Do we need any further proof that the administration is not fit to lead the Policeman of the World?
5 Likes
That is not how it works. The messaging apps send all conversations to all members whether or not they are watching / listening at the time. When any member next logs in they get ALL the messages from the time of last log in.
2 Likes
He did! It was only when the participants started proclaiming that no sensitive information was posted did he post limited excerpts to prove them wrong! He should get a medal for exposing incompetence.
4 Likes
The usual âdisgruntled military pilotâ was in fact a long-retired military pilot, interviewed by NPR, was probably a Kamala voter, too. The important focus here should be on what the mission was all about - ending the disruption to shipping caused by Iranian-funded fanatics that are equally unpopular among peaceful Yemenis. Perhaps if the Obama-Biden administration hadnât delivered a pallet full of money to the Iranian regime these rebels would be shooting only rubber bands at tankers, and not sophisticated weapons from Teheran. I did not read that the disgruntled F-14 pilot was bothered by that.
1 Like
Policeman of the world? Did really well in Iraq, Lybia, Syria, and now Ukraine. You can go play policeman if you want to.
Accountability has no politics in mind.
This lack of integrity is not only childish but itâs not even on the job training.
The definition of : Never take any responsibility for anythingâŚyou can never be wrong !!!
Chaos between the headsets.
3 Likes
For Hans and Raf, right back at ya 
I donât know if it is just me, but this guy Russ seems to write every article with a strong left wing bias. It would be nice if we could stick to more airplane stuff and less politics. It really turns me off from this website. I wonder if others agree. There are plenty of other places to speak political bias left or right.
1 Like
I donât know if it is just me,âŚ
If this was a survey, Iâd check âJust youâ. Russ may lean toward the left on OpEd style articles, but I think he is reasonably balanced on actual news.
From Russ:
Iâve always thought of myself as being a little right of center but the goal posts do shift. I appreciate your comment that the news is reasonably well balanced. Thatâs the much more important goal.
Russ
2 Likes
When talking about journalist or not, or what that person should have done or not, letâs remember that this kind of discussion should have never ever taken place on Signal. That is an insecure app that most of all prevents saving discussion of our public servants, elected or not, which the public should have access to, even it may be 30 years down the road. From what it seems, Signal may be in use by many more of these public servants, and it was only accidentally that we learned about this fact now. Using proper tools, appropriate for secret material and being preserved for posterity, is what we should got out of this scandal.
2 Likes
Iâm curious what you think the âleft wing biasâ was in the story by Russ. Was it that members of the Presidentâs Cabinet discussed attack plans on a non-secure chat platform? Or that military aviators expressed concerns about that non-secure discussion? Seems to me that the story is well within the broad range of aviation news that AvWeb attempts to cover. And I donât find any editorializing by Russ in the story.
2 Likes
This breach occurred due to ignorance, stupidity, and laziness. There are well established facilities (SITROOMs/SCIFs) and procedures for sensitive national-security communications. Anyone whoâs ever read a Grisham book or watched âThe West Wingâ knows that.
Those hubris-laden fools didnât know or care, because it wasnât convenient for them to use the proper tools. They might think they got away with it for months, but no one knows when the Signal platform was hacked, because it IS hackable. But Goldberg didnât do it, because he was invited, if unintentionally. Heâs simply the first lurker we know of, and probably the most patriotic one of them all (to the US, not the current president).
6 Likes
This was an epic screw up. The Defense Secretary and his team disclosed real time mission details, timing, targets, weapons load, over an unsecured messaging app, and civilian journalist Jeffrey Goldberg ended up in the group. This was not just reckless, it was disgraceful, especially considering the entire operation revolved around aviation assets.
According to the leaked Signal chat, the operation included:
- F/A-18 fighter jets launched from U.S. Navy carriers, with specific launch and target arrival times shared
- MQ-9 Reaper drones, with mission timing and tasking spelled out
- Tomahawk missile strikes, coordinated with both manned and unmanned sorties
- A full operational timeline, revealing the structure and cadence of the air campaign
Any aviator knows this kind of information does not belong on unsecured channels, especially not with a civilian in the loop. If a line officer in the Navy or Air Force had done this, they would be facing a general court martial, career ending consequences, and possibly jail time. But instead of taking responsibility, Hegseth and others pointed fingers, at the journalist, not at the officials who violated the most basic rules of military operational security.
And that is why this story belongs right here on AVweb. This was not just political drama, it was a direct risk to pilots, crews, and everyone flying those missions.
4 Likes
Russ, do you have a credible reference for that narrative?
Just to be clear, journalist are biased and âThe Atlanticâ is one of the worst in that regard.
Thanks.
Behaviour of POTUS et al was irresponsible.
And upset Israel as its intelligence was used.
I have not digested the published transcript yet, but am concerned that specifics were discussed not just overall strategy (such as asking why Europeans arenât doing the job since most of the traffic through the Suez canal benefits Europe).
Specific targets, methods, and timing should be left to field commanders. Thatâs a key reason Ukraine succeeded against Russia, it is taught by NATO. Enunciate principles. (NATOâs approach adapts to conditions of the moment. Demonstrated by Canadian soldiers in WWII, for example some Germans were would stay in foxhole then pop up and shoot Allied soldiers in back, so Canadians had a few soldiers hang back from the charge and nail them.
1 Like
Goldbergâs first story described the events and included screenshots of the group chat that proved the chat had occurred but didnât show any details. Hegseth et al insisted no classified information was included so the next day Goldberg released the whole thread. It was on all platforms from red to blue to pink with purple pocadots. Then Waltz admitted to the whole thing to Laura Ingraham but suggested Goldbergâs number had mysteriously appeared on his phone. Goldberg then went on another program and said his number was on Waltzâs phone because Waltz put it there. Pretty simple, really. I donât think anyone is arguing the basic facts of the case.
2 Likes
Claiming no classified information is a âslide-by-youâ tactic.
Classification is a process that had not yet been applied to the discussion.
Not all information is classified, an extreme example is that some is beyond top secret - called âblackâ because to even refer to it gives clues that it exists.
I read that Goldberg asked officials if they objected to him publishing the transcript, they said they would prefer him not to but did not forbid it.
âleft-rightâ is poor terminology.
I go with Harry Binswangerâs UP alternative as proper governance, which is not occurring in DC and hasnât for a long time.
Not Left, Not Right . . . Try Up (Parts I & II) â HBL
I expect Russia has been trying very hard to penetrate the âSignalâ communications method, as it is used by dissidents in Russia.
Russia supports Iran which is the puppet-master of the Houthis.
1 Like
So he published secrets⌠for personal reasons? What a xxxxxxxx.
From Russ.
No name calling.