Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 162 posts

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#111

Post by jacquesm »

colordrops wrote: post #106
jacquesm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most of what comes out of US mainstream media is propaganda. No, it isn't. There is a lot of pretty good journalism and then there is a bunch of trash. But the balance - for now - is still on the good side. If Rupert Murdoch kicked the bucket it might get a bit better still. > I support alternate sources in conjunction with those. Such as? FOX vs Russia Today is not 'alternate' by any definition. But if you want to…

> No, it isn't. Except, yes, it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-ti... https://fair.org/take-action/action-alerts/why-were-governme... https://fair.org/take-action/media-advisories/iraq-and-the-m... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_in_the_United_State...

I've actually read manufacturing consent and while I agree with the general idea that everything that we consume is propaganda to some degree I disagree that CNN is at the same level as Pravda in Russia.

There is definitely a case to be made for mass media being complicit in all this but not to the extent that actual propaganda mechanisms are put to work. The state does not own CNN, it does not own the Washington Post and it does not own the Guardian. Ironically, it does own the BBC and there are definitely times when you just knew that there was more to a story than what you could read but on the whole the 'manufacturing of consent' is not the same as outright propaganda.

For that you'd have to take a step back and look at some actual propaganda to see the difference. In the United States FOX comes pretty close (though not their 'hard news' section, that is still more or less factual), in Russia there are the various state owned media outlets and in China everything that the party sanctioned press will print would count as propaganda.

The rest of the media can - still, and who knows for how much longer - be held to a slightly higher standard.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#112

Post by zzzcpan »

avs733 wrote: post #86
tonysdg wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that basically what they did in Atomic Blonde with the crowd and the umbrellas?

Yes but real police are generally superior to movie police. They are also a much better shot than crime movies would lead you to believe.

Police is also generally useless if a crowd is not willing to let someone get arrested, especially a public figure. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUQ_zw_vUrU

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#113

Post by zzzcpan »

FireBeyond wrote: post #7

> I have already fully served any theoretical (I haven’t been charged) ‘bail violation’ whilst in prison and under house arrest. So why is there a warrant for my arrest?” Not in the least bit arrogant. "Well, I hid out here because I feared extradition. That should basically count as my sentence for violating bail, right?"

State initiated smear campaign is more arrogant.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#114

Post by notahacker »

culot wrote: post #105
pnathan wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> proof is a slightly different game. this is the dicey bit with spy games. part of the goal is to ensure courtroom proof isn't available. > why Russia might have poisoned the man Kill double agents as warnings? disloyal spies aren't exactly popular. My impression is Russia is moving to an execution phase for a plan of action.

That it coincidentally happens during a coordinated anti-Russian media onslaught should be taken into consideration. The US/UK are not above fabricating evidence when it suits them, as their post-9/11 tactics have made clear.

Since September 11th the US and UK have showed they're not even willing and able to organise the covert manufacture of nerve agents to "discover" in Iraq to avoid many leading political figures being permanently discredited when nothing was found, never mind manufacturing and using nerve agents to bump off a couple of Russians in a public place in Britain for no obvious political benefit.

If you genuinely think the UK needed a couple more dead Russian dissidents (and pretty unsympathetic ones at that) to justify stricter sanctions on Russia, you really, really don't understand the relevant politics.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#115

Post by colordrops »

jacquesm wrote: post #111
colordrops wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, it isn't. Except, yes, it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-ti... https://fair.org/take-action/action-alerts/why-were-governme... https://fair.org/take-action/media-advisories/iraq-and-the-m... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_in_the_United_State...

I've actually read manufacturing consent and while I agree with the general idea that everything that we consume is propaganda to some degree I disagree that CNN is at the same level as Pravda in Russia. There is definitely a case to be made for mass media being complicit in all this but not to the extent that actual propaganda mechanisms are put to work. The state does not own CNN, it does not own the Washington Pos…

You are moving the goalposts. We aren't talking about Pravda, we are talking about Russia Today, and we aren't talking about how bad the propaganda is, but whether it is propaganda at all.

Also, you are misunderstanding how propaganda works in the US if you think the outlet needs to be state owned. I suggest the following article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism#Compa...

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#116

Post by colordrops »

jacquesm wrote: post #108
colordrops wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sure does seem like it though. If you question that narrative at all you get downvoted.

Well, I'm pretty outspoken and I have a general anti-corporate streak running through me and I do not like the way the USA has comported itself on the world stage since 9/11 much. They had all the credit that they could possibly wish for and they totally fucked it up. The fact that my comments in that vein are not categorically downvoted (rather the opposite) should be a pretty strong proof that it is definitely poss…

There is no concrete evidence made publicly available whatsoever in the Russia hysteria that has been going on for 18 months. Bernie Sanders, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Jill Stein, Glenn Greenwald, and anyone who criticizes the left at all, even if they are leftist themselves, get called Russian stooges at this point.

It's too much:

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia...

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#117

Post by jacquesm »

colordrops wrote: post #115
jacquesm wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've actually read manufacturing consent and while I agree with the general idea that everything that we consume is propaganda to some degree I disagree that CNN is at the same level as Pravda in Russia. There is definitely a case to be made for mass media being complicit in all this but not to the extent that actual propaganda mechanisms are put to work. The state does not own CNN, it does not own the Washington Pos…

You are moving the goalposts. We aren't talking about Pravda, we are talking about Russia Today, and we aren't talking about how bad the propaganda is, but whether it is propaganda at all. Also, you are misunderstanding how propaganda works in the US if you think the outlet needs to be state owned. I suggest the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism#Compa...

I definitely consider Russia Today as a propaganda mouthpiece of the Russian State. I have no illusions about being able to operate something like Russia Today without permission from the state.

As for the state of affairs in the USA: I believe the USA is fundamentally broken in many ways. Born from violence and with an extreme focus on money in all aspects of life it has some pretty bad elements that amount to legalized corruption. The MIC, the number of people imprisoned, the two party system, the evangelical element, American exceptionalism, the fun fetish, the power of lobbyists, the power of money in elections all amount to flaws that each individually could be fatal, and that collectively are a ticking time bomb under the most powerful country in the world.

Which way that will go is anybody's guess, I personally am horrified that someone like Trump could make it to the position of president of the USA, but then again, if Ronald Reagan could then why not someone even less qualified?

Time will tell where it is all headed, but - in spite of you r links - I refuse to believe that all American media are complicit in this, even though I do believe that they could do a much better job at keeping the politicians sharp.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#118

Post by jacquesm »

colordrops wrote: post #116
jacquesm wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I'm pretty outspoken and I have a general anti-corporate streak running through me and I do not like the way the USA has comported itself on the world stage since 9/11 much. They had all the credit that they could possibly wish for and they totally fucked it up. The fact that my comments in that vein are not categorically downvoted (rather the opposite) should be a pretty strong proof that it is definitely poss…

There is no concrete evidence made publicly available whatsoever in the Russia hysteria that has been going on for 18 months. Bernie Sanders, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Jill Stein, Glenn Greenwald, and anyone who criticizes the left at all, even if they are leftist themselves, get called Russian stooges at this point. It's too much: https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia...

You're aware that a whole bunch of people have already been indicted and have admitted guilt?

At this point in time the 'Russia hysteria' is on pretty solid footing, the question is not whether or not there is something there but how high up it goes and who knew what and when.

Manafort will almost certainly end up being convicted and whether or not he will spend the rest of his life in jail hinges on Trump's ability to pardon him.

Whoever calls Sanders, Assange, Snowdon Stein and Greenwald a Russian Stooge has a problem, but that's not my problem.

The real issue is that even though none of them are with any likelihood - as far as I can see at the moment - Russian stooges does not mean that there are no Russian stooges. And if you put Manafort and Gates in there and listed Assange, Papadopoulos and mr. van der Zwaan in there as useful idiots I would probably agree with the list.

Incidentally, Greenwald is doing a pretty good job at keeping an even keel in general, and I totally support his debunking bogus claims. But that does not mean that all claims are bogus.

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#119

Post by colordrops »

jacquesm wrote: post #70
colordrops wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Most of what comes out of US mainstream media is propaganda. No, it isn't. There is a lot of pretty good journalism and then there is a bunch of trash. But the balance - for now - is still on the good side. If Rupert Murdoch kicked the bucket it might get a bit better still. > I support alternate sources in conjunction with those. Such as? FOX vs Russia Today is not 'alternate' by any definition. But if you want to…

To answer your question on alternate sources, my favorites:

https://www.theguardian.com

https://theintercept.com

http://therealnews.com

https://www.democracynow.org

Re: Ecuador cuts off Julian Assange's internet access at London embassy

#120

Post by colordrops »

jacquesm wrote: post #118
colordrops wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no concrete evidence made publicly available whatsoever in the Russia hysteria that has been going on for 18 months. Bernie Sanders, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Jill Stein, Glenn Greenwald, and anyone who criticizes the left at all, even if they are leftist themselves, get called Russian stooges at this point. It's too much: https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia...

You're aware that a whole bunch of people have already been indicted and have admitted guilt? At this point in time the 'Russia hysteria' is on pretty solid footing, the question is not whether or not there is something there but how high up it goes and who knew what and when. Manafort will almost certainly end up being convicted and whether or not he will spend the rest of his life in jail hinges on Trump's ability…

But what have they been indicted on? Tell me exactly the charges.
Post reply on HN