Voice of America v. Al Jazeera

[JJackson]

I have been following this thread and have found it a little confusing which may be due to my inability to speak, or read, Arabic. How different is Al Jazeera’s English output from their Arabic output? I have a TV package that gives me Fox news, BBC news and Al Jazeera but not VoA. I tend to get my news online, so do not watch any regularly, but have found the BBC and Al Jazeera similar and reasonably balanced (I tend to watch more Al Jazeera as they have more – and more in-depth - Africa & ME coverage). I occasionally watch Fox to see how a story is being packaged for a US audience but – having been brought up on BBC journalism – find it hard to stomach. I am used to seeing the moderator, in a discussion with politicians from opposing parties, trying to crack the weaknesses in both spokesman’s arguments not feeding soft questions to one and helping the other attack his opponent. Having no experience with VoA I have been reading, and watching, some of their output from their site over the last few days and find it much closer to BBC/Al Jazeera than Fox. In one discussion, on recent events in Basra, I thought they had a well balanced discussion including showing President Bush’s comments, which were criticised by all for showing a lack of understanding of what was going on.
If the complaint about VoA is that it is not overtly biased enough then those making that case must realise that a BBC like position will already viewed as ‘Western biased’ and trying to broadcast raw propaganda will just leave the VoA preaching to the converted. Might it not be more productive to look at the other sides arguments – which are being used to radicalise Muslims – and if they are false counter them. Better still adjust US foreign policy to make it harder for your opposition by giving them fewer easy targets and shooting yourself in the foot less often.

MountainRunner:
I read the Terrorist vs Freedom Fighter stuff and thought the explanation by the editors was unsurprising and the norm. I am not sure what other position they could possibly take unless their mandate changed to just re-broadcast White House press releases without any pretence at being a general news source. You are never going to win an Arabic audience by just saying Hamas & Hezbollah are beyond the pail because the US has put them on a terrorist list but the IDF (or even Abbas) are the good guys because we give them guns and money.
P.S. I loved the video very funny – and probably a fair reflection of how the rest of the world see the US’s attempts at democratising them – but I see that the VoA may not be happy if some of their staff were involved in its making.

[William F. Owen]

I have been following this thread and have found it a little confusing which may be due to my inability to speak, or read, Arabic. How different is Al Jazeera’s English output from their Arabic output?

The inability to speak or read Arabic is pretty much the issue. I have a lot of Arabic literate friends (one of whom is an Arab), and my father-in-law speaks it to a fair degree.

Simple test: Get someone who can read Arabic well, to pick up a few local newspapers in any Arab city and search for the word Jew (Jehudi). Then read how Jews are portrayed. Out of X number of stories, how many are positive? Then find the English language translation of the same piece. If you can, then you've done better than me over the past 30 years.

You could type "anti-semitism" and "Arab media" into google, but you would get mostly stuff from Jewish/Israeli organisations, and as some Arab Media will tell you, these people cannot be trusted - because they are Jews.

If you live in the UK, you can go to any of the big Jewish communities in London, Leeds, or Manchester, and they can probably point you at the same stuff.

[Rex Brynen]

Which satellite TV station do you watch most?

54.2% al-Jazeera
18.3% al-Aqsa (Hamas)
11.2% Palestine TV (Fateh/PA)
6.1% al-Arabiyya
3.6% al-Manar (Hizbullah)
0.3% al-Hurra (US)

.. which reinforces my earlier point about the market dominance of al-Jazeera, and the complete failure of US-branded IO (al-Hurra) in the Arab world--which I don't think VoA can do much better.

The data doesn't reflect the extent to which Israeli TV is also watched, since it asks about DBS TV only.

Oh, and note that over half the population has a news and current affairs channel as its most-watched TV. If only that were true in the west...

Data from the ever-excellent Palestine Center for Policy and Survey Research (March 2008 survey).

[Ken White]

...
Oh, and note that over half the population has a news and current affairs channel as its most-watched TV. If only that were true in the west...

As long as most channels spend so very much more time on the 'celebrity' culture and other trivia (not to mention trying to leverage local inanities and aberrations to national prominence) than on actual news, I see little chance for improvement. Sad.

[George L. Singleton]

I have been following this thread and have found it a little confusing which may be due to my inability to speak, or read, Arabic. How different is Al Jazeera’s English output from their Arabic output? I have a TV package that gives me Fox news, BBC news and Al Jazeera but not VoA. I tend to get my news online, so do not watch any regularly, but have found the BBC and Al Jazeera similar and reasonably balanced (I tend to watch more Al Jazeera as they have more – and more in-depth - Africa & ME coverage). I occasionally watch Fox to see how a story is being packaged for a US audience but – having been brought up on BBC journalism – find it hard to stomach. I am used to seeing the moderator, in a discussion with politicians from opposing parties, trying to crack the weaknesses in both spokesman’s arguments not feeding soft questions to one and helping the other attack his opponent. Having no experience with VoA I have been reading, and watching, some of their output from their site over the last few days and find it much closer to BBC/Al Jazeera than Fox. In one discussion, on recent events in Basra, I thought they had a well balanced discussion including showing President Bush’s comments, which were criticised by all for showing a lack of understanding of what was going on.
If the complaint about VoA is that it is not overtly biased enough then those making that case must realise that a BBC like position will already viewed as ‘Western biased’ and trying to broadcast raw propaganda will just leave the VoA preaching to the converted. Might it not be more productive to look at the other sides arguments – which are being used to radicalise Muslims – and if they are false counter them. Better still adjust US foreign policy to make it harder for your opposition by giving them fewer easy targets and shooting yourself in the foot less often.

MountainRunner:
I read the Terrorist vs Freedom Fighter stuff and thought the explanation by the editors was unsurprising and the norm. I am not sure what other position they could possibly take unless their mandate changed to just re-broadcast White House press releases without any pretence at being a general news source. You are never going to win an Arabic audience by just saying Hamas & Hezbollah are beyond the pail because the US has put them on a terrorist list but the IDF (or even Abbas) are the good guys because we give them guns and money.
P.S. I loved the video very funny – and probably a fair reflection of how the rest of the world see the US’s attempts at democratising them – but I see that the VoA may not be happy if some of their staff were involved in its making.

I guess you are not aware of the so-called "new" Al Jazeera, the mouthpiece of the Taliban and al Qaida. Al Jazeera now has local, native dialect broadcasts in Pashto, Urdu, and numerous other unique to all areas of Pakistan dialect broadcasts. Pashto is also the major language of much of but not totally all of Afghanistan. Al Jazeera now has all dialects of both Afghanistan and Paksitan on both TV and radio, fyi.

[George L. Singleton]

Which satellite TV station do you watch most?

54.2% al-Jazeera
18.3% al-Aqsa (Hamas)
11.2% Palestine TV (Fateh/PA)
6.1% al-Arabiyya
3.6% al-Manar (Hizbullah)
0.3% al-Hurra (US)

.. which reinforces my earlier point about the market dominance of al-Jazeera, and the complete failure of US-branded IO (al-Hurra) in the Arab world--which I don't think VoA can do much better.

The data doesn't reflect the extent to which Israeli TV is also watched, since it asks about DBS TV only.

Oh, and note that over half the population has a news and current affairs channel as its most-watched TV. If only that were true in the west...

Data from the ever-excellent Palestine Center for Policy and Survey Research (March 2008 survey).

Thanks for your stats. Per the 9/11 Commission Report as includes and involves Voice of America they "will" do better when better funded and hire more linguistics. I am helping refer a US based native of NWFP, over here 20 years now, who is fluent in his native Pashto (works in both Pakistan NWFP and Afghanistan), as a small personal effort. I still believe we need to help find fixes instead of arm chair complaining that so and so doesn't do the best or the right job. Hope you all agree, as many of you have contacts who speak more or other than Arabic, which is not the need of the hour when it comes to Afghanistan and Pakistan/NWFP/FATA.

[George L. Singleton]

I have been following this thread and have found it a little confusing which may be due to my inability to speak, or read, Arabic. How different is Al Jazeera’s English output from their Arabic output? I have a TV package that gives me Fox news, BBC news and Al Jazeera but not VoA. I tend to get my news online, so do not watch any regularly, but have found the BBC and Al Jazeera similar and reasonably balanced (I tend to watch more Al Jazeera as they have more – and more in-depth - Africa & ME coverage). I occasionally watch Fox to see how a story is being packaged for a US audience but – having been brought up on BBC journalism – find it hard to stomach. I am used to seeing the moderator, in a discussion with politicians from opposing parties, trying to crack the weaknesses in both spokesman’s arguments not feeding soft questions to one and helping the other attack his opponent. Having no experience with VoA I have been reading, and watching, some of their output from their site over the last few days and find it much closer to BBC/Al Jazeera than Fox. In one discussion, on recent events in Basra, I thought they had a well balanced discussion including showing President Bush’s comments, which were criticised by all for showing a lack of understanding of what was going on.
If the complaint about VoA is that it is not overtly biased enough then those making that case must realise that a BBC like position will already viewed as ‘Western biased’ and trying to broadcast raw propaganda will just leave the VoA preaching to the converted. Might it not be more productive to look at the other sides arguments – which are being used to radicalise Muslims – and if they are false counter them. Better still adjust US foreign policy to make it harder for your opposition by giving them fewer easy targets and shooting yourself in the foot less often.

MountainRunner:
I read the Terrorist vs Freedom Fighter stuff and thought the explanation by the editors was unsurprising and the norm. I am not sure what other position they could possibly take unless their mandate changed to just re-broadcast White House press releases without any pretence at being a general news source. You are never going to win an Arabic audience by just saying Hamas & Hezbollah are beyond the pail because the US has put them on a terrorist list but the IDF (or even Abbas) are the good guys because we give them guns and money.
P.S. I loved the video very funny – and probably a fair reflection of how the rest of the world see the US’s attempts at democratising them – but I see that the VoA may not be happy if some of their staff were involved in its making.

1. Thank you note from a Marine lst Lt. Platoon Leader in Afghanistan about Voice of America, etc. His Dad and I grew up together in TN and he was a classmate with one of my three daughters at Vanderbilt. This Marine and his platoon had just finished a tour in Iraq were on ship enroute to USA and ship was turned around and they were taken back to be airlifted into Afghanistan, a new tour, with no home leave. Good spirits and dedicated young Marines! George Singleton

Colonel SIngleton,

Thank you so much for your letter and kind words and for including me on your emails. I read your article in 'Military Officer' and am extremely thankful for your work overseas through writing and media. I agree with you that we must convince all peoples around the world what we are here to do - not to conquer, but to rid the world of dangerous terrorists who use intimidation and exploitation as their means of spreading their cause. I am hoping and praying that they will catch on.

I hope all is well with you and your family in Alabama. Where in Alabama do you live? My little sister lives in Birmingham (attending UAB graduate school) and I have numerous friends living throughout the state. All is well out here in Afghanistan. We just got our first rain today. Again, thank you and God bless.

Semper Fidelis,

2. This is response from PhD director of a major Pakistani university think tank in Lahore, Paksitan to Voice of America article I copied to him:

Thank you!

---=

Khalil Ahmad

3. From a friend who works out of Dubai, a video clip of interest:

I think this is the English version

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d9_1206624103

4. From a friend now serving inside Afghanistan who is here from Bham...Spencer Bachus is our local US Congressman (Republican). He is referring to the VOA clip by CBS42 TV newman here in Bham of Monday which interviewed both me and Congressman Bachus about the article I am in pushing for VOA expanded funding, more, varied linguists, etc. Our Congressional delegation here in Alabama is lining up behind it 100%, to remind, in part because it is in the 9/11 Commission Report Recommendations, and they bipartisanly then and today say it is long ago overdue and needed.
George,
I had no problems opening it. Excellent tv news piece. Good luck to you and Spencer in trying to fund this critical weapon in the “War on Terror”.

Jack



5. In response to reading the MOAA OFFICER MAG April 2008 article which I focused on Voice of America here is my friend, the retired Chief of Staff and Chief of all Navy SEALS response in part (named edited, but not rank):

Way to go George!!!, But the article doesn't do your letter writing campaign justice.... Great PHOTO though, just as I pictured you !! Thanx for your continued service...
Keep Charging ! XXXXX , Rear Admiral, US NAVY (Ret)

6. From another friend now serving in Afghanistan on Voice of America MOAA OFFICER MAGAZINE article focus on VOA, I have omitted his name to protect him, too.

George,

Good article. I have read with interest your letters to the Peshawar FRONTIER POST and agree that we need to do a much better job in the propaganda war that we really are losing over here. The Afghans that I work with appear to truly appreciate the work that we have jointly accomplished over here. However, the senior leadership of both the Afghan Army and the Afghan Police are for the most part corrupt and incompetent. Hopefully, the next generation will break the cycle of ignorance and intolerance that pervades this country, but I have my doubts.

_______________________



I am tired, and need to hit the sack, was on the road all day. But, let me summarize by saying I hear all the time from both those who know me and those who have only read what I write or what others have written about me.

One regular correspondent to me since 9/11, saw my letters in Peshawar FRONTIER POST and Karachi DAWN as I started my singular propaganda campaign, is the European Treasurer for the JKLF/UK. That is the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, which is peaceful, rather uniquely. He is ethnically I think a Pakhtun himself, but born in UK. His Dad was born in Kashmir.

The range and variety of people I hear from are from Muslim academia, business, military, you name it, out of Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, Russia (yes, Russia), Iran, UAE, and from Europe as well as overseas Muslims here in the US and Canada. I am very weary from the free work I do workload that has built up since 9/11 and want VOA to hire the right linguists, and do their job of the best anti-terrorist propaganda program in the world.

For those who say what would or will VOA talk about, go read on the Internet what VOA talked to the Communists about from 1945 until the Soviet Union and old East European Communist nations collapse. Themes are going to be similar, but VOA will have to delve into religious ideology to be effective.

My life has been threatened numerous times from the NWFP "zone" where I am the only non-Muslim writer on Hujra Online, which part of the Khyber Watch.com website. Only mention this cause the truth, I use facts and data that can be verified on/from the Internet, angers the enemy who are into all our sites, likely including this one, Small Wars Journal. But I hope SWJ is enemy free, but you never know today.

[Rex Brynen]

I guess you are not aware of the so-called "new" Al Jazeera, the mouthpiece of the Taliban and al Qaida. Al Jazeera now has local, native dialect broadcasts in Pashto, Urdu, and numerous other unique to all areas of Pakistan dialect broadcasts. Pashto is also the major language of much of but not totally all of Afghanistan. Al Jazeera now has all dialects of both Afghanistan and Paksitan on both TV and radio, fyi.

I know that al-Jazeera announced an Urdu language network in conjunction with ARY, but I didn't know that it was broadcasting yet (certainly, the website is still only under construction). I'm not aware that it is (or will be) broadcasting other than in Urdu, nor on radio--do you have sources for this?

Finally, as I noted before, the main Arabic al-Jazeera network can hardly be described as the "mouthpiece of the Taliban and al Qaida." For its part, ARY also runs (in additional to its news and entertainment networks) the Pakistani versions of HBO and Nickelodeon, plus a music video and home shopping channel. Do you have any concrete data showing that the Urdu-language version will somehow be so dramatically different from the products that these networks already broadcast?

[JJackson]

I guess you are not aware of the so-called "new" Al Jazeera, the mouthpiece of the Taliban and al Qaida. Al Jazeera now has local, native dialect broadcasts in Pashto, Urdu, and numerous other unique to all areas of Pakistan dialect broadcasts. Pashto is also the major language of much of but not totally all of Afghanistan. Al Jazeera now has all dialects of both Afghanistan and Paksitan on both TV and radio, fyi.

George. Although I have only seen Al Jazeera’s English output from their TV and web sites I have not found it a mouth piece for anybody and not dissimilar to VoA or the BBC. It is not rabidly American, as Fox can be, but is not pro terrorist or pro AQ. So my question remains is there evidence that Al Jazeera’s output in other languages is diametrically opposed to their English output if not why waste money trying to counter them as their output is basically the same as VoA’s.


Contrast & Compare
To see if my gut feelings were correct I opened todays BBC front page to pick something I thought they would both carry and would show up bias. This turned out to be a bit more of a problem than I thought as I started with the “Afghan suicide attack kills eight” only to find VoA had not got it yet (evidence they need a bit more funding?), I then tried reports of al-Masri’s death but Al Jazeera had not covered it so I settled for “Gaza gunmen attack border depot” (Anything to do with Israel should be good to show up bias with the US/Israel and the Arab Nations forming the extremes of a very polarised spectrum of views).
Links to full articles “Palestinian Gunmen Kill Two Israelis in Cross-Border Attack” (VoA), “Palestinians in cross-border raid” (Al Jazeera) & “http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7338055.stm” (BBC). All covered the basic facts that 4 Palestinians attacked a boarder crossing and there was an exchange of fire in which two were killed and two Israeli civilians also died, they also report the death of additional Palestinians in a car. It is quite enlightening to read the three side by side as each one has a different take. VoA alone introduces speculation from an Israeli General to suggest the attack may have been against a civilian target and describes the car as a getaway car. Al Jazeera opens with Israel’s shelling of Gaza city in response to the attack and the civilian casualties; it also plays up the Israel laying the blame on Hamas for not controlling the attack – which seems to have been by Islamic Jihad - and "there are reports of a state of emergency being declared along the Gaza border" not mentioned by the others.
The BBC decouple the helicopter strike on the car (getaway car) from the attack “Later, Israeli aircraft hit a vehicle in Gaza City which the military said had been carrying Islamic Jihad militants had taken part in the attack.” They also covered Islamic Jihad’s statement that the attack was to capture Israel soldiers and breaking the Israel blockade of the Gaza strip and Israel’s assertion “Israeli officials from the army and the government say the militants targeted this point along the border because they wanted to disrupt fuel supplies into Gaza and thereby create a civilian crisis.”

Putting all three together it appears four Islamic Jihad fighters attacked Nahal Oz crossing with a view to capturing Israeli soldiers using light arms, in the process they killed two Israel civilians, who worked at the crossings fuel depot. Israeli returned fire with a tank killing two and causing the others to flee. Israel then used artillery and a missile from a helicopter to attack those it felt responsible. Much beyond that seems to be speculation and not even this much is certain.

A P.S.
Fox also covered this but, unlike the others, used an AP reporter rather than in house. The piece linked Islamic Jihad to Iran, described the Israel civilian dead as riddled with bullets and had an interesting take on Hamas winning the elections in Gaza "But tensions have been increasing in Gaza, whose 1.4 million people have been confined to the territory since Hamas wrested control last June from security forces loyal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas." but all in all a reasonable piece.

[George L. Singleton]

I know that al-Jazeera announced an Urdu language network in conjunction with ARY, but I didn't know that it was broadcasting yet (certainly, the website is still only under construction). I'm not aware that it is (or will be) broadcasting other than in Urdu, nor on radio--do you have sources for this?

Finally, as I noted before, the main Arabic al-Jazeera network can hardly be described as the "mouthpiece of the Taliban and al Qaida." For its part, ARY also runs (in additional to its news and entertainment networks) the Pakistani versions of HBO and Nickelodeon, plus a music video and home shopping channel. Do you have any concrete data showing that the Urdu-language version will somehow be so dramatically different from the products that these networks already broadcast?

Thank you very much for your sound, logical, and probing questions. These and related points are in discussion currently before the Senate and House Appropriations Committees.

And as I said before I simply factually in view of world news coverage Al Jazeera uniquely has given to al Qaida starting immediately after 9/11 and in view of the funding shiek behind al Jazeera's relationships with the old Taliban Government of Afghanistan, the laundering of money you can reserach on the Internet for the terrorists through his UAE banks, etc, I do not agree with you nor does the 9/11 Commission when it comes to views for and against Al Jazeera. But, to each his own view. I'm supporting our troops by pushing for the 9/11 Commission Report better funding and more specific non-Arabic linguists.

It is important to stay focused on two things re need for Pashto, Urdu, etc. versions of VOA and enhanced programming to deal with terrorists kidnapping of moderate Islam in part via repeated propaganda on Al Jazeera: Of 166 million total Pakistan population about 46 million are illiterate, and many of these 46 million are in the NWFP, speak Pashto, are raw illiterate gun toting tribesmen who depend soley on TV and radio news, repeat news, broadcasts.

In Afghanistan out of an estimated by the CIA Fact Book on line (Internet) out of 37 million total population as many as 26.3 million are illiterate. Again these illiterates depend on TV and radio for all their news and other information.

Voice of America, right now, today, has an unmet need to support our boys and girls in the field there by broadcasing our views, facts, and news of evens there as well as world news as we see it. Especially important is getting Pashto speakers on the air to read peaceful admonitions from the Quran to undermine the mad mullahs and the dogma being pushed on air now by Al Qaida and the Taliban, some of which terrorist broadcasts are currently small FM transmitters being episodically set up in the mountains by the Taliban and al Qaida. I must admit I am baflled with an ancient, short history in TV and radio myself, as memory says AM waves bounce and work best for hilly terrain whereas FM waves are more straight line broadcast friendly.

I get my info on what Al Jazeera is doing, otherwise, from reading the on line Peshawar FRONTIER POST, the Karachi DAWN, but also from interchanges on the websie Hujra Online, which is a part of the KhyberWatch.com Pakhtun webiste. I also get info from the head of a major Pakistani university think tank who is refreshingly open minded and will print my articles, which are source deocumented, against the terrorist and their sympathetic friends who write in the same Pak think tank site, published mainly on the Internet to be clear. Also, I get a growing number of direct, personal e-mails from Muslims overseas who are of the more educated variety who wish to find a moderate path away from the terrorists and terrorism. This I can't reference to you as some of these folks, especially in the NWFP of Pakistan are among the minorities, Shias there who are be murdered indiscriminately by the Sunni Taliban and al Qaida inside Pakistan today. The do not want their info given out but of course I put that info into the Homeland Security pipleline regularly, via an anti-terrorism team here, a study group at West Point, and other special contacts that don't create "public awareness" of who these people are.

The Peshawar FRONTIER POST has no topical archive, it only as a by date for entire issues archieve. It used to have a topical log after 9/11 but received so many threats and Islamic Sharia Court lawsuits, as well as under Pakistani Government law(s) law suits that the topical and by writers name index was abolished, to stop false charges being made referncing articles and writers the terrorists didn't like or want printed, etc.

DAWN in Karachi however still has a proper archieve you can do some research on.

Trip yesterday to University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, and Marion Military Institute in Marion, Alabama, showed I need new disk brakes on my Impala and I am headed out early, now, to the auto mechanic's shop.

Al Jazeera has big bucks, is anti-US and West in general, and very much the channel which gets al Qaida's propaganda to the fore ever since 9/11. Do you like Al Jazeera doing children's TV programming promoting being a "good terrorist" boy and girl, blowing up in suicide martydome the infidel Christians? Come now. This is happening now in the Middle East as a starter.

We, via VOA, have to be proactive and look ahead.

[William F. Owen]

Putting all three together it appears four Islamic Jihad fighters attacked Nahal Oz crossing with a view to capturing Israeli soldiers using light arms, in the process they killed two Israel civilians, who worked at the crossings fuel depot. Israeli returned fire with a tank killing two and causing the others to flee. Israel then used artillery and a missile from a helicopter to attack those it felt responsible. Much beyond that seems to be speculation and not even this much is certain.

Who put this together? My take, is that a Hamas sanctioned/approved via lack of action, terrorist operation, aimed at killing civilians, to close down the Nahal Oz fuel depot, resulted in 2 civilians dead, and the IDF then went after and got the others responsible.

Hamas are terrorists, in the same way the IRA were/are, or Timothy McVeigh, was, or the Klu Klux Klan is. The more they can increase the suffering of those in the Gaza, the better they can promote their perceived legitimacy.

[JJackson]

Who put this together? My take, is that a Hamas sanctioned/approved via lack of action, terrorist operation, aimed at killing civilians, to close down the Nahal Oz fuel depot, resulted in 2 civilians dead, and the IDF then went after and got the others responsible.

Hamas are terrorists, in the same way the IRA were/are, or Timothy McVeigh, was, or the Klu Klux Klan is. The more they can increase the suffering of those in the Gaza, the better they can promote their perceived legitimacy.

William in answer to your question: I put this together based on the accounts referenced. I am not sure how your take got Hamas sanctioning or approving anything as one article explicitly said they had no prior knowledge and two others quoted Hamas describing the action after the event as a "heroic and courageous" act. None of the accounts suggested it was anyone’s intention to close the fuel depot although Al Jazeera quoted the Israeli prime minister’s spokesman as saying "The fact that Hamas would deliberately target the major crossing point for the import of fuel into the Gaza Strip in order to kill people and close down the terminal is a clear indication that Hamas has no concern whatsoever for the people of Gaza" which is unsurprising given the source but at odds with other Israeli army comments and those of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
As to who are, and are not terrorist, you and I have been around this before and are not likely to change each others opinions but for me Hamas and the IRA have/had legitimate grievances with little opportunity to have them addressed by those with the power. The KKK were completely different in they had the power and abused it on those who were relatively helpless (more IDF than Hamas for my money) and McVeigh was just an unbalanced individual who probably needed psychiatric help.
Hamas' legitamacy is through the ballot box and by virtue of having a significant level of popular support.

[George L. Singleton]

I was a bit surprised about an hour ago to find the SWJ discussion of Voice of America vs. Al Jazeera being posted almost moment by moment as we dialgoue herein.

That said, I have between business events (I still work for a living) found several Internet open to everyone sites that amplify this discussion.

Understand my premise is that we need to better fund and utilize Voice of America, especially at the current time into the NWFP of Pakistan and into Afghanistan as a part of what is loosely meant by the 100 year war, which to me means a propaganda war revolving around religious extremist terrorist Islamics vs. the rest of Islam and the rest of the world's all other faiths.

1. Here is the best discussion I can find for now on why VOA needs to be done better, all this of course building from the 9/11 Bipartisan Commission Report recommendation to build up and use more effectively Voice of America:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/usr_d...fAmerica_2.pdf

2. Here are a series of stories on the open Internet related to Al Jazeera, but pay special attention to the one about Al Jazeera being blatantly rascist, as a response to it was erased [by someone who controls these Internet entries] as I started open and read it:

http://www.truveo.com/aljazeera-chan.../id/2460008808

3. One of many examples where Al Jazeera has developed information on film useful to our enemies, the Taliban and al Qaida, which Al Jazeera and this very liberal website [source is copied below of this article] have tried to deny. "Loose lips sink ships" still applies today. This story is dated in 2006:

http://www.internews.org/pubs/afghan...12_jfr_09.shtm

Al-Jazeera TV reporter arrested by CFC-A:

According to Mohamad Sediq, administrator of Al-Jazeera TV network in Kabul, one Al-Jazeera reporter (Waliullah Shaheen), his cameraman (Saeed Naser) and their driver (Mohammad Agha) were arrested by the CFC-A (Combined Forces Command-Afghanistan) in Wazir Mohammad Akbar Khan while filming in the vicinity of Camp Eggers in Kabul. They were interrogated in cold weather under snow falling for almost an hour, their equipment was confiscated and the individuals were then taken to the 10th department of police in Kabul.

The Media Relation officer of the CFC-A, Lt. Mike Cody, told Media Watch: “Combined Forces Command-Afghanistan personnel reported to the scene saw evidence that security features had been filmed. As a result of the incident, CFC-A withdrew the credentials of the reporters involved.”

Ground rules for credentialed reporters specify that photography showing levels of security at military installations may not be published. Likewise, signs at the gate nearest to the incident warn, in three languages (English, Dari and Pashto) that photography is not allowed. He rejected the allegation of the Al-Jazeera TV production crew who said they were investigated in cold weather under snow falling for a long time. Mohammad Sediq denied having filmed prohibited areas and he added: “our reporters were 50 meters away from the signs saying “photography is not allowed.""

The 10th department of police released Waliullah Shaheen and his colleagues after four hours detention.

It is worth mentioning that their equipment was returned to them after one week, and their credentials (identification documents) have still not been returned to them.

4. Another 2008 Al Zazeera internet news site very unfriendly and many alleged facts being untrue as regards the US and her allies regarding the war on terrorism:

http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F...7EA9DAD30F.htm

5. A December, 2007 Internet site story/allegation of a break between al Qaida and Al Jazeera. You had to first have Al Jazeera as the primary propaganda promotion system of al Qaida to then have had a break.

http://www.stratfor.com/memberships/107762

6. This is the sort of untrue junk, lies, we get from the NEW YORK TIMES. Story dateline is 2001. Here is what Public Law says about Voice of America and I ask you to note in particular #3 in it's three part charter:

"The VOA Charter (Public Law 94-350) requires that broadcasts (1) be accurate, objective, and comprehensive; (2) represent all segments of American society and present a balanced and comprehensive view of significant American thought and institutions; and (3) clearly present the policies of the United States."

For VOA Charter story see: http://www.bbg.gov/bbg_aboutus.cfm

For NEW YORK TIMES warped and misrepresented story about Voice of America from 2001 article see:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...53C1A9679C8B63

In summary, the US needs a pro-active 100 years ideological war Voice of America in all releveant and related dialects and languges as laid out in the above charter. We cannot rely on surrogates who have ideological sharp differences of a religious nature which is what the entire ideological differences of a terrorist and extremist nature are all about.

Now, watch the Internet at large, look for a new posting very fast, separate and apart from the posting(s) I have created this one posting to break away from. Interesting?

[George L. Singleton]

"I was a bit surprised about an hour ago to find the SWJ discussion of Voice of America vs. Al Jazeera being posted almost moment by moment as we dialgoue herein."

This should read (I make typing errors believe me!): I was a bit surprised abou an hour ago to find on the open Internet the SWJ discussion of Voice of America vs. Al Jazeera being posted almost moment by moment as we post same within SWJ dialogue among us, herein."

[JJackson]

George I do not think you and I are going to square this circle. The links and examples you gave convinced me of nothing. One was of a Qatari rambling about racism, one was to an Al Jazeera page in Arabic I could not read. The liveleak link was to a Fitna video which I had seen before - and while I would defend the freedom to make and display this vile inflammatory racist filth - I regard it as being as odious as OBL’s more inflammatory broadcasts. In the extract in very large red type you choose to highlight clause 3 but I would go for clause 1 “be accurate, objective, and comprehensive” without that you are just going to be Lord Haw-Haw. The only link to anything which made any kind of sense was the NYT article; which was on the money.

[George L. Singleton]

George I do not think you and I are going to square this circle. The links and examples you gave convinced me of nothing. One was of a Qatari rambling about racism, one was to an Al Jazeera page in Arabic I could not read. The liveleak link was to a Fitna video which I had seen before - and while I would defend the freedom to make and display this vile inflammatory racist filth - I regard it as being as odious as OBL’s more inflammatory broadcasts. In the extract in very large red type you choose to highlight clause 3 but I would go for clause 1 “be accurate, objective, and comprehensive” without that you are just going to be Lord Haw-Haw. The only link to anything which made any kind of sense was the NYT article; which was on the money.

You are clearly in left field, which is your "right."

Let's let you have your views while America marches forward to a better day in the long term propaganda war against terrorism, which gets no freedom of speech rights with suicide bombers and such.

Glad you liked the speech of the retired Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission on why we need a better funded more heavily used VOA. Oh, did you overlook that one?

[George L. Singleton]

See:

http://www.bbg.gov/bbg_board.cfm

This is the oversight and policy board of the Voice of America, which is a bipartisan group of very distinguished Americans.

The new chairman of the BBG is James K. Glassman, appointed June 7, 2007, who among many accomplishments is the former president of The Atlantic Monthly Co., publisher of The New Republic Magazine.

[William F. Owen]

As to who are, and are not terrorist, you and I have been around this before and are not likely to change each others opinions but for me Hamas and the IRA have/had legitimate grievances with little opportunity to have them addressed by those with the power.

Not trying to change your opinion. I am merely presenting an opposing view point to prevent my people being unjustly slandered.

Hamas is anti-semitic organisation - thus unacceptable to me in any shape or form. They maybe elected, but Hitler died democratically elected. If the intent of the operation was to kidnap IDF soldiers, why attack Nahal Oz? if the real intent was kidnapping IDF soldiers, they would have found much easier targets else where.

The (Provsional) IRA were/are common criminals/drug dealers who were never the legitimate voice of the Catholics living in Ulster. - and also a tad anti-Semitic though I am sure you didn't know that.

[Steve Blair]

Ok, folks. Let's all take some deep breaths and possibly a step or two back. This is an interesting discussion, and I'd hate to see it get bogged down or sidetracked by personal attacks.

[George L. Singleton]

Ok, folks. Let's all take some deep breaths and possibly a step or two back. This is an interesting discussion, and I'd hate to see it get bogged down or sidetracked by personal attacks.

Thanks for the guidance applicable to several of us, including me!

Question: Can someone tell me how this discussion [about Voice of America primarily, but discussions of Hamas are within it, too, somehow] is being posted on the open Internet?

Here is the open Internet updated posting I just found the second day in a row now? I guess the SWJ except for the "Members Only" section is open or public domain, but it is curious to me how fast these VOA headlined discussin are making it onto the open Internet, outside of the SWJ.

Any ideas who is posting us, which includes the full formatted SWJ page and such?

Thanks for any feedback on this question.