Tuesday, 13 March 2018

Clare Rewcastle : "whose motives are the more admirable"..

I received this from Clare this morning: 

You have often said your memory is not so good, so you seem to forget what I did and did not promise. What I made clear is that I would put the public interest first. What you made clear is that you would put your pocket before the public interest. So, I suggest you think about whose motives are the more admirable. I have no problem if you want to go public about having passed me the information, as it will bring the story out further and put your source in the limelight to answer more questions, which I would not personally do. Your choice.
Certainly, if your source has more killer information, then this is the time to produce it. 
Kind regards

steadyaku47 comment :
Clare admits that I have passed the information to her in the above message to me a few hours ago. Her excuse for using the information and the documents she stole from me? Public her intention is admirable....not to get a huge scoop for herself and Sarawak Report but for "public interest"......while my interest is "to put your pocket before the public interest" and she wants to ask you all "whose motives are the more admirable" . I guess she has answered it herself by printing the information and documents she stole from me into the public domain....and she forgot to mention also "National Interest".... which she has time and time reminded me was the reason why she posted the stolen information and stolen documents in Sarawak Report. Huh!  
And then she says... "Certainly, if your source has more killer information, then this is the time to produce it"...WTF printing what you did before I got the full story and putting the whistleblower in harms way...YOU WEXPECT THEM TO GIVE ME MORE INFORMATION"? 
As for me putting my pockets first before the public interest....I will answer that in time to come. 
I rest my case.
to be continued.

No comments:

Post a Comment