Hayder al-Khoei: "Arab broadcasting has never been renowned for neutrality but the events of the past week in Saudi Arabia have revealed some interesting – if not surprising – bias.
On 20 November, 19-year-old Nasser al-Mheishi was shot dead in Qatif, Saudi Arabia. When the authorities refused to hand over his body to his family, protests ensued the next day and security forces shot another young man, Ali al-Felfel. In the demonstration that followed on Wednesday, two more protesters, Munib al-Adnan and Ali al-Qarayrees, were killed.
On Thursday, al-Jazeera Arabic did mention those two deaths but it simply echoed the Saudi authorities' claims that the security forces were fired upon and shot back in self-defence. The casualties were merely caught in the crossfire. End of story.
Even Al-Jazeera English, which does better than its Arabic sister station, did not follow up its coverage of deaths at Qatif protests"
Showing posts with label Al Jazeera. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Al Jazeera. Show all posts
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Al Jazeera English continues to cover Bahrain
The coverage of Bahrain by Al Jazeera English is impressive. I did not expect AJ to be objective on Bahrain.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Al Jazeera cameraman killed in Libya
"An Al Jazeera cameraman has been killed in what appears to have been an ambush near the rebel-held city of Benghazi in eastern Libya.
Ali Hassan Al Jaber was returning to Benghazi from a nearby town after filing a report from an opposition protest when unknown fighters opened fire on a car he and his colleagues were travelling in.
Two people including Al Jaber were shot. Al Jaber was rushed to hospital, but did not survive."
Ali Hassan Al Jaber was returning to Benghazi from a nearby town after filing a report from an opposition protest when unknown fighters opened fire on a car he and his colleagues were travelling in.
Two people including Al Jaber were shot. Al Jaber was rushed to hospital, but did not survive."
Saturday, March 05, 2011
Al Jazeera English covers arrest of Qatari blogger
More kudos to Al Jazeera English for covering the arrest of a blogger in Qatar, where Al Jazeera headquarters (and CENTCOM) are.
AJE: "Amnesty International says a blogger and human rights activist has been detained incommunicado in Qatar and is at risk of torture or other ill-treatment.
The UK-based human rights group said Sultan al-Khalaifi was arrested on March 2 by around eight individuals in plain clothes, believed to be members of the security forces.
According to information received by Amnesty International, al-Khalaifi had told his wife earlier that day that state security had contacted him, asking him to report to them, but that he did not know why.
The reasons for his detentions and his whereabouts are unknown, Amnesty said in a statement on Friday, adding that it is believed he is being held in the custody of state security."
AJE also covered this: "Saudi Arabia bans protest rallies"
AJE: "Amnesty International says a blogger and human rights activist has been detained incommunicado in Qatar and is at risk of torture or other ill-treatment.
The UK-based human rights group said Sultan al-Khalaifi was arrested on March 2 by around eight individuals in plain clothes, believed to be members of the security forces.
According to information received by Amnesty International, al-Khalaifi had told his wife earlier that day that state security had contacted him, asking him to report to them, but that he did not know why.
The reasons for his detentions and his whereabouts are unknown, Amnesty said in a statement on Friday, adding that it is believed he is being held in the custody of state security."
AJE also covered this: "Saudi Arabia bans protest rallies"
Monday, February 28, 2011
Al Jazeera's positive role in uprisings
Al Jazeera's web traffic has tripled in the last month. That's impressive. Al Jazeera has played a huge role in the uprisings. But these guys on the Dylan Ratigan show don't talk about the differences between Al Jazeera Arabic's coverage of Bahrain and their coverage of Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Friday, February 18, 2011
Al Jazeera English covers Bahrain
I wrote last night that Al Jazeera Arabic hasn't covered the protests in Bahrain. Al Jazeera English, however, has covered the protests:
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Al Jazeera Arabic not covering Bahrain
I just took a look at Al Jazeera Arabic and I don't see ANY coverage of Bahrain there. Can anybody guess why? Angry Arab was correct when he wrote "I do believe that the Qatari government deliberately protected the Bahraini monarchy through its lousy coverage of the repression in Bahrain."
I guess I was too quick to praise Al Jazeera for "changing" over the years into a non-sectarian pro-democracy station.
I guess I was too quick to praise Al Jazeera for "changing" over the years into a non-sectarian pro-democracy station.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Discontent among Shia in Bahrain
From Al Jazeera: 'Sunday's wide-ranging clampdown appeared directed toward Bahrain's Shia majority, which has led the drive for Monday's rallies.
Bahrain's Sunni rulers have already given out cash and promised greater media reforms in an effort to quell discontent.
In an open letter to the king, the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights has called for wide-ranging reforms to avoid a "worst-case scenario", including the dismantling of the security forces, the prosecution of state officials for abuses and the release of 450 jailed activists, religious leaders and others.
The tiny kingdom is among the most politically volatile in the Gulf and holds important strategic value for the West as the home to the US Navy's 5th Fleet.
Bahrain's Shias , which account for nearly 70 per cent of the total popualtion, have long complained of systematic discrimination by the ruling Sunni dynasty, whose crackdown on dissent last year touched off riots and clashes.'
Such honest reporting from Al Jazeera. Shia majority, Sunni ruler? Is this only in the English edition? In any case this is a new Al Jazeera, different from the one in 2004 that did not mention sect when covering Iraq.
Bahrain's Sunni rulers have already given out cash and promised greater media reforms in an effort to quell discontent.
In an open letter to the king, the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights has called for wide-ranging reforms to avoid a "worst-case scenario", including the dismantling of the security forces, the prosecution of state officials for abuses and the release of 450 jailed activists, religious leaders and others.
The tiny kingdom is among the most politically volatile in the Gulf and holds important strategic value for the West as the home to the US Navy's 5th Fleet.
Bahrain's Shias , which account for nearly 70 per cent of the total popualtion, have long complained of systematic discrimination by the ruling Sunni dynasty, whose crackdown on dissent last year touched off riots and clashes.'
Such honest reporting from Al Jazeera. Shia majority, Sunni ruler? Is this only in the English edition? In any case this is a new Al Jazeera, different from the one in 2004 that did not mention sect when covering Iraq.
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Egyptian govt unblocks Al Jazeera
"Egypt's state-owned NileSat satellite company has announced that it will unblock Al Jazeera and Al Jazeera Live, the Doha-based news network announced Wednesday, 10 days after authorities stopped transmission over the channel's coverage of anti-government protests."
Friday, January 28, 2011
The revolution is being televised
On Al Jazeera. But can it be called a revolution yet?
NYT: "WASHINGTON — As street protests raged across Egypt on Friday, with the future of the Arab world seeming to hang in the balance, rapt viewers across the region — and the globe — watched it unfold on Al Jazeera, which kept up an almost continuous live feed despite the Egyptian government’s repeated efforts to block broadcasts.
The channel was widely hailed for its early and aggressive coverage of the revolt in Tunisia, and it seemed bent on playing a similar role with the turmoil in Egypt.
The images were relentless. Thousands of people surging forward on a Cairo boulevard clouded with tear gas. Bloodied young men throwing rocks and grappling with baton-wielding riot police officers. A roaring crowd trying to push a burning police vehicle over a bridge into the Nile. Flames rising from the headquarters of Egypt’s governing party.
It was a spectacle that would have been unthinkable less than two decades ago, when Middle Eastern governments strictly censored any subversive images. Now, it seems, all revolutions are televised."
NYT: "WASHINGTON — As street protests raged across Egypt on Friday, with the future of the Arab world seeming to hang in the balance, rapt viewers across the region — and the globe — watched it unfold on Al Jazeera, which kept up an almost continuous live feed despite the Egyptian government’s repeated efforts to block broadcasts.
The channel was widely hailed for its early and aggressive coverage of the revolt in Tunisia, and it seemed bent on playing a similar role with the turmoil in Egypt.
The images were relentless. Thousands of people surging forward on a Cairo boulevard clouded with tear gas. Bloodied young men throwing rocks and grappling with baton-wielding riot police officers. A roaring crowd trying to push a burning police vehicle over a bridge into the Nile. Flames rising from the headquarters of Egypt’s governing party.
It was a spectacle that would have been unthinkable less than two decades ago, when Middle Eastern governments strictly censored any subversive images. Now, it seems, all revolutions are televised."
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Al Jazeera covers Tunisia round the clock
'The network turned to the Tunisian story in December after a young college graduate trying to earn a living as a fruit vendor set himself on fire to protest harassment by police and the hopelessness and lack of jobs under the government of President Zine el Abidine ben Ali. Its footage of angry mobs and blood in the streets was a creeping threat to Ben Ali, who was attempting to censor Tunisian media in a bid for calm.
The Tunisian parliament accused Al Jazeera of distortion and bias in its coverage. It condemned the network for hurting the country's reputation and creating a "spirit of hatred and resentment … to spread chaos, instability and distrust in the country's achievements."
It quickly became apparent, though, that Al Jazeera and other media were reporting on the unmasking and unraveling of a 23-year-old corrupt and autocratic regime. Images of protesters ransacking villas owned by the president's family provided an egalitarian element that roused activists across the region, including in Algeria and Libya, where governments were attempting to quell their own unrest.
Some analysts noted that Al Jazeera focused on the religious aspect of the Tunisian saga. Ben Ali was considered a U.S. ally for cracking down on Islamic extremism, which included jailing militants and forcing opposition politicians into exile, such as Rashid Ghannouchi, leader of the Islamic Renaissance Party. The network appeared to devote more time to Islamist voices than other opposition figures expected to have more of a role in the new political order.
Others, however, credited Al Jazeera with showing balance. "They did an excellent job," said Hussein Amin, a professor of journalism and mass communication at the American University in Cairo. "It was objective coverage with different points of view."
Unlike some of its competitors, Al Jazeera, with an estimated 40 million to 50 million viewers worldwide, prefers a more rapid tempo.
"I was able to follow Al Jazeera's minute-by-minute coverage of the revolution through my iPhone," wrote Bassam Sebti on MidEastPosts. "The Qatari network has an iPhone app that live-broadcasts their news, in addition to its presence on Facebook, Twitter and Al Jazeera Blogs. It was simply everywhere and for free!" '
The Tunisian parliament accused Al Jazeera of distortion and bias in its coverage. It condemned the network for hurting the country's reputation and creating a "spirit of hatred and resentment … to spread chaos, instability and distrust in the country's achievements."
It quickly became apparent, though, that Al Jazeera and other media were reporting on the unmasking and unraveling of a 23-year-old corrupt and autocratic regime. Images of protesters ransacking villas owned by the president's family provided an egalitarian element that roused activists across the region, including in Algeria and Libya, where governments were attempting to quell their own unrest.
Some analysts noted that Al Jazeera focused on the religious aspect of the Tunisian saga. Ben Ali was considered a U.S. ally for cracking down on Islamic extremism, which included jailing militants and forcing opposition politicians into exile, such as Rashid Ghannouchi, leader of the Islamic Renaissance Party. The network appeared to devote more time to Islamist voices than other opposition figures expected to have more of a role in the new political order.
Others, however, credited Al Jazeera with showing balance. "They did an excellent job," said Hussein Amin, a professor of journalism and mass communication at the American University in Cairo. "It was objective coverage with different points of view."
Unlike some of its competitors, Al Jazeera, with an estimated 40 million to 50 million viewers worldwide, prefers a more rapid tempo.
"I was able to follow Al Jazeera's minute-by-minute coverage of the revolution through my iPhone," wrote Bassam Sebti on MidEastPosts. "The Qatari network has an iPhone app that live-broadcasts their news, in addition to its presence on Facebook, Twitter and Al Jazeera Blogs. It was simply everywhere and for free!" '
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Latest Al Qaeda plot seen by Al Jazeera viewers as "politically motivated and contrived"
From the Palestinian Pundit:
'This new [Al Jazeera] poll asks:
Do you think that the suspect packages case is a real threat to the West or a contrived and politically motivated story?
With over 1,000 responding so far, 91% said that it is a politically motivated and contrived story.'
'This new [Al Jazeera] poll asks:
Do you think that the suspect packages case is a real threat to the West or a contrived and politically motivated story?
With over 1,000 responding so far, 91% said that it is a politically motivated and contrived story.'
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Iraq needs a real government
It's good to see Al Jazeera, the station that once praised the "legitimate" resistance in Iraq, being genuinely concerned about the terrorist attacks in Iraq. However, this AJ article states the bombings struck "key government sites" without mentioning that Al Shorja (one of Baghdad's biggest markets) and a university were also attacked.
Iraqis are still awaiting strong condemnation from our Arab brothers.
From Irish Times: 'The first explosion, detonated by a suicide bomber in the southern district of Dora, killed three policemen on patrol and 12 students from a technical college. The other targets were the busy Shorja market near the health ministry, the heavily guarded labour and interior ministries, a civil court in the diplomatic district of Mansour, a training institute for judges, the fine arts institute, where 27 musicians were injured, and the Mustansariya University, founded in 1234.'
The Al Jazeera article: 'A string of bombings which struck key government sites in the capital, Baghdad, killed and injured hundreds of people.
The death toll of at least 127 accounted for more dead in a single day than the number or those killed throughout the month of November.
But the co-ordinated attacks also cast doubts on the government's ability to maintain security using the country's national forces ahead of pivotal elections scheduled for March 7, 2010.
Al Jazeera's Ahmed Janabi interviewed Wafiq al-Samaraei, a former intelligence chief under the Saddam Hussein government, and more recently the former security advisor to Jalal al-Talabani, the current Iraqi president.
Al-Samaraei currently resides in London where he is an intelligence and security analyst.
Al Jazeera: The bombings on December 8 mark the third major set of attacks to hit the capital, Baghdad, since August. Why have the attack tactics changed to become fewer in number but greater in terms of the level of death and destruction?
Wafiq al-Samaraei: After the US implemented their security plan which involved setting up and supporting the emergence of the Awakening Councils (Sunni tribal militias) in 2006, many anti-government and anti-US armed groups found that they had lost the friendly environment that allowed them to freely operate after the US-led invasion in 2003.
Iraqi security forces increased in number and deployed to almost every part of Iraq.
Obviously, these armed groups can no longer stage face-to-face battles with heavily-equipped government forces. As a result, they began to modify their tactics to rely on intelligence-gathering operations.
Before 2006, the average number of attacks was 200 daily, only 10 of which were successful. Now, the average has dropped to 20 attacks a day but some 50 per cent are successful.
What can the Iraqi government do to avoid such a large number of casualties?
Iraq now is full of security forces, but lacks a sophisticated and effective intelligence department and the attackers know that very well. That is why they started to carry out attacks that cannot be foiled by police and security forces.
The government committed several fatal mistakes, the first being that it dismissed experienced intelligence officers because they worked under Saddam.
This has ultimately weakened the country's security situation because incompetent and inexperienced people now run the intelligence department in the defence ministry.
The second mistake was that in a bid to force his party's command of security forces, Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, (who lacks military experience), has been intervening in how security forces conduct their operations. This complicates their tasks and makes them lose their focus.
The third mistake is that there are nine security departments and each is controlled by different political blocs and work for different agendas.
How are the attackers able to bypass the huge number of checkpoints in Baghdad and carry out such devastating attacks?
Al-Maliki leads a small faction inside the Daawa Party, while the security forces are loyal to many other factions. This effectively means that al-Maliki does not have loyal security forces.
When security forces do not believe in the political agenda of their government, you end up with disloyal forces that perform sloppy security work, which could include accepting bribes to look the other way.
On the other hand, the attackers seem to have good intelligence. I am saying that because they managed to carry out simultaneous attacks in different areas in Baghdad. They were able to locate the secret headquarters of the ministry of finance. It also means they have good planning and manpower.
Again, I would urge Iraqis to work together to establish an efficient intelligence force; it is the only solution to prevent such tragic attacks on innocent people.
The government has accused the deposed Baath party and al-Qaeda of being behind the recent string of attacks. Other quarters point at US military involvement and Iranian operatives. Some have even gone so far as to say the government itself has been orchestrating the attacks. What are we to believe?
Whenever there is an attack, the al-Maliki government tends to use already prepared accusations to point the finger of blame at the Baath Party or neighbouring countries.
Such quick accusations that are not based on evidence and proper intelligence work would confuse everyone, and give anti-government forces an opportunity to suspect that the security forces themselves are involved.
Ultimately, accusations that are not based on forensic hard evidence end up harming security forces and eating away at their credibility.'
Iraqis are still awaiting strong condemnation from our Arab brothers.
From Irish Times: 'The first explosion, detonated by a suicide bomber in the southern district of Dora, killed three policemen on patrol and 12 students from a technical college. The other targets were the busy Shorja market near the health ministry, the heavily guarded labour and interior ministries, a civil court in the diplomatic district of Mansour, a training institute for judges, the fine arts institute, where 27 musicians were injured, and the Mustansariya University, founded in 1234.'
The Al Jazeera article: 'A string of bombings which struck key government sites in the capital, Baghdad, killed and injured hundreds of people.
The death toll of at least 127 accounted for more dead in a single day than the number or those killed throughout the month of November.
But the co-ordinated attacks also cast doubts on the government's ability to maintain security using the country's national forces ahead of pivotal elections scheduled for March 7, 2010.
Al Jazeera's Ahmed Janabi interviewed Wafiq al-Samaraei, a former intelligence chief under the Saddam Hussein government, and more recently the former security advisor to Jalal al-Talabani, the current Iraqi president.
Al-Samaraei currently resides in London where he is an intelligence and security analyst.
Al Jazeera: The bombings on December 8 mark the third major set of attacks to hit the capital, Baghdad, since August. Why have the attack tactics changed to become fewer in number but greater in terms of the level of death and destruction?
Wafiq al-Samaraei: After the US implemented their security plan which involved setting up and supporting the emergence of the Awakening Councils (Sunni tribal militias) in 2006, many anti-government and anti-US armed groups found that they had lost the friendly environment that allowed them to freely operate after the US-led invasion in 2003.
Iraqi security forces increased in number and deployed to almost every part of Iraq.
Obviously, these armed groups can no longer stage face-to-face battles with heavily-equipped government forces. As a result, they began to modify their tactics to rely on intelligence-gathering operations.
Before 2006, the average number of attacks was 200 daily, only 10 of which were successful. Now, the average has dropped to 20 attacks a day but some 50 per cent are successful.
What can the Iraqi government do to avoid such a large number of casualties?
Iraq now is full of security forces, but lacks a sophisticated and effective intelligence department and the attackers know that very well. That is why they started to carry out attacks that cannot be foiled by police and security forces.
The government committed several fatal mistakes, the first being that it dismissed experienced intelligence officers because they worked under Saddam.
This has ultimately weakened the country's security situation because incompetent and inexperienced people now run the intelligence department in the defence ministry.
The second mistake was that in a bid to force his party's command of security forces, Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, (who lacks military experience), has been intervening in how security forces conduct their operations. This complicates their tasks and makes them lose their focus.
The third mistake is that there are nine security departments and each is controlled by different political blocs and work for different agendas.
How are the attackers able to bypass the huge number of checkpoints in Baghdad and carry out such devastating attacks?
Al-Maliki leads a small faction inside the Daawa Party, while the security forces are loyal to many other factions. This effectively means that al-Maliki does not have loyal security forces.
When security forces do not believe in the political agenda of their government, you end up with disloyal forces that perform sloppy security work, which could include accepting bribes to look the other way.
On the other hand, the attackers seem to have good intelligence. I am saying that because they managed to carry out simultaneous attacks in different areas in Baghdad. They were able to locate the secret headquarters of the ministry of finance. It also means they have good planning and manpower.
Again, I would urge Iraqis to work together to establish an efficient intelligence force; it is the only solution to prevent such tragic attacks on innocent people.
The government has accused the deposed Baath party and al-Qaeda of being behind the recent string of attacks. Other quarters point at US military involvement and Iranian operatives. Some have even gone so far as to say the government itself has been orchestrating the attacks. What are we to believe?
Whenever there is an attack, the al-Maliki government tends to use already prepared accusations to point the finger of blame at the Baath Party or neighbouring countries.
Such quick accusations that are not based on evidence and proper intelligence work would confuse everyone, and give anti-government forces an opportunity to suspect that the security forces themselves are involved.
Ultimately, accusations that are not based on forensic hard evidence end up harming security forces and eating away at their credibility.'
Friday, October 23, 2009
Mish3an Jabouri Dreams of "Suraqia"
Mish3an Jabouri, the man who starred in the Al Jazeera interview below, dreams of uniting Iraq and Syria, like Saddam and the Ba3ath dreamed long ago. He dreams of good relations between Iraq and Syria. Given that the Syrians have allowed hundreds of suicide bombers to enter Iraq via the gates of Damascus since 2003, I also "dream" of good relations between Iraq and Syria!
'Mish'an Al-Jabouri: "We support good relations between Syria and Iraq, but not between Syria and the Al-Maliki government. We support good relations between Iraq and Syria regardless of who the ruler is, because we believe that this serves the people and their interests, and that it is a positive factor.
"Personally, I believe in the philosophy and notion of 'Suraqia' – Greater Syria and Iraq. This is what I dream about. Just like some people dream of Arab unity and others of Islamic unity, I adhere to the notion of Suraqia.
"Therefore, in the days of the late president Saddam Hussein, I used to call from Syria for good Syrian-Iraqi relations, at a time when they were very bad. Back then, Al-Maliki would curse me in the newspaper he had here, and would accuse me of working for Iraqi intelligence, and of being an agent for Saddam, just because I would call for good Syrian-Iraqi relations." '
'Mish'an Al-Jabouri: "We support good relations between Syria and Iraq, but not between Syria and the Al-Maliki government. We support good relations between Iraq and Syria regardless of who the ruler is, because we believe that this serves the people and their interests, and that it is a positive factor.
"Personally, I believe in the philosophy and notion of 'Suraqia' – Greater Syria and Iraq. This is what I dream about. Just like some people dream of Arab unity and others of Islamic unity, I adhere to the notion of Suraqia.
"Therefore, in the days of the late president Saddam Hussein, I used to call from Syria for good Syrian-Iraqi relations, at a time when they were very bad. Back then, Al-Maliki would curse me in the newspaper he had here, and would accuse me of working for Iraqi intelligence, and of being an agent for Saddam, just because I would call for good Syrian-Iraqi relations." '
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Great Poem
An Iraqi Brit slams Al Jazeera and the Arabs for their support of Saddam Hussein. I don't have time to translate it, but he says America is a liberator, not an occupier.
Friday, December 07, 2007
The Shia Taliban
This is very disturbing. After seeing this, I can understand why many Iraqis, especially women, would say that life was better for them under Saddam Hussein. How embarrassing for the Iraqi Shia who wanted freedom! Thanks to Harry Barnes for posting this in a comment. Also read this: Basra's murderous militias tell Christian women to cover up or face death
PS: I guess Al Jazeera isn't that bad. I have praised Al Jazeera before.
PS: I guess Al Jazeera isn't that bad. I have praised Al Jazeera before.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Iraqi expats want to stop Al Jazeera broadcasts in Europe
More GOOD news!
| December 6, 2007 | No.1778 |
 | |
| European Arabs Launch Campaign to Stop Al-Jazeera Broadcasts in Europe Arabs in Europe have launched a public campaign to stop Al-Jazeera TV broadcasts in Europe. In a petition, they accuse the channel of fostering extremism among European Arab youth and of supporting terrorism. While the petition's initiators have not provided their names, it seems likely that they are Iraqi expatriates; although various Arab news websites, such as Elaph, [1] have reported on the campaign, the petition itself has been posted primarily on Iraqi websites. These sites include the Iraqi news site Sotaliraq; [2] the Iraq of Tomorrow news site; [3] the Al-Najaf News site; [4] the website of Al-Fayhaa TV, a liberal Iraqi station; [5] the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan website; [6] Bahzani, a news and opinion website focusing on the Yazidi community and other Iraqi minorities; [7] the Yezidi Community website; [8] the website of the GilgamishCenter for Kurdish Studies and Research; [9] and the Kurdistan Times e-journal. [10] In addition, on November 28, 2007, Iraqi exile Joseph Shallal wrote an article on the Arab left-liberal Modern Discussion website urging a boycott of Al-Jazeera. TO VIEW MEMRI TV'S PAGE OF AL-JAZEERA CLIPS VISIT: http://www.memritv.org/subject/en/166.htm The following are excerpts from the petition and from Shallal's article: "Since Its Inception, Al-Jazeera Has Chosen the Path of Fostering Violence and Hatred" "Why should Al-Jazeera be blocked in liberal Europe? "More than 10 years after the emergence of the extremist Al-Jazeera channel, the time has come for Arabs who live in Europe and believe in a free Europe to defend the principles of a continent that has sacrificed millions of victims to reach its current state of progress, respect for human rights, rejection of extremism, and rejection of the fostering of hatred. "Since its inception, Al-Jazeera TV has chosen the path of fostering violence and hatred in the world, and has acted so as to be an arm of terrorist forces, such as Al-Qaeda and other extremist forces. [Al-Jazeera TV] has already been prevented from operating in many countries, and some of its presenters and technical crew have been arrested for their involvement in aiding obscurantist terrorist forces like Al-Qaeda and others." "The Time Has Come for… 'The Bin Laden Channel' to Face Its Day of Reckoning on the European Continent" "The time has come for Al-Jazeera TV, whose name has become 'the bin Laden channel,' to face its day of reckoning on the European continent. "It would be difficult, in this brief [overview], to provide examples of the calamitous influence, danger, and ignominy that Al-Jazeera TV has presented and continues to present. Every day that this channel [continues to] broadcast constitutes a clear violation of the principles of the media, and poisons the minds of the youth…" Al-Jazeera is Exploiting Europe's Democratic Environment in Order to Wholeheartedly Oppose Freedom and Respect "One cannot remain silent in the face of the dangerous insinuations broadcast by Al-Jazeera, that are aimed at trying to show that there is an extremist religious campaign against Muslims in Europe. "One cannot remain silent, given the statements of European political and cultural researchers as to Al-Jazeera's dangerous influence on the Arab youth in Europe. "One cannot remain silent in the face of [Sheikh Yousef] Al-Qaradhawi calling Christians and Westerners 'infidels' on Al-Jazeera, [and in the face of] his calls for violence. "European governments cannot but note Al-Jazeera's record in the Middle East, and the restricting orders issued against it in countries such as Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Perhaps these countries are not models of the kind of democracy found in Europe - but their judges and media personnel presented clear and irrefutable evidence of Al-Jazeera's involvement in actions unbefitting a media outlet. "One cannot remain silent in the face of Al-Jazeera's continued exploitation of the European continent's democratic environment in order to practice a media policy that is wholeheartedly opposed to the freedom and respect that European principles promote. "It is not our intention here to mention further examples of the Qatari Al-Jazeera channel's extremism. We will leave it to every free and sincere Arab individual to remember the many hours of anger he has spent viewing Al-Jazeera's destructive discourse." "Sign Your Name With Us and Take a Stand Against Hatred and Extremism" "Who is behind this campaign? "This is a campaign of Arabs and Europeans aimed at implementing peaceful pressure against European governments and the European Union to stop broadcasting by the extremist Al-Jazeera satellite channel on European cable networks, as a first step towards stopping the channel from broadcasting over the European satellite [service] Hotbird… "This is an appeal to all Arabs and Europeans, those who live in the European continent and those outside it, to add their names to the campaign. "This is an appeal to all academics and intellectuals, to provide us with their testimony regarding the terrorist channel. "This is an appeal to all lawyers and rights specialists, in Europe and elsewhere, to help us with their legal expertise in order to draw up a legal paper that we can present to the European parliaments and the EU. "This is an appeal to you, as an Arab and a European, and as a consumer, to join us in pressuring the European cable networks to remove Al-Jazeera… You do not want yourself, or anyone close to you, to turn to extremism and to hatred for the countries that have given us so much love. "Sign your name with us, and take a stand against hatred and extremism. Sign on to our campaign for 'a Europe without Al-Jazeera.' "Sign at this address: stop_aljazeera_in_eu@yahoo.com." "When Will Al-Jazeera's Hatred for Iraq and the Iraqis End?" In an article titled "When Will Al-Jazeera's Hatred for Iraq and the Iraqis End?" published November 28, 2007 by the Arab left-liberal Modern Discussion website, Joseph Shallal, an Iraqi exile living in Germany, wrote that Al-Jazeera is biased against Iraq, and urged a boycott against it. (It is not clear whether Shallal is connected to the petition initiative.) He also argued that Qatar, which sponsors Al-Jazeera, is hypocritical, since it is home to the largest U.S. military base in the region: "The Al-Jazeera channel was struck with hysteria after the fall of the late Saddam regime… "The goal of Al-Jazeera, and of those who stand behind it, is to harm intra-Arab relations as well as relations between Arabs and the countries of the world, and to sow and deepen religious and [Sunni-Shi'ite] sectarianism and hatred among all elements if the Arab region. "Most guests on its shows are from a single school and tendency… If we look at the Al-Jazeera Direct broadcasts, all we see are things harmful to the Iraqis and to Iraq - speeches, meetings, and conferences by Islamist terrorists from Al-Qaeda and from [other] terrorist organizations… "At the same time, Al-Jazeera Direct ignores anything positive, inside or outside Iraq… While it carried a speech by wanted Iraqi terrorist Harith Al-Dari, who represents nothing in Iraq, it did not carry the ceremony of Iraqi Patriarch Emmanuel Delly's ordination as cardinal… "What can we hope for and expect from a channel whose religious spokesman [i.e. Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi] calls day and night for jihad, killing, and terrorism, and issued a fatwa permitting the killing of Iraqis, and another fatwa permitting criminal terrorist suicide operations - so-called martyrdom operations - that violate all international laws[?]… "The channel [i.e. Al-Jazeera] says that Iraq is occupied. The occupation of Iraq was [based on] international resolutions, and was declared openly by the American administration. What we don't know is how Qatar was occupied and became the largest U.S. base… Did it take place with the agreement of the Al-Jazeera channel and its religious spokesman, or with that of the ruler of Qatar and his group? "The occupation of Iraq will end one day. But is the ruling family of the Qatari emirate and mini-state capable of expelling the Americans from their land?... "For these reasons, I call for a boycott of Al-Jazeera, and of Qatar. Every noble Iraqi should refrain from participating in Al-Jazeera programs, and refrain from visiting Qatar. And we demand that European countries remove Al-Jazeera from European satellite [services], particularly Hotbird, and that the channel's employees be denied entry to European and Arab countries because there are question marks regarding some of them - as was the case with Al-Jazeera correspondent and cameraman [Sami Al-Hajj] in Afghanistan. "We demand that Iraq break off all relations with the mini-state of Qatar, its government, and its biased media…" [11] | |
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Salvation Councils should avoid Al Jazeera
Abu Risha was killed just a few days after this documentary, in which Abu Risha was interviewed, was broadcast by Al Jazeera.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Al Jazeera
It was reported today that the Iraqi parliament voted to "start legal proceedings against Al-Jazeera television over perceived insults by the Arabic news channel against Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani." Interesting. I find Al Jazeera to be biased and not supportive of democracy in Iraq, but to sue Al Jazeera for criticizing Sistani seems rather silly. The reasons Iraqis dislike Al Jazeera go beyond Al Jazeera's "insult" of the revered cleric. If you have read my blog since October, you know that I dislike Al Jazeera - just search for 'Al Jazeera' using the blog search tool in the upper left corner if you are interested in what I have written about them. Based on discussions about Al Jazeera with Iraqis I know, it seems that most Iraqis dislike, even HATE, Al Jazeera. Iraq Pundit recently wrote in a post titled Why Iraqis Still Hate Al Jazeera:
I thought that was pretty good, and I agree. But we must give credit to Al Jazeera where credit is due. I thoroughly enjoyed the debate between Sadeq Al Musawi and Mish'an Al Jabouri - Al Jazeera would not have invited Musawi if they were totally biased. As'ad Abu Khalil (the Angry Arab) was a recent guest of Al Jazeera English in a discussion about the US media as accomplices to the Bush administration's propagandizing of the war. After watching the debate, I was surprised by the variety of guests, and I was delighted by what Alberto Fernandez said 47 minutes into the debate. It seems that Arab media has evolved over the years - it seems that Arab media has learned from western media. So Al Jazeera is not evil, and criticizing Sistani is not a crime, but overall they are still biased, in my opinion, and I doubt they will ever support true democracy in Iraq.
'Suddenly Faisal Qassem and his guests and Al Jazeera itself disappeared for me, and instead I saw a crowd of Iraqi men, women, and children choking to death in a cloud of chlorine gas released by one of the noble resistance's truck bombs. I saw the booksellers of Mutanabbi Street blown to pieces, their precious burning pages raining down on their corpses. I saw Iraqi girls who had gone to school and Iraqi mothers who had gone to the market, all murdered and lying in a sea of Iraqi blood. Characters like Qassem have seen all this too, but they don't see murder, they see "resistance."
But that's Arab Nationalism, isn't it? When the Baathist regime was overthrown, hardcore nationalists equated Arab "honor" with the survival of brutal and tyrannical trash. Now, they equate "resistance" with our slaughter. Do you remember the stories, following the overthrow of the Baathists, about Al Jazeera crews who had been set upon by Iraqis who had been enraged by the coverage? Sometimes these crews were forced to take refuge in their equipment trucks until help arrived. Sometimes they were chased to the next town. There was a reason for that Iraqi rage. There still is.'
I thought that was pretty good, and I agree. But we must give credit to Al Jazeera where credit is due. I thoroughly enjoyed the debate between Sadeq Al Musawi and Mish'an Al Jabouri - Al Jazeera would not have invited Musawi if they were totally biased. As'ad Abu Khalil (the Angry Arab) was a recent guest of Al Jazeera English in a discussion about the US media as accomplices to the Bush administration's propagandizing of the war. After watching the debate, I was surprised by the variety of guests, and I was delighted by what Alberto Fernandez said 47 minutes into the debate. It seems that Arab media has evolved over the years - it seems that Arab media has learned from western media. So Al Jazeera is not evil, and criticizing Sistani is not a crime, but overall they are still biased, in my opinion, and I doubt they will ever support true democracy in Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)