Post

the problem with The Signal Chat isn't that they added the editor in chief of the atlantic. the problem with The Signal Chat is WHY WAS THIS INFORMATION ON SIGNAL AT ALL. the fact that none of the 20-odd people in this signal chat said "HEY MAYBE SIGNAL ISN'T RIGHT FOR THIS" is a really bad sign!!

i know that this whole situation is so fucked up that it's impossible to count the ways that it is fucked up, but even a message to a signal chat that says "hey, check your high-side inboxes for our war plans" would be a huge problem, much less just PASTING THE WAR PLANS.

also, if these people successfully lie themselves out of trouble for this i will be so mad. even as someone who hates the current administration, and the US military-industrial complex that I am complicit in, I believe that "giving our enemies our war plans" is *still a bad thing for the world*.

while that story is ridiculous, it illustrates the point that operational information security for people who work with classified / national defense material has REALLY STRICT RULES and like every military rule, it's written in the blood of the people who broke it in the past. treasonous fucks.

i think a big portion of why it was a signal chat is the same reason leftist activists groups use signal: to keep it hidden from the government. these people want their conspiring to be free from any oversight, free from FOIA, so they can get away with it. what else have they done in secret chats?