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

Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 355 posts

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#301

Post by mint2 »

yucky wrote: post #256
ip26 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are those the only possible reasons you can imagine to dislike or mistrust a source of information?

The sad reality is the people who hate Assange most now are the ones who loved him for Collateral Murder, because it was damaging to their enemies. Once he released information that was just as accurate, but damaging to their political allies, all bets were off. Those are the facts.

I don’t even know what the “collateral murder” video was until googling it just now, so… err those facts mentions are “alternative facts”. A lot of Millennials (many of whom are disgusted by assanges selective war against democrats) were occupied with college and less tuned into politics other than being anti Iraq war and disliking bush. But facts smacks!

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#302

Post by petesergeant »

psychlops wrote: post #157
petesergeant wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s 21 years later now

Perhaps there should be a time limit when people should forget that their government imprisoned people without trial or charges, however I suggest it should be greater than 21 years.

To be clear then, you think that the comparison between Belmarsh prison and Guantanamo Bay is an apt one?

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#303

Post by kornhole »

yclept wrote: post #286
kornhole wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is part of the false narrative you and many were fed and believed. Assange repeatedly explained that documents you are referring to were leaked from someone inside and alluded without exposing that the source could have been Seth Rich who was shot in the street.

That is part of the false narrative you and many were fed and believed. Investigations, reporting from many parties, and the vicitm's own family weigh against this drivel.

The intelligence agencies and a paid contractor came up with the other story full of holes. Julian Assange has never lied to the public or published untrue information that I know of. So it is a matter of who do you trust: the government who constantly lies, or Julian Assange.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#304

Post by melast »

fmajid wrote: post #257

There are some signs new Australian PM Albanese has been quietly working to secure the release of Assange, but he is now a broken man after a decade of effective imprisonment and the last few years of torture. The deterrent effect against any would-be whistleblowers has been achieved.

There are zero signs, in fact we have proof they haven't lobbied anybody.

https://michaelwest.com.au/documents-show-no-sign-albanese-g...

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#305

Post by lamontcg »

93po wrote: post #297
mhh__ wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no evidence at all it was from anyone else. Where is the evidence that it was Seth Rich for example? Alex Jones?

The evidence is that Assange emphatically said it wasn't Russia, flatly said it was someone internal to the DNC, and he's never been shown to be wrong or dishonest about Wikileaks business. Additionally, Assange has implied it was Seth Rich as strongly as he can without actually confirming he was the source, because he's bound by journalistic ethics and his agreement with his source to not reveal them. Lastly, the Mu…

> The evidence is that Assange emphatically said it wasn't Russia,

That isn't evidence.

Find some factual evidence that Seth Rich ever touched the e-mails or had access to them.

Best evidence I think that its clearly the Russian GRU that gave it to Wikileaks is Assange trying to blame it on Seth Rich. Because of what he's done to Seth Rich's family I'm quite happy to see him rotting in a jail cell. In an ideal world, everyone pushing that story should be in there with him.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#306

Post by giantrobot »

dontlaugh wrote: post #294
giantrobot wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As we've seen since 2014, Russian "peace" overtures are "give us everything and you get nothing". They've also repeatedly proven that they won't honor agreements. They unilaterally broke the Minsk accords just last year with their invasion of Ukraine. There's no utility in "peace" talks with a dishonest party. All it does is provide the dishonest party with ammunition for propaganda. When the other side balls at thei…

The Ukrainian state has been breaking the Minsk accords for almost as long as they’ve each been in place, most blatantly by bombing the Donbas. Not that this would justify invasion of Ukraine proper, but let’s not pretend this has ever been one-sided. Wars end through peace agreements. Deliberately preventing them is what war mongers do.

> Wars end through peace agreements. Deliberately preventing them is what war mongers do.

What agreement could Ukraine possibly make with Russia? Previously Russia demanded Ukraine, a sovereign nation, be constrained by what treaties they could make or how they govern themselves. They've also been meddling in their internal affairs for decades culminating with the annexation of Crimea when Ukrainians decided to vote out the Russian supported/friendly president.

Russia can make peace any time they want by withdrawing from Ukraine. Ukraine didn't invade Russia or make war on them. The war monger in this whole affair is a short guy that lives in Moscow.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#307

Post by DANmode »

foldr wrote: post #277
DANmode wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> random people at GHCQ

Not sure what your point is. It’s clear from what’s quoted in the emails that some GHCQ employees are simply speculating based on the timing of the rape allegations. That’s something that a bunch of people outside GHCQ were also doing at the time. The emails were handed over because they weren’t considered to be classified information. So it’s quite unlikely that they reveal discussions among people who had any insid…

Your point (appears to be?) that GCHQ staff are on par with other Monday morning armchair quarterbacks; seems weak.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#308

Post by barrysteve »

f6v wrote: post #25
psychphysic wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This video is likely to be the highlight of the decade for me. https://youtu.be/s1kwq52NKmo

I like how the audience laughs at the expense of a million ruined lives.

Can hardly believe the audience is laughing at dead Americans. Even Bushites are not that callous.

They're laughing at his implied admission of guilt and the idea that Putin's unjustified wars are in George Bush's shadow.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#309

Post by caskstrength »

yucky wrote: post #299
caskstrength wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. What? Ukrainian nazis invaded Belgorod or something?

[flagged]

The revolution was not "on their border", it was in another independent country. Trying to deny Ukranian agency and sovereignty is usual Russian propaganda talking point. You are basically saying "Those pesky Ukrainians started a revolution without asking glorious Russian president Putin first while also being at Russian border! That was definitively an act of war!" which is laughable. And just for you to note - I have been living all my life in walking distance from Independence square, so I don't need smug Fox news fans to lecture me on internet about "coups" and Nuland "distributing billions, weapons and oranges infused with battle drugs to Ukrainian nazis on Maidan!!1".

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#310

Post by [deleted] »

petesergeant wrote: post #302
psychlops wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps there should be a time limit when people should forget that their government imprisoned people without trial or charges, however I suggest it should be greater than 21 years.

To be clear then, you think that the comparison between Belmarsh prison and Guantanamo Bay is an apt one?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN