WikiLeaks and Media Cracks

I must say that the leaked diplomatic chatter between those in possession of lawfully unquestionable immunity to "lie abroad" - undoubtedly a truthful pun intended on my part - has generated huge interest amongst the common public thanks to the heat generated by the fourth estate.

Well, everyone has an inalienable right to get entertained cheaply.

While I wonder whether the trained spies of other nations are as equally capable of peddling prattle directed towards their roosting nests as the Americans, there is something that has caught my attention.

To wit, one American cable dated April 2006 says the following:

"Forensics is weak in India. Only two DNA labs service the entire country!’

"Terrorism investigations and court cases...rely upon confessions...obtained under duress...[vide]beatings, threats...[and] in some cases, [other forms of] torture".

The Yanks have got it right, at least this time.

During the "recent stone age" in terms of investigative techniques between 2OO2 and 2O1O, police enquiries always implicitly implied "extraction" of evidence through "nailing" [my euphemism for plier aided pulling out of finger ends] or the shamefully outdated administration of "truth serum" induced stupors termed "narco-tests" - both of which are inadmissible in all proper courts of law, except of course, in those of the kangaroo variety.

In terms of Geneva Conventions that prevail globally as per United Nation' directives in civilised states, to put it mildly, both the methods are patently illegal and barbaric.

I have pointed this out several times...and friends in the press have been very kind to quote me repeatedly.

While I would love to get to know the technique used by trained spies to remember conversations and reproduce them verbatim - as the wikileaks make out in diplomatic cables - because wired recordings of conversations - live or otherwise - without the knowledge of others persons concerned are illegal.

Else, editorialised reproductions of pool-side or fire-side chats between dignitaries during asides of official functions are mere gossip endeavours with perhaps a little more sanctity than discussions of the nearly unpredictable British weather.

Almost wet behind his ears in political terms, Rahul Gandhi is being pilloried for his ‘terror remarks’ by the opposition and a section of the media.

While digging out asinine comments by politicians who, in my opinion, lack both knowledge and truthfulness, is not my job, I am sure, many have said worse things.

Ill-informed political vultures consider themselves as the next best after Saint Thiruvalluvar, Jesus Christ or Albert Einstein while commenting on the verbal diarrhoea of others of their ilk.

But, in reality, such opinions are as valuable as burnt out matchsticks.

The mischievously malicious remarks being circulated by a chatter hawking section of the media, in my opinion, are more harmful than the damages inflicted by WikiLeaks per se.