The crushing disappointment is palpable, isn't it? Especially in The Guardian. Last night's Newsnight reeked of it. 'Thousands' of leaked US documents, and not one of them remotely scandalous.
Last night's big lead - a few ill-tempered remarks made off the record by Prince Andrew at a brunch in Kyrgyzstan - has already dropped off the BBC News front page.
9 comments:
A friend was at the Prince Andrew thing and he reckoned the US representative exaggerated the whole thing. It was a coffee, not brunch, it didn't go on for two hours and Prince Andrew was doing a good cheerleading job but mostly just reflecting the mood in the room. He also thought he was very well informed indeed, and not just about the matters reported on.
I'm proud to have him as a trade envoy.
Totally agree with your point. I don't think anyone who has been paying attention to the areas in question has learnt anything new from this. But then that might mean the conspiracies are even more tight than we guessed, eh?
Hasn't really changed my opinion of our diplomats: good people sent overseas to lie for their hosts.
I agree Brit, not very exciting at all. I'm with Gaw - it's a conspiracy. Not a leak at all, but a clever stunt orchestrated by the Obama administration. Any of the texts I've read seem very frank and informative. To give the impression that it has so many talented, well-informed diplomats is a real PR-coup for the US.
Man, Andrew's gotten old while I wasn't paying any attention to him.
Once more the kiddywink faction of the press have new yellow ducks at bath time.
Question for the legal dept...will the Guardian and it's Yank despising chums be liable for prosecution, for receiving stolen goods?
They certainly seem to be just that, stolen, as in taken without consent.
will the Guardian and it's Yank despising chums be liable for prosecution, for receiving stolen goods?
I certainly hope not; that would be completely unAmerican.
Someone on the internets did have fun, though, pointing out that the NY Times refused to publish the climategate emails because they were stolen, but had no such qualms with wikileaks.
What's most surprised me about Wikileaks so far is that my world view has changed quite radically.
I never realised that *everybody* is sane enough to hate Iran's rulers and would be happy to see them bombed and that even China is sane enough to think that North Korea is run by a bunch of psychopaths and would be happy to see them bombed.
It's like George W. Bush was right all those years ago.
Someone on the internets did have fun, though, pointing out that the NY Times refused to publish the climategate emails ...
That someone would be James Taranto, always worth reading.
Apparently the most damning thing they have to say about us is we have an inferiority complex. Small wonder when other countries have leaders who are hound dogs with women or never go anywhere without their voluptuous Ukrainian nurses.
Post a Comment