Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "SecDef shares US war Plan in Group chat"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This "reporter" also broke the story of "losers and suckers"[/quote] He has receipts, i.e., actual screen shots of the messages. He didn’t chase the story – – he was added erroneously to the chat. What don’t you understand about that?[/quote] He also could have done what I have done at work when I have received something I should not receive and that is to contact someone and say I believe I received this by accident. No he is thinking he will get a book or a million speaking engagements. I am sure also exaggerating as well. Sad.[/quote] Why don't you apply that reasoning to the actual natsec people on the chat?[/quote] I stand by what I said. We live in a world where this kind of mistake can happen and you learn from it. I have definitely received emails and sometimes emails at the bottom say if you received by accident you need to erase and contact sender. I have done this and can even recall a time someone said something I didn’t appreciate and it was an awkward call. The dumb thing is this reporter could have done this and built a reputation as a stand up person instead of being so partisan. [/quote] :D unreal - you complaining about someone "being so partisan" hahaha you know how this mistake wouldn't have happened? if they'd all been in one room together and not in a group text[/quote] Except...how do you put them all in one room together when it's a Saturday, some of them are in Washington while others are at Mar-a-Lago?[/quote] You are asking why the people who are urgently involved with launching missiles at people need to.. show up for work on attack days? Seriously? So the paper pusher at the Department of Forestry has to drive an hour to sit at an office desk to file receipts, but the military leaders running missile strikes can do it while drunk-dialing reporters while in line at Starbucks?[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics