W I K I L E A K S

 AOG, Madrid

According to the Internet (guess whose name is buzzing and trending on most top 10 lists?), the arrest of Julian Assange, founder and director of Wikileaks, is imminent. 

 Apparently, he is wanted in Sweden in connection with rape and assault charges there. 

Now, I am no expert in undercover CIA ops, but it strikes me as odd that this guy would be guilty of said offenses. 

He may very well be, I don't know for a fact that he isn't, but isn't it 'convenient' that the US Government is these days trying to stop by all means a diplomatic fall-out with the rest of the planet courtesy of the salacious Australian? Link to the original story here.

As if that were not enough, even the website is under attack with some people calling Mr. Assange a "digital refugee": link to story here.

What amazes me most is the reactions of some politicians in the US who have declared that he should be put to death. Link to the story here. 

As we all know, when the American  Government (or any other foreign Government) does not want something to be known publicly, it does have a tendency to declare things like "National emergency", "Putting the lives of so and so at risk", "National interest concerns", etc etc. 

I'm sure that sometimes they are right, and sometimes they are not. 

But my question is this: is the American Government endowed with the divine power to decide who and what its electorate (and secondly the rest of the world) gets to know about its modus operandi? 

My take on it is that no, it just does not have that privilege. 

True, it certainly has the  resources to stop things from being known, but it, like the Papacy, cannot declare for itself the notion of Infallibility. Life just does not operate like that. Why? 

Because when faced with any Governmental pontification regarding the National interest, as defined by the US Government alone, a big fat "HELLO?" begins to take root on the mind of many people. 

Quickly followed by an "Excuse me?", and a no less irksome "Oh, really?" a la Saturday Night's Weekend Update.

If anything, the revelations of Wikileaks have shown that the US Government is probably the only Government who has an almost identical public and private discourse. 

Here in Spain, the revelations -as published by El País-, have only created a slight public outcry regarding the apparent Government intrusion into the Couso affair, whereby a Spanish cameraman was shot by US Forces in Irak, and the US has, it would seem, pressured Spain for this not to happen. 

Here's a link to an article talking about this very issue.

Of course, Spanish authorities have always denied obstructing the course of Justice in the country. But the leaks are there...

The documents in question only show what the US Diplomatic Corps is meant to do. 

The Diplomatic Corps of any country. If surprises have arisen, it is often to do with National politics and the behavior of certain individuals, politicians and influential society figures in their respective countries towards their electorate, to whom in most cases, it has lied to , or hidden the truth from, concerning their relations with the US. 

In my opinion, the fault does not lie with the American Government. It is free to do whatever it wants, and to ask, request, or coerce other Governments to do their bidding. The problem lies with the other party, the one the Americans talk to. 

 The problem is not that the US wants you to do something. Well, of course, it would. It is a global power after all. The problem is when you go along with it. 

Is Mr. Assange as bad as Osama Bin Laden? 

No. 

He has not plotted to kill Americans or anyone else. He has merely publicised a lot of documents the US Government would rather nobody saw for at least 30-50 years. Some call that a crime. 

A crime only the US Government has decided it is one. But of course, as with all else in life, their take on the situation is completely subjective. 

It cannot be a crime simply because they say so.

The Mayor who wants to sit in Congress

AOG, Madrid

These days, Madrid’s Mayor, señor Alberto Ruiz- Gallardón, has informed his party that he wants to become a member of the Spanish Congreso. His party, however, have ungraciously declined his offer and the whole country is talking about it.

Back in May, he mentioned much the same and was asked from high on up not to stir the waters. But last week, the story was that he was asked, and he just replied. It didn’t take long for his political adversaries to start showing their teeth. In short, his party, the Conservatives (Partido Popular), which for reasons unbeknown to be, call themselves “liberal”, have said he should remain as Mayor. Thanks, but no thanks.

This is all in the wake of next year’s general election. Some voices point to a victory of the left, and the ousting of the Opposition’s current leader Señor Rajoy. Others say the Right will win because of absenteeism on the part of the Spanish left.

I personally think the Socialists will win, but not with a majority in Congress. In any case, it may still be a few years before Señor Gallardón sits in Spain’s Congress. I think it may not happen until he leaves his party and joins the Socialists.

But will this happen? Probably not.

The secret of their salary

AOG, Madrid

April has been a funny month in Madrid. One day it is hot enough to inaugurate the “shorts” season, and the next it rains. Is this global warming?

Since January, I have been doing an internship at SER radio. Normally I started at three and left at ten PM. I have been re-allocated to the morning shift: eight to three PM. I find myself with a lot of free time in the afternoons. It has only been three days, but already I’m finding it a bit hard to adjust. It is difficult going to bed before midnight, though, surprisingly, it is relatively easy to wake up early. Go figure.

Last week, I watched a program called “Tengo una pregunta para usted” (I have a question for you), in which 100 regular people (referred to as citizens in the news), ask a politician a question.

The first guest was Spain’s Prime Minister, Señor Zapatero. His program did not go all that well. Some complained he had not had the opportunity to watch the show beforehand, unlike the leader of the opposition, Señor Rajoy. Out of the whole show, the only question which stuck out in people’s minds was the one where Señor Zapatero is asked the price of a cup of coffee. “It depends where you go but I would say normally about 80 cents” he replied. The media had a field day. It is true that in Spain’s parliament, subsidised coffee is 80 cents. But not in the real world.

However, Señor Rajoy also hade his Waterloo on television when he was asked his salary by a woman who lives on a monthly 300 Euros pension. His first reply was “Huh??” and then he declined to answer, though he assured her two things:

1- (humbly) he earned considerably more than her.

2- He was working hard to ensure that everyone’s pensions were improved.

Hard to believe from a man who has spent his entire time in the opposition fighting the Government at every opportunity, and then some.

Anyway, next day at work most people were siding with his actions. “The poor woman would have felt very uncomfortable if he had told her how much he made” was the reply I heard from most (though not all) people. Funny how it is quite customary in Spain to think of other people as being of less than average intelligence. I asked myself a few questions during that day- a day in which the press had another field day revealing the salaries of Spain’s top politicians, one after the other (even Señor Rajoy’s, who to this day continues to avoid saying how much he makes a month!).

I asked myself if most people think this woman would indeed be amazed to hear that Señor Rajoy makes over 9,000 Euros per month (he receives 2 salaries, one as a member of Spain’s Parliament and the other as leader of his party). I wondered why so many people were reluctant to talk about salaries ( I have since learned that in Spain- like in the UK-, salaries are private), and especially Señor Rajoy. After all, did he really believe for a second that the press would not reveal how much he made? After all, as a politician, his salary is public information.

I fully understand that many would not like to reveal their income, but a politician whose salary is voted publicly in Parliament? Odd to say the least.

Many have said that he was trying to, not so much save face, but rather please everyone. His intervention in the show had a higher audience than Señor Zapatero’s.

I read that, after 2 politicians, the show’s producers are looking for their next guest. Could be a painter, an actor, a musician….I think the public will vote. I think I should like to see who goes up for scrutiny next.