Shame on the @guardian
& @KathViner who are promoting
& propagating a massive misinformation using the man who exposed
inconvenient truths as a scape goat in the USA-Russian affair.
"Last week, The Guardian published
a "bombshell" front-page story asserting, without producing any
evidence, that Julian Assange had secretly met the recently convicted former
Donald Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort in 2013, 2015 and 2016. The
Guardian's attack on Assange came only days after it was confirmed that he has
been indicted some time ago,under seal, and that the U.S. will seek his
extradition from the U.K. The story was published just hours before a hearing
brought by media groups trying to stop the U.S. government from keeping its
attempts to extradite Assange secret.
The story went viral, repeated
uncritically by many media outlets around the world, including Newsweek.
This falsely cast Assange into the center of a conspiracy between Putin and
Trump.The Guardian even had the gall to post a call to its readers to
donate to protect "independent journalism when factual, trustworthy
reporting is under threat."
These three meetings with
Manafort did not happen.
As The Guardian admitted,
the Embassy's visitor logs show no such visits. The Guardian claims
they saw a separate internal document written by Ecuador's Senain intelligence
agency that lists "Paul Manaford [sic]" as one of several well-known
guests.'
Manafort, through his spokesman,
has stated: “This story is totally false and deliberately libelous. I have
never met Julian Assange or anyone connected to him.”
It appears The Guardian editors
tried to backpedal from the original story with post-publication stealth edits,
but they have not issued a correction or apology.
The journalists who wrote this
story must surely know that guests who enter the embassy must be registered in
logs, as pointed out by the former first secretary at the Ecuadorian Embassy
from 2010 to July 2018.
Ecuadorian intelligence has spent
millions of dollars on setting up security cameras inside its embassy in London
to monitor Julian Assange and his visitors. The Guardian has
previously published still shots from those cameras. However, in the case of
the claimed Manafort visit, they apparently demanded no such verification.
They also overlooked the simple
fact that millions of pounds have been spent over the years by the Metropolitan
police and secret services on monitoring the entrances of the embassy 24/7.
This is part of a series of
stories from The Guardian, such as its recent claim of a "Russia
escape plot" to enable Assange to flee the embassy, which is not true.
What do these stories have in
common? They all give the U.K. and Ecuador political cover to arrest Assange
and for the U.S. to extradite him. Any journalists worth their salt should be
investigating who is involved in these plots.
Mike Pompeo, when he was CIA
director, said the U.S. was "working to take down" WikiLeaks. This
was months after WikiLeaks released thousands of files on the CIA, the
"largest leak of CIA documents in history," called Vault 7. The
Guardian seems determined to link Assange to Russia, in full knowledge
that such claims are prejudicial in the context of Mueller's probe in the U.S.
and the Democratic National Committee lawsuit against WikiLeaks.
Numerous commentators have
criticized The Guardian for its coverage of Assange. Glenn Greenwald,
former columnist for The Guardian, writes that the paper has
"...such a pervasive and unprofessionally personal hatred for Julian
Assange that it has frequently dispensed with all journalistic standards in order
to malign him." Another former Guardian journalist, Jonathan
Cook, writes: "The propaganda function of the piece is patent. It is
intended to provide evidence for long-standing allegations that Assange
conspired with Trump, and Trump's supposed backers in the Kremlin, to damage
Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential race."
Hours before The
Guardian published its article, WikiLeaks received knowledge of the story
and "outed" it, with a denial, to its 5.4 million Twitter followers.
The story then made the front page, and The Guardian asserted they
had not received a denial prior to publication—as they had failed to contact
the correct person.
A simple retraction and apology
will not be enough. This persecution of Assange is one of the most serious attacks
on journalism in recent times."
Article published in Newsweek on 7 December 2018 by Kristinn Hrafnsson
No comments:
Post a Comment