Bill O'Reilly on Al Jazeera: they are terrorists

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by astabooty, Oct 22, 2004.

  1. astabooty

    astabooty Member

    Nov 16, 2002
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    sorry if the above quote is not exact, but that is what he said.
    in his opinion, since they play the videos of the hostages, the beheadings, etc, they are giving the terrorists incentive to take hostages and torture them.

    he believed that al jazeera should be labelled a terrorist organization, have the station banned in this country, kick their employees out of this country, and put pressure on qatar to get them shut down.

    finally he said how he refused to aire the abu grahib (sorry for the butchering) footage or photos because it could lead to violence against our soldiers.

    my biggest question is this, is it that much worse to show the actual footage than to only discuss the story? if bill wouldn't even discuss it, i think he would have a better foot to stand (although the wrong one imo), but it is discussed and imo that is doing basically the same thing.

    also, is it not the job of journalists to report what goes on? turning a blind eye to reality is wrong imo.

    anyway i would just like to read your opinions and i will chime in later, gonna head out now. c ya
  2. DynamoKiev_USA

    DynamoKiev_USA New Member

    Jul 6, 2003
    Silver Spring, MD

    Its an exaggeration, but yes, I think that they are doing great service to the terrorists by airing footage -- the kidnappings would lose half of their use without the tv footage.'s kind of like when our networks were p1ssed off that Bush conned them into airing an hour of his stump speech last month. There was nothing newsworthy about it, just propoganda. Same with the hostages, except much much worse.
  3. pupusa3000

    pupusa3000 Member

    May 15, 2001
    East Bay Area
    I agree with your post. Bill O'Reilly certainly has exaggerated opinions and this is no different. Besides Al Jazeera is the Fox News of the middle east as far as biased news channels go. What does he expect anyways They have been the same footage here so what's the big deal. Perhaps he needs to "blow off some steam".
  4. skipshady

    skipshady New Member

    Apr 26, 2001
    Orchard St, NYC
    Somewhat on topic, has anyone seen Control Room? I meant to see it this summer but never got around to it. I did hear it's good though.
  5. CrazyF.C.

    CrazyF.C. New Member

    Jun 15, 2001
    Washington D.C.
    I've seen it. Fantastic, fantastic, fantastic film. Everyone on this board should check it out. More or less, I honestly believe that their journalistic integrity is somewhat on par with our media's. In fact, one of the execs at al jazeera, I believe, makes the Fox comparison a few times. The bottom line is that while they do try to be journalistic, they are still sort of new at the whole thing, and they end up trying a little to hard to put out the "islamic perspective".

    And while I can understand their desire to do so in the fact of all the western medias perspective, they need to eventually discover that they are doing a disservice to the arab world by trying to put a perspective on it, something our media is also failing to grass.

    However, they are far from terrorists. In fact, there is one particularly great part where the head of al jazeera chews some dude out for booking a guest who is obviously some wack-job there to promote the idea of america as evil. I think that if you see this movie, you would have a very difficult time saying they are terrorists. Perhaps they do aide the anti-american sentiment a little bit, but can you really blame them? That's their perspective, and while we'd like to think that our media is free from perspective, all you have to do is look at the fact that people like Oreilly won't show abu graib photos.
  6. Acombfosho

    Acombfosho New Member

    Sep 28, 2004
    By their very own definitions of terrorism - Surely the US Administration are terrorists?

    Don't they define terrorism or a terrorist as somebody who illegally seeks to murder those of a nation which poses them no threat..

    if not, what is their definition of Terrorism?
  7. bigredfutbol

    bigredfutbol Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 5, 2000
    Woodbridge, VA
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    By my definition, you are disingenuous.
  8. afgrijselijkheid

    Dec 29, 2002
    AFC Ajax

    FYI the bottom link has a better seed ratio
  9. 96Squig

    96Squig Member

    Feb 4, 2004
    Hannover 96
    Nat'l Team:
    A spokesman of the German ZDF station said that they as well as most other European stations would air at least the Al quaida tapes (and the tapes showing how westerners got killed were only shown in the Inet, not on Al) if they woulod be mailed to them... opensightly AQ chose to send them AD, so they show them. If they wouldn't, it would just be spread through the Inet - same result, just less money for AD.
    And then again, for many ppl in the arabic world Bush, Cheney, Sharon and Rumsfeld are the terrorists, so what do you think would happen if AD would be shut down? more ppl over there would watch Fox News? certainly not. there would be just less controlable information flowing through the Internet, and than terrorists could just tarn themeselves as serious news agency's and make they'r work even 'better'. Is that what Fox wants?
    It is just journalism what AD does... maybe not the kind Fox does or want to be done, but still it is...
  10. ratdog

    ratdog Member+

    Mar 22, 2004
    In the doghouse
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Let's see here... By O'Vibrator's logic, AJ are "terrorists" because they cover terrorist activities and thereby give terrorists further incentive to commit their atrocities. Well, the entire U.S. media also cover terrorist activities and thereby give terrorists further incentive to commit their atrocities. Ergo, the entire U.S. news media, including O'Vibrator hisownself, are terrorists.

    Does this mean that the terrorists have already won?
  11. Roel

    Roel Member

    Jan 15, 2000
    Santa Cruz mountains
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    At the RNC, the Bushies invoked 9/11 as a reason to support their candidate. using a terrorist attack on the US for political gain is pretty sleazy, but i personally wouldn't call it support for terrorist actions. However, when a partisan hack like O'Reilly claims that comprehensive coverage of terrorist activities is an act of terrorism, then wouldn't you think that using terrorist acts for political gain is an act of terrorism/

    Do these guys sleep at night? No wonder Republicans have more nightmares than the rest of us.
  12. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    Atlanta, GA
    Al Jazeera is the only news agency with embedded reporters among the jihadists.
  13. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Bill "dog breath" O'Reilly is an idiot.
  14. Northcal19

    Northcal19 New Member

    Feb 18, 2000
    Celtic Tavern LODO (
    I think the squelching of the freedoms of the press is obviously an important step in fighting terrorism. I imagine the founding fathers would agree with that as well. :eek:

    Of course, this is Oreilly. I mean, who cares?
  15. sardus_pater

    sardus_pater Member

    Mar 21, 2004
    Sardinia Italy EU
    Cagliari Calcio
    Nat'l Team:
    Just saw the film... really good stuff.

    I suggest anyone interested to watch it.
  16. Kelly Vargas

    Kelly Vargas New Member

    Jul 11, 2003
    Scottsdale, Az
    you're an idiot... he wasnt arguing against comprehensive coverage he was arguing against showing these beheadings and acts of terrorism, that in turn, encourage more beheadings and acts of terrorism. You can't even begin to argue that what they're doing is "comprehensive" coverage... They're rallying fundamentalist muslims to continue their hatred of the west..
  17. Section106

    Section106 Member

    May 1, 2003
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    This sounds like a statement of fact. I for one would like a link to some proof.
  18. Kelly Vargas

    Kelly Vargas New Member

    Jul 11, 2003
    Scottsdale, Az
    well you're not going to get one unless aj actually comes out and says "we're just rallying fundamentalist muslims to continue their hatred of the west" and i dont think theyre gonna do that anytime soon.. you cant truly prove their motives, unless they come out and say it.. by that logic its suggested that michael moore and the swift boat vets are making "documentaries" because theres no link that proves theyre not, which i think everyone will agree, is not the case.
  19. Matt Clark

    Matt Clark Member

    Dec 19, 1999
    Liverpool FC
    You've not seen "Control Room" then?
  20. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    You won't get any because it's probably not true.

    For those people, (it's usually the same ones), that take part in debates about terrorism on these boards may I respectfully suggest they make a bit of a study of the history of terrorism in Northern Ireland and why it has largely now stopped.

    In relation to this issue I would just like to point out that the conservative gobernment, under Margaret Thatcer, insisted that we weren't allowed to hear what the political wing of the terrorists, (Sinn Fein), were saying because it gave the terrorists, (the IRA), the 'oxygen of publicity'. In TV and Radio interviews for many years they were allowed to appear on our TV and Radio programmes but their voices were 'spoken by an actor' as the phrase went. We were, frankly, an international laughing stock.

    Having said that, at least we allowed their words to be spoken.

Share This Page