I already owned up. And I can’t understand why not find the post from hoot again. Your post came right after I responded to mattindallas.It sounds like you’re struggling with this and I can appreciate that. I don’t think you’re alone. But in this post, you’re deflecting and not accepting responsibility for your actions here.
In post #555, you respond directly to hoot1, not to mattindallas. You flew off the handle, assumed a bunch of unwarranted things about hoots opinions, and then rudely said he was in a cult.
You did that. No one else. It’s not the site’s fault and it wasn’t hoot’s fault. And it wasn’t because you just can’t help yourself. You’re not a victim here.
Man up, accept responsibility, and apologize.
So I found my post to hoot. I did not say he was in a cult. My phrasing may not have been the best. I was talking about those in the cult can not admit it. Not specifically hoot. For that misunderstanding and clumsy phrasing I apologize to hoot. I owe no apology to anyone else. I have said I’ll own up unlike many here who refuse to. They all know who they are. Actually I stand corrected. They never think they’re wrong so the don’t have to own up. I’m done with this thread.It sounds like you’re struggling with this and I can appreciate that. I don’t think you’re alone. But in this post, you’re deflecting and not accepting responsibility for your actions here.
In post #555, you respond directly to hoot1, not to mattindallas. You flew off the handle, assumed a bunch of unwarranted things about hoots opinions, and then rudely said he was in a cult.
You did that. No one else. It’s not the site’s fault and it wasn’t hoot’s fault. And it wasn’t because you just can’t help yourself. You’re not a victim here.
Man up, accept responsibility, and apologize.
We’ll anxiously await your next ORANGE JESUS cultists postI already owned up. And I can’t understand why not find the post from hoot again. Your post came right after I responded to mattindallas.
So I found my post to hoot. I did not say he was in a cult. My phrasing may not have been the best. I was talking about those in the cult can not admit it. Not specifically hoot. For that misunderstanding and clumsy phrasing I apologize to hoot. I owe no apology to anyone else. I have said I’ll own up unlike many here who refuse to. They all know who they are. Actually I stand corrected. They never think they’re wrong so the don’t have to own up. I’m done with this thread.
He's an important journalist on matters of national security. OF COURSE he is in Waltz's contacts. Waltz would be negligent not to have him there. Jesus, man.OK, so if Waltz specifically, and not someone on his team, added "JG" to the chat...
he's either grossly irresponsible, or a rat, and should probably be removed sooner rather than later.
Which goes back to:
How, specifically, did "JG" get in Waltz's contacts? Did he add him manually? Was it downloaded from some state department list that was added to his contacts indirectly through some random contact download? And if the latter, who, specifically, created and cloaked "JG"? When and who?
You should ask to speak to a manager.Even if he were, he's one of the most polite posters here, yet still posts with wit, humor, and intelligence.
And then there's this guy, who flame throws at every opportunity and then has the gall to post this:
swman said:
Even though I post there at times, you’d be better off eliminating the water cooler altogether. Just political divisiveness. I’m a part of it but I think we’ve got enough of that already in our country and this is a sports forum. So we should just stick with that.
For my part I don’t look at it very often. But when I do, I let myself get sucked in and we go back and forth and it can get ugly at times. Lots of name calling and generally unnecessary stuff. I’m certain there are other forums where folks can argue. I belong to none for that very reason. When we’re communicating through a keyboard we don’t really talk to one another. And we certainly aren’t going to change anyone’s minds.
I know this will not be popular with the water cooler gang.
If there is a way to take it off my personal feed, I’d appreciate you letting me know how to do it. And I’m sure there are many who would welcome my absence there.
I just want to keep track of my beloved university and nothing else. I’m married so I’ve got enough drama in my life.
Sure. OK. I'll buy that.He's an important journalist on matters of national security. OF COURSE he is in Waltz's contacts. Waltz would be negligent not to have him there. Jesus, man.
My phone "cloaks" every single contact I have with initials. This isn't a mystery.Sure. OK. I'll buy that.
So why cloak him via using initials in your contacts? So cloaked, in fact, that even Waltz didn't now who he was.
If that's the case, I'll agree that Waltz was/is extremely negligent. In fact, I've already concluded that.
Are we assuming that Waltz just didn't have the time to label Goldberg via his entire name, so, I dunno, he didn't accidentally send him confidential information randomly sometime? Or, are we assuming that he is so close to Goldberg that simple initials is all he needs in his contacts to recognize one of his buddies?
OK, so if Waltz specifically, and not someone on his team, added "JG" to the chat...
he's either grossly irresponsible, or a rat, and should probably be removed sooner rather than later.
Which goes back to:
How, specifically, did "JG" get in Waltz's contacts? Did he add him manually? Was it downloaded from some state department list that was added to his contacts indirectly through some random contact download? And if the latter, who, specifically, created and cloaked "JG"? When and who?
Fine...whatever. Fire Waltz and whoever else.Who cares? It's beside the point. The main story should stay focused on why the FK these people thought it ok to be using Signal in the first place for these discussions.
The DOD IG is now investigating Hegseth as Signal is not permitted in DOD.
Are you thick in the head? I've already answered this. There is nothing suspicious about it at all. Pretty much every phone and app in existence defaults your contacts to initials until you assign a personalized avatar or something else.Fine...whatever. Fire Waltz and whoever else.
I'm more interested in why Waltz has Goldberg listed as Wendy Wheelchair in his contacts.
Hoot isn’t MAGA.
My phone "cloaks" every single contact I have with initials. This isn't a mystery.
I list all my high school buddies as Stern show characters so when Siri announces "Call from Bababooey. Would you like to answer it," I can giggle each time.So when you're compiling a Signal or text list, you can't select from actual full names as listed in your contacts, but just initials?
I list all my high school buddies as Stern show characters so when Siri announces "Call from Bababooey. Would you like to answer it," I can giggle each time.
No clue on any of this. They'll figure it out.Sure. Similar here.
So are we assuming Waltz just added the wrong Jeffrey Goldberg? Added the wrong Jeffery that autofilled? Added thw wrong "JG"?
Why does Waltz have Goldberg so cloaked in his contacts, that even he could mistake him for someone else?
Who was the person that was supposed to be in Goldberg's place?
No clue on any of this. They'll figure it out.
But someone's head should roll, and it should probably be this guy.
I’ll be getting rid of the rival site altogether. Never to be seen again. If it’s not there I won’t access it.Honest question: What's going to be different when your subscription expires? You don't need it to access the cooler. The only difference will be that you can no longer access the Premium Football and Basketball boards. Everything else will still be open to you.
I mean, if you're going to continue to believe in nonsense no matter how many times we explain to you why it's nonsense...I have no problem booting him...
But I still think the possibility that Waltz may have accidently cloaked himself out of a gig is worth investigating.
I mean, if you're going to continue to believe in nonsense no matter how many times we explain to you why it's nonsense...
You do you.
Does finding out who he meant to include change anything?Who do you think Waltz was trying to add in lieu of Goldberg, and what's your theory as to why/how he was added accidently?
It was reported in the first article that there was a guy on the national security council whose first and last name started with JG. That was probably who Waltz wanted to invite. I don’t recall the name. Regardless, it’s not a mystery how Goldberg was invited. Waltz said he did it accidentally. I don’t know why you keep harping on this. Waltz screwed up, simple as that. Whatever convoluted conspiracy theory you’re following is long dead and was ridiculous at the start.Who do you think Waltz was trying to add in lieu of Goldberg, and what's your theory as to why/how he was added accidently?
Yeah I saw that. Some guy in charge of Middle East commerce or something? That's plausible...shipping lanes and such being impacted.It was reported in the first article that there was a guy on the national security council whose first and last name started with JG. That was probably who Waltz wanted to invite. I don’t recall the name. Regardless, it’s not a mystery how Goldberg was invited. Waltz said he did it accidentally. I don’t know why you keep harping on this. Waltz screwed up, simple as that. Whatever convoluted conspiracy theory you’re following is long dead and was ridiculous at the start.
The important issues:
-Our national security leaders are sloppy and lax with sensitive and classified information.
-They’ve been routinely and inappropriately using Signal rather than appropriate channels and systems.
-Hegseth injected Top Secret strike mission details into the chat and has constantly lied about it.
-The entire DoD knows their boss is a liar.
Although there is a difference between approved for communication and approved for communication with confidential information.Yeah I saw that. Some guy in charge of Middle East commerce or something? That's plausible...shipping lanes and such being impacted.
I'll accept Waltz screwed up, obviously. I don't necessarily think he meant to add Goldberg on this chat...but the fact that he could make that mistake, and he (or someone from his team) either cloaked Goldberg with another name in a contacts list, or initials or something to hide his identity, is suspicious. Leads to the suspicion that either Waltz, or whoever developed this Signal Contacts list (if it was downloaded off some server as standard Dept contacts) leaks stuff to Goldberg all the time...
That said, the way Goldberg and Waltz have been basically DKing each other here...they're either good actors, or they really don't talk...
which leads back to, why is Goldberg in Waltz's, or the departments, potential Signal Contact List, and cloaked by another guy's name?
And, it sounds like "Signal" IS one of the recommended communication methods...
Yes, the Middle East guy who probably should have been invited.Yeah I saw that. Some guy in charge of Middle East commerce or something? That's plausible...shipping lanes and such being impacted.
I'll accept Waltz screwed up, obviously. I don't necessarily think he meant to add Goldberg on this chat...but the fact that he could make that mistake, and he (or someone from his team) either cloaked Goldberg with another name in a contacts list, or initials or something to hide his identity, is suspicious. Leads to the suspicion that either Waltz, or whoever developed this Signal Contacts list (if it was downloaded off some server as standard Dept contacts) leaks stuff to Goldberg all the time...
That said, the way Goldberg and Waltz have been basically DKing each other here...they're either good actors, or they really don't talk...
which leads back to, why is Goldberg in Waltz's, or the departments, potential Signal Contact List, and cloaked by another guy's name?
And, it sounds like "Signal" IS one of the recommended communication methods...
I lean towards #3, but not necessarily as an intentional "plant" or "cloak" for this case, just accidently stumbled upon.I know the conspiracy theories that you've been influenced by. Basically:
1. Staffer set up the meeting and intentionally included JG purposely to embarrass the administration (Trump, because it's always about getting Trump, right?). That's false we all know that Waltz set up the meeting himself.
2. Waltz is deep state (Never-Trumper) and he included JG purposely to embarrass the administration. Laughable on its face. Waltz is a Trumper and the embarrassment is all his.
3. Someone planted JG in Waltz' contacts and "cloaked" it so it wasn't obvious and Waltz would think it's the other JG. The other version of that one is that the person who planted the contact replaced the real JG with Goldberg's number. Both are laughable.
Give up on those ridiculous conspiracy theories. Waltz simply screwed up and Hegseth showed his rookie status and/or disregard for protecting classified information by taking information he had on SIPR and typing it into that Signal chat.
That’s false. Wasn’t Wong, it was Waltz. That was early false info about Wong. Waltz asked the people in the chat to provide their POCs to Wong for future meetings.I lean towards #3, but not necessarily as an intentional "plant" or "cloak" for this case, just accidently stumbled upon.
Waltz has said Goldberg was listed under another name in the Signal Contact list he had. Who did that, and why? Those contact lists can be pre-populated, and imported. Given Waltz and Goldberg are DKing each other here pretty convincingly (despite some photo op from a couple years ago), I don't think Waltz has been funneling JG info, but obviously someone had....maybe?
Looks like that Wong guy did setup the group...
Did Wong purposely, or by accident, add JG? And if by accident, why was the guy he was looking to add loaded into the contacts system incorrectly? Who created the mislabeled contact originally, and why? Was JG mislabled/cloaked for years in the contacts of whatever database was used?
Or, did Wong just add the wrong guy accidently from some master contact list via an auto-populate user-error?