Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Payback On Al-Jazeera?  
User currently offlineClipperhawaii From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2033 posts, RR: 11
Posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1448 times:

In November 2001 Al-Jazeera's Kabul office was destroyed along with their equipment by a U.S. missile. No injuries were reported.

Now, moving forward April 2003, Al-Jazeera's Baghdad's office is destroyed in the Monsul district of Baghdad by an A-10. This time a camera man was injured and one person is missing.

I wonder, was Al-Jazeera just in the "wrong" hot place? Or ....?

It's usually the press that fires the shots. Must be tough to be on the receiving end!

Roll On!




"You Can't Beat The Experience"
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1423 times:

What are you suggestion teh Americans are supressing free speech.

No surely not, we are teh good guys remember


User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1379 times:

Well a second attack on teh Jouros.
Fox reports snipers in the building, Journos on teh scene deny it.

David Chater even reports it was deliberately targeted. Is stumped why they were attacked and not the buildings 2 down that had the bad guys


User currently offlineUnited777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1657 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1326 times:

All Jazeera and Abu Dhabi are not in the Palestine hotel. They are the only two media org. that is are allowed to stay outside the Palestine Hotel. The Iraqi government makes all other media org. to stay in the hotel.

There were to separate bombing. The one on Al Jazeera killed the reporter ( a well known reporter). There are reports three bombs were dropped and there was an aircraft flying over head minutes before. All Jazeera is based in a residential area of Baghdad so again why is there bombing going on in a residential area. I think it's funny there office gets bombed in Afghanistan and Al Jazeera did not say anything just thought it was an accident bombing but now they get bombed in Iraq.

What does the US have against Al Jazeera.


User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1324 times:

THE



It's spelt ...

T
H
E

 Angry




ADG (speeling police)




User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1306 times:

Whoa, this is a completely stupid move by the allies (or Americans if it was just them) on bombing Al Jazeera.

We probably need the dust to settle but it will look to the Arab world that it was deliberately hit.

*stoopidest move I have seen*

mb

clowns=scuds


User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1300 times:

maybe thaT'S WHY THE OTHERS WERE HIT, TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE AN ACCIDENT.

But how can teh Mercans now say with a straight face that they don't target civilians, when they struggle with identifying a Gun or a Movie Camera.

I believe that they don't do it deliberately, but I also wonder if they take the time to get a proper Ident first.


User currently offlineQatarAirways From Qatar, joined Sep 2008, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1287 times:

Al-Jazeera gave the pentagon a breifing on the location of there offices including coordinates and the description of the building, coupled with the fact that the building is in a residential area I have a hard time believing that this is an accident. I just can't wait for the murder apologists to come here and try to justify it.

Abu Dhabi TV were also targeted and the Palestine hotel was also targeted. The missile hit the floor where Al-Jazeera, Abu Dhabi and Reuters are located.

It was heartbreaking to see the footage on Al-Jazeera the reporter who brought the news of his colleagues death. The camera was filming when the reporter was hit.


User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1282 times:

Qatar,

As we have seen in this war the propaganda from the American side is appalling to say the least.

I wouldn't be surprised if AJ was hit deliberately.

HOWEVER:

I am not making an excuse for them but anyone who is stupid enough to hang around a city that is under seige is asking for trouble.

Precision missiles and intelligence indeed.

mb

clowns are vomitrous


User currently offlineRacko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4857 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1272 times:

Now they've 4 Reuters guys. They attacked the Palestine hotel and claim there were snipers in it, however I've heard 2 different journalists reporting that they didn't see or hear any snipers in their building. They're pretty much shocked there at the moment.

[Edited 2003-04-08 13:18:39]

User currently offlineErj190 From Portugal, joined Dec 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1251 times:


Again some idiots in the US military are showing their real face. Shooting Al Jazeera in Afghanistan could be an accident.

Two accidents, are just too much to believe in coincidences.

Unless the US show pretty good reasons, I assume this was deliberate.

The US administration forced NBC and the National Geographic to fire Peter Arnett, but of course if you can't actually press Al Jazeera TV station to fire a reporter, you do it the cowboy way, you just shoot it down.

After all, who cares, it is just another stinking Arab.


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1234 times:

The Iraqi government makes all other media org. to stay in the hotel.

WHAT Iraqi government? Seems, as of yesterday, there's no such thing.

THE


It's spelt ...

T
H
E


I'm glad you pointed that out to them, ADG. It was bugging me. Teh, er, the guys need to learn how to spell  Big grin

We probably need the dust to settle but it will look to the Arab world that it was deliberately hit.

Mx, no matter what happens, the Arab world will be told by the Arab press that it was deliberate, that everything is deliberate.

Unless the US show pretty good reasons, I assume this was deliberate.

Again, Erj190, I'm not surprised. You feel that way because that's what you want to believe, nothing else.

The US administration forced NBC and the National Geographic to fire Peter Arnett

Peter Arnett was fired by them for violating his contracts with them. He failed to get permission from both to do an interview. Of course, you'll believe the line of bullshit you put forth.

Of course you believe that, because we're just stinking Americans, right?



[Edited 2003-04-08 14:45:26]

User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1229 times:

Yes, two "accidents" - it *must* be impossible.

The plan must've been to kill arab reporters to make the post war period easier.

Reuters must've been targeted to just make it look good.

Never mind all the friendly fire incidents - they must've been deliberate too.

Good analysis.
 Insane


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

The plan must've been to kill arab reporters to make the post war period easier.

ROTFL. You're joking, right? A few arab reports are not going to make any difference in the post-war period. None at all. Talk about grasping at straws.

It may have been deliberate, no doubt, but is that any more abomnable than suicide attacks, fake surrenders or executing POW's. If you're looking for angels, you won't find them in warfare.


User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1226 times:

The reporters in American AND the military say there was a sniper. All jounalists interviewed so far at the hotel that I have seen have indicated that there was NO firing.

Caught in the crossfire? Maybe
Murdered? Maybe





ADG


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1216 times:

Time someone got back to the Osama News Network IMO, they had it coming.

Planned target? Unlikely.
Pilot taking potshots with some leftover bombs at someone who pissed him off? Possibly.
Mistaken identity? Possibly.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1212 times:

It was sarcasm Alpha.

User currently offlineTurin_airport From Italy, joined Oct 2001, 278 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1190 times:

A fuc*ing U.S. tank has just killed two journalists, firing against Palestine hotel. The said there was a sniper in the hotel and decided to kill him with a M1A1. Good, very good... (as clever as try to kill Osama Bin Laden bombing a country with a bunch of B52s).

T_a


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

Turin_airport, naturally, you'd go up to OBL, tap him on the shoulder, and say "please sir, come out of your cave and surrender."

Tell me, how would you get OBL, if he's deep in a cave?

 Laugh out loud


User currently offlineErj190 From Portugal, joined Dec 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1175 times:

People, The US admitted the firing at the Palestine Hotel, killing two reporters, because there were clear pictures showing the M1 Abraham aim at the hotel and fire at the hotel.

Without those pictures, they would still be telling us they were working on it, they were assessing the information coming from various sources, they would carefully analyze the situation. We still have limited intelligence of the issue.

But, coincidence of coincidences, there where various guys showing the American tanks LIVE.

The shots are obvious. The cowboys just started shooting. Those reporters are a pain in the neck.

And Alpha_1

I am getting used to your clear, documented and argumentative opinions.
Mr. De LaPalicce wouldn't have put it better, Yes!, why?, well, because!
De LaPalicce is also known to have been killed in the last day of his life. Can you imagine that?
Thank you for your enlightened comments.

You actually believe that it is possible to win the LOTTO twice in a row. It is possible, but it is a question of probability.

The law of probability tells me that it would be possible for an American plane to bust AL JAZEERA once (Afghanistan). It was strange, it was dubious, but we should give them the benefit of the doubt.

But twice?, well, that is too much, I am not believing in something just because I want, I am making logical numerical deductions, unlike you, that whatever hideous crimes the Americans commit, will always find some flimsy excuse based on some silly argument taken out of the US media bad-excuse-shelve, ready to use and as always, predictable.

Please remember, most people, are actually used to think by their own heads, and are used to check, recheck and make self assessments.

The conclusion that AL JAZEERA was targeted by the US military is THE logical one to take. Unless the US military come out with a VERY, VERY good excuse - because the usual one just doesn't work, (because of the law of probability).

Facts are facts, numbers are numbers.

They are trying to avoid Saddam to contact with the troops. The US military clearly knows that TV and radio are the obvious means Iraqis are using. There is no other mean of communication.

So, you start hitting the reporters, because they are the next obvious link. You don't just bust AL-JAZEERA and ABU-DHABI TV you also target the western media. With luck they will get scared and will stop transmitting.

After all, yesterday they were showing those Bradley's in the other side of the Tigris river, and saying it was strange that they were not hit, because they were sitting ducks (Portuguese TV channels and one French TV said that - I don't know about others).

It's just sad, war is dirty, and some people want to show it desinfected, as if it was possible.


User currently offlineAirworthy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1168 times:

FACT: The Iraqi govt kicked Al Jazeera out of Iraq.

FACT: The Iraqi govt kicked Al Jazeera out of Iraq again in the last several days and theit Iraqi PR guy made it clear that Al Jazeera is not well liked

FACT: They are reporting inside a battlezone where yes, people may be injured...get over it.


User currently offlineTurin_airport From Italy, joined Oct 2001, 278 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1166 times:

Alpha1, why not? Maybe he's so polite to come out!  Smile

Seriously, mine last sentence was just a quip (maybe it's useful to use a B52 to find Bin Laden, I don't know).

What is important now is that a "friend" tank fired intentionally against innocent people. No mistake, just the clear will to fire. And what is much more ashamed is that they say they were trying to kill a sniper...

I know things like these can happen during a war, but this is not a good reason to let it go: who gave the order and who fire should be persecuted as criminals (IMO).

T_a


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1165 times:

Without those pictures, they would still be telling us they were working on it, they were assessing the information coming from various sources, they would carefully analyze the situation. We still have limited intelligence of the issue.

Amazing that someone with your insight can tell us that with absolute, 100% certainty. Of course, there's no way to prove if you're just full of hot air or not, so it's easy for an armchair quarterback like you to make such stupid statements, isn't it, without having to back anything up?

Please remember, most people, are actually used to think by their own heads, and are used to check, recheck and make self assessments.

I've noticed you don't fall into that category, Erj. When presented with something you don't like, you fall into your standard "cowboy" routine to talk about our troops. That's not thinking with your mind. It's because you don't have anything original to say, is that not right?

So, you start hitting the reporters, because they are the next obvious link. You don't just bust AL-JAZEERA and ABU-DHABI TV you also target the western media. With luck they will get scared and will stop transmitting.

ROTFLMAO!!! Yes, after letting them report on the American soldier who blew up his own comrades; after letting them report and show pictures of POW's on TV; after letting the report, and show picutres of, executed GI's; after letting them report on all the "friendly fire" disasters, which embarrass the Armed Forces. NOW, you say (snicker), that they're going to target the western journalists, to try to cow them.

And, you can actually say such a thing-such an idiotic thing-with a straight face? And you're SERIOUS?

Erj, if you start from such a premise, there's no point in even debating with you, because if you TRULY believe that's what will happen, then any time a reporter dies-even if it's shown to be an Iraqi round that did it, you'll preach your nonsense that the U.S. killed him.

I don't agree with Bush's push for this war. I wish it hadn't taken place. But having said that, what you said was an insult to the American people, and absolutely disgusting.

You say such crap, but not a word of anger or anything, at all the reports of human shields or civilians being killed as a weapon of fear by Iraq.


User currently offlineDeanBNE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1142 times:

ROTFLMAO!!! Yes, after letting them report on the American soldier who blew up his own comrades; after letting them report and show pictures of POW's on TV; after letting the report, and show picutres of, executed GI's; after letting them report on all the "friendly fire" disasters, which embarrass the Armed Forces...

Take a look at http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/video/070403_s3c3.ram . It's a video of NBC showing Iraqi POWs. Definately not as bloody as Al Jazeera's reporting but a breach nevertheless.

And while I'm on the topic of media during this war I've had the chance to view some of Fox's coverage. The examples I saw were more cowboyish sounding commentaries rather than reporting. Simply pathetic.

I have to say that as morbid as it may sound I'm glad that we here in Oz had a chance to see the Al Jazeera footage of the POWs and the dead. It's an unsanitised view of the war and one that truly brings the horrors of war home. A view that clearly the people in Washington really want to keep behind closed doors.

Dean


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1136 times:

Amazing, DeanBNE, all those people on here who decry civilian casualties, yet most of them are almost eager to see the footage of torn up bodies and the like. A bit of a hypocrisy, perhaps?

I don't have a problem with not showing a mangled body, a unrecognizable face. If you show a picture of a dead person at close range, or a medium range shot, without being gory, the same point is driven home-that war is a bloody, nasty, horrible business. If you want the blood and guts, for some perverse reason, go right ahead. I don't see the need for it.


25 Post contains images DeanBNE : Gotta love the old adage: the best form of defense is offense. Amazing, DeanBNE, all those people on here who decry civilian casualties, yet most of t
26 Erj190 : "... Without those pictures, they would still be telling us they were working on it, they were assessing the information coming from various sources,
27 Clipperhawaii : PS.I have nothing against Americans. From your previous posts in this forum, I would say that may not be entirely true. As for the press in Iraq, it i
28 CX747 : Standing on roof tops in the middle of a battle zone is not what I call a "smart move". The U.S. stated that snipers were in the building and that is
29 Post contains images Erj190 : Ok... I have nothing against the overwhelming majority of Americans. As to the victims. Once thing is a casualty due to an accident, the other is when
30 Dc10guy : Bush does not want the world to see dead Iraqi kids !!!! And AJ is just the type of liberal media outlet that would show these things. The last thing
31 LufthansaUSA : Al jazeera is a model of emerging free press in the arab world The west has free press for centuries, even in Portugal[Edited 2003-04-09 04:23:15]
32 Alpha 1 : The absolute 100% certain is based on the FACT that it is what the US military is telling us whenever there is no TV camera to prove they are wrong. N
33 Dc10guy : That's good spin Alpha 1 !!! AJ Would show kids bleeding with no one around... you know, like them liberal press guys did in Vietnam, The press comple
34 Alpha 1 : Of course AJ would show that. Why do you think they show it? To be "fair and balanced"? Hardly. They show it to whip up the Arab masses, and that's th
35 Boeing4ever : Al-Jazeera's Baghdad office was not hit because US troops aren't within 100 miles of the city according to Iraq's Information Minister...Roy confirmed
36 Dc10guy : So are we going to force the American story on the "Arab masses ? " should the Arab's watch CNN or AJ ??? If Bush has anything to do with it they won'
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Nothing Like Al-Jazeera's Take On It posted Thu Apr 3 2003 12:53:32 by Clipperhawaii
Perspectives On Posts, Al-jazeera And Reality posted Sat Mar 29 2003 21:57:03 by Clipperhawaii
Al Jazeera English Launches posted Wed Nov 15 2006 16:58:42 by GSM763
Al Jazeera Sets English Launch Date posted Fri Nov 3 2006 14:57:40 by Cedars747
Lucia Newman To Head Al-Jazeera's New Bureau? posted Sun Mar 26 2006 05:41:58 by Derico
Amazing Al Jazeera Broadcast posted Thu Mar 23 2006 08:10:12 by Cfalk
Bush Wanted To Bomb Al Jazeera HQ posted Wed Nov 23 2005 14:12:57 by QR332
Al Jazeera Launching All-English Channel posted Tue Jul 19 2005 19:34:52 by BA
Al Jazeera - London Bombs Done By MI5/CIA/Mossad posted Wed Jul 13 2005 18:07:06 by Ryanb741
CNN's Riz Khan Joins Al Jazeera posted Sat May 28 2005 07:45:10 by VictorTango