Assange Watch

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 23 Aug 2012, 12:38

I've tried to post links to the ABC programme but so far, I've only been successful in one instance! The other comments simply don't appear.

Then of course there are several sites which can only be accessed via Twatter or BaseFook, neither of which can I seem to get up much enthusiasm for.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 23 Aug 2012, 12:40

Don't suppose you kept copies of the missing posts, Steve?

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 23 Aug 2012, 13:03

biffvernon wrote:Don't suppose you kept copies of the missing posts, Steve?

No, that's the bloody trouble

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 23 Aug 2012, 13:13

Big argument going on here:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news- ... 8-680.html

...should anyone feel the urge to pile in.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 23 Aug 2012, 13:55

UndercoverElephant wrote:Big argument going on here:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news- ... 8-680.html

...should anyone feel the urge to pile in.

Sure UE, I'll take a read.

peaceful_life · Post by **peaceful_life** » 23 Aug 2012, 15:15

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/po ... journalism

Spot the funny within the comments.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 23 Aug 2012, 16:06

Don't read comments (unless I'm feeling masochistic) but John Pilger is the journalist of the past fifty years.

I still have serious doubts about the Guardian.

frank_begbie · Post by **frank_begbie** » 23 Aug 2012, 17:02

peaceful_life wrote:http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/po ... journalism

Spot the funny within the comments.

Not reading that lot. Point it out.

peaceful_life · Post by **peaceful_life** » 23 Aug 2012, 18:20

frank_begbie wrote:
peaceful_life wrote:http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/po ... journalism

Spot the funny within the comments.
Not reading that lot. Point it out.

Would you like a cuppa tea with that?

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 24 Aug 2012, 08:52

stevecook172001 wrote:I've spent the last three days attempting to counter (along with others) the absolute avalanche of misinformation, propaganda and downright lies being pushed out on the comments pages of the scandalous Guardian articles (barring the couple of pieces that have been stuck in there last minute to give the illusion of "balance"). I now find my posts are "pre-moderated". I have asked for an explanation but have had no reply.

I also find that some of my previous posts have been deleted. I have been racking my brain and I think it may be whenever I make mention of the name of the Swedish prosecutor who persistently leaked the Assange investigation to the media. I could be wrong.

Something very fishy going on.

update:

I have contacted the Guardian moderation team to find out why some of my posts were removed and why all of my posts are now being pre-moderated.

As yet, no reply

I have since contacted Glen Greenwald (author of the article) directly by email and asked him to forward the request for info to the relevant mod team. I am hoping that if he does this, they will be in less of a position to simply ignore the request.

ujoni08 · Post by **ujoni08** » 24 Aug 2012, 13:20

Well done, Steve. We need to resist what seems to be a very subtle programme of selective censorship.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 24 Aug 2012, 14:23

From China Daily.

Correa said: "It's not a problem to set up a US base in Ecuador. We can give the go-ahead as long as we are granted permission to set up an Ecuadorian military base in Miami."

frank_begbie · Post by **frank_begbie** » 24 Aug 2012, 15:19

emordnilap wrote:From China Daily.

Correa said: "It's not a problem to set up a US base in Ecuador. We can give the go-ahead as long as we are granted permission to set up an Ecuadorian military base in Miami."

This is the biggy for me. Makes no sense whatsoever.

There are other questions to be asked. Why, for instance, would the British and Swedish governments go to such lengths in a case involving sexual assault charges?

Post by **clv101** » 24 Aug 2012, 15:40

frank_begbie wrote:Why, for instance, would the British and Swedish governments go to such lengths in a case involving sexual assault charges?

It should be clear to anyone that this isn't do to with the sexual assault charges. That's just the public cover story.

madibe · Post by **madibe** » 24 Aug 2012, 16:35

There is no doubt that Assange is a courageous journalist. Punishing him for what he has done would have a chilling effect on investigative journalists.

I can only guess US government officials would be saying exactly the same things if the trove of diplomatic cables released weren't American.

Abso-frecking-lutely

The double standards displayed go beyond belief. I am actually impressed by the China report on this - it was factual and not overtly 'point scoring'... just good observation. A breath of fresh air where it was least expected (by me). Quite suprised.