Freedom of the Press vrs. Al Jazeera

[Gareth Munden]

David

 

I lived here in London throu' the IRA bombings ( also lived in Manchester for a bit when that was bombed).

You cannot compare what the IRA did ( mostly funded by the people of the USA )

and Hezbollah. I'm sorry David but they are very different. For one thing the amount of bombing and style at attacks are SO different. The IRA, liked to use minimum damage and maximum impact ( Look up the Canary Wharf bombing, which was carried out after everyone had left work ).

Hezbollah and Muslim terrorists want to kill as many people in the most evil ways possible.

They don't have AIMS in the way the IRA did, they want to destroy our way of life.

If you think for one minute that Israel can stop this with anything less then moving their whole country lock stock and barrel to Europe or the USA then you are wrong.

As I have said before on this forum Muslim terrorists are used by dictators from Iran and Syria, as a way of controlling the people.

 

David you seem like a wise old bean and you are a very important part of this forum, but don't compare chalk and cheese .

 

Gareth .

[Guest]

Paul, you ask for other thoughts on this....

 

"I don't think that is accurate. We were a British colony and many members were proud of that. The island of Manhatten was fairly pro-British throughout the war which is why so many fled when the war was over and they realized that they would be persecuted. "

 

David M, is quite correct, there was a substantial sector of the American public who did NOT support war with England. I doubt they are mentioned is US history books, but they sure are in Canadian texts. They where known as the United Empire Loyalists (UELs).

 

They packed up and moved to what is now the province of Ontario, many people in Ontario trace their roots back to the these loyal English patriots.

 

You can read about them here:

 

http://www.linksnorth.com/canada-history/t...itedempire.html

 

Canada has receieved a number of waves of immigrants from the USA, in every case they where either the downtrodden and persecuted, or people that simply disagreed with the policies of the US gov't.

 

Other examples are: thousands of black slaves who came to Canada via the underground railroad, American Indian tribes fleeing the US army, Vietnam War draft dodgers during the 60s and 70s.

 

Today we have a flood of US soldiers living here who have gone AWOL and refuse to go to Iraq. We have no idea what to do with them? What should we do with them?

 

Yes....Canada, a land of freedom and opportunity for those that wish to escape from America :)

 

R,

[David Mullen ASC]

I lived here in London throu' the IRA bombings ( also lived in Manchester for a bit when that was bombed).

You cannot compare what the IRA did ( mostly funded by the people of the USA )

and Hezbollah. I'm sorry David but they are very different. For one thing the amount of bombing and style at attacks are SO different. The IRA, liked to use minimum damage and maximum impact ( Look up the Canary Wharf bombing, which was carried out after everyone had left work ).

Hezbollah and Muslim terrorists want to kill as many people in the most evil ways possible.

They don't have AIMS in the way the IRA did, they want to destroy our way of life.

If you think for one minute that Israel can stop this with anything less then moving their whole country lock stock and barrel to Europe or the USA then you are wrong.

 

I agree that the comparisons are very limited; anyway, I was talking more about the tactics of the British government as a response than I was about the tactics of the IRA. I was more referring to the general situation of a large, technically advanced nation dealing with a small but determined insurgency that practices assymetrical warfare techniques.

 

But if you really believe that Israel can only stop this by "moving their whole country lock stock and barrel to Europe and the USA" -- and since that is blatantly impossible... what exactly are you saying? That's there's no solution, ever? Obviously from your sentence you don't believe military action is any more effective than any other action, so is the solution do nothing? Or are you one of these people that harbor some fantasy that it's the Arab nations that will move lock, stock, and barrel? Or that eliminating them is the only viable solution?

 

Any realistic solution has to be built around the fact that no one is going anywhere. Ultimately they have to get along with each other -- or have to destroy each other -- but one side isn't going to leave or stop existing. Now perhaps you are a fatalist (not hard these days) who believe it will be perpetual war until the Rapture comes, I don't know, but deep down I believe that the average person on both sides just wants to go shopping, take their kids to school, see a movie, etc. and not get blown-up doing it. Everyone gets tired of war eventually, but unfortunately we also go through periods where people seem to be tired of peace too.

 

But I also don't see any solutions as long as you view the other side as "evil" and "sub-human" -- it's the sort of reductive thinking that leads to open warfare on both sides. It's a short cut to thinking: if "evil" was the ONLY thing at work here, then you're not going to work at stopping the causes of terrorism because you think it's just somehow inherent in their subhuman souls. It's the sort of thinking that leads to genocide on BOTH parties when each views the other as not human. Do you honestly want to go down the same path as the terrorists and lose your soul? For NOW, yes, you can lay claim some sort of moral superiority because you aren't beheading people, but how long will that last? Why behave morally to sub-humans afterall? It's not such a big mental step to start rounding them up and putting them in gas chambers when you view other people as vermin.

 

What made the Nazis so henious was not that they were some sort of alien lifeform, but that they were human beings, civilized Europeans. Just chalking it up to "evilness", while comforting, only allows one to be blind to the causes that created Nazism in the first place.

 

Long-term warfare starts to being out "evil" in both sides -- just look at the atrocities committed by some American soldiers in wars over the years. I'm sure that one thing that allows terrorists to behave the way they do is that they mentally view their enemies as "evil" and "sub-human". So do you really want to play that game? Are you one of these "we have to be as bad as they are to win", the end-justifies-the-means sort of person?

[Gareth Munden]

David

 

The truth is I just don't have an answer, all I can see is that we are heading into a huge and very worrying conflict where many people will die.

 

I would like nothing better the to see Israel and it Muslims brothers live in peace.

 

Sorry wish I had more to add, the whole thing is very sad.

[John Holland]

Bloody religion , brainwashed people beliving in fairy tales , what ever religion , should be banned and wiped off the planet , its about being a human being , give and take . Just be nice and try to get on with one another . john.

[John Pytlak RIP]

David

 

The truth is I just don't have an answer, all I can see is that we are heading into a huge and very worrying conflict where many people will die.

 

I would like nothing better the to see Israel and it Muslims brothers live in peace.

 

Sorry wish I had more to add, the whole thing is very sad.

 

Getting back to the original topic, we can only hope that the news organizations covering war help show it for the horror it is, helping bring it to an end. Honest news coverage can lead to long term solutions to the conflict, and hopefully peace. The people behind the camera and who make the editorial decision of what to show have both a responsibility and an opportunity here.

[Guest]

"Bloody religion , brainwashed people beliving in fairy tales , what ever religion , should be banned and wiped off the planet , its about being a human being , give and take . Just be nice and try to get on with one another . john."

 

Is it just me, or is there a trend here that the English members tend to have very anti-religion feelings?

 

I was born in the UK, and I go to church every Sunday, I guess coming to Canada caused me to be "brainwashed" and "believe in fairy tales."

 

R,

[Robert Hughes]

Getting back to the original topic, we can only hope that the news organizations covering war help show it for the horror it is, helping bring it to an end. Honest news coverage can lead to long term solutions to the conflict, and hopefully peace. The people behind the camera and who make the editorial decision of what to show have both a responsibility and an opportunity here.

But what to do about news organizations that are transparent mouthpieces for governments or other power blocks that are behind the hatred and violence? What broadcast cameramen or news editors can make editorial decisions nowadays that do not conform to the agendas of their bosses' sponsors? If Al Jazeera plays a Bin Laden tape or Fox/CNN (no difference that I see nowadays) play "Herzbollah terrorist tactics" special reports, they are willing accomplices in the perpetuation of the cycle of violence.

[David Mullen ASC]

Getting back to the original topic, we can only hope that the news organizations covering war help show it for the horror it is, helping bring it to an end. Honest news coverage can lead to long term solutions to the conflict, and hopefully peace. The people behind the camera and who make the editorial decision of what to show have both a responsibility and an opportunity here.

 

It's always a tough call, like the issue of the government not allowing the media to show the soldiers' coffins arriving from the Iraq. When does that start being war propaganda when you avoid showing disturbing images of the war?

 

Being a nerd... I've been thinking of the Star Trek episode where two planets have had a century-long war where computers calculate the casualties of a virtual attack and then a percentage of the population voluntarily is executed to match these computer figures, under the notion that it is more "civilized" than real warfare, which could destroy each other completely. And Kirk destroys the computer and makes that speech about war being ugly and that's what motivates people to stop it; if you make it too neat and painless, there's no motivation to end it.

 

So I don't buy the notion that the media should avoid negative images of warfare because then people might be disturbed and become against the war, although I understand the government's motivation for controlling it. But if we're supposed to be this enlightened democracy, then why is the government so afraid of people thinking for themselves and making decisions based on information? Too often, this administration has wanted to avoid the hard work of making a real case for something they want to get done, and instead resort to playing politics (i.e. the Valerie Plame case) or outright propaganda and misrepresentation of basic facts. Maybe it's because they don't have much of a case, I don't know.

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

Bloody religion , brainwashed people beliving in fairy tales , what ever religion , should be banned and wiped off the planet , its about being a human being , give and take . Just be nice and try to get on with one another . john.

 

 

Its not religion that is the evil. It is the twisiting of that religion to justify whatever you want that is evil. "Just be nice and try to get on with one another" is the fundamental principle of most religions. A basic lession in Christianity is "Love thy Neighbor"

[John Holland]

"Bloody religion , brainwashed people beliving in fairy tales , what ever religion , should be banned and wiped off the planet , its about being a human being , give and take . Just be nice and try to get on with one another . john."

 

Is it just me, or is there a trend here that the English members tend to have very anti-religion feelings?

 

I was born in the UK, and I go to church every Sunday, I guess coming to Canada caused me to be "brainwashed" and "believe in fairy tales."

 

R,

Yes i hope so , if that is how you choose to spend your sunday morning .no prob. its the organised religious nutters who control weak minded people { like Bush or even Blair } who are really mucking up this world . john

[David Mullen ASC]

Its not religion that is the evil. It is the twisiting of that religion to justify whatever you want that is evil. "Just be nice and try to get on with one another" is the fundamental principle of most religions. A basic lession in Christianity is "Love thy Neighbor"

 

MUCH more than that, Jesus said:

 

"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you. If anyone hits you on one cheek, let him hit the other one too; if someone takes your coat, let him have your shirt as well."

"If you love only the people who love you, why should you receive a blessing? Even sinners love those that love them!... No, love your enemies and do good to them... Be merciful just as your Father is merciful."

 

And I believe the Koran says to "protect the innocent".

 

Obviously a lot of people are only paying lip-service to their own religion.

[Robert Hughes]

In Leviticus 19, God was speaking directly to the "children of Israel." Leviticus 19:19 says Im not to allow a garment "mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee." So, do you wear cloths of mixed cloth? Leviticus also says I can own slaves, sell my daugther, and stone my neighbor for working on the sabbath.

Gimme that ol' time religion!

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

MUCH more than that, Jesus said:

 

"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you. If anyone hits you on one cheek, let him hit the other one too; if someone takes your coat, let him have your shirt as well."

"If you love only the people who love you, why should you receive a blessing? Even sinners love those that love them!... No, love your enemies and do good to them... Be merciful just as your Father is merciful."

 

And I believe the Koran says to "protect the innocent".

 

Obviously a lot of people are only paying lip-service to their own religion.

 

 

I'm sure you understand David I was merely responding to the throwing-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater comment of John's. I have said before I don't condone the actions of everything going on.

 

But let me also add, we are not governed by a Christian government. Our government is seperated from any form of religion. By choice it has removed itself from any moral basis for its decisions or governing. What is to be expected of a non-absolute truth society? Simply more and more self-justified chaos.

 

It is difficult in a forum such as this to express everything you are trying to say. Especially on a topic as delicate as this. You tend to get a lot of deaf ranting. Comments from people shouting their emotions with little to no thought and without listening to others and thinking through what they have to say. This thread is filled with examples of it.

 

Also David, i've not read the Koran but I intend to. This is purely speculation but does it not also call for destruction of other religions? I'm not trying to prove a point here, but rather am just seeking knowledge. I wonder how an extremist defines "innocent"?

[Guest Paul Wizikowski]

Gimme that ol' time religion!

 

:D thats funny. but seriously...what was the point of those commandments? Try to reference them in context and understand what the writer is referring to. I'm not trying to teach a Bible lesson here. I'm not the person to do it.

Edited July 27, 2006 by Paul Wizikowski

[James Steven Beverly]

"Yes Richard, I'll take the destruction of property over the loss of human life any day of the week, as for being on drugs or insane, I'd have to be it I thought for one second YOU represented the majority of Americans."

 

Ah I'm Canadian, incase you didn't read any of my other posts. So I don't represent American opinion in any way. But I did go to university in your country and live there for a long time.

 

Of course I could list off any of the other genocidal activities committed by the USA in the past, i.e. slavery and the elimination of the American aboriginals. Would you add those activities to your list of "we are always right."?

 

R,

 

Your Canadian and your telling ME what Americans think? You need to have have this conversation with Nick. You two would get along swimmingly, and if YOU read MY posts, you would see I never said we were always right. I said we usually try to do the right thing and we admit when we're wrong. Your comment proves my point. Americans fought one of the bloodiest wars in history to abolish slavery and most Americans view the treatment of American Indians during the push west as deplorible, However, without "Manifest Destiny" this nation would not be a the only superpower left in the world today and There would be noone strong enough to fight for what's right. American Indians have made great stides in our nation and gain an almost universal respect for their contribution and culture from our people.

[Guest]

"Americans fought one of the bloodiest wars in history to abolish slavery "

 

Ahhhh my understanding of US history here is a little fuzzy, but from what I recall the AMERICANS in the southern states fought to KEEP slavery.

 

"this nation would not be a the only superpower left in the world today and There would be noone strong enough to fight for what's right"

 

You've really got to be joking I mean really. The US is the only country strong enough to fight for what is right? I think the world would survive if the USA was teleported to Mars, which is what most members of the US gov't secretly hope for :)

 

And for the last time "noone" is TWO freaking words!!! No one, no one, no one!!

 

R,

 

PS: Interesting you would raise the issue of Manifest Destiny. LUCKILY for us Canadians we escaped becoming a part of the USA. The predictions that we would one day request annexation have obviously not come to pass.

 

O'Sullivan's original conception of Manifest Destiny was not a call for territorial expansion by force. He believed that the expansion of the United States would happen without the direction of the U.S. government or the involvement of the military. After "Anglo-Saxons" emigrated to new regions, they would set up new democratic governments, and then seek admission to the United States, as Texas had done. In 1845, O'Sullivan predicted that California would follow this pattern next, and that Canada would eventually request annexation as well. He disapproved of the outbreak of the Mexican-American War in 1846, although he came to believe that the outcome would be beneficial to both countries.[5]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny

[James Steven Beverly]

So in you vast knowledge of the American people you can devine want members of our goverment secretly want, what an amazing talent can you also juggle? The world wold no doubt survive without the US but it would be a much poorer place for the loss and would probably be living under a Chinese dictatorship. Yes and Americans in the southern states also helped escaped slaves flee to the North and freedon and some southerners were the first to die in the struggle for abolition. If the south had won, things might have been differnt, but they didn't the the argument is moot. Thanks for the history lesson but nothing you said negates the fact that in order to become the nation it is today America have to tame the west and expand to fill it's borders. The result was a country unlike anything ever attempted in the history of mankind. At only 230 years old there is bound to be some growuing pains and a lot of readjustments ond we have made mistakes the we as a nation regret but then again, NOONE is perfect. B)

Edited July 27, 2006 by Capt.Video

[David Mullen ASC]

in order to become the nation it is today America have to tame the west and expand to fill it's borders. The result was a country unlike anything ever attempted in the history of mankind. At only 230 years old there is bound to be some growuing pains and a lot of readjustments ond we have made mistakes the we as a nation regret but then again, NOONE is perfect.

 

You have a Texan's outlook on American history... And which side of the slavery issue did Texas fight on?

 

Reaching the Pacific may have been inevitable, but it didn't have to be as rushed or as bloody as it was. The Gold Rush in California caused a massive leap in population within two years, with an attendant wholesale slaughter of Native Americans, I mean, literally in some cases, someone paying for every head of an Indian you brought in. Would it really have made a difference if we had taken another decade or so to head west? Did we really have to displace Indians from lands for farms that now we don't have even farm anymore? Was there really so little space on this continent for the two groups to share?

 

In fact, one of the reasons for the "intolerable" taxes imposed by the British to pay for the presence of British troops in the colonies, was to stop the colonists from stealing Indian land and expanding further west, thus starting wars. Yet the truth is that even on the Eastern half of this country there is still enough undeveloped land that could have been left to the Indians. There is very little positive you can say about the history of the U.S. regarding the displacement of Native Americans. For all we know -- and we'll never know -- we could have become an even greater culture had we handled it differently, the same goes for slavery.

 

Back to Lebanon, there was an interesting analysis of the military issues by Augustus Richard Norton today:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0727/p09s02-coop.html

[Guest]

"Thanks for the history lesson but nothing you said negates the fact that in order to become the nation it is today America have to tame the west and expand to fill it's borders. The result was a country unlike anything ever attempted in the history of mankind."

 

Oddly Canada managed to expand its borders to the Pacific without a total massacre of the Aboriginals living here. The expansion was not perfect, but the systematic destruction of an entire race of people was not the order of the day here.

 

Canada also managed to gain independence from England without a war. And there has never been a war "between the provinces."

 

What makes America so unique? Canada is also in every way a nation "unlike any thing ever attempted in the history of mankind." We just managed to do it in a much more peaceful & civilized manner.

 

Today Canada is a light to the world, the greatest nation in the history of planet earth :)

 

R,

[Dan Goulder]

Doesn't the fact that the "religious right" appears to be politically aligned with the "pro-war" Party make the whole claim about being "religious" just a bunch of hollow lip service? It's amazing that we have people in this country who, with a perfectly straight face, can claim to be pro-gun, pro-war, pro-life "Christians". Jesus might insist they quit soiling his name.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

Doesn't the fact that the "religious right" appears to be politically aligned with the "pro-war" Party make the whole claim about being "religious" just a bunch of hollow lip service? It's amazing that we have people in this country who, with a perfectly straight face, can claim to be pro-gun, pro-war, pro-life "Christians". Jesus might insist they quit soiling his name.

 

---Gore Vidal points out that the Pilgrims came to this country because they weren't allowed to persecute others for their religion in Europe.

 

& the great Puritan parlimentarian Oliver Cromwell wanted to exterminate the Irish so the English could have more farmland. The the Irish were Papists was a plus.

"Christ not man is king".

 

& no, I'm not Irish. Though a 20th century politician had a similar idea for clearing Slavs off of their farmlands and building autobahns so his constituents coulddrive their volkswagens to their farms on the weekends.

 

---LV

[Chad Stockfleth]

My in-laws have been in Haifa for the last two weeks on a religious pilgrimage. Mother-in-law is Canadian, Father-in-law is British, both are Bahai which is yet another religion that claims that region as their holyland. They literally left the day after the fighting started....decided to go anyway, I thought they were crazy, but they did it.

 

I'm amazed how impassioned this thread has become, by far the most popular on the board lately. Just another reminder of how extremely polarized the world has become. What happened to the middle ground? Why is it that nobody can seem to see what they have in common instead of where they differ. Why can't the Muslims of the region understand that the Jews were hunted in Europe the first part of last century and that they need a country? Why can't the Israeli's who so has been said have as modern a land as Chicago and New York see the utter poverty of the region around them and sympathize? Where's the shred of decency hiding? We can't even maintain courtesy on a cinematography forum.

 

As a species we are showing ourselves to be spiteful, selfish, short-sighted little animals, and to borrow from another popular thread, perhaps we deserve what we get from global warming. Give a chance to another more compassionate species.

 

I can barely maintain an ounce of optimism anymore. If one of these crazy religions is right and there IS a god, he must be awfully disappointed.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

America is not the only superpower left in the world. China has four times the population and very probably equal military might, if that's what particularly floats your aircraft-carrier.

 

I am constantly disquieted by the need of some Americans to claim that the US is somehow superlative among countries. The United States of America is not the largest or most populous country in the world, it does not have the highest per-capita GDP or standard of living, nor the finest standards of public life, law and governance, the most blameless history, the healthiest economy, or supremacy in any one of a dozen other measures a person could cook up to try and rate places to live.

 

Don't get me wrong. I like the US; it's generally filled with friendly, welcoming and generous people. It contains many beautiful and interesting things and a fascinating and telling history. I have a good time whenever I go there. It does fairly well in many of the areas I mentioned.

 

But then again, so do a lot of other countries. Life for Americans (and their allies) would be filled, I think, with vastly less strife if the US were to overcome its frankly rather immature delusions of grandeur. In comparison, I think British colonialism died at exactly the right time.

 

Phil

[Guest]

"or supremacy in any one of a dozen other measures a person could cook up to try and rate places to live."

 

What about monster truck rallies Phil? No one beats America at Monster truck rallies.

 

What about beauty pageants for little girls? No other nation has better beauty pageants for girls under three years old than the USA.

 

And don't forget America's freedom, the terrorists hate America because of its freedom, don't you listen to George Bush?

 

R,