Freedom of the Press vrs. Al Jazeera

[Robert Hughes]

Interesting article in today's Washington Post about the troubles of Al Jazeera television crews shooting in the United States, even when the crews are American citizens. Insurance companies won't cover them, big accounting firms refuse their business. Locals find out they work for Al Jazeera and call the police.

 

Is supporting Terrorist TV inimical to America's interests? Or is freedom of the press guaranteed only for Republican Party donors?

[Phil Rhodes]

Considering that prior to September 11 2001 the US government had no need of an Arabic media boogeyman and was generally supportive of Al Jazeera as one of the freest and most widely viewed Arabic language broadcasting organisation.... I'd suspect the latter.

 

Certainly I am not aware that they have broadcast anything nearly as offensive as Fox.

 

Phil

[Peter J DeCrescenzo]

On a happier note, "Bridges TV" in the State of NY, USA seems to be doing good work in an indirectly-related area:

http://www.bridgestv.com/

 

However, I don't know what if any degree of hassle they endure to achieve what they do.

[Guest]

The NSA will have that site shut down very soon. Where will the Bush admin and American Rednecks be if Muslims are "de-monsterized."

 

Let's face it America seems to work best when it has enemies to fight. During the peaceful period bewteen the end of the cold war and 9/11, the US gov't didn't know what to do with it self. It got stuck dealing with things like, crime, poverty, health care, etc etc. The was no "War On Blank" to conduct, so you have to deal with the tough stuff. Yasser Arafat had the exact same problem if he made peace with Israel.

 

Why does the US presidents polls numbers shoot up every time he drops bombs on some poor buggers living in Third World squalor? Strange, very strange.

 

R,

[James Steven Beverly]

Let me start off by saying I HATE the Bush administration with a passion that burns through to my very soul. That said, Al Jazeera does have the right of freedom of the press of course, but WE have the right NOT to suport them IN ANY WAY. That is our RIGHT as Americans. I can choose not to do buseness with them and I have the RIGHT to report anything I concider suspicious. These "journalists" who support mass murderers and terrorists have the right to free press in this nation, a nation they have time and time again bashed with statements that had they been directed at their own countries would have led to their immediated shut down and arrest, but if they think that gives them the RIGHT to politeness and cooperation the they are sorely mistaken.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Capt.Video

[Hal Smith]

Let's face it America seems to work best when it has enemies to fight. During the peaceful period bewteen the end of the cold war and 9/11, the US gov't didn't know what to do with it self. It got stuck dealing with things like, crime, poverty, health care, etc etc.

R,

Gee, last time I checked the US economy was booming during those horrid days between the Soviet Union's falling apart and onset of the Bush Administration. We had a Democratic President with an IQ around 180, as opposed to the current village idiot, and a balanced budget.

 

I do credit President Reagan with cutting off the Russians at the knees - there was much to dislike about his administrations but the Gipper knew how to "act" tough, and it worked.

 

How you define "work best"? We've got the worst deficits we've ever had and we're letting the Oil Barons and Communist China finance them. I think you've been eating too many Maple Leaves.

[Tim J Durham]

Let me start off by saying I HATE the Bush administration with a passion that burns through to my very soul. That said, Al Jazeera does have the right of freedom of the press of course, but WE have the right NOT to suport them IN ANY WAY. That is our RIGHT as Americans. I can choose not to do buseness with them and I have the RIGHT to report anything I concider suspicious. These "journalists" who support mass murderers and terrorists have the right to free press in this nation, a nation they have time and time again bashed with statements that had they been directed at their own countries would have led to their immediated shut down and arrest, but if they think that gives them the RIGHT to politeness and cooperation the they are sorely mistaken.

Where did you get the idea that Al Jazeera supports mass murderers and/or terrorists?

 

We know all too well how the Reagan and Bush 41 administrations armed, trained and supported them, but how, exactly, has Al Jazeera supported them?

[Dan Goulder]

These "journalists" who support mass murderers...

I assume you're referring to the pathetically dishonest, right-wing butt boys over at the Fox Network, who've knowingly spread intentional misinformation to their audience, of whom upwards of 80% still believe we were attacked by Iraq on 9-11. Or, maybe you're referring to the slimeballs over at Clear Channel, who staged Nuremburg-style war rallies around the country prior to and in support of the Iraq invasion. (I videotaped one of these rallies, which may someday serve as a documentation of the downfall of the Caucasian race. Yeah, it was like a KKK rally without the masks...)

 

Speaking of Al Jazeera, you might want to check out an excellent documentary called "Control Room". It's interesting to note that the U.S. spokesman (and apologist) from that movie was eventually hired as an American correspondent for...Al Jazeera.

[Guest]

"How you define "work best"? We've got the worst deficits we've ever had and we're letting the Oil Barons and Communist China finance them. I think you've been eating too many Maple Leaves."

 

Simple, when there's a "War on _________________" can be any thing, just fill in the blank. The US gov't is able to side step issues like poverty, crime, health care, etc. There have even been two movies made about this phenomenon, Canadian Bacon & Wag The Dog. In each movie the concept is that a fictional war is created so the president can be a warrior and distract the public from the real failures of their administration. In Bush's case this of course would be his disastrous handling of the US economy for starters.

 

So from the US governments perspective it "works best" when there is an enemy to fight abroad, rather than having to deal with domestic issues. As I pointed out earlier, the more bombs a US president drops on some third world toilet, the higher his poll numbers. The US would I'm sure bomb Canada if 90% of our population was not with in 100 miles of the US border. Then again if the US did bomb Canada it would be the last item on the nightly news so who would hear aboooot it?

 

Yes, I prefer eating maple leaves over the vittles, grits, and pork rinds, you like to eat.

 

R,

[N DeWood]

Capt. Video,

 

You hate the Bush administration? No, you don't!

You sound exactly like a mouth piece straight out of his press office. Reading your post, you have absolutely no clue what Al Jazeera is, and why there is an organized effort to destroy it in the U.S.

 

Let me remind you that Bush wanted to destroy Al Jazeera by bombing it, except that Blair was forced to change this idiot for a president's mind. And you allege Al Jazeera supports "mass murderers and terrorists," goodness, you really do sound like Bush!

 

Let me start off by saying I HATE the Bush administration with a passion that burns through to my very soul. That said, Al Jazeera does have the right of freedom of the press of course, but WE have the right NOT to suport them IN ANY WAY. That is our RIGHT as Americans. I can choose not to do buseness with them and I have the RIGHT to report anything I concider suspicious. These "journalists" who support mass murderers and terrorists have the right to free press in this nation, a nation they have time and time again bashed with statements that had they been directed at their own countries would have led to their immediated shut down and arrest, but if they think that gives them the RIGHT to politeness and cooperation the they are sorely mistaken.

[James Steven Beverly]

You mean if I don't agree with you I must be a Bush supporter. If I'm not for you then I'm against you, Right? Now who sounds like Bush? I don't have to be a card carrying right wing warmonger to dispise a "news network" that supports countries that advocate the destruction of the US, refuse to condenm acts of mass murder, broadcast the beheading of innocent people, and lend support and a forum to international terrorists. I find Fox news coverage a joke as well but relitively harmless as MOST people realise this is biased broadcasting and dismiss it as such as Bush's approval ratings show.

 

Al Jazeera, however is a far more dark and dangerious entity. By providing a platform from which to broadcast and spread the message of hate in Islamic fundementalist terror, glorifying acts of murder and destruction, and providing a sence of solidarity with religious zelots bent on remaking the world in their own twisted version of Islam, this entity has moved from a news gathering organization to a propaganda machine. With the Israli / Lebonese crisis looming they are even more dangerous. When Iran developes the bomb, and they will, the exportation of terrorism moves to a whole other level. If this organization continues to fan the flames of hatred there may come a time in the future when we will have to answer fire with fire. I for one would rather my country not have to level Teharan because some Islamic nutcase with a deathwish, a 3rd grade education and a promise of 72 virgins after he honorable murders millions of people by setting off a nuke in the heart New York City after he hooked up with some carismatic loon who he happened to catch on the tube one evening, spouting off about the glorious jae had being waging against the great Satan of America on one of Al Jazeera' s fair and unbiased broadcasts. In fact bombing Al Jazeera may have been the ONE action Bush could have taking that I might have supported!

Edited July 23, 2006 by Capt.Video

[David Mullen ASC]

If this organization continues to fan the flames of hatred

 

Even if that's true, I don't know why they would even bother... when the United States is so much more effective at making new enemies through its policies and actions. The news of a couple of bad-apples in the U.S. army raping and killing some woman in Iraq can do more to create new terrorists than a year's worth of propaganda on Al Jazeera -- the TRUTH is damaging enough.

 

The real question is why do we keep giving the Islamic world reasons to hate us? The president of Iran calls us puppets of Isreal... and now we seem to be supporting his nutty claims by our tacit support of the invasion of Lebanon. It's going to now be much harder to refute such anti-semitic nonsense coming out of the Arab world.

 

And historically, most of the Middle-East crisis has been due to actions of the U.S. and Europe over the decades. So if Al Jazeera is "fanning the flames", then they are using a hair dryer next to our turbo-prop... if they shut it off, it would hardly make a dent in the total amount of air being blasted.

 

Besides, we have our own version of Al Jazeera for the other side, Fox News. They aren't so bad at fanning flames themselves...

[Tim J Durham]

I don't have to be a card carrying right wing warmonger to dispise a "news network" that supports countries that advocate the destruction of the US, refuse to condenm acts of mass murder, broadcast the beheading of innocent people, and lend support and a forum to international terrorists. I find Fox news coverage a joke as well but relitively harmless as MOST people realise this is biased broadcasting and dismiss it as such as Bush's approval ratings show.

 

First of all, Al Jazeera has NEVER broadcast the beheading of anyone. Never. Nor does it shy away from covering war or terrorist bombings (I assume that is the 'mass muder' you're talking about). What it also does not do is swallow whole the Bush administration spin on events. Your opinion of Al Jazeera is typical of many uninformed Americans, though. Most cannot understand Arabic and therefore must rely on what other people have to say about what and how Al Jazeera broadcasts. Currently, this has mostly come from Donald Rumsfeld and he has his own reasons for characterising Al Jazeera the way he has. You can guess for yourself what those reasons may be.

 

Al Jazeera, however is a far more dark and dangerious entity. By providing a platform from which to broadcast and spread the message of hate in Islamic fundementalist terror, glorifying acts of murder and destruction, and providing a sence of solidarity with religious zelots bent on remaking the world in their own twisted version of Islam, this entity has moved from a news gathering organization to a propaganda machine.

 

I'd ask for examples of this but I know you don't have any. If you're talking about Al Jazeera broadcasting messages from al Qaeda, I'd ask you to try to remember where you saw those tapes broadcast. Was it ON Al Jazeera? Or was it on some other, let's say American, network? CNN, ABC, Fox like it when people think that Al Jazeera is the one who braodcasts these messages even when nearly everyone has watched it somewhere else. That way, the American networks can say, 'Hey, it wasn't US broadcasting those Al Qaeda messages... it was Al Jazeera!'. Even as they replay the tape again and again all the while saying, 'Today, Al Jazeera broadcast another...'.

 

Believe me, if those tapes were sent first to CNN, that's where you'd see them. Just like you do now. And no one would be accusing CNN of being an Al Qaeda mouthpiece BECAUSE THOSE TAPES ARE NEWS! Get it?

Short of getting a sit-down interview with Osama, that's all their is coming from Al Qaeda.

 

Al Qaeda sends those tapes to Al Jazeera (my assumption) because they are the biggest news organisation in the Arab world, not because of some exclusivity deal. If Al Jazeera stopped airing exerpts, they would be sent to CNN or BBC who would happily accept them and handle them EXACTLY the same way as Al Jazeera.

 

With the Israli / Lebonese crisis looming they are even more dangerous. When Iran developes the bomb, and they will, the exportation of terrorism moves to a whole other level. If this organization continues to fan the flames of hatred there may come a time in the future when we will have to answer fire with fire. I for one would rather my country not have to level Teharan because some Islamic nutcase with a deathwish, a 3rd grade education and a promise of 72 virgins after he honorable murders millions of people by setting off a nuke in the heart New York City after he hooked up with some carismatic loon who he happened to catch on the tube one evening, spouting off about the glorious jae had being waging against the great Satan of America on one of Al Jazeera' s fair and unbiased broadcasts. In fact bombing Al Jazeera may have been the ONE action Bush could have taking that I might have supported!

 

It sounds to me like the flames of hatred are burning right around YOU, dude. Al Jazeera regularly deals with the Israeli defense forces. The Israelis know Al Jazeera treats them fairly as they do every player in the middle east. You are confused because Al Jazeera airs more than just the Bush Administration version of events. They try to present both sides of important issues while keeping in mind that both sides are not always equal. This is called journalism. If you only want to hear the Bush version, you can get that by watching Fox (and to a lesser extent, most other American broadcasters) and listening to Rush Limbaugh, which it sounds like you already do.

 

If you support the bombing of Al Jazeera, then it won't be long before you'll scream for the bombing of the New York Times or the Washington Post or any other news organization not currently in the lap of the Bush Administration. Let's hope you wake up before that happens.

[Hal Smith]

.........by our tacit support of the invasion of Lebanon...........

 

Quote from Friday's NY Times story headlined "U.S. Speeds Up Bomb Delivery for the Israelis."

 

"The munitions that the United States is sending to Israel are part of a multimillion-dollar arms sale package approved last year that Israel is able to draw on as needed, the officials said. But Israel's request for expedited delivery of the satellite and laser-guided bombs was described as unusual by some military officers, and as an indication that Israel still had a long list of targets in Lebanon to strike.

 

It would seems our support isn't quite that "tacit".

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/world/mi...&ei=5087%0A

[Dan Goulder]

I find Fox news coverage a joke as well but relitively harmless as MOST people realise this is biased broadcasting...

If only that were so. Between Fox, which CNN's Christiane Amanpour characterizes as "foot soldiers for the Bush administration", and Clear Channel, which controls most major radio stations in the U.S., there is enough clout to influence national elections. Literally millions of Americans bypass print media altogether, thus relying exclusively on these broadcast entities to hand them their daily, politically-distorted worldview. Having witnessed a Clear Channel sponsored war rally, it's positively scary to see just the kind of influence these politically-connected monoliths have on the gullible masses.

[John Holland]

Can someone anyone please ,please, explain to me how the hell Bush was relected ? . Until he and his revolting administration is long gone i will not set foot in your country , a place where i have had such good times in the past , very sad . john .

[David Mullen ASC]

Can someone anyone please ,please, explain to me how the hell Bush was relected ?

 

Fear and the Culture War, or as John Stewart summed it up" "Dudes kissing."

 

Look for a repeat this fall. Fox News will be full of "World War III has started" and the fight to ban gay marriages, because it plays well in the red states. Terrorism + anti-homosexuality seems to be a winning combination over and over again.

 

After the last presidential election, the Onion's parody headline was:

 

NATION'S POOR WIN ELECTION FOR NATION'S RICH.

 

"The Republican Party -- the party of industrial mega-capitalists, corporate financiers, power brokers, and the moneyed elite -- would like to thank the undereducated rural poor, the struggling blue collar workers in Middle America, and the God-fearing underpriviledged minorities who voted George W. Bush back into office," Karl Rove, senior advisor to Bush, told reporters at a press conference Monday. "You have selflessly sacrificied your well-being and voted against your own economic interest. For this, we humbly thank you."

[John Holland]

Thanks for that David , so what happens next election ? any ideas ? we have a Prime Minister here whos head is lodged up your President arse , so not of a chance for us over here . I have never felt so scared or down about our futures . Hope my children 18 +15 take to the streets , like i used to . john.

[Tim J Durham]

Fear and the Culture War, or as John Stewart summed it up" "Dudes kissing."

 

Look for a repeat this fall. Fox News will be full of "World War III has started" and the fight to ban gay marriages, because it plays well in the red states. Terrorism + anti-homosexuality seems to be a winning combination over and over again.

 

Sad but true. If you payed attention to the boob tube prior to the last two national elections, you now have to wonder what the terrorism threat level is? They changed it daily leading up to each election. Now there doesn't seem to be any such threat.

 

Or when the Fitzgerald probe started looking into Karl Rove, and that perhaps he and Dick Cheney have commited treason, you'd never know it by watching Fox. Over there, "IT'S A WAR ON CHRISTMAS!"

 

Or when things continue to go very badly with the spreading of "freedom" across Iraq and the middle east, according to Bush (I mean Fox): CBS JUST SHOWED JANET JACKSONS NIPPLE!

 

Health care debacle? Seniors can no longer get prescriptions filled? Fox: MEXICANS ARE STORMING OUR BORDERS!

 

Global Warming? How about: WE MUST PROTECT OUR FLAG AT ALL COSTS!

 

The largest transfer of wealth from one economic stratum to another in human history (from the have-nots over to the haves- nice touch); the most massive federal deficit ever racked up by any country; the largest trade deficit ever (with our biggest rival, no less) and no end in sight, nor any plan to remedy it; civil war and mass starvation across the globe; worldwide fear and hatred of the US and Americans and what do they do to address that? Bush: let's draw up plans to invade Iran and Syria and maybe North Korea once those are in the bag. Afghanistan and Iraq are pretty much lost causes. Dammit, we need a winner! And make those tax cuts permanent!

 

Even George Orwell could have never dreamed this stuff up. I know, let's blame Al Jazeera...

[Dan Goulder]

It's funny how those bi-weekly terror alerts ceased on the EXACT SAME DAY the very people who were putting them out were reelected. Go figure!

[Guest]

"Can someone anyone please ,please, explain to me how the hell Bush was relected ? . Until he and his revolting administration is long gone i will not set foot in your country , a place where i have had such good times in the past , very sad . john ."

 

It's kind of odd, an Englishman making a post like the one above. If the internet was around 100 years ago we would all be on here talking about the bad behaviour of the British Empire. The US was nothing back then.

 

America may be building a new world empire, but even now it is quite puny compared to the former size of the British empire which was once 1/3 of the earth's real estate. How did England's empire get so big? Not by asking other countries politely if they wanted to join. They where conquered and taken over. The USA would still be a part of the British Empire today had France not paid for 100% of America's war costs during the revolutionary war and blocked the escape of Cornwalis at Yorktown with their navy.

 

Britain used to be extremely hated the world over, which was interpreted by the English that they where on the right track. Even Kipling believed in the "White Man's Burden" doctrine, it was the responsibility of the English to civilize the globe.

 

Have a look at flags of the world in the year 2006, a surprising number still incorporate the Union Jack in their national flags. 50 years ago there was a lot more. GASP!! Even a US state incorporates the Union Jack into their state flag to this day!!!!!!!

 

Sing it with me now: Ahhhh Britania, Britania rule the waves..........

 

R,

[John Holland]

You seem to have edited my post , i did include this countrys loony Prime Minister in it . I am not and would never defend anything that this country down in its awful past. I would have hoped that our idiot leaders would have learned just a bit from history , but it seems not . john .

[Guest]

I got the full gist of your post John, yes I know you mentioned Tony Blair's relationship with Bush. (FYI: I left out some of the worst bits of the UKs colonial past i.e. slavery)

 

I was simply pointing out the irony of how the world's "bad boy" has shifted from England to the USA. And now the British dislike the USA for doing what they did for 200 years.

 

Here's some more fuel for thought....if the internet had existed 50 years ago, we would all be discussing the "German Problem." Yes, believe it or not there was a time when Germany was the North Korea or Iran of our day. Luckily for all of us neither North Korea or Iran has the capability to do what Germany did from 1939-45.

 

My question is this, when will it be Canada's turn to be the international "bad boy." :)

 

I guess the first step on that road will be to build an army, hmmmm who can we hire?

 

R,

[Dan Goulder]

Britain used to be extremely hated the world over, which was interpreted by the English that they where on the right track.

That attitude is mirrored exactly by the militant, right-wing imbeciles running this country today. Being despised by most of the human race seems to be worn by these cretins as a badge of pride. They are too delusional to realize that, despite their claims to the contrary, history will lump them in with every other scumbag that ever started a war.

[James Steven Beverly]

Can someone anyone please ,please, explain to me how the hell Bush was relected ? . Until he and his revolting administration is long gone i will not set foot in your country , a place where i have had such good times in the past , very sad . john .

 

I ask myself that every day. It's the equivalent of handing the village idiot a gun and after he shoots you with it, handing him more bullets so he can do it again. The only thing I can say is this nation is not Red or Blue. It's DEEP Purple. Bush won by one of the slimest margins in US history. There is NO QUESTION Bush has made an absolute nightmare out of US foriegn policy, the economy and most major domestic issues however, NOTHING ON EARTH justifies what Hummas and Al Quiada has done and ANY support of thier actions is reprehensable. We will be cleaning up the mess left by the figurehead of the oil interests for decades to come but as bad as Bush is, he didn't start this war. They hit us during Clinton's reign. They killed the Israli atheletes in Munic. This goes back a long, long time and after they ran 3 airliners into buildings and 1 into the ground all I have to say is enough is enough. Even now, if we could just leave and this would all end I would be satisfiied with the justice we have exacted. I'd say let them go back to killing each other, tribe against tribe, the way they did before WW1, but that's not going to happen. They started something that can only end with their total annialation and until their own people stand up and say "We WILL NOT tolarate terrorists", these people will find safe haven and innocent blood will be spilled and as long as entities like Al Jazeera treat them as though they were some kind of ligitimate political organization rather than the murdering cowards they actually are, this war will drag on and on. They screwed with THEE most powerful military in the world, what did they expect would happen? Did they think we would just forget about it? They deserve EVERYTHING they're getting and their countries deserve everything they're getting for letting these people live and Al Jazeera deserves the treatment it's getting in this nation for NOT denouncing these monsters as the criminal scum that they are. However WE DO have a free press and we DO allow people who don't agree with us to be heard, But that doesn't mean I have to help them.