51–60 of 136 posts
I think this is a very good thing. We need more accountability from public figures. Moral fibre is a rare element among the top 1%. If they can't regulate themselves, then someone else ought to do it. We need an incentive for people to pay their fair share of taxes and to behave ethically - Protecting your public reputation is a good incentive. The law is simply useless when it comes to ethical matters - Radical tran…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was almost certain the things you're suggesting were true, however I also thought Julian assange was no longer alive, or not free/able to reach out, as did the people who came up with and spread the theories that something big went down. However this week Hannity flew to the UK and interviewed Julian Assange who is alive and well. Don't you think he might have hinted at the fact that such was the case during the in…
[deleted]
Or they're just a front for Russian intelligence, as has been suggested for years, as evidenced by the fact that Assange says there's no need to report on Russia because of the "free and open media" they have, as evidenced by his show on RT, as evidenced by their facilitating Snowden's defection, as evidenced by... It seems like there are a few die-hards left who thought Assange and Manning were the greatest thing ev…
Maybe you are a front for the US intelligence, given that you provide no source for your claims about Assange saying that.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/24/julian-assange...
On Wikileaks facilitating Snowden's defection:
http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-assange-wikileaks-and...
Oh, and here's him requesting FSB security guards inside the Ecuadorian embassy, because that's totally a normal thing that normal people do:
https://archive.is/wEW0o#selection-867.62-867.223
And here's just a decent run-down of the whole shebang:
https://20committee.com/2015/08/31/wikileaks-is-a-front-for-...
How and why would they do that? The idea does not much sense reading this article.
"We have your name and address. Stop talking about the connections between Wikileaks and Putin." That's why.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you are a front for the US intelligence, given that you provide no source for your claims about Assange saying that.
>He said: “In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like “Novaya Gazeta”, in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn’t a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Mosc…
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of...
Please don't try to spread FAKE NEWS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
See: https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of...
Look, you either believe people like Assange, Greenwald, and Snowden are honest people, or you don't. I do not, to say the least. The three of them strike me as some of the most fundamentally dishonest people in the public sphere.
But to apply the same criticism to Edward Snowden is a whole different thing altogether. He has produced reams of evidence on the practices of the US intelligence agencies, for him to be "fundamentally dishonest" would involve fabricating large chunks of that, and if I believed that then I wouldn't stop at "dishonest" I'd go with "crazy" or worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>He said: “In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like “Novaya Gazeta”, in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn’t a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Mosc…
The Guardian’s Summary of Julian Assange’s Interview Went Viral and Was Completely False https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of... Please don't try to spread FAKE NEWS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>He said: “In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like “Novaya Gazeta”, in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn’t a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Mosc…
The Guardian’s Summary of Julian Assange’s Interview Went Viral and Was Completely False https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of... Please don't try to spread FAKE NEWS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>He said: “In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like “Novaya Gazeta”, in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn’t a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Mosc…
The Guardian’s Summary of Julian Assange’s Interview Went Viral and Was Completely False https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of... Please don't try to spread FAKE NEWS.
Also, Assange said those things in the actual interview (which the Guardian linked to):
> In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like "Novaya Gazeta", in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn't a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Moscow.
So, given that the reality is that in Russia journalism is oppressed to levels that are rather extreme, that the media in the West is much more vibrant and critical of government than in Russia, and given that Assange obviously knows that, the Guardian's summary is not only valid, but pretty much the most reasonable one.