The Wikileaks collection

[JMA]

what they say on the Assange matter???

I'd also press your quote into addressing the most of the media as well -- they tend to be over excitable...

On the Assange matter you are likely to get different views probably along anticipated party political lines.

As with the media. Quite sure one can by now anticipate which slant you will get from which TV station and from which newspaper.

Are you fooled by it?

[Ken White]

Are you fooled by it?

However, you often appear to be. Many of your posts here certainly are strong reactions -- or overreactions -- to first blush, incomplete media reports and the ridiculous statements of politicians...

As far as illegal is concerned lest just start with that horrible Clinton womans cable instructing all diplomatic staff to spy on UN staff and others.

I'd agree with your description but probably for quite different reasons. In any event, as Stan noted, all Embassy cables are 'signed' by the current SecState just as all our Bank Notes are 'signed' by the current SecTreas.

I keep trying to tell you we're different. Not better, maybe worse but in any event just different. You cannot judge the US by what other nations do or don't do.

I presume you do know that the UN Buildings in New York (as well as in Geneva and elsewhere) are espionage hubs for most nations? The question indicates you may not be. Should be obvious, though...

If the US would deal swiftly with that then maybe they would regain some credibility...

The US government is purposely designed to not be able to act swiftly and we really like it that way. Cuts down on the real overreaction even if it does stimulate a lot of the verbal sort. We are also quite unconcerned about our 'credibility' with others.

...and given the history of US extra legal activities it is fair to say that on the balance of probabilities we have the makings of another Watergate brewing within the Obama administration.

Could be, no big thing, we can do another 'Gate' or two or more and still be here. On the extra legal bit, stay tuned, more to come. From this Administration and the next -- and the next and the one after that until we are no more (and that is likely to be well past your Grandchildren's life times...).

[Rex Brynen]

Ken is quite right. Various countries spy on the UN. Various countries have spies at the UN. Pretty much everyone who works for the UN realizes that people spy on them. No revelations there.

Equally, diplomats collect information. They collect all sorts of information. They have been doing it since the beginning of diplomacy. It is what they are (among other things) paid to do.

Overall I'm struck by the way in which the "cablegate" leaks seem to generally confirm people's preexisting biases. Those inclined to see the US up to nefarious actions find evidence of those. Those who tend to see the US in a more positive light, on the contrary, find the leaks as comfortable confirmation that US diplomats pretty much do in private what Washington does in public, just more frankly.

[JMA]

The US government is purposely designed to not be able to act swiftly and we really like it that way. Cuts down on the real overreaction even if it does stimulate a lot of the verbal sort.

Well the downside of that is that there is the temptation for the less moral and ethical of your politicians and bureaucrats to, as a short cut, take the law into their own hands - which sadly seems to be the case already.

Lets sit back and watch, the show hasn't started yet only 1,344 out of 251,287 documents released.

So tell me Ken... is it going to get more boring or more and more embarrassing as this all unfolds?

[Ken White]

Well the downside of that is that there is the temptation for the less moral and ethical of your politicians and bureaucrats to, as a short cut, take the law into their own hands...

As you said of politicans...

- which sadly seems to be the case already.

Your proof of that contention is?

Lets sit back and watch, the show hasn't started yet only 1,344 out of 251,287 documents released.

Whatever you need to do for entertainment...

So tell me Ken... is it going to get more boring or more and more embarrassing as this all unfolds?

I say the former but am quite sure you will endeavor -- most likely fruitlessly -- to elevate some things to the latter in your convoluted fashion. You have fun, heah (that's a US Southern-ism with some nuance that's quite applicable...)

Your diversionary prowess is really slipping. That's on display with this exchange. Selil has asked twice "...what specifically, has the United States done in the Wikileaks/Assange debacle that was illegal?" and your quite non-specific but apparently best response is a rather limp:

I like that... the innocent until proved guilty routine.

Pity it does not apply to WikiLeaks and Assange.

Yet again you've been called out on bogus comments by others and have no real response, merely adding more innuendo as a feeble attempt to counter...

[Fuchs]

"Trying to know what yor neigbor think is the diplo basic course 101."

To collect DNA samples of foreign diplomats doesn't sound like diplo 101, though. It sounds more like preparations for framing and blackmailing.

[JMA]

"Trying to know what yor neigbor think is the diplo basic course 101."

To collect DNA samples of foreign diplomats doesn't sound like diplo 101, though. It sounds more like preparations for framing and blackmailing.

Gasp... you mean (some organ of) the USG may actually indulge in such nefarious activities such as (gasp) framing and blackmail?

[bourbon]

To collect DNA samples of foreign diplomats doesn't sound like diplo 101, though. It sounds more like preparations for framing and blackmailing.

Probably more for biogeographical ancestry purposes; identity plays a huge role in the world and is factor in an individual’s decision making. Ancestral information would be desired for any background dossier, and modern science allows for the identification of a person’s genetic percentages or tribal origin. All this, however, would require a DNA sample.

[JMA]

Probably more for biogeographical ancestry purposes; identity plays a huge role in the world and is factor in an individual’s decision making. Ancestral information would be desired for any background dossier, and modern science allows for the identification of a person’s genetic percentages or tribal origin. All this, however, would require a DNA sample.

That's interesting.

Now why don't those smart guys in the USG guild an open database containing this information on all US politicians, diplomats and bureaucrats?

Make this invasion of privacy more palatable by setting the example themselves.

In a democracy you get the government you deserve.

[M-A Lagrange]

"Trying to know what yor neigbor think is the diplo basic course 101."

To collect DNA samples of foreign diplomats doesn't sound like diplo 101, though. It sounds more like preparations for framing and blackmailing.

Blackmailing on what? Who sleeps with who? Who's a war criminal or other dirty stuff?
Everyone knows already, there are very few secrets in that organization.

The idea of tribal origin sound much crazier and less realistic. So it must be it.

[Fuchs]

Probably more for biogeographical ancestry purposes; identity plays a huge role in the world and is factor in an individual’s decision making. Ancestral information would be desired for any background dossier, and modern science allows for the identification of a person’s genetic percentages or tribal origin. All this, however, would require a DNA sample.

You need vast databases for comparison and the information is much easier to come by reading the official bio, doing some small talk and doing some phone calls.

Blackmailing on what? Who sleeps with who?

Illegitimate offspring, for example.