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

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#561

Post by riffraff »

angra_mainyu wrote: post #244
Animats wrote: post #150

"and block its websites." So this keeps Israelis from reading Al Jazeera. Now that's new. Israel started Internet censorship in 2017.[1] Initially it was limited to "terror group websites, online illegal gambling, prostitution services, hard drug sales". At the time, "due to warnings from rights groups that the law poses a slippery slope toward additional censorship, the final version of the legislation dictates that…

Europe has done the same with Russia. Also, I think a few other Arab countries like Egypt have blocked/banned Al Jazeera.

The main difference would be that Al Jazeera is from Qatar and not Gaza, this would be the equivalent of the EU banning Armenia because they are friendly with Russia.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#562

Post by mrkeen »

DEADMINCE wrote: post #382
belorn wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that people in general seems to react strongly negative to government censorship, but I can not avoid seeing it through the light of recent trends of post-truth online censorships that blasted the internet during the last decade. Popularity of censorship is something that seems to go in wave, and outside the US there seems to be more acceptance to government censorship as comparative to platform censorship. In…

Honestly, I kind of think censorship would be a positive thing when applied to people lacking education. Where to draw the line is the issue, but at the least maybe people who didn't finish highschool or get a GED or equivalent shouldn't be exposed to conspiracy theories that they then act on.

Education doesn't make for a good cutoff.

> We examined the educational backgrounds of 75 terrorists behind some of the most significant recent terrorist attacks against Westerners. We found that a majority of them are college-educated, often in technical subjects like engineering.

> In the four attacks for which the most complete information about the perpetrators' educational levels is available -- the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the attacks on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the 9/11 attacks, and the Bali bombings in 2002 -- 53 percent of the terrorists had either attended college or had received a college degree.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/14/opinion/the-madrassa-myth...]

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#563

Post by rendall »

FireBeyond wrote: post #536
rendall wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you openly call for the murder of in the US under the protection of the first amendment ? Yes. We see this with open chants of "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" and "Globalize the Intifada" ...as long as the call is not likely to produce "imminent lawless action". Brandenburg v. Ohio was a decision by the Supreme Court establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for determining when speech…

> "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" For several decades, Israel's Likud party (currently in power) election manifesto was... "From the river to the sea, there will be only Israeli sovereignty". Perhaps that's where the Palestinians got it? "Palestine will be free" is not "openly calling for murder".

This is not an argument. To address my argument, you'd have to show that "free" meant "sovereignty". But you cannot, because that's not what it means. It means the destruction of Israel and the expulsion - at best - of its people. It does not mean "living in peaceful coexistence with". What else do you think it means? What else could it possibly mean?

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#564

Post by Aerbil313 »

mrtksn wrote: post #330
angra_mainyu wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe has done the same with Russia. Also, I think a few other Arab countries like Egypt have blocked/banned Al Jazeera.

That's correct and IMHO its the right thing to do when shooting begins because when people shoot each other this is no longer a discussion and the press is part of the warfare. Remember all the Russian media and social media accounts claiming that its American hysteria that they will invade Ukraine? They denied and mocked anyone who claimed that they will invade up until the tanks rolled in. Personally, I'm critical…

> That's correct and IMHO its the right thing to do

I'm in awe. I'm pro-censorship myself as a general principle (though not in this obviously unjustifiable instance of it), but please be coherent. How come the current semi-popular opinion on HN happens to be pro-censorship, when HN community is against censorship in every other situation?

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#565

Post by zarzavat »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #487
Ahmd72 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not really sure pulling out a controversies tab from wikipedia is making the point that OP is trying to make. It's like citing BBC for their controversies https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies

And? Not a great counter point though. BBC is known to have issues with factuality. https://deadline.com/2023/10/bbc-wrong-to-speculate-on-gaza-... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/21/bbc-reporter-nig... But to address your point: https://www.aljazeera.net/news/2024/5/3/%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B3%D... "Russia is ready to discuss serious peace proposals, and Zelensky is rushing British weapons "

Every single news outlet is known to have issues with factuality. Reporting the news is expensive and the people paying for it almost always want their point of view to be taken into consideration, regardless of state or private funding.

There is a spectrum of factuality, BBC News has problems with the govt threatening to shut it down if it doesn’t report what the govt wants it to report, but it’s no Russia Today, Daily Mail, or Fox News.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#566

Post by helpfulContrib »

mupuff1234 wrote: post #346
neves wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their journalist were trained at BBC. It is funny that BBC exactly fits your definition :-) BTW both have very high standards and make excellent journalism. I'd like to see examples of bad Al Jazeera journalism instead of just attacks to Qatar monarchy.

The BBC doesn't fit my definition as it's run by a democracy with a high degree of human rights and civilian freedoms. And journalism can be technically right while still showing a very one sided view. Not that I'm pro ban, just saying that there's a good reason to be vigilant when it comes to their news coverage and make sure it's not you're only source.

[dead]

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#567

Post by helpfulContrib »

rendall wrote: post #563
FireBeyond wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" For several decades, Israel's Likud party (currently in power) election manifesto was... "From the river to the sea, there will be only Israeli sovereignty". Perhaps that's where the Palestinians got it? "Palestine will be free" is not "openly calling for murder".

This is not an argument. To address my argument, you'd have to show that "free" meant "sovereignty". But you cannot, because that's not what it means. It means the destruction of Israel and the expulsion - at best - of its people. It does not mean "living in peaceful coexistence with". What else do you think it means? What else could it possibly mean?

> It means the destruction of Israel and the expulsion - at best - of its people.

Literally nothing in the definition of the word means what you are attempting to make it mean:

free | friː | adjective (freer | ˈfriːə | , freest | ˈfriːɪst | )

1 able to act or be done as one wishes; not under the control of another: I have no ambitions other than to have a happy life and be free | a free choice.

• [with infinitive] able or permitted to take a specified action: you are free to leave.

• (of a state or its citizens or institutions) subject neither to foreign domination nor to despotic government: a free press.

• historical not a slave: the poor among the free men joined the slaves against the rich.

• [in names] denoting an ethnic or political group actively opposing an occupying or invading force, in particular the groups that continued resisting the Germans in the Second World War after the fall of their countries: the Free Dutch, Free Polish, and Free Norwegian fleets. See also Free French.

2 [often as complement] not or no longer confined or imprisoned: the researchers set the birds free | police were forced to let him walk free.

• not physically obstructed or fixed: he tried to kick his legs free | she smiled, leaned back, and waved a free arm in the air.

• Physics (of power or energy) disengaged or available. See also free energy.

• Physics & Chemistry not bound in an atom, a molecule, or a compound: the atmosphere of that time contained virtually no free oxygen. See also free radical.

• Linguistics denoting a linguistic form that can be used in isolation.

3 not subject to engagements or obligations: she spent her free time shopping.

• (of a facility or piece of equipment) not occupied or in use: the bathroom was free.

4 (free of/from) not subject to or affected by (something undesirable): our salsas are free of preservatives.

5 given or available without charge: free healthcare.

6 using or expending something without restraint; lavish: she was always free with her money.

• frank or unrestrained in speech, expression, or action: he was free in his talk of revolution.

• archaic overfamiliar or forward.

7 (of literature or music) not observing the normal conventions of style or form.

• (of a translation) conveying only the broad sense; not literal.

8 Sailing (of the wind) blowing from a favourable direction to the side or aft of a vessel.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#569

Post by solatic »

afavour wrote: post #15

I’m not sure about “dark day for the media” but it does feel like a dark day for Israel. Once you’ve established that the government can unilaterally ban a voice for reasons of “national security” you’ve essentially given them a free pass. As Americans living post-9/11 will know, “national security” is a deliberately elastic term that can cover anything required in the moment.

> As Americans living post-9/11 will know, “national security” is a deliberately elastic term that can cover anything required in the moment.

One of the genuine cultural differences between the US and Israel is that while Americans prefer greater liberty (even if it means less security), Israelis prefer greater security (even if it means less liberty). Which is to say, both cultures appreciate both values, but they have different priorities.

Israel is a country where you will have your bags searched before entering shopping malls or train stations. That Israelis' privacy is violated on a daily basis by other Israelis is popular. There is a sense that the privacy violations are genuinely needed, result in genuine protection, and are not abused by those in power.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#570

Post by zarzavat »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #152
jjgreen wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In July 2017, former CIA director David Petraeus revealed that Qatar has hosted the Hamas leadership at the request of US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_and_state-sponsored_terr...

> Petraeus revealed that Qatar has hosted the Hamas leadership at the request of US Sure. Hence why I qualified my statement with "continuing." Doha hosting Hamas in '17 was fine. Doha hosting them after October 7 is fair to criticise.

I can point to a laundry list of atrocities committed by US. Should Qatar refuse to host US?

Qatar is not a western country, there is no reason to expect it to buy into western exceptionalism. This is not to defend Hamas but simply to point out that the western double standard doesn’t reach much beyond Europe.

Post reply on HN