The American government isn't blocking it so this article is really pointless. Companies have the right to carry or not carry any station or programming they choose and those decisions are usually based on economic considerations. It costs money to carry a station and they will only carry it if there is a large demand for it by their subscribers.

As for ISPs blocking acces to the site, I'd be curious to know which ones as I haven't seen any evidence of this.

"Fear of knowledge .... or Hypocrisy"

More like taste. This is an example of what a lot of "thinkers" claim the free market can't do. Police itself. Despite the continual decline of humanity, there are evidently still a few lines we won't tolerate people crossing. Granted, instead we are watching film of accidents, people eating bugs, etc., but at least there's SOME standard.

I live in the Middle East and have watched the new channel (Al Jazeera International), since it launched early November. As opposed to the Arabic channel, the International channel is
aimed at viewers of CNN, Sky and BBC ie, it is extremely professional and has top journalists and news-people poached from the afore-mentioned channels and others.
To set minds at rest ,Sir David Frost, Bill Foster and many other top broadcasters, are unlikely to flight Al Quaeda as anything other than a terrorist organisation and you will certainly not see anything gruesome on this channel. The Arabic channel is also being refined and will have a higher profile with less bias.

To ban Al Jazeera in the US would be a stupid move even though it provides competition. Al Jazeera has grown up.

LW: English-Langauge AlJazeera is different from the newly launched Channel Aljazeera/English. The first is a mere translation of the Arabic Broadcast, the second is a completely separate one addressing the English speaker from the Arab point of view.

I understand the difference between private and government obligations. Regardless of who is doing this it is not healthy and it is not the American spirit.

there are evidently still a few lines we won't tolerate people crossing.

I'd be interested in knowing what line you speak of.




Still, this does bring up an interesting question.

Are we really, as he says, "naive," are we caught up in everything that has happened so far...all the...well, anti-muslim/islam rhetoric/BS that exists?

Can we -no- would we be able to see things from other view points?


~L

That is my point. I believe we should and WE are able. Knowing what others say and how they think, even if it is against you, is very important. We cant formulate our own decisions in the right way to serve our own interests unless we KNOW all sides of the story. Truth always surface to the top even with all the falsehood piled over it. and THAT is what we should be trying to do. If we listen enough and think enough we will recognise which is a truth and which is propaganda. Then we are best able to serve our own interests without paying so dearly to achieve so little.

If we listen enough and think enough we will recognise which is a truth and which is propaganda.

Truth...Propaganda...It's all relative. One's truth is another's propaganda, and vice versa.

Double Post.

>One's truth is another's propaganda, and vice versa>

For the casual listener, that may be true. But if we listen and think about what we hear we will always discover which is which. Not everything is relative ..... . not by a long shot. sooner or later truth becomes so obvious that people wonder how did they miss it for so long. Propaganda is a spin on facts of reality, truth is facts of reality itself. Facts of Reality are not subject to personal opinions. They are there for all to see. If someone chooses to ignore them, that doesnt change their nature. If I choose not to look at the sun or if i ignore the clouds that are covering it and then I say there is no sun, does that change the fact that it IS there?

For the casual listener, that may be true. But if we listen and think about what we hear we will always discover which is which. Not everything is relative ..... . not by a long shot. sooner or later truth becomes so obvious that people wonder how did they miss it for so long. Propaganda is a spin on facts of reality, truth is facts of reality itself. Facts of Reality are not subject to personal opinions. They are there for all to see. If someone chooses to ignore them, that doesnt change their nature.

Ehh, not all people will admit the truth...even if it dances naked in front of them. Some people prefer blindness to sight, fiction to fact. It's sad, but it's true, and I can think of a person I know who is like it.

It may not change what it is...but, tell that to those who spun it, or revealed it.

As opposed to the Arabic channel, the International channel is
aimed at viewers of CNN, Sky and BBC ie, it is extremely professional and has top journalists and news-people poached from the afore-mentioned channels and others. - Adnauseam

I don't watch much television, but I've been visiting the al-jazeera website for a little over a year now.

WWW Link

I remember using Al-Jazeera as a source for an article a while back. To attack the credibility of the source, a blogger cried,"You're going to use articles from our enemies to support your arguments?"

There was no convincing that guy, but all in all, the Al-Jazeera website is professional, they do provide excellent in-depth reporting and they do, oddly, remind me of the BBC. Al-Jazeera is one of many sources I consult daily for news.

knowledge or propaganda?

The way I understand it, the freedom of speech applies only to American citizens, and does not extend to those of other nations.

The way I understand it, the freedom of speech applies only to American citizens, and does not extend to those of other nations.

Okay, the following is my opinion.

I believe in every human beings right to freedom, that if they disagree with something....that they can say so,and the right to live their lives the way they see fit.

"I believe in every human beings right to freedom, that if they disagree with something....that they can say so,and the right to live their lives the way they see fit."

I'm sure you don't believe people have the right to slander one another or issue knowingly false threats, like shouting "Fire!!" in a crowded theater. I'm also sure you don't believe people should have the right to murder, rape, and steal, either.

So, given you believe that expression and "living your life as you see fit" can be regulated, it just becomes a sliding scale, right? There is no hard, objective ideal here, just your values against other people's in a democracy.

Xythe: Freedom of speech includes the right to listen and the right to know ..... and that is what this whole article is all about. for an operator of a cable, satellite or news paper or ISP company to deny access for anyone from anywhere based on their own liking or bias should not be permitted. As long as the content does not violate the rules under which they operate, they have the obligation to allow that content to be available to the American Citizens. They operate a public service not a private property. and by law, providers of public services are not allowed to deny their services based on bias or personal likings. bias against knowledge and information is worse than bias against color, gender or any other form of bias.