“Those are the “revised” version of WikiLeaks”

Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Samvel Nikoyan is convinced that WikiLeaks publications are deliberately translated poorly and wrongly, causing discrepancies

– The “WikiLeaks” subject has become number one subject today. Recently a lot of sensational information was published, your name was also used, things were said that you or others voiced during personal conversations. Why does anybody, including you, neither deny, nor confirm the sayings?
– Serious politicians around the world avoided commenting on WikiLeaks publications. The same thing is done in Armenia. I think that this approach is justified. Two materials concerning me were published, which include conflict-arising elements and enter the sphere of personal relations. Now it is clear for me why such attitude was shown toward WikiLeaks publications in different countries. In order to present news trustworthy they attribute those to different officials, “spicing” those with some ideas really expressed by that official. Naturally, no politician, including me, would allow himself to discuss the personal relations between the top-ranking officials with a foreign diplomat. To be frank, I was forbidden to enter that field, to speak of such matters. However, I must observe the poor or deliberately poor translations of the WikiLeaks publications by the mass media; particularly, in the English original the offensive phrases about Gagik Tsarukyan were expressed not in my, but in the diplomat’s question, however, unfortunately, in the Armenian translation those were attributed to me. Meanwhile even moderate knowledge of English would be enough to translate that text correctly, if certainly, there was no intention to distort the fact for the well-known reasons. To be honest, I don’t remember a case, when a foreign diplomat allowed himself to say offensive phrases about G. Tsarukyan or other officials. It seems to me and that idea is gradually forming in my mind that these publications are the “revised” version of WikiLeaks.
– In your opinion, why and for what end are those “revised”, as you put it and whom are they against?
– It is obvious that these “exposures” aim not so much at the authorities, the opposition or any state official, but at generally undermining the state, political, economic system, and they attempt to plant a mechanism of self-destruction in the society. That is the reason why I will not read, comment and treat seriously publications like that anymore.

P.S. Basically not only “nasty-nasty” things are written in WikiLeaks about Armenian politicians; particularly, there is the following quote about mentioned Samvel Nikoyan, “According to the conversations with the opposition, there were political conflicts with the Fact-Finding Group since its establishment on October 23, 2008. The opposition claims that two pro-government appointees have tried to impede the Group work many times. Samvel Nikoyan from the ruling Republican Party who is also the head of the interim parliamentary commission, said to the embassy official that stopping the activities of the Fact-Finding Group would be extremely bad. When the Group sent its report, Samvel Nikoyan said that he would be able to include that in his final report, without accusing his Republican colleagues.” Or this one that the establishment and work of the March 1 commission were assessed as “one of the few bright spots of the Armenian government.”