Slightly warranted. It seems like there is some time-pressure (prosecutors confiscating files after scanning) that means any time taken away from archiving all this could lead to some things being hidden from public view if the prosecution suddenly decides to confiscate all the files.

It wasn't phrased particularly nicely, but it's got some reasoning behind it I think?

The BBC reported on this last night - saying something along the lines of there being a 72 hour recovery window (not sure if that means from being thrown into the lake or from being surfaced).

Quite a good report actually, they showed the drying and scanning. Apparently some documents were burned before being thrown into the lake also. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26361455

It is harsh but I stand by it. Take a look at mashable.com and maybe you will understand my aggression.

Mashable reports a wide variety of stuff these days, like this current top story:

http://mashable.com/2014/02/27/russia-protect-ukraine-yanuko...

Of course! Anything that brings visitors who you can serve ads to is good content. Re-wording AP releases or stories from news websites does not take much time.

It's okay. News websites are easy to knock. Truth is we have spent months following this story and have a reporter on the ground in Kyiv. This is a sampling: http://mashable.com/category/ukraine-protests/. More here: https://www.google.com/search?q=ukraine+site%3Amashable.com&....

The article on Al Jazeera's imprisoned reporters was a really good read. I guess I should thank you for sending me there.

You mean the re-worded http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/02/al-jazeera-... ? You are welcome for me sending you to Al Jazeera.