Great title the gift that keeps on giving. I cant help it I am so fascinated in how things will pan out with the whole wikileaks thing.

I feel as if I have to choose a side at times but which side? Really though I did not feel that our Prime Minister Julia Gillard has any idea of what she is saying. Most of her comments have appeared confused which is not good for a leader of a country. Why did she not just keep her personal opinions out of this? Rudd did and he was involved in the leaks. Howard even chimed in and stated that Assange needs support and did not commit a crime. Not that Howard matters though.I do not think Julia has been professional at all throughout this saga. I am interested to hear what Turnbull and Abbot have to say on the matter. Bronwyn Bishop's twitter account is a fake one,so all the harsh comments towards Wikileaks and assange are just someone who is trying to stir up drama. Wikileaks has developed a life of its own.

It does appear to be a Christmas drama, I am just waiting on the movie to come out in the next year or so. Like they have done with the Social Network movie.

*Ninety-four per cent of Greens and 73 per cent of Labor voters disapprove of her critical pronouncements on Assange and the legality of his behaviour.*

Perhaps what we need now, is for somebody to place a few thousand
internal Greens party emails and other documents on the web,
especially those marked "confidential".

We'd soon find out as to how many Greens party members are
hypocrites.

Sorry, but I tend to respect the fact that confidentiality matters
in all things. We have freedom of information laws, for when
there could be a true reason to get to the truth.

But then perhaps a large number of punters are voyeurs, obtaining
their thrills from others business. Perhaps they lead boring lives
and don't have enough real problems of their own. So the circus
continues.

"WikiLeaks may stand in a sweet spot for its story, but our love is not unconditional".

That may be well be right.

For me, it was a question of what was more important. Firstly, the legal misdeeds seemingly now caused by Britain, not Sweden. The treatment of Assange by the people involved in the UK deserves condemnation to say the least. There is a something wrong there and I hope that truth will out eventually. Influence of some type, I feel. In the UK as well? They can’t say that they don’t know the law.
After all, they gave us our laws in Australia from top to bottom but now seem to have forgotten basic human rights and fundamental law.

The second point, not just to me, was the selective content of the leaks. It is selective, mostly undated and that worries me. Such material should be date-stamped everywhere as it is the nature of the public servant to do this. These leaks are coming from public servants whatever they might like to call themselves;, CIA, cultural ambassadors, political advisers, military advisers, charge-d'affaires and on. Why no dates?

Graham said today “The irony for WikiLeaks is that while its operation continues as a bit of Christmas drama it will probably retain its favourable status, but should it cause any serious damage, then things will change.”

Well, according to Veteranstoday, http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/12/18/gordon-duff-gov-jesse-ventura-proves-911-cover-up-will-americas-government-fall/

‘Former Vice President Cheney has been accused of engineering the Pentagon attack. Rumsfeld cited as possible accomplice’.
It involves US$ 2.3 Trillion.

I think the above story is capable of upstaging anything that Wikileaks could offer with what is left of 2010.

rexw $ 2.3 trillion is a lot of money.For every US family of four in todays money,this is almost $ 50,000.This money was not part of the US Military budget since the annual budget was a third of this amount.

Where did this huge sum of money come from? The only institution capable of generating that amount of cash is the US Federal Reserve.

Wikileaks is very selective about what it releases and I fear it will be used to premote war with Iran.Wikileaks is not all it seems since the Murdoch press and others clear the leaks with the US State Dept before publication.Why does then the State Dept then feign outrage?Perhaps it needs and excuse to censor the net?

Organisations or individuals who have cables or emails published do
so at a cost but I can tell you from personal experience, little can be done officially unless one want's to charge the publisher of so called
confidential or private emails with a privacy infringement. Libel and
then damages possibly, even if the contents of the email are true.

In America, the libel laws are different from Australia and UK. And no charges have yet to be laid against the release of the climate gate emails allegedly sent between Michael Mann and the University of East Anglia.

Michael Mann has threatened to sue of course but has anything as yet
eventuated from the U Tube 'Hide the decline'? Nor the second one?

The yanks have been embarrassed. They have possibly lost some diplomatic credits that they need to hold on to, with all the nasties around the world wanting nothing better but discredit the West and particularly the US of A. But others are taking advantage
and some releases from Pakileaks are saying Israel was advised by the USA to attack them, and blame it on Iraq/Iran, now that is dangerous
lies. And nothing to do with Wikileaks at all.

Although I have great respect for America, they are under tremendous
financial decline, that means they can't afford now to be 'the policeman of the world' as Britain boasted to be, rightly or wrongly.
And Wikileaks have actually played into hands of the enemies of the US of A.

But I would rather have the US of A as a friend than an enemy. And don't think that the West and developed countries don't have enemies who would like to see our way of life deminished and destroyed forever

And Happy Christmas or Yule to all subscribers and particularly Graham.
I'm hoping that Julian will not be extradited to the US of A. I can't see how they can do this. But -from an email from the Swedish foreign ministry, it seems they have not charged him yet with any sexual offenses but I query then why they would bother appealing against his bail? Seems to me, as grasping at straws?

Anyway, goodnight and have a happy festive season, and I'll be back
next year, as family commitments and I have to organize my annual Christmas lunch for 11 people and running out of time right now to do it.