New Deep State Op Drops: Pete Heseth Said "Kill Them All" Just Like Colonel Kurtz, and US Planes Fired on Drug Boat Survivors Clinging to the Wreckage Like Heroes

I missed this story, but someone I knew who spent the holidays with her liberal family said that CNN is pushing this latest op non-stop.

It has to do with the latest drug boat interdiction-by-missile.

There are two main hoaxes in this latest op. The first is that Pete Hegseth showed that he is a psychopathic dry-drunk unfit to serve by demanding that the military "kill everybody."

The second, pushed by deranged insurrectionist and future court-martial convict Mark Kelly, is that there is video of the survivors of the first missile strike clinging to the wreckage of the drug boat, but then the second missile ordered by Jack T. Ripper, I mean Pete Hegseth, murders them.

Here's the Washington Post -- not edited enough by centrist liberal Bari Weiss -- pushing the hoax, based on highly credible Unnamed Sources.

The Washington Post @washingtonpost

Exclusive: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave an order to "kill everybody" in the first strike on suspected drug boats in the Caribbean. After two men survived, the mission commander ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth's instructions, according to two sources.

Here's the Washington Post op:

Hegseth order on first Caribbean boat strike, officials say: Kill them all As two men clung to a stricken, burning ship targeted by SEAL Team 6, the Joint Special Operations commander followed the defense secretary's order to leave no survivors.

The longer the U.S. surveillance aircraft followed the boat, the more confident intelligence analysts watching from command centers became that the 11 people on board were ferrying drugs.

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.

A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck.

The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack -- the opening salvo in the Trump administration's war on suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere -- ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth's instructions, two people familiar with the matter said. The two men were blown apart in the water.

The article strains to insinuate that the "Kill everyone" order came after the first strike, with the express intent to kill the two alleged survivors clinging to the wreck, while soft-pedaling the actual claims made in this op, that the order came before any missile strikes at all.

There's also no context for the "kill everyone" order, if it was made at all. Here's some context I can imagine: Given resistance leftists and their determination to refuse to carry out "illegal orders" -- that is itself an op -- I can see leftist personnel objecting to the strikes entirely, saying "we should just stop the boats and arrest them" and an annoyed Secretary of War saying, "We have declared war on the narcoterrorists, and we kill people in war. You have your orders, kill everyone attempting to smuggle drugs into the US."

Or something like that.

The fact that this article provides no context for the alleged order strongly suggests that the context, were it supplied, would undermine the narrative being pushed. Propagandists don't leave out context which supports their propaganda messaging, after all.

Hegseth's order, which has not been previously reported, adds another dimension to the campaign against suspected drug traffickers. Some current and former U.S. officials and law-of-war experts have said that the Pentagon's lethal campaign -- which has killed more than 80 people to date -- is unlawful and may expose those most directly involved to future prosecution.

Which is the point of the Democrats' "Refuse to obey the chain of command" op.

And that's further context for the alleged order: Resistance leftists might say "But I am exposing myself to prosecution by AOC and Mark Kelly" and Hegseth might have responded, "You have your orders, you cannot be prosecuted for following a lawful order, I am ordering you to kill everyone on those boats. You have no legal liability."

The alleged traffickers pose no imminent threat of attack against the United States and are not, as the Trump administration has tried to argue, in an "armed conflict" with the U.S., these officials and experts say.

Well, if experts say....

Amazingly, even the New York Times points out that critical context for this alleged order is entirely absent from the hit piece. Even they seem to realize that this is likely yet another op.

The Times also points out that while the Post strains to link the order to the second strike -- they want to claim the second strike was an attempt to fulfill Hegseth's alleged order -- in fact there is no actual connection between the order and the second strike.

Mollie @MZHemingway

It is not surprising that the WashPost, which originated the Russia collusion hoax, the Kavanaugh hoax, and the first Trump impeachment hoax, would run another false info op. It IS a bit surprising that the NYT isn't going along with it in their normal manner.

Hegseth dismissed the op.

"As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland," Hegseth wrote on X after the report dropped.

"As we've said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be 'lethal, kinetic strikes,'" the Pentagon chief continued. "The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narco-terrorists who are poisoning the American people.

"Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization."

Echoing Hegseth, Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson argued: "Every lethal kinetic strike against narco-terrorists is:1) Completely legal 2) Conducted against the operations of a Designated Terrorist Organization 3) In defense of vital U.S. national interests."

President Trump shared footage of the Sept. 2 attack -- the first of more than a dozen military strikes targeting suspected drug smugglers in the Caribbean Sea and Eastern Pacific -- showing only the first missile hitting the speed boat, and seemingly obliterating it.

Hegseth also denied the claim that there were any survivors clinging to the boat targeted by the second strike.

"The Biden administration preferred the kid gloves approach, allowing millions of people -- including dangerous cartels and unvetted Afghans -- to flood our communities with drugs and violence," Hegseth's post continued. "The Trump administration has sealed the border and gone on offense against narco-terrorists.

"Biden coddled terrorists, we kill them."

The war secretary argued that the strikes against suspected narcoterrorists, part of a campaign dubbed "Operation Southern Spear," are "lawful under both US and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict -- and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command."

Democratic lawmakers vowed to investigate and prosecute anyone who gave "illegal orders" in response to the report.

"The idea that wreckage from one small boat in a vast ocean is a hazard to marine traffic is patently absurd, and killing survivors is blatantly illegal," Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), wrote on X. "Mark my words: It may take some time, but Americans will be prosecuted for this, either as a war crime or outright murder."

Rep. Eugene Vindman (D-Va.) warned Hegseth that he will be "held accountable for illegal orders you give.

Kelly continues breaking military law by telling military personnel they themselves can discern "legal" orders from "illegal" ones, despite the fact that the code of military justice says that personnel can only reject "manifestly" illegal orders and specifically tells them not to bring their own judgement to that question.

posted by Ace at 01:15 PM

| Access Comments