Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How Wired Magazine Helped The US Government Try To Frame Julian Assange (And Failed)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 02:33 PM
Original message
How Wired Magazine Helped The US Government Try To Frame Julian Assange (And Failed)
We've learned a few important things from the full transcripts of Bradley Manning's online chats with Adrian Lamo. Glenn Greenwald has already focussed on how with-holding the full transcripts has damaged the reputations of Manning, Assange and WikiLeaks. But it's worth examining in more detail exactly how Wired's subterfuge has affected Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in particular.

Firstly, and most importantly, it's now clear that Julian Assange did NOT know if Bradley Manning was the source who leaked the US cables to WikiLeaks. Manning tells Lamo that Assange “knows little about me” and “he takes source-protections uber-seriously.” Furthermore, he says, Assange "won’t work with you if you reveal too much about yourself.” Assange even instructs Manning to lie about his identity!

This blows apart the US government's protracted efforts to suggest that Assange actively enticed Manning to hand over the cables, and thereby charge the Australian with criminal activity. In fact, it was only through his own protracted sleuth work that Manning even knew who HE was talking to: "it took me four months to confirm that the person i was communicating was in fact assange".

Why would Wired with-hold this critically important information, unless they were actively co-operating with US agents trying to fabricate charges against Assange? Given that Lamo had notified authorities of Manning's alleged actions while still continuing to chat with him, it's logical to assume the Feds would have wanted to censor any published details. Wired appears to have willingly complied.

http://jaraparilla.blogspot.com/2011/07/how-wired-magazine-helped-us-government.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. Who Owns "Wired"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I don't know. That's a good question. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
4.  Condé Nast n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. thanks!
Edited on Fri Jul-15-11 03:21 PM by fascisthunter
geez... they own alot!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EOTE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. I remember hearing a poster here suggesting that they were owned by the CIA or FBI.
Sounded rather conspiratorial to me at the time, but now I'm having a hard time doubting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
9.  Pentagon and CIA had programs where they place people at media
outlets. No need to own anything.

lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. enter Judith Miller? Maybe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
6. R&K
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. K & R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
11. It was Glenn Greenwald who forced Wired to even admit
that they had selectively published the conversation and then HE ended up on the list of people to smear.

It's at the point now where you have to assume that there are few sources that can be trusted and as soon as you see people trying to hide facts, that is a good indicator that something is wrong.

I wonder why Wired chose to reveal this now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
12. k and r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
13. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlabamaLibrul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
14. (1:55:10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i told you, none of this is for print
Asshole.

Tom Gabel - Anna Is A Stool Pigeon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zKE-LfdM5E
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC