General Chat

You may have said things about your mother in law that you'd have preferred her not to hear, but what about this?

Admire Assange or revile him, involuntary transparency is coming our way!

What do you think?

Sue x

I think it's terrific.

And I'm looking forward to some super embarrassing stuff for our vile Prime Minister and his vile government here! Apparently there is some. ;)

Governments carp on about transparency - now they've got it!! LOL

More power to Assange's elbow :o)

Palin's response:

Hunt down Assange like a terrorist
She asks why the WikiLeaks chief is not hunted "with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders"

D'uh - because 'outers of truth' aren't threatening to bomb innocent people perhaps? Outing the truth to innocent tax payers/potential voters etc seems an act of humanity. 'They' want to know our every move - lets put the boot on the other foot!

Whatever ya do, don't put Sarah Palin in charge of deciding whom to hunt down and whom not to!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/24/sarah-palin-north-korea_n_788107.html

Sarah Palin took a break from her book tour Wednesday to call into Glenn Beck's radio show and weigh in on the recent shelling of a South Korean island by the North Korean military. Unfortunately, a verbal slip-up caused her to urge the U.S. to support an unexpected country.

"But obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies. We're bound to by treaty," Palin said in her analysis, before being corrected by the show's co-host. "Yeah," Palin continued. "And we're also bound by prudence to stand with our South Korean allies, yes."

To be fair, the mistake appeared to be a case of a verbal stumble -- not actual confusion about which country she was supposed to support.

_________________________________

How many verbal stumbles can one person make before they just can't get up again? ;)

The good old adage 'Put brain into gear before engaging mouth" seems to be something Mrs Palin has never heard!!


..........or maybe there's not much of a brain.........

Absolutely, no brain........


just pandering to the bottom line. Sadly, the bottom line (like any triangle) is the biggest - or should I say bigot-est?

I've lost any faith I could've had in Government . Before any of this lot was released, the US Govt said that it would cost innocent lives. Assange challenged them to name the lives in question. To my knowledge, no answer was forthcoming.

What WAS forthcoming was a load of embarrassment for the powers that be. Who obviously don't think that they really answer to their electorate - since their electorate apparently have to be kept in the dark - for reasons of "security" apparently.....

Watch, he'll be silenced when we're too busy dancing on ice to the X factor

Suex

Interpol are after him:
"An international arrest warrant is being issued for the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, after Swedish prosecutors were today granted permission to detain him for questioning in a rape case."

Assange claims he's innocent and has agreed to be interviewed, but prosecuters insist he returns to Sweden,

More here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/18/interpol-arrest-warrant-julian-assange-wikileaks-rape

What about today's revelations, then?

It's enlightening to know what they really think of us Britains

My advice - don't get sucked into this "arrest Assange" stuff

The truth may hurt, but bring it on. At least we know where we stand

Sue x

ALL Nations engage in intelligence gathering. To publish these leaked memos etc is totally irresponsible. The dates that some of them were sent is within the last year or so. The Countries discussed are going to have to respond publicly which will do nothing for diplomatic harmony and indeed, create or increase friction. Suspicion is one thing, confirmation of those suspicions are another.

However, I am also highly concerned at the sudden publicity given to the criminal charges made against Assange. That is not to say that there is a case to answer, but the timing is too great to be co-incidental.

I'm sure all countries engage in intelligence gathering. Just not against their so-called allies.

Why is publishing them irresponsible? What's irresponsible is that that these things were said in the first place.

It'd be so much better if people were just honest and said what they thought in public, instead of this "love you in public, despise you in private" stuff.

Remember, these are the governments that we pay for, that we elect and that are supposed to be accountable to us

Sue x

Love you in public, despise you in private -- just how I might feel about Assange, actually. ;)

Reminds one of numerous people.

I was a huge fan of Elliot Spitzer, then the attorney general of New York State, some years ago. He was going after the illegal operations of the anti-choice brigade, their "crisis pregnancy" centres where they practised medicine without a license, violated medical ethics and privacy laws, and were just all-round evil, of course. A brave crusader.

Word is he was also about to go after the banks very publicly, well before it all came crashing down two years ago. He was governor of New York by then. And his designs on the banks for their illegal activities were known.

And that's when the poop hit the fan for him: the high-priced hookers. He was done, finished, stick a fork in him. Now he has a show on CNN.

It's always just so coincidental, isn't it?

Spitzer lost 100% of my respect, as a human being. Pure pond scum. As a politician and public figure, however, he was still better than 99% of his counterparts. But stupid, gawd, how can anyone that smart be so stupid?

Funny how it does seem to happen, though, kinda like you predicted up above there, suzian, even if it differs in the specifics. They just go that step too far toward exposing it all, and oops, cut off at the knees by something that will turn the public against them in spite of everything.

Assange seems like he might be cut from the same Kennedy-Clinton-Spitzer mold. Something to do with a gigantic ego, evidently. But also, at least in those cases, a complete lack of morality, and in particular respect for women.

What is it about people ... mostly men? How can they be so apparently dedicated to good work, and such worthless human beings at the same time?

I'm not saying Assange dunnit -- far from it; the allegations seem rather flimsy at the moment. I'm just saying ... I wouldn't be all that surprised ...

I suppose what I'm trying to say, Janey, is that the world has changed irrevocably with the internet - as I said " involuntary transparency is coming our way"

And just as it should be.

Sue x

*Involuntary transparency is coming our way*

I'm not sure if the world is ready for that. Not all nations have a democracy, or mutual ethos of goodwill towards men/people. This surely stems from amongst other things, their cultural heritage.

I forsee more conflict, rather than harmony........depending on the national/cultural views.

What I see is that politicians - and their officers - will have to be a whole lot more careful about what they say in "private". In other words, a bit of honesty
.

On which note, I'm off to bed. And you can definitely quote me on that!

Sue x

Unfortunately, if policy makers have to be overly aware about what they say amongst 'friends', they would end up being so careful about how they express themselves, they won't be able to make a reasoned descision!

We would end up with infighting made public, and loss of confidence from the electorate..............regardless of your political allegance, and the Party in power.

We can at least agree with your last paragraph

nighty night.
xx

What Assange has exposed, apart from things governments wished he hadn't, is how weak the security is on the Internet.
I mean, if governments can't keep their e-mails secret, how does the general public fare with internet banking?
..and there's also the fact that if Assange can get this information - what can a determined terrorist get?

It also brings to light the favour Gary McKinnon (an Englishman with Aspergers) gave to the US years ago - when he intercepted the American military, apparently looking for a cover up of UFO activity . Instead of thanking him and tightening their security, they want to extradite and charge him.
Seems like their security is still as lax as ever.

Personally, I'd have a whole lot more faith in policy makers (of what ever political persuasion) if they just said what they think

Not too much to ask, eh, particularly as I was party to electing them -that'd be me who they represent

Sue x

I agree, let 'em say what they think -- and let us see it!

If the cretins in DC want to natter on at one another about the Canadian "inferiority complex", let us hear them, so we can respond appropriately. I.e.: by laughing out loud at their pomposity and self-importance and stupidity. (We don't mind people thinking we have an inferiority complex. ;) It has all sorts of benefits, apart from the belly laughs!)

The yanks apparently aren't pleased with the programming produced by the CBC, our public broadcaster here. That "Little Mosque on the Prairie" sitcom, it seems it's just full of "anti-American" stuff.

This is what they spend their time briefing their president on, I kids ya not.

But DET -- I don't understand what that not all nations having democracy has to do with it.

This is just the sort of thing that undemocratic regimes need -- having their deeds exposed. At the moment it's the US getting the brunt of the exposing, but this is just the beginning, one might think.

And no, cultural heritage really doesn't prompt people to embrace dictatorships ... dictatorships come about many ways, sometimes even "democratically" ... if we recall a certain Mr. Hitler ...