The requested discount?
Report:
The nature of the attack in Lebanon was not discussed at the cabinet meeting for fear of leaks.
(How do you know this information? From the leak!)
This is reminiscent of a circular argument/assumed premise. But not as a fallacy.
Is this true? Is this the definition? If so, is it correct to say that this is the desired assumption, not a logical fallacy? (This has a positive connotation)
What’s going on here? What assumption is being sought? It just turned out that they were right not to talk about secrets there because there are leaks from there.
This report is not just a statement of fact.
It is an argument against certain ministers for leaking.
The claim that there is such a leak (for not detailing plans) proves what is claimed in the body of the report against ministers who are leakers.
Isn't this the assumption of the requested?
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
