But are they blatantly biased in opposition of Israel?
Maybe, maybe not. Who else is reporting on the plight of the ordinary Palestinians?
Until that story , I had no idea the summarily executed had yet to be released for burial. Is it unreasonable for elected Palestinian officials to work in this capacity?
Pretty sure the body of an Israeli held for this long without burial would have garnered more attention. Also dont see widespread reporting of Jewish officials meeting with suspected perpetrators of violence toward Palestinians. Like say the "suspects" in the deaths of that family burned alive.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Hmm. Ok then as I asked, point to some more neutrl sources that will tell both sides of the issue.
Am curious though, what leads you to that conclusion of bias in this source.
I know plenty of people who would automatically assume they support terrorists based off the name alone, I mean, why would they have an Arabic name unless they are jihadists???
Hmm. Ok then as I asked, point to some more neutrl sources that will tell both sides of the issue.
Am curious though, what leads you to that conclusion of bias in this source.
I know plenty of people who would automatically assume they support terrorists based off the name alone, I mean, why would they have an Arabic name unless they are jihadists???
No name alone is not an issue.But they are more sympathetic I would think.Much like the NYT would be in reverse.Im acknowledging the bias both ways. I soured on them years ago when they were the exclusive dumping ground for all jihadist head lopping videos.And protected sources.So that's my stance. I only commented about Mickeys links because his last few have all been from the same source.
Point me to another source that isnt so blatantly biased toward israel like any american media is.
Think the fact is, AJ has access that others are denied by israel. They also have the willingness to present other perspective.
I find AJ to be pretty good as far as that goes. Never once felt that it was biased toward or against Israel. Not even a little. I actually consider AJ to be the most reliable and unbiased news network available.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Hmm. Ok then as I asked, point to some more neutrl sources that will tell both sides of the issue.
Am curious though, what leads you to that conclusion of bias in this source.
I know plenty of people who would automatically assume they support terrorists based off the name alone, I mean, why would they have an Arabic name unless they are jihadists???
No name alone is not an issue.But they are more sympathetic I would think.Much like the NYT would be in reverse.Im acknowledging the bias both ways. I soured on them years ago when they were the exclusive dumping ground for all jihadist head lopping videos.And protected sources.So that's my stance. I only commented about Mickeys links because his last few have all been from the same source.
Isnt source protection a standard journalistic duty here? Why should it be considered differently elsewhere?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Hmm. Ok then as I asked, point to some more neutrl sources that will tell both sides of the issue.
Am curious though, what leads you to that conclusion of bias in this source.
I know plenty of people who would automatically assume they support terrorists based off the name alone, I mean, why would they have an Arabic name unless they are jihadists???
No name alone is not an issue.But they are more sympathetic I would think.Much like the NYT would be in reverse.Im acknowledging the bias both ways. I soured on them years ago when they were the exclusive dumping ground for all jihadist head lopping videos.And protected sources.So that's my stance. I only commented about Mickeys links because his last few have all been from the same source.
Isnt source protection a standard journalistic duty here? Why should it be considered differently elsewhere?
Yes, now I'm thinking rr thinks that JZ is lacking because they aren't specifically biased against terrorists. So being biased isn't his issue. Not being biased against the groups he want them to be biased against is the problem. So basically JZ is TOO unbiased.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Well, there's certainly bias in Al Jazeera's reporting, just as there's bias in just about any news organization. The trick with any source is to consider its editorial point of view. There's a difference in bias between the Washington Post and Washington Times. There's a difference in bias between Fox News and MSNBC. That doesn't mean that the stories/articles should be dismissed or discounted out of hand, but it always helps to understand what you're reading.
Anyway, rather than posting a bunch of links, here's a quick one highlighting some of Al Jazeera's biases. Again, that doesn't mean that it isn't a valid source of news, or that anything it prints is incorrect, I certainly read Al Jazeera from time to time and appreciate getting a different perspective.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
ALL major news networks are biased, of course. I just find that JZ is the best of the bunch in that context. After them it's BBC. Then all the rest. Mind you, I'm only talking about English language Al-Jazeera. I have no fucking idea what's going on with them otherwise.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Hey RR heres a snippet of the Wikipedia article linked by jeffbr
Contrary to some allegations, including the oft-reported comments of Donald Rumsfeld on 4 June 2005, Al Jazeera has never shown beheadings. (Beheadings have appeared on numerous non-Al Jazeera websites and have sometimes been misattributed to Al Jazeera.)[57]
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Good on them if they didn't show em,although I do remember them doing so.
Well put Jeff.You basically said what I was saying.You just did it better.lol
No PJ,that's not it at all.I want every side to have the same amount of pro and con stories.Anytime a reporting organization goes heavy in one direction(as Jeff said w/Fox) you get a skewed view of the real story.i guess my question is does AJ ever report anything positive about isreal?If so I've never seen a link.(not that I went looking).They do however as Mickey has posted print plenty of negative.
Mickey,yes protecting sources is crucial for news Orga but I think there are extenuating circumstances.Like if a child mass murderer gave an exclusive interview with CNN,And producers knew how to find him,but wouldn't tell authorities.I think when public safety is very much in concern then it should be outed.
This again, rr? I'm not going to call you out for another ad hominem fallacy (discrediting the source), because lets face it....I do it all the time when people try to convince me of something by quoting Fox or whatever...but as we went thru a few months back in the 'new face of terrorism' thread - it really isn't possible to find an unbiased source. The source, the reporter, the editor, the board of directors, the government liaison to the outlet, the person sharing the info....there are too many fingers in the cookie jar to trust any one source as impartial (indy media generally has less 'fingers', but is more likely to contain op-ed articles).
I saw a poll that studied political leanings in relation to which news sources were most (and least) trusted....people who identified as strictly conservative only trusted Fox news, Brietbart, Dredge, Rush, Hannity, and Beck. Strictly liberal leaning people trusted most mainstream sources, and distrusted all of the conservative ones listed above. I don't know what's worse - listening to those Con media personalities, or listening to the mainstream....But the only sources that both groups trusted were the Economist and the BBC. Personally, I don't trust any source, period. Every article needs scrutiny.
If you read something regarding the occupation on AJ that you find biased - search for the other side of the story yourself and share that info with us! The person sharing the info should def fact check and ensure they're not spreading disinformation, but it is unrealistic to expect everyone to provide both sides of every story they share. Esp as it pertains to the occupation, Israel ALWAYS has their side readily available for anyone who wants to look....check nearly any mainstream Israeli media outlet not named Haaretz and you will find the Israeli government (or some whacko extremist) position.
There are a number of sites I follow that are blatantly pro-Palestinian: electronic intifada - i sometimes find myself disillusioned by their prose and lack of context. Same goes for 972mag - they are heavier on 'shock' content, tho....so I rarely cite either despite the fact they are two of the few Pro-Palestinian sites that cover day-to-day events on the ground in Palestine - tons of stories you won't find elsewhere. Mondoweiss I find to be a great site - with an obvious bias - Phillip Weiss is an avowed (jewish) anti-zionist...but I have seen him write critically about the Palestinian position and he and his writers avoid sensationalism for the most part. I honestly feel the intent of that site is equality and human rights for all. Hyperbole and sensationalism is what takes a source from bias to borderline dishonest, imo.
If AJ has a pro-Palestinian bias, it is much less pronounced than other Pro-Palestinian sources....and nowhere near as biased as most mainstream sources (pretty much all of them) are toward the Israeli side. AJ is the only 'mainstream' outlet that has even a slightly pro-Palestinian angle, tho you will find the occasional honest article on BBC, CBC, and the Guardian. Soooo....to me, when it comes to the occupation, AJ is as close to unbiased coverage as you will find, especially in the mainstream. CNN, MSNBC, Fox et al are government mouthpieces, and we know which way the government leans in regards to the occupation.
Drowned,good post.I am Not revisiting that old thread,I do remember our conversations.That was actually a good one. Im also not getting into this honey trap from a debate standpoint I'll leave that to you guys.I was merely commenting on Mickey citing the same source material in multiple posts and it got me thinking about perception from both sides. Regardless of the subject,I hope the reporting is as fair as can be,but like you mentioned it's tough to do.And as a viewer or reader I acknowledge my bias in who I choose to follow.I admit I let My preconceptions weigh on my AJ views.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
Signed. I'm also hugely disappointed in this bill's passing.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
this has been going on for decades.
sounds like your country is being open about it. here activists are arrested on flimsy charges, harassed by law enforcement, or intimidated into silence.
BDS is having an impact. if it were being marginalized, why would your government legitimize it by passing this law?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
These are direct attacks on freedom of speech and should be called as such. What do they call AIPAC in Canada and do they not have to register as lobbyist just like in America. Sickening really. Andrew Jackson was a wise man
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
These are direct attacks on freedom of speech and should be called as such. What do they call AIPAC in Canada and do they not have to register as lobbyist just like in America. Sickening really. Andrew Jackson was a wise man
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
Honestly I'm unsure about registering. But there are several groups in Canada that lobby the government and universities on behalf of Israel...Jewish Defense League, B’Nai Brith, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Canadian Jewish Congress...
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
this has been going on for decades.
sounds like your country is being open about it. here activists are arrested on flimsy charges, harassed by law enforcement, or intimidated into silence.
BDS is having an impact. if it were being marginalized, why would your government legitimize it by passing this law?
That's exactly it....Sodastream admitted recently that the closure of it's West Bank plant was accelerated by BDS. Every time it comes up in the press, or in comments by Roger Waters, or anywhere else, it gets people talking. And generally speaking, people are shocked when they hear another side of the story - one that doesn't paint ISrael as victims.
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
Signed. I'm also hugely disappointed in this bill's passing.
So Canada just voted to condemn the BDS movement. When I first heard about this (which was via fb messenger, didnt' see any mention in the lamestream), I thought it was a legless, symbolic measure. After reading up a bit more, I found that the bill gave the government the ability to cut funding to groups or individuals that promote BDS. Sooooo...our government is protesting a non-violent boycott with a boycott of non-violent protestors. Free speech? Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent: http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
Not signing and proud of Canada's stance.
Almost forgot...your massive 2-1 vote margin at McGill was a vote of 512 - 357 out of a total student body of about 30,000. Most students go to school to get a degree and not to participate in SJW nonsense.
We know where you stand BS. As for McGill....voter apathy is everywhere. Maybe not 2-1, but when it comes to politics, that's a landslide...and you know it. Downplay it all you want, it's another institution joining the movement.
The Detainees and Ex-Detainees Committee, said in a report published on Sunday, that 85 percent of Palestinians who were killed by Israel since the beginning of 2015; 179 Palestinians, were killed in extrajudicial field executions.
It maintained that Israeli forces executed Palestinians in ‘cold-blood’ and on the grounds of mere suspicion, maintaining that forces acted as both judges and executioners.
Comments
Until that story , I had no idea the summarily executed had yet to be released for burial. Is it unreasonable for elected Palestinian officials to work in this capacity?
Pretty sure the body of an Israeli held for this long without burial would have garnered more attention. Also dont see widespread reporting of Jewish officials meeting with suspected perpetrators of violence toward Palestinians. Like say the "suspects" in the deaths of that family burned alive.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Am curious though, what leads you to that conclusion of bias in this source.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I soured on them years ago when they were the exclusive dumping ground for all jihadist head lopping videos.And protected sources.So that's my stance.
I only commented about Mickeys links because his last few have all been from the same source.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Anyway, rather than posting a bunch of links, here's a quick one highlighting some of Al Jazeera's biases. Again, that doesn't mean that it isn't a valid source of news, or that anything it prints is incorrect, I certainly read Al Jazeera from time to time and appreciate getting a different perspective.
Contrary to some allegations, including the oft-reported comments of Donald Rumsfeld on 4 June 2005, Al Jazeera has never shown beheadings. (Beheadings have appeared on numerous non-Al Jazeera websites and have sometimes been misattributed to Al Jazeera.)[57]
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Well put Jeff.You basically said what I was saying.You just did it better.lol
No PJ,that's not it at all.I want every side to have the same amount of pro and con stories.Anytime a reporting organization goes heavy in one direction(as Jeff said w/Fox) you get a skewed view of the real story.i guess my question is does AJ ever report anything positive about isreal?If so I've never seen a link.(not that I went looking).They do however as Mickey has posted print plenty of negative.
Mickey,yes protecting sources is crucial for news Orga but I think there are extenuating circumstances.Like if a child mass murderer gave an exclusive interview with CNN,And producers knew how to find him,but wouldn't tell authorities.I think when public safety is very much in concern then it should be outed.
I saw a poll that studied political leanings in relation to which news sources were most (and least) trusted....people who identified as strictly conservative only trusted Fox news, Brietbart, Dredge, Rush, Hannity, and Beck. Strictly liberal leaning people trusted most mainstream sources, and distrusted all of the conservative ones listed above. I don't know what's worse - listening to those Con media personalities, or listening to the mainstream....But the only sources that both groups trusted were the Economist and the BBC. Personally, I don't trust any source, period. Every article needs scrutiny.
If you read something regarding the occupation on AJ that you find biased - search for the other side of the story yourself and share that info with us! The person sharing the info should def fact check and ensure they're not spreading disinformation, but it is unrealistic to expect everyone to provide both sides of every story they share. Esp as it pertains to the occupation, Israel ALWAYS has their side readily available for anyone who wants to look....check nearly any mainstream Israeli media outlet not named Haaretz and you will find the Israeli government (or some whacko extremist) position.
There are a number of sites I follow that are blatantly pro-Palestinian: electronic intifada - i sometimes find myself disillusioned by their prose and lack of context. Same goes for 972mag - they are heavier on 'shock' content, tho....so I rarely cite either despite the fact they are two of the few Pro-Palestinian sites that cover day-to-day events on the ground in Palestine - tons of stories you won't find elsewhere. Mondoweiss I find to be a great site - with an obvious bias - Phillip Weiss is an avowed (jewish) anti-zionist...but I have seen him write critically about the Palestinian position and he and his writers avoid sensationalism for the most part. I honestly feel the intent of that site is equality and human rights for all. Hyperbole and sensationalism is what takes a source from bias to borderline dishonest, imo.
If AJ has a pro-Palestinian bias, it is much less pronounced than other Pro-Palestinian sources....and nowhere near as biased as most mainstream sources (pretty much all of them) are toward the Israeli side. AJ is the only 'mainstream' outlet that has even a slightly pro-Palestinian angle, tho you will find the occasional honest article on BBC, CBC, and the Guardian. Soooo....to me, when it comes to the occupation, AJ is as close to unbiased coverage as you will find, especially in the mainstream. CNN, MSNBC, Fox et al are government mouthpieces, and we know which way the government leans in regards to the occupation.
Im also not getting into this honey trap from a debate standpoint I'll leave that to you guys.I was merely commenting on Mickey citing the same source material in multiple posts and it got me thinking about perception from both sides.
Regardless of the subject,I hope the reporting is as fair as can be,but like you mentioned it's tough to do.And as a viewer or reader I acknowledge my bias in who I choose to follow.I admit I let My preconceptions weigh on my AJ views.
http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=770389
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Here is a petition, I hope any Canadians reading will sign it, regardless of your stance on BDS...this is a direct attack on free speech, an attempt to stifle dissent:
http://cjpme.nationbuilder.com/condemn_me
Spineless libs voting with the Cons on this....and the NDP only had the balls to call this out on the free speech angle. Mulcair is another israeli stooge. In other words; when it comes to human rights for Palestinians, Canadians have no political options. Virtually our entire government is (as always) pandering to the Israel lobby / zionist voters. This is unacceptable.
the same day this was passed, students at McGill University voted (by a 2-1 margin) to align with BDS. Yet our politicians are busy trying to make criminals out of activists. Bullshit.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
sounds like your country is being open about it. here activists are arrested on flimsy charges, harassed by law enforcement, or intimidated into silence.
BDS is having an impact. if it were being marginalized, why would your government legitimize it by passing this law?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Sickening really. Andrew Jackson was a wise man
BOYCOTT
DIVEST
SANCTIONS
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-02-26/senate-democrats-dispute-obamas-decision-on-israel-boycotts
be afraid
Congressional bitch boy whores for the motherland (AIPAC)
Almost forgot...your massive 2-1 vote margin at McGill was a vote of 512 - 357 out of a total student body of about 30,000. Most students go to school to get a degree and not to participate in SJW nonsense.
As for McGill....voter apathy is everywhere. Maybe not 2-1, but when it comes to politics, that's a landslide...and you know it. Downplay it all you want, it's another institution joining the movement.
The Detainees and Ex-Detainees Committee, said in a report published on Sunday, that 85 percent of Palestinians who were killed by Israel since the beginning of 2015; 179 Palestinians, were killed in extrajudicial field executions.
It maintained that Israeli forces executed Palestinians in ‘cold-blood’ and on the grounds of mere suspicion, maintaining that forces acted as both judges and executioners.