Iraq, Israel, brew deep Middle East mistrust of US : poll Fri Dec 2, 8:07 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - People in Arab nations believe the Iraq war has brought less peace, more terrorism and contrary to Washington's claims, will result in less democracy, according to a poll. The survey of six Arab countries, also found a plurality of respondents got their news from the Al-Jazeera satellite television network, currently at the center of a storm over an alleged US idea to bomb its headquarters. When asked which country was the biggest threat to them, most respondents chose Israel or the United States, while France was nominated as the country most respondents would like to be a superpower. The University of Marylan Zogby International poll published Friday was conducted in Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in October. Eighty-one percent of respondents said the Iraq war had brought "less peace" to the Middle East, while only six percent believed it had enhanced peace. Seventy-eight percent of people questioned believed the Iraq war had resulted in more terrorism than before, while 58 percent said it brought less democracy, with only nine percent believing it enhanced democratic development. While the administration of President George W. Bush frequently argues that it has liberated Iraqis from Saddam Hussein, only six percent of those surveyed believed that the Iraqi people were better off after the war. Seventy-seven percent thought they were worse off. "In addition to the Arab-Israeli issue, which has been the prism of how Arabs have looked at the US, there is an added new prism, and that is Iraq," Shibley Telhami, Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland told AFP. "They think the Iraq war has brought nothing but disaster." Only six percent thought spreading democracy was an objective in the war in Iraq, while seventy-six percent thought control of oil fields was important, and 68 percent believed support for Israel was key motivating factor. "The American presence itself is something they fear ... the perception of threat is there, because it does mean that in general people are rooting against the US in Iraq," said Telhami. The survey makes unwelcome reading for US diplomats, who have repeatedly tried to improve US standing in the Middle East. Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes confronted some of the hostility during a regional swing in September. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2005120...w_1Rp.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-
If they are relying on Al Qaida TV as their source of news, no wonder they are wrong. No one alive today has killed more Muslims than Saddam Hussein, so he is a hero to them. Nice.
I digress. Milosevic was resposnible for more deaths. And our government is about to surpass Saddam's mark.
Al Qaida TV merely reflects Arab media generally. Remember, a lot of Arabs think 9/11 was an Israeli operation.
How many Muslims do you think Hussein killed? By the way, how many Arab countries used their military forces to stop Milosevic?
As long as you keep referring to Al jazeera as Al Qaida TV I will continue to believe you are a joke. Al jazeera is no more AQ TV as Fox is Whitehouse news. Oh wait... lpbman no offence taken. It's just some people need to be reminded once in a while.
I don't get why you and others keep trumpeting this in an attempt to discredit the Arab media. After 9/11, 3% of Americans answered that Hussein and Iraq were behind 9/11. Thereafter, figures reached as high as 70% of Americans believing a link between 9/11 and Iraq and as high as 80% believing in the existance of WMD. It works the same anywhere. A deceitful press is the greatest tool for changing the tide of public opinion.
im still waiting for stats on that statement buddy you cant say that a lot of people do something without backing up that claim. alot would be a good majority or atleast half of them. please back up your claims.
The situation is moot, we will never know how many Muslims Hussein has been responsible for killing. Too much propaganda, not enough facts. And the Arabs did fight. Millions of dollars were funneled into the region during the genocide.
They shouldn't waste their time thinking on their own. We will tell them what to think. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002660427_webiraqnews02.html Pentagon propaganda an effort to "get the truth out," senator says By Lolita C. Baldor The Associated Press WASHINGTON – A key senator and the country's top military commander said today that a Pentagon propaganda program was part of an effort to "get the truth out" in Iraq. Leaving a Pentagon meeting with Defense Department officials, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., said the program, which pays to plant favorable stories with Iraqi journalists and newspapers, is a serious problem. But Warner told The Associated Press that, "Things like this happen. It's a war. The disinformation that's going on in that country is really affecting the effectiveness of what we're achieving, and we have no recourse but to try and do some rebuttal information." And Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, added that, "We want to get the facts out. We want to get the truth out." Warner met with chief Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita and members of Pace's staff, but only bumped into Pace on his way out of the building. Meanwhile, a Pentagon spokesman said today that it is not clear whether the program violated the law or Pentagon policy, a Defense Department spokesman said today. "You can do something perfectly legal, but that is inconsistent with the policy or procedures of the department. Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's the right thing to do," said spokesman Bryan Whitman. He said the department is still gathering information on the matter. Warner initially requested a Capitol Hill briefing for the committee, but committee spokesman John Ullyot said those plans were changed "at the Pentagon's request." Whitman said the department was still gathering information about the program and the multimillion-dollar contracts that included paying Iraqi newspapers and journalists to plant favorable stories about the war and the rebuilding effort. "We don't have all the facts," he said, including whether or not defense officials in Iraq knew exactly what was happening or whether they believed any of it was improper. Military officials in Iraq say the program is a critical tool on the Iraq battleground. "The purpose of this program is to ensure factual information is provided to the Iraqi public," Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a U.S. military spokesman, said in Iraq. But Congress members and the White House have expressed concern. "A free and independent press is critical to the functioning of a democracy, and I am concerned about any actions which may erode the independence of the Iraqi media," Warner said earlier. One of the companies involved — the Washington-based Lincoln Group — has at least two contracts with the military to provide media and public relations services. One contract, for $6 million, was for public relations and advertising work in Iraq and involved planting favorable stories in the Iraqi media, Defense Department records show. The other Lincoln contract, which is with the Special Operations Command, is worth up to $100 million over five years for media operations with video, print and Web-based products. That contract is not related to the dispute over propaganda and was not for services in Iraq, according to command spokesman Ken McGraw. The Lincoln Group shares that Special Operations contract with SYColeman, a division of L-3 Communications, and Science Applications International Corp., a San Diego-based defense contractor. The program came to light just as President Bush released his strategy for victory in Iraq. It includes the need to support a "free, independent and responsible Iraqi media." "We're very concerned," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. "We are seeking more information from the Pentagon." Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., characterized the program as a scheme that "speaks volumes about the president's credibility gap. If Americans were truly welcomed in Iraq as liberators, we wouldn't have to doctor the news for the Iraqi people." Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company
Which Arab armies fought Milosevic? I'm not talking about sending cash, I'm talking about sending troops to help their Muslim brothers and sisters? Once again, I ask: How many Muslims has Saddam killed? Perhaps, you can break it down into categories: 1. Killed in Iran-Iraq war 2. Killed in Gulf War 1 3. Killed in Gulf War II 4. Marsh Arabs killed 5 Shiite Arabs killed 6. Kurds killed 7. Political prisoners killed 8. Killed by international sanctions
As long as you condemn it without having the slightest idea what they are about, I will consider you opinion on the matter less than worthless.
LOL!!! Congratulations! You've earned a new nickname! From now on I dub thee... lil'texxx! Have you been taking lessons?
But I don't condmen Al Jazeera without having the slightest idea what they are about. I have both condemned and defended Al Jazeera depending on their story. I have also done at least a minimal amount of research into their programming. I realize that they have stories against Al Qaeda all the time, and in no way are the mouthpiece of that organization.
