The Guardian hit a new low in Amelia Hill’s report on Julian Assange’s appearance at the Oxford Union. Hill moved beyond propaganda to downright lies.
This is easy to show. Read through Hill’s “report”. Then zip to 20 minutes and 55 seconds of the recording of Assange speaking at the event Hill misreports, and simply listen to the applause from the Oxford Union after Assange stops speaking.
Just that hearty applause is sufficient to show that the entire thrust and argument of Amelia Hill’s article moves beyong distortion or misreprentation – in themselves dreadful sins in a journalist – and into the field of outright lies. Her entire piece is intended to give the impression that the event was a failure and the audience were hostile to Assange. That is completely untrue.
Much of what Hill wrote is not journalism at all. What does this actually mean?
“His critics were reasoned, those who queued for over an hour in the snow to hear him speak were thoughtful. It was Julian Assange – the man at the centre of controversy – who refused to be gracious.”
Hill manages to quote five full sentences of the organiser of the anti-Assange demonstration (which I counted at 37 people) while giving us not one single sentence of Assange’s twenty minute address. Nor a single sentence of Tom Fingar, the senior US security official who was receiving the Sam Adams award. Even more remarkably, all three students Hill could find to interview were hostile to Assange. In a hall of 450 students who applauded Assange enthusiastically and many of whom crowded round to shake my hand after the event, Hill was apparently unable to find a single person who did not share the Rusbridger line on Julian Assange.
Hill is not a journalist – she is a pathetic grovelling lickspittle who should be deeply, deeply ashamed.
Here is the answer to the question about cyber-terrorism of which Amelia Hill writes:
“A question about cyber-terrorism was greeted with verbose warmth”
As you can see, Assange’s answer is serious, detailed, thoughtful and not patronising to the student. Hill’s characterisation – again without giving a word of Assange’s actual answer – is not one that could genuinely be maintained. Can anybody – and I mean this as a real question – can anybody look at that answer and believe that “Verbose warmth” is a fair and reasonable way to communicate what had been said to an audience who had not seen it? Or is it just an appalling piece of hostile propaganda by Hill?
The night before Assange’s contribution at the union, John Bolton had been there as guest speaker. John Bolton is a war criminal whose actions deliberately and directly contributed to the launching of an illegal war which killed hundreds of thousands of people. Yet there had not been one single Oxford student picketing the hosting of John Bolton, and Amelia Hill did not turn up to vilify him. My main contribution to the Sam Adams event was to point to this as an example of the way people are manipulated by the mainstream media into adopting seriously warped moral values.
Amelia Hill is one of the warpers, the distorters of reality. The Guardian calls her a “Special Investigative Correspondent.” She is actually a degraded purveyor of lies on behalf of the establishment. Sickening.
N_, 3 Feb, 12:14 pm:
This is true, but it doesn’t mean that CO2 emissions aren’t heating our planet. It just describes the political response to that heating. I think you should concentrate your energy on “supply side vs. demand side” arguments, which is where you’ll find the true hypocrisy, propaganda and deception:
http://www.monbiot.com/2007/12/11/rigged/
@Fred
““I haven’t heard anyone claim the Little Ice Age ended because of industry”
No you wouldn’t because it isn’t true.”
Actually Fred I hear lots of ‘experts’ say stuff that isn’t true. I’m not going to discuss with you if you use sarcasm and snotty putdowns rather than engaging properly.
“Just as the fact there are cycles in our weather isn’t an argument against anthropomorphic climate change.”
Who mentioned cycles? I talked about long-term changes in climate, not weather. You’re not addressing what I’m saying properly.
You opened this by confusing denial of climate change with denial of anthropomorphic climate change. Presumably you wouldn’t want to try to further your arguments by using false assimilation or confusion – am I right? If so, you should ask how it got into your head to post what you did.
@Resident Dissident
“N = not only do I know a few Swedes but I have also read Fishing in Utopia by Andrew Brown (about his experience of living in Swededn for a number of years) which received an Orwell Prize a few years backs – so with all due respects what you are talking about is garbage.”
You are now on my ‘ignore’ list.
All fucking Swedes know about how the Wallenberg family exerts a vice-like ‘grip’ on Sweden.
Go and find out about it, and come back and apologise. That’s when I may reply to you next.
@ Resident Dissident, 12.29pm
Oh dear. You’re a bit late. Andrew Brown has already been outed earlier in this thread as the original source of a rather nasty smear against one of the Swedish witnesses for Assange, Johannes Walstrom, by association with Israel Shamir (he’s his son, sins of the father an’ all that) and kicking off the completely unfounded smear that Wikileaks passed cables to a Belarussan dictator. Here:
Stjarna’s comment, 31 January, 7.29pm:
The Guardian’s Vendetta: ‘Cable Cooking’, Grey Propaganda & the WikiLeaks Films, The 5th Estate & We Steal Secrets: http://www.marthamitchelleffect.org/#/cases-of-the-old-media-2/4572966061
and again here:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/why-i-am-convinced-that-anna-ardin-is-a-liar/comment-page-6/#comment-391424
I’ll reproduce the bit relating to Andrew Brown for you:
You mention the “legal processes in a progressive and decent country such as Sweden”. I’m not sure they are held in quite the regard they once were. The latest scandal to emerge from Sweden’s “legal processes” is the Thomas Quick case. He was a mental health hospital patient, a compulsive liar due to being hugely overdosed on medication while there, but was nevertheless convicted of eight murders on the basis of nothing more than his own drug-addled ‘confessions’, the say-so of a corrupt prosecutor (ring any bells?) and the barmy ideas of his psychiatrist. After 12 years, all eight convictions were finally overturned this week, but the reputation of the Swedish judicial system has been left in tatters.
The trolls sent to this site are truly pathetic.
Is there some sock puppeting going on too?
“All due respects” indeed! You have no respect for yourself if you can’t accept enlightenment brought to you in a friendly way.
You probably think of yourself as a great cosmopolitan because you’ve read some easy-reading Granta-published Observer-reviewed travel book. Sounds like chewing gum for the mind, to me.
I was just telling you what every Swede knows: the Wallenberg family owns Sweden.
Ask one.
I’ll tell you something about Sweden…yes the big-selling novelists do go on about neo-Nazis and violent criminals a lot. But most of the population still believe in all this ‘lagom’ shit. There – I’ve given you a word which will help you to find out about Sweden if you really are actively interested…as if there was any other kind of worthwhile interest than active.
Responses like yours – cocky self-satisfied ignorance – annoy me. But I will now go back to following my own rules and not feed the trolls.
Apologies to Mary, Arbed, and all other good people here! ‘Don’t feed the trolls‘ can be a hard rule to keep, sometimes!
We must all persevere 🙂
Arbed, 1.19pm
I should add that the defence attorney in the Thomas Quick case, who did absolutely nothing to help his client (despite large quantities of exculpatory evidence) while collecting $600,000 in State-paid fees for this work, was none other than Claus Borgstrom, the State-paid counsellor/lawyer for the two women in the Assange investigation.
Tend to agree with Fred, by 1814 we’d burned most of the forests, producing waste gases and eliminating the huge co2 ‘sink’ that a fully forested Britain was – co2, water and sunlight (reduced by the pall of smoke that hung everywhere) – being the ingredients for photosynthesis (more co2 available increases plant growth); early steelmaking (swords and knives) took place on a huge scale, and having exhausted local wood supplies, drew in fuel from ever further afield; ‘royal’ forests were maintained not so much for hunting, but as a reserve in order to quickly arm. This state of affairs pre-dated the industrial revolution and used colossal amounts of wood, and having exhausted those supplies entirely, such domestic weapon production declined, peace was in danger of reigning unless quality steel could be imported. Later discoveries of ‘black band’ – co-existent iron ores and coal – along with the discovery that ‘coked’ coal could provide the carbon requirement for edged weapons, for which wood was peerless, revived domestic steel-making and started the industrial revolution proper. I for one don’t doubt that while climate fluctuates, there is a detrimental man made element also, our biosphere, the life-support system on which we all depend, is a closed system, what we do matters.
Oh, nice – Rixstep has now weighed in on The Amelia Hill Affair. A teensy tad hyperbolic, perhaps, for some people’s tastes, but that’s part of Rixstep’s charm, surely? No more hyperbolic than Nick Cohen’s anti-Assange rampage in the Observer today, and at least Rixstep gets his facts straight.
http://rixstep.com/1/20130202,01.shtml
Well, I like it. 🙂
Just half an hour ago this Torygraph headline came to mind which I had read earlier.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/council-spending/9845092/Sacrifice-services-and-freeze-tax-public-tells-councils.html
I heard a commotion in the garden to find a small black dog had somehowe got in although there is a gate and the garden is well fenced. It had got hold of one of my hens who was making a heck of a din. The hens are free to roam when I am home.
The dog, one of those curly haired poodle crosses, was seen off by my dog who had been indoors with me. It was wearing a red collar with a disc but I did not get near enough to see the name of the owner. It was obviously wandering loose as I did not recognise it as belonging to anyone local. My priority was to find the hen who was under the hedge. She seems OK but is limping. I have put her in a warm and dark place.
I attempted to contact the dog warden a) to report the incident and b) to ask that the dog be found so that it did not cause a road accident. I live on a busy road. There was an answerphone message giving details of the opening hours and the Christmas office times! (it is now February 2nd!) and was given an emergency number. That was answered promptly for emergency environment department calls and then I got a message that all the officers were busy. Musak followed. Ten minutes later, I was still getting the musak. There was obviously noone there.
God help all these good self satisfied citizens who don’t want services retained if and when they have a real emergency on their hands that might endanger human life.
“Who mentioned cycles? I talked about long-term changes in climate, not weather. You’re not addressing what I’m saying properly.”
But the Thames freezing is not evidence of long term changes in climate on a global scale. Water still freezes in winter and the fact the Thames doesn’t freeze now could just as easily be ascribed to changes in the Thames as changes in climate.
Our climate is not governed by just one cycle, it is governed by many of varying lengths and varying effect. It can also be affected by natural events such as volcanoes. All these things have to be taken into consideration and all the data put into complex computer models before you have some idea what is happening. You can’t just say that because the Thames used to freeze over the scientists must be wrong.
There have been satellites orbiting since the 70s, they can not only measure how much heat our planet radiates each night they can measure how much of each wavelength. They know how much climate change is down to natural cycles and how much down to man.
“What’s that thing sitting under a bridge two comments up?”
Wonderful image. I straightway pictured a big hairy neck-less squat-head with beady eyes and a sour countenance.
There are certain people who comment on here I just bypass most of the time. Life’s too short and precious to waste it looking for a sensible comment from those with moss on the brain.
N
You have shown in your comments on climate change that you have little respect for scientific method. I wouldn’t deny that some Swedes believe that there country is owned by the Wallenbergs – but that is not the same as “all” – can I presume by “all” you meant “all” that you are prepared to listen to with your nasty little closed mind? Where is the evidence for your ridiculous statement – I actually have some Swedish friends and have worked with a number of Swedes in the past and they most certainly don’t share your views. I dare you to produce some evidence to support your statement – otherwise I agree with your view that ignoring me is your best response on the basis of when in a hole stop digging.
Mary
You can call me what you want – but I came here of my own volition, difficult though it may be for you to understand that concept.
Arbed
Just because Andrew Brown may or may not have contrary views to yourseld on Assange I’m afraid that doesn’t make him a non person or the 200+ pages that he wrote about Sweden (pre Assange and not entirely positive – the clue being in the subtitle “Sweden and the Future that disappeared”) o0f no validity whatsover. Or perhaps it does in the balck and white “book burning” world that you inhabit. You perhaps should also note that in my original comment I qualified my comment about Sweden being decent and progressive as being relative to the regimes favoured by you and your ilk. Having a little bit of subtlety I tend to avoid assigning absolutist lables to everything – perhaps you should try it sometimes?
Habbabkuk
2 Feb, 2013 – 6:41 pm
“It’s of course entirely possible that his interpretation of events – ie, that he was kept off air deliberately – is correct. But is it also not possible that time just ran out? After all, the length of time finally needed to deal with every question can only be estimated and not guaranteed in advance. Furthermore, would it not have been simpler for Dimbleby and company just not to have selected Doug’s question?”
If you had any common sense and a wider grip of reality you would be aware that many live broadcasts and events have been interrupted by Palestine campaigners. This is not what Any Questions or other broadcasters like. So I suspect Dimbleby and others thought that if my question was not selected there might be some sort of disruption while the program was on air. The way Dimbleby and the panellists handled it makes perfect sense (except to you).
As I said in my post I could not remember the exact wording of my question (this you overlooked for some reason). What I was trying to put forward was that if 72% of British Jews regarded themselves as Zionist there is likely to be a higher percentage in Israel. And of course we mustn’t overlook the power and influence of the British Zionist lobby in matters of foreign policy.
Talking of Sweden, didn’t they provide Germany right through world war 2 with copious amounts of the aforementioned iron-ore and much else. They didn’t need their own form of Quisling, the existing government were obliging enough without resort to any coercion at all. Now they’ve gone over to the Zionist camp entirely by way of compensation.
We Have Always Been At War With Eastasia
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a2974c50-6dfa-11e2-983d-00144feab49a.html#axzz2Jqd1MjOL
Blair
Resident Dissident, 2.16pm
“Or perhaps it does in the balck and white “book burning” world that you inhabit.”
No, my dear – I’m the type of woman they used to burn.
“You perhaps should also note that in my original comment I qualified my comment about Sweden being decent and progressive as being relative to the regimes favoured by you and your ilk.”
You know my political leanings, do you? That’s clever, because I’ve never given any hint of them here – I studiously avoid doing that in fact. What’s that about “assigning absolutist lables to everything”?
Hmmm, and all I did to put myself under the radar of your impressive mind-reading skills was to point out that Andrew Brown was the original source of a smear. Here it is in its original form in – where else? – the Guardian if you don’t believe me:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-israel-shamir-russia-scandinavia
“Talking of Sweden, didn’t they provide Germany right through world war 2 with copious amounts of the aforementioned iron-ore and much else. ”
Yes, they were neutral so there was no reason for them not to. They also exported to Britain those less bulky but very valuable items which could be sneaked past the German blockade.
America was trading with Germany right up to them entering the war and some Americans, like Prescot Bush, even after that. Ford, ITT, they were all at it, German troops were drinking CocaCola.
Arbed
My “original comment” wasn’t addressed to you personally (see the word “most”) – although you seem to think that it was – I was simply trying to make the point that when I made that comment I didn’t accept that all in Sweden was decent and progressive – and was just making a relative call – e.g I would be more than happy to assign that label to Sweden than any of Galloway’s pet regimes (the USSR for which he cried it broke up, Saddam’s Iraq or Assad’s Syria etc etc.).
Whether or not Andrew Brown was the source of a smear against Assange is not of relevance – even if he was, it doesn’t in itself invalidate what he wrote about Sweden before Assange entered on the scene. Galloway pretty much issues a smear everytime he opens his mouth – but it doesn’t stop you leaping to his defence.
BTW I think you hide your politics about as well as I do!
“What’s that thing sitting under a bridge two comments up?”
It could be a rapist troll who has yet to be found out, but under Wallenberg/Swedish/Borgstrom law, you know the kind that lets robbers and murderers get away with challenging its affirmative actions, this troll could also be accused of rape, cause sitting under that bridge, the little hairy fellow must have eaten some of the disease carrying American crayfish from the stream he so clearly loves, and we all know how much the Swedes like their crayfish, hence he must have been there or he is Swedish, probably.
Further, living under the bridge, his views/peeks from below, scaring little girls crossing, could be easily construed as paedophilia under said law, or was it schlaw, slimey law, ….ah I give up…
That is enough connections for swedish law to apply for a EAW, is it not?
It’s not an Either/Or Kiekegaardian proposition on climate change. Yes there are natural cycles of ebb and flow, but the human element exacerbates. Is there any doubt about the effect of carbon? Humans don’t seem to be a natural part of the equilibrium of life on Earth.
In fact, some see Humans as more of a virus than a beneficial organism. What have we contributed to this planet beside plastic? (H/T George Carlin)
@ Mary. saw the plant in Surrey, the term eco can’t possibly apply and sounds as if its trying to hide something.
The massive tanks seem to be designed to hold liquid waste that ‘can’t be recycled’ a theme that runs though the application. Should it read ‘cant be recycled in Britain’?
That said, Germany does operate incinerators, they are highly monitored and have very high chimneys, most over 200m hight.
Proposed waste burner in Kings Lynn, guaranteed to emit over east Lynn, east winch and even Sandringham, is merely 85 m.
“Book burning” – an emotive term, often used by those who are unaware that thousands of titles were banned, confiscated and pulped in Germany by the WW2 victors, who made possession of any listed title a crime.
The given troll might as well tell me to get back to North Korea! 🙂
Actually I think Juliette by De Sade should be banned.
Misspelled the existentialist’s name; shame.
@Ben – I’ve got no disagreement with your 3.44pm post, except to say that the changes in the climate that would occur if humans weren’t here, and which have occurred for thousands and indeed millions of years, cannot be summarised as occurring in ‘cycles’.
Actually, there is a hilarious quote in that Andrew Brown smear article that I’d forgotten about:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-israel-shamir-russia-scandinavia
“His father [Shamir] was reached and conducted a bizarre interview with them in English. Asked if Wahlström was, in fact, his son, he replied: “I have heard such things. That’s what they say. I have heard this kind of rumour, but I don’t intend to talk about my personal, family things at all.”
Ok, just me then.
But, see how hard Andrew Brown works to sully the name of Johannes Walstrom, a witness for Assange? And the apology at the end:
“I’m sorry that so many of the links are in Swedish. ACB”
Indicates this article was a bit of a rush job. No time to source English-language translations, or even whack them through Google translate. Quick, got to get this to print before Nick Davies’ 10 Days in Sweden hatchet job of the leaked police protocols, due to go to print in five hours’ time at 9pm!
Nothing wrong with burning books, they’re carbon neutral and throw out some heat.
I often burn surplus to requirements books without a hint of emotion…well apart from a slight grin when a copy of Fahrenheit 451 went on the stove.
N_; I’m not sure if you are making a distinction as to ‘cycles’. What language would you use to describe climactic changes sans human presence?
At some point, humanity should learn how to at first influence, and eventually control Earth’s climate. Do we really want the next ice-age to happen? What about the next eruption of one of Earth’s super-volcanos? The question is how best to achieve climate control. At present we can’t even control our corporations. Most of us have trouble controlling ourselves at times.