Al-Jazeera a Zionist Plot!

How long before the "Al-Jazeera network" is held complicit in terrorism? To date they have worked hand-in-hand to spread the word of terror, faithfully broadcasting the latest head-chopping and every jihadi video from terrorists spread far and wide.

Is it news for the Al Jazeera network to accept terror videos? Does Al Jazeera and its practice of journalism have a solemn duty to differentiate between "news" and terrorism? I think so.

It would send a powerful statement to immediately expel all Al-Jazeera journalists on U.S. soil, and warn the network that its sponsorship of radical Muslim terrorism will not be tolerated.

IntheNet

 

Well, yes. Public commentary from international fugitives is an interesting story. There is a negative in that it publicizes the cause of terrorist jerks, but then again, it's not as if people like us who live in New York and DC were ignorant of it. But let's say Fox News suddenly got offered an exclusive interview with Zarqawi. You think they'd turn it down?

 

So explain the news value in a video showing someone beheaded? And explain Al-Jazeera's choice to show these videos repeatedly... and explain Al Jazeera's reluctance to cooperate in providing information on the receipt of this video media, which might aid in capturing known terrorists?

 

Of course they would. Then, they'd mention how they turned it down every five minutes in the course of attacking whichever station decided to take it. You're forgetting how self-righteous FOX is.

 

"Following the advice of U.S. and Israeli experts in psychological operations (psyops), Al-Jazeera took actions which gave Westerners a negative image of Islam and Muslims"



A bunch of Arab/Muslim terrorists drive planes into a building and kill 3,000 innocent people.

A band of terrorists kidnap innocent people, some of whom spent their life helping the poor and oppressed in Muslim countries, then behead them.


And the people who report these tragedies are "giving a negative image of Islam and Muslims".

Talking about shooting the messenger...

 

In related news.

Even Liberal Iranian opposition groups are really pissed at National Geographic and Al-Jazeera:
http://www.freemyiran.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=233&mode=&order=0&thold=0

Geographic's Gulf gaffe has Iranians irate:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002101154_atlas26.html

 

And America, of course.

If Tehran Times is a respected source for most Iranians, I'd guess they do. If not, then hopefully they don't. I don't know anything about them.

 

good lord

you guys are Arabs.The persian people disapeared a millenia ago, you are not persians.. you are the descendants of the people who replaced them.. quit trying to ride the glory of a culture you wiped out. (like all the US whities who ride the Sioux or Cherokee thing)

 

I hadn't even heard of this "paper" until I read this article. I don't even think they publish or print their rag on paper. Anyways, if you truly want to learn more about what Iranians believe (as if there's no diversity of opinion among Iranians), visit one of the thousands upon thousands of Iranian/Persian blogs on the internet.

 

Wow, another ignorant peon added to the mix. Iranians/Persians have a distinct, Indo-Aryan ethnic makeup that has been preserved very well over history. Persians haven't been "wiped out" by any civilization, and all scientific studies (on genetic markers that map racial migration...etc) show that Iranians are more closely related to Croats, Greeks, and Ossetians than they are to Arabs. In fact, "Bedouin" Arabs are the furthest you can get on any random, published genetic distance tree from Persians. The ethnic makeup of Iran: Persian 51%, Azeri 24%, Gilaki and Mazandarani 8%, Kurd 7%, Arab 3%, Lur 2%, Baloch 2%, Turkmen 2%, other 1% (CIA World Factbook 2004).

 

Neither were the Persians, yet this Herodetus reincarnate thinks making random claims in an effort to "inflame passions" is cute.

 

Tehran Times is prolly as skewed a source as CNN.
Damn the media!

 

Sure they do, these are the same people that believe Allah sent giant spiders to fight US troops in Fallujah.

 

Since poorly structured and grounded stereotypes are in season, this poor sap is representative of the ignorance of the average American. The kind that blows up abortion clinics, lynches black men, drags disabled people across Texas's gravel roads, the kind that enters into a mass suicide pact to save his soul, the kind whose paranoia drives him to hole himself up in a cabin in an FBI standoff, the kind who sends his young boy to church to be molested by a priest, the kind who...

 

Do we speak Arabic? Do the Arabs regard Iran as an Arab state? If we are Arab, how come we don't know it ourselves?

Here is some basic encyclopedia reading you could have used before posting,

Persians: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persians
Persia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persia

There is more Arabs in Israel and USA than there is in Iran

 

Did someone -- I? -- suggest there is "no diversity of opinion among Iranians"?

 

I enjoy how self-"englightened" people selectively weed out things to subconsciously feed their narrow, simpleton viewpoints. It's either a by-product of utter ignorance, or it stems from the fear of knowing that which renders many of their previous opinions obsolete. It'd be like me posting a story about a female who drowns her kids in a bathroom tub, and then going on to use it as a basis for future comments on the nature of the mother-child relationship in the American social fabric. Some people are beyond ridiculous.

 

I based my inference on the following comment: I'd guess they do. If not, then hopefully they don't. It seems rather binary to me as it's presented in the form of an 'either/or' proposition. Either way, I probably just read too far into your comments.

 

Unless you are just "self-englightened and selectively weeding out things", feel free to try again, and quote the entire sentence this time.

 

If a network manages to piss off USA, Iran, various arab states etc. etc. in various occasions it much probably means it's working well.

 

The only sentence I snipped was the following: If Tehran Times is a respected source for most Iranians, I'd guess they do. Taken as a whole, you reference "them" and ascribe an opinion on a binary scale (belief vs. non-belief) to the collective inherent in the term itself.

 

You can find countless editorials in Iranian papers, domestic or foreign-based, that forward competing explanations on the same subject (as should be obvious). Tehran Times doesn't have much of a circulation, and I'm not sure whether the guy who wrote this article believes in his own conspiracy theory. I'm guessing he believes it to be an appropriate stab at Al-Jazeera after they published what he believes is a slap in the face of Iranians.