whatever rocks your boat. al Jazeera

This is meant to be a critic on reporting on alJ.

I am not much of a media freak, so this basically about the content of the your views page and the actual articles. Sometimes i watch a vid, a report, or a thematic one, but i don't have the media experience to compare them to anything.
Generally spoken the way alJ works with videos on inet, and with you tube, is sympathic. At least the subjects appear to be of more quality then the usual medias, and not rarely the report and way of journalism.

Thats why in alJ articles there is a lot of unexpected to be found. Reporters are almost always on spot, or none farther of then other journalists.
However...i do notice a trend also on alJ to disturb the news. well not really the news only mayb.. but its backgrounds. it goes like this:

alJ has a dedication to informing, and as such often they go into great detail repeating the background of a situation. A thing btw. you may notice many other newspapers articles do. They use something close to mantras. Wen something happens,
the official variety of the context and history is donned at us endless numbers of times.
Usually you can just skip such matters. No need to read something you read 10 times before. Sometimes its even usefull, like for example trying to memorise political players and partys names in otherways remote and little highlighted nations. Sometimes its plain boring. I think everyone knows by now Bush attacked saddam over faked allegations of wmd (the last thing they might not repeat just as often).

However apparently it is also an instrument of indoctrination.
It appears the storys are not only undercooled at times, they also change. although the story has been repeated a 100 times before, certain detail never emerges, outside specific articles, certain (unwanted by the west) detail even disappear from the callroll. So at most every article on many subjects you get a summing up of a history that gets less complete, less complex and less true over time.

I don't read european media all that much to check if they use the same mechanism. For one thing because their endless repeating of brainless slogans and oneliners to excuse her political and warry behaviour abound just bores me of the pages.

Maybe it's just that i care about alJ, that makes me notice.
However i sometimes think the indoctrination can become extreme, although i do dislike the dutch papers desinforming, i see less of a structure in destroying the detail from the general report. Ofcourse we are alredi more badly informed then muslims need be. I can see the ruling system would see slightly less need in dutch media.

Paradoxally i think alJ is a professional journalists attempt to bring a better reporting, altho commercial or publicationary interests apparently do stand in also their way.

It is strange that such a well meant attempt can only be made with a relatively high level of censory and arbitrage. Not very hopegiving in fact.

So thats with the articles. I think it is my responsability to let ppl know, that alJ is among the first to be subject to mediastrategy, and the creation of blank spaces in our memory, if so told, ordered , forced, or even payed?

Partly it is pragmatically ofcourse, however the pretence of giving the other news, "more of the news", also makes it a very powerfull instrument in this respect.
I fear almost the only reason alJ can exist is it complies.

So thats for the articles, and some of it i only noticed recently.. perhaps the policy has (like once before) changed, for a more paranoid line. Either through extern pressure or through intern complacity or just because we notice it less when it goes slowly.


Your Views:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B84B85E3-7E69-4D79-8121-746EBEA7B304.htm

Then on with you views part. I still like this a lot, even tho i am censored at times (and worse at points)The reason to like it are the contributions from everywhere, and a few tough people that just like me always keep an eye on whats going on in a more independend way. Often its not so much good but at least then you get a pretty clear picture of what the antagonists say.

I being an anti-repression person, am often on one of the sides in a debate.
It's still better then to always do the arguments on your own. Actually its quite a soap. Apparently iraki contributions tend to be censored recently, must be they don't at all agree to anything usian , i think.
It can't be they constantly invoke prophets and deity only, cus firstly it still happens (for different gods), and secondly alJ doesnt hesitate to publish as defiling , hatemongering, scournfull and cursing posts of zionists. (I must add superfluously, and sometimes their opponents.)

Zionism is a great thing when censoring me from alJ. I had posts censored over
the corridor through israel plan, wich annoyed me, because its such a good thoughts experiment. I am not sure my post about the "least efficient economy" ((US) and her economical "enemies" was published. And i am sure on at least one occasion a specific anti-governmental remark , that wouldn't flatter israel was left out.

Wich also happened yesterday. Yesterday i wrote concerning the arab plan to park a contingent "peace"soldiers in gaza, that it might be fairer to consider burdening also the jews with an army to feed.
Just that part , what lights out the hypocracy of targetted attacks, decimating hamas supporters etc. was left out. The world remains a view that palestineans need pacifying.

and that is ... al jazeera, thought you might want to know.

In charge

Finally the gaza strip is in the hands of hamas. Finally the popular majority can hold her own reigns. Finally not anymore an alienating security force dominate the street picture? Finally we can guard ourselves in our hunger?

I don't know what has been the spark, but i have noticed the glow of the fire before.
Anyway finally we are governed by someone who oposes israeli airstrikes, finally fatah shows up in the repressed and miserable occupied form of representation where it rili stands. The hopeless situation of the west bank.

(remember i felt like writing how we will finally have a decent organisation in gaza again.)
The point i make above is really what i feel, fatah has surrendered to much of her palestine identity to the circumstance. With best intends , though.

I remember how the al aqsa had to be turned into something we (nato had antagonised them a lot) could handle,
and how the result seemed to much influenced to maintain integrity.
I also remember how i thought arming up palestine security forces was a very unfriendly and not very sane measure. I would almost suspect money to come in at this point for lack of a better excuse. (It was at the task desciption i noticed btw... so i am not to blame(1))

From this vantage point fatah(the echelon esp., it was supposed to be hard but some struck it insane) has stuck to her word. Honestly, i suppose.
This is not an everything is ok message just a relativation on the security forces situation, wich is more specific then needed since the situation can be explained through the context of the gaza populace.

I want to stress the sociological aproach, i don't want to say gaza populace is such and such, or has such and such, but show that such development was rather inevitable for any populace in such a (limited) situation.
Now it has happened, i am not surprised at all.
I am surprised but i absolutely understand the logic behind it.(at least i think you might understand it better after reading this)

There are so many reasons people in gaza would be desperate about their life as a result of the negotiations (and blackmail) with israel. There is so little progress (outside eg. hamas social movement, i suppose this is where the islam solidarity could play a role. Well you have to pay for progress somehow.)
Everyone can and should try to understand how very limited the role of regional solidarity gets if the money can get "frozen" (they usually disappear after, at least i never heard of any of these mysteriously reappearing very much).

On with the subject. How would a situation where the security forces motives got to alienated, or to little control of their own actions, (they killed palestineans in some of the early attempts to surpress hamas on international ordres.) a situation were people have some (or at least something internationally called) control over their surrounds?

I tell you what would happen. It would be a politically motivating situation,
you being allowed politics and nothing else (electricity, water, medicines, school money or safety) would make a certain percentage of ppl inhibit political thought.
An arguably artificial political agravation indeed.

So i don't want to say these are majority opinions, i think we can speak of a situation were the feelings of the majority express though the level of power,
governance, ("souvereignity" perhaps). Since nothing (except unfortunate israeli incidents ) can or is allowed to happen in Gaza, the ppl already involved in political thought would feel a more pronounced responsability to reconsider the motives, targets, methods and strategys.(indeed both fatah and hamas got active almost frenzy at some points)

The situation in gaza has been rather shifty with quitte some violence, i think that is how the idea, to just take over, was born. Think logically, we are the majority, ppl would opt for that unity, and we are utterly(internationally) repressed for being us, our people are not respected. Why not try to arrange those affairs with the political reality internally represented. Why not?

You can see the gaza people got very politicised from this incident if you consider it like this, and people should maybe be hopefull because of that , and not angry.

I can think like hamas, the situation is shit, but we are in charge.
Wich is better then the situation is shit and this is not leading anywhere.

Perhaps hamas is more primitive, dutch would get more primitive if you kept taking out their radical reformist leaders, but it reflects its politico-social reality.

Wouldn't every surpressed people within a confinement attempt to organise it's own (consensual,'democratic')structures and hold them over the official one? (sooner or later.)Don't *you* admire the individual that can?

Gaza people's or the hamas political thought goes like:
let us at least try to arrange our own affairs as the shit for standing up for our peoples rights is apparently unrecoverable.

(also economically a half year ago," the damage is done", you know 'discrimination' : some event of that kind.)

I hope hamas will negotiate a truce with europa and the arab union to just get the chance to live untill the regional situation improves that much setting up something there is not a calculated loss, and when we do that fine seems cheaper. pls think education cus later perhaps there will be jobs or possibilities at some point instead) Zion has always been scared for Tyrus, though, and i think they are in charge.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) the really better aproach in such a case is to opportunistically formulate.
a very rare example would have been to actually have had the fatah security army secure palestinean airspace. That is how long i suspect we still stand from solutions in formal ways in general .The example was to striking to go unnoticed somehow..(It would definetly include jetattacks on palestinean civilians. For people persistent in denying that.. i thought i better notice,except ofcourse the palestineans currently in jet-attacks of the israelian populace.
What the israeli's should learn is to make qassam-1s: really hard to stop even by the palestinean security force, walls are forever!