Live data from Hacker News

Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

theguardian.com

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#871

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly every democratic country has previously or is currently censoring the media in some ways, including the US[1] and EU[2]. Single factor analysis is one of the worst kinds of analysis. If we only consider this one factor, then there is basically no country that is not like Apartheid South Africa. Apartheid South Africa was not exceptional or notable because it did what nearly every other country has or is curren…

I think that most people would argue that past censorship by the US was a violation of democratic principles.

Maybe I'm not looking in the right places, but I don't see widespread condemnation for current EU and US censorship of the Russian propaganda outlet RT, and to be quite frank, I think it should be censored. The right to free speech does not extend to people who are not subject to a countries laws, and I don't see why it should.

I'm not condoning all past actions of the US or EU, but censoring fake news and propaganda that is controlled by groups or nations that want to destroy you seems like something that is reasonable to do.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#872
post #808

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument in no way implies that there is no other way to deal with malice, only that it is an option. The argument further implies that the decision to censor should not be taken lightly. When censorship is being considered in a democratic society, the decision to do so must be argued and debated. Note that it is perfectly possible to be well-educated and still be taken in by bullshit and false information - it h…

Content is being banned because the governments don't think the citizens collectively can handle that content. This is the government thinking for the people. I wouldn't have an issue if it was really argued and debated, but I don't really see that happening. It is mostly just the government unilaterally deciding that said content is bad and banning it with no really possibility for debate. It isn't too hard to imagi…

Your analogy was bad in that it represented a case that I had not made, that the ban was a convenient lever to be reached for out of convenience.

I have not seen an operating system of civil governance that has not reserved to itself the right coerce behaviour as a "last resort" (this would be different things to different people), so it is hard to say much about your last paragraph.

I would say: if you don't think that people are going to debate and argue a case for banning, for punishing, for going to war or other forms of controversial and "extraordinary" behaviour, you probably can't think that people are going to agree to be educated properly, whatever that means. Debate, argument and loser's consent are fundamentals behind the model of democracy we have today. including, in my view, the part where the demos is educated.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#873
post #749

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are regular pro Palestine protests in my German hometown. And they do condemn Israel's actions.

I know some people who are regularly protesting in Germany also, but my understanding is that they knowingly break the law in doing so. Is this not correct?

It's complicated.

Germany has pretty strict laws against "incitement of hatred". Additionally it's illegal to deface, damage or destroy a foreign flag. Also demonstrations and protests need to be registered in advance with proof of proper security and safety measures. Germany is also very biased in favor of Israel and has (like the US) adopted the stance that an attack on Israel is an attack on Judaism. This has led to Jewish anti-Israel protestors being arrested.

In theory it is possible to have a "spontaneous" protest without leaders but in practice this means the police will designate the loudest persons in the crowd as leaders and claim that they organized a protest without a permit and arrest them for that. Also the political bias favoring Israel means pro-Israel counter-protestors are likely to be tolerated more than anti-Israel protests.

And of course anti-genocide is conflated with anti-Israel and pro-Hamas, again like in the US. But yes, most political protests are illegal because they are not formally organized with the authorities (and even with organized protests you often have break-out protests deviating from the permitted route/location or overstaying). From personal experience I can tell you though that unless the police can pin anything on you (e.g. trespassing, resisting arrest, "attacking a police officer"[0]) this usually only ends up with the police roughing you up a bit maybe and then recording your identity before dropping you off somewhere else with a temporary restraining order.

[0]: This is worth mentioning because it explains the low police numbers for injured protestors in Lüzerath compared with the video evidence of police charging unarmed protestors: being injured by a police officer is considered evidence for attacking a police officer as unless there is evidence for the police officer doing anything wrong the assumption is that they followed the guidelines for escalating force, i.e. they must have had a good reason. It's also worth mentioning that in many places riot cops do not have any visible unique identification so reporting any claim of police brutality at a protest is usually fruitless as the alleged perp can not uniquely be identified and you need an individual person to accuse. Protest medics thus have stopped giving detailed statistics as merely keeping a tally would help the police in tracking down "suspects" by visiting the nearby hospitals (which they did e.g. after Lüzerath).

So tl;dr: depending on your demographic, your cause and which police you end up being surrounded by, it's relatively safe to take part in an illegal protest in Germany as long as they can't prove you did anything illegal and don't get hurt.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#874
post #827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is the parent comment [flagged] yet this one is not?

Now I'm curious as to what they said

Yep, I wish I could read dead comments after a couple clicks. Maybe not vouch for them, but definitely reading them

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#875
post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as it hurts even writing it, I don't think its a rare story there these days. History will not look kindly at both sides here, they really have no higher moral ground than the other

>History will not look kindly at both sides here, they really have no higher moral ground than the other There are four sides here: the Israeli government, Hamas, Israeli citizens, and Palestinian citizens. The first two are the active combatants. The third group were victims in October. The fourth group are still victims today. Killing unarmed and non-hostile citizens is absolutely immoral. Acting in such a reckless…

You forgot the United States who provides the weapons to Israel.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#876

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the UK, you used to be able to watch RT on broadcast. Now only the Internet version is accessible, and I think some ISPs DNS block them. Granted, a DNS block is easy to circumvent if you understand it, but most users will still be cut off.

Was it actually broadcast terrestrially? I remember picking it up from Astra2 (the "skytv" satellite) but looking online, it's not transmitted anymore.

I used to watch it on Freeview, picked up via a regular antenna if that's what you mean by "terrestrially".

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#877
post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're missing is that Israel is banning foreign reporters from Gaza. That's why there are none there. It also number 1 reporter killing country in the world. Killed more than 100 in the last 365 days. Does EU kill reporters? So stop your false comparisons.

How many of those 100 journalists killed were intentionally killed because they were journalists, as opposed to dying as collateral damage? And if foreign journalists want to get into Palestine, they have other options than entering through the Israeli border, they can enter through the Egyptian border.

> And if foreign journalists want to get into Palestine, they have other options...

First, they don't. All crossings are controlled by Israel. There's a reason why you have a lot of foreign reporting on the ground from Syria civil war and nothing from Gaza. (I noted your switch from Gaza to Palestine, btw) And journalistic agencies complain about this repeatedly.

10% of journalists killed (against 2% of total population killed) and ratios of killed/injured certainly suggest special targeting.

So here, have a blast and count for yourself based on your definition of collateral damage: https://cpj.org/2024/05/journalist-casualties-in-the-israel-... there's a story/sources there for every single killing that is known/documented.

To me, it looks like majority were killed intentionally based on that list. Things like sniper and other direct fire killings, being killed in their homes along with their families when doing nothing but dinning or sleeping, or at assignments, or in front of hospitals near journalist tents, or being denied medevac after critical injuries, is not how I'd define collateral damage.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#878

i am curious ig there is a valid threat in israelis reading al jazeera. or if they have any proof of any falsehoods being published there and why it would need to be shut down?. any good neutral resource around this for a non-israeli/non-palestinian person to make sense of this? from the surface this looks so grim, but i do not want to jump to conclusions... its so hard to make sense of this more and more.. and it be…

I am all agaisnt censorship, but I am ok with gagging the guy screaming fire in the theather. 90% fake news outlets fall into that category.

IDK about your country, but Latam RT was 25% discussion about how Russia has been great through history, 25% one sided debates about how democratic countries are hypocrites and bad, 25% wrong and one sided reads into current events, and 25% travel bloggers in Russia.

I am on the fence about removing RT, but arab Al-Jazera calling for action and praising the martyrs falls into my censorable bag

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I'd say that was a dark day for the EU as well. Our democracies are now little more than a farce.

There's nothing undemocratic about banning foreign propaganda or news outlets. Illiberal maybe, but not undemocratic.

Freedom of the press is typically considered one of the tenets of a democracy. The vote becomes meaningless if voters cannot be informed, which includes having access to all possible points of view.

Re: Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices

#880
I don't agree with Israel censoring websites, but important to keep in mind Al Jazeera is run by Qatar which is a monarchy without real freedom of the press, it's not CNN. They have strong regional interests and an obvious desire to shape the narrative of the conflict. They're not humanitarians.
Post reply on HN