WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

But the Americans also reserved judgment on Thomas Hammarberg – the council's human rights commissioner – for his criticism of US counter-terrorism policy. In a separate cable referring to comments made to the US by the Maltese ambassador, Hammarberg is accused of seeing himself as "God's gift to the world".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-european-human-rights-standards

Haven't you ever had conversations with someone in authority who spoke through a pasted on smile, but you knew the smile was false and the pressure was real?

I am afraid olga that I may need a book full of analysis to get a full grasp of it, and I'm not sure that wouldn't be just a mite too, too boring.....

The Council isn't being treated as an irritant, msolga.

US officials regard European human rights standards as an "irritant", secret cables show, and have strongly objected to the safeguards which could protect WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange from extradition.

In a confidential cable from the US embassy in Strasbourg, US consul general Vincent Carver criticised the Council of Europe, the most authoritative human-rights body for European countries, for its stance against extraditions to America, as well as secret renditions and prisons used to hold terrorist suspects.

He blamed the council for creating anti-US sentiment and hampering the US war on terror. "The Council of Europe (COE) likes to portray itself as a bastion of democracy, a promoter of human rights, and the last best hope for defending the rule of law in Europe – and beyond," Carver said. "[But] it is an organisation with an inferiority complex and, simultaneously, an overambitious agenda ..

Please tell me something that I don't know, MsO. The only bit of honesty that I have seen is from CJ and I have been pleasantly surprised by that. The rest, as you've noted, want to hedge this and nuance that.

No one has come out and told CJane that she is wrong. They can't do that. The facts are too clear, so they have to nibble away at the edges.

If this was about Russia or another "bad guy" country, the condemnations would be flying fast and furious, the "I/We told you so's" nonstop, the claims of inherent evil in those systems would be legion.

Quote:

Apparently the Guardian is convinced that any and all discussion with US officials involves those officials applying pressure on their counterparts.

But then we know all too well how those crafty and duplicitous American diplomats reveal their perfidy in one section of a secret cable but take great pains employing misleading euphemisms in another. Of course, when they wrote "review," they meant "pressure."

Perceptions matter, Finn. Haven't you ever had conversations with someone in authority who spoke through a pasted on smile, but you knew the smile was false and the pressure was real?

Yeah, a grasp of the leaks. Most of what I've heard is a lot of gutter snipping in the State Dpt leaks and some undercover resources exposed in the DOD leaks. No one is gonna read 250,000 + 150,000 + 10 times that still unreleased separate reports. Anyways, I'm not. I'll rely on analysis.

But the Guardian was not present during any conversations between Jagland and US officials and doesn't report that they were informed by anyone who was present that "pressure" was applied.

The cables themselves (although believed to be secret by their authors) did not mention or even hint at "pressure" being applied.

Quote:

But the Guardian was not present during any conversations between Jagland and US officials and doesn't report that they were informed by anyone who was present that "pressure" was applied.

The cables themselves (although believed to be secret by their authors) did not mention or even hint at "pressure" being applied.

Well of course they didn't, Finn!
As if they'd say they were "pressuring" anyone!
The leaked official cables speak for themselves.

have you forgotten that America has not signed on to the International War Crimes.