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.
Villager, how do you tell a victim of propaganda from a purveyor of propaganda? Most people are both, to varying extents. Occasionally, a member of the security services is revealed as “seeding” stories to the media, and then you’ve caught one. Beyond that, you can’t really get very far.
Clark, very good question as also the answer within it. One day i aspire to be as quick on my feet as you. Well, at least my memory served me well to call Res Diss’s bluff.
May i add that it is much better to have you here as a vocal participant than as a mod. These too clever-by-half types are self-destructive frauds by my observation of life.
For those who are interested, you can now download or watch the documentary TPB AFK, which premiers at the 63rd Berlin International Film Festival today.
From The Pirate Bay of course, completly leagal.
https://thepiratebay.se/search/tpb%20afk/0/99/0
Or Youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTOKXCEwo_8
The movie homepage, with nore details
http://watch.tpbafk.tv/
Villager, from the point of view of someone who holds a roughly “mainstream” (i.e. corporate media influenced) position, someone like Mary seems highly offensive. She keeps posting things that contradict the corporate position, with angry little quips interspersed. From the corporate-influenced position, this is challenging and seems provocative. You have to have countered the propaganda before that you can see that Mary’s anger is driven by compassion. Refer to my “Stage 0, stage 1…” description.
The corporate position is that “Western” governments are essentially decent, that “our” wars are necessary wars, that politicians are in a “difficult” position having to “balance moral considerations”. Something like Iraq 2003 was a “mistake”, torture happened when “procedures failed”.
Of course, this is all bollox. Iraq 2003 was a case-study in how to engineer the conditions for war. It was the exact opposite of a mistake, it was utterly deliberate, decided in advance. A plan was instigated to make it all happen, and everyone of any power who stood in the way was discredited, defeated, smeared, sacked or ended up dead.
But that is not how the corporate media reported it at all. Not at the time nor at any time since. It is utterly outrageous that Blair, Bush and a host of others are walking around free, rolling in money, and still part of the political process. They should all be locked up, either pending trial or serving their sentences.
It’s utterly ridiculous that we’re here discussing whether Assange should be extradited on the basis of the testimony of a woman who didn’t want him arrested and another who reversed her opinion and then apparently faked some evidence, when people who deliberately started war after war are not even thought of by the majority of voters as the criminals they so obviously are.
But for this outrageous farce, we can thank the corporate media. The whole bloody lot of them.
@ Clark : well, you call it disruption, I would call it “calling to account” or “challenging what I consider to be a silly or malicious assertion”.
What’s your definition of disruption?
PS – pls note addition to handle, I hope it’ll annoy those who always see the worst in everything and everyone!
@Clark; “Trolls disrupt. Shills argue some other party’s point. There is rarely any point in accusing anyone of being a shill, because it is usually impossible to prove.”
Shills advance agendas, often by derailing threads either by turning them over to their agenda linked topics, or stopping discussion of a vested topic, this & other associated debate stifling & shifting tactics are the very essence of trolling, which is used by them as a means to an end, so effectively all shills are also trolls.
Have you noticed how both Habby & Res Dis are both very actively keen on demonising Assad, you would of thought that after the catastrophes of Iraq, Afganistan & Libya, such egging-on of reckless military action against Syria, a bit odd, especially coming from a “Yorkshire Methodist with Chartist roots”, and one good Catholic ?
Not so odd perhaps if you consider that Assad’s Syria is the last Arab country defying a sell-out “peace agreement” with Israel.
Of course Arbed and John Goss omit Nick Davies response
http://www.themonthly.com.au/letters/nick-davies
And they have the nerve to lecture us on what is justice and fair play.
I think I should also make the observation that is is pretty common for rape victims to be confused and change their accounts of what happened for pretty obvious reasons. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they are lying – just that they need some time and sympathy to get their story together.
As I have said before the correct way for this particular case to be examined is through the Swedish legal process and not by amateur lawyers with only partial access to the evidence and no access to the witnesses through the internet.
The Medialens editors have written another of their fine pieces on the corporate media.
Jousting With Toothpicks – The Case For Challenging Corporate Journalism
http://tinyurl.com/d644pup
This miscellany of headlines is a good illustration of what is produced.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/02/iraq-iran-redlines-and-headlines/#more-47611
|~~~~
The Medialens editors are already being attacked on twitter. Les Hinton Murdoch’s head operative was the first.
Les Hinton @leshinton
Newspaper lover – and independent. Previously CEO, Dow Jones; publisher, Wall Street Journal; exec. chairman, News International UK; CEO, Fox TV Station Group
New York City
https://twitter.com/leshinton/status/299902596146151424
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1360340060.html
Villager, do you remember the days before you realised that you were being bombarded with propaganda? I do. Russia was a grey, dark place where everyone was miserable and nothing good ever happened. The Middle East was full of violence that was utterly inexplicable; those people were just inherently violent, it must be just that it’s much hotter down there… And Labour and Tory argued endlessly in apparently pointless contradiction, seemingly for the sake of argument.
Then I deliberately looked away for years. I banned televisions from my home, I never bought a paper. I did theatrical work, did sound for parties and “raves”, didn’t vote, read popular science, classic novels and science fiction…
Then I discovered the Internet, this place and Media Lens, and the work of Chomsky. At first it looked outrageous, all I thought I’d ever known had been stood on its head. But Craig’s testimony was undeniable. And then he started writing about imperialism, and the writing of J.A. Hobson:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/?s=Hobson
I started applying my own thoughts, applying what I’d learned from popular science about the social insects and how cells in bodies get to be subverted by something greater than themselves, so that they cooperate for the good of the body although it guarantees their individual extinction.
And I thought – cells in bodies, bees in the hive, employees in corporations…
And suddenly it all fell into place.
@Arbed
RT has huge viewing figures in the US. Really? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/business/media/23russiatoday.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/russia/121219/russia-today-television-rt-satellite-tv-moscow-putin-washington
And still not rated by Nielsen – search their site for RT and you get a big blank
“So, not that different from Channel 4 commissioning a series from an independent production company then.”
So that well known proponent of freedom of expression and Press freedom also pays the bills at Channel 4?
resident dissident, 8 Feb, 8:46 pm
Which is exactly what Assange has said he wants, too. Unfortunately, he’s to scared to go, because of the giant jumping up and down on the other side of the Atlantic. So everyone involved suffers in limbo.
You don’t really think that the man who established Wikileaks in defiance of the US, China, and some of the most powerful corporations in the world is frightened of a woman who never wanted him prosecuted and a torn condom with no DNA on it, do you?
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!), 8 Feb, 8:35 pm
Well one of my definitions of disruption is deliberately annoying people, funnily enough.
Villager/Mary
Happy to apologise for my weather quip – I got my facts wrong on that one. Not apologising for anything else however.
Perhaps, I should put together a list of all the things I have been called on just this thread and demand apologies. Fortunately I’m the tolerant type.
“Have you noticed how both Habby & Res Dis are both very actively keen on demonising Assad”
The only person demonising Assad is Assad himself. Syria is in the process of standing up to Assad if you haven’t noticed. My concern is for his victims – and I certainly haven’t argued for Western military intervention to topple Assad. You I suspect are quite keen on maintaining the Russian intervention to keep him in power.
PS I am not a Yorkshire Methodist – I am agnostic – my ancestors are largely Yorkshire Methodist. Lets just say i am part of the Dissenting tradition.
Myself:
Actually, I think that if Sweden weren’t being vassal to the US, they’d have dropped this case long since. There ceased to be any hope of a fair trial as soon as someone leaked the matter to Expressen, which was before Assange even woke up. For the three people involved, it’s screwed beyond redemption, and has been for years.
Who thinks that any possibility of a fair trial remains, and why?
Creepy my avatar has turned all black again – I have no clue whatsoever why that has happened.
Clark, on computer matters – the malware definitely came from where I said it came from, although I take you point that does not mean that it conclusively came from the owners of that site. Fortunately it was detected pretty much straightaway.
“You don’t really think that the man who established Wikileaks in defiance of the US, China, and some of the most powerful corporations in the world is frightened of a woman who never wanted him prosecuted and a torn condom with no DNA on it, do you?”
I don’t know – all men (and women) for that matter have their weaknesses, even the great ones. Some thought equally highly of Jimmy Saville.
resident dissident, 9:29 pm
Untrue. The corporate media and certain Western governments have been demonising Assad, and pushing for war, just like Wesley Clark said they intended to. He said they’d do the same to Hezbollah and Lebanon, too, resident dissident. The corporate media reports that speech of his hardly at all, despite him repeating it several times.
We also know that some very nasty countries and groups are fighting in Syria. It’s just that with all the corporate media bias, it’s impossible to know the exact mixture. The whole thing is a tragedy, but with Saudi fighters involved, the “West’s” hands are obviously unclean.
You may get annoyed with Macky and Villager, but we just can’t ignore these things. Your opponents don’t support dictatorship and Putin. They just want to nip wider war in the bud, stop it before it’s too late. We all know that Iran and its oil fields are the objective. Just look at this map:
http://www.killick1.plus.com/map.jpg
Well, put yourself in Assange’s position; which would you be more scared about? Whatever penalty you get for otherwise consensual intercourse but without a condom while half asleep, or what the US is currently doing to Bradley Manning?
@ Clark : you have a habit of seizing on the minor point and not answering the major one.
The bit about I’ve added to the handle to annoy people was a bit of a joke, as you should have guessed. Anyway, just ask yourself : what sort of person would get annoyed by that addition?
So, leave aside that joke and tell me how you define disruption. My suspicion is that you find any muscular challenge to any of the Eminences, if persisted with, to be a disruption. No doubt a challenge foloowed by an immediate backing down, would not count as disruption in your book.
But feel free to persuade me otherwise.
(Not that it’s of any importance, but I find a constant stream of O/T posts and links disruptive of the subject of a thread. Take this thread : it could have led to a serious discussion of subjects such as monarchy and what form of representation might be best for the state, etc. How many posts until it went O/T? And who first took us O/T? I also find incoherent posts disruptive. nd the same goes for the wilder conspiracy theories.
Over to you, Clark.
sorry, I meant the next post on Richard III, not this one!
resident dissident, I’m pretty sure that that is my old avatar, from when I was really pissed off and I “ran up the Black Flag”. Jon discovered some bug that caused avatars to get swapped; I wish I could remember the details… You could try clearing your browser’s cache, which is good practice in any case.
Malware from sites where the public can submit comments is nearly always caused by submitted nasties. It’s just opportunism and they’re out to make money. I’ve never heard of Islamists doing cyber-war of any description. China does it a lot. Muslim countries have been victims of cyber-war, on the largest scale of anyone (Stuxnet and co.). I don’t count the drone that Iran landed; that was in Iranian air-space, and they weren’t islamists, they were proper Iranian forces.
Resident Dissident, 8.46pm
“I think I should also make the observation that is is pretty common for rape victims to be confused and change their accounts of what happened for pretty obvious reasons. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they are lying – just that they need some time and sympathy to get their story together.”
… no, but handing in a torn (the forensic report indicates ‘cut, possibly with scissors or a blade [as quoted in the UK High Court judgment, para 94], used-looking (photographs available!) condom with ABSOLUTELY NO DNA ON IT does.
Oh Habbabkuk, what shall we do with you…
Resident Dissident, 9.09pm
“And still not rated by Nielsen – search their site for RT and you get a big blank”
You’re quoting Nielsen figures? Surely you realised a figure of 650 million viewers for RT’s global reach obviously referred to its online audience – y’know, on the internet, not terrestrial viewing figures.
Habbabkuk has seamlessly transferred mention of Assange’s extradition to the Richard III thread. Will we all be driven as crazy as he seems to be?
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)
8 Feb, 2013 – 9:52 pm
@ Fred : “That’s a matter for the Tunisians, isn’t it?……We don’t tend to interfere in the internal affairs of other counrtries…”
You mean like Julian Assange’s extradition is a matter for the Swedes? You mean like there haven’t been entire threads here on Sweden and its legal system?
Habbabkuk, 10.04pm
“I find a constant stream of O/T posts and links disruptive of the subject of a thread. Take this thread : it could have led to a serious discussion of subjects such as monarchy and what form of representation might be best for the state, etc. How many posts until it went O/T?”
You think Assange is a monarch? Only kidding, but we are on the Amelia Hill is a Dirty Liar (for blatantly misreporting on Assange’s speech to the Sam Adams awards)
Myself:
I should also have mentioned the Syrian government’s refusal to allow adequate coverage.
Some of points of corporate media bias on this.
Firstly, constantly calling the Syrian Government “Assad’s regime”. It’s a one-party system based upon the old Soviet model, but it does include some democracy, and according to some reports, Assad had quite a bit of public support, before, and some time into, all the fighting. I can’t be sure of how much, but then Western governments generally operate on a largest-minority “mandate”. Are two nearly identical parties really that much better than one?
Secondly, ramping up the restrictions on reporting as “hiding what’s going on”. Those Ba’ath governments were notably paranoid even without any conflict in progress; it’s unreasonable to expect them to become more open with death squads roaming their country and huge amounts of negative press over here.
Thirdly, treating the whole problem as Assad’s fault, without mentioning the context of constant Western intervention and destabilisation that’s been going on for decades.
Res Dissident
“Villager/Mary
Happy to apologise for my weather quip – I got my facts wrong on that one. Not apologising for anything else however.”
Step in the right direction but Res what about the attempt of trying to hide behind LBB’s post? Do you admit that the cover you were seeking was an intellectual lie?
Personally i found that as an insult to the profound, helpful and well-researched piece she wrote.
Look forward to a straight-forward answer.
::::
Also your: ” I don’t know – all men (and women) for that matter have their weaknesses, even the great ones. Some thought equally highly of Jimmy Saville.”
Comparing Saville to Assange!!? in response to Clark’s:
““You don’t really think that the man who established Wikileaks in defiance of the US, China, and some of the most powerful corporations in the world is frightened of a woman who never wanted him prosecuted and a torn condom with no DNA on it, do you?”
Your answer is deflective–a non-answer. The question is whether you think Assange is frightened of the accusers? Are you being intellectually dishonest, again?
Arbed
8 Feb, 2013 – 10:28 pm
NICE ONE, Arbed!
Ii’s encouraging our Resident Babbler Kuku has realised he’s on the wrong thread. He may yet just wake up to realise he’s on the wrong blog, altogether!
Clark
You fail to mention that Russia does cyber war in quite a big way as one of the Baltic republics is all too aware.
I’m sorry I just don’t take the line that the mess in Syria can all be attributed to outside forces – the Assad family have a long and considerable history of human rights abuses. Eventually when you behave like that to any country the local population start to fight back. You also ignore the point that the major outside force interfering in Syria is Russia – who supply the wherwithall for Assad to stay in power and abuse large numbers of his population. Without them Assad would have gone long ago and the country would not have descended into its current state – and although there may well be a lot of people in government in Syria with whom I would disagree – that would really be none of my business and Syria would be far nearer a state of self determination than it has been for many years.
Arbed
I aws specifically trying to avoid commenting on the particulars of the case for the reasons I gave earlier – you just don’t hold rape trials in public. And in a similar vein, Clark, I an not trying to read Assange’s motivations – just saying don’t assume what you believe to be obvious.
So where is RT in the various statistics for web site hits? Evidence please. Very strange that it should be negligible on TV and so strong online.