Camp Pendleton Rejects Rock Beyond Belief 2 »« Bachmann Introduces First Pointless Bill of Session

Al Jazeera Buys Current TV; Cue the Outrage

I don’t get Current TV on my cable and I’ve never actually seen the channel, but I’m happy to hear that Al Jazeera bought the network and I hope we get it soon. The wingnuts are, of course, throwing a fit about it. Here’s Pam Geller’s unhinged reaction:

Full circle and out of the proverbial closet. The left goes full-on jihad. Al Jazeera has acquired Current TV. More jihadist propaganda on your cable dial…

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called the broadcaster’s reporting “vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable” and President George W. Bush joked about bombing it, and senior Bush officials caricatured the channel as an anti-Semitic, anti-American outlet for Islamo-porn. And here we are eleven years after the largest and bloodiest Islamic attack on America and Al Jizz is buying Gore TV. This is a major step in the network’s goal of expanding jihad propaganda further into the U.S. cable market and gives it a chance to brainwash millions of Americans.

I’ll guarantee you one thing: The U.S. government monitors Al Jazeera very closely, because the fact is that Al Jazeera does a lot of really good journalism and covers a lot of stories from around the world that American media outlets don’t touch. And they’re very well connected in the Middle East, which makes them a very important source of information.

Comments

  1. shouldbeworking says

    It would be great if they bought into Faux News. Just imagine Bill O and Hannity heads exploding. Priceless!

  2. John Hinkle says

    …and gives it a chance to brainwash millions of Americans.

    Thank God we have Pam “Broken Record” Geller to break the spell!

  3. says

    Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called the broadcaster’s reporting “vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable” and President George W. Bush joked about bombing it, and senior Bush officials caricatured the channel as an anti-Semitic, anti-American outlet for Islamo-porn.

    Every single one of those critics have been proven wrong about everything they’ve spoken of in the eight years they were in power, and have proven themselves utterly lacking in credibility. The fact that Al Jazeera get so much hatred from such obvius lying scum, is a huge plus for them.

    PS: I watch Al Jazeera English fairly regularly, and so far, I’ve seen absolutely zero op-ed or opinion content of any kind, let alone jihadi propaganda. Not that that makes any difference to Hitler wannabees like Gellar, who most likely think ANY reference to reality is “propaganda.”

  4. says

    As far as “info ops” and “information war” go, I’ve always wondered why some of the other governments in the world don’t just fuck with the US for entertainment’s sake. If I were working for the Iranian gov’t I’d try to get about $20 mil in funding to wikileaks. I mean, hey, if the US gov’t can pressure Twitter to help organize protests in their country, turn-around is fair play. And, sure, if I were Putin I’d try to buy Fox News. Just for the surrealist humor alone.

  5. dingojack says

    During the Second Oil War, I found Al Jezeera English to be the most creditable news outlet, because they were the only ones not engaged in jingoistic propaganda (just good, solid, accurate journalism).
    (I suspect Pammy has never even heard of the concept.)
    Dingo

  6. says

    I found Al Jezeera English to be the most creditable news outlet

    I used to listen to BBC but switched to Al Jazeera for the same reason. I’m still switched.

  7. says

    I’m honestly surprised they don’t do that already at the knowledge that Fox News is part-owned by a Saudi prince.

    Oh wait. Those are the *good* arabs, the ones with the oil and the money.

  8. typecaster says

    The thing that Gellar, and the rest of the wackaloons, never seem to notice is that Al Jazeera is absolutely hated by the Islamic governments because they cover stories that those governments don’t want covered, or cover them in ways that don’t adhere to the “official” interpretation. Of course, that also applies to stories that our government doesn’t want covered – but that’s what actual journalism is all about. It’s a real shame that no one under 35 (optimistically) remembers seeing that done in any US mainstream media operation.

  9. Sastra says

    Perhaps Al Jazeera will take over the conservative Washington Times. If Moonie control didn’t bother them, what would?

  10. jesse says

    I watch Al-Jazeera pretty regularly too. They get a lot of stuff that US networks just miss entirely.

    For example: If you listened to commentators here in the US you’d think the Egyptian revolution was the result of a whole bunch of Twitter-connected urbanites in Cairo. In fact, the beginnings were in the Nile Valley textile mills. Al-Jazeera covered that story. Not a single US media outlet ever once mentioned those folks, who were ultimately as important as the people in Tahrir Square. (If you don’t know why look up cotton exports and the garment industry there).

    Same for the revolutions in Tunisia and Yemen. And Iran. (Did it occur to anyone touting the wonders of social media that Iranians who were organizing via Facebook would do it in Farsi and not English?) Al-Jazeera was all over it and they were able to get into who it was that was at the vanguard.

    I might add as a more general criticism of US media, that the same thing happened 20 years ago in Russia. Most reporters from the US did not speak Russian — certainly not well enough to interview people alone. Certainly nobody from the TV outlets did then or as far as I know does now. Anyhow, the only sources they had were western-educated people who by and large thought privatization was a fine idea. They were the kind of people who had a vested interest in very specific outcomes. They were not representative of the Russian people or government, necessarily. But the result was that there was almost nobody appearing in the US press who said, “you know, this whole restructuring might not be the best plan in the world.”

    Al-Jazeera is a welcome antidote to that kind of thinking. They aren’t perfect. But at least they talk to someone other than a wealthy oil baron or employee of a US think tank.

  11. jnorris says

    And they’re very well connected in the Middle East

    As is Fox News which is owned by News Corp which in turn has an Islamist who hold 15% of the stock.

    Prediction: if Al Jazeera/Current TV starts a 2 hours weekly right wingnut broadcast, Pam Gellar will apply to host the show.

  12. IslandBrewer says

    When are Gellar and the Wingnutterati going to let their outrage spill over to the BBC, because Al Jazeera is basically the BBC’s spun off Middle East desk? Or do they not know that?

  13. Nick Gotts (formerly KG) says

    d.c.wilson, you forgot Al Capone, Al Sharpton, Al Franken, Al Pacino, Al Roker and Lake Alatoona. – fifthdentist

    Then there’s Al Gebra, Al Gorithm, Al Kali, Al Debaran… mathematics and science are clearly a Moooslemterrist plot!

  14. Nick Gotts (formerly KG) says

    Incidentally, what you won’t find on Al Jazeera is any serious criticism of the (effectively absolute) monarchy in Qatar.

  15. says

    “Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called the broadcaster’s reporting “vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable”…”

    Strangely enough, that was my exact impression nearly every time Rumsfeld spoke in front of a camera.

  16. iangould says

    “The thing that Gellar, and the rest of the wackaloons, never seem to notice is that Al Jazeera is absolutely hated by the Islamic governments because they cover stories that those governments don’t want covered, or cover them in ways that don’t adhere to the “official” interpretation.”

    Unfortunately, at times, al Jazeera does adhere to “the official interpretation”.

    Al Jazeera is owned by the emir of Qatar and if you watch al Jazeera regularly you’ll notice, for example, that the pro-democracy movements in fellow Gulf Kingdoms like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain are largely ignored.

    Sunni Islamists overthrowing secular dictatorships – Egypt, Libya, Syria – are A-OK with Al Jazeera. Anyone – especially Shia Islamists – seeking to overthrow a hereditary Arab dictatorship are the bad guys.

    Their economic coverage gives far too time to left-wing fringe theories.

    Their coverage of Venezuela ignores Chavez’ human rights abuses and economic failures.

    I could go on.

  17. meg says

    I used to teach history. Had a colleague once do a fascinating exercise with his class to help teach about bias in sources. Half the class was given a Fox News report of an incident in Afghanistan, and told to present the details to the class. The other half were given the Al- Jazeera report of the same incident. After the two groups arguing how each other got it wrong, the whole class watched both reports, then the BBC coverage. They then apparently spent ages (including much of their own time) trying to find the ‘truth’. Their teacher set up a forum on their class webpage for them to talk about it. They searched internet sites of all persuasions and linked to them, and actually actively asked where the report was from, who could influence the report, why they would, etc. They kept at it for a few weeks before deciding BBC/Al-Jazeera were probably closest to being right (accepting that it’s almost impossible to know for sure).

  18. mildlymagnificent says

    I used to listen to BBC but switched to Al Jazeera for the same reason. I’m still switched.

    Hah! Our 24 hour ABC television news runs these two one after the other at various times. Very welcome. (Because 24 hr news generally means the same handful of stories run over and over and over again.)

  19. sunsangnim says

    There’s also “You can call me Al”. I knew Paul Simon was a secret Muslim. Look at all those scary foreigners in his band! They look Kenyan!!

Leave a Reply