Al-Jazeera: Again

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gilliam

Guest
Iraq Suicide Bomber Uses Ambulance

We’ve just received word that Al-Jazeera (All Jihad! All The Time!) has aired a videotape showing a suicide bomber readying explosives in his car, reading his will, and then driving a bomb-laden ambulance into a U.S. checkpoint in Iraq. Reuters is also reporting:

The videotape shows the person who carried out the operation while preparing the booby trapped vehicle camouflaged as an ambulance with a number of explosive devices. The tape also shows the perpetrator reading his will before ramming into a US checkpoint near the Iraqi-Syrian border.

The 47-second video can be viewed at Al-Jazeera’s website.

This one video captures what so many of us have been saying about the enemy. We are facing a ruthless group of fascists who will use any ruse, any at all, even those that go well beyond human decency, to kill and maim.

Not even the Nazis used ambulances as instruments of war.

So many on the Left seem to think that the enemy is a figment of a crazed-right-wing-maniac’s authoritarian imagination.

But, perhaps–just perhaps–the real problem lies in the Left’s inability to see an enemy even when the enemy appears on television, explains that he wants to kill us and then proceeds to commit a war crime, all on tape.

To coin a phrase: we have met the enemy, and he is not us.
newsisyphus.blogspot.com/2005/02/iraq-suicide-bomber-uses-ambulance.html
 
Gilliam - the evil of these people has been apparent to many of us for some time now. The good news (although not reported on American or other liberal news stations) is that the Iraqi people are committed to a democratic nation and are standing up to the fascists. All we get is the bad news. God knows that, like America and Israel, freedom and liberty is born in blood.

And remember: “Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
 
This one video captures what so many of us have been saying about the enemy. We are facing a ruthless group of fascists who will use any ruse, any at all, even those that go well beyond human decency, to kill and maim.]

The Iraqi resistance may be many things, but it is not ‘fascist’. Fascism is a European creation, usually associated with government and industry coming together to further the interests of the state. Since the resistance has no government and industry in Iraq has been dormant for decades (thanks to the combination of a brutally repressive Saddam regime and crippling UN economic sanctions), calling the enemy fascist makes no sense (unless one merely wants to use it as cussword).

By the way, going after military targets and personnel is not ‘terrorism’ per se, no matter how revolting and repulsive the tactics may be. Unless you believe that American motives are always pure and just simply because Americans act on them, it might help to try to see ourselves as others see us.
 
40.png
gnjsdad:
The Iraqi resistance may be many things, but it is not ‘fascist’. Fascism is a European creation, usually associated with government and industry coming together to further the interests of the state. Since the resistance has no government and industry in Iraq has been dormant for decades (thanks to the combination of a brutally repressive Saddam regime and crippling UN economic sanctions), calling the enemy fascist makes no sense (unless one merely wants to use it as cussword)…
Click to expand...
Your definition is off. The definition of fascism is:

a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fascism

a political system based on a very powerful leader, state control and extreme pride in country and race, and in which political opposition is not allowed
dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=28083&dict=CALD

In short, what you see in Baathists and Islamofascism. What you see in the enemy we are fighting now in Iraq.

The Baathists in Iraq, who we are now fighting in Iraq, and the Baathists in Syria, who we are now fighting in Iraq certainly have a direct history that dates back to fascism and being trained by fascists.
By the way, going after military targets and personnel is not ‘terrorism’ per se,
Click to expand...
Mosques are not milliary targets
Voting booths are not military targets
Bakeries are not military targes
need I really go on?
 
For those who care, there is a good history on the Baathists in Bernard Lewis (Princeton University): “The Crisis of Islam” and in “The Middle East”.

Briefly, the Vichy government handed over Syria to the Nazi’s, who were intent on causing trouble for the British, who occupied the rest of the fertile crescent inherited from the Ottomans at the end of WWI. The Nazi’s indocrinated the Baathists to provide such an insurgency. When de Gaulle got Syria back, he was happy to leave the Baathists in place.

Also see page 348 of “The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 years” by Dr Bernard Lewis. It speaks of how the Nazi’s used Vichy France to establish influence in the region. Vichy controlled Syria helped, and assisted an Iraqi politician named Rashid Ali al Gaylani in establishing a pro-Nazi regime in Baghdad. This axis served as the pre-cursor to the Baath party.
 
40.png
gilliam:
For those who care, there is a good history on the Baathists in Bernard Lewis (Princeton University): “The Crisis of Islam” and in “The Middle East”.

Briefly, the Vichy government handed over Syria to the Nazi’s, who were intent on causing trouble for the British, who occupied the rest of the fertile crescent inherited from the Ottomans at the end of WWI. The Nazi’s indocrinated the Baathists to provide such an insurgency. When de Gaulle got Syria back, he was happy to leave the Baathists in place.

Also see page 348 of “The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 years” by Dr Bernard Lewis. It speaks of how the Nazi’s used Vichy France to establish influence in the region. Vichy controlled Syria helped, and assisted an Iraqi politician named Rashid Ali al Gaylani in establishing a pro-Nazi regime in Baghdad. This axis served as the pre-cursor to the Baath party.
Click to expand...
So how are we to deal with the scum of the earth? Negotiate? Appease? Make nice?

I wish it were so simple, That the Lord of all said so?

These heathens don’t give a good rat’s behind about what our Lord says, so they must be minimized by our God given right to defend our faith and ourselves.
 
I don’t understand your dig at Al-Jazeera. They release news and videos like this all the time from all over the spectrum of beliefs. Their philosophy of news broadcasting is simply that news is news, and it’s their job to report it.
 
40.png
Ghosty:
I don’t understand your dig at Al-Jazeera. They release news and videos like this all the time from all over the spectrum of beliefs. Their philosophy of news broadcasting is simply that news is news, and it’s their job to report it.
Click to expand...
Even Al-Jazeera admits it slants the news.

Also see: Al Jazeera: Do they ever learn?
 
40.png
gilliam:
a political system based on a very powerful leader, state control and extreme pride in country and race, and in which political opposition is not allowed
Click to expand...
And of course you have a communist party in America?
 
Yeah, where does it say that it slants the news? I’ve watched them plenty of times and seen nothing but open airing of the news that comes to them. I’ve also seen nothing to indicate that they intend to put any slant on what they show. In fact, if anything can be said about Al-Jazeera it’s that it puts little commentary at all on its news items, and while that might be considered a problem in and of itself, it can hardly be considered putting a slant on the news.

Having read your post on that thread, it seems more likely that you simply don’t like them releasing the various viewpoints on subjects as they come in. It also seems that you object to their airing of the footage, such as that made by militants and extremists, that is available to them. You even actively misrepresented them in that thread, saying that they were supporting Syria’s claims that the assassination was Israel’s doing, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
 
40.png
Matt25:
What does it say on that and where does it say it?
Click to expand...
Here is a somewhat objective article on the subject
slate.msn.com/id/2081057/

But the best way for someone to judge the station is to look at their webpage. If someone can go away from there and say that they are objective, then that person doesn’t know the meaning of the word objectivity.

Also it is interesting to note that now that democracies are actually appearing in the Arab world, the station seems to not quite know if it should be changing its slant. So far they are still siding with the fascists.
 
Hmm isn’t slate.msn.com/id/2081057/ the link that says~

So, it’s not as if Al Jazeera has morphed into the news as told by Lee Greenwood. Or even that Al Jazeera has morphed into CNN. Rather, it’s fairer to say that since the war began, CNN—and American TV news in general—has become more like Al Jazeera. To those who have tarred him as pro-war and pro-administration, CNN’s Aaron Brown replied: “I think there is some truth in it.”** Fox’s Neil Cavuto was blunter: “You say I wear my biases on my sleeve? Better that than pretend you have none, but show them clearly in your work.”** Cavuto’s comments echo a statement made by Al Jazeera’s Ramallah correspondent to 60 Minutes in May 2001 about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: “To be objective in this area is not easy because we live here. We are part of the people here. And this situation belongs to us also, and we have our opinions.”

placeAd(2,‘slate.homepage/slate’)
American TV news has always presented an American perspective, just as Al Jazeera presents an Arab perspective. But in wartime, the American slant has become more obvious, and as a result Al Jazeera’s Arab slant has become less objectionable. Less than 18 months ago, Fouad Ajami declared in a long New York Times Magazine article that Al Jazeera was “a dangerous force.” But in the wake of this war’s coverage by the American media, his fears and criticisms sound quaint. Ajami blasted the channel’s “shameless” promos, including a montage of scenes that portrayed a clear sympathy for the Palestinians.** But how different are MSNBC’s or CNN’s montages of heroic American soldiers set to patriotic, martial music? Or the recurring shots of Americans saving babies and handing out candy to children**? Ajami also criticized Al Jazeera for focusing too much on the tragedy of a single individual, 12-year-old Muhamed al-Durra, a Palestinian shot and killed in Gaza. But American networks pull similar heartstring-tugging tricks, the latest being the mediathon over the rescue of Jessica Lynch, a single American POW. (American television ignores, for the most part, the lives and the deaths of Brits and Iraqis.)
 
Matt, no matter what you want to happen, the fascists will loose this war. You picked the wrong side this time.
 
40.png
gilliam:
Matt, no matter what you want to happen, the fascists will loose this war. You picked the wrong side this time.
Click to expand...
Which war? The war to censor independent non-American TV stations?
 
Incidentally the video of the suicide bomber and ambulance is Reuters not al-Jazeera’s swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=143&sid=5542836

“BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A Saudi militant from al Qaeda smiles and points to a wire taped to 20 large artillery shells in
the back of an ambulance. Then he speeds to his death, ramming into a U.S. base in Iraq, a new video shows… The video identified the militant, who appeared to be in his thirties, as Abu Mu’aad al-Janubee, a member of al
Qaeda in Iraq, a group headed by Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… The tape was obtained by Reuters on
Wednesday.”

I suppose Reuters because they are not cheerleaders for Bush must be fascists too. I suppose all critics of Bush must be Fascists. The definition of democracy is having the freedom to criticise US Foreign Policy but never actually doing so.

BTW I can find no evidence of this video of the sniper targetting a US service person can you point me to a relevant link?
 
No Matt, it is a terrorists tape, not a Reuters tape. But Reuters and Al-J both are airing it. The difference between the two agencies is that Al-J ALWAYS airs them and seldom airs the other side, Reuters tries to be more objective.

But you know that.
40.png
Matt25:
BTW I can find no evidence of this video of the sniper targetting a US service person can you point me to a relevant link?
Click to expand...
Then he speeds to his death, ramming into a U.S. base in Iraq, a new video shows

Your quote!

Matt, you have turned into an apologist for the terrorists. You need to do some deep soul searching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top