Het is
bijna niet te geloven, de reguliere (massa-) media die zich meer dan 2 jaar richtten op
Russiagate en die Julian Assange keer op keer hebben besmeurd, zijn ontwaakt in de Assange nachtmerrie….. Eindelijk
begrijpt men in die media wat de arrestatie van en de beschuldigingen tegen Assange betekenen en zelfs de schoothondjes van de
plutocraten, degenen die talk shows doen, zijn bijzonder
verontwaardigd…. (de wonderen zijn toch de wereld nog niet uit!)
De beschuldigingen tegen Assange, waaraan nu zelfs spionage is toegevoegd, zijn een nieuwe stap van de VS naar een volledige politiestaat….. De vrijheid van nieuwsgaring wordt met de nieuwe beschuldigingen tegen Assange zwaar geweld aangedaan….. Reken maar dat de EU zelfde stappen zal nemen, mocht de VS doorgaan op dit heilloze pad, immers alles wat de VS doet wordt hier gezien als manna uit de hemel…….
Lees het
volgende artikel van Caitlin Johnstone, door mij overgenomen van
Anti-Media en laten we hopen dat de reguliere media het werk weer
gaan doen waarvoor ze ooit ontstaan zijn: onafhankelijke berichtgeving brengen in dienst van het volk en niet van de grote ondernemingen en een
spuugrijke elite……. Jammer genoeg zijn die media in handen van dezelfde plutocraten dan wel van investeringsgroepen, waar beide groepen zoveel mogelijk winst willen maken en geen kritiek dulden op het alom tegenwoordige ijskoude en inhumane neoliberalisme, of op het ophitsen van de VS en haar oorlogshond NAVO tot (illegale) oorlogsvoering, op zo groot mogelijke schaal, immers ook dat is goed voor de winsten…….
Professional
Assange Smearers Finally Realize His Fate Is Tied To Theirs
The
Media is Finally Realizing What the Prosecution of Assange Means for
Journalism
May
24, 2019 at 8:39 am
Written
by Caitlin
Johnstone
(CJ Opinion) — Rachel
Maddow has aired a segment condemning the new
indictment against Julian Assange for
17 alleged violations of the Espionage Act.
Yes, that Rachel
Maddow.
MSNBC’s
top host began
the segment after
it was introduced
by Chris Hayes,
agreeing with her colleague that it’s surprising that more news
outlets aren’t giving this story more “wall to wall” coverage,
given its immense significance. She recapped Assange’s various
legal struggles up until this point, then accurately described
Assange’s new Espionage Act charges for publishing secret
documents.
“And
these new charges are not about stealing classified information or
outsmarting computer systems in order to illegally obtain classified
information,” Maddow said.
“It’s not about that.
These
new charges are trying to prosecute Assange for publishing that
stolen, secret material which was obtained by somebody else. And that
is a whole different kettle of fish then what he was initially
charged with.”
“By
charging Assange for publishing that stuff that was taken by Manning,
by issuing these charges today, the Justice Department has just done
something you might have otherwise thought was impossible,”
Maddow added after
explaining the unprecedented nature of this case.
“The
Justice Department today, the Trump administration today, just put
every journalistic institution in this country on Julian Assange’s
side of the ledger. On his side of the fight. Which, I know, is
unimaginable. But that is because the government is now trying to
assert this brand new right to criminally prosecute people for
publishing secret stuff, and newspapers and magazines and
investigative journalists and all sorts of different entities publish
secret stuff all the time. That is the bread and butter of what we
do.”
Maddow carefully
explained to
her audience that these new charges have nothing at all to do with
the 2016 election or any of the Russiagate nonsense the MSNBC pundit
has been devoting her life to, correctly calling what the Trump
administration is doing with Assange “a novel legal effort to punch
a huge hole in the First Amendment.” She tied this in with Trump’s
common references to the mass media as the “enemy of the people”,
finally taking mainstream liberalism into a direct confrontation with
Trump’s actual war
on the press instead of nonsense about his tweeting mean things about
Jim Acosta. She rightly highlighted the dangers of allowing a
president with a thick authoritarian streak the ability to prosecute
journalists he doesn’t like, and discussed the possibility that the
UK may not comply with this new agenda in extradition proceedings.
“I
think these 17 espionage charges against the WikiLeaks guy are a huge
deal, and a very dark development,” Maddow concluded.
“Chris Hayes this evening called it a ‘four alarm development’,
and I absolutely share that.”
“And,
you know, I know you,” Maddow continued, pointing to the camera.
“Given everything else that we know about the WikiLeaks guy, I can
feel through the television right now your mixed feelings about what
I am saying. I can feel what may be, perhaps, a certain lack of
concern about Julian Assange’s ultimate fate, given his own gleeful
and extensive personal role in trying to help a hostile foreign
government interfere in our election in order to install their chosen
president with WikiLeaks’ help. Okay? I know. Okay, I feel ya. I
got it. But, it is a recurring theme in history, heck, it is a
recurring theme in the Bible, that they always pick the least
sympathetic figures to try this stuff on first. Despite anyone’s
feelings about this spectacularly unsympathetic character at the
center of this international drama, you are going to see every
journalistic institution in this country, every First Amendment
supporter in this country, left, right and center, swallow their
feelings about this particular human and denounce what the Trump
administration is trying to do here. Because it would fundamentally
change the United States of America.”
Wow.
Make no mistake, this is a hugely significant development. This isn’t
just some columnist for the New
York Times or
the Guardian,
this is Rachel effing Maddow, the Queen Mother of all tinfoil
pussyhat-wearing Russiagate insanity. This same pundit was just a
couple of months ago not just smearing but outright lying about
Assange, deceitfully telling
her audience that
the new legal rings closing around Assange were about his 2016
publications then instructing viewers not to Google anything about it
because they’ll get computer viruses. Now that she’s recognized
that this could actually hurt her and her network directly, she’s
finally feeding her audience a different narrative out of sheer
enlightened self-interest.
The
fact that such a hugely influential figure in mainstream liberal
media is now pushing back against Assange’s prosecution, and doing
so in a way that her mainstream liberal anti-Trump audience can
relate to, cannot be over-appreciated. Maddow’s credulous audience
would eat live kittens if she told them to, so the way she’s
pushing back against a dangerous legal precedent in language they can
understand will make a difference in the way American liberals think
about Assange’s predicament. It won’t make them like him, it
won’t make them value the things he’s done, but it will get them
to finally begin resisting something that badly needs to be resisted.
And that’s huge.
The
danger has always been that this fatal blow to journalism would be
meted out with total compliance and support from a population
hammered into docility by the ongoing narrative war which has been
waged on Assange’s and WikiLeaks’ reputations with the help of
the mass media.
There
was a very real danger that thought leaders like Maddow were going to
choose their feelings over reasoning when the foot finally fell and
the charges that criminalize journalism as “espionage” were
finally put into play. I don’t think anyone would have been
surprised if she’d applied that giant intellect of hers into making
it possible to ignore it without upsetting her audience and try and
figure it out later when it was too late and the legal precedent was
set. It would have been so easy to keep feeding into the dominant
“Assange is bad so everything bad that happens to him is good”
sentiment, but she didn’t. She directly contradicted it.
She
actually chose to do the right thing. I’m gobsmacked, and it’s
not an exaggeration to say that my hope for humanity sparked up a
little today.
If
the resting smugfaced apex of liberal psychosis is getting this one
right, then many more will surely follow. And indeed, many already
are. In addition to Hayes’
coverage of the story,
MSNBC’s Ari
Melber also did a segment harshly
criticizing the implications of Trump administration’s new charges.
We’re seeing multiple segments from
CNN about the grave dangers of the legal precedent that is being set
with the superseding indictment, as well as urgent warnings about the
new charges from major publications like the New
York Times,
the Washington
Post,
and the Guardian.
The Espionage indictment of Assange for publishing is an extremely dangerous, frontal attack on the free press. Bad, bad, bad.
The outlets which have been smearing Assange relentlessly are now finding themselves forced to defend him.
A
typical comment under Maddow’s YouTube share of this segment reads
“This is very strange. Very alarming! There we go again. The GOP is
preparing the country for a Dictatorship.” And okay, that’s not
exactly what is happening (this has been a bipartisan push and it’s
not just preparations, we’re in full swing), but whatever, now this
viewer can actually see the monster’s outlines. Finally the Maddow
crowd which has been fruitlessly expending all their energy so far on
punching at Russian shadows will actually be attacking a real thing.
And
I’m quietly excited about that. I’m eager to see what happens to
the #Resistance if it actually starts #Resisting something. It
doesn’t matter that this is only happening because mainstream
liberal media outlets realized that they might be next on the
chopping block; it matters that it’s happening, period.
For
years mainstream liberals have been fixating on the fake Russiagate
psyop and rending their garments about Trump’s rude tweets while
commentators like me desperately implored them to pay attention to
the actual dangerous agendas that this administration is actually
advancing. They’ve been in a holding pattern of adamantly refusing
to do that, and now, because it’s threatening them personally,
we’re suddenly seeing a sharp deviation from that holding pattern.
As
Bill Murray said at the end of Groundhog
Day,
something is different. Anything different is good.
The Department of Justice just declared war––not on Wikileaks, but on journalism itself. This is no longer about Julian Assange: This case will decide the future of media. nytimes.com/2019/05/23/us/…
Assange Indicted Under Espionage Act, Raising First Amendment Issues
The WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange faces 17 new counts in a superseding indictment over his role in publishing classified documents in 2010.
Support
Caitlin’s work on Patreon or Paypal.
Opinion
by Caitlin
Johnstone /
Republished with permission / Medium / Report
a typo
=======================================
Zie ook:
‘Belangrijk account voor de verdediging Julian Assange geblokkeerd door Twitter‘
‘CNN met nog smeriger lastercampagne tegen Julian Assange‘
‘Julian Assange: Speciaal VN rapporteur martelen heeft grote twijfels bij onafhankelijkheid rechter‘
‘Het westen vervolgt journalist Assange, Rusland laat journalist vrij na onrust over diens gevangenschap‘ (en nog hadden de reguliere media een grote bek over Rusland, media die niet anders hebben gedaan dan collega Assange besmeuren…..)
‘VN rapport: Assange is gedemoniseerd en psychisch gemarteld‘
‘Dag van Persvrijheid: Assange wordt zoveel mogelijk uitermate hypocriet gemeden door de pers‘
‘Julian Assange (brekend nieuws) veroordeeld tot 50 weken gevangenisstraf……‘
‘Julian Assanges vervolging is de genadeklap voor klokkenluiders en (echte) journalisten‘
‘Brekend nieuws: EU neemt internet censuurwet aan……‘
‘Chelsea Manning blijft voor onbepaalde tijd in de gevangenis‘
‘VN heeft eerder de ‘detentie’ van Assange al als onwettig verklaard‘
‘Brekend nieuws: EU neemt internet censuurwet aan……‘
‘VS Navy SEALs werden gewaarschuwd geen oorlogsmisdaden te melden‘ (zo valt er niets te lekken naar WikiLeaks, of de reguliere media….)
‘‘Journalisten’ tegen openheid‘ (‘journalisten’ waaronder Jan Kuitenbrouwer en de intussen overleden Max van Weezel, al wordt de laatste niet in dat bericht genoemd. Van Weezel zei een paar jaar geleden letterlijk dat hij ‘zich voor kan stellen’ berichten voor het publiek achter te houden, m.a.w.: dat heeft hij daadwerkelijk gedaan, waarom zou je dit anders melden als ‘journalist..?’)
En gerelateerd:
‘Robert Mueller lijdt aan dementie en maakt van Russiagate een nog belachelijker verhaal‘
‘Russiagate: nog overtuigd van bestaan daarvan? Lees dit!‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht)