General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat Pres Correa really said about Assange & the Snowden safe-conduct
I've mentioned this before in posts but this is important enough for an OP due to all the misinformation put out by the historically dishonest and anti-Chavez author Rory Carroll, who Chavez mocked and called a Republican to his face. I too listened to Rafael Correa's interview and he never stated he was sorry for offering Snowden asylum or that he was tired of Assange. On the contrary, his PM, restated after the dishonest Guardian article, that they hadn't backed down a single millimeter.
Rory Carroll has carried a lot of water for the global MIC but this was his lowest blow. Lower even than the dishonest book he wrote about Hugo Chavez. After he was confronted about his dishonesty by outraged readers in the Ecuador Asylum story, and President Correa tweeted about it and posted the video of the interview for everyone to see how dishonest that reporter is, he issued a small correction to one of his lies but not the rest.
I have carefully listened to the interview conducted in Spanish of President Rafael Correa with The Guardian on the Snowden saga, also focused on the role of the WikiLeaks founder Mr Julian Assange. Frankly, I became astonished realizing the extent to which the answers of Rafael Correa were misrepresented by The Guardian, and subsequently by other MSM. Instead of what it has been reported, Ecuador has never retracted of their positive statements on whisteblower Edward Snowden, or on their openness to study his asylum. Correa affirms clearly that Ecuador has not negated the safe-conduct issued to Mr Snowden. He also says emphatically that Mr Assange continues to enjoy our respect
By Marcello Ferrada-Noli
Journalist Rory Carroll and the President of Ecuador Rafael Correa (In Spanish, no subtitles)
The Presidency of Ecuador has now published a videotape with the actual interview
...
I have carefully listened to the interview conducted in Spanish of President Rafael Correa with The Guardian on the Snowden saga, focused on the role of the WikiLeaks founder Mr Julian Assange. Frankly I was astonished when realizing to which extent the declarations of Rafael Correa as presented in The Guardians reports, were in fact misrepresentations of what the Ecuadorian president actually expressed. These misrepresentations mainly quotes out of context, as Correa would say afterwards were in fact repeated by the rest of the conspicuous MSM. The Washington Post, for instance, sourced an own article about the Snowden situation on what The Guardian had reported of the interview but not in the interview itself.]
...
Namely, what Correa is stating is that it is an error to affirm that Ecuador negated afterwards the salvo-conduct given to Snowden. Further, any Spanish-speaking listener would appropriate testify, after to have listened to what Correa is answering in the interview, is that the Ecuadorian president is saying exactly the opposite. Correa says expressly, No es que hemos negado el salvo-conducto (It is not that we have negated the save-conduct).
...
For instance, the journalist in the actual interview puts a leading question on that if president Correa thinks Assange abusó de la confianza del gobierno (de Ecuador). Far from that, Rafael Correa explained instead the context in where Mr Assange made the declarations he did, that he can understand Assanges concern for Edward Snowdens situation. President Correa says in the interview very clear about that subject, we understand the situation perfectly and Mr Assange continues to enjoy our respect.
And regarding other international dispatchs on that the Ecuadorian government was furious also with their own Consul in the UK, whom would have even received a reprimand: Not at all. Rafael Correa refers in the interview with Rory Caroll that he said to the Consul and mentioning the context of previous experiences in which Ecuadorian consulates abroad had hastily to issue safe-conducts, historically for instance in Czechoslovakia to save Jews from persecution , If you think you were doing the correct thing, I respect your decision. He also says that he regards the Consul as a very cultivated person.
...
The journalist took up the item that the Ecuadorian government according to press reports was full aware of such safe-conduct since the beginning, and that they would have changed their minds only five days later. President Correa called that information a lie. With those words, and emphatically. He also has asked for the proof behind such information, which never got it. To the best of my knowledge, no one of these items were ever published by the international MSM.
http://professorsblogg.com/2013/07/08/correa_assangesnowden/
Short example of the dishonesty, In Spanish WITH English subtitles
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I wonder how much they pay him to keep on embarrassing himself this way?
Thank the gods the Guardian has hired a Liberal to counter some of the trash they have allowed on their site from shills like old Rory.
Slapped down brilliantly, once again! He should know better than to lie about Correa, Correa enjoys the battle and I have yet to see him beaten by one of the anti-Latin America propagandists who I hope are not being paid too much. What a waste of space Rory Carroll is.
I do love how those Latin American leaders use people like Carroll though. It's a beautiful thing to see.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Catherina
(35,568 posts)Joe Emersberger has been on his tail for years unanswered emails to Guardian's Rory Carroll re Venezuela
Here's the number he pulled on Noam Chomsky: Chomsky Responds: Extreme Dishonesty And A Quite Deceptive Report
I wish the Guardian would stop giving that cretin a platform. He has no ethics whatsoever.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Catherina
(35,568 posts)Lots of journalists removed their masks. I hope they're held to account.
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)I'm so glad Rafael Correa has called him out.
Rory Carroll is the reason that I've placed the Guardian on candidate status for my list of lying turd news sources--along with the New York Slimes, the Wall Street Urinal, the Washington Psst, the Associated Pukes, Rotters, the Miami Hairball and all the rest, including the BBCons. ALL of these news sources, and their brethren in the corporate TV/radio monopolies, are goddamned liars about the Latin American left. All propagandize for the 1% who seek to restore control of Latin America in order to loot its resources and enslave its people.
I have not re-named the Guardian yet, except to occasionally refer to it as the Guardian-of-Nothing. That's not strong enough when it comes to Carroll. The Guardian-of-Lies? But the Guardian is not 100% bad, as all the others are. So I'm waiting--for them to fire Carroll and disavow and remedy his goddamned lies.
If the Guardian goes on my list, I--and I believe, everyone else in the English-speaking world--will be left with NO reliable news source on Latin America. Zero. Zilch. NONE! Nothing but 24/7 corporate propaganda.
That is...shocking!
Catherina
(35,568 posts)He his a long history of doing this and I can't believe anyone publishes his articles.
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)Rory Carroll is "fit to be printed" there, or anywhere in the corporate "Big Lie" media. What's shocking to me is to see this tripe in the Guardian--or, I should say, what WAS shocking to me. After the BBCons bent over, on LatAm left subjects, I really stopped being shockable. I have NEVER HEARD a more shockingly biased--sneering, nasty, blind, stupid--'report' on LatAm than I heard on BBC radio not long ago about Chavez/Venezuela. My jaw literally fell open.
We are bereft of objective news and intelligent analysis--let alone pro-democracy and progressive news, analysis and opinion--on Latin America.
We of course have new, alternative, internet-based sources, or maybe we wouldn't be talking to each other. How did YOU get informed? I started with Venezuelanalysis (still kicking) and BoRev (now gone) and then started seeking more info wherever I could find it--Common Dreams, Colombia Reports (Judi Lynn put me on to that one), the fact-rich CEPR, the Real News, In These Times, Counterpunch and others--and began seriously ANALYZING what I was reading/seeing in Corporate News. I was pro-left to begin with, and had some notion of U.S./LatAm history, so it didn't take me long, with the internet, to start exposing specific lies, overall egregious bias and cute corporate 'journalism' tricks for getting their 'news' consumers to swallow shitpiles of disinformation. What an eye-opener!
This media junta--the pervasive lying about LatAm--occurred at the same time as the WMDs that were not in Iraq. Easy to see the parallel loss of integrity throughout the corporate media, especially given the New York Slimes shilling for Donald Rumsfeld (they might as well have been on his payroll). But when ALL the old more or less reliable sources began to "turn" bad, on LatAm (including BBCons and the New Yorker, for godssakes, as well as lesser lights like the Christian Science Monitor), it became easier to instantly know what was REALLY going on in LatAm: just REVERSE whatever the corporate media and fallen independents are trying to make you believe, about LatAm, and you will know truth.
For instance, "Chavez the dictator"? The exact opposite is true--Venezuela never more democratic than with their re-write of their constitution and election and re-election of Chavez. Chavez, Correa, Morales, et al, "anti-free speech"? Not true! LatAm has NEVER HAD freer speech! What they really mean is that the CIA/Corporate disinformation empire has been successfully challenged in LatAm. They can't create coup d'etats any more, that way; they can't easily install fascist governments using the media as one of their methodologies.
Once you know this--that the Corporate Media is dealing in impressions not facts, and that the REVERSE of these impressions is about 99% of the truth--then you can begin to make sense of items like this: The corporate media in Venezuela BANNING all Chavez government officials from the public airwaves during the 2002 coup attempt!
By "free speech," they mean CORPORATE speech; speech for the 1% and for NO ONE ELSE.
You begin to understand why the corporate media has NEVER--anywhere, at any time, in any publication--reported the very significant achievements of the Chavez government on poverty reduction, educational opportunity and economic growth, and--wonder of wonders--on honest, transparent elections, public participation, inclusiveness and voter turnouts.
You begin to understand why the corporate media has suppressed INDEPENDENT information sources on these achievements--including the UN Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean, the Millennium Project, the Gallup Well-being poll, all international election monitoring groups, and more.
These things DON'T FIT the IMPRESSIONS they want to pummel your brain with--in repetitive "Big Lie" fashion--so they don't print them.
So, yes, I can believe that Rory Carroll would be published by any of the corporate propaganda horns--even the New Yorker, which recently fell to this media junta. (I wrote 'em a letter to the editor asking if they'd 'downsized' and fired all their famous fact-checkers. Gawd.) But the Guardian?
That's the last straw. And what it means is that "western civilization" is just about dead...except in Latin America!
The two most important planks of "western civilization"--honest journalism and honest elections--are just about gone...except in Latin America!
If the Guardian does nothing about Rory Carroll, then plank no. 1 is dead. And if our Democratic Party does nothing about ES&S/Dieobld vote counting here--and there is no sign whatever that they will--then plank no. 2 is dead.
What's left? Spying, dirty tricks and war. The CIA's world.
Except in Latin America.