Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#541

Post by runarberg »

ipaddr wrote: post #532
Loquebantur wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it downright perverse to call genocide "retaliatory" and the act of covering it up "normal".

To parse your statement we need to understand what genocide means to you. For most it means the systemic killing of every person of a certain genetic identity. Is that what you believe is happening or something else? If genocide is illegal than covering up would be the only logical move. Therefore it would be normal.

Genocide has a precise definition and has been codified in international law. I believe this internationally recognized definition mirrors what most people mean when they use the term. It does not necessitate the systemic killing of every person of a certain genetic identity.

Genocide is outlined in the Genocide convention from 1948[1]. It is short so I’ll give you the whole definition here:

> In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

> (a) Killing members of the group;

> (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

> (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

> (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

> (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Genocide is illegal under international humanitarian law, there is no justification admissible for the crime of genocide. It is not normal to cover it up. Israel is currently being investigated by the ICJ for the crime of genocide. Israel has argued that whatever it is doing in Gaza is not genocide.

1: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Prevention_...

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#542

Post by invalidname »

Amir_A wrote: post #528
invalidname wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the risk of being downvoted as the parent comment. There were many reports in Israeli media showing their reporters framing a false narrative around the conflict. To be fair, I think that blocking etc. is a dumb move by the government. Even though they are clearly a very biased organization the damage of closing their offices is probably worse than the alternative. The fear mongering of the top parent comment is u…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#543

Post by ashconnor »

exe34 wrote: post #195
cjk2 wrote: post #176

Just a point about Al Jazeera that is worth mentioning. There are two Al Jazeeras. One which is presented to Western audiences and one which is presented to Middle-Eastern audiences. The media and articles are politically aligned in each region. Don't assume what you read in the US/UK/wherever is the same as over there. In the case of Israel, the Middle-Eastern unit were literally showing videos demanding further upr…

I didn't realise they had two versions, but it makes sense. Is the anti-infidel version only available in Arabic then?

"anti-infidel version" - Godwin's Law but descending to Islamophobia.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#544

Post by kingofpandora »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #259
cjk2 wrote: post #176

Just a point about Al Jazeera that is worth mentioning. There are two Al Jazeeras. One which is presented to Western audiences and one which is presented to Middle-Eastern audiences. The media and articles are politically aligned in each region. Don't assume what you read in the US/UK/wherever is the same as over there. In the case of Israel, the Middle-Eastern unit were literally showing videos demanding further upr…

> In the case of Israel, the Middle-Eastern unit were literally showing videos demanding further uprising against Israel across the region directly from Hamas. > > It's even banned in some Arab countries for being a security risk. > > Why would you allow that to continue in your country? Especially when you have, in your country, about 20% of muslim arabs, most of which being israelo-palestinians ( i.e . palestinians…

> It's of note that while there about 20% muslims in Israel, there's about zero jewish person in Gaza (there are some israelo-palestinian though) and zero jewish person in Iran. Or close to that.

Not only are there Jews in Iran, they even have a seat permanently reserved in the Iranian parliament.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#545

Post by imperfect_light »

jdietrich wrote: post #315
pydry wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are interviews with Hamas spokespeople. It isnt the opinion of al Jazeera being presented. There's nothing more shocking than the stuff Ben Gvir (security minister of Israel) does or says. The second interview even references his calls to burn women and children as, yknow, a bad thing. "memri" doesnt seem to consider that valid context, that is probably because it is a state propaganda outfit acting on behalf o…

It's not an interview if a spokesman is allowed to say whatever they like without being challenged. It's not an interview if you broadcast a pre-recorded speech without comment. Ben Gvir is awful, but that doesn't change the fact that Al Jazeera's Arabic service is not impartial and is not acting as a legitimate journalistic outlet.

Wait, impartial is the measure now?

The most-read newspaper in Israel, Israel Hayom, is owned by a friend of Bibi. Is it impartial? Should it be shut down?

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#546

Post by janalsncm »

jcranmer wrote: post #488
csdreamer7 wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you openly call for the murder of in the US under the protection of the first amendment ? You can not. Inciting violence and calls for criminal action is a well establish limit of the First Amendment, but that is not what they are doing from what I gathered in this thread. From the poster a few levels above: > In the case of Israel, the Middle-Eastern unit were literally showing videos demanding further uprisin…

> You can not. Inciting violence and calls for criminal action is a well establish limit of the First Amendment, but that is not what they are doing from what I gathered in this thread. Brandenburg v Ohio (the current standard for what constitutes incitement) literally says your free speech rights run up to and include advocacy for violent overthrow of the government. The limitation it establishes is "incitement to i…

There is still a question of whether that is the correct limit. Many people think it is. Obviously Israel disagrees. We can’t use the First Amendment and SCOTUS precedent to uncover aughts, especially to another country.

However, if you agree that Brandenburg set the correct limit, you can conditionalize aid on it. It’s just not a first principles approach.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#547

Post by emodendroket »

cjk2 wrote: post #176

Just a point about Al Jazeera that is worth mentioning. There are two Al Jazeeras. One which is presented to Western audiences and one which is presented to Middle-Eastern audiences. The media and articles are politically aligned in each region. Don't assume what you read in the US/UK/wherever is the same as over there. In the case of Israel, the Middle-Eastern unit were literally showing videos demanding further upr…

Providing political influence is the point of any state news agency, including "unobjectionable" ones like the BBC, among others. In a democratic country worthy of the name they're allowed to operate regardless. I'd like to see some citation for the claim that Al Jazeera was serving as some sort of pro-violence propaganda stream; CNN showed some speeches from bin Laden after 9/11 but that doesn't make them al Qaeda propaganda.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#548

Post by emodendroket »

avip wrote: post #312
whatshisface wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would you allow that to continue in your country? We have a constitution that protects our rights, and among them a right to make up our minds on the basis of an uncensored discourse. That's the other, implicit half of the first amendment: the right to listen to what others want to tell you.

Can you openly call for the murder of in the US under the protection of the first amendment ?

Actually yes.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#549

Post by emodendroket »

austin-cheney wrote: post #491
avip wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you openly call for the murder of in the US under the protection of the first amendment ?

That’s complicated. The US has criminal and civil law. With regards to criminal law in terms of expression and liberties there are very few things you cannot do. The default is to lean towards liberty always. In terms of civil law you can generally sue anyone for anything at anytime unless there is existing law or contracts halting further civil actions.

You can't sue someone for calling for violence, including racially motivated violence. Incitement is a crime, but incitement happens when you direct someone to take a specific action and they do exactly what you said (e.g., you tell them to go beat someone and they do it).

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#550

Post by emodendroket »

csdreamer7 wrote: post #379
avip wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you openly call for the murder of in the US under the protection of the first amendment ?

> Can you openly call for the murder of in the US under the protection of the first amendment ? You can not. Inciting violence and calls for criminal action is a well establish limit of the First Amendment, but that is not what they are doing from what I gathered in this thread. From the poster a few levels above: > In the case of Israel, the Middle-Eastern unit were literally showing videos demanding further uprisin…

> You can not. Inciting violence and calls for criminal action is a well establish limit of the First Amendment, but that is not what they are doing from what I gathered in this thread.

Saying "ethnic group XXX should be exterminated" does not meet the standard for incitement. I don't know why the debate has become about US law but I'm even more puzzled about so many people confidently stating, wrongly, that the US bans hate speech. The US has frequently been criticized by Europeans for this exact reason -- in their view, the US stance permitting hate speech is irresponsible.

Post reply on HN