Leaking vs. Declassification
Last week Bush was criticized for intentionally
leaking certain top secret prewar documents to combat criticism of claims that
the administration basically lied us into a
war.
It turns out that it's mostly not
illegal for the president to leak lots of top secret information, like it is for
anybody else, because he can unilaterally decide to declassify
things.
Today, the language has changed
from "leak" to "declassify." Was there an official decision to declassify
documents? It doesn't seem so -- but when the president leaks, it's
"declassification." If anybody else leaks, it's "treason." Soon we'll find out
that Valerie Plame's identity had been
declassified.
We all know that there
weren't any WMDs in Iraq, and that there was, before we invaded, plenty of
evidence that this was so. We also know that there was no cooperation between
Iraq and al Quaeda, and there was plenty of evidence on that front, too. So now
the big question: Did our president intentionally lie to us to force us into
this exciting and profitable war, or is he just a woodenheaded idiot who sees
only what he wants to see, and ignores facts that don't agree with his
predeterminations?
Filed Mon - April 10, 2006, 08:57 PM in
Return to: |