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
war crime
Mike Johnson Defends Murder of Shipwrecked Sailors as 'Entirely Appropriate'
"There can be no war crime if there is no war," said one human rights scholar this week. "But there can still be murder, which these attacks were."
Dec 12, 2025
What human rights experts and scholars of international law have described as nothing short of calculated and cold-blooded "murder," Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson on Thursday claimed was "entirely appropriate"—the extrajudicial killing of two shipwrecked sailors clinging to the side of their exploded boat after it was bombed in the middle of the Caribbean Sea by the US military.
The murder of the two men on Sept 2., which followed approximately 45 minutes after all the others on the boat were already killed in an initial strike that shattered the boat in a ball of fire, has become the center of controversy in terms of the legality of such attacks on nearly two dozen boats that have left at least 87 people dead over recent months.
Following a Thursday briefing, Johnson emerged to say that we was convinced the killings were justified despite the chorus of expert voices who have said—even if you accept the Trump administration's dubious claims about the justifications and authority to eviscerate alleged drug boats and everyone on board them with no due process—that killing people so clearly defenseless and unable to harm anyone, let alone the United States, would be a textbook war crime in the context of war and a murder on the high seas in the context of international maritime law.
In his remarks, Johnson said the killings of the two men was "entirely appropriate," though he has not yet called for the full video of the killing to be released, unlike others among the small handful of lawmakers who have seen it.
"They were able-bodied, they were not injured," Johnson said of the two victims, "and they were attempting to recover the contents of the boat, which was full of narcotics."
"The individuals on that vessel were not helpless castaways," he added. "They were drug runners on a capsized drug boat, and by all indications, attempting to recover it so they could continue pushing drugs to kill Americans."
According to experts, however, the claim—which numerous Republicans and high-ranking Trump officials have now made—that two men who have just survived a massive missile strike on their boat, clinging to life on bits of debris in the middle of the ocean were in the act of "pushing drugs to kill Americans," defies belief.
Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch and now a visiting professor at Princeton’s School of Public and International Affairs, argued this week in The Guardian that such claims must be resolutely countered and these 87 killings at sea—ordered by President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth—condemned for what they are: murder.
"The Pentagon has also fallen back on the claim that the two were trying to right the remains of the boat that might have still contained cocaine," wrote Roth. "But the stricken boat was clearly going nowhere and could easily have been intercepted. There was no need to kill the two men clinging to its wreckage."
"In an armed conflict, it is a war crime to attack people who have been shipwrecked at sea, as some in Congress have alleged happened. They are considered hors de combat—outside the fight—and hence no longer combatants who can be shot on sight. They are akin to wounded or surrendering combatants. Opposing forces have a duty to receive and care for them, not kill them."
Going beyond the "war crime" narrative, Roth echoes in his column what many other rights experts have said, that there can be no "war crimes," in fact, when there is no declared armed conflict that constitutes a war.
"There can be no war crime if there is no war," argues Roth. "But there can still be murder, which these attacks were. So were every one of the other killings at sea that Trump and Hegseth have ordered."
Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which earlier this week filed a lawsuit demanding release of the internal Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo justifying the killings, accused the administration of warping the law beyond recognition in defense of what people should recognize as a murder spree, not legal military operations.
“The Trump administration is displacing the fundamental mandates of international law with the phony wartime rhetoric of a basic autocrat,” Azmy said. “If the OLC opinion seeks to dress up legalese in order to provide cover for the obvious illegality of these serial homicides, the public needs to see this analysis and ultimately hold accountable all those who facilitate murder in the United States’ name.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Retired General Says Hegseth Boat Strike on Shipwrecked Sailors Was a 'War Crime'
"Secretary Hegseth is basically convening everyone to think... this is the kind of thing that happens in war," said retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling. "It's not."
Dec 08, 2025
A retired general suggested Monday that the Trump administration’s strike on shipwrecked survivors on September 2 may have been a war crime.
In the face of mounting scrutiny, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has continued to defend what has been described as a "double-tap" strike off the coast of Trinidad, alleging that the two survivors were drug traffickers bound for America who could have still theoretically harmed it in some way despite clinging to the wreckage for their lives following the first strike.
NBC reported this weekend that Adm. Frank "Mitch" Bradley, who oversaw the strikes, told lawmakers that Hegseth had given direct orders for all 11 men aboard the vessel to be killed because "they were on an internal list of narco-terrorists who US intelligence and military officials determined could be lethally targeted.”
Last week, when reports first emerged of a second strike, Hegseth denied that it had taken place, calling it “fake news” before the White House later confirmed and defended the killing of the survivors.
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, who served as the commanding general of the US Army Europe from 2011 to 2012, discussed the strikes on Monday in an appearance on MS NOW's (formerly MSNBC's) "Morning Joe."
"It is, in fact, in my view, a war crime," Hertling said.
"Imagine yourself falling off a cruise ship and being asked to hang on to a piece of wood after you've just been struck with a large kinetic round that has killed nine of your 11 copilots on this boat," Hertling said. "It doesn't matter what they're doing at that point."
Hertling suggested that the frequent use of the term "double-tap" to refer to the strike was a misnomer, as was Hegseth's invocation of the phrase "fog of war" to defend the military's actions.
“That’s a term that special operators use when there are two successive rounds at a target to eliminate it, and to get rid of someone who is attacking them,” the general explained regarding the claims of a "double-tap" strike. “This was a restrike, with time between the first strike and the second. That gives you time to figure out what you’re going to do and clear that so-called ‘fog of war.'”
He cited the definition from Carl von Clausewitz, the 18th-century Prussian general and military theorist who coined the term to describe the “uncertainty” of battle.
"Secretary Hegseth is basically convening everyone to think he has been in war for 20 years, and this is the kind of thing that happens in war. It's not," Hertling continued. "What I'll tell you, having been involved in strikes like this on the ground, the only time you consider a restrike is when the enemy continues to fight, and you're continuing to either strike them with artillery or some type of faraway missile. So a restrike like this occurs when you realize the individuals on the ground or in the water are trying to fight back."
Hegseth and Bradley’s defense of the strikes has centered around the idea that even as they floated helplessly on a piece of debris, the victims still posed a “continuing threat” as they could have theoretically called in other traffickers as backup to retrieve them and their cargo.
As of yet, the administration has presented no evidence that the men were calling for backup, and videos of the incident viewed by members of Congress during a closed-door hearing reportedly suggest they lacked any means of communication. Bradley, meanwhile, acknowledged in his Senate testimony that the survivors did not appear to have any radio or communication devices.
Further undermining the Trump administration's argument that the boat posed an immediate threat, Bradley also reportedly told Congress that the ship was not even bound for the US, but for the South American nation of Suriname.
Hertling emphasized that the two men were shipwrecked on "a piece of debris floating in the middle of the Caribbean," adding that "these individuals are not going to go anywhere, which will become clear with the film," though Hertling acknowledged that he had not personally seen it.
In recent days, leading Democrats, as well as some Republicans in Congress, have called for the release of the video, which House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Ranking Member Jim Himes (D-Conn.) described last week as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.” Himes said that while the video showed the men were carrying drugs, “they were not in a position to continue their mission in any way.”
The strike was the first in a months-long campaign of extrajudicial bombings by the Trump administration on boats that they have claimed without evidence have contained drug traffickers bound for the US. At least 87 people have been killed in the two dozen strikes since September. Some of those killed in the strikes were later reported to have been ordinary fishermen, and others who had nothing to do with the drug trade.
While focus has been centered on the details of the September 2 strike in recent days and Hegseth's role, experts have emphasized that the entire boat-bombing campaign is illegal.
"The initial attack was illegal too,” said Kenneth Roth, the former longtime director of the advocacy group Human Rights Watch, on social media last week. "Whether Hegseth ordered survivors killed after a US attack on a supposed drug boat is not the heart of the matter. It is blatantly illegal to order criminal suspects to be murdered rather than detained. There is no 'armed conflict' despite Trump's claim."
While the "Morning Joe" segment focused on the question of whether the second September 2 strike was a war crime, some legal experts have said those involved in ordering and carrying out that attack and the other bombings could actually be liable for murder under US law, since Congress has not authorized an armed conflict in the Caribbean.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Howl That the World Doesn't Hear': A Gaza Teacher in Her Own Words
At 28, Reham Khaled has lived through eight wars of varying intensity. The current war has been the most brutal she's known.
Sep 20, 2025
So begin the words of a Gaza teacher's recent post after being forced to flee her home in the Al-Daraj neighborhood of Gaza City and the school she'd set up in a tent. A bomb tore apart the tent next to the one where Reham Khaled taught her students. Two were killed:
Pain is not a passing sensation, but a being that resides within. It has fangs and fingers. It presses on the heart, weighs down the chest, and makes the breath hesitate like a hole in the air. There is a moment, just one moment, when all the internal walls we have tried to build crumble and we reach what is called the threshold of pain. At this threshold, pain is no longer just an echo or a tremor. It turns into a howl.
Skilled at weaving the horror that is war-torn Gaza with evocative imagery of far sweeter things, Khaled says that before the bomb tore apart the tent, she and her father-in-law were dreaming of eating mangoes and chicken. “And then the rocket exploded. One moment. A collective scream. A small lake of blood begins with two children whose greatest ambition was to eat chicken and mango. It is a moment, but inside me it is years.”
Born in Gaza's Jabalia refugee camp, her grandparents were displaced from the Palestinian village of Najd which was ethnically cleansed in 1948 when the state of Israel was created. The Israeli town of Sderot was later constructed over the site of the village, as well as the nearby village of Huj, according to Working Class History.com.
Her goal, other than giving as many students as possible the right to education, is to instill one idea in the children of Gaza “so that they may travel the world and spread peace one day."
In Gaza, Khaled studied in UNRWA schools, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, established by the UN in December 1949, to provide relief and humanitarian assistance to Palestine refugees displaced by the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
At 28, she has lived through eight wars of varying intensity. The current war has been the most brutal she's known. She and her extended family have been displaced 15 times.
The howl is “not a loud, audible scream”, explains Khaled, “but the howl of the soul, that subtle sound that the ear cannot pick up but shakes the entire body from within. It's like the wind sweeping through an empty house, or the emptiness exploding in the head. In Gaza, this howl has become the secret language of everyone. The child who smiles so as not to cry in front of his mother, the mother who hides her tears from her child, the man who stands silently before the corpse of his son. They all howl from within, with a voice the world does not hear.”
A teacher of language and literature, Khaled is not overtly political and shies away from assigning blame for what is happening to her people once again. All she knows, she tells me when we exchange more messages, is that “the language of killing and violence is the biggest mistake that my people have been paying the price for two years or more.... The world is mean, cruel, and dull to the point of melting the nerves. I try to keep up with it, but I break. I try to look at it, but I find its eyes devoid of any glimmer of humanity.”
At this writing, Israeli forces have destroyed an estimated 70% of Gaza City. Airstrikes have turned entire apartment blocks and tent encampments into rubble. The Israel Defense Forces claim, without evidence, that Hamas has been using the buildings for surveillance; justifying collective punishment of Gaza City's entire population. While collective punishment is a war crime and prohibited under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, this has done nothing to protect innocent civilians throughout Gaza from October 2023 to the present. An estimated 65,000 have been killed to date, with upwards of ten thousand trapped under the rubble.
“Howling,' writes Khaled, “doesn't always manifest in screams or tears. Sometimes it manifests as cold dullness. Evacuation notices drop on doors like inane announcements, read by people with blank eyes and then go on with their lives: a man arguing with his neighbor over a gallon of water, women fighting over a turn at the oven, a young man fixing a crack in the wall. It's as if the announcement of the city's destruction means nothing, as if the preordained mass exodus is just another rumor.”
“This isn't true indifference,” she believes, “but another form of howling: a hidden protection against total collapse. When a person is unable to face the naked truth, they hide in the small details, clinging to crumbs to prevent their souls from disintegrating. Politics isn't content with killing bodies; it seeks to break the inside, to make people treat their end as secondary news. It wants evacuation itself to become a habit, a weightless piece of paper, part of the daily noise.”
Israel has ordered everyone in Gaza City to evacuate to the al-Mawasi tent encampment in the south. But the camp is severely overcrowded with hundreds of thousands of displaced people from Rafah, Khan Younis, and other areas and there is no available land. Nor is it rent free, as others I am in touch with tell me. The entirety of Gaza's most southern city, Rafah, once home to 250,000 people, was razed to the ground earlier this year. Khan Younis was razed in part, but some neighborhoods remain.
As for Khaled and her family, refusing to be broken or adhere exactly to Israeli orders, they moved to Deir al-Balah, a city about 10 miles south of Gaza City. They're not safe there, but at least they found land to set up tents. Khaled has already started looking for a new place to establish a school. This morning she reposted a link for the school, which is backed by the Chuffed Project, a nonprofit whose goal is to support children's education in Gaza
Her goal, other than giving as many students as possible the right to education, is to instill one idea in the children of Gaza “so that they may travel the world and spread peace one day. Plant a rose on the tip of every gun. Prevent killing. Spread love and peace and never allow war to continue for long.”
It doesn't mean she's not always hungry or trying to recover her voice or understand why such hell has been unleashed on her people. But that she refuses to surrender to the “twisted logic that turns life into a farce. My voice has been extinguished, not because it disappeared, but because the echo no longer returns. And my being? I've scattered like dust, like a ravening beast that isn't satisfied with flesh and bones, but burrows deep within me in search of something I no longer know the name of. Yes, I'm hungry, but not just for bread. I'm hungry for the security that has become a myth, for the meaning that has become a mirage, for a slice of life that resembles life, not this mockery I live.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular