Fionn,

Read what I wrote:

"...Andrew Gilligan, writing as a "Mail" reporter, uses the same interview material in such a way as to make it possible for anyone who knew Dr. Kelly, knew is work, or, who worked with him, to easily identify the source as Dr. Kelly."

The qualifications as to who would be capable of identifying Dr. Kelly in the above are clearly stated, which makes your latest opening remark -
"Teribus, you must be the only Mail reader who managed to suss Kelly's identity from that article." - rather ridiculous.

MGoH,

On the subject of reporters, both Goik and myself are speaking from past experience, I also believe that Ard Mhacha has voiced similar views again from personal experience and from noting the difference observing incidents and comparing his own observations to what is subsequently reported. You can only speak as you find - I know that for my own part, I would never willingly talk to any reporter in the future.