71–80 of 162 posts
Here's the plan. We form a large enough mob of people who are dressed to look exactly like Assange (wigs and all), then he can just run into the mob and disperse, make contact with sympathizers, and flee to a less oppressive country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You fully support a propaganda agency?
Most of what comes out of US mainstream media is propaganda. I support alternate sources in conjunction with those. What I don't support is getting all your info from a single narrative. Edit: there are obviously a lot of brainwashed people or actual agents in this thread doing some unfair downvoting.
Know your audience. The only acceptable stance on HN is rabid and unsubstantiated Russiaphobia. Either don't comment or find a different community, on this topic.
You're permitted to have an opinion on typesafe languages, tabs vs spaces, etc. Dissent from CIA or GCHQ talking points? Not so much.
How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intent doesn't matter. It's information. Judge it on evidence and truth and take it or leave it. No amount of twisted logic will make intent relevant.
Intent is how we judge the veracity of the information and whether it's slanted or not. I could tell you that Argentina sank a Chinese fishing vessel. Or I could tell you that Argentina sank a Chinese fishing vessel that was fishing in Argentine territorial waters. Both are true statements. One of them is incomplete and can lead you to judging the event differently. And unfortunately you, like most of us, aren't in a…
How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.
By the same logic, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein would be russian agents too.
Assange's communications have been cut down due to the overwhelming pressure of the Spanish government into Ecuador. This is clearly explained in the official communication of the Ecuador government : https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZY7pY1WkAALgkz.jpg (could not find a better link) The reason is that he was tweeting again in favour of Catalan Republicans, more precisely against the current wave of political prisoners th…
Did you read the article? It includes your image, and says that is not the reason this time. The example you quote was when he was given his first/last warning. This time he was cut because he commented on the UK/Russia poisoning thing.
1) the spanish nationalist media is all histerical about this event, thanking Ecuador for its help and solidarity
2) this comes just one day after Assange started re-tweeting again about Catalonia, after several months of radio silence about the subject
3) he has always been commenting about russia, the uk, and many other things.
4) The UK can not effectively cut the connection to Assange, only Ecuador (by threatening to expel him from his embassy).
The key bit: > The Ecuadorian government said in statement that it had acted because Assange had breached “a written commitment made to the government at the end of 2017 not to issue messages that might interfere with other states”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'll question the information merit of any rotten source. Go ahead and question it. Have you come up with any evidence that it's fabricated?
The concern isn't fabrication. The concern is that the information is being intentionally selectively provided to influence events.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From three seconds of googling. Wikileaks releases documents it claims detail Russia mass surveillance apparatus https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/19/wikileaks-releases-documen...
And this link clearly says: > It’s the _first_ time the organization has leaked (what it claims is) material directly pertaining to the Russian state. So... first time for how many years? And as, article points out, the leak itself is rather minor.
How ... convenient all of Wikileaks were damaging to the government of the USA and somehow never to the government of Russia. And, of course, Mr Assange had his show on RT (Russia Today). No way he is a Russian agent. No way.
This criticism only makes sense if they are sitting on a pile of leaked material that is unflattering Russia. There’s no reason to believe that is the case.