I suddenly find myself wondering about the validity of information leaked to the press. Tracing "suddenly" back to its root, a few weeks ago I was fairly surprised when Don Rumsfeld stated that he wanted to imprison the person who leaked plans on invading Iraq. Why wouldn't General Rumsfeld feel this way about all military leaks?
Being a closeted cynic, I naturally reasoned that the military leaks information as an alternative to press releases, sometimes letting them be true, sometimes letting them be misinformation. And, unlike a press release, nobody has to account for what was said. Each leaked statement has an intrisinc "maybe" attached to its end without the unbecoming wishy-washyness.
But alternatives abound. There could be people, spies in a sense, who are paid for the information. Others may do so out of moral repugnance of what they've witnessed. Others may just want to befriend a journalist, with adolescent hopes of mutal back scratching. In each case, alterior motives could easily slide a leak into the territory of a blatant lie.
Or I could be completely wrong. So, does anyone know where leaks come from?
Eu"yes, suddenly = a few weeks... I live in Florida"gene