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

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#611

Post by bottlepalm »

arp242 wrote: post #595
bottlepalm wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of what I'm getting at. I don't support either side because both are wrong. Stopping the suffering means compromise and concessions on both sides. The best the world can do is make that clear and not get caught up protesting for one side or the other - again, both are wrong. Their current path will only lead to another 100 years of suffering.

> I don't support either side because both are wrong. That's only true if you view the "Israeli government" and "Hamas" as the only sides that exist. That is not the case; you don't need to choose either of them. Now, of course it's true that everyone has legitimate grievances here for all sorts of reasons, an it's also true that forever banging on about every little thing anyone has ever done wrong will lead to anot…

Right, that's my point. All of these protests have taken one of the two sides. Which has zero chance of resolving this. There aren't any protests pointing the finger at both these groups telling them to figure their shit out.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#612

Post by smallstepforman »

arp242 wrote: post #107
taf2 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We definitely did block or at least make them less available, as I recall prior to the invasion RT was commonly on when walking into a hotel room or in Youtube recommendation lists. Post invasion in US I never see it in any hotels or recommended on Youtube... was it censored or maybe just wildly boycotted, not sure... but seems appropriate as a response to me

RT was outright banned by the EU after they invaded Ukraine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Responses – it's also been dropped/banned by most mainstream platforms. I don't think you can compare Al Jazeera and RT, because one has been a firehose of bullshit that has literally advocates invasion of Ukraine, and the other does not. As far as I know, Al Jazeera is banned purely because they've been critica…

To clarify your post:

“because one has been a firehose of bullshit that has literally advocates invasion of Ukraine”

How is that different from CNN/BBC/whatever advocating NATO/US invasions in the last half century? (Serbia, Iraq2, Libya, etc). And more recently Gaza.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#613

Post by dunekid »

imchillyb wrote: post #443

Is it a good idea to allow governments the power to silence journalists so completely? I’d love to hear some perspective other than rabid politics.

No.

There can be regulatory bodies, which ideally should be self governing the media instead of executive of the elected government, which regulate some of the media attributes. But a blanket ban on a media house, for criticism in the name of national security? No. That is the failure of the civilian leadership to provide the security to the nation. Admitting that you are naked should the norm, not blinding the population from seeing you.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#614

Post by akira2501 »

amitport wrote: post #555
akira2501 wrote: post #32

If you allow "national security" to be used as an excuse to "grant powers" which ultimately just "destroy freedom" then you will end up with leaders who intentionally do a bad job at security in order to access the power that grants them. If your government cannot protect the country from journalists, then you should force them to resign, and call for new elections.

and if you allow foreign agents to incite for ethnic murder and the destruction and on your country on local cable TV? you think this ends well?

Isn't that just a crime in and of itself? Wouldn't that entitle the government to just arrest and charge that particular person with these crimes? I think that stands a chance of ending well, or at least, justly.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#615

Post by refurb »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #522
reissbaker wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The U.S. Constitution provides rights for citizens to have free speech — not non-citizens. And in fact, the U.S. does not allow broadcast companies (along with various others, e.g. common carrier and aeronautical radio companies) to be more than 25% owned by foreign entities unless the FCC specifically approves them: https://www.fcc.gov/general/foreign-ownership-rules-and-poli... And for 60+ years the cap was 20%, an…

Free speech in the US is not limited to citizens. The first amendment reads “Congress shall make no law”. It doesn’t say anything about citizens. That’s a complete misunderstanding of the first amendment.

It’s not, but it’s nuanced.

The US Constitution applies to any US Person - someone within the US’ international borders, regardless of citizenship status.

Banning a foreign news outlet who broadcasts outside the US isn’t violating anyone’s 1st amendment rights.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#616

Post by boxed »

kingofpandora wrote: post #544
TacticalCoder wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

From 100 000 before the islamic revolution to 8 000 today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Jews

The ethnic cleansing isn't totally complete, but it's quite close. It's nice that the Ayatolla made a fatwa to protect them though. But if I were Jewish in Iran I would expect that protection to fall the second the Ayatolla dies.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#617

Post by dang »

joecool1029 wrote: post #226

> Haarez has good coverage. For now. They are likely to be the next outlet banned. The government has been openly threatening them for a year or so now. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-23/ty-article/is...

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40268301.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#619

Post by int_19h »

dlubarov wrote: post #581
kragen wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's correct and IMHO [censorship is] the right thing to do when shooting begins it's been a common observation since aischylos that the truth is the first casualty of war it's quite different to assert that the truth should be the first casualty of war, which seems to be your position

Few questioned Ukraine's decision to ban RT's operations. This doesn't seem terribly different - Al Jazeera has very deep ties to Hamas, the enemy Israel is at war with, and has arguably been acting as their mouthpiece for propaganda.

It should be noted that Ukraine has banned far more than just RT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press_in_Ukrain...

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#620

Post by int_19h »

edanm wrote: post #606
runarberg wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Conventi…

I think it's fairly clear that given this definition (which is the same one I always reference), Israel isn't committing a genocide. If you do think Israel is committing a genocide, I think one thing you have to do is demonstrate how what Israel is doing is different from any other war (e.g. war on ISIS, Afghanistan, Iraq as obvious examples). The statute makes the difference pretty clear - it's the intent to kill so…

There were quite a few statements by key people in the current Israeli government that demonstrate clear intent for genocide.

As to why they don't massacre every living Palestinian in Gaza if they really want to do so - Israel still depends significantly on external support, most notably from US, but also from European countries. Thus even if intending to commit genocide, they have to do so in a plausibly deniable way.

Post reply on HN