US diplomatic cables to be dropped by wikileaks; US doing pre-emptive damage control

[aurik]

The US *does* periodically say that Isr should stop with the settlements. It's just been shown repeatedly to be toothless, as they block any multilateral attempt to pressure Isr into dismantling them.

[kuronosan]

Yes, because we don't want to anger the Jews. They own most of the country.

[Kuya]

Yes, because we don't want to anger the Jews. They own most of the country.

This was sarcasm i hope.

[Mizango]

This was sarcasm i hope.

lol

[Elvis]

The US *does* periodically say that Isr should stop with the settlements. It's just been shown repeatedly to be toothless, as they block any multilateral attempt to pressure Isr into dismantling them.

The US mostly says that the expansion is 'harmful' to the peace process or that Israel should 'halt' the expansion. I haven't heard them say that the settlements are illegal under international law or that Israel is colonizing the West Bank and E. Jerusalem. These are truisms to the conflict but it carries tremendous political weight to articulate them out in the open. You risk being called an anti-Semite and being ostracized.

Language and rhetoric are very important in this conflict.

People don't know how to talk about the Establishment when it comes to American Jewry/Israel/Zionism. See: Rick Sanchez. They are a demographic like any other demographic. How often are 'Muslims' referred to in the same vein? In fact, they are spared no quarter. By both the so-called 'liberals' and the Right. Yet when you bring up Zionism in any context, you're crossing the line. And all these Israel lobby groups (StandwithUs/ADL/ZOAetc.) all want 'balance' when what that means is they want to counter the very few instances where we see another perspective.

Anyways, no US president has the balls to stand up to Israel. The Israel lobby is too powerful on this issue.

This is why BDS (Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions) is the only option at this point. Israel needs to be isolate in the same way as South Africa was during the Apartheid era.

[Ashmada]

Eh so the founder of Wikileaks is upset about leaks against him? lol...

John Humpries: [...]Serious allegations have been made against you.

Julian Assange: Most of what we know is, in fact, from the newspapers because somehow the Swedish prosecution has been, deliberately and illegally, selectively taking bits of its material and giving them to newspapers.

JH: Can't you see that it's a bit rum for you to be sitting there under these circumstances. You, Julian Assange, the Wikileaks man, who's become terribly famous, as has your organisation, for leaking material that other people didn't want to see published and here you are saying: "They've leaked something about me."

JA: Not at all. We are an organisation that does not promote leaking. We're an organisation that promotes justice…

JH: You hardly discourage it when you print a couple of million private cables.

JA: … that promotes justice through the mechanism of transparency and journalism.

JH: Based on leaks.

JA: When a powerful organisation that has internal policies, that is meant to be creating and following the law, i.e. Swedish prosecution's judicial system, abuses its own regulation and its own position to attack an individual, that is an abuse of power.

Taken from:


Assange says people affiliated with Wikileaks have been assassinated in it, btw.

[Shuvo]

John Humpries: [...]Serious allegations have been made against you.

Julian Assange: Most of what we know is, in fact, from the newspapers because somehow the Swedish prosecution has been, deliberately and illegally, selectively taking bits of its material and giving them to newspapers.

JH: Can't you see that it's a bit rum for you to be sitting there under these circumstances. You, Julian Assange, the Wikileaks man, who's become terribly famous, as has your organisation, for leaking material that other people didn't want to see published and here you are saying: "They've leaked something about me."

JA: Not at all. We are an organisation that does not promote leaking. We're an organisation that promotes justice…

JH: You hardly discourage it when you print a couple of million private cables.

JA: … that promotes justice through the mechanism of transparency and journalism.

JH: Based on leaks.

JA: When a powerful organisation that has internal policies, that is meant to be creating and following the law, i.e. Swedish prosecution's judicial system, abuses its own regulation and its own position to attack an individual, that is an abuse of power.

Taken from:


Assange says people affiliated with Wikileaks have been assassinated in it, btw.

Wow that interviewer was a prick, lost a tonne of respect for BBC after watching that. And as usual, Assange owned the interview, despite all the obvious attempts the interviewer made to rattle him.

I really wanna see the CIA file on Assange... would probably say something along the lines of "The more he speaks on TV the more support he gets". Too bad we probably won't see it for another 30-40 years when it's declassified =(

[Valisk]

I really wanna see the CIA file on Assange... would probably say something along the lines of "The more he speaks on TV the more support he gets". Too bad we probably won't see it for another 30-40 years when it's declassified =(

Unless Julian Assange leaks them first.

[Gryffes]

That interview was pretty low quality from a journalistic POV, the last BBC interview I saw ( female interviewer ) was awful as well.
I used to like John Humphreys as well, I guess he's going senile.

[Effluo]

Doubtful that cablegate had much to do with it, but just heard Hillary might be stepping down as Secretary of State. Hillary for 2012?

[Meian]

And as usual, Assange owned the interview, despite all the obvious attempts the interviewer made to rattle him.

Seen previous interviews where he'd get up and leave (3 times?) whenever the sex allegations were brought up in a rather pathetic manner. Could be because his lawyer doesn't want him to talk about it but the way he did it was just pitiful.

[Shuvo]

Seen previous interviews where he'd get up and leave (3 times?) whenever the sex allegations were brought up in a rather pathetic manner. Could be because his lawyer doesn't want him to talk about it but the way he did it was just pitiful.

Was it 3 times? Considering his personality, I think he just considered the very early questions beneath him and left. Not the best strategy I know, but when he actually stays to speak I've never seen him lose, even against Stephen Colbert (who is one of the best on TV when he drops the comedy act and gets serious).

[Meian]

Was it 3 times? Considering his personality, I think he just considered the very early questions beneath him and left. Not the best strategy I know, but when he actually stays to speak I've never seen him lose, even against Stephen Colbert (who is one of the best on TV when he drops the comedy act and gets serious).

Can't remember sadly was on the news a few days ago and they showed each time it happened, pretty sure it was 3 but /shrug

[Uzor]

Julian Assange has stated in a recent interview that he's a victim of revolutionary feminism in Sweden, and has stated that Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism.

As a Swede, I have to say I agree with him. It's what I've said the entire time about what he's accused of. A lot of people in Sweden seem to be unaware of what feminism is - gender equality. Sadly, a lot of people seem to believe it is rather something to make females have it better than males, and that women should dominate.It is something that has annoyed me greatly lately, with famous politicians claming that men should be forced to pay "male tax" for their beasty sexual behavior, and that males are nothing but simple animals. It is only further proven by the fact that both of the women that accused him of rape are radical feminists.

[Mizango]

Man that sounds a lot like affirmative action, but with 10% more bitches.

[Uzor]

It is. In Sweden we're almost forced to use affirmitive action in order to hire women for positions usually dominated by men. However, the same does not apply for the common female-dominated positions, such as children day care, as women are "better suited to take care of children", and you have to take the child in to consideration. Also, because "all men" that apply for these jobs are child molesters and rapists, and are subsequently bullied away from the position either by parents or colleagues. If a work place has 90% men and 10% women, odds are a woman will be hired rather than a man - even if the male has better references, skill and experience. The same holds true to some extent for education - even if there's 4000 men applying and 1000 women.

Affirmitive action also don't apply when the parents are getting a divorce and court is deciding who gets the children. In 90% of the cases, the woman gets custody, simply because she's a woman and is deemed "more fit" to take care of the children.

In my opinion you should get the job if you have the best qualification - not someone else because you already have 50 males but only 15 females and the government wants you to hire more females.

Spoiler: show

The above is a simplification - but that's pretty much how it works.

[Max™]

^which is why I thought the charges were absurd, and not (as some on other boards insisted) because Assange is some anarchist hero of mine.

Whether he is a rapist cuntbag or not doesn't change that wikileaks is a great idea.

[Bingbong]

Sweden: Avoiding sausage-fests at all costs.

[Uzor]

Sweden: Avoiding sausage-fests at all costs.

Well, yeah. God forbid a gay male get a job at a children daycare center, he'd molest them all!

Anyway, not really. Sweden has nothing against sausage fests as long as women get an equal share of it, or something... Just make sure to wear protection, or they'll sue you for rape. Don't you dare touch their catfests, though, or they'll claw you to hell for stealing their traditional roles. God forbid males actually try claim what's partially theirs - the children.

We've had so many cases in Sweden where women sue their employer over getting fired "because they were pregnant". A few years ago my father fired a woman who were lazy, sloppy and sat around talking to her friends all days. It ended with her sueing my father for discrimination because she was pregnant. The whole story ended up in the newspaper, too. It was so horrible, the poor woman was fired because she was pregnant, right?! God forbid she actually does something at work when she's one-month pregnant.

[Kuya]

It's like women in Sweden want to destroy men so they can lez all day.