rebeccmeister: (Default)
[personal profile] rebeccmeister
I just saw a really terrible take on that whole USian Signal debacle that just declared the situation as evidence of the incompetence of the people currently running this country.

Don't get me wrong - there certainly was a slip-up.

What I'm personally thinking about more is the double-facedness it revealed. The people involved in that discussion and decision-making process were VERY clear, timely, and decisive when communicating with each other, internally. We might (vehemently!) disagree with policy positions and decisions, but they exist.

Meanwhile, what about the messages that get intentionally fed to reporters? Lies, reversals, more lies, contempt, et cetera. Why even bother asking the dude in the big house the question, if it's clear he's more than happy to use the occasion to lie even more?

There's already a lot of discussion and things written about code-switching in political conversations; is this that write large? Do people aligned with the dude's goals just smile and laugh every time they learn about the next round of witty repartee?

Why does it feel so hard to counteract what the people in charge are doing right now?

I'm not sure I'll join one of the T$la Takedown protests; protests aren't a great fit for me, although I support the effort. I continue to think there's benefit from my work in the classroom. Perhaps, though, I need to join colleagues who are creating forums for discussions about current events.

Date: 2025-03-27 09:20 pm (UTC)
twoeleven: Hans Zarkov from Flash Gordon (Default)
From: [personal profile] twoeleven
there certainly was a slip-up.

Debacle is closer to the truth. I've worked with "sensitive" information before, and their little Signalling problem was a disaster.

And while I realize the rest of these are probably rhetorical... :)

Do people aligned with the dude's goals just smile and laugh every time they learn about the next round of witty repartee?

Many of them do, apparently, though some are apparently buying the clue, having lost their own jobs/veteran's benefits/etc.

Why does it feel so hard to counteract what the people in charge are doing right now?

Lack of formal methods (e.g. recall elections) to remove them from office. Informal methods, well, that's what Signal is for. ;)

Perhaps, though, I need to join colleagues who are creating forums for discussions about current events.

Good idea! You're in a convenient place for that.

Date: 2025-03-27 11:02 pm (UTC)
altamira16: A sailboat on the water at dawn or dusk (Default)
From: [personal profile] altamira16
It's a big deal because numerous people involved were lying to Congress. Tulsi Gabbard who was in the chat told Congress that there was no classified information before the next day when she told them she was confused about what entity stuff was classified under. Then someone asked her if she understood that as the Director of National Security, it was her job to investigate a leak that she knew about. And it is like "This ding dong does not need to be the Director of National Security."

The testimony before Congress was coincidentally happening around the time that this happened. They were going to discuss other security issues, but events overtook them.

Date: 2025-03-28 01:31 am (UTC)
twoeleven: Hans Zarkov from Flash Gordon (Default)
From: [personal profile] twoeleven
So...there's a mixture of genuine incompetence on top of it all, depending on who is involved

Oh, yes!

There's about a million different variations on the same piece, all interviewing different people familar with the same sort of discussion, all saying the same sorts of things.

(Sorry, I thought you were asking a different question.)

Date: 2025-03-28 01:13 am (UTC)
altamira16: A sailboat on the water at dawn or dusk (Default)
From: [personal profile] altamira16
So a friend had me reading a different substack today, and a Westpoint history professor is convinced that the military organizations are intentionally creating the opportunities for leaks to maximally embarrass some incompetent dodos. It's a hypothesis that makes sense, but is it appealing because I want to know things that other people do not know?

Date: 2025-03-28 04:19 am (UTC)
moodyduck: (Default)
From: [personal profile] moodyduck
I think the lying and hypocrisy is pretty much what everyone expects by now. Some people think it doesn't matter if they get what they want out of it in the end. Or they think they will.

The confusion doesn't surprise me either. No one is told if they are supposed to lie or tell the truth on any given day. I do find it bizarre that declaring ignorance of a topic is considered a good, viable defense for a US president. It's what he always does but uh, the president really should be in the loop of some things.

What really gets me is the incompetence though. I am an ecologist who has never worked on anything of national security concern and I KNOW BETTER. I can recite all the rules about different types of controlled information and limited areas and information security and counterespionage and OPSEC in general. I have never needed this information! It is possible I never will! But I take that training every year because I work for the government. People who do have clearances have to take much more training. Ok, I've been at this job for 15 years but still, how do I know more about this than most of the Cabinet? I had better OPSEC around a project that was business sensitive and it was about endangered fish.

I've been obsessed with this topic all week but I'll leave it there.

Date: 2025-03-28 04:32 am (UTC)
moodyduck: (Default)
From: [personal profile] moodyduck
I should add that it's pounded into our brains in training that it is every single person's responsibility to report behavior that is not allowed. So every government official in any of these signal chats is culpable for not shutting it down or reporting it to someone who would. E.g. if I overheard someone at work talking about classified or controlled unclassified information and I have nothing to do with it, I have to call our security operations center and report it.

Date: 2025-03-28 02:16 pm (UTC)
mallorys_camera: (Default)
From: [personal profile] mallorys_camera
I'm similarly conflicted about joining protests. If the size of the protests aren't being accurately reported upon—and they aren't—then they're pointless. Also, Tesla is a kind of confounder, no? Protests should be aimed at Trump.

It does feel hard to counteract what's going on, but the fact that they pulled Stefanik from that UN nomination means they actually thought they were gonna lose that Placerville special election. They're running scared.

Speaking of elections... Personally, I think one of the best things we all can do right now is make sure every one of our potential voters has proof of citizenship. That way, they can't be disenfranchised if proof of citizenship becomes a voting requirement. Proof of citizenship can be difficult for some people to attain—they may need help tracking down birth certificates. Offering them that help proactively is something concrete we can do.

Date: 2025-03-28 03:18 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] sytharin
I'm less interested in Tesla protests than in divesting from Tesla stocks. And Meta and Alphabet etc while we're at it.

Protests in general are a mixed bag, but I do think it's useful to join the biggest ones -- the Stand Up for Science rally was an opportunity to hand out leaflets to people who are already engaged, and the upcoming protest day on April 5 seems like another good space to coordinate more effective collective actions.

Profile

rebeccmeister: (Default)
rebeccmeister

July 2025

S M T W T F S
  1 2345
6 7 8 910 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 1819
2021 22 23 24 25 26
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 27th, 2025 01:19 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios