Chrisbb

the fact that it is not in the news certainly does not mean it doesnt happen

__________________

TrueBlueAmerican

Unfortunately not. Reuters Canada ran the story though. They dont mention the CIA by name though.

Iran arrests group for mosque blast, blames West | Top News | Reuters

Chrisbb

an excerpt from an interesting BBC article on al jazeera:

Last year's attacks against the US were the turning point for the station, which was launched in 1996.

Since then, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Tony Blair and Ariel Sharon have been interviewed by al-Jazeera.

The first two took the opportunity to criticise the station's coverage, but the appearance of such heavyweights lent it the kind of credibility it needed.

The station is owned by Qatar's emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, whose vision is of an independent, unbiased Arabic channel. Indeed, the channel encourages debate and covers subjects deemed taboo by Arab governments.


Al-Jazeera has become notorious for airing Bin Laden messages

But lack of objectivity is a criticism that has often been levelled at the station.

Its reporters have at times been banned by Kuwait, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority. It has been criticised by Saudi Arabia and was reportedly described by Bahrain as being pro-Zionist.

But al-Jazeera says the fact that it has managed to upset so many governments is the clearest evidence that it is doing its job properly.

Free speech

"We always try to provide as comprehensive a picture as possible. We don't only reflect one angle and this is why some governments are unhappy with what we do," Yosri Fouda, deputy executive director of al-Jazeera's London bureau, told BBC News Online.

"Al-Jazeera is a cultural, political and social phenomenon - it's teaching people about things like civil society, human rights and voting - many governments in our part of the world are not happy with such things."

The station's reputation for being a mouthpiece of Bin Laden is shrugged off. Yes, it aired the tapes, but what news network would not have, Mr Fouda argues.


The network has even interviewed the Israeli Prime Minister

He finds it ironic that the US administration initially sought to prevent al-Jazeera and US networks from broadcasting messages from Bin Laden and the Taleban leadership.

"This, from a country entrusted with defending free speech. Here we had politicians interfering in the name of protecting Western values," Mr Fouda says

US commentators argue that much of their suspicion comes from the fact that al-Jazeera's material is often uncheckable.

And they say that, by Western standards, much of the station's coverage would be considered lacking in fairness and balance.

BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Al-Jazeera and Bin Laden

__________________

Comicsartist

Oh, trust me. I know.

Of course they don't mention the CIA. Georgie-boy would say the Canadian press is part of the Axis of Evil if they did.

__________________

TrueBlueAmerican

Democracy Now did a segment awhile back on the United State's sponsorship of the Kurdish terrorist group PJAK. They were running operations in Iran.

Democracy Now! | Report: U.S. Sponsoring Kurdish Guerilla Attacks Inside Iran

anhailla

for the second time, I was joking about Al Jazeera

__________________
...either I go, or that wallpaper does.

Oscar Wilde

anhailla

but here...I'll take a stab,

Al jazeera may have run their information through their uber oil/rich buddies in Qatar...

just out of curiosity...what makes Al Jazeera more credible than CNN?

__________________
...either I go, or that wallpaper does.

Oscar Wilde

Richterscale

Nothing. But it works the other way also.

You need look no further than the recent NYT expose about the Pentagon using 'Military Analysts' to push their talking points to every single MSM player, who absorbed and repeated the propaganda endlessly and unquestioningly.
And since the story broke, the MSM has had a near total blackout on the story, proving their complicity.

And I should trust CNN more than Al Jazeera? Sorry. Not gonna happen.

But to be fair, I do trust their weather forecasts, sometimes.

__________________
Google Sibel Edmonds

"How many people died from the Kama Sutra as opposed to the Bible? Who wins?" - Frank Zappa

anhailla

Isn't the NYT mainstream media? or are you just talking about television networks?


here's why I am posing that question. Americans do have alot of access to information, sure it may not be spoon fed to you by Wolf Blitzer, but it's there.

Can Tehran say the same... or is information very tightly guarded?

__________________
...either I go, or that wallpaper does.

Oscar Wilde

Richterscale

I should have been more specific. I did in fact mean the TV networks.

Yes, we do have many avenues for our information, which is a damned good thing. How would you like to still be reliant on TV news alone, now that there is absolutely no question that they are either spewing propaganda, or just as bad, not reporting major news at all?

As to Tehran vs Washington, I'm not sure which is worse. media controlled by govt, or media complicit with govt. At least with govt controlled media, you know you are being lied to.

__________________
Google Sibel Edmonds

"How many people died from the Kama Sutra as opposed to the Bible? Who wins?" - Frank Zappa