IRaqi PM shows hs "support" for freedom of speech

jethrek · Aug 8, 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3545514.stm

It's not like the Arab world needed a lot more reason to view the interim government as illigitimate, but it's highly ironic we're touting this government is supporting freedom given this.

SML · Aug 8, 2004

It would seem more leering if you hadn't put support in quotations, fyi.

dragonwillow · Aug 8, 2004

Al-Jazeera is the closest fucking thing they have to unbiased media.
What a horrible move.

galfordo · Aug 8, 2004

Good for him - Al Jazeera can eat my ass. Those guys have shown no class whatsoever - and no consideration for victims' families. At least here, the media outlets have some standards of decency (as low as they may be). Al Jazeera, on the other hand, is a ratings-whore network of the worst kind. They'd broadcast that the terrorists had taken over the US if they thought it'd help their ratings.

Terrorists live for media coverage, and Al Jazeera is all to happy to give it to them. If not giving the terrorists the media coverage they so desire qualifies as censorship, then so be it.

evil wasabi · Aug 8, 2004

galfordo said:
Good for him - Al Jazeera can eat my ass. Those guys have shown no class whatsoever - and no consideration for victims' families. At least here, the media outlets have some standards of decency (as low as they may be). Al Jazeera, on the other hand, is a ratings-whore network of the worst kind. They'd broadcast that the terrorists had taken over the US if they thought it'd help their ratings.

Terrorists live for media coverage, and Al Jazeera is all to happy to give it to them. If not giving the terrorists the media coverage they so desire qualifies as censorship, then so be it.

The idea is that that doesn't matter. Freedom of the press/media involves allowing networks to air whatever they like.

dragonwillow · Aug 8, 2004

Galfordo, you're wrong there.
Al-Jazeera is anything but a ratings whore.
Do some research on the background and history of Al-Jazeera first, before you make accusations. They're the one hope of unbiased and uncensored media in most of the Arab world these days. You know what their motto is? "We look at both sides." They've even supported Israel before.

PS:
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

It's not that terrorists love Al Jazeera. It's that Al Jazeera is the only news organization respected by them... or anyone there. You think CNN or Fox wouldn't want to get the news as fast as them?

galfordo · Aug 8, 2004

dragonwillow said:
Galfordo, you're wrong there.
Al-Jazeera is anything but a ratings whore.
Do some research on the background and history of Al-Jazeera first, before you make accusations. They're the one hope of unbiased and uncensored media in most of the Arab world these days. You know what their motto is? "We look at both sides." They've even supported Israel before.

Supporting one side for five minutes doesn't make their network balanced. You have to maintain that type of attitude on a consistent basis. I'm tired of their anti-American, pro-terrorist bullshit. Just reading over their home page below shows you what side these people are on.

dragonwillow said:
PS:
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

It's not that terrorists love Al Jazeera. It's that Al Jazeera is the only news organization respected by them... or anyone there.

So the fact that the terrorist "respect" Al Jazeera is supposed to give credibility to the station? All the more reason to shut them down, IMO. Watch what happens once the terrorists learn that their idiocy isn't broadcast all over the nation anymore. They won't stop, but it'll definitely be a deterrent.

lithy said:
The idea is that that doesn't matter. Freedom of the press/media involves allowing networks to air whatever they like.

Yeah, I get it, but there have to be some guidelines, particularly when a station is threatening the stability of a nation by basically encouraging terrorist acts. These people could use a lesson in responsibility.

jethrek · Aug 8, 2004

After all, galfordian thinking is thus: people should be free, unless we don't like them.

And hey, since the US doesn't like Al Jazeera why should they be free to report the news as they choose to?

galfordo · Aug 8, 2004

jethrek said:
After all, galfordian thinking is thus: people should be free, unless we don't like them.

People should be free to write what they want, but they don't have the right to threaten the lives of the public citizens and encourage terrorism. That's my thinking. People are also not free to yell "fire!" in a crowded area - I'm sure you'd like to fight against their "oppression" too.

jethrek said:
And hey, since the US doesn't like Al Jazeera why should they be free to report the news as they choose to?

Many of Al Jazeera's reporters were being paid by Sadaam to write stories about how the US is in Iraq to "occupy" the middle east, and how we were there to murder civilians - which obviously incities terrorism. That's not an independent news network (not even close), but rather indirect propaganda from enemy forces, which jeopordizes the lives of Iraqi citizens and U.S. forces. Again, good riddance I say.

Poonman · Aug 8, 2004

DUDEZ1! STOP THE QUARELLIN!G!1

I used to argue politics day and night with you people and got nowwhere....

Can we at least agree that this broad has a great ass......rack, face, hair, skin, etc?????

Even the peeps at Al Queda/Jazeera have to aggree with me on this one: This is a top grade piece of trim.....That is all.

jethrek · Aug 8, 2004

Nice conspiracy theories galfordo, but you're full of shit and obvious know nothing whatsoever about Al Jazeera. They just report both sides of the story, this is in no way encouraging terrorism. But hey, they MUST be in Saddam's pocket to not lick the US's balls.

Poonman · Aug 8, 2004

I thought Al Jazeera was an affiliate of CNN hence, their support of Israel? Or am I mistaken and they only sympathised with them?

Either way I'm pretty sure they don't support/sponsor "terrorism"....unless, you think that CNN(their affiliate) is in on it too? :cool:

Finally, Galfordo, you're seeing things from Kid Aphex's perspective, took you long enough to come around LOL.... :buttrock:

galfordo · Aug 8, 2004

jethrek said:
Nice conspiracy theories galfordo, but you're full of shit and obvious know nothing whatsoever about Al Jazeera. They just report both sides of the story, this is in no way encouraging terrorism. But hey, they MUST be in Saddam's pocket to not lick the US's balls.

It has been proven that reporters working for Al Jazeera were previously paid by Saddam. And you're fucking blind if you think they report both sides of the story - just look at their web page for a week or so - and then show me a story from Al Jazeera about the good that the US has done over there. You need to take your head out of your ass and quit believing whatever suits your political interests.

@Spoon: I didn't say that the group as a whole directly sponsors/supports terrorism. I said that they indirectly support it by giving inordinate amounts of air time to terrorist activities, which is exactly what the terrorists want. I do, however, maintain that their reporters were taking handouts from Saddam's men, in order to cover a specific body of material.

P.S. @ Spoon: I can't see the top grade piece of trim. :crying:

Poonman · Aug 8, 2004

I say it all in jest, Galfordo...save your energy typing up rebuttals to all the rest of your critics....

PS: DUDE. check the source and paste it into yer browser, plz...If I didn't know any better, this broad would've completely ruined real women for me....Christ, wut an ass....

evil wasabi · Aug 8, 2004

galfordo said:
and then show me a story from Al Jazeera about the good that the US has done over there.

There would have to be some good to report any good, or else that's making up news ala Jessica Lynch and that's wrong (Ron White voice please)

syringe · Aug 8, 2004

lithy said:
There would have to be some good to report any good, or else that's making up news ala Jessica Lynch and that's wrong (Ron White voice please)

1) Ron White isn't famous enough to use as a reference.

2) Galfrodo needs to stop posting in polticial threads voluntarily or the mods should involuntarily lock him out of unrelated to accomplish this.

So all political threads wouldnt degenerate into a remedial flame war

Howdoin · Aug 8, 2004

I say : Give them Fox News... teh Iraqis might not gain much but it should make some people happy - wink! wink! -

evil wasabi · Aug 8, 2004

Scanline said:
1) Ron White isn't famous enough to use as a reference.

I bed to differ, say that a year ago and I agree, but Comedy Central has been airing both Blue Collar Comedy Tour and his individual special constantly lately.

syringe · Aug 8, 2004

lithy said:
I bed to differ, say that a year ago and I agree, but Comedy Central has been airing both Blue Collar Comedy Tour and his individual special constantly lately.

I didn't say he wasn't funny I just meant that a large portion of the forum wouldn't get the reference.

'tater salad :buttrock:

evil wasabi · Aug 8, 2004

Scanline said:
I didn't say he wasn't funny I just meant that a large portion of the forum wouldn't get the reference.

'tater salad

I think a large portion of the forum will get the reference is what I said. AND he's funny.

'tater tot

galfordo · Aug 8, 2004

lithy said:
There would have to be some good to report any good, or else that's making up news ala Jessica Lynch and that's wrong (Ron White voice please)

Personally, I think it's good that Saddam is out of power and his regime has fallen. But then again, I'm just another wacky conservative. C'mon lithy, you know that there have been some good things that came out of the Iraqi conflict.

P.S. SPooN you weren't kidding! :eek:

Scanline said:
So all political threads wouldnt degenerate into a remedial flame war

I've tried that. It didn't work - they still degenerated rather quickly, save for the ones that nobody replied to. If the mods ask me to stay out of 'em, I will. They're not all that sacred to me.

syringe · Aug 8, 2004

lithy said:
I think a large portion of the forum will get the reference is what I said. AND he's funny.

'tater tot

Large portion as in a sizable minority like 30-40% or at least the majority as in 51% and greater?

I'd guess around 25-30% myself.

'Poot.

evil wasabi · Aug 8, 2004

galfordo said:
Personally, I think it's good that Saddam is out of power and his regime has fallen. But then again, I'm just another wacky conservative. C'mon lithy, you know that there have been some good things that came out of the Iraqi conflict.

P.S. SPooN you weren't kidding!

That's why my reply was sarcastic. Anyway I'll take your challenge if you can find me one negative story on fox news in a week.

evil wasabi · Aug 8, 2004

Scanline said:
Large portion as in a sizable minority like 30-40% or at least the majority as in 51% and greater?

I'd guess around 25-30% myself.

'Poot.

True majority 51 percent or more

You can take down those roadblocks now.

syringe · Aug 8, 2004

lithy said:
That's why my reply was sarcastic. Anyway I'll take your challenge if you can find me one negative story on fox news in a week.

Sarcasm is one of life's greatest treasures without which we would all surely die

edit: Let's just agree on the fact that Ron White owns and if Galfrodo was a comedian he'd be Gallagher.

IRaqi PM shows hs "support" for freedom of speech

,

NEANDERTHAL FUCKER,

Ghost of Captain Kidd

Analinguist of the Year

The Jongmaster

Ghost of Captain Kidd

Analinguist of the Year

,

Analinguist of the Year

macebronian

,

macebronian

Analinguist of the Year

macebronian

The Jongmaster

Banned

, Le BLING-BLING!,

The Jongmaster

Banned

The Jongmaster

Analinguist of the Year

Banned

The Jongmaster

The Jongmaster

Banned