Donald Trump has been urged to fire US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth following the leak of highly sensitive war plans – as national security adviser Mike Waltz said he took “full responsibility” for organising the group chat.
The conversation on the messaging app Signal between US officials, including vice presidentJD Vance and Mr Hegseth, was leaked to American journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, who was added to the chat in error.
Mr Waltz –who had mistakenly added Mr Goldberg to the Signal discussion – said: “I take full responsibility…I built the group.”
Democratic congressman Hakeem Jeffries, minority leader of the US House of Representatives, described Mr Hegseth as “the most unqualified Secretary of Defence in American history” and called for him to be sacked.
“His continued presence in the top position of leadership at the Pentagon threatens the nation’s security and puts our brave men and women in uniform throughout the world in danger,” he wrote.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
“His behaviour shocks the conscience, risked American lives and likely violated the law.
“Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth should be fired immediately.”
Image: The president has defended national security adviser Mike Waltz. Pic: Reuters
Speaking from the White House, Mr Trump downplayed the incident and said he believed the chat contained “no classified information”.
“They were using an app, as I understand it, that a lot of people in government use, a lot of people in the media use,” he told reporters.
Trump expressed support for Mr Waltz, telling NBC News his national security adviser “has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:40
How serious is US chat breach?
The US president said officials would “probably” not use Signal any longer but did not agree to a full investigation of what Democrats have called a major security breach which required high-level resignations.
Included in the conversation on Signal were Mr Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Mr Hegseth.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe – who were both also in the chat – testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that no classified material was shared.
Image: Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe were under pressure as the Senate Intelligence Committee challenged them about the leak. Pic: Reuters
But Democratic senators have voiced scepticism, noting that the journalist, The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg, reported Mr Hegseth posted operational details “including information about targets, weapons the US would be deploying, and attack sequencing”.
Republican majority leader, John Thune, said on Tuesday he expected the Senate Armed Services Committee to look into Trump administration officials’ use of Signal.
Meanwhile, the White House has mostly attacked the journalist responsible for the original story instead of admitting culpability. The integrity of Mr Goldberg has been repeatedly called into question.
Posting on X, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt accused Mr Goldberg of sensationalising the story, and White House communications director Steven Cheung called the media coverage of the security breach a “witch hunt”.
If a British defence minister was found to have shared details about a live military operation in an unofficial messaging group with colleagues, they would be sacked.
That President Donald Trump has tried to dismiss the revelation that his top defence and security team not only did just that but accidentally included a journalist in the chat will be watched with deepening horror by US allies and growing glee by American enemies.
In public, the UK government is still insisting security ties with the US are as strong as ever.
But in private there will doubtless be horror – though perhaps not surprise – within Whitehall at this extraordinary lapse in the most basic operational security by the president’s national security adviser, defence secretary, national intelligence chief and even the boss of the CIA.
Any information about plans to – for example – launch bombing raids against Iranian-backed Houthi militants in Yemen would ordinarily only be shared on specially designated government systems that ensure classified information is secure.
The fact that Mike Waltz, the national security adviser, felt it was acceptable to set up a group on the commercial messaging app Signal – which does provide encryption but is only as secure as the device that it is being used on (so not secure at all if a mobile phone or laptop is compromised) – to discuss plans to attack the Houthis is bad enough.
The Atlantic has hit back, dismissing those claims. “Attempts to disparage and discredit The Atlantic, our editor, and our reporting follow an obvious playbook by elected officials and others in power who are hostile to journalists and the First Amendment rights of all Americans,” it said in a statement.
Mr Hegseth told reporters on Monday no one had texted war plans – prompting Mr Goldberg to call those comments a lie during an interview on CNN.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
It remains unclear why the officials chose to chat via Signal instead of secure government channels typically used for sensitive discussions.
The Pentagon reportedly warned of a known vulnerability on the Signal chat app, in an email sent out prior to the publication of The Atlantic article, according to reports by Sky News’ US partner network NBC News.
The email reported: “Russia-aligned threat groups are actively targeting the Signal Messenger application of individuals likely to exchange sensitive military and government communications related to the war in Ukraine”.
Employees were told the vulnerability could be mitigated by updating to the latest version of the app and applying proper settings.
An Israeli reservist who served three tours of duty in Gaza has told Sky News in a rare on-camera interview that his unit was often ordered to shoot anyone entering areas soldiers defined as no-go zones, regardless of whether they posed a threat, a practice he says left civilians dead where they fell.
“We have a territory that we are in, and the commands are: everyone that comes inside needs to die,” he said. “If they’re inside, they’re dangerous you need to kill them. No matter who it is,” he said.
Speaking anonymously, the soldier said troops killed civilians arbitrarily. He described the rules of engagement as unclear, with orders to open fire shifting constantly depending on the commander.
The soldier is a reservist in the Israel Defence Force’s 252nd Division. He was posted twice to the Netzarim corridor; a narrow strip of land cut through central Gaza early in the war, running from the sea to the Israeli border. It was designed to split the territory and allow Israeli forces to have greater control from inside the Strip.
He said that when his unit was stationed on the edge of a civilian area, soldiers slept in a house belonging to displaced Palestinians and marked an invisible boundary around it that defined a no-go zone for Gazans.
“In one of the houses that we had been in, we had the big territory. This was the closest to the citizens’ neighbourhood, with people inside. And there’s an imaginary line that they tell us all the Gazan people know it, and that they know they are not allowed to pass it,” he said. “But how can they know?”
People who crossed into this area were most often shot, he said.
More on War In Gaza
Related Topics:
“It was like pretty much everyone that comes into the territory, and it might be like a teenager riding his bicycle,” he said.
Image: The soldier is seen in Gaza. Photos are courtesy of the interviewed soldier, who requested anonymity
The soldier described a prevailing belief among troops that all Gazans were terrorists, even when they were clearly unarmed civilians. This perception, he said, was not challenged and was often endorsed by commanders.
“They don’t really talk to you about civilians that may come to your place. Like I was in the Netzarim road, and they say if someone comes here, it means that he knows he shouldn’t be there, and if he still comes, it means he’s a terrorist,” he said.
“This is what they tell you. But I don’t really think it’s true. It’s just poor people, civilians that don’t really have too many choices.”
He said the rules of engagement shifted constantly, leaving civilians at the mercy of commanders’ discretion.
“They might be shot, they might be captured,” he said. “It really depends on the day, the mood of the commander.”
He recalled an occasion of a man crossing the boundary and being shot. When another man came later to the body, he too was shot.
Later the soldiers decided to capture people who approached the body. Hours after that, the order changed again, shoot everyone on sight who crosses the “imaginary line”.
Image: The Israeli soldier during his on-camera interview with Sky News
At another time, his unit was positioned near the Shujaiya area of Gaza City. He described Palestinians scavenging scrap metal and solar panels from a building inside the so-called no-go zone.
“For sure, no terrorists there,” he said. “Every commander can choose for himself what he does. So it’s kind of like the Wild West. So, some commanders can really decide to do war crimes and bad things and don’t face the consequences of that.”
The soldier said many of his comrades believed there were no innocents in Gaza, citing the Hamas-led 7 October attack that killed around 1,200 people and saw 250 taken hostage. Dozens of hostages have since been freed or rescued by Israeli forces, while about 50 remain in captivity, including roughly 30 Israel believes are dead.
He recalled soldiers openly discussing the killings.
“They’d say: ‘Yeah, but these people didn’t do anything to prevent October 7, and they probably had fun when this was happening to us. So they deserve to die’.”
He added: “People don’t feel mercy for them.”
“I think a lot of them really felt like they were doing something good,” he said. “I think the core of it, that in their mind, these people aren’t innocent.”
Image: The IDF soldier during one of his three tours in Gaza
In Israel, it is rare for soldiers to publicly criticise the IDF, which is seen as a unifying institution and a rite of passage for Jewish Israelis. Military service shapes identity and social standing, and those who speak out risk being ostracised.
The soldier said he did not want to be identified because he feared being branded a traitor or shunned by his community.
Still, he felt compelled to speak out.
“I kind of feel like I took part in something bad, and I need to counter it with something good that I do, by speaking out, because I am very troubled about what I took and still am taking part of, as a soldier and citizen in this country,” he said
“I think the war is… a very bad thing that is happening to us, and to the Palestinians, and I think it needs to be over,” he said.
He added: “I think in Israeli community, it’s very hard to criticise itself and its army. A lot of people don’t understand what they are agreeing to. They think the war needs to happen, and we need to bring the hostages back, but they don’t understand the consequences.
“I think a lot of people, if they knew exactly what’s happening, it wouldn’t go down very well for them, and they wouldn’t agree with it. I hope that by speaking of it, it can change how things are being done.”
Image: The soldier is a reservist in the Israel Defence Force’s 252nd Division
We put the allegations of arbitrary killings in the Netzarim corridor to the Israeli military.
In a statement, the IDF said it “operates in strict accordance with its rules of engagement and international law, taking feasible precautions to mitigate civilian harm”.
“The IDF operates against military targets and objectives, and does not target civilians or civilian objects,” the statement continued.
The Israeli military added that “reports and complaints regarding the violation of international law by the IDF are transferred to the relevant authorities responsible for examining exceptional incidents that occurred during the war”.
On the specific allegations raised by the soldier interviewed, the IDF said it could not address them directly because “the necessary details were not provided to address the case mentioned in the query. Should additional information be received, it will be thoroughly examined.”
The statement also mentioned the steps the military says it takes to minimise civilian casualties, including issuing evacuation warnings and advising people to temporarily leave areas of intense fighting.
“The areas designated for evacuation in the Gaza Strip are updated as needed. The IDF continuously informs the civilian population of any changes,” it said.
An Australian mother has been found guilty of murdering her estranged husband’s parents and an aunt by serving them a beef wellington laced with poisonous mushrooms.
Erin Patterson, 50, invited her former parents-in-law, Don and Gail Patterson, both 70, and Gail Patterson’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, 66, to the fatal lunch on 29 July 2023.
The mother-of-two, from the state of Victoria in southern Australia, has also been convicted of the attempted murder of Mrs Wilkinson’s husband Reverend Ian Wilkinson.
All four fell ill after eating a meal of beef wellington, mashed potatoes and green beans at Patterson’s home in the town of Leongatha, the court was told.
Prosecutors said Patterson knowingly laced the beef pastry dish with deadly death cap mushrooms, also known as Amanita phalloides, at her home.
The guests ate their meals off four large grey dinner plates, while Patterson ate from a smaller, tan-coloured plate, the court heard.
Mrs Wilkinson and Mrs Patterson died on Friday 4 August 2023, while Mr Patterson died a day later.
More on Australia
Related Topics:
Reverend Wilkinson spent seven weeks in hospital but survived.
Image: Ian and Heather Wilkinson Pic: The Salvation Army Australia – Museum
Image: Ian Wilkinson arrives at court during the trial. Pic: Reuters
Her estranged husband Simon Patterson, with whom she has two children, was also invited to the lunch and initially accepted but later declined, the trial heard.
The jury was told that prosecutors had dropped three charges that Patterson had attempted to murder her husband, who she has been separated from since 2015.
Reverend Wilkinson said that immediately after the meal, Patterson fabricated a cancer diagnosis, suggesting the lunch was put together so that she could ask them the best way to tell her children about the illness.
The trial attracted intense interest in Australia – with podcasters, journalists and documentary-makers descending on the town of Morwell, around two hours east of Melbourne, where the court hearings took place.
A sentencing date is yet to be scheduled.
What makes death cap mushrooms so lethal?
The death cap is one of the most toxic mushrooms on the planet and is involved in the majority of fatal mushroom poisonings worldwide.
The species contains three main groups of toxins: amatoxins, phallotoxins, and virotoxins.
From these, amatoxins are primarily responsible for the toxic effects in humans.
The alpha-amanitin amatoxin has been found to cause protein deficit and ultimately cell death, although other mechanisms are thought to be involved.
The liver is the main organ that fails due to the poison, but other organs are also affected, most notably the kidneys.
The effects usually begin after a short latent period and can include gastrointestinal disorders followed by jaundice, seizures, coma, and eventually, death.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow @SkyNews on X or subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.
Israel says its military has attacked Houthi targets at three ports and a power plant in Yemen.
Defence minister Israel Katz confirmed the strikes, saying they were carried out due to repeated attacks by the Iranian-backed rebel group on Israel.
Mr Katz said the Israeli military attacked the Galaxy Leader ship which he claimed was hijacked by the Houthis and was being used for “terrorist activities in the Red Sea”.
Image: A bridge crane damaged by Israeli airstrikes last year in the Yemeni port of Hodeidah. Pic: Reuters
It came after the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) issued an evacuation warning for people at Hodeidah, Ras Issa, and Salif ports – as well as the Ras al Khatib power station, which it said is controlled by Houthi rebels.
The IDF said it would carry out airstrikes on those areas due to “military activities being carried out there”.
Afterwards, Mr Katz confirmed the strikes at the ports and power plant.
Earlier in the day, a ship was reportedly set on fire after being attacked in the Red Sea.
A private security company said the assault, off the southwest coast of Yemen, resembled that of the Houthi militant group.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:00
From May: Israel strikes Yemen’s main airport
It was the first such incident reported in the vital shipping corridor since mid-April.
The vessel, identified as the Liberian-flagged, Greek-owned bulk carrier Magic Seas, had taken on water after being hit by sea drones, maritime security sources said. The crew later abandoned the ship.
The Houthi rebels have been launching missile and drone attacks against commercial and military ships in the region in what the group’s leadership called an effort to end Israel’s offensive against Hamas in Gaza.
Between November 2023 and January 2025, the Houthis targeted more than 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two of them and killing four sailors.
The Houthis paused attacks in a self-imposed ceasefire until the US launched an assault against the rebels in mid-March.
That ended weeks later and the Houthis have not attacked a vessel, though they have continued occasional missile attacks targeting Israel.
A renewed Houthi campaign against shipping could again draw in US and Western forces to the area.
The ship attack comes at a sensitive moment in the Middle East.
A possible ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war hangs in the balance and Iran is weighing up whether to restart negotiations over its nuclear programme.
It follows American airstrikes last month, which targeted its most-sensitive atomic sites amid an Israeli war against the Islamic Republic that ended after 12 days.
How did the Houthis come to control much of Yemen?
A civil war erupted in Yemen in late 2014 when the Houthis seized Sanaa.
Worried by the growing influence of Shia Iran along its border, Saudi Arabia led a Western-backed coalition in March 2015, which intervened in support of the Saudi-backed government.
The Houthis established control over much of the north and other large population centres, while the internationally recognised government based itself in the port city of Aden.