Kind of hypocritical to be banning a couple of news organizations from government press briefings when you talk about "freedom and democracy" all day isn't it?
MrS
___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel -"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.
Sep-24-2003 01:42
Yoepus
Neo-condimist
Registered: Jan 2002
Location: Ketchup fields, Texas
As far as I know, I heard that Al J. and another Arab news organization were suspsended for Iraq by the Iraqi Legislative Council (or whatever they call it) for aiding and supporting terrorist actions. Either by invokation or direct support.
If that has a spectical of truth to it, I don't see why they shouldn't evict them or why it would run contrary to freedom of press (or is it speech..).
Sep-24-2003 01:46
occrider
Traveladdict
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: New York
Here's an actual article as opposed to a Q&A report.
Registered: May 2001
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
I saw something about this on the news earlier this morning. Keep in mind that it's not actually the American administration that introduced the ban, it's the Iraqi governing council. According to the story I saw (it was either on BBC or CNN) the American administrators had nothing to do with it, and for various reasons (including the likely public backlash) would have probably prefered for the ban to have been averted.
But it's interesting that the former Iraqi administration (i.e. the Baathist party) banned the station on the basis that it was anti-Arabic and the current administration has banned it on the basis that it is pro-Arabic, in their opinion, to the point that it incites violence against non-Arabic people. Good sign though - you know you're doing something right when both sides of the political spectrum accuse you of "bias".
I must say though....Ahmed Chalabi is far from being well-liked at Al-Aribiya. Every time I saw one of their senior anchors ina panel discussion on Nightline or The NewsHour or some CNN show they all basically called him a crook.
Seeing as he is now "President" of the governing counsel maybe he is paying them back?
Just a minor conspiracy theory that popped into my head. But I always have gotten the "used car salesman" vibe from him. Call it a hunch but I don't think he really cares all that much for the general populace of Iraq.
BTW thanks for the real story occrider....I am still lookin for those damn $200 bill pictures.
EDIT: SCORE!!! See money thread
MrS
___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel -"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.
Sep-24-2003 02:22
occrider
Traveladdict
Registered: Oct 2000
Location: New York
quote:
Originally posted by Renegade
I saw something about this on the news earlier this morning. Keep in mind that it's not actually the American administration that introduced the ban, it's the Iraqi governing council. According to the story I saw (it was either on BBC or CNN) the American administrators had nothing to do with it, and for various reasons (including the likely public backlash) would have probably prefered for the ban to have been averted.
But it's interesting that the former Iraqi administration (i.e. the Baathist party) banned the station on the basis that it was anti-Arabic and the current administration has banned it on the basis that it is pro-Arabic, in their opinion, to the point that it incites violence against non-Arabic people. Good sign though - you know you're doing something right when both sides of the political spectrum accuse you of "bias".
LOL that's the wrong answer renegade. If the murderous baathists banned it, and the evil Americans would like to ban it (but couldn't), then the matter they are banning has got to be intrinsicly GOOD!
Well I'm practical, if banning the station lessens the violence and death, and thereby hastening transition, then I'm all for it.