Great question. As Greenwald has pointed out, there's no obligation to protect confidential sources who lie to you. Either ABC continues to protect the source because they think that they are going to be valuable (and not lie to them) in the future, or because they're embarrassed at how easily ABC was used to help beat the drums for war against Iraq, or because they think if they ignore it, it will just go away.
Why is Glenn Greenwald the only person who seems to care that ABC is protecting government insiders who lied about anthrax attacks?
Dunno, probably the same reason he was the only person who seemed to care about Bush's illegal warrantless wiretapping of American citizens.
Slashdot Mirror
Why hasn't ABC outed the people who lied to them?
Great question. As Greenwald has pointed out, there's no obligation to protect confidential sources who lie to you. Either ABC continues to protect the source because they think that they are going to be valuable (and not lie to them) in the future, or because they're embarrassed at how easily ABC was used to help beat the drums for war against Iraq, or because they think if they ignore it, it will just go away.
Why is Glenn Greenwald the only person who seems to care that ABC is protecting government insiders who lied about anthrax attacks?
Dunno, probably the same reason he was the only person who seemed to care about Bush's illegal warrantless wiretapping of American citizens.
I want to go to the Creation Museum just to read the graffiti that will inevitably show up on the men's room walls.
"Flush twice, it's a long way to the curator's office," etc.
Flip you, mellonfarmer! (TV version)