Unnamed sources who lie should be OUTED!!!!

[spanone]

I believe that unnamed sources that lie should be held accountable.
By using 'unnamed sources' the White House is bringing down the press and the press is helping them by protecting (them) their sources. The free press is being used and abused.

It's a fine line between protecting sources and using sources as both political sides do. But when a source blatantly lies then can hide behind the 'unnamed sources' confidentiality it is wrong. Valerie Plame could have been targeted, 16 people died from Newsweek article (so they say). I truly believe that bushco is trying to KILL the press. Destroy it for their own purposes.

[BillZBubb]

1. If you are certain that they lied, then yes.

But suppose a source was just repeating what he had been told by a higher up? He might have no way to prove the assertion, but assumes it's true because the higher up had every reason for the information to be kept hidden. It might be true or that employee was being used as part of a higher up disinformation or media entrapment plan.

So, do you destroy a potential source of future good information based on his being decieved himself or simply unable to provide supporting proof? I don't think that is a good solution.

The press in this country is weak, simpleminded and naive. They don't realize they are being used by a fascist regime to spread disinformation and to entrap themselves. They are, many times, even willing participants. Judith Miller is probably the most prominent willing tool.

The press needs to get some courage and street smarts to stand up to the fascists. Will they? I doubt it.