Nothing like complaining against allegations of anti-Semitism by blaming it on a Jewish conspiracy. Oh, and then asking the reporter to whom you made the accusation to "forget the Jewish thing". Stay classy, Julian Assange.
UPDATE: Henry Farrell points out in comments that the source for this is Ian Hislop, editor of Private Eye. Hislop isn't exactly known as an exemplar of fairness and objectivity, so perhaps take the allegation with a grain or twelve of salt. Hislop has been sued for libel and lost many times; Wikipedia says the most in English history. Of course at this point Assange has credibility issues of his own. So caveat emptor, no matter which side you choose to believe.
IPE @ UNC
IPE@UNC is a group blog maintained by faculty and graduate students in the Department of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The opinions expressed on these pages are our own, and have nothing to do with UNC.
Bookshelf
Tags
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(365)
-
▼
March
(27)
- Winter's Officially Over
- Will Barclays Leave London?
- Insane Price Point of the Day
- Some Politics of Debt, Default, and the EMU
- Krugman vs. Krugman
- More on Libya and the U.S.
- FYI
- The Post-American World? Not Yet.
- "Social science and the Libyan adventure", Rebutted
- Real-Life Laffer Curve (or, Arbitraging Internatio...
- George Rabinowitz
- International Relations, 1980-2006
- RIP, George Rabinowitz
- Quick Note on Trade
- This Is What Adjustment Looks Like (An Ongoing Ser...
- ISA
- On the Dollar, Euro, and RMB
- Hegemoaning
- Cake! And Eat it Too!
- Deep Thoughts
- #Winning the Future
- Who's Winning the Future? Someone's Gotta Keep Score
- Dude, Where's My Government?
- Just Sayin'
- UNC Everywhere
- Digging the Hole Deeper
- Missing the Point
-
▼
March
(27)
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Digging the Hole Deeper
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I wouldn't be calling Ian Hislop a "reporter" for values of that term which include fairness, reliability etc. Nor would I be trusting his account of a conversation without substantial supporting evidence. Not that I would be surprised if Assange did have all sorts of unpleasant views, but I am rather surprised to see the NYT go with such a thinly sourced story.
True. I'm not super-up on my British journos, but hasn't he been sued more than anyone else, and also never won a case?
I expect there's a tape of the conversation somewhere, and if so the truth will eventually be revealed. And at this point I'm not sure if there is a person less credible than Assange.
But perhaps you're right that a qualifier is in order. I'll add a note to the post.
Post a Comment