Was Al Jazeera the source for unbiased news in the country? Why is the news service unpopular in Iraq?
Are they unpopular ? And if they are, it’s likely that people are afraid we’ll haul them off, and torture/murder them for listening. Not to mention bomb any of their reporters; from the beginning reporters that don’t suck up to us have suffered so-called friendly fire casualties; I and others think they are being targeted and killed by us.
Not to mention that the Iraqi people seem to hate Al Jazeeras glorification of terrorism, doesn’t enter the equation does it Der?
Do you have a cite that the Iraqi people hate Al Jazeera, or that it “glorifies terrorism” ? Especially since I suspect you define “terrorism” as anyone who dares resist the occupation. Shooting and bombing enemy soldiers isn’t terrorism.
Isn’t it a bit soon to be using the past tense here?
How are you measuring this?
Ryan_Liam I sense a thread of yours that could actually be pretty enlightening and informative (until your second post, but let’s overlook that for the time being).
This is a very interesting subject, but could you back up two assertions before we start: a) the unpopularity of the news service, and b) its glorification of terrorism.
A cite of a poll that Iraqi’s don’t like AJ would be a good place to start this. Myself, I have no idea how most Iraqi’s feel about AJ one way or the other.
Jjimm never refrains from the insults :rolleyes: anyway, I assume most of Iraqs population which isn’t Sunni Arab is pissed at the way Al Jazeera has been used by the most prolifent terrorist groups to show beheadings (which I believe Al Jazeera showed unedited) it’s interviews for known terrorist leaders/sympathisers and how some of its reporters have been in known terrorist hotspots in the country and not attacked.
Only because I don’t know if Al Jazeera has still been banned by the Iraqi authorities.
killing civilians on purpose is. Which the terrorists do quite alot.
Western governments have killed quite a few as well.
We’re still waiting on those cites however. Apart from things you ‘assume’ and ‘believe’ that is.
An absence of blogs would be nice as well.
Rolleye as much as you want, but the american forces in Irak have been indeed accused of deliberatly targeting independant journalists, in particular from Al-Jazeera. You might not believe it, but I’m sure a number of Irakis do.
A very impressive and detailed rebuttal of my opinions. You might next time try to come up with a reason I’m wrong, however.
So do we. Should they ban CNN ? For that matter, we kill far more out of sheer indifference.
So much for it’s “unpopularity”.
Iraq. Unless it’s Irak in French, in which case I apologise.
After some googling and babelfishing, it appears that some other languages use Irak instead of Iraq.
Yes, it’s IraK in french, hence the mistake.
You’re wrong because there are no evidences they were actually targeted deliberatly, though I know that some journalists, even westerners ( I think i heard German journalists stating so, for instance ) thought they had been.
Mind you, I believed (and still believe) of a lot of things I read/heard about Iraq without proper evidences, more or less when they’re reported often enough by enough witnesses, and on occasion it has been proved that I was right in believing them, the most blatant example being Abu-Ghraib about which there has been a lot of reports before the videos. I also don’t believe a word of what comes from the White House (actually, I came to a point where official american statements have a negative credibility for me. If they say “white” I suspect immediatly it must be “black”).
However, I still can’t see the USA making a policy of killing journalists. Plus, it’s quite credible that a journalist with, say, a camera, could be mistaken from a distance for an armed man. Also, independant, non-imbedded journalists, during the few actual battles that took place against american forces and the insurgents could be found on the insurgent sides. I’ve seen a number of footage of insurgent fighting that certainly didn’t came from imbedded american journalists. And american weapons probably weren’t very discriminating during such battles. Finally, even assuming that the journalists who reported they had no doubt, given the conditions, that they were shot at deliberatly were right, this might have been a individual action rather than a policy.
Generally, those who said they were targeted thought that the goal was to dicourage them, or to prevent reports from the non-american side. However, that would require a general policy and I don’t think that such a general policy could stay secret, anyway. So, I would have to assume that the White House ordered specifically the killing of some specific journalists. But then, you’d have to tell me why these particular journalists would have been targeted.
Al Iraqiya is a Pentagon funded Government News Channel. Yet gets the same ratings as Al Jazeera. But does that mean people would disregard the news channel as being ‘a lackey of the US military?’
Well, seeing as you bring up the Washington Times, I’ll counter with Wikipedia:
The polling data sucks, and will probably continue to do so until Nielson sets up shop in Baghdad.
That being the case, it’s ridiculous to claim that Al Jazeera is unpopular in Iraq. Just as it’s ridiculous to claim that Al Iraqiya, or even Alhurra, is unpopular in Iraq. The most that can be said is that they all have goodly audiences.
Fucq that shit!