• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mike Waltz claims ‘full responsibility’ for Signal chat group leaked to journalist

Mycroft said:
The memo didn't say Signal "shouldn't be used".

Are you SURE you read the article? Or, maybe you just have a problem comprehending what you read?
Click to expand...

How about posting a link to your bullshit...

Mycroft said:
The Signal app isn't the problem. It is certified by all the government security agencies as being secure
Click to expand...
 
Mycroft said:
The memo didn't say Signal "shouldn't be used".

Are you SURE you read the article? Or, maybe you just have a problem comprehending what you read?
Click to expand...

“The bulletin also underscored to NSA employees that third-party messaging applications such as Signaland Whatsapp are permitted for certain "unclassified accountability/recall exercises" but not for communicating more sensitive information.”

It should be obvious to anyone that non-public DoD information did not belong there. Reckless, stupid incompetence.
 
eohrnberger said:
That could be one explanation, and if so, it could have been a simple data entry error (wrong phone number), or it could have been malicious, or maybe even something else. Who knows?

My guess is that it'll be handled internally and quietly, as would be most appropriate.
Click to expand...
A "simple data entry error"? That just so happened to be the number of one of the most aggressive media Trump haters? I don't think so.

It might be handled quietly, but I think that would be a mistake. I think this should be broadcast to the world. The perpetrator should be totally exposed to the public. EVERYONE should learn the lesson that ****ing around with the Trump administration like this is happening and that it won't be tolerated.
 
Mycroft said:
A "simple data entry error"? That just so happened to be the number of one of the most aggressive media Trump haters? I don't think so.

It might be handled quietly, but I think that would be a mistake. I think this should be broadcast to the world. The perpetrator should be totally exposed to the public. EVERYONE should learn the lesson that ****ing around with the Trump administration like this is happening and that it won't be tolerated.
Click to expand...
What rubbish.

Going to back first batch of bullshit up?

Mycroft said:
The Signal app isn't the problem. It is certified by all the government security agencies as being secure
Click to expand...
 
Elmo said:
I'll make you a deal: when you stop lying about being a "Progressive", I'll start treating your posts seriously. Until then, bye 👋
Click to expand...
Fair.

I'm pretty progressive, so that was easy. Pick any post of mine and say where the point isn't mostly (and usually very) progressive?

So why did you bring up the same MAGA talking points used against Clinton like, ten years ago? Didn't we all decide that was a nothingburger?

Notice how I call out individual posts by you, and you have zero evidence for your claims?
 
CaughtInThe said:
:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:



bafkreigeodkoeksaxygnzivorkqvej5tzxhivu23int4wnxziid3roolim@jpeg
Click to expand...
Is there anything more transparent than including reporters in high level governmental discussions?

Would you prefer they be less transparent?
 
Trumps entire staff are completely incompetent and “yes men”. Not one set of balls amongst any of them.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Is there anything more transparent than including reporters in high level governmental discussions?

Would you prefer they be less transparent?
Click to expand...
This was a discussion of military operations in advance of the strike. Transparency in this case would risk the operation and lives.
 
Allan said:
These guys look worse and worse.

Waltz struggles to explain what happened but he has Elmo looking into it...



Later in the interview he suggests Goldberg might have hacked into the text group....



The most clueless person might still be Donald Trump who at first knew nothing about this, even after the Atlantic story was being widely reported, and now thinks it was a phone call...



www.theguardian.com

Mike Waltz claims ‘full responsibility’ for Signal chat group leaked to journalist

Trump adviser says he can’t explain how Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg’s number was included in the group chat
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
I like the "best technical minds" part. Like, does it take the best technical minds to understand you shouldn't be discussing sensitive it classified material on an unsecured phone app? lol
 
The hearings today should be "interesting" to say the least.
 
Ikari said:
I like the "best technical minds" part. Like, does it take the best technical minds to understand you shouldn't be discussing sensitive it classified material on an unsecured phone app? lol
Click to expand...
Does it take the "best technical minds" to understand you shouldn't invite a journalist to the unsecured chat?
 
Mycroft said:
You are ignoring something very important that Waltz said...that the contact in the Signal app had one person's name and, instead of their number, it had that reporter's number. Yes, Waltz is doing the right thing and taking full responsibility for this happening, but he knows HE didn't do that and you can be damned sure he's going to find out who did.

I would hate to be that person.
Click to expand...
They used Signal because they are lazy, incompetent, or don’t know or care about established protocols for secure communications (or all of those.)

Consequently, when what those protocols are supposed to do aren’t used, a failure occurs and someone takes the blame. However, that person knows nothing will happen because nobody will charge them and if they miraculously got charged, the Fascist In Chief would pardon them. So, there is no incentive to following established protocols.

But why were they sharing highly sensitive information over a private messaging app rather than using secure channels? The most likely explanation is that they wanted to evade accountability: texts between government officials are supposed to remain part of the record, while Signal texts can be and in this case were set to disappear. As Phillips O’Brien notes, war planning aside, what the group chat reveals is top officials’ contempt for and hostility toward Europe; some of them opposed an operation against the Houthis because clearing the shipping lanes might help our (erstwhile?) allies.

So the disaster reflected both stupidity and bad intentions. And the same is true of other ongoing disasters, including the shockingly rapid collapse of the Social Security Administration.
 
Last edited:
Allan said:
This was a discussion of military operations in advance of the strike. Transparency in this case would risk the operation and lives.
Click to expand...
I mean, I don't think f 18 pilots were worried about terrorists shooting them down. They've been running bombing missions weekly for 1.5 years... the terrorists know that they are going to be bombed.

But if you want less transparency, that is fine. Many people do.

Others want more transparency. There is no level that is going to make everyone happy,
 
Metric Mouse said:
I mean, I don't think f 18 pilots were worried about terrorists shooting them down. They've been running bombing missions weekly for 1.5 years... the terrorists know that they are going to be bombed.

But if you want less transparency, that is fine. Many people do.

Others want more transparency. There is no level that is going to make everyone happy,
Click to expand...
They weren't being transparent. They ****ed up.

If they were being transparent as you claim they would have briefed Fox News.
 
Mycroft said:
The memo didn't say Signal "shouldn't be used".

Are you SURE you read the article? Or, maybe you just have a problem comprehending what you read?
Click to expand...
But this one DOES:

DoD said:
Unmanaged 'messaging apps,' including any app with a chat feature, regardless of the primary function, are NOT authorized to access, transmit, process non-public DoD information. This includes but is not limited to messaging, gaming, and social media apps. (i.e., iMessage, WhatsApps, Signal)
Click to expand...
emphasis mine.

 
Metric Mouse said:
I mean, I don't think f 18 pilots were worried about terrorists shooting them down. They've been running bombing missions weekly for 1.5 years... the terrorists know that they are going to be bombed.

But if you want less transparency, that is fine. Many people do.

Others want more transparency. There is no level that is going to make everyone happy,
Click to expand...

not being incompetent would make me happy(ier).
military ops shouldn't be transparent.
 
Allan said:
This was a discussion of military operations in advance of the strike. Transparency in this case would risk the operation and lives.
Click to expand...
Isn't is amazing, the mental gymnastic that Maga is going through to justify such an egregious security leak, one that would send you and I to Leavenworth prison for a long spell.

That is what cults do to brains.
 
Mycroft said:
A "simple data entry error"? That just so happened to be the number of one of the most aggressive media Trump haters? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. That is too much of a coincidence. In my defense I did say 'could have been'.

Mycroft said:
It might be handled quietly, but I think that would be a mistake. I think this should be broadcast to the world. The perpetrator should be totally exposed to the public. EVERYONE should learn the lesson that ****ing around with the Trump administration like this is happening and that it won't be tolerated.
Click to expand...
Hmm. i guess we'd need to refine what I meant by 'quietly' and 'internally'.
While the firing / discipline of the person might be 'quietly', word sure will get around internally.
I meant 'internally' as in 'not in the media'.

You don't feel the same? OK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom