A couple friends have taken exception to Obama's choice of Al Arabiya as his first interview, on the grounds that Al Arabiya is often criticized as being pro-Saudi and pro-American, and he should have gone to Al-Jazeera. The point came up in a dialogue I had with my California friend, whom I'll call 7, (out of respect for the fact that she was 7 when she saw her Palestinian grandfather humiliated under occupation). I was asking 7 about the lack of free speech in Arab societies.
you mean that nobody has freedom of speech, right? and that's true, i
think with the exception of lebanon where are all the papers freely rip
everyone apart. but the other regimes and dictators in the middle east
would never allow it, which is why al jazeera has been kicked out every single arab country that they have reported out of.
think with the exception of lebanon where are all the papers freely rip
everyone apart. but the other regimes and dictators in the middle east
would never allow it, which is why al jazeera has been kicked out every single arab country that they have reported out of.
i wish that obama would have gone on al j instead of al arabiya
specifically for that reason. he has the choice of giving an interview
to any arab media outlet, he could have picked the ONLY one that truly
does have freedom of speech…
(Phil Weiss)
As'ad AbuKhalil has some pithy remarks about the choice of Al Arabiya in his blog post about the interview itself. The entire post is well worth reading. Here is the excerpt about Al-Jazeera vs Al Arabiya:
"There are several things to be said about this interview, and I don't believe that there is anything new in it whatsoever. I mean, CNN is lauding it as an example of how Obama (or Bushama) is willing to reach out to the Muslim world. I listened to it on my way from SF last night and CNN aired it in full. First, if the Bushama really wants to be different from Bush he would have selected AlJazeera and not al-Arabiyya. I mean, CNN does not know that Bush spoke to Arabic TV stations regularly, and Rice was a fixture on Al-Arabiyya TV. And they selected Al-Arabiyya because it is "friendly" to US interests and because on Al-Arabiyya TV US officials get softball questions. If Obama wanted to be different he would have chosen Al-Jazeera because it is the Arabs' favorite channel. Al-Arabiyya is the US government's favorite channel, and the US under Obama does not seem to want to respect the choices and preference of the Arab population. Secondly, Obama chose this station because he wanted to appease the Saudi royal family especially after the moping remarks of Prince Turki–the midwife of Al-Qa`idah and a key ally of the US. This president is signaling that he will be no different than Bush in coddling the Saudi Wahhabi dictatorship–a key ally of Israel today…"
And until now, as our anonymous journalist friend reveals, we, the supposed "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave," have not not had free speech here in the U.S. We've had Lobby censorship.
As Nim Chimpsky points out, the web as long as it's "neutral," that is "free" allows both liberated and courageous thought.
***Thanks, Phil, for setting up this "site" of valiant emancipation for the rights of people striving with fortitude for self-determination in Palestine
Sorry for the missing comma after "free." As some of you friends say, the struggle to free Palestine is obsessing us all and I'm not getting enough sleep. Sleeping is hard, isn't it. when we urgently want to solve an easily-fixable problem? The answer is simple and we all, including Zionists, know it:
Stop U.S. funding and [im]moral support for the Purge of Palestine.
We can sort out Reactionaries from Liberals by whether they say the challenges in the Middle East are "intractable." The situation would be comically straightforward if it weren't so tragic:
Remove the unholy American patronage of tyranny.
And the very clarity of the way out is what has always provoked the vitriol of Israel-Firsters against the movement to Free Palestine.
Susie, would you like to borrow my copy of the Protocols and learn how enslaved you really are? And that you are so powerless that there is nothing you can do about it?
It would give you something to read while you're weeping with two loaves of bread under your arms.
Chris, the one who's enslaved around here is you. You make Richard Witty look open-minded and intellectually honest by comparison, which he really isn't. All you ever do is trot out the Israel Lobby party line without even Richard's weak attempts at trying to seem fair and critical about it. You're nothing but a stooge.
You're right. I should just give in to the massive lies and propaganda supported by your side because there are so many of you that believe that garbage.
Then again, I guess I'll keep fighting the good fight. Sorry, you haven't convinced me of anything but your ignorance.
Keep it up Berel. With every post you write our aversion of what the late French ambassador Daniel Bernard called "that shitty little country" deepens.