What have I been saying to you?

[gotterdamerung]

Al_Jazeera incites criminal behavior

[lummox]

are you just gonna lay there and stink or get up and make me a sammich?

[markinore]

Have you been saying, "The U.S. invaded Iraq to build a democracy. Naturally, we must squelch any independent media that do not support us unequivocally. That brings democracy."

 

If that's what you have been saying, damn, you have been right!

[Fairweather]

In the name of fairness perhaps the Iraqi government should kick ALL foreign reporters out of the country for a few months.

 

I'm not being a smart ass....I am serious.

[gotterdamerung]

You're a fool if you don't believe that Al Jazeera is more than a news source. They instigate and create news rather than cover it. In unclassified intel there have been instances where Al Jazeera reporters were implicated in several hostile actions against the US.

[Fairweather]

I do believe it. That's my point. Fuck Al-Jazera and all the reporters who just like to stir shit up. They don't give a shit about our soldiers. Let their camera men film the muzzle-flash from an American .50cal as the screen goes to static.

[markinore]

Oh, why don't you just admit it? You don't like any journalists unless they back you up. "Instigating" and "creating" news was a charge that has been directed for over 40 years at media in this country that covered civil rights protests, antiwar protests, and any other activities that government authorities didn't want to appear in newspapers or on TV.

 

If your accusation is that Al Jazeera is biased, you're right. All media are biased. In the Arab world, where the traditions of independent journalism are of miniscule duration compared to ours, Al Jazeera is the only source of news that is not directly controlled by some government. Al Jazeera is unquestionably in a period of rapid evolution, and much of its reporting can rightly be criticized in terms of journalistic thoroughness, ethics, fairness, and other standards. Journalists in this country, with far less personal risk and far longer histories, can be criticized on these grounds as well.

[arlen]

Meaningfully, the Iraqi government re-instituted the death penalty at the same time. I don't have a huge problem with their decision to hide from AJ or capital punishment, but it's a shame to see them being led into barbarism by the bad guys.

[gotterdamerung]

I have no problem with journalism that disagrees with my point of view whatsoever. I do find issue with journalism that sensationalizes and creates acts of violence against young soldiers and civilians deployed by your elected leaders to foreign countries. If a poll were taken here by people on the ground they would tell you that one of the first indicators of a violent act about to occur or a ramdom murder would be an Al Jazeera newsman standing by. It adds up to something that reaks of something less than journalism. It adds up to complacency to murder.

 

The incident that sealed the coffin on them was that they were cleverly positioned for some first hand shots of Christian Churches being blown to bits along with people, children, women.\

 

Arlen are you saying that someone like Hitler should have avoided the death penalty because it's barbaric?

[willstrickland]

I could do without Al Jihada, they show too many pictures of this fugly bastard, who BTW is about to get his head ripped off and stuffed up his ass.

 

 

Nice choppers Muqtada, now come here so I can stomp them out with these size 10 Redwings. This fucker shoulda been clipped 8 months ago.

[arlen]

Comparisons to Hitler don't say much in this context except to illustrate Godwin's law. The death penalty applies to drug offenses, just like in Saddam's regime. That suggests that 1. maybe we haven't brought much "democracy" to the Iraqis; 2. the government is playing by the insurgents' rules.

[Stonehead]

They need to have more of this type of programming. Yeah, that's the ticket.

[JayB]

I can't believe that my evil homonym has bypassed this opportunity to launch into an impassioned defense of Al-Jezeera's scrupulous impartiality and strict adherence to the highest ethical standards....

[rbw1966]

Perhaps he has grown to recognize an indefensible position.

[j_b]

wtf? nobody has provided any evidence toward anything. So it's not because some blowhard on some web site wants us to believe that reporting about what's going down somehow amounts to incitement to violence that i am going to run around reaching for conclusions. some of you guys are so credulous it's pathetic. especially considering the history of these allegations and the advantage to be gained by shutting AJ down. it appears some of you have not yet understood that imposing one's propaganda is critical during modern warfare, particularly when it involves squashing an insurgency against foreign occupation.

 

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11115

 

Reporters Without Borders today denounced as a "serious blow to press freedom" the Iraqi interim government's order .... etc

 

JayB - f**k off!

[JayB]

Gets easier every time.

 

I am, however, slightly dissapointed that you didn't refer to the armed millitants as Freedom Fighters - but I am confident that you can remedy this shortcoming and return to your typical form in subsequent posts.

[j_b]

 

upon further consideration i'll take the troll because i believe it is worthwhile to expose your underhanded tactics.

 

1) i never claimed that news media were objective, on the contrary. imo AJ is pro-arab and it is also one of the best thing going on in the arab world today. it has a cultural, political bias that is to be expected. if it spewed pro-west propaganda 24/24 it would not be anywhere as successful as it is. it is modern and promotes pluralism, which goes a lot further toward establishing democracy in the arab world than anything we have done.

 

2) i have never referred to anybody as a freedom fighter. in fact, that term came back into vogue when you hypocrites lauded the praises of the coke-smuggling, nurse-raping, teacher-butchering contras during the nicaraguan conflict.

Edited August 10, 2004 by j_b

[willstrickland]

some of you guys are so credulous it's pathetic.

 

That's rich coming from you, one who dines at the trough of the left-wing propaganda machine.

[j_b]

do you care to substantiate that by giving one factual instance of my being credulous?

[willstrickland]

Goddamn j_b, that would take me seven or eight days to compile all the "sources" with extreme bias that you routinely use in your arguments. You obviously buy into them, hence your credulousness, or credulity if you prefer (both are correct btw).

[Dru]

When Al Jazeera camera team or reporters follows al-Sadr militia along, it is somehow ethically or morally different from embedded Fox News reporters in US military units?

 

I suppose the al-Sadr may be more likely to commit violent acts if it gets them on Arab TV whereas the presence of a Western reporter may be an iuncentive for US military forces to avoid shooting women and children etc. if they know its going straight to the 6 PM news in their home town. Although from what I heard the newsfeeds coming out of the "embedded" reporters were heavily edited to remove all that anyways.

[j_b]

lame. so you can't come up with one example right off the top of your head? so how does it sit with your contention of extreme bias?

 

extreme sources? like the guardian, the independent, reporters without borders, human rights campaigns, and a boatload of mainstream sources in the us. dude, you are a liar.

 

i am taking a chance by asking you of one instance of my being credulous and the only thing you can do is resort to a dodge? pfft!

 

note: i could counter by citing your own bias but i won't stoop that low.

[j_b]

gee! go figure! the "extremists" at the new york times are not falling for it either: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/10/opinion/10tue3.html

 

More sensitivity and less stridency on Al Jazeera's part would certainly be welcome. But on the whole, it has been a healthy and crucially important force for change. It often stands almost alone in holding the actions of previously unaccountable governments up to public view and encouraging broader public debate. Mr. Allawi's government is supposed to be pointing the way toward a more democratic Iraq in a more democratic Middle East. By moving against Al Jazeera, it does just the opposite.

 

could it be that the extreme point of view is to argue for shutting down media when it does not toe the party line?

 

hey stickland: what about these "extreme sources i use routinely"? don't you know how to use the search engine? or are you now playing the "i'll take the high road" on this one? a little late for that.

[ken4ord]

wtf? nobody has provided any evidence toward anything.

 

What, evidence, no way that is expecting too much from people who are too close minded to see that Al Jazeera is no different than any other news organization. If anything they probably do a better job at being objective than most news organizations. That is probably why they have been critized so much by US and Arab nations.

[gotterdamerung]

Have you naysayers been smoking your liberal crack pipe in bed again? Gee...how many CNN camera people were invited for front row seats at the latest and greatest massacre of civilians? How many FOX news cameras were rolling at the latest kidnapping of westerners or people trying to make an honest living driving a truck? How many CBS news teams covered the last beheading? Wake up.