Possibility #3: "Everybody lies about everything, all the time."

[Robb]

Oh, boy. :D

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Brooker+WikiLeaks+could+lies/4001071/story.html">Brooker: WikiLeaks could be lies

I wish I could remember the name of the 90-something British diplomat who dropped a telling remark during the swirl of events which followed September 11, 2001. But I'll never forget what he told less-worldly observers about international realpolitik.

"Just remember this," he offered, obviously freed from a lifetime of circumspection. "Everybody is lying about everything all the time."

(snip)

The secondary reinforced message is that a variety of Arab nations are revealed to be secretly agitating for the demise of Iran, with military force if necessary. Sure, anything could be true. But I am highly skeptical that Middle Eastern governments would look favourably on bombs, possibly nuclear, falling in their back yard.

For years now, factions in British, U.S. and Israeli governments have been lobbying to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. Yet, just as with Iraq, international watchdogs like the IAEA have repeatedly asserted that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program.....

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Brooker+WikiLeaks+could+lies/4001071/story.html#ixzz18emSwplB

Your morning monkey wrench, from the consummate skeptic. :hi:

[lunatica]

1. Wikileaks has simply shown the defective underbelly of politics

Hell, what they want us to see has shown us here that stupid is everywhere. We even vote for it. If what the public is supposed to see is that bad, imagine what it's like when they're pretty sure we won't see it. We thought of them as wisely and cleverly working things out in back room deals but with the best possible wishes for the country, but now they're double and triple dealing against the best interest of the country, much less its citizens.

Our Congress has become much more like High School with the bullies and the mean girls running the show.

[mmonk]

2. WikiLeaks isn't all that "controversial" from the US foreign policy

strategy point of view. Just embarrassing. Which all these calls for prosecution of Assange is probably a bigger play. An excuse for an even more dominant control of public information possibly by intimidation.

[geckosfeet]

3. No, they don't want a nuclear armed Iran next door - unless Iran decides it wants to share.

Iran could make a move to 'unite' middle eastern countries against the west. Middle eastern governments are weighing their options. I have to expect that their own self interest will continue to win out unless a charismatic middle eastern demagogue emerges to lead them. I do not see the current Iranian leadership in the role. Perhaps the US can convince middle eastern countries that the US can take out Iran's nuclear facilities and leave the middle eastern countries out of it. Then they still have their western devil AND a weakened Iran.

But, I still do not see the advantage of continued internal struggles in the middle east. It would seem a united middle east aligns with their own self interests.

[Robb]

4. Nailed it. nt