That was, as I mentioned a mistake not intentional. If anything was intentional it was the so called journalist giving it publicity instead of doing his duty as a citizen to report it, delete it. Doing anything else is in my books treason.
As a company employee that's what you're supposed to do if copied wrongly on an email. In fact that's the usual disclaimer that appears in many email footers.
Your best argument is that journalists should look the other way when serious problems land in their lap?
> As a company employee that's what you're supposed to do if copied wrongly on an email. In fact that's the usual disclaimer that appears in many email footers.
This analogy would make sense if the messages went to an employee of the federal government, but they didn’t.
It’s mind-bending that someone could be so bought into a bad situation that they try to shift blame to outside parties like this.
What information did they reveal that was sensitive? The strikes had already taken place and so nothing they shared had any strategic value after the fact, other than to confirm the validity. To be clear it is utterly fucking insane (borderline "Russian bot" talking point) that you are entertaining this line of reasoning and I feel dirty for even engaging you.
As a company employee that's what you're supposed to do if copied wrongly on an email. In fact that's the usual disclaimer that appears in many email footers.