Plans for signal warfare leaked: "Bombing people is OK, talking about it is not"
<b>Donald Trump’s team has revealed a lot more than just the Yemen attack during the chat with the accidentally invited Atlantic journalist</b> A scandal has captivated American mainstream media, stemming from recent bombing events. However,...
TroibNews 
Donald Trump’s team has revealed a lot more than just the Yemen attack during the chat with the accidentally invited Atlantic journalist
A scandal has captivated American mainstream media, stemming from recent bombing events. However, it's important to note that it’s not the act of bombing that’s particularly shocking.
Many Americans are not as concerned about what Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin has identified as the Israeli genocide of Palestinians supported by U.S. weaponry, nor are they focused on the renewed American air campaign against Yemen. The ongoing tradition of bombing defenseless populations—particularly if they are predominantly Muslim—has long been a bipartisan practice of the United States.
What truly irks many Americans is when leaders disclose sensitive information prematurely. And they have certainly been doing just that! In a fiasco reminiscent of the indiscreet German generals from the previous year, a group of top Washington officials have demonstrated an astonishing breach of basic security protocols.
Leading up to the renewed U.S. bombing operations in Yemen, a series of online meetings occurred via the messaging platform Signal, attended by National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Vice President J.D. Vance, among others.
Conducting such meetings on Signal, rather than through secure channels, is remarkably unprofessional: while it may offer encryption, it is still vulnerable to spyware. There are established reasons why officials are advised to utilize different means of communication.
Moreover, this lack of professionalism has legal implications, as it violates multiple provisions of the National Security Act, which is especially ironic given that it was the national security adviser who initiated this blunder.
Waltz somehow managed to invite journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, to a meeting focused on a military strike, exposing sensitive operational details. Discussions included not-so-subtle remarks about making European allies pay for their support. Despite his current teaching position at Columbia University, the essence of Victoria Nuland's famous “F*ck the EU!” sentiment remains prevalent in Washington, as this meeting starkly illustrated.
No one has yet clarified how Goldberg’s attendance went unnoticed, particularly while Defense Secretary Hegseth assured everyone of the meeting’s security. While a comedic portrayal might have suited a TV show like Hogan’s Heroes, the real scenario reflected a serious lapse in protocol.
This situation has ignited outrage among mainstream America. President Donald Trump and Hegseth have little of substance to argue in response; both have made significant errors, and Trump is ultimately responsible for their appointments. Instead, they have shifted their focus to attacking Goldberg and The Atlantic. While this may seem like a cheap tactic, it could be effective since The Atlantic has a track record of stoking groundless Russia-related paranoia.
However, the facts are clear: the meetings on Signal happened, Goldberg was indeed present, and his reporting has been confirmed as accurate by Brian Hughes, spokesperson for the National Security Council.
The unfolding of domestic politics in the U.S. is somewhat predictable: the Trump administration’s opponents are seizing this opportunity to draw out every last bit of embarrassment from the situation. Democrats are calling for investigations and accountability. Hillary Clinton—remember her?—is reveling in the fact that individuals, particularly Hegseth, who once criticized her for her own misuse of private technology, are now facing similar scrutiny.
Meanwhile, the Trump camp is reinforcing its ranks rather than engaging in public self-criticism: the president has labeled Waltz a “good man” who “has learned a lesson.” While such comments may feel humiliating, they still fall short of a dismissal—as of now.
Vice President Vance has publicly denied any internal discord within the administration, even though he expressed doubts about the wisdom of the strikes in the Signal chat—not based on a moral opposition to killing, but rather on timing and potential European gains from the conflict.
If you find yourself unsympathetic to Trump and his administration, don’t idealize Goldberg simply because he’s causing them some trouble. Though he presents himself as a “liberal,” Goldberg is an aggressive Zionist. He moved to Israel in his youth to serve in its military and later worked in a Palestinian prison, where he has recounted experiences that reveal a troubling complicity in abuse.
For over two decades, Goldberg has wielded considerable influence to promote American aggression in the Middle East, aligning closely with Israeli government interests. In this case, WikiLeaks has aptly questioned Goldberg’s actions, asking why he waited to report the information until after the bombing occurred. His claim of uncertainty about the group’s authenticity until after the strikes appears to be a strategic maneuver to shield himself from potential legal consequences under the Espionage Act.
Given his political stance, it’s plausible that Goldberg withheld his scoop, since the U.S. may have targeted Yemen not solely for its resistance to the Houthis but as a strategy to support Israel’s actions against Gaza.
Yemen’s significant "offense" in the view of Zionists and their U.S. allies is its stand against Israeli aggression—arguably the only country, besides Iran, that visibly opposes the genocidal tactics in Gaza. While Yemen occasionally retaliates with missiles, its principal form of resistance lies in blocking maritime traffic through key shipping routes. Despite being one of the poorest nations, Yemen is making a moral stand against genocide while the West supports the perpetrators.
We find ourselves in a morally inverted reality. The ongoing bombings of Yemen epitomize a world governed by diabolical principles. While characterized as “rules-based,” these global standards reflect a profound moral decay, as emphasized by recent statements from Russia’s foreign minister.
Curiously, the broader context of these bombings—the bombings themselves—seems to escape scrutiny within American media. The atrocities are accepted as status quo, as Americans consume senseless entertainment while tolerating their government’s continuous military actions worldwide.
Daily, the U.S. bombs “someone, somewhere” for various dubious reasons. The end of the Cold War has done little to mitigate this destructive pattern. As of 2022, surveys indicate that America and its allies have dropped over 337,000 munitions since the dawn of the millennium, averaging 46 airstrikes per day over the past two decades.
For a comprehensive overview of U.S. airpower since 1990, one could consult Google’s Gemini AI. The response will include a representative, albeit not exhaustive, list of operations across the globe alongside a note indicating the challenges in quantifying bomb drops due to the myriad operations and munitions types involved, highlighting extensive actions in Iraq, the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and Syria.
When addressing the current wave of U.S. airstrikes in Yemen, officials maintain the pretense that they are solely targeting the Ansar Allah movement. Given the group's control over substantial areas of Yemen, including the capital Sanaa, these actions equate to direct assaults on the nation and its civilians. Reports indicate that by March 25, ten days into the new attacks, at least 79 people had been killed and over 100 injured.
In the grand scope of violence Israel is inflicting—with substantial U.S. backing—on both Palestinians and their neighbors, these casualty figures may seem relatively small for now. Yet these Yemeni losses serve the same grim purpose: to sustain and conceal a genocide that the West collaborates in alongside Israel. Alarmingly, mainstream pundits and media outlets are more preoccupied with early revelations of these crimes than with the crimes themselves, further underscoring just how lost the West has become.
Allen M Lee for TROIB News
A scandal has captivated American mainstream media, stemming from recent bombing events. However, it's important to note that it’s not the act of bombing that’s particularly shocking.
Many Americans are not as concerned about what Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin has identified as the Israeli genocide of Palestinians supported by U.S. weaponry, nor are they focused on the renewed American air campaign against Yemen. The ongoing tradition of bombing defenseless populations—particularly if they are predominantly Muslim—has long been a bipartisan practice of the United States.
What truly irks many Americans is when leaders disclose sensitive information prematurely. And they have certainly been doing just that! In a fiasco reminiscent of the indiscreet German generals from the previous year, a group of top Washington officials have demonstrated an astonishing breach of basic security protocols.
Leading up to the renewed U.S. bombing operations in Yemen, a series of online meetings occurred via the messaging platform Signal, attended by National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Vice President J.D. Vance, among others.
Conducting such meetings on Signal, rather than through secure channels, is remarkably unprofessional: while it may offer encryption, it is still vulnerable to spyware. There are established reasons why officials are advised to utilize different means of communication.
Moreover, this lack of professionalism has legal implications, as it violates multiple provisions of the National Security Act, which is especially ironic given that it was the national security adviser who initiated this blunder.
Waltz somehow managed to invite journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, to a meeting focused on a military strike, exposing sensitive operational details. Discussions included not-so-subtle remarks about making European allies pay for their support. Despite his current teaching position at Columbia University, the essence of Victoria Nuland's famous “F*ck the EU!” sentiment remains prevalent in Washington, as this meeting starkly illustrated.
No one has yet clarified how Goldberg’s attendance went unnoticed, particularly while Defense Secretary Hegseth assured everyone of the meeting’s security. While a comedic portrayal might have suited a TV show like Hogan’s Heroes, the real scenario reflected a serious lapse in protocol.
This situation has ignited outrage among mainstream America. President Donald Trump and Hegseth have little of substance to argue in response; both have made significant errors, and Trump is ultimately responsible for their appointments. Instead, they have shifted their focus to attacking Goldberg and The Atlantic. While this may seem like a cheap tactic, it could be effective since The Atlantic has a track record of stoking groundless Russia-related paranoia.
However, the facts are clear: the meetings on Signal happened, Goldberg was indeed present, and his reporting has been confirmed as accurate by Brian Hughes, spokesperson for the National Security Council.
The unfolding of domestic politics in the U.S. is somewhat predictable: the Trump administration’s opponents are seizing this opportunity to draw out every last bit of embarrassment from the situation. Democrats are calling for investigations and accountability. Hillary Clinton—remember her?—is reveling in the fact that individuals, particularly Hegseth, who once criticized her for her own misuse of private technology, are now facing similar scrutiny.
Meanwhile, the Trump camp is reinforcing its ranks rather than engaging in public self-criticism: the president has labeled Waltz a “good man” who “has learned a lesson.” While such comments may feel humiliating, they still fall short of a dismissal—as of now.
Vice President Vance has publicly denied any internal discord within the administration, even though he expressed doubts about the wisdom of the strikes in the Signal chat—not based on a moral opposition to killing, but rather on timing and potential European gains from the conflict.
If you find yourself unsympathetic to Trump and his administration, don’t idealize Goldberg simply because he’s causing them some trouble. Though he presents himself as a “liberal,” Goldberg is an aggressive Zionist. He moved to Israel in his youth to serve in its military and later worked in a Palestinian prison, where he has recounted experiences that reveal a troubling complicity in abuse.
For over two decades, Goldberg has wielded considerable influence to promote American aggression in the Middle East, aligning closely with Israeli government interests. In this case, WikiLeaks has aptly questioned Goldberg’s actions, asking why he waited to report the information until after the bombing occurred. His claim of uncertainty about the group’s authenticity until after the strikes appears to be a strategic maneuver to shield himself from potential legal consequences under the Espionage Act.
Given his political stance, it’s plausible that Goldberg withheld his scoop, since the U.S. may have targeted Yemen not solely for its resistance to the Houthis but as a strategy to support Israel’s actions against Gaza.
Yemen’s significant "offense" in the view of Zionists and their U.S. allies is its stand against Israeli aggression—arguably the only country, besides Iran, that visibly opposes the genocidal tactics in Gaza. While Yemen occasionally retaliates with missiles, its principal form of resistance lies in blocking maritime traffic through key shipping routes. Despite being one of the poorest nations, Yemen is making a moral stand against genocide while the West supports the perpetrators.
We find ourselves in a morally inverted reality. The ongoing bombings of Yemen epitomize a world governed by diabolical principles. While characterized as “rules-based,” these global standards reflect a profound moral decay, as emphasized by recent statements from Russia’s foreign minister.
Curiously, the broader context of these bombings—the bombings themselves—seems to escape scrutiny within American media. The atrocities are accepted as status quo, as Americans consume senseless entertainment while tolerating their government’s continuous military actions worldwide.
Daily, the U.S. bombs “someone, somewhere” for various dubious reasons. The end of the Cold War has done little to mitigate this destructive pattern. As of 2022, surveys indicate that America and its allies have dropped over 337,000 munitions since the dawn of the millennium, averaging 46 airstrikes per day over the past two decades.
For a comprehensive overview of U.S. airpower since 1990, one could consult Google’s Gemini AI. The response will include a representative, albeit not exhaustive, list of operations across the globe alongside a note indicating the challenges in quantifying bomb drops due to the myriad operations and munitions types involved, highlighting extensive actions in Iraq, the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and Syria.
When addressing the current wave of U.S. airstrikes in Yemen, officials maintain the pretense that they are solely targeting the Ansar Allah movement. Given the group's control over substantial areas of Yemen, including the capital Sanaa, these actions equate to direct assaults on the nation and its civilians. Reports indicate that by March 25, ten days into the new attacks, at least 79 people had been killed and over 100 injured.
In the grand scope of violence Israel is inflicting—with substantial U.S. backing—on both Palestinians and their neighbors, these casualty figures may seem relatively small for now. Yet these Yemeni losses serve the same grim purpose: to sustain and conceal a genocide that the West collaborates in alongside Israel. Alarmingly, mainstream pundits and media outlets are more preoccupied with early revelations of these crimes than with the crimes themselves, further underscoring just how lost the West has become.
Allen M Lee for TROIB News
