To stay in the fight, just what fight where they staying in?

So: Was this “they were in a fight,” or people just trying to survive / not drown?

From what’s publicly documented:

• The two survivors reportedly were clinging to wreckage, not visibly armed or engaged in combat. The Washington Post+2Al Jazeera+2

• Their being in the water after the first strike — wounded or shipwrecked — should legally make them non-combatants, under laws protecting shipwrecked persons, unless they were actively hostile (which has not been shown). Legal experts say targeting them in that condition would likely be a war crime. The Washington Post+2Foreign Policy+2

• So yes — there is a credible, public-report based interpretation that they were trying to stay alive, not fight, when the second strike happened.

That means the narrative of “stay in the fight” — or justification of the strike as combat — is highly contested, deeply ambiguous, and legally dubious given what is known so far.

Got news for you folks, it’s up to you now. accept this obvious coverup or force it out, force it to stop. It’s up to us to stop  Pumpkin because the Republican castrated cowards aren’t doing it. The great Pumpkin isn’t God, although he thinks so.

Impeachment is a right.