 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forums - The lounge
Subject: al jazeera
Original Message Date: 09-Apr-03 @ 09:40 AM Edit: 09-Apr-03 | 09:42 AM - al jazeera
The english version of the Al Jazeera website is online at the moment.. hacking and denial of service attacks have kept it offline for most of the last few weeks.
Interesting for those of you who want a different view of the war with Iraq. Surpisingly it is not any more biased/partisan than FOX news, maybe less so...
English - Al Jazeera
In fact some of it's reporting on protests in the West is more than you are going to get from mainstream media in those bastions of free speech and democracy...
Interesting for those of you who want a different view of the war with Iraq. Surpisingly it is not any more biased/partisan than FOX news, maybe less so...
English - Al Jazeera
In fact some of it's reporting on protests in the West is more than you are going to get from mainstream media in those bastions of free speech and democracy...
Message 21/38 17-Apr-03 @ 06:41 PM - RE: al jazeera
hilarious. I'm gonna have to catch the rerun tho, because I was in an out. I saw heeeeenifer, tho 
Message 22/38 18-Apr-03 @ 02:46 AM - RE: al jazeera
cheddar - you have typed lots of garbage, yet not answered a question I posed.
Message 23/38 18-Apr-03 @ 08:52 AM - RE: al jazeera
Sorry C - nothing personal but u used the "T" word and that is just asking for it.
Do you deny that the US put Saddam in place? if not then all of these 'good things' you suggest including (most laughably) compensation are afronts to those offended and really point to consicnce salves for the offenders - feeling better?
"...helping them build a government for themselves a pretty good thing?" - feeling better?
"...is it a bad thing that Saddam was removed? - feeling better?
Was there another way to do it? -see other post
As regards the news - especially in times of war - there may be an argument that this was started (possibly exacerbated) by "News. Inc" - a real ratings war.
Do you deny that the US put Saddam in place? if not then all of these 'good things' you suggest including (most laughably) compensation are afronts to those offended and really point to consicnce salves for the offenders - feeling better?
"...helping them build a government for themselves a pretty good thing?" - feeling better?
"...is it a bad thing that Saddam was removed? - feeling better?
Was there another way to do it? -see other post
As regards the news - especially in times of war - there may be an argument that this was started (possibly exacerbated) by "News. Inc" - a real ratings war.
Message 25/38 19-Apr-03 @ 12:16 AM Edit: 19-Apr-03 | 12:25 AM - RE: al jazeera
Zazza
Posts: 1502
Link?: No link
File?: No file
Conscience: 'And anyways, helping them build a government for themselves a pretty good thing?'
Hahahaha.. hoohoohoohoo..
Awww.. how sweet, the US is helping another country build a government 'for themselves' again!
Hopefully someone can return the favour...
'George W Bush's brother captured attempting to enter Mexico as regime crumbles.. reveals that the US has been manufacturing and exporting weapons of mass destruction'
'US funds terrorism in Latin America shock'
'George W Bush 'double' spotted at Disneyland surrounded by 'citizens' wearing fur suits'
'Israel accused of 'Harbouring' Donald Rumsfeld, could be next on list'
'United Kingdom told to "choose their friends carefully"'
'Members of the ruling 'Republican Party' become victims of revenge attacks by long oppressed minorities'
'Louis Farrakhan proposed as 'interim' US leader.'
'Shock as luxury lifestyle of corporate 'executives' revealed. Money should have been used for medical care and pensions claims Liberation forces'
'Canada warned to 'secure border' as americans flee from precision bombing.'
'Water and electricity to be restored to major cities within weeks, claims liberation force'
'Liberation forces secure oilfields'
'Depleted Uranium contamination to have 'minimal effect' on cancer rates among US citizens claims liberation spokesperson'
'Mansions in Hollywood looted by poor, liberation forces stand by and say 'we can understand why they would do this''
etc..
contributions welcome..
Hahahaha.. hoohoohoohoo..
Awww.. how sweet, the US is helping another country build a government 'for themselves' again!
Hopefully someone can return the favour...
'George W Bush's brother captured attempting to enter Mexico as regime crumbles.. reveals that the US has been manufacturing and exporting weapons of mass destruction'
'US funds terrorism in Latin America shock'
'George W Bush 'double' spotted at Disneyland surrounded by 'citizens' wearing fur suits'
'Israel accused of 'Harbouring' Donald Rumsfeld, could be next on list'
'United Kingdom told to "choose their friends carefully"'
'Members of the ruling 'Republican Party' become victims of revenge attacks by long oppressed minorities'
'Louis Farrakhan proposed as 'interim' US leader.'
'Shock as luxury lifestyle of corporate 'executives' revealed. Money should have been used for medical care and pensions claims Liberation forces'
'Canada warned to 'secure border' as americans flee from precision bombing.'
'Water and electricity to be restored to major cities within weeks, claims liberation force'
'Liberation forces secure oilfields'
'Depleted Uranium contamination to have 'minimal effect' on cancer rates among US citizens claims liberation spokesperson'
'Mansions in Hollywood looted by poor, liberation forces stand by and say 'we can understand why they would do this''
etc..
contributions welcome..
Message 26/38 19-Apr-03 @ 01:19 AM - RE: al jazeera
Well good luck finding someone with perfect motives to fix the problem. I suppose the world should have left them alone. After all, it WAS the US that funded Saddam, so they shouldn't be the ones to fix it. Let's wait for the UN to handle it. Sounds like a plan.
In all of this anti-Americanism (I'm not arguing the validity, the point has been made again and again) there has yet to be a good solution offered. Whenever the question has been posed, the likely suspects point at the CIA's indescresions (Iraq, Iran, Chile, Nicaragua, etc), Bush's past (like GWB's granddads support for the Nazi's), the US' conservative party agenda (can't remember the name of the organization, but it outlined foreign policy aimed at taking over the world), the average American's inability to sift between pro-war propaganda and 'real' quality reporting of 'Iraqi kids being crisped' (I paraphrase), and the overall questionable motives.
This leads me to believe that you think we should have left the situation as it was. Saddam should still be in power. Is my assessment correct? Will someone bother to answer the question.
Cheddar - you still haven't answered the questions.
In all of this anti-Americanism (I'm not arguing the validity, the point has been made again and again) there has yet to be a good solution offered. Whenever the question has been posed, the likely suspects point at the CIA's indescresions (Iraq, Iran, Chile, Nicaragua, etc), Bush's past (like GWB's granddads support for the Nazi's), the US' conservative party agenda (can't remember the name of the organization, but it outlined foreign policy aimed at taking over the world), the average American's inability to sift between pro-war propaganda and 'real' quality reporting of 'Iraqi kids being crisped' (I paraphrase), and the overall questionable motives.
This leads me to believe that you think we should have left the situation as it was. Saddam should still be in power. Is my assessment correct? Will someone bother to answer the question.
Cheddar - you still haven't answered the questions.
Message 27/38 19-Apr-03 @ 12:43 PM - RE: al jazeera
Zazza
Posts: 1502
Link?: No link
File?: No file
Conscience..
No weapons of mass destruction have been found which was the so-called 'reason' for invading Iraq.
Yes, Saddam was a dangerous and reprehensible tyrant. Unfortunately there is no provision under international law for invading countries because they have a repressive dictatorship, otherwise the US would have found it itself with a large number of its own client countries subject of invasions to restore the very democracies they toppled.. to whit chile etc.
While removing dictators and attempting to replace them with functioning democracies seems like a very good idea, surely we should be setting up an International Court of Law so that action is not taken for self interested motives by anyone who decides that country X with dictator Y deserves it.
Of course, an International Court HAS just been set up, but the US has refused to join it on the grounds that they do not want THEIR leaders or representatives subject to the law and possible prosecution.
I doubt if this has received much coverage on Faux News.
So, in my opinion, the invasion of Iraq is against international law, therefore illegal and Bush and Blair are mass murderers.
This action has been a pure power play for control of the middle east and in support of oil interests and Israel. If you think that the attpemt to bring 'democracy' is anything but a sham, wait until the Shi'a muslims attempt to vote in an Islamic government and then see what happens.
That is assuming that Iraq does into descend into civil war first.
Good luck!
No weapons of mass destruction have been found which was the so-called 'reason' for invading Iraq.
Yes, Saddam was a dangerous and reprehensible tyrant. Unfortunately there is no provision under international law for invading countries because they have a repressive dictatorship, otherwise the US would have found it itself with a large number of its own client countries subject of invasions to restore the very democracies they toppled.. to whit chile etc.
While removing dictators and attempting to replace them with functioning democracies seems like a very good idea, surely we should be setting up an International Court of Law so that action is not taken for self interested motives by anyone who decides that country X with dictator Y deserves it.
Of course, an International Court HAS just been set up, but the US has refused to join it on the grounds that they do not want THEIR leaders or representatives subject to the law and possible prosecution.
I doubt if this has received much coverage on Faux News.
So, in my opinion, the invasion of Iraq is against international law, therefore illegal and Bush and Blair are mass murderers.
This action has been a pure power play for control of the middle east and in support of oil interests and Israel. If you think that the attpemt to bring 'democracy' is anything but a sham, wait until the Shi'a muslims attempt to vote in an Islamic government and then see what happens.
That is assuming that Iraq does into descend into civil war first.
Good luck!
Message 28/38 19-Apr-03 @ 04:05 PM - RE: al jazeera
"Let's wait for the UN to handle it. " - who runs the UN and who is just about to close the UN cos it couldn't control it 100% - 'so if the UN is not with us then..?'
What we need to do is waiti until the anti Americanist is at such a peak that you can craete a scene and a new word for it like "anti semetic" and before zou know it it wil be morally questionable to be Anit American....waiting
Questions.., look inside yourself to justify the question. I am waiting for your wailing
What we need to do is waiti until the anti Americanist is at such a peak that you can craete a scene and a new word for it like "anti semetic" and before zou know it it wil be morally questionable to be Anit American....waiting
Questions.., look inside yourself to justify the question. I am waiting for your wailing
Message 29/38 19-Apr-03 @ 04:51 PM - RE: al jazeera
i caught a bit of that indiana jones tv series once. great scene where some guy says something like "seņor, it is always someone stealing my chickens."
between a fascist state i know something about and someone i only hear lies aobut, who would you choose? where is the choice to justify these actions? maybe saddam inflicts torture on a percentage of the population, but doesn't his country still support the nomadic paradigm?
saddam does win points with me for setting those oil fields ablaze. i can empathise with that cuz it's better to kill my spirit being useless than contributing to u.s. culture.
between a fascist state i know something about and someone i only hear lies aobut, who would you choose? where is the choice to justify these actions? maybe saddam inflicts torture on a percentage of the population, but doesn't his country still support the nomadic paradigm?
saddam does win points with me for setting those oil fields ablaze. i can empathise with that cuz it's better to kill my spirit being useless than contributing to u.s. culture.
Message 30/38 20-Apr-03 @ 02:34 AM - RE: al jazeera
Personally, I'm all for whatever the Iraqi's want. If they vote in a fundamentalist regime, then there you go. At least they had a choice. But that's me. But in the same breath that people are bashing the US (and the UK in this instance), they'll fire back something about Rwanda (as cheddar aluded to). I suppose it's all or nothing, or in the case of the Europeans, nothing. Ever.
Regarding the International Court. Not sure exactly what you are talking about, but you'll have to forgive my cynicism. Like Saddam Hussein would recognize a court of law...Or how about Hitler? Think he'd say "sure, you're right - I should step down..."?
How do you get the world to agree on laws when we can't sort out extradition. You can't just throw out a bunch of laws and expect nations to abide by them.
But that's just an initial reaction. Tell me more about this court thing you are talking about. Sounds pie in the sky to me, but I'll give it look and a ponder. Hell - it just might work. My questions aren't rhetorical - I'm interested in learning more about things I don't know much about.
Regarding the International Court. Not sure exactly what you are talking about, but you'll have to forgive my cynicism. Like Saddam Hussein would recognize a court of law...Or how about Hitler? Think he'd say "sure, you're right - I should step down..."?
How do you get the world to agree on laws when we can't sort out extradition. You can't just throw out a bunch of laws and expect nations to abide by them.
But that's just an initial reaction. Tell me more about this court thing you are talking about. Sounds pie in the sky to me, but I'll give it look and a ponder. Hell - it just might work. My questions aren't rhetorical - I'm interested in learning more about things I don't know much about.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
There are 38 total messages for this topic
Reply to Thread
You need to register/login to use the forum.
Click here to Signup or Login !
[you'll be brought right back to this point after signing up]
Back to Forum
