There is a lot more to Julian Assange than meets the eye.His revelations are not really that outrageous and are skewed to a specific political agenda. http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/12/wikileaks-a-big-dangerous-us-government-con-job

That agenda in my view is to give the US Govt an excuse to censor the internet and to justify an invasion of Iran.The Dept of Homeland Security has already siezed and closed down 75 sites in the last week.

Before any of Assanges material is published,newspapers get the OK from the US State Dept.So why is a Govt body permitting embarrassing political material to be published and then feigns outrage at Wikileaks?

Congrats arjay.
This takes the cake all of your conspiracy theory's fail to challenge this one.
The henny penny award for 2010 is yours in the bag.
Wikileaks is an American conspiracy!ROFL.

Belly ,look at the evidence.Assange's latest claims have backed exactly what I've been saying about Iran.Australian intelligence sources according to Wikileaks,is fearful that Israel will invade Iran and bring on a nuclear war.Our own intelligence say that Iran is no threat.They are backing my assertions.

Belly,Kevin Bracken one of your own Union people knows more than you.Perhaps you need to consult him.

Arjay, I weary saying this unions there is a difference.
Solidarity is a once proud name, no longer has meaning.
Under the flag union some real nuts, criminals, thugs, mugs and worse exist.
And proudly,some mine in fact, are continuing to grow and bring a better work place.
Your conspiracy's, in the strangest way, hide the conspiracy's we are victim to.
Good morning to HFR.

Belly ,you have failed to answer any of my assertions.Why did the US State Dept approve Assange's leaks then become outraged by them? Newspapers before publishing get the OK from the State Dept. You try to discredit by ad hominen yet fail to address the reality.

Did you bother to read the article?

http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_16829555?nclick_check=1
“According to Judge T.S. Ellis in the AIPAC case, this means that the prosecution must prove, among other things, that a defendant knew that the information he was disclosing was potentially damaging to national security and that he was violating the law.“

“In that second letter, Assange stated that the department's refusal to discuss redactions "leads me to conclude that the supposed risks are entirely fanciful." He then indicated that WikiLeaks was undertaking redactions on its own. “

http://www.techeye.net/internet/did-wikileaks-cut-a-deal-with-israel
"There are other weak points to the idea. Wikileaks has been friendly with the pro-Hezbollah Lebanese al-Akhbar newspaper, which if Assange was pro-Israeli would not happen.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/sexual-slurs-stockintrade-when-the-powerful-hit-back-20101213-18vee.html
“In a rich historical irony, Ellsberg introduced Kissinger into the world of classified information with this warning: ''You're about to receive a whole slew of special clearances … First, you'll be exhilarated. But second, almost as fast, you will feel like a fool for having studied, talked and analysed decisions … without having known of the existence of all this information. Then, after you've started reading … what amounts to whole libraries of hidden information … you will forget there ever was a time when you didn't have it, and you'll be aware only of the fact that you have it now and most others don't … and that all those other people are fools. The danger is, you'll become something like a moron."”