US: Lebanon war victims sue al-Jazeera

[Andalublue]

Al J promotes an Arab world view, but does not promote an Arab world view. Got it.

That makes such perfect sense, I'm glad you explained it.

Ever thought of taking up ventriloquism? Who used the word "promotes"? You did. You clearly don't understand basic English usage. To lean in political terms is not synonymous with being prejudiced. Or perhaps it is in your world.

 

[Apocalypse]

There's a big difference between leaning in a particular direction, which ALL news organisations do, without exception, and being prejudiced (i.e. having a pre-conceived opinion that is not based on reason). AJ leans in the direction of an Arab world view, but is not prejudiced in a partisan manner. Your last sentence sums it up quite well I think, and contradicts your first two sentences. Apart from the bit about The (Liberal Democrat-supporting) Guardian being far-left. Ha! You should check out some real leftist newspapers like The Morning Star or even The Independent.

I find CNN to be quite objective, they take objectivity very seriously and while they have some non-objective players amongst them, they do kick them out once their credibility is being compromised.
See the case from a few days ago when a veteran CNN journalist was being sacked for making supportive statements towards the late spiritual leader of Hizballah.

Al-Jazeera however is a network that leans heavily towards pro-Islamic sentiments. This is clear to anyone who'll zap between al-Jazeera and CNN (and even BBC) during the covering of an international event.

And the Guardian is as left as a newspaper in a Western country ever went, it clearly has by far a pure and nearly declared anti-Israeli policy, and its opinion articles are mainly filled with anarchists and communists. Socialists.

 

[Apocalypse]

Ever thought of taking up ventriloquism? Who used the word "promotes"? You did. You clearly don't understand basic English usage. To lean in political terms is not synonymous with being prejudiced. Or perhaps it is in your world.

That it has a lean towards anything which is not pure objectivity is wrong for itself, but al-Jazeera expresses this lean through its reports and coverings of events, it is hence a biased and partisan network, one of the biggest there are out there, and as I said, it puts Russia Today to shame.

 

[Andalublue]

I find CNN to be quite objective, they take objectivity very seriously and while they have some non-objective players amongst them, they do kick them out once their credibility is being compromised.
See the case from a few days ago when a veteran CNN journalist was being sacked for making supportive statements towards the late spiritual leader of Hizballah.

And the Guardian is as left as a newspaper in a Western country ever went.

Agree with your first point, but I'd add the BBC and AJ to that group of news organisations who make strenuous efforts to achieve a degree of objectivity.

I strongly disagree with your second. Were they a far-leftist newspaper they would have called for the ending of the capitalist system, would have never supported the LibDems or previously, New Labour. They would be in favour of widespread public ownership and would be regularly calling for withdrawal of British troops from Afghanistan, withdrawal of the UK from the capitalist club, the EU and the Post-Imperialist NATO alliance. Those are all far-left, Marxist positions and The Guardian supports none of them. Your experience of leftist media outlets is clearly very scant.

 

[Apocalypse]

Agree with your first point, but I'd add the BBC and AJ to that group of news organisations who make strenuous efforts to achieve a degree of objectivity.

Which is where I find no sense.
The BBC has covered up the case against its mideast editor, Jeremy Bowen, not taking any form of action against him after he was compromised as an anti-Israeli propagandist:
Jeremy Bowen breached BBC impartiality rules in Middle East coverage - Times Online
And al-Jazeera was not taking any action against one of its higher officials in Beirut who has celebrated a birthday party on the network there to an arch-terrorist, Samir Kuntar, who has personally murdered 3 Israelis including a police officer, a father, and his 4 years old daughter.

I strongly disagree with your second. Were they a far-leftist newspaper they would have called for the ending of the capitalist system, would have never supported the LibDems or previously, New Labour. They would be in favour of widespread public ownership and would be regularly calling for withdrawal of British troops from Afghanistan, withdrawal of the UK from the capitalist club, the EU and the Post-Imperialist NATO alliance. Those are all far-left, Marxist positions and The Guardian supports none of them. Your experience of leftist media outlets is clearly very scant.

It could be that I was wrong in labeling the Guardian as a far-leftist newspaper(At least by European standards), it could be that I was simply labeling them that way because of their hardcore anti-Israeli policy, but nevertheless the Guardian is indeed the most anti-Israeli paper there is out there in the Western World, and it is the source of opinion articles by figures who frequently support terror and promote anti-Israeli conspiracies and blood libels.

 

[mbig]

Agree with your first point, but I'd add the BBC and AJ to that group of news organisations who make strenuous efforts to achieve a degree of objectivity.

I strongly disagree with your second. Were they a far-leftist newspaper they would have called for the ending of the capitalist system,....

We've been through this:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...gly-guardian-bbc-israel-3.html#post1058689633

Also suggest you Google the infamous and still Sealed Balen report.

And the BBC is 'better' than the pogrom-inciting Invective in the Guardian.

 

[Andalublue]

We've been through this:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...gly-guardian-bbc-israel-3.html#post1058689633

Also suggest you Google the infamous and still Sealed Balen report.

And the BBC is 'better' than the pogrom-inciting Invective in the Guardian.

Yes. Yes we have. But you good ol' boys seem to want to bring it up time and time again. Gets boring, doesn't it?

 

[Andalublue]

Which is where I find no sense.
The BBC has covered up the case against its mideast editor, Jeremy Bowen, not taking any form of action against him after he was compromised as an anti-Israeli propagandist:
Jeremy Bowen breached BBC impartiality rules in Middle East coverage - Times Online

Covered up? It's there in The Times and the record of his reprimand is a matter of public record. You'll find it here...BBC Trust - Homepage June finding of the editorial standards committee hasn't yet been posted, but it'll be there shortly.

It could be that I was wrong in labeling the Guardian as a far-leftist newspaper(At least by European standards), it could be that I was simply labeling them that way because of their hardcore anti-Israeli policy, but nevertheless the Guardian is indeed the most anti-Israeli paper there is out there in the Western World, and it is the source of opinion articles by figures who frequently support terror and promote anti-Israeli conspiracies and blood libels.[/QUOTE]

I see, so, anti-Israel (in your words) = far-left, does it? You might want to tell that to the Klansmen and the neo-Nazis. This might be interesting too...
Socialist Zionism

 

[alexa]

anti-Israeli conspiracies and blood libels.

The internet is weird is it not. I had never heard of all these anti-israeli conspiracies and I am not even sure I as yet know what a blood libel is or any of the other apparent things which we brits are supposed to be doing from the moment we wake up.

How weird to have been recommended the Guardian by my Jewish tutor all those years ago, only to discover I have been reading, unbeknown to myself about things called blood libes and conspiracies. She should have told me.

 

[mbig]

Yes. Yes we have. But you good ol' boys seem to want to bring it up time and time again. Gets boring, doesn't it?

"Good ol' boys"?
We "bring it up" WHEN it becomes Relevant.. again. As I just did. And to which there was no real reply.
You post one of the aforementioned biased sources and... it will be pointed out.
The BBC is somewhat better than it used to be. They probably were forced to read, if not disclose, the Balen report.
Guardian, OTOH, is still as as bad as it gets.

 

[Shayah]

The internet is weird is it not. I had never heard of all these anti-israeli conspiracies and I am not even sure I as yet know what a blood libel is or any of the other apparent things which we brits are supposed to be doing from the moment we wake up.

Same weird thing happened to me. An Arab co-worker highly recommended rense. I previously had no idea how many anti-Arab conspiracies are hatched in my neck of the woods such as HIV chewing gum and spiking the Nile with an aphrodisiac.

Damn.

 

[Shayah]

Don't get in a tizzy ^^

It's good ole boy sarcasm :2razz:

 

[Apocalypse]

Covered up? It's there in The Times and the record of his reprimand is a matter of public record. You'll find it here...BBC Trust - Homepage June finding of the editorial standards committee hasn't yet been posted, but it'll be there shortly.

Yep, covered up.
BBC seeks to suppress bias report - Israel News, Ynetnews

I see, so, anti-Israel (in your words) = far-left, does it? You might want to tell that to the Klansmen and the neo-Nazis. This might be interesting too...
Socialist Zionism

You'll find that things have changed a lot since then on the political scale.
Today on the international ground the far-left are mainly the radicals rooting for political Islam, facist governments like Iran and China, and pretty much anything that goes against democracy.
Frankly, they are basing their entire ideologies on anti-Western sentiments, supporting terrorism against Western civilians and cursing the system.
The far-right has of course not changed much at all during the time and they are still mostly the radicals who promote xenophobia and racism.

So being a far-leftist might not necessarily point at an anti-Israeli stance one is holding, but the majority of those who do hold far-leftist opinions are also holding anti-Israeli (and also anti-American) opinions.

 

[Gardener]

I see, so, anti-Israel (in your words) = far-left, does it? You might want to tell that to the Klansmen and the neo-Nazis. This might be interesting too...
]

That is unusually perceptive for you to notice the great similarity between the far left and the neo Nazi right.

You are right on the mark for a change.

 

[Orion]

I think the lawsuit is mostly political posturing but if they get a judge that is sympathetic to Israel, the case will win. Al-Jazeera reports the news, it's not engaged in military espionage... but unfortunately the tort system will permit any ridiculous argument to win the court's favor as long as it can cast reasonable suspicion.

 

[alexa]

I think the lawsuit is mostly political posturing but if they get a judge that is sympathetic to Israel, the case will win. Al-Jazeera reports the news, it's not engaged in military espionage... but unfortunately the tort system will permit any ridiculous argument to win the court's favor as long as it can cast reasonable suspicion.

Thank you for presenting the possible reason the US has been chosen for this.

 

[Gardener]

I think the lawsuit is mostly political posturing but if they get a judge that is sympathetic to Israel, the case will win. Al-Jazeera reports the news, it's not engaged in military espionage... but unfortunately the tort system will permit any ridiculous argument to win the court's favor as long as it can cast reasonable suspicion.

I think your real worry is that they might get a judge who is neutral rather than one who shares the same irrational hatred for Israel so typical of those in many other places in the world.

 

[Apocalypse]

I think the lawsuit is mostly political posturing

So you share Andal's belief that the victims of the war simply try to promote some agenda, as if they weren't really hit by missiles and as if they haven't really lost relatives.
I find such notions to be mostly political posturing.

but if they get a judge that is sympathetic to Israel, the case will win.

What the hell is a judge "that is sympathetic to Israel"?
A judge is an individual that is given the responsibility of delivering judgment objectively. If he has a past of being either a pro or an anti-Israeli they won't let him judge the case. Period.

Al-Jazeera reports the news, it's not engaged in military espionage... but unfortunately the tort system will permit any ridiculous argument to win the court's favor as long as it can cast reasonable suspicion.

We'll have to wait and see, I think right now the facts are quite against al-Jazeera in this case, it has reported in real time even though it wasn't allowed to do so and has aided Hizballah in improving the effectiveness of its rockets on the civilian populations.

 

[Mira]

We'll have to wait and see, I think right now the facts are quite against al-Jazeera in this case, it has reported in real time even though it wasn't allowed to do so and has aided Hizballah in improving the effectiveness of its rockets on the civilian populations.

Technically not possible. Here is an example of a large live broadcasting truck. Usually they use smaller vans, but still TV-s almost never take that kind of equipment into places where rockets are falling and they don't need to braodcast real time in that kind of situation anyway. They try to be as lightly equipped as possible in order to be able to shelter themselves from danger.

I really cannot see how AJ would drive even a satelite van to a forbidden zone without being instantly noticed.

 

[Tashah]

I really cannot see how AJ would drive even a satelite van to a forbidden zone without being instantly noticed.

Inside Fallujah: The Unembedded Story
Ahmed Mansour / Olive Branch Press / 2009 / 360pp

Mr. Mansour is an Egyptian journalist and a talk show host/correspondent for the al-Jazeera network. He was the only reporter to remain in Fallujah during the US siege of the city. In his book above, he stated that his equipment consisted of a hand held video-camera, a small gas-powered electric generator, and a mobile satellite transmitter with a small dish. Mansour and his crew entered/exited Fallujah in a nondescript beat-up passenger van to avoid detection.

Your assertion that it was simply impossible for AJ to transmit any real-time-strike-data is erroneous. I myself have called in air-strikes using nothing more than a GPS grid unit, a laptop computer, and a satellite phone. I needed no monster-truck to cart me and my equipment around.

I've often wondered how Hezbollah managed to precisely target the commuter train terminal in Netanya. Perhaps the trial will explain this uncanny precision.

 

[ido_]

I've often wondered how Hezbollah managed to precisely target the commuter train terminal in Netanya. Perhaps the trial will explain this uncanny precision.

What?! when ??

 

[Tashah]

What?! when ??

My mistake. It was Haifa, not Netanya.

 

[Shayah]

My mistake. It was Haifa, not Netanya.

Get it right, and don't give me that jet-lag crap :2razz:

 

[joergan]

I think the lawsuit is mostly political posturing but if they get a judge that is sympathetic to Israel, the case will win. Al-Jazeera reports the news, it's not engaged in military espionage... but unfortunately the tort system will permit any ridiculous argument to win the court's favor as long as it can cast reasonable suspicion.

And there is such a thing in the system called "appeal."

To claim al jazeera reports the news is hilarious, i have contacts here with the US office, and even they laugh at the awful reporting by the overseas bureaus. You talk about propaganda, to the trained and educated serious AJ journalists, the arab bureaus are little more than terrorist press conferences masquerading as news.

How many countries has AJ been thrown out of?

 

[Mira]

Inside Fallujah: The Unembedded Story
Ahmed Mansour / Olive Branch Press / 2009 / 360pp

Mr. Mansour is an Egyptian journalist and a talk show host/correspondent for the al-Jazeera network. He was the only reporter to remain in Fallujah during the US siege of the city. In his book above, he stated that his equipment consisted of a hand held video-camera, a small gas-powered electric generator, and a mobile satellite transmitter with a small dish. Mansour and his crew entered/exited Fallujah in a nondescript beat-up passenger van to avoid detection.

Your assertion that it was simply impossible for AJ to transmit any real-time-strike-data is erroneous. I myself have called in air-strikes using nothing more than a GPS grid unit, a laptop computer, and a satellite phone. I needed no monster-truck to cart me and my equipment around.

I've often wondered how Hezbollah managed to precisely target the commuter train terminal in Netanya. Perhaps the trial will explain this uncanny precision.

Have you seen a mobile satellite device ?

By the way, you don't have the same space to maneuver whe you are a military and a when you are a journalist.