Maybe it's just me, but it seems that the real crime is that there exists an institution that is free to murder innocent human beings, to plot their attacks in secret, and to steal our wealth in order to have the tools to do this. It seems to me that the crime is NOT that these folks' secrecy was momentarily breached.
I'm finding it harder and harder to understand why this needs to be explained to civilized people. But maybe there aren't a lot of those left anymore.
Thanks for pointing this out. All I heard on the news and even on social media was about the communications mistake. I don't know why I thought the Republicans might be a little less casual about killing civilians than the Democrats were. No such thing as a party of peace in the American empire.
Coercive civil authority is inherently, intrinsically evil. And it seems to attract the kind of people who think it's noble. As a certain president might say, SAD.
You’re absolutely right. The casual disregard for civilian life and the casual execution of what should require a formal declaration of war are horrifying and should be the biggest part of the story. That’s not to say that the casual disregard for operational security and the disrespectful and mercenary attitude towards our allies aren’t noteworthy contenders for the worst aspects of this debacle.
I’m very concerned by the message it sends to both enemies and allies. After Biden’s multiple foreign disasters, we were supposed to be “ Team Don’t Fuck With Us,We Ain’t Biden”. True, we just add people to an insecure group chat that are the worst possible and can’t explain why. Not can we explain a large group of Intel Heads participating online instead of a SCIF. Worse, is that it was hacked and the participants personal info was published online.
Did Trump not learn from the devasting leaks during his first term?
It makes me think that perhaps the reason this aspect draws so little attention compared to objectively more trivial things like emoji use is that many people simply don't seriously question the sacrificing of innocent lives in war or they believe in collective guilt. When I push on this point, I often get some kind of justification for it in the realm of "war is hell" or "the girlfriend knew what her boyfriend was involved in and is thus an accomplice."
This unwillingness to recognize individuals as individuals, innocent until proven guilty, is probably a large part of why war persists today.
The real scandal isn’t the Signal leak, it’s civilian casualties brushed off like background noise, all to take out one target in a country we’re not even at war with.
I especially like how you cited Greenwald: “It's of course a war crime, and if anyone applied this logic to the US, they'd be branded ‘terrorists.’” It's one of those "it's okay for me, but not for thee" moments, and it's basically been how U.S. foreign policy has acted regardless of whether there's a Republican or a Democrat in the White House. Terrorism itself comes in many forms and, objectively speaking, if you're drone-bombing civilians, regardless of who you are, you're committing an act of terrorism.
The Houthi are the aggressors. Would be nice if we could eliminate collateral deaths-not gonna happen. These are the same that drag soldiers bodies through the streets, rape women, murder homosexuals, etc. I guess I’m attempting to defend the indefensible….
Goldberg could have stated that he was wrongly included in the chat. Instead he chose to snoop.
The major fault here was Waltz continuing to employ an aide who is a Trump hater and whose wife is anti-Trump. Poor vetting by Trump.
Also Waltz denied knowing Goldberg, but there is an internet photo of them at a party several years ago. How could Waltz keep Goldberg's number in his phone? How much did they communicate? Pull the phone logs.
Putting this out there for all the neocons. Why do we have to be in the Middle East? If we brought all our forces home and didn't bug West Asia, would we not be better off?
Do you think the Houthis would cross the ocean in their dhows and attack us? The Iranians would sail over. Tell me the reason to be there?
And, for that matter, why do we have to be in Europe, or Asia?
This was a very disappointing piece. It basically reminds me of what the dying legacy media does. Now that Goldberg’s story is falling apart, they shift the focus. That way, people will forget the discredited narrative. Sadly, this is exactly what I see in your post.
Now it’s worse because civilians might have been hurt. Hamas chose war. You bring up Obama’s droning of people. He actually dropped the most of any president since WW2. Yet there was no media outcry. Any outcries were suppressed or ignored.
I’m glad at least you called out Goldberg. If he had any integrity, he would have identified himself and/or gotten off the phone, but he didn’t, again revealing his lack of integrity.
Actually, we should question anything coming from the Atlantic and the other usual suspects, considering their abysmal record. Their narratives have a way of unraveling and turning out to be more lies than truth. Think the climate change hoax, the faux pandemic, the efficacy of the COVID vaccine and the list goes on and on.
I question the story because of the timing. Why wait until nearly 2 weeks after the attack to bring it up? This could have been his Pentagon Papers moment. Considering his hatred for Trump, why didn't he expose it much earlier?
Instead, he just “happens” to expose it right before the Senate Intelligence briefing. What a coincidence. And why was any of the intelligence briefing done in public? Usually, they are held behind closed doors since supposedly they cover classified info. Maybe it’s ok now because Biden left classified docs in his garage, among other places?
Which makes me wonder, was the timing of the exposé to create a media circus and give the Dems an opportunity to look so self-righteous? Never mind that they said nothing about Hillary’s server and again Biden’s gross mishandling of classified docs.
These unanswered questions make me doubt that this was simply an accident. We need the all facts first before we just accept the media narrative.
Reagan famously said: trust but verify. With the dying legacy media, I've adopted Reagan's approach, but in reverse: “verify and then trust.”
He published the texts and nobody has denied any of them. The National Security Council spokesman corroborated Goldberg’s account. Even Hegseth admitted as much with his lame attempt to parse attack plans and war plans. Why do you think the Goldberg story is falling apart?
So you’re okay with killing his girlfriend, who may not have known what he was up to, but how about the men, women, and children in the building who may not have known him at all?
The question should be. Why is she okay dating a terrorist especially knowing he might be killed?
Of course, there is a possibility he is using his girlfriend as a human shield. That is why they hold up in schools and hospitals. They use people as human shield. That's their MO. That and indiscriminately killing innocents. Are you okay with that?
I'm never okay with killing innocents, not even when my government does it. I have no idea whether the girlfriend was a human shield, considered him a freedom fighter, or didn't know anything about what he was doing. I know even less about the other people who may have been in the apartment building when it was leveled. That is the point. Did those high level people in the chat know all that? Their comments sounded like they didn't care.
I'm glad the killer of innocents is dead, but what if there were innocents in that building? What if they have family who want revenge on the terrorists who killed their innocent loved ones? When human beings are considered collateral damage, none of us are safe.
Putin is a monster because he killed innocent people. How is Trump or Biden or Obama or Bush or Clinton, etc. any different when they kill innocent people? There has to be a better way.
I can see by your response that you truly care about human life. It is an extremely difficult place we find ourselves in. We face a terrible dilemma.
This is the first I've seen of those comments. So I wonder if they are true. That said, I view them differently. He was merely pointing out he had eyes on the target. If these are the real comments, JD was merely saying it was excellent that the terrorist was killed. He is thinking that it is one less terrorist. By the way, we are assuming his girlfriend was there. It's quite likely she was but we don't know.
I agree with you that Putin and terrorists are monsters. They will kill us if they had a chance. The terrorists have made that clear just as Imperial Japan and Nazis.
We are trying to negotiate a peace between Ukraine and Russia so that the useless killing stops. We are also trying to negotiate peace in the Middle East. Much depends on the parties being willing to stop.
Our military works hard to minimize civilian casualties unlike the terrorists and Putin but they are imperfect like all of us and dealing with an enemy who would love us to just let them own people and us.
I agree with you. I too wish there was a better solution but there isn't. We can only do the best we can under the circumstances we find ourselves in. Sadly, it's either kill or be killed. I don't think that will change until Jesus comes.
And just who are you? Are you so cloistered in the 60 year old bleeding heart liberal (misnomer) bubble (that has been completely hijacked by marxists, socialists, and communists, who want to destroy our country btw) that you somehow forgot that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, floats on water (literally and figuratively [go hamas! /sarcasm] had feathers] and goes great with a cherry reduction..
that rational Americans who care about protecting their children from terrorists (who would prefer them dead over graduating from preschool) give half a shit?
Take your N95 mask off and take a whiff of the shit you are shoveling.
My words are hard because everyone needs to hear them. I fully recognize that hard working people who, at no fault of their own, believed the abject lies on every important topic of the last 17 years from the MSM, have a perspective grounded in those lies respond exactly as you have.
I’m happy to show you the receipts. I’m 100% sure you are a good person. You’ve just been had I’m sorry to say.
LOL. Being mistaken for a "bleeding heart liberal" is funny. I'm more often mistaken for a "heartless conservative." FYI, I'm neither; I'm someone who believes the guilty should be held accountable for their crimes and the innocent protected. I believe the US government should be protecting the life, liberty, and property of Americans, not putting us in danger by dropping bombs on people on the other side of the world who haven't done anything to us. If a boat full of Houthis attacks a US ship, blow it out of the water, but don't go bombing a civilian building full of unknown people to kill one or two bad guys. I thought we were supposed to be the good guys. Killing innocents is what terrorists do.
Copy that Joyce. I appreciate your beliefs. My only point is that the lense through which you see things is deeply smudged with fingerprints of the guilty and they’ve been in view so long you don’t see them.
I truly hope you are happy and healthy and sincerely appreciate the dialogue.
Sorry, but no. It is romantic to imagine that any opponent will strike and then stand clear to challenge their enemies to single combat. Doesn't happen. The primary tactic of terrorists is to hide in the population that they claim to champion. It is intended that the stronger opponent will be tempted to hold back the counterstrike. If one chooses to punish his enemies, innocents will get hurt.
The fighter will become hardened to the collateral damage. To be a pacifist is to accept the damage done by the attacker. It is a simple choice, Either alternative has consequences.
It is ugly, but not a scandal. It is not an issue among terrorists or mobsters. These people are focused on their task, it isn't pretty. But please consider that this particular conversation was rather mild compared to others in the moment.
While I don’t intentionally wish to be associated with EU war mongers, Victoria Nuland, Antony Blinken, and Jake Sullivan, I have long resigned myself to the risk that the town in which I live, Portland, could at any moment be wiped-out (with me in it) by Russian nuclear attack, given that NATO (U.S.) armaments are currently being used to kill Russians. War is hell, by proxy or otherwise, and we citizens are inescapably at risk.
Thank you.
Maybe it's just me, but it seems that the real crime is that there exists an institution that is free to murder innocent human beings, to plot their attacks in secret, and to steal our wealth in order to have the tools to do this. It seems to me that the crime is NOT that these folks' secrecy was momentarily breached.
I'm finding it harder and harder to understand why this needs to be explained to civilized people. But maybe there aren't a lot of those left anymore.
Thanks for pointing this out. All I heard on the news and even on social media was about the communications mistake. I don't know why I thought the Republicans might be a little less casual about killing civilians than the Democrats were. No such thing as a party of peace in the American empire.
Indeed.
Coercive civil authority is inherently, intrinsically evil. And it seems to attract the kind of people who think it's noble. As a certain president might say, SAD.
You’re absolutely right. The casual disregard for civilian life and the casual execution of what should require a formal declaration of war are horrifying and should be the biggest part of the story. That’s not to say that the casual disregard for operational security and the disrespectful and mercenary attitude towards our allies aren’t noteworthy contenders for the worst aspects of this debacle.
I’m very concerned by the message it sends to both enemies and allies. After Biden’s multiple foreign disasters, we were supposed to be “ Team Don’t Fuck With Us,We Ain’t Biden”. True, we just add people to an insecure group chat that are the worst possible and can’t explain why. Not can we explain a large group of Intel Heads participating online instead of a SCIF. Worse, is that it was hacked and the participants personal info was published online.
Did Trump not learn from the devasting leaks during his first term?
Such a great point Jon, glad you wrote this.
It makes me think that perhaps the reason this aspect draws so little attention compared to objectively more trivial things like emoji use is that many people simply don't seriously question the sacrificing of innocent lives in war or they believe in collective guilt. When I push on this point, I often get some kind of justification for it in the realm of "war is hell" or "the girlfriend knew what her boyfriend was involved in and is thus an accomplice."
This unwillingness to recognize individuals as individuals, innocent until proven guilty, is probably a large part of why war persists today.
Sadly, I think you are correct.
The real scandal isn’t the Signal leak, it’s civilian casualties brushed off like background noise, all to take out one target in a country we’re not even at war with.
I especially like how you cited Greenwald: “It's of course a war crime, and if anyone applied this logic to the US, they'd be branded ‘terrorists.’” It's one of those "it's okay for me, but not for thee" moments, and it's basically been how U.S. foreign policy has acted regardless of whether there's a Republican or a Democrat in the White House. Terrorism itself comes in many forms and, objectively speaking, if you're drone-bombing civilians, regardless of who you are, you're committing an act of terrorism.
The Houthi are the aggressors. Would be nice if we could eliminate collateral deaths-not gonna happen. These are the same that drag soldiers bodies through the streets, rape women, murder homosexuals, etc. I guess I’m attempting to defend the indefensible….
Mummy, he started it...wah.
Grow up. The Houthis are fighting what is arguably a just war and interdicting commerce.
It is arguable that the man targeted was a legitimate target, but his girlfriend was not, nor the other residents.
There is a country that has a constitution that requires a declaration of war. Any of you neocons know its name?
Yes, Hamas chose war. It doesn't bother them one bit to kill civilians as evidenced by their actions.
Goldberg could have stated that he was wrongly included in the chat. Instead he chose to snoop.
The major fault here was Waltz continuing to employ an aide who is a Trump hater and whose wife is anti-Trump. Poor vetting by Trump.
Also Waltz denied knowing Goldberg, but there is an internet photo of them at a party several years ago. How could Waltz keep Goldberg's number in his phone? How much did they communicate? Pull the phone logs.
Putting this out there for all the neocons. Why do we have to be in the Middle East? If we brought all our forces home and didn't bug West Asia, would we not be better off?
Do you think the Houthis would cross the ocean in their dhows and attack us? The Iranians would sail over. Tell me the reason to be there?
And, for that matter, why do we have to be in Europe, or Asia?
neutralistassociationofthe.us
This was a very disappointing piece. It basically reminds me of what the dying legacy media does. Now that Goldberg’s story is falling apart, they shift the focus. That way, people will forget the discredited narrative. Sadly, this is exactly what I see in your post.
Now it’s worse because civilians might have been hurt. Hamas chose war. You bring up Obama’s droning of people. He actually dropped the most of any president since WW2. Yet there was no media outcry. Any outcries were suppressed or ignored.
I’m glad at least you called out Goldberg. If he had any integrity, he would have identified himself and/or gotten off the phone, but he didn’t, again revealing his lack of integrity.
Actually, we should question anything coming from the Atlantic and the other usual suspects, considering their abysmal record. Their narratives have a way of unraveling and turning out to be more lies than truth. Think the climate change hoax, the faux pandemic, the efficacy of the COVID vaccine and the list goes on and on.
I question the story because of the timing. Why wait until nearly 2 weeks after the attack to bring it up? This could have been his Pentagon Papers moment. Considering his hatred for Trump, why didn't he expose it much earlier?
Instead, he just “happens” to expose it right before the Senate Intelligence briefing. What a coincidence. And why was any of the intelligence briefing done in public? Usually, they are held behind closed doors since supposedly they cover classified info. Maybe it’s ok now because Biden left classified docs in his garage, among other places?
Which makes me wonder, was the timing of the exposé to create a media circus and give the Dems an opportunity to look so self-righteous? Never mind that they said nothing about Hillary’s server and again Biden’s gross mishandling of classified docs.
These unanswered questions make me doubt that this was simply an accident. We need the all facts first before we just accept the media narrative.
Reagan famously said: trust but verify. With the dying legacy media, I've adopted Reagan's approach, but in reverse: “verify and then trust.”
He published the texts and nobody has denied any of them. The National Security Council spokesman corroborated Goldberg’s account. Even Hegseth admitted as much with his lame attempt to parse attack plans and war plans. Why do you think the Goldberg story is falling apart?
Thank you so much. I am dispirited that no one really wants to talk about this.
FAFO when you attack a air craft carrier!!!
Same. These people are terrorists. If you are regularly within touching distance of known terrorists, you are one too, IMO.
So you’re okay with killing his girlfriend, who may not have known what he was up to, but how about the men, women, and children in the building who may not have known him at all?
The question should be. Why is she okay dating a terrorist especially knowing he might be killed?
Of course, there is a possibility he is using his girlfriend as a human shield. That is why they hold up in schools and hospitals. They use people as human shield. That's their MO. That and indiscriminately killing innocents. Are you okay with that?
I'm never okay with killing innocents, not even when my government does it. I have no idea whether the girlfriend was a human shield, considered him a freedom fighter, or didn't know anything about what he was doing. I know even less about the other people who may have been in the apartment building when it was leveled. That is the point. Did those high level people in the chat know all that? Their comments sounded like they didn't care.
I'm glad the killer of innocents is dead, but what if there were innocents in that building? What if they have family who want revenge on the terrorists who killed their innocent loved ones? When human beings are considered collateral damage, none of us are safe.
Putin is a monster because he killed innocent people. How is Trump or Biden or Obama or Bush or Clinton, etc. any different when they kill innocent people? There has to be a better way.
I can see by your response that you truly care about human life. It is an extremely difficult place we find ourselves in. We face a terrible dilemma.
This is the first I've seen of those comments. So I wonder if they are true. That said, I view them differently. He was merely pointing out he had eyes on the target. If these are the real comments, JD was merely saying it was excellent that the terrorist was killed. He is thinking that it is one less terrorist. By the way, we are assuming his girlfriend was there. It's quite likely she was but we don't know.
I agree with you that Putin and terrorists are monsters. They will kill us if they had a chance. The terrorists have made that clear just as Imperial Japan and Nazis.
We are trying to negotiate a peace between Ukraine and Russia so that the useless killing stops. We are also trying to negotiate peace in the Middle East. Much depends on the parties being willing to stop.
Our military works hard to minimize civilian casualties unlike the terrorists and Putin but they are imperfect like all of us and dealing with an enemy who would love us to just let them own people and us.
I agree with you. I too wish there was a better solution but there isn't. We can only do the best we can under the circumstances we find ourselves in. Sadly, it's either kill or be killed. I don't think that will change until Jesus comes.
100%. Like the OP said, FAFO.
And just who are you? Are you so cloistered in the 60 year old bleeding heart liberal (misnomer) bubble (that has been completely hijacked by marxists, socialists, and communists, who want to destroy our country btw) that you somehow forgot that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, floats on water (literally and figuratively [go hamas! /sarcasm] had feathers] and goes great with a cherry reduction..
that rational Americans who care about protecting their children from terrorists (who would prefer them dead over graduating from preschool) give half a shit?
Take your N95 mask off and take a whiff of the shit you are shoveling.
My words are hard because everyone needs to hear them. I fully recognize that hard working people who, at no fault of their own, believed the abject lies on every important topic of the last 17 years from the MSM, have a perspective grounded in those lies respond exactly as you have.
I’m happy to show you the receipts. I’m 100% sure you are a good person. You’ve just been had I’m sorry to say.
LOL. Being mistaken for a "bleeding heart liberal" is funny. I'm more often mistaken for a "heartless conservative." FYI, I'm neither; I'm someone who believes the guilty should be held accountable for their crimes and the innocent protected. I believe the US government should be protecting the life, liberty, and property of Americans, not putting us in danger by dropping bombs on people on the other side of the world who haven't done anything to us. If a boat full of Houthis attacks a US ship, blow it out of the water, but don't go bombing a civilian building full of unknown people to kill one or two bad guys. I thought we were supposed to be the good guys. Killing innocents is what terrorists do.
Copy that Joyce. I appreciate your beliefs. My only point is that the lense through which you see things is deeply smudged with fingerprints of the guilty and they’ve been in view so long you don’t see them.
I truly hope you are happy and healthy and sincerely appreciate the dialogue.
Sorry, but no. It is romantic to imagine that any opponent will strike and then stand clear to challenge their enemies to single combat. Doesn't happen. The primary tactic of terrorists is to hide in the population that they claim to champion. It is intended that the stronger opponent will be tempted to hold back the counterstrike. If one chooses to punish his enemies, innocents will get hurt.
The fighter will become hardened to the collateral damage. To be a pacifist is to accept the damage done by the attacker. It is a simple choice, Either alternative has consequences.
It is ugly, but not a scandal. It is not an issue among terrorists or mobsters. These people are focused on their task, it isn't pretty. But please consider that this particular conversation was rather mild compared to others in the moment.
While I don’t intentionally wish to be associated with EU war mongers, Victoria Nuland, Antony Blinken, and Jake Sullivan, I have long resigned myself to the risk that the town in which I live, Portland, could at any moment be wiped-out (with me in it) by Russian nuclear attack, given that NATO (U.S.) armaments are currently being used to kill Russians. War is hell, by proxy or otherwise, and we citizens are inescapably at risk.