640 dead in Bagdad

[London Irish]

[BThis is amazingly irresponsible broadcasting by Al-Jazeera, and serves only to widen the divide and exacerbate the problem. [/B]

Do you honestly think Al-Jazeera are editorialising in favour of the bombers? Now I'll be impressed if you tell me you speak Arabic and you watched and understood fully the context in which this video was shown.

I'm right in my earlier comment, though, aren't I? You have a definite fondness for diverting discussions into the role and shortcomings of the media, which I concede is a very interesting subject for both the right and the left.

Do you think the US will ever own up to its policy of deliberately bombing Al-Jazeera offices? An interesting way of trying to influence the independent Arab media.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Al-Jazeera have no business broadcasting a video from a murderer confessing to his killings, especially so soon after the event when people are still coming to terms with their grief.

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

Do you honestly think Al-Jazeera are editorialising in favour of the bombers? Now I'll be impressed if you tell me you speak Arabic and you watched and understood fully the context in which this video was shown.

I'm right in my earlier comment, though, aren't I? You have a definite fondness for diverting discussions into the role and shortcomings of the media, which I concede is a very interesting subject for both the right and the left.

Do you think the US will ever own up to its policy of deliberately bombing Al-Jazeera offices? An interesting way of trying to influence the independent Arab media.

I don't (I have enough Arabic to get by if I have to), but I know a man who does!

Check out their website, it's fairly clear that they are giving prominence to the message that this guy wants made public. The overall tone of their website is anti-US, anti-West, pro-Arab, despite their avowed code of ethics.

I don't mind the media, I just have a very cynical approach to them. Freedom of speech is great, as long as it's not being corrupted for a media outlet's own end - which we know has been the case on many occasions. I have had dealings with "temperamental" journos who's first line of attack was to hunt for the big story, the cover-up scoop that would make them a major name - even if it got those around them killed. Holding a press pass does not make them invincible!

Of course the US attacked al-Jazeera, it's common knowledge. They made a big play about being an "uncontrollable" media outlet, and would not toe the party line - therefore, they were surgically removed from the situation. I don't have to like the way it was done, but the US had an objective and al-Jazeera were not helping. The media is always a casualty, even more so now when they report live and can cause more problems by doing so.

Anyway, it's not a media thread, so I will get off my horse on that one!

 

[London Irish]

Of course the US attacked al-Jazeera, it's common knowledge. They made a big play about being an "uncontrollable" media outlet, and would not toe the party line - therefore, they were surgically removed from the situation. I don't have to like the way it was done, but the US had an objective and al-Jazeera were not helping.

Honest comments from you, as ever. If the US military was ever to admit its policy of targeted bombings of Arab journalists, there would of course be worldwide outrage and revulsion, even within the US.

I'm sure the tone of coverage of Al-Jazeera is pro-Arab, after all, its audience is Arabs but I doubt it is "anti-West", after all, its owner, a Qatar emir, is not renowned for his hostility to the West. I'm sure that al-Jazeera does faithfully reflect the overwhelming hostility of Arabs to US-UK policy in the region though, but that's not being "anti-West", any more than a Briton protesting against the Iraq War is being "Anti-American".

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

Honest comments from you, as ever. If the US military was ever to admit its policy of targeted bombings of Arab journalists, there would of course be worldwide outrage and revulsion, even within the US.

I'm sure the tone of coverage of Al-Jazeera is pro-Arab, after all, its audience is Arabs but I doubt it is "anti-West", after all, its owner, a Qatar emir, is not renowned for his hostility to the West. I'm sure that al-Jazeera does faithfully reflect the overwhelming hostility of Arabs to US-UK policy in the region though, but that's not being "anti-West", any more than a Briton protesting against the Iraq War is being "Anti-American".

Being owned by an emir does not make it not anti-west (urgh, too many negatives in there!)

After all, the Mirror had a personal finance page which gave out pensions advice.....and they were owned by Robert Maxwell.

As for the US military admitting to selective removal - they do have quite a history of handicapping those who don't quite toe the party line! It's normally only a matter of time (and political expediency) before these things get revealed. The MOD had an anti-media policy for a short time in 1982 following their publication of Falklands battle plans, allowing the Argentines to reinforce key defensive areas. The D-Notice committee, of course, are not officially empowered to prevent publication, they are advisory, but they can make life bloody awkward if you don't follow their guidelines!

*************************

Probably for LI only, but this is quite an interesting article http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/04spring/mclane.htm

as is this one

http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?outfit=pmt&requesttimeout=500&folder=25&paper=47

 

[London Irish]

Cheers. Interestingly, Al-Jazeera are launching an English language channel soon directed at Western Muslims, so all of us will all be able to get a much clearer idea of its editorial policy and direction.

Here's the info from the Guardian, who I'm sure the US military would also like to surgically remove from the situation if they had the chance

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1547089,00.html

 

[swindonseagull]

No, that wasn't his point,

London Irish do not give up your day job and try and make a living as a mind reader because to tell the truth ,you are not very good.

The actual point he was making was that it was the religious, Islamic nature of the gathering that had led to the crowding and the panic and therefore the deaths. Swindon was saying that the stampeded people were complicit in their own deaths, hence they did not deserve any sympathy.

Again wrong

Swindon I think looks down on these Shia Muslims in similar fashion, as some kind of sub-human scum.

Jeez you just dont give up....

Why is there no public order control in Baghdad? Because the security infrastructure of the country is, of course, a joke. There is no effective police force, no real security, no one taking charge of large public gatherings, no one able to prevent the stray mortar rounds landing on the crowd and provoking the stampede.

you ar free of course to apply for a job training the Iraqis If you feel you can do it.

Lazy racists like Swindon will blame all this on the pour souls who died. But anyone with half a brain cell knows who is really responsible for the utterly chaotic shambles that passes for public order in that country.

such an eloquent arguement finished with a childish insult....

PS what the fuc@ is a lazy racist?
Answers in more than 1 word please..

 

[bhaexpress]

Swindon, as sole nominee for the 'Leper of the Week' award time to keep a low profile isn't it ?

 

[SK1NT]

Swindon, as sole nominee for the 'Leper of the Week' award time to keep a low profile isn't it ?

calling him a leper, isn't fair to lepers.


So swindon what did you mean then? Rather than us all guessing. Did you really mean to sound like a heartless bastrad?

 

[swindonseagull]

Swindon, as sole nominee for the 'Leper of the Week' award time to keep a low profile isn't it ?

I will be quiet when I want to be quiet... fredom of speech and all that..

but thanks for your concern.

 

[bhaexpress]

I will be quiet when I want to be quiet... fredom of speech and all that..

but thanks for your concern.

Abuse of same and far too much self abuse applies to you.