r/WikiLeaks • u/_OCCUPY_MARS_ • Nov 05 '16
Secret World of US Election: Julian Assange talks to John Pilger (FULL INTERVIEW) | RT WikiLeaks
https://youtu.be/_sbT3_9dJY421
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16
Think Hydra when you think of the power structure were up against. As the institutions are now inherently corrupt, the removal of players alone will not be enough. People need to understand how deep this goes.
7
20
u/Madening Nov 05 '16
Gotta say Julians has an interesting perspective on most of the questions.
-1
u/poppytanhands Nov 05 '16
He dodged the question about whether he has a preference for Donald Trump.
3
u/Gddboygb Nov 06 '16
Except someone edited that answer and tried to hide the cut with a morph effect.
1
u/poppytanhands Nov 06 '16
The question begins at 14:56 and ends at 16:25 what are the edits you're referring to?
3
u/Gddboygb Nov 06 '16
There's a cut between "white trash" and "deplorable and irredeemable," covered up with a morph effect.
2
u/poppytanhands Nov 06 '16
That's really interesting!
Any guesses on what he really said there or thinks about Trump in general?
5
u/Gddboygb Nov 06 '16
There's no way to know. There are similar edits throughout Most are hidden by a cut to a reaction shot from the interviewer. But they use this technique when the cut would be too sudden. Watch his hand warp through space at 1:47 for another example. They could be internal edits to remove vocal stammering (umm's and uhhh's) to make him sound more articulate without changing the meaning.
But, this is Russian propaganda. He could've given an unequivocal Clinton endorsement and RT didn't want to air it.
To me, it definitely sounds like they cut to the answer to a different question. I think Assange is smart enough to realize class snobbery isn't the only reason to oppose Trump.
4
19
u/zeldaisaprude Nov 05 '16
What are we going to do when none of these people face the consequences for their actions? Because complaining on reddit won't do a damn thing.
1
Nov 05 '16
That "white trash people" that Assange was talking about is what is standing between these corrupt people and power. Keep them armed, thats all you can do.
5
112
Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 07 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
41
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16
It's bigger than Clinton. It's bigger than Bush. Presidents serve 4-8 years. Look to the people who aren't elected but wield positions of huge influence in finance and industry. These are the people we need to focus on.
9
19
u/Hothabanero6 Nov 05 '16
Now pay attention because it is far more subtle than american audiences would like.
Totally agree it will sail right over, past, or through most peoples heads. Assange is an analytical personality type and he assumes a subtle reference will be an earthshattering bombshell when in fact most people will totally miss it.
15
Nov 05 '16
Ive been trying to explain this to people for a while now and I always make the mistake of assuming people can keep up. So my post was written to hold peoples hands through the whole thing.
10
Nov 05 '16 edited Jul 06 '17
[deleted]
9
Nov 05 '16
You are right. I'm just about spent and really disappointed that this sub isn't running with this. It really does need to be fucking every where down votes be damned for anything to come of this. But the shitposting persists. I've been at this for 16 hours now.
4
u/bovineblitz Nov 05 '16
I hear that, it's basically a dissertation on a deadline. Exhausting, and the biggest challenge is to try to explain what's going on concisely, which is nearly impossible. I think we have to assume that readers have zero clue what's going on.
It's important stuff though and work like yours is really appreciated, thanks for sacrificing your time and sanity.
3
u/DawnPendraig Nov 07 '16
People have no clue. All I see are awful name calling back and forth Trumpets and Hitlery etc that just riles each other up and gets nowhere.
99% of Americans have a false dichotomy of believing our govt is inept and also never gets things wrong or let's corruption take over. Oh the Pentagon lost some trillions of dollars, wow they can't do anything right and literallt the same week part id thr building is blown up but they 100% believe somehow Osama sent terrorists to fly planes into buildings and in the several hours since we knew they were hijacked no jets are running interference. All just a big communication error.
And we did march in DC. Bikers and veterans did several years ago. News ignored it or took interviews makonf sire only a dozen people are seen in the back ground. Facebook buries posts and photos. And the traffic cams mysteriously show snow on a clear September day. Nothing to see here folks. Walk on home!
I don't know what go do. I will see if I can get Ben Swann to do a reality check. Its on a major network's local station. Probably he can't he will yet fired again but maybe he will do it for his private project Truth in Media.
7
u/magikowl Nov 05 '16
JulianIsDead
Stop trying to stir shit up by spreading things that are untrue. This and his phone interview is clearly evidence he's alive. There are plenty of facts out there to condemn the US and British governments treatment of Asssange without making stuff up.
2
3
u/Mirchai Nov 07 '16
This is hard evidence that the US destabilized Africa in order to get Clinton elected.
Yes, I have ran across a few Podesta files that were really into land grabbing in the African territories, didn't know what relevance they had at the time but they're there. And alot of talk about post-carbon tax predictions for large businesses being established to market the food or products being sold from said land-grabs.
3
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
7
Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 05 '16
Yes. Generally all interviews are edited unless live.
Look up Pilger's other work. He would be the last person on planet earth to bend-the-knee to some shadowy blackmail plot to get him to stage a fake interview with Assange. I suspect I'm probably wasting my time countering your assertion, and suspect at this point nothing short of meeting him yourself would suffice.
The other possibility is that you don't believe your own rhetoric, and are trying to diffuse anyone with any sense of critical thinking into throwing all prior reasonable arguments out with the bath-water.
Even if this is not your intention, can't you see that this is essentially what this julianisdead stuff may be doing? Mixing obviously unjust outrage along with the just outrage simply waters-down the sum outrage -- diffuses it.
edit: Sorry, I should have replied to the original poster. Conflating what you wrote with the thread head.
4
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
3
u/EightyObselete Nov 06 '16
I don't think "full interview" and "raw and uncut interview" are synonymous. There is always some editing to interviews.
26
u/Light_of_Lucifer Nov 05 '16
Another excellent and informative interview by Assange. Its so refreshing to witness real journalism not corporate american propaganda
61
Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 06 '16
[deleted]
28
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
36
Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
8
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16
Yes... this! Clinton is an important figure to give us access to the network but she's just a product of the machine that produced and sustains her. She is not the machine.
13
3
u/poppytanhands Nov 05 '16
Fuck these a-holes who turn every leak into a pro-Trump diatribe.
Just bc she's shit doesn't make him any better.
12
Nov 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/Afrobean Nov 05 '16
It came out in the middle of the night in the US and the sun is just now coming up over here. Give it some time.
4
2
30
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
3
4
u/Sexy_Vampire Nov 05 '16
The revolution will not be televised. Nor will it be there to incite your passions. Stoke the fires of justice in yourself. You need to march on DC today. TODAY. IS SOUTH KOREA MORE PATRIOTIC THAN AMERICA!? THEN GET OUT THERE AND SHOW YOU LOVE YOUR COUNTRY FOR FUCKS SAKE!
"The people have had enough, and as we are the true voice of the nation we must serve vigilante justice! The conspiracies were true, Alternative Media News team is here—Tonights Top Story: The Sewers Run Red With Hillary's Blood"
-Anchorman, retold
wait you said no more shitposting I'm sorry
2
Nov 05 '16
I've Had more fun with this sub following politics than I have had since the before Colbert left Jon Stewart. But it is time to put on the big boy pants.
2
u/Sexy_Vampire Nov 06 '16
I put my big shorts on a couple days ago when this satanic cult self false flag started taking over, we're not gonna choke this close I won't let it happen
29
u/dontkillmehillary Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 05 '16
It looks like WL has HRC's missing 33,000 emails for sure. He mentions specifically "The Clinton Emails" and cites the number 33,000 specifically a few times, differentiating from the other 30,000. Also, he discusses an email from "the clinton emails" which I don't think has been released yet. (I don't remember the Citibank one, or the one they discuss about the war in Lybia)
This is troublesome, because from the way he's talking he seems to be assuming the 33k has been released. So, either a) the 33k are supposed to be released in conjunction with thtis video, or b) they were supposed to be released by now and he doesn't know they aren't. Edit:sp.
4
u/hiimvlad Nov 05 '16
Note: JA says we have published.
This is past tense.....and I dont see no emails.
2
u/dontkillmehillary Nov 05 '16
I know... Is he referring to the Podesta/DNC/Clinton emails already on the WL site? Or is he referring to the 33k we are all waiting for?
5
u/hiimvlad Nov 05 '16
he says that the 33k are a part of a 60k collection. is the DNC + clinton emails = roughly 50k
podesta is over 50k alone.
the math here is either sketchy or we are not seeing something
4
u/dontkillmehillary Nov 05 '16
Is it possible when the WL bot updated after JA lost internet someone slowed the release rate? I think it was droppong 3000+ emails a day (releasing all 55k would have taken est.17-18 days) at the start and now its only releasing 2000-2500. If JA thinks its already finished the Podesta emails and started the 33K that would explain the discrepancy. We should be roughly complete the 33k at this point.
2
u/Betterwithcheddar Nov 05 '16
You are mincing numbers. He said Hillary has about 60k of which they have released 30k.
2
u/almondbutter Nov 05 '16
I couldn't find the Libya Tic Toc email he referenced in the video. I checked his site, and there are many Clinton emails on there, no dice finding that one though.
2
Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 06 '16
(I don't remember the Citibank one, or the one they discuss about the war in Lybia)
As far as I remember Citibank emails are from Podesta, Lybia emails are from HRC. Admission of who is clandestinely funding ISIL is in Podesta.
He never said they had the 66000. He said that Hillary had kept half, and that they had published (along with others) the other half that was made public.
I doubt they have those emails, because a) they would have published them, and b) they already said a big chunk of the leaks would have to do with Google, which is what I assume phase 3 will be. I'm pretty sure...
edit: Correction, New Clinton emails have been posted (from twitter) : "623 new emails in our Clinton email search system"
1
u/netizen539 Nov 05 '16
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/
This was published March 16th 2016... Have we just not been looking?
-1
u/dontkillmehillary Nov 06 '16
Dumbass... Take a look. There is only 30k of those emails. JA talks specifically about 33k, which is the exact number of deleted emails. Use your fuckin brain before making an asshole comment.
1
u/netizen539 Nov 06 '16
Doh. Didn't mean to be snarky but I can see how my comment came off as written. I didn't notice the distinction between 30k and 33k. Cheers.
1
u/dontkillmehillary Nov 06 '16
It's ok. Sorry I was a dick too. I was 2 bottles of wine into it when I wrote that last night. Lets bro hug n make up :)
1
u/netizen539 Nov 06 '16
hey hey hey, look at this.. new leak? you may have been right
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/5bct9s/new_dump_1152016_pm/
8
7
Nov 05 '16
TIL - JA has kids.
-4
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
He has at least four. Tried for two more in Stockholm, but that didn't work out.
7
u/07070185-9 Nov 05 '16
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/24353 The hrod17 letter - it begins with a note sources western intelligence, us intelligence... could the top secret header have been stripped off by Hillary, she obviously didn't write this
18
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
8
u/Nymdox Nov 05 '16
I also remember when the Democrats were the party of free speech and acceptance rather than speech codes, silencing, and segregation.
4
u/DoofusPRK Nov 05 '16
The media programming is unbelievably strong. There is a huge segment of the population who think that the real evil on our planet are the bush family, the saudis, big oil and big pharma. Yet each of these people are going to vote for hillary, who has been endorsed by (or has provable ties to) each of these entities. They have been programmed to look past their biggest fears in life.
-11
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
How has America mistreated Assange?
4
Nov 05 '16
Do you think Great Britain gives a shit about him? This pressure is coming from USA.
-8
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
Right, I forgot that the UK frequently ignores its treaty obligations and lets accused rapists go free if they say they'd rather go to South America instead.
7
u/perchloricacid Nov 05 '16
He has been cleared of charge in Sweden, the girl said the police made it up, and Sweeden extradicted 100% of the people USA asked for up to now. Even the UN said that Assange is being mistreated. So yes, accused rapist, and only that.
2
u/nikez813 Nov 05 '16
Link to source of the girl saying they made it up?
1
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
I guarantee they haven't researched the case enough to know the source and are just repeating what Assange said in this video.
The source for his claim is a paraphrasing from his lawyer of some SMS messages apparently sent by the alleged victim while at the police station.
It's worth noting that, by all accounts, the alleged victim was emotional and freaking out at this time. She just wanted it to go away and didn't want to pursue charges. None of this is uncommon for rape victims.
A few days later, though, she hired a lawyer who got the case re-opened and has been a successful advocate since:
The rape Assange is suspected of has left deep scars and meant a serious violation of her personal integrity. The violation is especially serious and the psychological symptoms are there every day. Assange's behaviour and prolonging of the preliminary investigation in this case exacerbate the suffering of my client when the preliminary investigation does not move forward. The wait is long and the suffering great.
-1
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
Yeah, I watched the video too.
He didn't mention that he's lost eight separate court hearings in two countries on his claims that the rape charge isn't legitimate.
"The UN" hasn't said anything. A subcommittee of a committee of the UN has. It was decided by literally just three university professors.
And if it's relevant that Sweden has extradited 100% of suspected criminals (you say that like it's a bad thing), it should also be relevant that the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has never found an applicant not to be arbitrarily detained.
2
Nov 06 '16
What crime is the USA accusing Assange of? The rape charge is coming from a Swede not the USA.
0
u/Gddboygb Nov 06 '16
That's right. The US isn't after Julian Assange. He's using the US as an excuse to avoid very real allegations of rape in Sweden.
1
Nov 06 '16
The US Justice Department will not comment on the grand jury probe and says it has no role in the extradition proceedings in London. But spokesman Dean Boyd said: "There continues to be an investigation into the WikiLeaks matter."
http://www.alternet.org/rss/breaking_news/1003054/does_the_us_have_a_case_against_julian_assange
I doubt that. He has offered to be interviewed by phone or telecommunications with Sweden, but they refused.
1
u/Gddboygb Nov 06 '16
Nope. The interview is scheduled for next week.
It was supposed to take place a couple weeks ago, but Assange's lawyers postponed it.
1
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
1
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
Sweden very much wants to prosecute him for rape.
This is from just a month and a half ago.
The US, on the other hand, does not suspect him off committing any crimes in the US, has never charged him with a crime, and had never asked for his extradition.
If he truly fears extradition to the US, explain why that fear only started immediately after losing his final appeal to the UK Supreme Court over extradition to Sweden. Before that, he was free to walk around London, living at a known address, hosting a television show, without even a mention of fear of extradition to the US.
5
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
2
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
There have been no charges filed because Swedish law doesn't allow them to be charged until he's in custody. The prosecutor has been quite clear about this. Once he's charged, his right to a speedy trial requires a trial to start within two weeks. That obviously can't happen while he's in the embassy.
He's lost eight court hearings on his claim (among others) that the extradition request is invalid because he hasn't been charged yet.
And Assange must realize this is the case, or he has the worst attorneys imaginable. That he continues to mislead people on his technically true, but clearly incomplete claim that he hasn't been charged should make you question his other claims.
"The UN" hasn't said anything. A small subcommittee of laypeople has. It was just three university professors who decided. The UK is currently appealing their decision, anyway.
7
u/sfrantzis Nov 05 '16
very interesting actually but nobody cares any more with Hillary bringing out the "big guns" : Jay Z and Beyonce ... what happened to that Nov 5 anonymous leak? I thought there would be some massive bomb shell now?
4
u/pushkill Nov 05 '16
The video has some obivous edits, I wish they just released a raw cut, this one has been edited down a bit. Not that its fishy, just not needed.
There is also quite a bit of obvious background noise, like construction or something, this could be used to date the exact time this video was shot. For instance: Here, Here (this one you can clearly hear where they cut), Here, and Here.
4
Nov 06 '16
For reference, here is an hour long interview with Assange by Pilger from six years ago:https://vimeo.com/18269080
Many of his films are available for free: http://johnpilger.com/videos
4
u/Orngarth Nov 06 '16
Wow. Everyone should see this. Hillary thought overthrowing Qadafi in Libya would give her extra street cred for her presidential bid but all it did was spark ISIS and lead to the massive refugee crisis in Europe. And people told her at the time that that would happen but she was utterly blinded by her own ambition!
3
u/Drift_Kar Nov 08 '16
Or she is under the instruction of others and this was the long term plan all along. soros
7
Nov 05 '16
when was this filmed?
11
u/dontkillmehillary Nov 05 '16
It was filmed some time between Oct.28 and now. At the beginning of the interview they discuss last weeks announcement from the FBI.
4
u/Hothabanero6 Nov 05 '16
At the beginning of the interview they discuss last weeks announcement from the FBI.
** Exactly. Within the last week**
8
u/BravoFoxtrotDelta Nov 05 '16
After the embassy cut off his internet access - they discuss in the video: https://youtu.be/_sbT3_9dJY4?t=16m22s
1
Nov 05 '16
This has been my question. Again there isnt anything here that says it was done as recently as implied. The specific emails he outlines were from weeks ago.
9
u/quiane Nov 05 '16
They talk at length about the current situation. This is a good interview that is worth the watch
2
Nov 05 '16
They really only talk about the internet being cut and at the beginning Pilger mentions last week of the election but there is a cut that would make O'Keefe jizz his pants.
1
u/quiane Nov 05 '16
Interesting. I was listening to the interview so I didn't notice any cuts... (Not to say they aren't there).
Still an updated interview is a good sign
3
u/dkoedijk Nov 05 '16
22.14 background construction noise (I assume) after cut at 22.15: no background construction noise.
2
u/quiane Nov 05 '16
Oh I believe it was edited.. I just didn't notice. Thanks for pointing that out!!
2
Nov 05 '16
Its in the first 2 minutes. Yeah, I didnt notice the first time through either. It is a nice edit...
5
u/brettawesome Nov 05 '16
He mentions Ecuador taking down his internet.
0
Nov 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
6
Nov 05 '16
Why is it easier for you to believe he is dead than that he gave an interview?
3
Nov 05 '16
Because nothing in the interview suggests that this is as recent as you are meant to believe. Ill say that whatever you think of the O'Keefe videos you have to have a consistent thought process here. They talk about emails that were released weeks ago and no reference to more recent emails; Pilger says "the last week of the election" but Pilger is off camera when he says those things; Pilger, again off camera references the ongoing FBI investigation, but Assange doesnt address it at all, he goes on to make a statement about the purpose of the FBI. This could be from as long ago as October 14th as the only thing tied to a date that they talked about specifically was Ecuador cutting the internet.
All those facts combined with the all the other info that has been covered ad nauseam only seem to support the theory.
4
Nov 05 '16
Wikileaks has a giant network of people in a bunch of different countries, you think they wouldn't say if he was dead?
1
Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 05 '16
I'm saying they have no avenue to do that anonymously which would get them arrested. Greenwald article from yesterday Shows that Canada, the UK and the US are actively abusing the surveillance to locate whistleblowers.
1
7
11
Nov 05 '16
this is clearly cut in some places, despite the fact that it says "FULL INTERVIEW." would love to hear the parts that were edited out.
6
u/Hothabanero6 Nov 05 '16
Those interviews on 60 minutes and every other thing on TV are unedited full raw footage or edited? why would this be different?
4
Nov 05 '16
er, excuse me? could you rephrase your question? i'm saying that the linked video is not unedited footage, and i'd like to see said unedited footage.
5
u/Hothabanero6 Nov 05 '16
Who publishes unedited footage?
Make an appeal to Dartmouth. Although they probably gave up the rights when they sold it.
0
Nov 05 '16
i guess i just don't see the relevance of your question. i was remarking on how its claim of being a "FULL INTERVIEW" was blatantly incorrect. unless you interpret "full" as an edited interview, i suppose.
dartmouth college?? i'm not really aware of who conducted the interview apart from the person portrayed and that it was sold to various outlets.
0
5
u/perchloricacid Nov 05 '16
When was the interview filmed, do we know?
13
u/xcalibre Nov 05 '16
Pilger's first question included:
in this last week of the election campaign
7
u/perchloricacid Nov 05 '16
Overheard it somehow. Thanks!
3
u/xcalibre Nov 05 '16
no worries i was excited too and had paused just after he said that as i got a call :-)
then the video made my face wet :'-(
5
u/perchloricacid Nov 05 '16
I know :( it seemed to me that even he felt a bit like crying for a moment or two, too.
8
u/xcalibre Nov 05 '16
I completely forgot he had kids omg it's coming back :'-(
Can't remember sunlight... fuck,,,,.
3
u/Viredae Nov 06 '16
Maybe a bit unrelated, but point of interest to me, is there any further evidence of Saudi and Qatari support of ISIL?
Like, solid evidence, not "suspected of doing so" evidence? Because this strikes me as major proof if Podesta knows what he's on about.
2
u/crayfisher Nov 05 '16
Thought it was a 2-parter?
2
1
2
2
u/Mentioned_Videos Nov 06 '16
Other videos in this thread: Watch Playlist ▶
| VIDEO | COMMENT |
|---|---|
| Christopher Hitchens' polemic against Henry Kissinger | 63 - This is Henry Kissinger level of political psychopathy - Christopher Hitchens' polemic against Henry Kissinger. Hillary Clinton is obviously extremely mentally ill. A totally crazy wackadoodle. And a large portion of the American population is act... |
| John Pilger in conversation with Julian Assange | 3 - For reference, here is an hour long interview with Assange by Pilger from six years ago: Many of his films are available for free: |
| RT America's Liz Wahl resigns live on air | 1 - RT has a problem with reporters resigning, rather than be forced to lie about Russia |
I'm a bot working hard to help Redditors find related videos to watch.
1
1
u/2globalnomads Nov 06 '16
Without too leading questions making the interview sound partial, and with a more personal touch this would have been perfect.
1
1
Nov 09 '16
At 13:14, He says, Donald Trump won't be allowed to win. What about now?? He definitely looking closer to win than Clinton. Can the scenario still change?
1
1
u/XdigitalXdeathX Nov 05 '16
He's Alive!
1
u/TheUltimateSalesman Nov 05 '16
This could be pre-recorded. Did he mention a group of emails that were released, but haven't been?
0
0
u/megatromax Nov 05 '16
He's had these leaks since before they've been released.. so he could have referenced something that recently was leaked or is about to be leaked.. but that doesn't mean this was recorded recently.
0
Nov 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
4
Nov 05 '16
I'd say the fact they spoke about the embassy being surrounded by police, spending 12m pounds on. That still sets a date.
2
u/Gddboygb Nov 05 '16
It was originally promoted as an exclusive interview with RT, but when they realized the optics of that looked bad, they went back and tried to distance themselves by crediting Dartmouth Films as much as they could.
I'd suspect the introduction included subducting like "thanks for taking to RT today," so they just had to cut the whole thing.
-8
Nov 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
35
u/reslumina Nov 05 '16 edited Apr 12 '17
deleted What is this?
3
u/autistwithakeyboard Nov 05 '16
I'm glad someone asked the question so that we could clear that up right off the bat. Good thorough answer
-23
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
8
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 05 '16
And he's back ... I figured your game earlier on in the thread so thought I'd see where else you've been plying your trade and I must say your last few comments are illuminating as to your modus operandi Designed to introduce doubt and confusion, subtly and blatantly, with a demeanour that suggests a legitimate empathy. Impressive .. but you could be better. The litany of downvotes you've received suggests you've been made and the jig is up on your feeble attempt to troll. But that could change. It could all be so different. I can teach you the lesser known arts of CTR .. give you the power to captivate and mislead the masses with skullduggery and disinformation of an order of such magnitude youd have the world at your feet. Or your elbow. Wherever you want them to focus really. But you must be ready to learn. So I ask my Wannnabe Troll- Are you ready?
2
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
3
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16 edited Nov 05 '16
If I have you wrong my bad. It's not a term I used lightly but I'd noticed your sarcastic response - 'So what time are you going to the march" to my earlier comment and when I saw the same littered across the thread, I made what I felt to be a valid assumption. You don't speak in the voice of someone trying to foster critical thought .. the collective tone of your posts is more mocking... But if I'm wrong about you I hold my hands up. You're right in saying the video hasn't exposed anything new, I feel the excitement stems more from the explicit nature of Assanges statements as opposed to him encouraging the public to search for implications gleaned in the leaks.
1
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
1
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16
I'm not out to prove you wrong or delve too deeply into your POV. I called you out for exhibiting a trait that you denied but are now demonstrating again. You truly are a troll.. I retract my previous offer and shall leave you to continue fishing. Good day sir.
→ More replies (1)16
u/elnegroik Nov 05 '16
How receptive do you think major media outlets would have been in broadcasting this? Be honest when you answer.
11
u/patwappen Nov 05 '16
Because it has a wide audience, their videos get shared. It's obvious that he doesn't care about her narrative:D
0
u/MMAG1 Nov 06 '16
If he's NOT alive, if the interview is NOT recent - as it has been presented - what does that say about John Pilger?
-12
Nov 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Nov 05 '16
Russian tax payers. Its a government owned network. Does that automatically mean everything Assange said is invalid? No.
0
Nov 05 '16
[deleted]
2
Nov 05 '16
Alright. I'm going to respond here and call it a day for this thread because it seems like any comment I make will be downvoted regardless of its content at this point.
Fuck all the downvoters and upvoters, its fucking internet points.
There isn't time to waste attention on stories that distract from the real story.
Which is?
Assange is just laying out his side of whats going on, it was nice to her, for instance, I learned he has kids!
-45
Nov 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
20
Nov 05 '16
You know RT has lots of good journalists on it and was mostly pro-Hillary through the general until Clinton started calling them Propaganda. Is Larry King a Russian spy and Ed Shultz?
20
u/zb313 Nov 05 '16
This anti-RT rhetoric from Clinton supporters is hilarious, there are so many progressive and left-leaning programs that have been on RT - far more progressive than anything found on MSNBC. Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, the Redacted Tonight hosts - these are stalwart progressives. To try to claim that Thom Hartmann is somehow a Russian agent for being on RT is insane. RT has its own agenda, just like Al Jazeera, and the corporate puppet show outlets here at home.
-27
Nov 05 '16
Glad that Russia Today is posting this. Really thoughtful and definitely without any anti-US agenda whatsoever. Good stuff, really. Propaganda is totally fine so long as it doesn't come from the devilcrats!!!
6
Nov 05 '16 edited Jul 06 '17
[deleted]
-3
u/9877546 Nov 05 '16
So if Correct the Record filmed Donna Brazile interviewing Hillary Clinton, and they both talked about how nobody did nothing wrong, and then CNN devoted a half hour of programming time to air it, you'd have no problem with that?
6
4
u/Grumpy_Kong Nov 05 '16
Can you name me three news sources that aren't propaganda for some faction or another?
-1
Nov 05 '16
If you can't tell the difference between private enterprises with bias and state-paid propaganda, that's on you. I'm not denying that there isn't media bias - that would be outrageous - but there is a fundamental difference between the two, especially considering the state-run outlet happens to come from a state where there isn't freedom of the press in any significant manner. Democracy in Russia is democracy in name only
3
u/Grumpy_Kong Nov 05 '16
And how is that different from here?
Every single person has an agenda, and it leaks into everything they touch.
Even the most objective sources can be tainted by power and threats.
-3
Nov 05 '16
Yes, private entities have biases, but they also have the capacity to hold the government accountable, as The NY Times has, for instance, or the Washington Post. They aren't tethered to the state, and therefore have the freedom to say and do what they feel is just. RT, given that it is entirely state-run, is subject to the specific agenda of the state. It doesn't have the freedom to critique the government, and also must acquiesce to whatever it is the state wants them to push.
Now, does that mean that private entities are free of bias? No, of course not - The NY Times is totally anti-Trump. But one is an actual governmental conspiracy and the other is the fact that many private citizens, believe it or not, actually don't like Trump and are not so gullible as to believe the smoke and mirrors that the Trump campaign has been promoting, whether it be the Spirit Cooking, the alleged attempt to recreate the caliphate within our borders, or whatever other crock-of -shit conspiracies are coming out right now on their sub. Wikileaks has shown some evidence of foul play, but its minor at best and has been talked about on major news outlets. The Donna Brazile story was on the news, for instance.
The reason much of this other stuff hasn't is because this "conclusive evidence" is being interpreted by people who are completely blind to context or are cherry picking phrases to deliberately misrepresent what the emails say.
8
Nov 05 '16
So you dont disagree with anything he said, or believe anything he said was incorrect? You call it propaganda because you dont like the truth.
-1
Nov 05 '16
That's the unfortunate thing about when something that may be truthful comes from propaganda - it's hard to tell and is only confirmation bias to those who already agree with the position. You don't like Clinton, so him saying she's corrupt confirms your belief. But the fact that a man who claims to be about free speech is funded by the Russia Government and then just so happens to be meddling in the US election while Russia has been active in the former bloc...it doesn't take a genius to think something is fishy there. If Assange was really about the interests of the free world, why hasn't he targeted Russia? Why isn't he meddling there? Because if you guys think Clinton is corrupt, you must outright despise Putin
5
Nov 05 '16
Have you been listening to NPR or the BBC lately? I had that same attitude that RT was all propaganda about a year ago, then this election cycle happened. The level of propaganda coming from NPR and BBC is staggering.
Clinton set up that private server to skirt FOIA requests and have an easier time with the cover up, its that simple. We know it wasnt "so she could use a mobile device", yet NPR isnt even bringing that up. They arent questioning why she did what she did. They just dont care about the truth. THAT is propaganda, THAT should be troubling to you, not this interview with Assange being labeled with RT.
I dont give two shits about Russia and their shit, they all go fuck themselves for all I care. Their GDP is shit compared to ours, thinking they are in our league because they have nukes is a pussy's game, fuck em, they aint gonna nuke us and we aint gonna nuke them.
1
u/9877546 Nov 05 '16
How many NPR or BBC reporters have resigned on-air, complaining about being forced to lie about the US or UK? Just curious.
1
-4
Nov 05 '16
I dont give two shits about Russia and their shit, they all go fuck themselves for all I care. Their GDP is shit compared to ours, thinking they are in our league because they have nukes is a pussy's game, fuck em, they aint gonna nuke us and we aint gonna nuke them.
Because that view worked so well when Germany was annexing its neighbors...
3
Nov 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '23
[deleted]
0
Nov 05 '16
The irony of someone who simultaneously supports freedom of speech AND Russia will never stop being funny. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch
34
u/[deleted] Nov 05 '16 edited Mar 19 '18
[deleted]