Green Energy

Storm Track Disinformation: Terrorist TV- Al-Jazeera Speaks

It’s 1942. The TV networks, ABC, CBS and NBC are running propaganda speeches and pro-opinion pieces on Nazism. Absurd, right? No broadcasting network would be allowed to serve such blatant propaganda and misinformation from the enemy in time of war.

Fast forward 50 odd years and we see it happening right before our eyes. And the enemy mouthpiece freely admits what they are doing and are jeered on by the liberal left as an example of free speech in this country. How far we have devolved in our ideas of fighting a war brought on by the political failures of Korea, Vietnam and Iraq.

Read an interview with Al-Jazeera Editor-in-Chief and see the face of the enemy. Pierre Heumann of the Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche spoke with Al-Jazeera Editor-in-Chief Ahmed Sheikh in Doha. This revealing interview appears here in English for the first time - a master of misinformation and double talk. Goebbels would be proud.

-o-

Mr. Sheikh, as the Editor in Chief of Al-Jazeera, you are one of the most important opinion-makers in the Arab world. What do you call suicide bombers?
For what is happening in Palestine, we never use the _expression "suicide bombing."

What do you call it then?
In English, I would describe it as "bombings."

And in Arabic?
Literally translated, we would speak of "commando attacks." In our culture, it is precisely not suicide.

But instead a praiseworthy act?
When the country is occupied and the people are being killed by the enemy, everyone must take action, even if he sacrifices himself in so doing.

Even if in so doing he kills innocent civilians?
That is not a Palestinian problem, but a problem of the Israelis.

You're avoiding the question.
Not at all. When the Israeli Army attacks, it kills civilians. An army should be able to distinguish between military and civilian targets. But how many innocent people did it kill in Beit Hanoun? And then they justify this in saying that the grenade went astray, that there was a technical problem or something. But who believes that?

There's a difference between Palestinian "commando actions" and Israeli military operations. In the one case, the aim is to kill as many civilians as possible; in the other, it is exclusively a matter of military targets.

Oh really? If the Israelis made such mistakes only once or twice a year, I would agree with you and say that it didn't happen intentionally. But such mistakes happen every week. There are three possible explanations for this: either the military equipment is not up to date or the soldiers are badly trained and do not know how to use their weapons or they do it intentionally. Now, we know that the Israelis get the best weaponry from the American arsenal and that the soldiers are well trained. That leaves, then, only one conclusion: they do it intentionally.

You come originally from Nablus: a city that was occupied by the Israelis in 1967. In 1968 you left your homeland to study in Jordan. When you say that, is it the Palestinian in you speaking, who regards Israel as the enemy, or the journalist, who is dedicated to finding the truth.

The journalist.

So your personal background has no influence on your work?
When I'm in the newsroom, I forget my personal background. I set aside my political convictions. The news story is sacred for me. One cannot change it. One has to broadcast the story, as it is. Unchanged.

Still, I have trouble believing that you leave out your personal history in assessing a story.
You're right. It's not always possible at work completely to separate oneself from one's personal background. For example, in the newsroom one evening I received the images of the poor little girl whose parents were killed on the beach in Gaza and who was screaming in such a heartbreaking way. I went into my office, closed the door, and cried. Then I decided to broadcast the images of the girl screaming, but without commentary. In this case, you could, of course, say to me that it was the Palestinian in me who acted. Nonetheless, I do believe that one can separate oneself from one's personal background provided one works hard enough at it. In the newsroom, an editor has to set aside his personal feelings. Otherwise, you lose credibility.

How did you report on Beit Hanoun, where 19 Palestinians were killed?
We interviewed people on location. We even spoke with the Israelis. We wanted to know from them if they had done it intentionally, which, of course, they denied. We had to ask them that. As professional journalists, we can't afford only to speak to Palestinians. Even if you hate the Israelis that doesn't mean that you shouldn't speak with them. They are, after all, a party to the conflict.

Did you show all the images from Beit-Hanoun or did you censor particularly gruesome bloody scenes?
We didn't show close-ups of what was too brutal. We don't want to turn the spectator's life into a nightmare.

Evidently, for your coverage of Iraq other standards apply. You have repeatedly shown beheadings of western hostages. In the U.S., you are accused of using Al-Jazeera to incite the Iraqi population against the American troops.
The U.S.A. is occupying a country and one has not only to expect, but also to accept that the people there resist. You see yourself: in the end, the American Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, had to resign. Because everyone in the White House and in Washington understood that the man was a catastrophe. In fact, I am sorry about his resignation. (Laughs.) With his attacks against us, he was a very good promoter of Al-Jazeera. But seriously: now even Tony Blair, in his interview with Al-Jazeera [November 18], has admitted that the war in Iraq is a disaster. The British now say that he misspoke, that he didn't mean it like that. But I ask you: can one justify the American policy and America's actions in Iraq? My opinion is clear. The Americans should stop accusing us of putting the lives of their soldiers in Iraq in danger with our reports.

Is that why you again and again broadcast tapes of Osama bin Laden that your station receives?
You are a journalist and you must know actually that if somebody offers you a tape or an interview with bin Laden, you don't hesitate to accept the offer -- even if it will get you sent to Guantanamo.

It's striking, of course, that Al-Jazeera has a quasi-monopoly on information coming from the milieu of bin Laden. Obviously, you are close to them. On conservative blogs, your network is even called "Osama TV."
Because the Americans are in a difficult situation in Iraq, they are looking for scapegoats and they've found one in Al-Jazeera. In the last five or six years, we've received maybe two or three tapes per year. That's news that we cannot hold back from our public. Besides, we're not the only ones to get mail occasionally from bin Laden. In the past, CNN was also in the mailing list, and news agencies like the AP or broadcasters like Al-Arabiya also receive messages from al Qaida. It's true, though, that we receive such tapes more often than the others. Then we put this information in a news context. When, for example, bin Laden offers a 90-day ceasefire or when he takes responsibility for the bombings in Madrid, we have, of course, to report on it. It's news.

Read the rest The Gathering Storm

Sign up for my free WEEKLY STORM REPORT and receive a synopsis of the most important weekly news revealing the intimidation, infiltration and disinformation tactics used to soften-up the non-Muslim world for domination.

- Obama Regime Heaps Praise On Al-jazeera, “they’re A Really Important Media Entity, We Have A Really Great Relationship With Them”
From Will at The Other News: In the halls of American power, the Arab Spring has brought Al-Jazeera in from the cold. Seven years after then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called the broadcaster’s reporting “vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable”...

- Turn About Is Fair Play
Iraq has a bone to pick with that pinnacle of opinion free journalism – Al Jazeera. The Iraqi government has discovered that Al Jazeera has been slanting and even creating news events. So, what is Iraq doing? They sue. Read the rest at The Gathering...

- Storm Track Infiltration: Muslim Activism By The Numbers
Remember that tiny majority of Mulsim who do not support the Islamist agenda? Not so tiny if you look at the total picture. It's just a small fringe, a marginal few at best, they tell us, so don't worry about it all too much. One percent or...

- The Root Cause Of All The Arab World's Problems, As Seen By Arabs Themselves
An excerpt from the recent statements of the Palestinian-born Al-Jazeera editor-in-chief, Ahmed Sheikh, who granted an interview this month with Pierre Heumann, the Middle East correspondent of the Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche: Sheikh: [...] It’s because...

- Sometimes You Just Gotta Love Your Enemies
Al Jazeera is running a videoclip of Osama Bin Laden meeting with the 9/11 highjiackers: The Arab television channel Al-Jazeera broadcast a video which it said showed Osama bin Laden and suicide candidates of Al-Qaeda preparing the September 11, 2001...

Green Energy