I think not playing newsworthy tapes because they 'promote' terrorism is as wrong as can be. For one that gives Al Jazeera the power to decide what's good and what's bad. The News should report everything. I don't like white supremicists, but I'm glad there are news interviews of them spouting their hatred and ignorance so that people can see them for what they are. I would much rather know who my enemy is and what he's saying about me. It's also free press, when news agencies are called upon to not play certain things because one side doesn't like it, the freedom of the press is compromised. Play it all and trust the listners to make the right decisions. I would like to think I'm capable of hearing Al Qaeda say blow up Americans, and I won't follow that directive.
That was not my point. I guess my point was too subtle. You originally said I'm sorry but I feel it is wrong for any TV station to play any audio or video tape which calls on people to kill other people. My point is that Bush did the exact same thing. He stood before our nation on TV and lied about an imminent danger to our country and then instructed our troups to go kill Iraq's troups plus one thousand or so innocent Iraqi citizens. BTW, our troups have less a choice about following through on the killing viz-a-viz the Al-Jazeera viewers. It is all about perspective.
President Bush <b>never</b> instructed our military troops to go kill Iraqi civilians. You are loose with the facts, buddy.
Would you feel that way if lynchings of black people were on the rise because of the same free press? What's the point? These tapes are general instructions meant ti raise ire not just intelligent propoganda.
There is no evidence that terrorism is on the rise BECAUSE of Al - Jazeera. And giving the history of civil rights, the more abuse and racism people saw, the more they were in favor of civil rights legislation. Free press is the way to stop these guys. They don't need these broadcasts to give instructions. They are technology adept. They have cell phones, websites, the written word, word of mouth, etc. They don't need these over the air messages to carry out their attacks. Stopping these broadcasts wouldn't cut down on the attacks.
Which nation-states were supporters of the KKK? State governments maybe but they were easily overwhelmed when the Feds got involved. I"m not sure I agree with your initial statement. Do they have to play and play the tape; can't they just tell us there is a new tape? I know MadMax (I think) saw this. MSNBC did a piece on side by side reporting of their reporters and the A-J reporters. I believe that they happened to be sharing office space or something. The reports were virtually contradictory and, in MSNBC's opinion, the A-J reports were replete with misinformation. That we have to respect?
My point isn't that the KKK were sponsored by certain states. Al-Jazeera isn't sponsored by any state either. My point is that initially civil rights legislation had little support. Then the more the injustices were exposed the more public support grew. Again the terrorists don't need tapes played over Al-Jazeera to get their message across. They can post any message they need on the internet. It isn't hard. I don't disagree that A-J has some misinformation in their reporting. So does Fox News. They reported no fewer than three times during operation Iraqi Freedom that WMD had been found. Fox also reported on six Iraqis loose in Mexico or Southern U.S. possibly with WMD. Now that is wrong. The New York Times also had JAyson Blair spewing misinformation and lies all over the place. That stuff happens. None of it means that we should try and limit the freedom of the press.
Oh, give me a ****ing break! The news media in the United States is ridiculously pro-American. Every story is skewed to entertain the audience, and keep them in line with the Bush ideal. There is not an unbiased source of news in the entire country. Al Jazeera has just as much right to be biased on their side. But really, if you're going to destroy Al Jazeera, at least take out ****ing Fox News at the same time. That would balance things out a bit, and maybe we would hear a shred of truth in the news for a change, not the mass-produced, heavily edited, right-wing slanted bull**** we are subjected to every waking minute.
Isn't A-J based in Qatar, which is the most U.S. friendly nation in the middle east? can't you just ask their government to shut A-J down? I don't think "taking out" (i assume you mean by military force) A-J would go over too well with one of the few real allies we have in the region. If ABC, CNN, et all received the same Al-Q tape, you don't think they would air it?
That was my point too. I only suggested support of the state in anticipation of a comeback response. The problem is exacerbated by the link between the belief system of the fanatics (72 virgins et al) and the <b>desire</b> to commit violence, even ultimate violence. KKK fanatics were never giving up their lives to kill blacks in a 1 for 3, 7, 21 or 3000 exchange.
That is not even the exact same thing. Your right...it is all about perspective and I completely disagree with what your trying to pass as a comparison to what Al Jazeera is doing for terrorists as far as spreading their hateful words of "go out and murder Westerners indiscriminately".
All this from a person who lives in a country with a free press. Isn't it funny how we can so easily suggest that rights that are the foundation to our country can be casually disregarded elsewhere? If a free press is good for Americans, it should also be good for others, right?
I suspect that Bush signed off on "rules of engagement" that euphemistically limited civilian casualities. We certainly bombed civilian areas, purposedly and accidentially. We knew this before the war started. I do not think that I have at all been loose with the facts.
just to be clear, i wasn't advocating shutting them down. just saying that those who think they should be shut down should use diplomatic channels (remember those?) instead of military force to acheive their goals.
Absolutely. My thread title is structured as a question but I left out the question mark. I'm all for diplomatic solutions within reasonable time constraints. With Saddam, we exceeded a decade. Let's give A-J until the week after sweeps....
