We need to stop using the word leak altogether. It’s propaganda.
It’s propaganda only if you share their associated meaning/connotation. I can see how it could be, but it isn’t for me.
“We have no evidence that Enemy Of The Month didn’t do it.”
typical propaganda supporting a given war, and we have had many.
but wait – there’s more: it’s not just a war against the purported victims of “the attack”. It is also a war against YOU, the American citizen who has been trusting the liars who do the work of the owners: lying to us, the voters, who give them the power to make decisions on our behalf. it’s not the gov’t who is the enemy – it’s the people who have have bought the government and tell it what to do.
More like a spurt, then.
This is a time-honoured misunderstanding that’s always good for a bit of journalistic hand-waving. All countries that I know of make a distinction between authorised and non-authorised disclosure of information. The former is a normal part of politics, the latter is a potential crime in any legal system. Whatever you think of this leak, or whatever you think of Snowden for that matter, the only question is whether those who spoke to the media were authorised to do so. If they were not, of course, then they may have committed a crime.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
