In August 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, precipitating the first Persian Gulf war, state-run media in the Arab world suppressed the news for three days. Today, word of such an attack would be out within minutes because of a television station called Al Jazeera. Financed by the iconoclastic emir of Qatar, the gulf state where our war operations are based, Al Jazeera is the only independent broadcasting voice in the Arab world, watched by 35 million people. That is why the decision by the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq to bar the station’s reporters is so repugnant. The exchanges’ complaint against Al Jazeera is that it is not “responsible.” This is a cryptic allegation but it seems linked to the television station’s decision last Sunday to show images of dead American and British soldiers as well as P.O.W.'s in Iraq. But Al Jazeera says that after the Pentagon asked it to remove the pictures until families had been notified it did so for eight hours, while the television stations of numerous countries continued to show them.
In truth, it seems that New York’s exchanges have a broader complaint, heard in various forms elsewhere — that Al Jazeera is insufficiently supportive of America and its war in Iraq. As the only uncensored Arabic television in the world, Al Jazeera does indeed slant its debates and discussions in a way that can be hostile to the West. It is not Fox News. But if our hope for the Arab world is, as the Bush administration never ceases to remind us, for it to enjoy a free, democratic life, Al Jazeera is the kind of television station we should encourage.
It is the only Arabic television station that regularly interviews Israeli officials. It is also an important forum for American officials. Last week alone, it interviewed three senior members of the American government, including Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Al Jazeera has also been a vital source of information about Al Qaeda. Its reporters have had access to Qaeda leaders, and tapes of Osama bin Laden have found their way to the station’s offices. This has been a useful window on a world that for too long has been utterly alien to us. The ban on Al Jazeera by the princes of the free market puts them in impressive company. Libya and Tunisia have both complained that Al Jazeera gives too much airtime to opposition leaders. Jordan has thrown it out. Kuwait refused visas to its correspondents who were to be placed with American forces based there. If a free, uncensored press ever arrives in the Arab world, many Americans will be shocked by what it says. Then, the energetic if somewhat tendentious broadcasts of Al Jazeera will seem, in comparison, like the nuanced objectivity of the BBC. For right now, Al Jazeera deserves all the help and support it can get.
:konfused: In the past seven days, how many Iraqi governmental officials has CNN interviewed on tv?
Here’s an op-piece by one of Al-Jazeera’s senior editors, Faisal Bodi - (who used to work with the BBC’s Radio 4’s news programme The World Tonight, until his strong pro-Islamic stance apparently caused a stir): Al Jazeera tells the truth about war, 28 March 2003, The Guardian
When Al Jazeera was the first to get hold of those OBL/Al Qaida tapes it was the toast of the town in the states, yet now it is the villain and it's websites are hacked and it is maligned by those same earlier champions. As the article says the US government seems to be in the same league as the corrupt dictatorships of the Arab world in trying to muzzle Al Jazeera.
I think a lot of this has arisen because the 'embedded' reporters under US/UK command have been so way off the mark and clueless in their reporting. It's almost looked like blatant propaganda. Many mainstrean british broadsheets have been complaining that the official Iraqi reports have been more accurate - which must be severely embarassing for the allied govts.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Judge^MentuLL: *
I think a lot of this has arisen because the 'embedded' reporters under US/UK command have been so way off the mark and clueless in their reporting. It's almost looked like blatant propaganda. Many mainstrean british broadsheets have been complaining that the official Iraqi reports have been more accurate - which must be severely embarassing for the allied govts.
[/QUOTE]
I agree. I think partly because they can't give away positions etc. I would imagine they probobly aren't that close to the frontlines with the exception of that first day for safety sake.
So they don't have much to report. I would tend to trust what the soldiers have to say when they are rarely interviewed rather than what some trumped up CNN guy in his army fatiques and helmet has to say..
I do think they wait on confirming aircraft shot down so that possibly the Iraqi's aren't completly sure they've been taken out by being shot down or just crashed until the U.S. or Brits tray to take out their anti-aircraft defenses before they move em. So you will hear it from the Iraqi's first I think.
I do believe the numbers on casualties from both ends.
That said, I think the embeded media is probobly reporting what they can. Gosh, I wonder what would happen to them if they got captured? And what sensitive information they might know? So I would tend to think they are pretty far behind the lines.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by chosen1: *
Nothing new, remember the "accidental" bombing of Al Jazeera offices in Afghanistan during the war there.
[/QUOTE]
Thats why before the war started the first thing Al-Jazeerah did was provide the cordinates and let the world know about it... So that yanks will be left with no excuse.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Judge^MentuLL: *
I think a lot of this has arisen because the 'embedded' reporters under US/UK command have been so way off the mark and clueless in their reporting. It's almost looked like blatant propaganda. Many mainstrean british broadsheets have been complaining that the official Iraqi reports have been more accurate - which must be severely embarassing for the allied govts.
[/QUOTE]
That's very true the Iraqi's have made no wild claims about civilian casualties, unlike the Anglo-Saxon invaders who have made nothing but wild claims and predictions even before the war started. This war has seen Arabic channels like Al Jaeera, Al Arabiya and Abu Dhabi tv etc come forward an provide first hand and factual accounts of this war, while the embedded western journalists have to often reported misleading and untruthful stories.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
I think they might all be kicked out of Iraq...cept maybe the ones with the army and maybe Peter Arnet?
[/quote]
No, sorry, i was referring to Iraqi govt'l. officials. Al-Jazeera seems to be giving some of its media air-space for interviews with US govt'l. officials (in Malik73's article it says in the past week Al-Jazeera has interviewed 3 senior-level American govt'l. officials). How many Iraqi officials has CNN interviewed in the past seven days? i would venture to say zero. The point is not that i want to hear an Iraqi general spew his propaganda, but the point is that - there has to be a balance. We see so many British or American talkingheads on tv, why not Iraqi ones ? Or Muslim ones for that matter.
*I wish someone would, or at least broadcast the Iraqi or AlJazerra interviews and translate for us. *
There's an English web version of the official Al Jazeera network. Lemme try to find it.
I write, the al-Jazeera website has been down for three days and few here doubt that the provenance of the attack is the Pentagon. Meanwhile, our hosting company, the US-based DataPipe, has terminated our contract after lobbying by other clients whose websites have been brought down by the hacking.
What a bunch of sore losers, and indeed blatant hypocrites the Pentagon and the US government are if they have done this or are somehow behind this. Shameful.
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
**I wish someone would, or at least broadcast the Iraqi or AlJazerra interviews and translate for us. *
There's an English web version of the official Al Jazeera network. Lemme try to find it.
[/QUOTE]
I found the website. Read it won't be up in English until mid-April due to the hacking.
Thanks for looking.
I think Al Jazeera shows the truth about war in their pictures. Graphic or not. Need to be seen.
I don't think they would confirm exact Iraqi troop movements anymore than the American reporters would confirm exact American troop movements. But there is more to war than that and Al Jazerra gives it.
And, as they are showing video's of murdered corpses of American's, screw'em!
Perhaps they think that Somalia will reoccur. Far from it. Pictures of abused American corpses enrages the "American Street" (or perhaps living room). Nothing could have steeled American resolve more than those video's.
*And, as they are showing video's of murdered corpses of American's, screw'em! *
[/QUOTE]
Tsk tsk...do you want them to be fair and show what is happening to the other side as well? Then maybe the US military should ask Al Jazeera to take pictures every time they murder Iraqi women and children in cold blood? What do you think?
"Chicago Tribune has a front-page picture of a murdered Iraqi soldier"
No, that would be a soldier killed in battle. Murdered would be with a bullet hole neatly in the middle of the forehead, as with the American POW's that were shown on Arab View TV.
No, that would be a soldier killed in battle.
[/QUOTE]
Have you forgotten the pictures of the charred bodies of Iraqi soldiers at Mutla ridge after the first Gulf war - those have and were widely printed in the US media and publications?
But you dodged my question on Al Jazeera. Do you want them to be fair and show what is happening to the other side as well? If so, then the US military should ask Al Jazeera to take pictures every time they murder Iraqi women and children in cold blood?
