealed a key detail about the "targeting criteria" the military has been using as it's conducted the bombings since last September.
On Tuesday at a hearing where Secretary of State Marco Rubio testified, Kaine noted that "evidence of narcotics on the boat" has not been a prerequisite for US Southern Command to conduct lethal strikes in Operation Southern Spear, despite the fact that the administration has insisted the operation is aimed at stopping drug trafficking boats from reaching the US.
"I've been briefed on Southern Spear since the first operation on September 2 and most recently within the last couple of weeks, and I've asked again and again, 'Have the targeting criteria changed?' 'No they have not,'" said Kaine. "The presence of narcotics on the boat has never been a targeting criteria."
Despite that, Kaine noted, "The administration has always announced, 'This is against narco-traffickers'" when a new strike has been carried out.
Adam Isacson, director for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America, pointed out that Operation Southern Spear comes two decades after human rights groups presented evidence to US military leaders that "their Colombian military partners were carrying out extrajudicial executions" in what became known as the "false positive" killings.
As Human Rights Watch has explained:
Between 2002 and 2008, army brigades across Colombia routinely executed civilians. Under pressure from superiors to show “positive” results and boost body counts in their war against guerrillas, soldiers and officers abducted victims or lured them to remote locations under false pretenses—such as with promises of work—killed them, placed weapons on their lifeless bodies, and then reported them as enemy combatants killed in action. Committed on a large scale for more than half a decade, these “false positive” killings constitute one of the worst episodes of mass atrocity in the Western Hemisphere in recent decades.
"Now," said Isacson, US officials are "carrying out their own extrajudicial executions every few days. No middleman."
Journalist Joseph Bouchard said the boat strikes could be called the United States' "own false positives scandal."
"None of these have been military targets," said Bouchard. "And even then, do we just kill drug traffickers now, without trial? Better name might be the classic 'crimes against humanity.'"
Keep ReadingShow Less
In 'Troubling Escalation' Against Free Press, Pentagon Bans Reporters From Public Affairs Office
"Banning journalists from the press office in the Pentagon, where they worked professionally in previous administrations, is simply a sign that current DOD leadership fears accountability," said one reporter.
Jun 02, 2026
The Trump administration's "asinine attempts to silence objective journalism just hit a new low," said one press freedom advocate late Monday after the Pentagon announced that the US Department of Defense would mark its press office as a classified area, banning journalists from the space where they've previously talked openly with DOD officials.
Reporters on the military are currently largely banned from the building altogether as litigation is ongoing over the administration's requirement that journalists have an escort to move about the Pentagon, but the new policy means that should they be able to return, they would be even more limited in their access to public affairs officers whose job it is to keep the press and public informed.
"For multiple administrations, Pentagon reporters have used the press office to meet with public affairs officers and have open conversations about what America's armed services are doing in order to keep the public informed," said Ben Grazda, an advocacy manager for Reporters Without Borders North America.
Calling Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth "petulant" and pointing to his unsuccessful demand that journalists sign "loyalty pledges," Grazda added that "journalists will continue their tenacious reporting and hold the Pentagon accountable for the money, operations, and lives they impact every day."
The Washington Post reported that Pentagon speechwriters will be moved into the public affairs office, which will be equipped with the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network, or SIPRNet, which is used to transmit classified information.
“This is the most transparent war department in history. No amount of spin from the Fake News media will change that. The Pentagon Press Office has been redesignated as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility due to speechwriters from the Office of the Secretary of War sharing the facility," said Jose Valdez, the acting Defense Department press secretary, on social media on Monday, referring to Hegseth by the title he prefers.
Despite Valdez's claims, journalists referred to the decision as "Orwellian" and noted that Hegseth is further curtailing press access to the Pentagon as the US is mediating talks to end the war the US and Israel started against Iran in February.
The policy was also announced as The New York Times reported that Hegseth had blocked the promotions of nine Navy officers who had been selected by senior Navy admirals, appearing to "violate the rules governing a promotion system that is supposed to be apolitical and merit-based."
"Banning journalists from the press office in the Pentagon, where they worked professionally in previous administrations, is simply a sign that current DOD leadership fears accountability," said Times reporter Trip Gabriel.
The decision to close the press office to members of the press comes eight months after hundreds of journalists walked out of the Pentagon in protest of a new policy barring them from seeking information that the Trump administration had not authorized for release.
That policy was struck down by a federal court earlier this year, but the government has appealed the ruling.
The National Press Club called the Pentagon's newest policy "a remarkable and troubling escalation in the Defense Department’s ongoing effort to restrict independent reporting."
"This move does not occur in isolation," said Mark Schoeff Jr., a reporter at CQ Roll Call and president of the organization. "It follows a troubling pattern of escalating restrictions on Pentagon coverage, including efforts to limit journalists to pre-approved information, revoke credentials for routine reporting practices, and physically remove reporters from long-standing workspaces and access without an escort."
"Calling a press workspace ‘classified’ does not make the government more transparent," said Schoeff. "It creates yet another obstacle between journalists and the information Americans have a right to know, especially at a moment when the public needs clear, unfiltered information about the US military."
"Independent reporting on the US military is not optional," he added. "When journalists are pushed farther from the institutions they cover, the American people are left with less information, less transparency, and less oversight. Any effort to restrict that access should alarm everyone who values a free and informed society."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular