Steemit-Only Opinion: The Unintentional Irony Of The Lying Legacy Press

in #fakenews6 years ago (edited)


This article is my own intellectual property and is originally published via Steemit.

The level of irony that legacy press figures prove blind to in their own statements can be downright astonishing.

Disobedient Media recently discussed the travesty of an article published by The Guardian, which claimed former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had visited WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London numerous times, including a trip in the spring of 2016. The trouble was, the paper provided no evidence whatsoever to back its claim, and a great bucketload of evidence quickly contradicted the paper's claims.

The backlash was so severe, that Politico allowed an anonymous "ex" CIA officer to pen an article blaming the lies of Luke Harding and Dan Collyns on - you guessed it - the Russians. Matt Taibi of Rolling Stone was quick to pounce on the move, saying: "We've gone from unnamed sources to unnamed authors.":

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 7.31.41 PM.png

The Guardian's debacle was not the first time it had been burned by Harding, who in addition to accusations of plagiarism, previously published a smear against Assange, using source Fernando Villavicencio of FocusEcuador - despite the fact that Villavicencio had a history of publishing forged documents in the Guardian.

The litany of other issues with Luke Harding's credibility - as well as that of the Guardian - could provide enough subject material for an entire book. However, it is worth noting that in the wake of The Guardian's attempt to conflate Russiagate with Assange's impending prosecution, a spotlight has also been cast on The Guardian fixture Carole Cadwalladr.

Cadwalladr is a journalist with The Guardian and a staunch Russiagate proponent.

While recently reviewing the social media profiles for both Harding and Cadwalladr, this writer noted one of the most appalling examples of unintentional irony I've come across in my time as an independent journalist. Less than a month before The Guardian would publish Harding's claptrap of a smear on Assange, Cadwalladr posted the following screed via Twitter, where it was also retweeted by Harding:

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 4.17.24 PM.png

In the jaw-dropping post, Cadwalladr criticizes the BBC for "giving a platform to a liar," which, as most readers are aware, is precisely what the Guardian went on to provide yet again to serial-liar Luke Harding. It would be hilarious if the stakes involved weren't so deadly serious.

This writer couldn't help but respond to such idiocy:

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 2.32.12 AM.png

The straight-faced irony of Cadwalladr's statement is amplified further by the observation of independent journalist Caitlin Johnstone, who pointed out that it had been a full week since the journalist had lied about the location of a photograph of Dana Rohrabacher allegedly meeting with Tommy Robinson, claiming he was pictured on the steps of the Ecuadorian Embassy, before admitting this was false but failing to delete the tweet for seven days.

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 8.01.24 PM.png

Cadwalladr pivoted from this blatant inaccuracy, claiming the image was taken "... shortly before/after he met with Assange. On a different set of steps."

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 8.04.13 PM.png

Again: Cadwalladr, an award-winning journalist only deleted the offending tweet one week after publishing it, not due to the fact that it was a lie, but because she had been "attacked" by Trump and WikiLeaks supporters.

Cry me a river, Carole.

Meanwhile, thanks to the intrepid reporting of Stefania Maurizi of la Repubblica, the public has learned that Assange has been starved. Maurizi Tweeted the following just days ago:

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 2.34.12 PM.png

Unfortunately, it goes without saying that the intense irony of Cadwalladr and Harding's reporting, as well as their respective Twitter statements, is utterly lost on the legacy press journalists. They whinge about being criticized for inaccurate reporting they refuse to correct. They scream on social media at other establishment press outlets for "providing a platform to a liar," so blind to their own bullshit that they don't see the irony in their complaint.


It would be amusing if it wasn't so serious. The MI6 apologists project onto others the deception they commit, deliberately deceiving and manipulating the public via their own platform at the Guardian and on social media. Assange, unlike Harding and Cadwalladr, cannot answer the lies spread about him on Twitter.

Nonetheless, the pair and their ilk hurl fictionalized accusations at the gagged fellow journalist who is in solitary confinement, who is being starved to death, and who has is being prosecuted by the US and UK deep state for the crime of accurate reporting, an act that Cadwalladr and Harding need never fear being persecuted for.

Given the absolute lack of self-awareness demonstrated in Harding's exchange with journalists like Aaron Mate, one might conclude that propagandizing the public is the conscious intent of their work.

The contrast between figures like Assange and establishment journalists does not end with their vastly different predicaments and their ability to speak out in their own defense. The gulf between them is deepened further in the context of Assange's own actions over time.

As noted by his supporters, Assange has consistently fought for the rights of others, especially those with less power than himself. Just days before the Ecuadorian government cut off Assange's access to the outside world, he called for Twitter to reinstate the account of vindicated activist Lauri Love, who had at the time just avoided extradition to the US from the UK.

That singular example is one of many of the more well-known instances of similar works, including Assange's continual support for Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden.

What does all of this tell us? As Craig Murray put it:

"Assange is not a whistleblower or a spy – he is the greatest publisher of his age, and has done more to bring the crimes of governments to light than the mainstream media will ever be motivated to achieve. That supposedly great newspaper titles like the Guardian, New York Times and Washington Post are involved in the spreading of lies to damage Assange, and are seeking his imprisonment for publishing state secrets, is clear evidence that the idea of the “liberal media” no longer exists in the new plutocratic age. The press are not on the side of the people, they are an instrument of elite control."

Support Elizabeth Vos's independent journalism via Patreon

Support Julian Assange's legal defense fund

Support WikiLeaks in suing The Guardian


Thanks for the Steemit exclusive! Those faux writers (won’t call them journalists, cause that’s not journalism!) are knee deep in cognitive dissonance that they vehemently believe the crap they spew. Akin to Killary supporters honestly.

You are very welcome!

Most of these so called news organizations are not listed as a news organization. One merely needs to read the terms of service to find that they have listed themselves as entertainment.

In light of this fact let me ask you a question. Do you have to tell the truth when entertaining people?

Thank you! :)

Thank you Elizbeth for the excellent work you do... I really like your style!

Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)

  • Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.

  • Join our discord and chat with 250+ fellow Informationwar Activists.

  • Join our brand new reddit! and start sharing your Steemit posts directly to The_IW, via the share button on your Steemit post!!!

  • Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Leadership/Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call

Ways you can help the @informationwar

  • Upvote this comment.
  • Delegate Steem Power. 25 SP 50 SP 100 SP
  • Join the curation trail here.
  • Tutorials on all ways to support us and useful resources here

Why are indie journalists who are speaking out about the crimes against humanity Julian Assange is subjected to for years, turning a wilful blind eye to targeting crimes & electronic torture via stealth/neuro- weaponry on knowingly innocent people of gargantuan proportions in the Western world, e.g, USA, UK, Europe, 5 Eye Countries?

Why not write about these crimes when Wikileaks has leaked almost 10,000 documents about the use of directed energy weapons around the world? Doesn't sound supportive of Julian Assange or Wikileaks journalism if indie journalists are just going to cherry-pick the leaks they want to write about, and not write a full exposure on how exactly directed energy weapons are used on knowingly innocent people and that people from all walks of life including children are recruited and trained in organized multiple person harassment/stalking and torture for profit, rewards, promotions etc. To find out more about these crimes visit lone investigative journalist Ramola D at for ground breaking information, evidence, whistle blowing exposures.

Read more about these heinous crimes against humanity which allow what was done during the Holocaust to be committed insidiously & remotely via dangerous mind/body control weaponry within someone's home, mind & body:

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.19
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 64252.58
ETH 3398.15
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.50