Manufacturing Contempt for Assange: How the Media Made WikiLeaks Founder into a Scapegoat

The Guardian was one of WikiLeaks’s partner organizations, being fed bombshell after bombshell, revelations that helped build its brand and its audience. Yet, far from standing up for free speech and an open society, it was in the lead in attacking WikiLeaks and its founder.

[mintpressnews.com]

Lowkey is a British rapper and activist which I posted a couple of discussions of him, one with Chris Hedges, and one with Abby Martin, a while back. Obviously dissenting against the warring and capitalism that comes with imperialism.

I haven't done a whole lot on Assange in quite a while and figured this was a good way to get the issue all in one post, or spark an interest if nothing else. Not so much the video but the narrative of the written body and links within. Seriously I've been of the thought that if anyone was interested in the delusional reality created within the Assange issue you all have plenty of access to the vast amount of articles found here at Mint Press News and Consortium News when you visited the sites from my post. Consortium has been vastly on top of the Assange case from the start. No place better for information than there.

{It is now known that UC Global – the private security firm hired to protect the Ecuadorian Embassy, where Assange was confined – was secretly spying on their charge, sending the information they gleaned back to the United States government. This included security cameras and audio bugs. The company even scavenged the embassy’s garbage, stealing Assange’s children’s diapers.}

This was highly covered by both this news site and The Grayzone if you wish to find more on it.

{The Guardian was one of WikiLeaks’s partner organizations, being fed bombshell after bombshell, revelations that helped build its brand and its audience. Yet, far from standing up for free speech and an open society, it was in the lead in attacking WikiLeaks and its founder. Of particular note is Luke Harding, who, mistakenly or otherwise, published the passcode to a trove of WikiLeaks documents, an act that the U.S. government claims endangered its representatives around the world.}

Virtually every MSCM has a history of using and taking information WikiLeaks put out and used it for their benefit. If Assange can have a manufactured illusion build for his imprisonment then every information source that used their information should also be under the same blanket of injustice.

{In 2018, Harding also published a viral story that claimed that Assange had secretly met with Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and unnamed “Russians” while in the Ecuadorian Embassy. The insinuation was that Assange (and Russia) was partly responsible for Trump’s shocking election in 2016.}

Harding, from above you might now realize, writes often for The Guardian. He also wrote a book on this same issue in regards to the Steel dossier to financially benefit from. In which Aaron Mate, now working at The Grayzone, held and interview with him which became the beginning of exposing how much of a fraud this Russian narrative and Steel dossier was in its early stages. It was the classic Aaron Mate take down he's known for put on Harding as Mate constantly kept attempting to get factual information rather than baseless accusations. Harding unable to provide any sense of factual information, obviously becoming frustrated his bullshit isn't being accepted abruptly leaves the discussion at the end.

[therealnews.com]

{There were gaping holes in this accusation, not least that there was no record of Manafort ever visiting the embassy, one of the most surveilled buildings in the most surveilled city in the world. Police, reporters, activists and intelligence agents were outside 24 hours a day. Yet Manafort was reportedly able to enter without anyone noticing. Almost immediately, The Guardian walked back the claims, adding qualifying language. Even more embarrassing, it later transpired that Harding’s source was likely a disgraced Ecuadorian agent who had previously burned The Guardian with fake information, forcing them to retract a story.

From being Assange’s partner, the newspaper morphed into “the vanguard or the spearhead of a campaign of vilification by the mainstream media,” Navarette told Lowkey.}

If you hold a political stance for either of the criminal establishment parties, or anyone involved, the value of this information isn't about Trump, the GOP, or the democrats. It's about the collaboration of them all that sets the underlining reality at the end of the game as a whole. The 2016 election cycle provided a litany of highly unethical practices turned into normalities, election tampering on the part of both parties, especially in regards to the Clinton campaign and the DNC as a whole, the MSCM in every aspect in this arena, and the DOJ.