I'm trying to get..........

back to the format I was using a couple of years ago. That is, first some current event rant in which I slay dragons and set things right, then, a quote of the day and,finally, the Mexico As I See It segment.

Yesterday I wrote a screed about Wikileaks. I ran out of gas before getting to the rest so, today, I'm playing Ketchup.


QUOTE OF THE DAY: Stupidity has a knack of getting its way - Albert Camus


MEXICO AS I SEE IT:

Well, I can tell you my host country is plenty pissed with France. They, the French, want their girl, Florence Cassez, to do her sixty years jail time in France. They also don't believe she got a fair trial here on kidnapping and murder charges. Don't know where they got that idea.

The French also say the witnesses against their compatriot were probably offered a deal or, even, paid outright to testify. Supposedly Florence didn't know any thing about drugs, murder and kidnapping. Don't know where they got that idea.

The Mexicans say her testimony, that she was just staying at the ranch with her narco boyfriend and did not know all those others brought there were kidnap victims doomed to die, is bullshit. Can't imagine where they got that idea.

Mexico says Ms. Cassez got a fair trial and was proven guilty. She stays in Mexico because Mexico doesn't trust the French to carry out her sentence. Can't imagine where they got that idea.

There also happens to be a yearlong festival of the Mexican Culture going on in France. Sarkozy has criticized Calderon publicly for not honoring the French request and Calderon has accused Sarkozy of trying to bully him into compliance. Now the Mexicans have pulled out of the festival in France. So, France is left with a year of Mexican festivals with no Mexicans. While the Mexicans will forego an opportunity to polish their worldwide tarnished reputation.

So, we're in a grand snit, a real live Mexican standoff.

As the blacks say: First liar ain't got a chance.

And you thought Egypt was the only big news in the world.

Wikileaks, fair or foul?

I'm having a time of it trying to decide where I stand on Assange and his Wikileaks. On the one hand it seems fair to the people to find out what forked tongued, back stabbers they have voted for to protect their interests and to speak for them. Then, there's the U.S. government's outrage, calling everybody involved traitors who must be held accountable, maybe for life. Whether the government's side is justifiable is difficult to say since they have used the same old tried and true scare card they use whenever any heat comes their way, 'national security is at risk'.

I have a friend with whom I chat about politics and government in general. We are usually in agreement, at least basically, on current events. We both count ourselves more as Democrats than Republicans, consider the Bush/Cheney era as tarnishing America's reputation throughout the world and each of us are a bit discouraged by Obama's performance, my friend more than I. But, regarding Assange and Wikileaks my friend is adamant, unshakable in his opinion that Assange is a traitor and should be hunted down and tried as such. How that squares up with the fact that Assange is not an American citizen and therefore could not really be a traitor to a foreign country, I don't know. It's not important though because if the Feds want him bad enough you can bet he will fall under one or more of the 'terrorist' definitions.

It's one thing for us to discover that the hierarchy of public servants appear to be snide, smug and prejudicial, below average types. Most of us have suspected that for decades. But, if these leaks were to prove wrong doings, even crimes, have been committed by elected and appointed officials of, not only our government, but, governments around the world would that be a bad thing? Should we know what goes on or does the running of foreign and domestic affairs demand a level of secrecy that we the people cannot comprehend? And,if so, why can't American families conduct their personal affairs in secret when the IRS comes calling?

Perhaps the whole problem should be separated into its parts to determine what or who is at fault. Is the concept of Wikileaks essentially wrong and dangerous? Is Assange a villainous malcontent who exposes dirty laundry in all the wrong places? Is the soldier who mailed the stuff in the first place a 'whistle blower' or a traitor intent on destroying democracy? Weighty questions indeed.

Supposedly there is pending legislation to protect 'whistle blowers' from being fired, ostracized or worse, when they step forward to expose maleficence in their workplace. Perhaps Congress meant the new rules for whistle blowers who blow the whistle farther from home.

I'm too tired to go on, but if I could I would.

P.S. Dear friends, I will soon get back to complaining about Mexico. I'ts that there is just so much a person can do in an old man's day.