Taking the -Leak with a grain of salt

[what? me? lie? I'm a diplomat.]
The latest Wiki-Leak documents might actually be an intentional leak, like the ones they do at nuclear plants, when nobody’s looking.

Other than some embarrassing personal comments about some rulers’ corruption and vanity (actually, they didn’t get the half of it, with Berlusconi). The only hot policy issues that were released were about the two big international political problems for the US, namely North Korea and Iran.
It’s not surprising that
the so-called ‘embarrassing’ leaks
actually help make the case for US intervention against North Korea
(abandoned by China)
and Iran
(abandoned by the Arab leaders).

In my world, if the end result of the leaks (other than the petty comments) is in the US’s favour, then they actually planted the leaks.
[Chomsky's has some doubts too]

You see it was meant to be found and spread as propaganda.
the best kind, because it appears genuine!

As you saw, the very next day, they attacked Iranian nuclear scientists. The world just said, ‘well, Iran deserves it.’

You did too, you idiot!

The Guardian, those half-wits, recognised both Clinton’s ‘shock’ about the leaks and her ‘righteousness’ regarding Iran as a problem.
They didn’t recognise that maybe these Iran/Korea leaks were the reason for the bunch of Leaks, and that the rest of the docs were just enticement, and a distraction for the hoi polloi.
If I were H Clinton, I would have used the anger of Iran’s Arab neighbours as a talking-point long ago. What’s so earth-shattering about saying ‘Iran’s neighbours hate Iran’. Just leave the details out, and you’re set. So, this is another reason why I don’t believe the Leaks. Let’s wait and see how many of these ‘Leaks’ are rejected as false by the ‘victims’. Or, how much pressure will be placed on the bought-and-paid-for Arab governments to not say ‘But, I didn’t say that’. Another article in the Guardian noted that Arab citizens don’t hate Iran, and instead hate the US much more. Maybe Arab governments are speaking about their own interests. Iran is just ruining their party by pushing for a political solution in their neighbourhood, which would lessen the need for the US to bribe Arab leaders, so they’d be slaughtered by their people.
I think we’ll never find out the truth about Iran, but it’s no surprise that the US has the country completely surrounded: they’re in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Other than the geopolitics and the natural resources, the third reason for this is to infiltrate, break the defences of Iran and take it over. Perhaps their spies will make the need for a long war unnecessary by weakening the country from the inside. Maybe the US will go bankrupt and leave, like the Romans did with Britain.

Let’s watch.

A writer, a former diplomat Jonathan Powell (Guardian), asked ‘whose interests are served’ by this massive leak. He says it squelches conversations between diplomats. I don’t think anything important was revealed in most of them, so he’s feigning upset to try to keep a lid on this ‘popular uprising’ which has, for a few seconds, levelled the playing field. Tomorrow, it’s back to normal. When he writes “on the whole it is surprising how few real surprises seem to be contained in quite such a huge amount of material” he actually argues against himself. When he says “it comes as no great surprise that Arab states fear Iran”, he is either a liar, disingenuous, or he wasn’t a bureaucrat. He should have known about this, and said to us ‘I knew about this issue before the leak’. If he didn’t, then it’s not true, and it was planted to make a case against Iran. Note: the guy was Tony Blair’s chief of staff for 13 years. If the Arab claims were true, he would have known about them. Mandarins live on salacious gossip. The Guardian doesn’t usually knowingly blind its readers, but it is often used by liars.

-Costick67 ~(8^P