Admiral Who Ordered 'Wet Work' on Survivors to Brief Congress
The mainstream media breathlessly reports on a 'classified briefing' for top lawmakers regarding a Navy admiral who, according to the original source text provided by you, ordered an attack that killed survivors of an alleged drug boat strike. The framing suggests this is a rare anomaly requiring hushed congressional oversight. Yet this 'oversight' often seems to serve more as a public relations
soft-landing than genuine accountability for military actions with civilian casualties. (Remember when the U.S. drone strike in Kabul in 2021 was called a 'tragic mistake' that killed 10 civilians, including 7 children, before anyone was held accountable for anything?) One might wonder if these 'classified briefings' are designed to inform lawmakers or to manage the public narrative, especially
when similar incidents abroad, particularly involving alleged terrorist targets, receive even less scrutiny. This system appears less about justice and more about maintaining plausible deniability while operations, however ethically dubious, continue. How many 'classified briefings' does it take for a pattern to become policy?