Al Gore sells his TV channel to Al-Jazeera.

[aristotle]

I see them as a global news agency (I have no clue what legitimate means in relation to any news agency. Too many factors and people involved).

Al-Jazeera is a mouthpiece for Qatar's dynastic rulers, the Al Thani family. Al-Jazeera exists only so long as it pleases their autocratic monarch. We are in a global war between two great civilizations. Why would Al Gore grease the skids for those sympathetic to our enemies?

The United States has a large military presence on and around Qatar. On paper, we act cooperatively with each other. Make no mistake, Qatar is no more our friend than is Pakistan.

 

[paullud]

I see no threat from Al-Jazeera, they do not create terrorists. If you fear their capabilities of slanting the reporting to create terrorists then Fox has got to be the first to go followed by the rest of the liberal news. The way news is reported may cause a bit of emotion but it will not cause a rational person to become a terrorist. Yes there are lunatic Muslims in the world but they have been groomed by their parents or mentors, kind of like the Westboro group. As stated before I live in Utica, NY, they brought in over 10,000 Muslim refugees from Bosnia. They are hard working, good people that I liked working with and I am HIGHLY doubtful they are a danger.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

 

[aristotle]

I see no threat from Al-Jazeera, they do not create terrorists. If you fear their capabilities of slanting the reporting to create terrorists then Fox has got to be the first to go followed by the rest of the liberal news. The way news is reported may cause a bit of emotion but it will not cause a rational person to become a terrorist. Yes there are lunatic Muslims in the world but they have been groomed by their parents or mentors, kind of like the Westboro group. As stated before I live in Utica, NY, they brought in over 10,000 Muslim refugees from Bosnia. They are hard working, good people that I liked working with and I am HIGHLY doubtful they are a danger.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

We are at war with Radical Islam, not the refugees from Bosnia.

 

[paullud]

We are at war with Radical Islam, not the refugees from Bosnia.

I understand that but there seems to be a fear of Al-Jazeera having an impact on Muslims. If you do not have that fear then there is no reason to even discuss stopping them, it is nothing more than free speech. I have never paid much attention to Al-Jazeera but if I find I they report things in a way that hurts the country then I will lump them in with MSNBC.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

 

[aristotle]

I understand that but there seems to be a fear of Al-Jazeera having an impact on Muslims. If you do not have that fear then there is no reason to even discuss stopping them, it is nothing more than free speech. I have never paid much attention to Al-Jazeera but if I find I they report things in a way that hurts the country then I will lump them in with MSNBC.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

Paul... would you have allowed Nazi Germany to broadcast in the United States? Radical Islam is a real and present danger to the United States. It's just a matter of time and luck before they succeed in attacking our homeland again. Free speech doesn't extend to all people at all times.

 

[paullud]

Paul... would you have allowed Nazi Germany to broadcast in the United States? Radical Islam is a real and present danger to the United States. It's just a matter of time and luck before they succeed in attacking our homeland again. Free speech doesn't extend to all people at all times.

If the Nazi's were simply reporting the news then yes I would say they should be able to broadcast. If they were using it to cause physical harm then I would say no. I only need to think back to 2001 when people were against the TSA and Patriot Act because restricting freedom and changing our way of life meant the terrorists won.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

 

[layoutshooter]

How does one determine if a STATE OWNED outlet is just reporting the "news"?

 

[aristotle]

It seems as though most, if not all, news outlets demonstrate editorial bias or slant the news favorably in line with their ideological sympathies. News sources are constantly trying to shape public opinion.

 

[Brisco]

After reading through the comments below the article in the OP......here's an interesting side note to this whole ordeal:

Report: Glenn Beck tried to buy Current TV, Al Gore went with Al-Jazeera | Fox News

And another article that pointed out something that will PROBABLY NOT be discussed by the MSM about this sale:

Glenn Beck tried to buy Current TV - POLITICO.com

Those critics will also find irony in the fact that Gore and Current wanted to close the deal before Dec. 31, in order to avoide the higher tax rates that were to take effect on Jan. 1 — a detail flagged by Brian Stelter, who broke the news about Al-Jazeera's bid.

 

[paullud]

How does one determine if a STATE OWNED outlet is just reporting the "news"?

If they are directing or signaling people to commit acts of terrorism then it could and should be stopped. If they are talking about how bad Israel and America is then it is simply a statement of their feelings and should absolutely be protected.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

 

[layoutshooter]

If they are directing or signaling people to commit acts of terrorism then it could and should be stopped. If they are talking about how bad Israel and America is then it is simply a statement of their feelings and should absolutely be protected.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums mobile app

As I stated, NO State OWNED source can be trusted, regardless of the country who owns it, not just this one.

 

[RLENT]

Apparently, the Bush administration worked hard to discourage American cable and satellite TV providers from carrying Al-Jazeera.

Criminals generally don't like being exposed ... so it's not entirely surprising - given that they had the military deliberately target AJ's offices in Kabul ...

Or was it Baghdad ?

Al Gore was more than happy to sell out to a network which doesn't necessarily have our best interest in mind.

Yeah well, that's that global capitalism/free markets thingie for ya ...

Of course, we know what kind of a State and society we wind up with when we only have media which (supposedly) only have our (so-called) "best interests" in mind ...

 

[RLENT]

Not sure why anyone would support any administration who felt it was their mandate to pressure cable outlets on what they chose to carry.

Scott,

It's just a different side of the same coin - government action is often totally ok and indeed even quite holy ... when it's one's own faction that is in power ...

Let the other (political) side get in though ... and then government action becomes "bad" ... immoral even ...

Unlikely that you will receive much of intelligible reply from others to your comment above - the cognitive dissonance is probably far too great to allow it ...

 

[RLENT]

Al Gore's move is a sign of the times we live in. Hope he got more than 30 pieces of silver.

Pity you can't view those wondrous capitalista's ... the veritable scions of industry ... who have been quite busy shipping our industrial/technological capacity overseas (which might have some slight Nat Sec repercussions eventually) for the last 20 or so years ... with a similar level of disdain ...

 

[RLENT]

I guess it would have been a good idea to allow Nazi Germany to broadcast here in the days leading up to WWII if cable had been around then.

This looks like the EO Soapbox Stupid Comment/Analogy Of The Week ... but mind you I've been busy for the last seven days and haven't got a chance to scope out anything beyond this thread ...

And you were doing so well there for a while ...

 

[RLENT]

So you agree with government censorship then. You seem to pick and choose when you want them in your life.

Funny that ... he seems very ... conflicted ...

 

[layoutshooter]

"Of course, we know what kind of a State and society we wind up with when we only have media which (supposedly) only have our (so-called) "best interests" in mind"


Yep, what we have here now, a Marxist dictatorship being born with the help of a, for the most part, very biased press. Same as you will get with AJ, a STATE OWNED propaganda machine, as ALL state owned propaganda machines, (news outlets) are. NO STATE OWNED "news outlet" can be trusted, regardless of country of origin. News should never be a function of government. neither should education be. It is FAR too easy for those functions to be abused and misused.

You will see the result of a quasi state owned press here with the beginning of the debate on, what they like to call, 'gun control'. There will be ZERO effort on the part of our, so called, free press, to put for ANY kind of factual information, nor to point out the Constitutional issues at stake. They will even go as far as to state that the Second Amendment was put in to authorize a standing army and not even blink an eye about those lies. The Administration will put out it's 'talking points' and those will be, for the most part, the ONLY things talked about on our "news outlets". State owned or state directed 'news outlets' are a vile, disgusting arm of government, all of which are themselves, vile and disgusting.

 

[RLENT]

During WW2, can anyone imagine a US vice-president selling broadcast access and capability to Joseph Goebbels?

Nope ...

But I can imagine a Joseph Goebbels type character being appointed as head of the US Ministry of Prop ... errr, I mean ... Information ... yeah, that's it ... Information ... and you being totally down wit it ... 'cause it's in our "best interests" ...

 

[RLENT]

Nope, never read it.

You just can't make it up ...

 

[layoutshooter]

"You just can't make it up ..."

Nope, you can't. I do not have ANY trust for ANY STATE OWNED "News Outlets". They are vile by their very nature, REGARDLESS of nation of origin.