And let me make these insinuations less vague. The intelligence community orchestrated a a huge lie about Saddam Hussein having nuclear weapons to start a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. The intelligence community and the American government purposely and methodically hid connections of the 9/11 attacks with the Saudi scum and blamed it on the Taliban to start another pointless war. These are war criminals and fear-mongers so shame to anyone who takes them seriously.
I think we should be historically accurate here especially with things we've lived through. The intelligence community writ large did not push anything about Saddam having nuclear weapons or blaming the 9/11 attacks on the Taliban. The Bush Administration did not even go that far with Saddam, instead they did everything they could to create that impression without making the exact claim because for one, the intelligence community and their allies were already pushing back against such a claim and were trying to erode even the lower tier WMD claims.
The Taliban were not, to my knowledge, ever blamed directly for 9/11 by any American officials of importance. They were accused of cooperating with and protecting al Qaeda, specifically bin Laden himself. They were also essentially given an ultimatum they could not comply with simply for the show of diplomacy that went much like the Austrian-Hungarian equivalent to Serbia. This relationship wasn't untrue, and was known prior to 9/11, al Qaeda was helping prop up The Taliban as well. There wasn't any need to fake or lie about any of this, it was public knowledge. The Saudi "misdirection" is arguably far less egregious (especially considering they were at war with al Qaeda) than the longer term Pakistan one.
We can point much more easily to things regarding the intelligence communities willingness to lie for nonsensical institutional reasons by looking at James Clapper's repeated perjury to the U.S. Senate regarding something (Snowden's NSA leaks) that was already public knowledge and the entire reason he was being questioned. We don't need to invent elaborate conspiracies that run counter to historical facts when they do it willingly and openly.
Because a leak is something that happens when an individual or a small group of individuals in a large organization risk everything to reveal important info to the public that the specific organization wanted to keep hidden, not when these large organizations reveal info to their corporate media buddies that may or may not be true to push their own agendas.
A leak is simply when information gets out against the "leaked from" organization's desire. E3 leaks are still leaks, even though nobody has "risked everything to reveal important info to the public" and sometimes those are even planted stories, even by competitors. I remember Steve Race when he was at Sony infamously revealed Sega's upcoming price drop they were going to announce at E3 offhand during an interview to somebody the week before. I want to say he did the same thing about the Saturn's early US release, like the night before Sega's E3 press conference.
