CORRECTION: Black PR Psy-Up Behind “Assange” Tweet About Podesta

I checked it with the person I trust most about all things Wikileaks, Bella Magnani, on Twitter. She explained it was false and I immediately took it down. I apologize to Truth Barrier readers, but there is a more valuable lesson here. Big money is being spent to discredit Julian Assange by creating imposter accounts on Twitter.

Thus is why I miss the days of interviewing people on creaky old tape recorders. You always knew that the person was real, and said what they said.

I feel sorry for people who only have “fake news” as their life-blood.

Julian Assange Impostor Accounts: Report to Twitter for impersonation and block

Comments

  1. john powell says:

    First was the TB publication of bogus Assange twitter statements, without confirming the authenticity of that twitter account and the statements it contained.

    Now comes this TB post, in which a link to further unconfirmed statements is endorsed as gospel truth.

    At that link, the writer/blogger states: “A lot of time and therefore money is being expended in creating Assange impostor accounts for Black Propaganda.”

    Surely, some time is being spent creating impersonated accounts, but, where is the evidence that “a lot” of money is being expended to conduct a “black psy-op” against Assange, using those bogus twitter accounts?

    Creating those impersonations is rather easy, and doesn’t require “a lot of time”. It requires expending no money at all, except for owning a computer with the software to cut and paste digital graphics. Quite elementary.

    “Black psy-op”?
    “A lot of time and money”?

    Really?

    Says who? Confirmed by what?

    First was the TB publication of unconfirmed twitter statements. Then there was the TB publication of unconfirmed conclusions, in the TB statement above and at the link promoted therein.

    With gentleness and harmlessness, I suggest, as I have suggested numerous times previously, that the publication of ALL accusatory statements be withheld until the deeds and actions described have been confirmed.

    That’s a reasonable and wise discipline, useful for one’s prevention of self-inflicted injury to one’s credibility.

    {footnote: Is it not possible and plausible that the impersonated Assange twitter statement, in which the false Assange accuses Podesta of having incriminating material in his computer, was created and deployed to harm Podesta, not to harm Assange? I don’t know. Does anyone know? Does anyone possess real evidence? Or, is this whole event (including its reportage) a trip down a rabbit hole dug entirely with imagined elements, and with eagerly-libelous, eagerly-malicious partisan wishful thinking which is being dispatched by both sides of the Assange/Podesta matter?}

    I suggest, stop hollering what’s whispered by critters under rocks and litter. 🙂

    • ger says:

      what a load of crap. Anyone who sets out to defraud others by impersonating someone is a person who is entitled to command a good deal of money. Not least because if they are caught their livelihood is is smithereens and secondly if they have the tech savvy, then they deserve payment and there seems to be a lot of these people that are employed in this activity. Hence, they are being paid to deceive, manipulate and most impressive of all, not get caught and also, not reveal their source of revenue. Who wouldnt value such a disposable commodity.

  2. Melvin Ross says:

    Thank you for the responsible retraction. They don’t make them like you. <3

Speak Your Mind