pelican,
Another way of looking at the dilemma can be found in a previous interview of DER SPIEGEL with the former US ambassador to Germany, in particular:

“Their release could damage important cooperation among governments or in some countries endanger dissidents who have put their trust in the United States. I hope that the publications who are printing them, including DER SPIEGEL, will think carefully about what they are doing. Randomly releasing "secrets" does not necessarily serve the goal of international understanding.” (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731794,00.htm).

You probably know this, but still: You can subscribe for free to the spiegel.online newsletter containing timely English translations of the main articles appearing in the prestigious DER SPIEGEL weekly that you have to pay EUR 3.80 for if you want to read the German original.

I think the view of US seen from here (I live now in Germany) is more sophisticated, less black&white, love-or-hate, than what I was used to when seeing these things from Melbourne.

I suspect you are right George - about the cultural differences and how that affects perceptions of the US. The cablegate affair has revealed nothing that is not already known or suspected.

Even the recent revelations listing possible terrorist targets provide nothing surprising and highly organised terrorist groups (and foreign neighbours) would already be well apprised of potential targets of which destruction would severely limit a country's capability in a wartime situation.

I don't agree with Assange's alleged comment about President Obama being sacked or arrested for spying on the UN. Is this really surprising. Espionage has always been part of diplomatic missions and many 'trade' advisors located in foreign embassies are not there to tout local products to an export market. Why would the UN be spared any similar scrutiny? What is important is how this information is assessed, used, manipulated and possibly 'distorted' for policy decisions. WMDs are a good example.

There is also a difference between governments and a nation's people. Most people would value the friendship with Americans in general many of whom are critical of their own government's stance on many issues including Iraq and other international policy decisions over the years. Vietnam was a highly unpopular war with citizens and at least the US is a country where one can voice an alternative view (in the main). The fear is that the extremists who call for assassinations are allowed any real power, then tyranny will win.

That is the beauty of democracy and a country that values freedoms, but it has to be more than just on paper, but enacted in real life.

Poirot, "An open letter has been sent to Julia Gillard which has almost 200 prominent names attached, appealing for the protection of Julian Assange.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41914.html"

Good for them, thanks for the link.

The behaviour of PM Gillard and Attorney-General Robert McClelland has been irresponsible and reprehensible and both should resign. What about accountability? What is wrong with the lily-livered backbenchers on both sides of the house that they put up with this? Obviously they all value their ambition and perks more than the rights of the citizens they are supposed to be representing.

While I am at it, what about the toadying compliance of the Fourth Estate when the US administration snaps its fingers?

Dear runner,

I venture I know considerably more about both Jesus and Julian. In fact yourself and AGIR have demonstrated over a significant period on time on this forum that you both have very little idea about what Jesus really stood for.

In that light and as with AGIR I personally deem you no longer justified in calling yourself Christian but the best I can do for you is to call you a Paulian (really no pun intended).

From what I have observed of Julian Assange who I first encountered in the book Underground many years ago he is a principled defender of our right to know the truth and a scourge to the authorities whose hold on power depends on hiding that truth from us.

No one can deny he has put himself in harms way to do so and I for one am grateful.

csteele

'In that light and as with AGIR I personally deem you no longer justified in calling yourself Christian but the best I can do for you is to call you a Paulian (really no pun intended).'

Thank God I don't need your endorsement. In actual fact I would be quite a bit more worried if I did have it after reading many of your posts.

Dear thinker2,

My apologies for getting a little off topic.

I find it interesting Gillard is happy to cosy up to Wilkie who was a leaker/whistle blower but also he first removed the classified information himself.

If Assange who just publishes is to be prosecuted then why not he?