Listening to the various reports, I am led to asking myself a few little questions:
a. who leaked the information;
b. what was the real motivation;
Hi Rob,
These were the first two questions that popped up in my mind as well.
Assuming this is not all fake, mail, and especially diplomatic mail, is supposed to be confidential. So what was the motivation to make it public.
Not that the observations voiced in those mails were new, afterall a couple of books have been released on what is happening in the West-wing of the White House, but they seem to confirm what others have observed as well, with a focus on how it affects the UK (which is a role of the Ambassador).
c. since it's nothing new, and already information obvious to the entire world, is there genuine, legitimate journalistic value to publishing the story;
Hard to say, maybe the anticipated reaction is worthwhile (to somebody) enough to throw some oil on the fire?
d. is this incident any different in concept to the Wiki one with pop hero Julian Assange;
Who's to say this isn't a reaction to Assange's pending extradition?
e. is the Mail running a campaign of its own to undermine the United Kingdom;
f. the fact that at 1.11 euros-to-the-pound at this very moment, as low as I can ever remember it, is anyone left who can think at all, who can still believe that the prospects of a Britain out of Europe strikes the money men as a clever step forward?
It boggles the mind. Mad cow's disease? Russians again, after killing some defected spies and being found out, trying to cripple Western Europe? The USA, trying to weaken potential trading partners? Many possible scenarios.
Time for some real investigative reporting into the leak (do diplomats use unencrypted e-mail?) and the money trail.
Cheers,
Bart
