Watch Julian Assange Vaporize TIME's Credibility in ABC - Stephanopoulos 'Grilling' - LOL!

[kpete]

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me bring this back to Julian Assange. Back in 2010, an email that was revealed from you by Bart Gellman in "Time" magazine, said that you hoped the revelations from Wikileaks would bring about, quote, "the total annihilation of the current U.S. regime." Is that still your goal, and what did you mean by that?
ASSANGE: I did not say that and there is no such email. That is simply false.

STEPHANOPOULOS: It's quoted in "Time" magazine in December 2010.

ASSANGE: Yes. Well, I mean, "Time" magazine. But this is -- it's very interesting that you raised such a thing like that. We are in a situation where we have these extraordinary revelations that are causing great embarrassment to a new national security state that is arising in the U.S. It's not just the U.S. Similar national security states are rising in other countries, but it is trying to evade democratic will. It's treating Congress like a bunch of fools. And we saw Clapper up there lying, bald-face lying to Congress. We have secret interpretations of the law. What does the law mean if there are secret interpretations in secret courts?

....................

"Yes well I mean TIME magazine" doesn't convey the disdain with which Assange dismisses TIME's reporting. You have to see his expression and hear him in the video which starts around the 12:00 mark.
VIDEO & MORE HERE:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/30/1220141/-Watch-Julian-Assange-Vaporize-TIME-s-Credibility-in-ABC-Stephanopoulos-Grilling-LOL

[xchrom]

1. du rec.

[jazzimov]

2. He deflected the question!

He didn't address TIME mag's credibility at all! He simply deflected the question.

[ProSense]

3. Barton Gellman differs

Barton Gellman differs

Barton Gellman @bartongellman

To @Frontline, Assange said "I don't know" if he wrote the email. Disputed only the word "regime." http://bgell.me/17vzxxh @ThisWeekABC
10:30 AM - 30 Jun 2013

3 Retweets 2 favorites Reply
Retweet

The link leads to this: (behind the scenes, interview tape between Julian Assange & PBS Frontline’s Martin Smith which was recorded on 4/4/2011)

Tell me whether this is true, that in an e-mail you said, "The total annihilation of the current U.S. regime or any other regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone could be accelerated or advanced by several years if WikiLeaks does its job right."

I don't know if I wrote that e-mail, but I recall that it spawned (controversy). That I've read. I don't think the word "regime" was used. I believe the word (was) "administration."

http://wikileaks.org/WikiSecrets-Julian-Assange-Full.html

He also references this excerpt from an email

WL can advance the political/governance aspects of these developments

by several years which will have all sorts of positive cascades, not
the least of which is total annihilation of the current US regime and
any other regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone.

http://cryptome.org/wikileaks/wikileaks-leak.htm

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1220141/50599643#c34

[think]

4. And the quote in question was taken so far out of context it was essentially a fabrication

The email that is referred to is from a right wing blog from 2007. By quoting it as an email from 2010 it made it sound like Assange was talking about the Obama administration when clearly it would have been aimed at the Bush administration. And the bush administration WAS violating the law at the time.

In addition to that egregious twisting of the facts the quote is still literally taken out of contest as well. Here is the quote from the purported email from 2007 (The News Real Blog is a right-wing blog operated by the David Horowitz Freedom Center FYI):

E-Mails Revealed: Show Intent To Bring Down The U.S. Government And Possible Connections to George Soros
by Joseph Klein
Posted on December 1 2010 10:44 am

~Snip~

In the following example, after discussing the virtues of file-sharing over the Internet as a way to defeat copyright enforcement, the e-mail ends with its author’s belief that Wikileaks can assist with the ” total annihilation of the current US regime.


From:

WL can advance the political/governance aspects of these developments by several years which will have all sorts of positive cascades, not the least of which is total annihilation of the current US regime and any other regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone.

Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 08:56:55 +1100

To:

[This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g.....

~Snip~

Then there are the tantalizing references to George Soros, whom Wikileaks apparently tried to hit up for a substantial donation to its cause.

Full post:
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/12/01/wikileaks-internal-e-mails-revealed-show-intent-to-bring-down-the-u-s-government-and-possible-connections-to-george-soros/2/

Just pointing that out....

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

5. wow, that was pretty impressive, I hope this gets a lot of airtime (doubt it)

JA is a very impressive speaker on these critical issues, and I wish him gods speed on his mission

The M$M are looking pretty weak these days, some even repeat lame talking points for the www that have already been repeatedly shot down on the web.

I guess that's why the totalitarians are so committed to destroy him (the messenger) and desperat to avoid any discussion/investigation on the message.

Thanks for sharing this important video

[Fuddnik]

6. Double kick and Rec!

[Civilization2]

7. "any regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone",.

and that would be bad because?

Why would anyone defend a "regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone"?

lolz

[sulphurdunn]

10. I was thinking the same thing.

[DeSwiss]

8. He should have said:

''Well Stephie, I suppose I should expect for ABC to quote the lies from TIME magazine. Seeing how you're both cut from the same raggedy, shitty piece of cloth, right? But don't you people have any journalistic integrity left? You know, checking the facts and things like that? No? Pity. You had so much promise......''

- K&R

[n2doc]

14. +1 n/t

[WillyT]

9. K & R !!!

[rustydog]

11. I don't see how a look "vaporizes" Time Magazine's credibility

Assange is a bit full of himself and not much better than your average hacker.
Wanna bet his favorite movie line is: "Hack the planet! Hack the planet!"

[L0oniX]

12. Here comes the "Julian Assange stomps on bunnies" gang. n/t

[warrant46]

16. LOL

[KoKo]

13. Fascinating!

[Buzz Clik]

15. Holy shit! He contradicted a claim that presented an inconvenient point of view!!!!11

Total desctruction.

[marmar]

17. k/r

[rurallib]

18. don't know about vaporizing, but Jesus is Stephie ever a pathetic

sad excuse for a journalist.
Little but fellating the NSA

[zeemike]

19. K&R

[pacalo]

20. It was more of a dismissive disdain than "vaporizing".

I thought Jesselyn Radack's comments on whether or not it would make more sense for Snowden to return to the U.S. were the best zinger (toward hypocrisy) of the segment:

STEPHANOPOULOS: That's not what he's saying, sir. He has also broken the law. Let me bring that now to Jesselyn Radack, who is also here with me right now. Julian Assange mentioned Edward Snowden's father, who has also written -- his attorney has written a letter to Eric Holder, the attorney general, saying that he believes that his son would be willing to come back to the United States if he would not be detained or imprisoned prior to trial, if he would not be subject to a gag order, if he would be tried in the venue of his choosing. Do you think it would make sense for Snowden to return under those circumstances?

RADACK: I actually don't. I have represented people like Thomas Drake, who was an NSA whistle-blower, who actually did go through every conceivable internal channel possible, including his boss, the inspector general of his agency, the Defense Department inspector general and two congressional committees, and the U.S. turned around and prosecuted him. And did so for espionage and threatened to tie him up for the rest of his life in jail. I think Snowden's outlook is bleak here, and instead of focusing on Snowden and shooting the messenger, we should really focus on the crimes of the NSA. Because whatever laws Snowden may or may not have broken, they are infinitesimally small compared to the two major surveillance laws and the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution that the NSA's violated.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But these surveillance programs, as the president has pointed out, were passed by the Congress, are overseen by a court.

RADACK: Well, both of those are incorrect. Congress has not been fully informed. Only the--

STEPHANOPOULOS: They passed the laws, there is oversight, or there is (inaudible).

RADACK: OK, but there is a secret interpretation of Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which nobody knows, except for the Intel Committee of Congress, and even they say that they think most Americans would be appalled by that. And to say that it's been approved by the courts is a misnomer, because it gives the impression that federal courts have approved this, when in reality, it's the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has rubber-stamped every single--

STEPHANOPOULOS: Which is a federal court.

RADACK: No, it is a secret court set up at the Justice Department that has federal judges on it. But last year, it approved 2,000 out of 2,000 applications. They hear only the government's side, and they have never -- they have rejected an application one time since 1978.

[Hydra]

21. They're pushing the Meme that Wikileaks is a terrorist news organization

It's too bad he can't actually say what was quoted at him. I don't see how dismantling our current ongoing regime circa 1980 would be a bad thing...but they'd say he and his people were a threat to the whole world if they could paint him with that brush.

[struggle4progress]

22. Assange, 24 May 2011: "I don't know if I wrote that e-mail"

See: http://wikileaks.org/WikiSecrets-Julian-Assange-Full.html

Assange, 30 June 2013: "I did not say that and there is no such email. That is simply false."
See: OP

So two years ago, Assange thought that email sounded enough like him that he wasn't sure whether he wrote it or not. Now he's sure there is no such email

I'm gonna guess this only means he finally trashed all his old emails