3 ms·

I respectfully think at this point we should agree to disagree as we are going in circles. There was no indication that cellular networks were at risk and all

I respectfully think at this point we should agree to disagree as we are going in circles. There was no indication that cellular networks were at risk and all critical communication was being handled by capitol police over encrypted trunked two-way radios. The only thing members of congress should be doing is following directions from police. Senators being issued satellite phones would not have added an value to that incident. Those phones are useful on boats, islands and sometimes on trails but to jki275's point one needs a very clear view to the sky. I still think the phones are for something else entirely.

mikem170 3y ago
Yeah, we are kind of missing the bigger picture. The article said there was a new Senate Sergeant at Arms after January 6, he offered representatives the phones, "to ensure a redundant and secure means of communication during a disruptive event." So the phone may have been prompted by January 6, but were not necessarily intended for January 6 scenarios. For example, I assume these phones might come in handy if hackers or saboteurs took out or jammed the cell phone network while terrorists somewhere set off a tactical nuke, etc. It seems remiss not to have the infrastructure set up before hand. Senators using police radios may not be as secure as having communications prepared for them in advance, even if not perfect. Just in case. Is that what you meant when you said that you thought the phones were for something else?