₦airaland Forum

I nominate Idowuogbo

Kobojunkie:
Ok . Let's go with that for a minute or two. We demonized the last Cabal, accused them of some of the most heinous of crimes, and essentially blamed them for everything wrong with the nation then, then we turned around and did most everything wrong against our nation. Why does it still seem like the Cabal never really went away? lol

cos another set of cabal have been welcomed. tanimu et al have been forever banished [the Katsina caliphate]. . theophilus danjuma is a key member of jonny boy's cabal, the man who made 500 million dollars from the sale of an oil block in nigeria. profit

buzugee:
pete docherty still raisin hell in england ?? . yeah different set of laws for blacks and whites in america. dunno bout england though. england is a very humane country. most judges in england usually dont slam down on minorities.

hes actually done some time. 2 months here, a month here but his legal woes started close to 7 years ago ! and short of murder and rape hes done everythng else doable,. see here if u have NOTHING to do http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Doherty

nedra:
my girlfriend is weighty as a result of food and lack of exercise. so notin good to say for now.

need to encourage her son, perhaps work out with her if you have time and tell her it will be ok. good luck

buzugee:
he will be out in 2 absolute bollocks. the law does not apply to white women or most white men. paris hilton and lindsey lohan would have been locked up for 20 years now had they being minorities. consuming drugs while driving, drinking and driving, escaping the scene of an accident, numerous drug possession charges, breaking the conditions of their suspended sentence, are just a few of their infarctions

5 cant disagree with this. add pete doherty to the list[ex boyfriend of kate moss], who has gone to court more times than ive gone to the loo, but still no jail time. i appreciate the cases and the gravity are different but u cant help wondering if one law exists for blacks and another for whites even in 2010. having said that snipes is guilty and must pay the time.

there will always be a cabal in every government worldwide. the prayer is that their intentions are for the common good, rather than the evil ones we are used to. in the west i believe the term 'stakeholders' are used.

amala politics

RIP bawomolo

if only we told the truth in our country, be it war, death, assassination, espionage, illness. almost everything is shrouded in secrecy. a remembrance for the dead will heal wounds, and as someone rightly pointed, Biafrans are still Nigerians. when will we start to carry out lessons learnt activities? when?

i meant impatient. also meant gentlemen.

Sagamite:
Where did you get the impression that our students (that studied in Nigeria) perform very well in schools abroad?

It would help if you define what you term as "perform very well" when answering the question.

Things will get better. Nigeria is getting better despite people not realising it because they are impatient (which can be a positive thing though) or they think change takes place overnight.

No one would have thought back in the 90s that Nigeria can ever have the likes of Fashola, Donald Duke etc as governors. It would have been Alao-Akalas and Yerimas across all states before.

No one would have thought the likes of Ribadu would even have a reasonable shot at presidency. It would have been criminals like IBB and Atiku as favourites without question.

As we get better governance from people of the right calibre in most areas, things will improve. Maybe one day in the next 20 years, we will be like Malaysia _{Yes, we have sunk too badly that being at that level is a far and more realistic dream}.

there have been positive changes in Nigeria, at least when i visited, albeit 2 states [lagos and FCT]. being patient for success or general improvements is good, because the alternative is disastrous. it will come. i would rather die an optimist and criticise the negative things, than die a pessimist and still criticise the negative things. positive change is hard work, and the cliche that Rome wasnt built in a day couldnt be truer. it is true that some states have sterling leaders governing them, and even though we would like this to be holistic across board, we can applaud the few gentlement who have stamped their place in history. all we have to do is positively encourage those making a good difference and contribute in our own little way to improve our country, wherever we are.

Sagamite:
Without a shred of a doubt!

I was actually thinking about this a couple of days ago.

The likes of Bawomolo and chiogo demonstrate higher intellectual qualities when discussing issues (hardly any conjectures) and are good, willing listeners (when evidence is put forth that proofs they are wrong) than those of the similar age that grew up in Nigeria who would argue sillily, boisterously and turn to "I will die arguing" even when their arguments has been proven weak.

One of the reasons I liked Bawo and never ever used a bad word against him was his intellect and I observed when I proved him wrong in a debate, he took it well and learnt even though his conviction has not changed.

Sometimes I read posts of some Nigerians on NL and I almost tear my hair out thinking if any thought was put into it at all. Arguments are based on conjectures, unreliable rumours, emotions, poor analytical thinking and subjectivity. That is why I keep on harping that what universities or teacher's college produced these guys.

Very few impress me on NL and when I get to know these few, they are likely to be the ones doing very well in Nigeria career-wise.

in addition to your post responding to a writer's piece should be carried out without emotion. i believe majority of the people who post here write with emotions, possess bags of angst, which for some reason this is the place to drop it. learning, which should be the principle reason for sharing opinions on a thread is dourly lacking here. logical and reasonable thinking is also sadly lacking. we should use this excellent forum to learn new things, not just throw barbs on each other or force opinions down others throats. anytime i come here i learn from at least one person, and today that person is you. lets use nairaland as a learning tool, and when we are wrong lets think outside the box and accept change. after all even the best of the best people and organisations practise what is known as continuous improvement process or what the Japnese call Kaizen [which means change for the better or improvement].

Kobojunkie:
Same silly excuse people also Offered for Yar adua's handling of Nigeria. Do you folks even keep up at all? lol

same sheeeet different president. and everytime a new president comes it either he's God given [goodluck], hes a graduate [yar adua], hes born again [OBJ]. i wont even talk about the military as they came in with guns. when will we elect on merit??

na wa o.

kobo my dear where u dey? lets jaw jaw.

on topic- “Lagos is one of the one of the most important places. It is bigger and more important than Cape Town even though the latter is 100 times better in terms of livability.”

staggering stuff

DapoBear:
Nigerian banks charge high interest rates. And you are attributing this to corruption?! Rather than the fact that the country has high inflation, not-so-great mechanisms for recovering defaulted money, etc? Even if there was no corruption in Nigeria, interest rates would still be high.
Then pray tell, how did Lagos State get investors to commit hundreds of millions to build the Lekki road?
So somehow you believe that foreign investment REDUCES the number of jobs in Nigeria for graduates? I do not follow your argument. Foreign investment increases the amount of jobs, not decreases it.
You've thoroughly confused me.  Anyway, I suspect we agree, but somehow you are misunderstanding my position.

Long story short, I'm very much pro privatization, pro foreign investment. I encourage Nigerian private businesses/capitalists want to invest too; the more the merrier. Whoever wants to invest, let him bring his money and go ahead. Everyone is welcome to spend their capital building Nigeria.

agreed

Seun:
They don't have to nag but they don't know better because that's what their parents also did.

true

this is the kind of initiative Mr Seun suppose don bring up, at least to ease all the agbero cursing, fighting and arguing

abi how una check am. i will take booze, music and breeze over any argument, anyday

adexchamp:
Must they travel to Europe first before they can be a proffesional footballer and make good money

errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, YES

Ranoscky:
Exactly my sister, that was why they said 'TRUTH HURTS'.

Wisdom write up brov, enjoy!

seconded.

Kobojunkie:
No, I think you are confusing the one with the other. Freedom of information deals with access to information, especially that of Government. We currently do not have that. Sure, freedom of expression exists but there is no freedom of information. That bill has been back and forth in NASS for well over 10 years now, and it still does not seem it is going to be signed anytime soon.

tunmi shes right here. the FOIB has been doing the rounds for eons now, with the house of reps and those buffoons refusing to sign it as it will expose their evil practices, amongst other pertinent info all of us need to know. freedom of expression is distinct and separate from freedom of information.

*even

Kobojunkie:
Please go back and re-read what I have actually posted on this issue. I am not sure where you get that I am saying the one is the other.

you never know when you are beat down. even as referee don count 1 to 9 u go still dey argue. even as referee count 10, u go still argue say na u win fight, een though you've been knocked out

theres nothing wrong with accepting when wrong, and learning from others.on this issue you are wrong, and also been receiving a beat down

@ ROSSIKE and dapobear- you guys are on point. very good defence on your POV. eko o ni baje o. life is about how you look at it. some will always look at a glass half empty while others look at the same glass half full.

digressing a lil bit. back in 1994 a friends dad passed on the opportunity to own dirt cheap plots of land in lekki phase 1. his reasons were the usual [bar beach has problems so lekki too would]. he could have gotten them for hundreds of thousands then. the guy who practically begged him to invest bought a few, as as we are debating here already has his pension rapped up for the rest of his days. all he did was partition the land and sell it in bits. he currently has a portfolio of over 100 million [ in land alone]. not to talk of built property.

my friends dad, well he tells the sad story to anyone who cares to listen. so my people some will support eko atlantic, invest, someday reap the rewards. others will bash criticise, and be average. never taking risk, or by the time they are ready to invest the money they drop is astronomically high. magodo, same thing, in 1994 where was magodo?

The British government's deep fears that Libya would take "harsh and immediate" action against UK interests if the convicted Lockerbie bomber died in a Scottish prison are revealed in secret US embassy cables which show London's full support for the early release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, made explicit and "thuggish" threats to halt all trade deals with Britain and harass embassy staff if Megrahi remained in jail, the cables show. At the same time "a parade of treats" was offered by Libya to the Scottish devolved administration if it agreed to let him go, though the cable says they were turned down.

Britain at the time was "in an awkward position" and "between a rock and a hard place". The London charge d'affaires, Richard LeBaron, wrote in a cable to Washington in October 2008. "The Libyans have told HMG [Her Majesty's Government] flat out that there will be 'enormous repercussions' for the UK-Libya bilateral relationship if Megrahi's early release is not handled properly."

This intelligence, the cable said, was confided to the US embassy by two British officials: Ben Lyons, in charge of north Africa for Downing Street, and Rob Dixon, his counterpart at the Foreign Office.

Details of the Megrahi manoeuvrings come in the latest batch of leaked US dispatches which also detail:

• Deep distrust of Gaddafi among other African leaders; Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni, for example, feared a Libyan attack on his aircraft.

• Gaddafi's many eccentricities, including phobias about flying over water and staying above ground floor level.

• Saudi calls for an Arab-led force, backed by US air and sea power, to fight Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Megrahi cables may do much to explain why he was released in August 2009, supposedly because he was on the brink of death from prostate cancer. The decision incurred American wrath. More than a year on Megrahi is still alive, having been feted when he was escorted back to Tripoli by Gaddafi's son.

Public congressional hearings in September were told by a US prostate specialist that the official reason for the compassionate release – that Megrahi was within three months of death – was "ridiculous".

Anger with the British persists in some American circles, and UK ministers, Labour and Tory, have attempted to distance London from the release insisting it was purely a Scottish decision.

In January 2009, six months before Megrahi's release, the US ambassador to Libya, Gene Cretz, confirmed that "dire" reprisals had been threatened against the UK, and the British were braced to take "dramatic" steps for self-protection.

The Libyans "convinced UK embassy officers that the consequences if Megrahi were to die in prison … would be harsh, immediate and not easily remedied … specific threats have included the immediate cessation of all UK commercial activity in Libya, a diminishment or severing of political ties, and demonstrations against official UK facilities.

"[Libyan] officials also implied, but did not directly state, that the welfare of UK diplomats and citizens in Libya would be at risk."

The British ambassador in Tripoli, Vincent Fean, "expressed relief" when Megrahi was released, the US reported.

"He noted that a refusal of Megrahi's request could have had disastrous implications for British interests in Libya. 'They could have cut us off at the knees,' Fean bluntly said."

Cretz cabled that "the regime remains essentially thuggish in its approach". He warned the US itself should keep quiet: "If the [US government] publicly opposes al-Megrahi's release or is perceived to be complicit in a decision to keep al-Megrahi in prison, [America's Libyan diplomatic] post judges that US interests could face similar consequences."

In the light of the repeated, politically unacceptable demands for Megrahi's release from Gaddafi, the illness at first seemed providential for Britain.

The cables reveal how the Scottish Nationalist first minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, was edged into taking the political heat for releasing Megrahi, who had been diagnosed with cancer in September 2008. The message US diplomats received from Jack Straw, then justice minister, was that although Megrahi might survive up to five years, Labour's rivals in Scotland – Salmond and his SNP – were nonetheless inclined to release him.

A cable said: "Megrahi could have as long as five years to live but the average life expectancy of someone of his age with his condition is 18 months to two years. Doctors are not sure where he is on the time scale."The Libyans have not yet made a formal application for compassionate release … but HMG believes that the Scottish may be inclined to grant the request, when it comes, based on conversations between … Alex Salmond and UK justice secretary Jack Straw. Although the general practice is to grant compassionate release within three months of end of life, this is not codified in the law, so the release, if granted, could occur sooner."

The American diplomats were worried "Salmond and the SNP will look for opportunities to exploit the Megrahi case for their own advantage". But when the Scottish justice minister finally announced a "compassionate release" to a storm of protest the following August, the US ambassador said the Scots had got out of their depth.

"The Scottish government severely underestimated both US government and UK public reaction to its decision … Alex Salmond has privately indicated that he was 'shocked'."

Salmond had told the US consul in Edinburgh on 21 August that "he and his government had played straight with both the US and the UK government, but implied the UK had not … he said the Libyan government had offered the Scottish government a parade of treats, 'all of which were turned down'."

Three days later Robin Naysmith, who served as the SNP's representative in Washington, said Salmond was shocked by the US outcry. "Naysmith underscored that Scotland received 'nothing' for releasing Megrahi, while the UK government has gotten everything – a chance to stick it to Salmond's SNP and good relations with Libya."

SNP "comments were designed to blame the UK government for putting the Scots in a position to have to make a decision", according to civil servant Rob Dixon, talking to the Americans.

Washington's ambassador to London, Louis Susman, observed unsympathetically: "It is clear that the Scottish government underestimated the blowback it would receive in response to Megrahi's release and is now trying to paint itself as the victim."

US officials were suspicious, going so far as privately to accuse the wealthy Gulf state of Qatar of bribing the Scots by dangling the possibility of Middle East loans.

In October 2009 the US ambassador in Doha confronted Khalid al-Attiyah, a Qatari minister who had lobbied SNP politicians at the time.

The US had "strong objections" to what had happened, he said. "The ambassador raised strong US government concerns about Qatar's role in the release … Al-Attiyah explained the Arab League had asked Qatar, in its capacity as the current chair … to seek Megrahi's release on humanitarian grounds; second, Megrahi had sent a personal letter to [the Qatar ruler] pleading for humanitarian intervention.

"On the basis of these two factors … he was dispatched to Scotland to meet the minister of justice there.

"Ambassador pressed the issue of whether Qatar had offered any financial or trade incentives to induce al-Megrahi's release. Al-Attiyah strongly dismissed such speculation, saying: 'That is ridiculous. It was not necessary to offer money. It was all done within Scottish law. We offered no money, investment, or payment of any kind.'"

The other object of US suspicion was Tony Blair's 2007 visit to Libya as British prime minister. The trip was linked to oil and gas. The US embassy in Tripoli noted on 23 August 2009: "Rumours that Blair made linkages between Megrahi's release and trade deals have been longstanding among embassy contacts … the UK ambassador in Tripoli categorically denied the claims."In February this year UK diplomats told the US they were fretting about the prospect of an eventual hero's funeral for Megrahi. The new Foreign Office north Africa director, Philippa Saunders, "explained that fear over how Tripoli will handle Megrahi's eventual funeral remains a major concern".

She added: "The UK embassy is currently engaged in an effort to identify all possible UK 'levers of influence' with Tripoli. Unfortunately 'there aren't too many', although she mentioned Tony Blair and a private doctor who had a personal relationship with the Gaddafi family.

"There will be maybe a 48-hour window if we're lucky between Megrahi's eventual death and a funeral."

Salmond's spokesman said last night that the leaks were "diplomatic tittle tattle", but "vindicated" the Scottish government's position.

He said: "We were clearly the only ones playing with a straight bat and interested in applying the precepts of Scottish justice, which we continue to do and continue to uphold.

"The cables confirm what we always said – that our only interest was taking a justice decision based on Scots law without fear or favour, which was exactly what was done, and that our public position was identical to our private one.

"They also show that the former UK government were playing false on the issue, with a different public position from their private one - which must be deeply embarrassing for the Labour Party in Scotland - and that the US government was fully aware of the pressure being applied to the UK government."
sourced from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/07/wikileaks-gaddafi-britain-lockerbie-bomber

The British government's deep fears that Libya would take "harsh and immediate" action against UK interests if the convicted Lockerbie bomber died in a Scottish prison are revealed in secret US embassy cables which show London's full support for the early release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, made explicit and "thuggish" threats to halt all trade deals with Britain and harass embassy staff if Megrahi remained in jail, the cables show. At the same time "a parade of treats" was offered by Libya to the Scottish devolved administration if it agreed to let him go, though the cable says they were turned down.

Britain at the time was "in an awkward position" and "between a rock and a hard place". The London charge d'affaires, Richard LeBaron, wrote in a cable to Washington in October 2008. "The Libyans have told HMG [Her Majesty's Government] flat out that there will be 'enormous repercussions' for the UK-Libya bilateral relationship if Megrahi's early release is not handled properly."

This intelligence, the cable said, was confided to the US embassy by two British officials: Ben Lyons, in charge of north Africa for Downing Street, and Rob Dixon, his counterpart at the Foreign Office.

Details of the Megrahi manoeuvrings come in the latest batch of leaked US dispatches which also detail:

• Deep distrust of Gaddafi among other African leaders; Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni, for example, feared a Libyan attack on his aircraft.

• Gaddafi's many eccentricities, including phobias about flying over water and staying above ground floor level.

• Saudi calls for an Arab-led force, backed by US air and sea power, to fight Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Megrahi cables may do much to explain why he was released in August 2009, supposedly because he was on the brink of death from prostate cancer. The decision incurred American wrath. More than a year on Megrahi is still alive, having been feted when he was escorted back to Tripoli by Gaddafi's son.

Public congressional hearings in September were told by a US prostate specialist that the official reason for the compassionate release – that Megrahi was within three months of death – was "ridiculous".

Anger with the British persists in some American circles, and UK ministers, Labour and Tory, have attempted to distance London from the release insisting it was purely a Scottish decision.

In January 2009, six months before Megrahi's release, the US ambassador to Libya, Gene Cretz, confirmed that "dire" reprisals had been threatened against the UK, and the British were braced to take "dramatic" steps for self-protection.

The Libyans "convinced UK embassy officers that the consequences if Megrahi were to die in prison … would be harsh, immediate and not easily remedied … specific threats have included the immediate cessation of all UK commercial activity in Libya, a diminishment or severing of political ties, and demonstrations against official UK facilities.

"[Libyan] officials also implied, but did not directly state, that the welfare of UK diplomats and citizens in Libya would be at risk."

The British ambassador in Tripoli, Vincent Fean, "expressed relief" when Megrahi was released, the US reported.

"He noted that a refusal of Megrahi's request could have had disastrous implications for British interests in Libya. 'They could have cut us off at the knees,' Fean bluntly said."

Cretz cabled that "the regime remains essentially thuggish in its approach". He warned the US itself should keep quiet: "If the [US government] publicly opposes al-Megrahi's release or is perceived to be complicit in a decision to keep al-Megrahi in prison, [America's Libyan diplomatic] post judges that US interests could face similar consequences."

In the light of the repeated, politically unacceptable demands for Megrahi's release from Gaddafi, the illness at first seemed providential for Britain.

The cables reveal how the Scottish Nationalist first minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, was edged into taking the political heat for releasing Megrahi, who had been diagnosed with cancer in September 2008. The message US diplomats received from Jack Straw, then justice minister, was that although Megrahi might survive up to five years, Labour's rivals in Scotland – Salmond and his SNP – were nonetheless inclined to release him.

A cable said: "Megrahi could have as long as five years to live but the average life expectancy of someone of his age with his condition is 18 months to two years. Doctors are not sure where he is on the time scale."The Libyans have not yet made a formal application for compassionate release … but HMG believes that the Scottish may be inclined to grant the request, when it comes, based on conversations between … Alex Salmond and UK justice secretary Jack Straw. Although the general practice is to grant compassionate release within three months of end of life, this is not codified in the law, so the release, if granted, could occur sooner."

The American diplomats were worried "Salmond and the SNP will look for opportunities to exploit the Megrahi case for their own advantage". But when the Scottish justice minister finally announced a "compassionate release" to a storm of protest the following August, the US ambassador said the Scots had got out of their depth.

"The Scottish government severely underestimated both US government and UK public reaction to its decision … Alex Salmond has privately indicated that he was 'shocked'."

Salmond had told the US consul in Edinburgh on 21 August that "he and his government had played straight with both the US and the UK government, but implied the UK had not … he said the Libyan government had offered the Scottish government a parade of treats, 'all of which were turned down'."

Three days later Robin Naysmith, who served as the SNP's representative in Washington, said Salmond was shocked by the US outcry. "Naysmith underscored that Scotland received 'nothing' for releasing Megrahi, while the UK government has gotten everything – a chance to stick it to Salmond's SNP and good relations with Libya."

SNP "comments were designed to blame the UK government for putting the Scots in a position to have to make a decision", according to civil servant Rob Dixon, talking to the Americans.

Washington's ambassador to London, Louis Susman, observed unsympathetically: "It is clear that the Scottish government underestimated the blowback it would receive in response to Megrahi's release and is now trying to paint itself as the victim."

US officials were suspicious, going so far as privately to accuse the wealthy Gulf state of Qatar of bribing the Scots by dangling the possibility of Middle East loans.

In October 2009 the US ambassador in Doha confronted Khalid al-Attiyah, a Qatari minister who had lobbied SNP politicians at the time.

The US had "strong objections" to what had happened, he said. "The ambassador raised strong US government concerns about Qatar's role in the release … Al-Attiyah explained the Arab League had asked Qatar, in its capacity as the current chair … to seek Megrahi's release on humanitarian grounds; second, Megrahi had sent a personal letter to [the Qatar ruler] pleading for humanitarian intervention.

"On the basis of these two factors … he was dispatched to Scotland to meet the minister of justice there.

"Ambassador pressed the issue of whether Qatar had offered any financial or trade incentives to induce al-Megrahi's release. Al-Attiyah strongly dismissed such speculation, saying: 'That is ridiculous. It was not necessary to offer money. It was all done within Scottish law. We offered no money, investment, or payment of any kind.'"

The other object of US suspicion was Tony Blair's 2007 visit to Libya as British prime minister. The trip was linked to oil and gas. The US embassy in Tripoli noted on 23 August 2009: "Rumours that Blair made linkages between Megrahi's release and trade deals have been longstanding among embassy contacts … the UK ambassador in Tripoli categorically denied the claims."In February this year UK diplomats told the US they were fretting about the prospect of an eventual hero's funeral for Megrahi. The new Foreign Office north Africa director, Philippa Saunders, "explained that fear over how Tripoli will handle Megrahi's eventual funeral remains a major concern".

She added: "The UK embassy is currently engaged in an effort to identify all possible UK 'levers of influence' with Tripoli. Unfortunately 'there aren't too many', although she mentioned Tony Blair and a private doctor who had a personal relationship with the Gaddafi family.

"There will be maybe a 48-hour window if we're lucky between Megrahi's eventual death and a funeral."

Salmond's spokesman said last night that the leaks were "diplomatic tittle tattle", but "vindicated" the Scottish government's position.

He said: "We were clearly the only ones playing with a straight bat and interested in applying the precepts of Scottish justice, which we continue to do and continue to uphold.

"The cables confirm what we always said – that our only interest was taking a justice decision based on Scots law without fear or favour, which was exactly what was done, and that our public position was identical to our private one.

"They also show that the former UK government were playing false on the issue, with a different public position from their private one - which must be deeply embarrassing for the Labour Party in Scotland - and that the US government was fully aware of the pressure being applied to the UK government."
sourced from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/07/wikileaks-gaddafi-britain-lockerbie-bomber

tensor777:
Seems you are asking the right questions here . Anyway thus far there has been nothing shocking or revelationary about the documents for anyone that closely follows international political power play. Yes a little embarasmment heere and there but there was nothing new about the revelations.

there is more to come, at least over 200,000 more to come.

AjanleKoko:
The US and the other powers deserve the egg on their faces. They can lock down this dude, but there'll aways be other Assanges.
So much for the First Amendment and other hypocritical laws. Death Before Dishonour, when all that is at stake involves their dishonour and someone else's death. They are just about to make a martyr of the dude.

exactly. protegee will exist already to continue the work, thats how these things pan out. martyr, yep. i concur. what ever happened to international diplomatic relations, guess its theory

Evil Brain:
Terrorist: 1. A person whom the US government doesn't like.
2. A person whom right wing Americans e.g. Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin say is is a terrorist.

na so my broda. na so. if sarah palin is the future for US im sorry for that country. really sorry

kobojunkie may be fooled but the rest of us are clearly not fooled or amused at the least. sweden is US's poodle, the minute he gets extradicted his chances of getting a fair trial are between 0 and 1 %. have u guys forgotten top  US legislators were OPENLY asking for his execution live on american tv, a man who hasnt been tried yet in a court of law. yet some people support this same country ill breeding these types of people. ludicrous really. we are not fooled

[quote author=e-herbal link=topic=563913.msg7292494#msg7292494 date=1291778844]i guess osama bin laden is somewhere laughing his head off[/quote]yess boss the focus had shifted from him over 5 yrs ago anyway. this is d largest public leak since whenever, yo think over 250k hasnt been published yet. over the next few months expect more. cant wait for specific details about nigeria.cant wait

Pataki:
Reading some arguments here, I cannot help but laugh how some people reason.

When WikiLeaks released the video of US Military forces shooting innocent Iraqis from their airspace, where were you people to harangue and call for the arrest of Assange?

When WikiLeaks released the address details of all members of BNP in the UK, where were you all to call for the arrest of Julian?

Suddenly, he is releasing the top US secret documents, which are in direct violation to the UN Convention in which the US is a treaty of, he is tagged as a terrorist.
How ridiculous!

e be like say the definition of the word terrorist needs to be redefined. haba anything now na terrorist. o ga ju. we are all witnessing a live robert ludlum novel and its unfolding beyond our eyes. the rape charges are beyond ridiculous. truly absurd

yeswecan:
@ Kobojunkie your American diction is causing irritation over here . . your effort to be on the American side is so glaring and annoying

Just to echo Tsiya's point on UN and Clinton. It is just alright tor America's secretary of state to order the spying of UN top dogs - asked for credit card fingerprint and all that - without apologizing even now that we are talking facts . . it is about right for an autocratic ruler to call for the booming of a democratic state which will definitely lead to uncountable death, no one is saying anything about that they are rather bothered with trivial issues. The leak documents only revealed America for what they truly are- as opposed to placing lives in danger. They are hypocrites, a self interested empire that will stop at nothing to get what it wants. People already know this - the leak does nothing new

No life is at risk. It was the same WikiLeaks that posted a video of US soldier's atrocities in Iraq, they should be applauded - J. Assange is like the tank man to me.

leave kobo jare, maybe one day when she's old and grey she go see yankee for what it truly is, time will tell.