Media tonen ware gezicht door weigering Julian Assange te verdedigen

Door de weigering Assange te verdedigen, tonen de reguliere media hun ware gezicht, aldus de kop van een artikel van Caitlin Johnstone op Media.com en hieronder overgenomen van Anti-Media. Een top advocaat van de New York Times (NYT), David McCraw waarschuwde een zaal vol rechters dat de vervolging van WikiLeaks journalist Julian Assange een gevaarlijk precedent zal scheppen en zou kunnen eindigen met het beschadigen van de reguliere (massa-) media..... (ha! ha! ha! Wat er nog te beschadigen is aan de reguliere media is me een raadsel, gezien het enorme gehalte aan nepnieuws ['fake news] en de leugens die daar dag in dag uit ten toon worden gespreid.....)

Volgens McCraw zullen wetshandhavers uiteindelijk weinig verschil kunnen zien tussen een internetplatform als WikiLeaks en mediaorganen als de New York Times en de Washington Post (WaPo)..... Lullig werden de woorden van McCraw niet gepubliceerd in 'zijn eigen' NYT..... (!!) Echter zolang de reguliere media de leugens van politiek en geheime diensten maar blijven herhalen, zal er geen vuiltje aan de lucht zijn.....

Het publiceren van o.a. uitgelekte gegevens die geheim werden gehouden voor het volk, is in feite de taak van de echte journalistiek, immers het is de taak van de journalistiek om de machthebbers te controleren, het volk daarover in te lichten* en het publiek tevens te leren kritisch naar de machthebbers te kijken.....

Daar wringt dan ook de schoen aldus Johnstone, de reguliere media hebben deze taken al lang bij het grofvuil gezet en schikken zich naar de eisen van overheid en degenen die deze media in handen hebben, miljardairs en beursgenoteerde bedrijven......... Niet voor niets dat de journalisten van de reguliere media Assange keer op keer demoniseren en de leugens van de politiek en geheime diensten als CIA en FBI (notoire leugenaars) over bijvoorbeeld de zogenaamde bemoeienis van Rusland met de VS verkiezingen blijven herhalen, ook al is er geen nanometer bewijs voor......

Daarover gesproken: hoorde onlangs een Belgische 'journalist' die het gore lef had te zeggen dat hij de 'stapel aan bewijzen' voor die Russische inmenging met de VS presidentsverkiezingen had gelezen, een keiharde leugen, daar die bewijzen (nog steeds) niet bestaan.....

Lees deze korte mooie analyse van Caitlin Johnstone:

In Refusing to Defend Assange, Mainstream Media Exposes Its True Nature

July 29, 2018 at 10:24 pm

Written by Caitlin Johnstone

(CJ Opinion) — Last Tuesday a top lawyer for the New York Times named David McCraw warned a room full of judges that the prosecution of Julian Assange for WikiLeaks publications would set a very dangerous precedent which would end up hurting mainstream news media outlets like NYT, the Washington Post, and other outlets which publish secret government documents.

“I think the prosecution of him would be a very, very bad precedent for publishers,” McCraw said. “From that incident, from everything I know, he’s sort of in a classic publisher’s position and I think the law would have a very hard time drawing a distinction between The New York Times and WikiLeaks.”

Do you know where I read about this? Not in the New York Times.

“Curiously, as of this writing, McCraw’s words have found no mention in the Times itself,” activist Ray McGovern wrote for the alternative media outlet Consortium News. “In recent years, the newspaper has shown a marked proclivity to avoid printing anything that might risk its front row seat at the government trough.”

Consortium News@Consortiumnews

Though The New York Times itself has not reported it, it’s No. 2 lawyer told a group of judges that the prosecution of Julian Assange could have dire consequences for the Times itself, explains Ray McGovern.https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/25/the-gray-lady-thinks-twice-about-assanges-prosecution/ …

3:40 PM - Jul 26, 2018

The Gray Lady Thinks Twice About Assange's Prosecution

Though The New York Times itself has not reported it, it's No. 2 lawyer told a group of West Coast judges that prosecution of Julian Assange by the U.S. government could have dire consequences for...

consortiumnews.com

• 351
• 321 people are talking about this

So let’s unpack that a bit. It is now public knowledge that the Ecuadorian government is actively seeking to turn Assange over to be arrested by the British government. This was initially reported by RT, then independently confirmed by The Intercept, and is today full mainstream public knowledge being reported by mainstream outlets like CNN. It is also public knowledge that Assange’s asylum was granted by the Ecuadorian government due to a feared attempt to extradite him to the United States and prosecute him for WikiLeaks publications. Everyone from President Donald Trump to Attorney General Jeff Sessions to now-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to ranking House Intelligence Committee member Adam Schiff to Democratic members of the US Senate have made public statements clearly indicating that there is a US government interest in getting Assange out of the shelter of political asylum and into prison.

The New York Times is aware of this, and as evidenced by McCraw’s comments it is also aware of the dangerous precedent that such a prosecution would set for all news media publications. The New York Times editorial staff are aware that the US government prosecuting a publisher for publishing important documents that had been hidden from the public would make it impossible for the Times to publish the same kind of material without fear of the same legal repercussions. It is aware that the maneuvers being taken against Assange present a very real existential threat to the possibility of real journalism and holding power to account.

You might think, therefore, that we’d be seeing a flood of analyses and op-eds from the New York Times aggressively condemning any movement toward the prosecution of Julian Assange. You might expect all media outlets in America to be constantly sounding the alarm about this, especially since the threat is coming from the Trump administration, which outlets like the New York Timesare always eager to circulate dire warnings about. You might expect every talking head on CNN and NBC to be ominously citing Assange as the clearest and most egregious case yet of Trump’s infamous “war on the free press”. Leaving aside the issues of morality, compassion and human rights that come with Assange’s case, you might think that if for no other reason than sheer unenlightened self interest they’d be loudly and aggressively defending him.

And yet, they don’t. And the fact that they don’t shows us what they really are.

Belinda Noakes@belindanoakes

A fine piece of work. I see a handful of international journalists brave enough to write about this. Where are the others? Can they not see that if Assange is persecuted to death, they’re next? #unity4J

stefania maurizi@SMaurizi

Dear Readers, our op-ed on Julian #Assange and #WikiLeaks published in @consortiumnews https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/19/inside-wikileaks-working-with-the-publisher-that-changed-the-world/ … has been shared by more than 10,000 readers, as for now we have 100 comments: THANK YOU! Without you, our work would be completely useless

12:46 AM - Jul 26, 2018

• 55
• 26 people are talking about this

WikiLeaks

✔@wikileaks

Replying to @belindanoakes

They're not next. Very few will ever publish anything substantive enough to generate serious blowback.

1:15 AM - Jul 26, 2018

• 111
• 44 people are talking about this

Theoretically, journalism is meant to help create an informed populace and hold power to account. That’s why it’s the only profession explicitly named in the United States Constitution, and why freedom of the press has enjoyed such constitutional protections throughout US history. The press today is failing to protect Julian Assange because it has no intention of creating an informed populace or holding power to account.

This is not to suggest the existence of some grand, secret conspiracy among US journalists. It’s just a simple fact that plutocrats own most of the US news media and hire the people who run it, which has naturally created an environment where the best way to advance one’s career is to remain perpetually inoffensive to the establishment upon which plutocrats have built their respective empires. This is why you see ambitious reporters on Twitter falling all over themselves to be the first with a pithy line that advances establishment agendas whenever breaking news presents an opportunity to do so; they are aware that their social media presence is being assessed by potential employers and allies for establishment loyalism. This also why so many of those aspiring journalists attack Assange and WikiLeaks whenever possible.

“Everyone hoping to gain admission to the cultural elite must now strenuously cultivate their social media so as to avoid controversy,” journalist Michael Tracey observed recently. “Eventually they will internalize controversy-avoidance as a virtue, not a societal imposition. Result: a more boring, conformist elite culture.”

A great way for an aspiring journalist to avoid controversy is to never, ever defend Assange or WikiLeaks on social media or in any media outlet, and certainly under no circumstances allow yourself to look like the sort of journo who might someday publish the sorts of materials that WikiLeaks publishes. An excellent way to prove yourself is to become yet another author of yet another one of the many, many smear pieces that have been written about Assange and WikiLeaks.

Common Dreams@commondreams

Why Americans Need to Defend Julian Assange’s Freedom http://ow.ly/qUJ130l9O1G 

2:10 AM - Jul 28, 2018

Why Americans Need to Defend Julian Assange’s Freedom

Criminalizing the act of publishing through the Espionage Act destroys the First Amendment as the guardian of democracy.. Over 50 years ago, in his letter from the Birmingham Jail, addressing a...

commondreams.org

• 56
• 52 people are talking about this

Mainstream media outlets and those who thrive within them have no intention of rocking the boat and losing their hard-earned privilege and access. Conservative mass media will continue to defend the US president, and liberal media will continue to defend the CIA and the FBI. Both will help advance war, ecocide, military expansionism, surveillance and police militarization, and none will leak anything that is damaging to the power structures that they have learned to serve. They will remain innocuous, uncontroversial defenders of the rich and powerful at all times.

Meanwhile, alternative media outlets are defending Assange ferociously. Just today I’ve seen articles from Consortium News, World Socialist Website, Disobedient Media, Antiwar and Common Dreams decrying the persecution of the most important government transparency advocate living today. Alternative media outlets and independent writers aren’t bound by establishment servitude, so the value of WikiLeaks is clear as day. One’s eyes are only blinded to the pernicious behaviors of power when power is signing one’s paycheck.

Mass media outlets in America and around the world have fully discredited themselves with their failure to defend a publisher who actually holds power to account and brings facts into the light of truth to create an informed populace. Every day that goes by where they don’t unequivocally condemn any attempt to prosecute Assange is another day in the pile of evidence that corporate media outlets serve power and not truth. Their silence is a tacit admission that they are nothing other than stenographers and propagandists for the most powerful forces on earth.

Support Caitlin’s work on Patreon or Paypal.

Opinion by Caitlin Johnstone / Republished with permission / Medium / Report a typo

=====================================
* In Nederland durfde de zwaar over een keeshondendrol getilde zakkenwasser Max van Weezel, die zich godbetert journalist durft te noemen, te zeggen 'dat hij zich voor kan stellen bepaalde zaken niet te publiceren.......' Ondanks deze uitspraak en een onnoemelijk aantal andere 'journalistieke' uitglijders, wordt deze kwezel geëerd door het grootste deel van de andere Nederlandse 'journalisten...' Wat dan weer genoeg zegt over 'de kwaliteit' van de Nederlandse reguliere journalistiek...... Voor berichten met blunders van van Weezel, klik op het label met zijn naam, direct onder dit bericht. (als na een aantal berichten het laatste telkens wordt herhaald, even opnieuw op dat label klikken en wel die onder het laatst gelezen bericht)

PS: het is vrijwel zeker dat Ecuador Assange op de Londense straat (hij zit al jaren in de ambassade van Ecuador in Londen) zal zetten en hij na zijn arrestatie zal worden uitgeleverd aan VS......

Zie ook:
'Julian Assange, valse beschuldigingen, Big Brother en VS steun voor terrorisme'

'Westerse massamedia lopen aan de leiband van plutocraten, de neoliberale politiek en geheime diensten'

'Russiagate en Assange: The Guardian wordt nu zelfs door collega's voor zot uitgemaakt'

'The Guardian: ondanks een enorme misser (fake news) gaat men door met de valse beschuldigingen t.a.v. Assange......'

'WikiLeaks belooft The Guardian 1 miljoen dollar als het haar leugens i.z. Assange en Russiagate kan bewijzen.......'

'Julian Assange gedemoniseerd door media die hem zouden moeten steunen, waren ze bevolkt geweest door echte journalisten........'

'WikiLeaks toont aan dat VS en GB een gezamenlijke gewelddadige en bedrieglijke buitenlandpolitiek voeren'

'De prijs op het hoofd van Julian Assange: 1 miljard dollar.....'

'Assange kan niet voor spionage worden vervolgd, immers hij is journalist >> aldus Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers) in een video'

'Westerse bevolkingen worden bespeeld door regeringen, massamedia, grote bedrijven, financiële instellingen en geheime diensten......'

'Assange is journalist en zou alleen daarom al niet mogen worden vervolgd, een artikel o.a. voor de huidige 'journalisten' van de reguliere media en de gebruikers van die media'

'WhiteHouse: US, Ecuador Coordinating About Future Of Assange Asylum' 

'Stop de isolatie van Julian Assange!'

'JulianAssange (Wikileaks) haalt hypocriete Britse regering onderuit voorwijzen op belang van vrije en onafhankelijke media'

'Volkskrant en Nieuwsuur Fake News over 'Russische hacks.....''

'VS waarschuwde regering van Zweden voor Wikileaks in aanloop verkiezingen, Assange 'moest en zou hangen', ofwel de zoveelste VS manipulatie van verkiezingen elders......'

De VS heeft een lange geschiedenis in het ontvoeren van kinderen uit niet witte families.......

Terecht was en is er veel ophef over het scheiden van ouders en kinderen door de VS overheid bij het illegaal inreizen over de VS - Mexicaanse  grens. In het hieronder opgenomen artikel van ACLU gaat de schrijver Jeffery Robinson in op de lange geschiedenis in de VS van het uit elkaar trekken van families..... Zoals bij de concentratiekampen in WOII voor Japanners die (al lang) in de VS woonden (en Duitsers, vreemd genoeg worden die in dit verband weer niet genoemd).... Waar de vaders van deze gezinnen voor het overgrote deel al eerder werden geïnterneerd in kampen waar ze werden onderworpen aan dwangarbeid......

Voor de ergste gevallen moet je terug naar de genocide op de oorspronkelijke volkeren van wat nu de VS wordt genoemd (het gestolen land), zoals het Navajo volk (ook wel Dineh volk genoemd), mensen die ten onrechte worden aangeduid als indianen. De kinderen van deze volkeren werden van hun ouders afgenomen en op speciale 'kostscholen' geplaatst: -waar ze hun taal niet mochten spreken, -waar hun haar werd geknipt, -waar ze werden vernederd en -waar ze werden groot geschopt en gehersenspoeld met het verfoeilijke christelijke geloof......

Uiteraard geldt voor de slaven uit Afrika hetzelfde, al werden de kinderen van deze mensen niet naar scholen gebracht, maar zo snel mogelijk ingezet als arbeidskracht, ofwel tewerkgesteld als kindslaven.........

Heden ten dage lijkt het er zwaar op dat de psychopathische Trump administratie al van meet af aan niet van plan was om de kinderen van vluchtelingen uit Latijns Amerika te herenigen met hun ouders....... 'Een mooi afschrikwekkend voorbeeld' voor mensen die nog van plan zijn naar de VS te vluchten (voor het overgrote deel op de vlucht voor de gevolgen van VS bemoeienissen met het land van herkomst in Latijns Amerika....).....

Een overeenkomst met kinderen van de oorspronkelijke volkeren uit dit deel van Noord-Amerika: de door de VS overheid ontvoerde kinderen van gevluchte ouders uit Latijns Amerika, moeten de bloederige vlag van de VS eren, bovendien zouden ze de verfoeilijke valse teksten van het VS volkslied op moeten kunnen zeggen, althans zo meldden meerdere bronnen de afgelopen weken....... Hoe cynisch kunnen zaken zijn in het gestolen land dat men 'Amerika' durft te noemen......

Lees het indrukwekkende artikel van Jeffery Robinson:

America Was in the Business of Separating Families Long Before Trump

By Jeffery Robinson, ACLU Deputy Legal Director and Director of the Trone Center for Justice and Equality

JULY 6, 2018 | 1:00 PM

Children are crying for their parents while being held in small cages. The attorney general tells us the Bible justifies what we see and the White House press secretary backs him up. Be horrified and angered, but not because this is a new Trump transgression against real American values. America was in the business of separating families long before Trump. 

I am not talking about spurious claims that Obama did the same thing or the valid comparisons to how our criminal justice system uses a cash bail system that every day rips children from their families before they or their parents have been convicted of any crime. The true story is that the United States has a well-documented history of breaking up non-white families.

When we sent Japanese Americans to internment camps, families were often separated when fathers were sent hasty relocation orders and forced labor contracts. In some cases, family members (usually the father) had been arrested earlier and sent to a different camp.

Forty years later, the U.S. government apologized, provided reparations of $20,000 to every survivor of those internment camps, and blamed the “grave wrong” on “racial prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” 

Sound familiar?

The separating of Native American families was more intentional. America deliberately tried to wipe native culture from our country. According to the Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian, beginning in the late 1800s, thousands of American Indian children were forcibly sent to government-run or church-run “boarding schools,” where they were taught English and forbidden to speak their native languages.  

An exhibit at the museum includes a quote from Richard Henry Pratt, founder of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, stating: “In Indian civilization I am a Baptist, because I believe in immersing the Indian in our civilization and when we get them under, holding them there until they are thoroughly soaked.”

The boarding schools forced children to cut their hair and give up their traditional clothing. Their meaningful native names were replaced with English ones. Their traditional religious practices were forcibly replaced with Christianity. They were taught that their cultures were inferior. Teachers sometimes ridiculed the students’ traditions. These lessons humiliated the students and taught them to be ashamed of their heritage.

“They tell us not to speak in Navajo language. You’re going to school. You’re supposed to only speak English,” John Brown Jr., a Navajo who served in World War II as a code talker by using his Navajo language for tactical communications the Japanese could not decode, told the museum in a 2004 interview. “And it was true. They did practice that, and we got punished if you was caught speaking Navajo.”

And then, of course, America enslaved Blacks for 246 years. Separating enslaved families was done for profit, for punishment, or simply because a seller or buyer wanted it that way in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. 

“Destroying families is one of the worst things done during slavery,” said Henry Fernandez, co-founder of the African American Research Collaborative (AARC) and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “The federal government maintained these evils through the fugitive slave laws and other rules which defined African Americans as property with which a slave owner could do whatever they wanted.”

Each of these policies, Fernandez said, begins with the assumption “that the idea of family is simply less important to people of color and that the people involved are less than human. To justify ripping families apart, the government must first engage in dehumanizing the targeted group.”

“The Weeping Time” exhibit at the Smithsonian Museum of African American History and Culture documents the U.S. history of separating children from parents.  “Night and day, you could hear men and women screaming … ma, pa, sister or brother … taken without any warning,” Susan Hamilton, a witness to a slave auction, recalled in a 1938 interview. “People was always dying from a broken heart.”

A report in the Maryland State Archives includes a narrative from a man named Charles Ball, who was enslaved as a child and remembered the day he was sold away from his mother.

“My poor mother, when she saw me leaving her for the last time, ran after me, took me down from the horse, clasped me in her arms, and wept loudly and bitterly over me,” Ball recalled. “My master seemed to pity her and endeavored to soothe her distress by telling her that he would be a good master to me, and that I should not want anything.”

Ball added that when his mother’s persisted, his master hit her with a rawhide whip.

Thousands of former slaves looked for lost relatives and children who had been sold away from their families. They placed thousands of ads in newspapers. Those ads are now being digitized in a project called “Last Seen: Finding Family After Slavery,” which is run by Villanova University’s graduate history program in collaboration with Philadelphia’s Mother Bethel AME Church.

Our history of separating families is no older than our use of the Bible to justify transgressions against humanity. In 1667, Virginia law stated that if an enslaved person became Christian it did not mean freedom because the only way that conversion could happen was through the “charity and piety of their masters.” When Texas withdrew from the union it declared that enslaving people was justified by “the revealed will of the Almighty Creator.” William T. Thompson, the designer of the Confederate Flag said, “As a people, we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race.” Jeff Sessions is simply the most recent person to try to justify an indefensible policy by referring to the Bible. 

On June 14, Attorney General Jeff Sessions cited biblical scripture Romans 13 to claim support for the Trump administration’s forced separation of immigrant families. “I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order,” he said.

As it happens, this is the same passage cited by loyalist preachers who said America should not declare independence from England; it was cited by southerners defending slavery; and, it was cited to defend authoritarian rule in Nazi Germany and South African apartheid.

Zie wat betreft het 'vluchtelingenbeleid' van de VS:

'Jeff Sessions: 'asielzoekers zijn alleen welkom in de VS als ze kunnen bewijzen dat ze overleden zijn t.g.v. geweld..........''

'Immigrants& Muslims Are Trump's Jews ... Until He Comes for theActual Jews' (van Harvey Wasserman)

'VS martelt gevluchte kinderen.....'

'VS sluit zelfs kinderen van 10 jaar op..... Met dat land onderhoudt Nederland hechte banden, een rechteloos land waaraan 'we' zelfs mensen uitleveren.....'

'A Grandmother Seeking Asylum Separated From Disabled Grandson at the Border. It’s Been 10 Months'

'Met nieuw VS 'vluchtelingenbeleid' zullen nog meer kinderen seksueel worden misbruikt.....'

Children Drugged, Given Forced Injections at Texas Detention Facility: Lawsuit

Pentagon Accepts Trump’s Call to House 20,000 Children on US Military Bases

'Concentratiekampen in VS voor migranten.......'

'Peuter vluchtelingen moeten eigen zaak bepleiten in VS rechtszalen, de VS: het land van de 'ongekende mogelijkheden....''

Plus de volgende link naar een bericht over de oorzaak voor het op de vlucht slaan van mensen die hun heil zoeken in de EU: 'Vluchtelingencrisis EU één op één veroorzaakt door de VS (met hulp van de NAVO).....'

PS: de VS ging ook met de kinderen van gevluchte Ieren niet zachtzinnig om, deze mensen werden zeker in het zuiden van de VS gediscrimineerd als waren ze zwart gekleurd en waar borden hingen dat zwarten geen toegang hadden, hing daar vaak een zelfde bord, maar dan voor mensen uit Ierland.......