25/08/2012 Dateline London

I will be back with a news bulletin Welcome to Dateline London. Strange

use about rate from both sides of the Atlantic. Greece asks for more

time again, and if you edited a newspaper which you published

photographs of naked Prince Harry? My guests are Mina Al-Oraibi of

Asharq Alawsat, Maria Margaronis of The Nation, Anthony Faiola of the

Washington Post and Ned Temko of the Observer.

Good to see you. Supporters of WikiLeaks founder

Julian Assange, who is wanted in Sweden connected with the rate

investigation claimed there is a conspiracy to send him to the

United States, but they may not have helped their cause when the MP

George Galloway described what happened nearly as bad sexual lead

the -- bad sexual etiquette. In the United States Todd Akin who is the

Republican candidate for the US Senate in Missouri said women who

were the victims of what he called legitimate rate could not get

pregnant. Were you shocked by some of these comments? Both comments.

It has happened in one week, and two representatives of the people.

George Galloway is an MP in the UK, and both of them came out with

these opinions, or only clarifying that they misspoke or were

misunderstood because there was uproar. The reality is that women

are used for political gains, and the fact that Galloway was using

the issue of rate to defend Julian Assange because he believes in his

views regarding the US and other issues, nothing to do with women,

it is the victims who are the women who are being ignored. It was the

same thing with Todd Akin. He is running a Senate race, and victims

of rate are being misunderstood. open ups -- it opens up the culture

context, because going back to the 60s, going back to the marriage and

homosexuality has become a really hot issue. Yes, Todd Akin handed

the Democrats' new ammunition with the view that the republics were

The Republicans are banking on the fact that there are some women out

there who are religiously minded enough to back them in the United

States, and there is no question that there are some of them out

there, but at the same time we have to wonder whether or not

independent voters that they have to cultivate are going to buy into

the democratic argument that you have a bunch of guys out there with

medieval thinking about women's bodies. Because Mitt Romney was so-

called pro choice and is now so- called pro-life and is seen as a

flip-flop to some Conservatives has become an issue in the party itself.

Absolutely. It is one reason that you seek him there because they

want to lend the idea of fiscal conservatism. We also see Ryan's

position on abortion, he would support a constitutional amendment

against abortion with exception to victims of rate. -- rate For stop

There is a real difference between Todd Akin and Ryan. It is important

to emphasise that Rhine shares his views on rate which are used on

abortion. They are very different from George Galloway, who is an art.

-- a nut. He is a respected member of parliament! But when you see him

on big brother and a cat suit, you cannot take him seriously! It was

the most bizarre thing I have seen, when he was talking about insertion.

There are views that are extremely destructive to women, and pushing

his agenda more and more. At the last presidential election, gay

marriage was the issue that was used to rally the troops, and it

seems to be abortionist in. marriage is also an issue in this

election. Are you surprised by these comments and how they have

been represented? I am surprised in that they are a wake-up call, a

reminder that what we thought was steady and significant progress in

the way we define women's issues, rate, sexual assault, over a period

of decades now, is not something we take for granted. -- rate. These

are medieval comments, the notion that toddy can raise this bizarre

notion of legitimate rate, but also this consent that woman's body shut

down and you cannot get pregnant if You are right to raise the

political issue of this kind of social issue, and one of the

interesting things is that it is a risk for the Republicans because

national opinion poles show that on some of the social issues there

really is a kind of culture war. When you ask people, are you in

favour of a blanket ban on abortion, a sizable majority of Americans say

basically no, they are not on the side of Todd Akin or Paul Ryan.

What do you make on the political issue on this side of the Atlantic,

the Julian Assange case? He faces a real threat of extradition to the

United States, and we have seen over the past decade American

behaviour in Iraq that contributes to the idea that he is just one

dirty trick away from ending up in the equivalent of Guantanamo Bay.

That argument has to be taken seed Esler. I think so. It is quite

clear -- taken seriously. As we were saying earlier, he is a public

figure, and biscuits all the attention. If the US could shut

down WikiLeaks, they could, and they have not tried to hide that.

The fact that Bradley Manning is still somewhere and no one knows

what is happening to him should be addressed. I think if he was going

to get extradited it would probably happen from the UK more than it

would happen from Sweden. It is interesting that he feels he would

be safer, even though he is in the wicked -- Ecuadorian embassy, but

before that he fled Sweden. One us and -- 1 Julian Assange reporter

says that Sweden would do the same, which is effectively what they are

arguing. We are clear on where we stand with regards to expedition,

and this case has nothing to do with WikiLeaks, so I think the

Swedish legal system has shown that it is quite strong and that it

would be about this case. However, once he went back and faced court,

what would happen afterwards if he was put in prison? How is this

playing in the United States? It is pretty obvious that the

administration might be quite quiet at the moment. But they would like

to be Julian Assange on trial, wouldn't they? At the moment we do

not know what the US intentions are. There are allegations that there

was a sealed indictments somewhere that has not been released. It

would be much easier for Julian Assange to be extradited from the

UK than Sweden. There are exceptions in Swedish law, made for

asylum seekers that are seeking to evade political persecution that do

not exist in the same context in the UK. Julian Assange may not have

helped himself necessarily. This is the same government that has been

persecuting the media since they came into power. To that extent, I

think it is hard to see him as too much of a sympathetic figure.

any of this damage WikiLeaks? When you have one of the figures

involved in it, facing an investigation like this. Does it

damage WikiLeaks? I do not think so. It may be better off without Julian

Assange. It has been doing his work quietly without Julian Assange's

presents causing more publicity. I do also have some sympathy with him

on the extradition issue. It may be politically more difficult for

Britain to extradite him and Sweden. The sense of Britain having to be

the poodle of the US makes it more difficult to do that. It would be

excruciatingly difficult for either country to extradite him. I think

one of the problems is that we forget that he has gone through not

one but several processes of Appeal in this country. He chose to come

to the United Kingdom, and that is what extradition has four. There

are two very separate issues. -- that is what it tradition is for.

There is also legislation that makes it impossible for either

Sweden or Britain to extradite him if it is on an offence that carries

the death penalty. It is not a black and white issue. Let us move

on. Greece wants more time to get his finances in order, because many

economists believe the country cannot do what is demanded of it in

the timescale imposed. Germany has resolute that Greece has to do as

First of all, it must be miserable, even in this wonderful summer

increase. It has been a rough summer. There has been a lot less

internal tourism. Things get worse and worse and worse. The prospect

of further cuts, further pension cuts, further pay cuts is

devastating to people. I do not know anybody any more increase who

is not in some kind of difficulty. He their run a very slippery slope

downwards. I do not think anything is going to happen next very

quickly, because I think this meeting was a lot of window

dressing. He had to go and say he was negotiating agreement because

that was a platform on which he was elected. He will have to push

through these cuts and Parliament. 11 billion euros of cuts, with

opposition and a lot of unrest on the streets probably. Angela Merkel

has to walk the tightrope between trying to serve -- save the

eurozone. Her coalition partners are flatly opposed to giving any

more help to Greece. This has become a political test in Germany

and Greece has to stand for Germany's role in the Eurozone.

This is not about grace any more, it is about Spain and Italy and

tried to come up with some way to save the leaky ship. This meeting

was about this morning, it was about creating that and this

postponement has consequences for the Greeks. I have talked to lots

of people and a very Economist has a different view, but there is one

view that this is an essentially a political problem. Economic

solution is obvious, because Greece cannot do this, so crease were

going to default but stayed within the euro. Angela Merkel can say to

stuff, but we have to face the inevitable and the Greeks will end

up staying within the euro, and given softer terms. Does that seem

like a possible way forward, which would mean we would not have to

talk about the separate three months? It seems that one possible

way forward and sadly not the best one, but one of the more likely

once. One of the interesting things about her conversations on this

programme about it is the realities have not changed. We're just in a

new game of chicken. The factors once the euro got into trouble, at

some stage in order to reassure the market, Germany and the European

Central Bank could have said at any stage, we're going to take a huge

amount of money. The eurozone is a eurozone and we will guarantee the

debt. It is politics that made it impossible for them to do that, but

one of the problems is, by delaying it, and you're right we will just

go to another crisis, it gets more expensive and does not change the

fact that is only one way it of this. That is, unless Greece and

possibly Italy, Spain and Portugal leave the eurozone, at some stage,

credibly with the markets, the European Central Bank and the

Germans have to say, we stand behind the single currency. If they

do, it works, if they don't, it doesn't. That's was something that

came out of the meeting, Angela Merkel saying, we want Croesus in

the eurozone. OK, you keep talking the talk, and walk the walk. After

the elections in Greece, there was some time later out that the

problems of the economy did not go away. Looked at from the United

States, Barack Obama will probably have to wait until the middle of

November or even longer. Add the US looks at the problems of Europe and

is somewhat mystified by the bureaucracy involved in trying to

solve this problem. The fact we're here time and time again. The truth

is, I think there is a lot of under estimation in the USA of just how

truthful Angela Merkel is being when she says she would like used

to say in the eurozone. The euro at its core is as much a political

scene as it is an economic union. It is about bringing together these

countries that have a history of conflict, uniting them and bringing

them forward. The Germans in particular have an interest in

making sure that holds together. Of course there is always a cost of

you have to weigh those costs, that is what Germany is doing, but you

cannot underestimate their desire to United 1. The one thing that has

been consistent in the last three years is what Angela Merkel has

said. She has not shifted on anything. Given our readers around

the world change of use, it is refreshing.

Prince Harry was photographed naked in an American hotel suite and the

pictures are on the internet for anyone who cares to look. So is it

a bit daft for some newspapers NOT to publish them? Is it a privacy

issue and they should not be published? And a third possibility

- who cares? Some people just do not care about this. Other people

are very amused. The newspapers have been engaged in a debate about

publishing are not publishing. And the Observer? I am not in that role

at the Observer. But I did edit a British newspaper, the Jewish

Chronicle for years. I would have published them, perhaps with a

circumcision, but there are two separate issues here. One a

personal level, I take option three, who cares? I think it raises a

press issue. Even before were Lord Justice love us and started looking

into the British press, there was an oddly supine sense that British

newspapers have to behave themselves. We have the Press

Complaints Commission and self regulation. I think that is

disturbing. So on the principle, although we do not think there is

any public interest in this a tall, I am quite happy that the Sun

newspaper did what they did. But it really... Another tabloid published

our lookalike, almost the same thing, but said they would not

publish the pictures. I think it is about the reason you you do not

publish. When bad reason for not publishing is because you're scared

of what Leveson or the Press Complaints Commission or a

Buckingham Palace thing. I I think the issue we're talking about today

is hypocrisy. This meeting between Merkel and Samaras. It is not what

they said it was about. The tabloids are saying it is about

press freedom, but we all know it is not. But it is all about what we

pay the Royal Family for. This has amused us. Whether you publish them

in the newspapers are not is a red herring, because there will lighten

the internet anyway, so what is it about and that is different? Cat

litter the next day. There are different legal things, but in this

case, Buckingham Palace just said, police are not publish these. Some

people said it was a privacy issue because it took place privately.

Harry did not choose to be born into the family he was born into,

but when you are supported by the taxpayer to the tune of several

million a year, maybe you have to think about it. Maybe what happens

in Las Vegas doesn't stay in Las Vegas any more. It is like the

newspapers meet playgirl magazine. I think looking at this from an

American point of view, I cannot see how this is not a public figure

in a story that needs to be covered. The question is what you do with

the photograph? Publishing the photo, you could argue they were

doing it for money, but at the same time, what happens next time, when

there is another story? Would you draw the line at publishing are not

publishing? In this post Leveson world and the UK, the media is

still trying to at work out where the signs are. Perhaps you need to

be more careful enjoying them to close. I suppose the thing is that

even though people argue that this is a private place, it happened as

a party with a lot of people have mobile phones and you take your

clothes off and you're a member of the Royal Family with strangers.

There are so many different angles to the story. I am against

publishing the full to us and the press. Yes, it is fun and internet

and those who want to see it will go and see it. People have been

discussing the role of the Royal Family, especially because he has

been representing the Queen this year. That puts a lot of strain on

Harry to grow up, which everybody in the 20s has to face up to. There

is an interest in that kind of story, but I do think the issue of

privacy is one we will always go back and question and how much do

you publish? I still think there is no need real need to publish it,

and it is not because you were toeing the line and worried about

annoying the palace, but I just think it is in bad taste.

Do you think the Royal family themselves actually come out of

this not badly at all. Everybody family has people we get into

scrapes. You expect it from Harry and that is the role he plays. The

Queen is head of state and he isn't. And he is number three in line.

We're running out of time are we could spin the sound for ever, but

if you remember when Prince Charles had his famous private phone call

with Camilla Parker Bowles, that was a more serious thing, because

Prince Charles was the heir to the throne. This one will just pass, I

think, unless there are dozens of photos. There may be more her. The

Washington Post did what? We put a front-page story on it, but not the

photograph. We did the same. From a certain angle. It was front-page

news. That is the role of the Sun newspaper, they do it

straightforwardly. That's it for Dateline London for this week.