Are we really supposed to believe this

I was on a thread in which Bin Laden tape was to be aired when I saw this

ethics

I just had to laugh because, where are your ethics when you endorse murder and terrorism. The proof of which is the total disreguard for common decentsy by posting videos and live broadcasting video tapes
containing such activities. You endorse an action when you do not refuse to air it, now I'm all for freedom of press but when you have been targetted as a propaganda machine and dont stop it the what do you call it.

I dont want them to compramise their ability to earn money like any other buisness, however they are getting these tapes from terrorists free.
There werent any trade mark of other contractual releses signed they just show up and AL-Jazeera puts them on. What do we do or should we anyway.


Just look at numbers 8 and 9 in the list for a blunt show of hypocracy.

[edit on 30/10/2004 by drbryankkruta]

Well at least CBS is better..

Originally posted by edsinger
Well at least CBS is better..

Yes they only get stories wrong, you gotta give them that

If you go around and look at Islamic sites the clerics are taking Bin ladens words apart piece by piece and relishing them. You will have to translate the documents unless you read Arabic. They are actually delving into many a thesis on a mere sentence of Osama!

This is a serious situation that will have serious consequences for recruitment, aid, and attacks. You must understand that the Islamic world, much of it, contrary to the peace loving nay sayers, are treating the Sheik (as he is referred to) like a doctor in Nuclear Medicine who analyses atom variance.

You could equate Osama to Leo Strauss but with 1000 times the disciples. He is not only attracting the dumb who will blow themselves into itsy pieces but the doctors of islamic law, the rich gas station owners in America, the international clerics who are considered wise and faithful followers of Islam.

If we kill him we make him a martyr and his generation of disciples will seek to follow his cause and become martyr's themselves. We are in one #ey situation.

Originally posted by vincere7
If you go around and look at Islamic sites the clerics are taking Bin ladens words apart piece by piece and relishing them. You will have to translate the documents unless you read Arabic. They are actually delving into many a thesis on a mere sentence of Osama!

This is a serious situation that will have serious consequences for recruitment, aid, and attacks. You must understand that the Islamic world, much of it, contrary to the peace loving nay sayers, are treating the Sheik (as he is referred to) like a doctor in Nuclear Medicine who analyses atom variance.

You could equate Osama to Leo Strauss but with 1000 times the disciples. He is not only attracting the dumb who will blow themselves into itsy pieces but the doctors of islamic law, the rich gas station owners in America, the international clerics who are considered wise and faithful followers of Islam.

If we kill him we make him a martyr and his generation of disciples will seek to follow his cause and become martyr's themselves. We are in one #ey situation.



What does all this mean in ref to the ethics code Im talking about?

absolutely nothing in fact I didn't even read the link. Must be one of those wrong posts wrong place wrong times thing.




[edit on 30-10-2004 by vincere7]

There is something eerie about OBL's taped message, almost like it is a verbal trjan horse with hidden meaning. From his motions, to the color of the backdrop not to mention what he was saying which whould be lost in the English translation. But who knows, the FNN spinners were having a ball

Originally posted by drbryankkruta

Are we really supposed to believe this

You don't have to believe it if you don't want to. Some people like Aljazeera and some don't. Personally, I visit the site occasionally and don't have a problem with it.

Originally posted by drbryankkruta
You endorse an action when you do not refuse to air it

The reason terrorists give the video's to Aljazeera is because they know that they will air them and we will get to see them.

Originally posted by drbryankkruta
I dont want them to compramise their ability to earn money like any other buisness, however they are getting these tapes from terrorists free.

I don't understand? Are you saying it's unethical that the terrorists don't demand a fee for the video's? If Aljazeera actually paid for them, wouldn't that be kind of like "supporting terrorism"?

Originally posted by drbryankkruta
There werent any trade mark of other contractual releses signed they just show up and AL-Jazeera puts them on. What do we do or should we anyway.

Well I guess Bin Laden and Associates should find themselves a new agent. As to what we should do, I guess if you don't like the site, don't go there.

I think they need a little work on this one:

3. Treat our audiences with due respect and address every issue or story with due attention to present a clear, factual and accurate picture while giving full consideration to the feelings of victims of crime, war, persecution and disaster, their relatives and our viewers, and to individual privacy and public decorum. [emphasis mine]
english.aljazeera.net...

Originally posted by Psychoses
You don't have to believe it if you don't want to. Some people like Aljazeera and some don't. Personally, I visit the site occasionally and don't have a problem with it.

I have been using it for quite a while cause despite lack of ethical concern at least they put it out there right or wrong.

The us wont even do that. They filter, chop, cut and drop stories more than I believe they should.

The reason terrorists give the video's to Aljazeera is because they know that they will air them and we will get to see them.

That was my point they are a free of charge and morals propaganda machine.

I don't understand? Are you saying it's unethical that the terrorists don't demand a fee for the video's? If Aljazeera actually paid for them, wouldn't that be kind of like "supporting terrorism"?

Not at all I'm implying charging, the terrorists for public access shows an impartialness to the terrorists message. Right now they charge others for the use of air time and are of not charging the terrorists, that shows support and agreement, and special treatment.

Well I guess Bin Laden and Associates should find themselves a new agent. As to what we should do, I guess if you don't like the site, don't go there.

It is the dismissive and combative nature like desplayed here that breeds news organizations that have no COMMON HUMAN DESCENTSY and boost the activities of those like AQ. The point I am making is their should care more about their audience then to give power to those, who would kill their audience with no compasion or justification.......And before you get cocky and come with the Justification arguements.....civilians are not military targets and 3000 died because of a military / political attack.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I think they need a little work on this one:

3. Treat our audiences with due respect and address every issue or story with due attention to present a clear, factual and accurate picture while giving full consideration to the feelings of victims of crime, war, persecution and disaster, their relatives and our viewers, and to individual privacy and public decorum. [emphasis mine]
english.aljazeera.net...

Thank You Fact and point right here, If you can see it why cant PSHYCOSES and other just like him. This is the type of point I'm trying to make.

drbryankkruta,

I'm not going to "get cocky" or anything with you.

I just put forward my opinion on your post, that's all.

I guess we just don't see eye to eye on this one.

Originally posted by Psychoses
drbryankkruta,

I'm not going to "get cocky" or anything with you.

I just put forward my opinion on your post, that's all.

I guess we just don't see eye to eye on this one.

I find people's opinions are to be heard , but not always agreed with .

No hard feelings , I'm cool with you I just cant see why there is any justification for somone to do as they do. And in violation of their own ethics. Were cool right?

Dr. Bryan K. Kruta, your statements is not democratic at all.

We get a republican administration to promote democracy and to liberate countries from dictatorship, and what do you get? See Iraq for yourself and tell me how much death and fear have we brought to innocent people?

Liberation and democracy = invasion and dictatorship

So going back to your point, why should the poeple of the world tolerate your unilateralism? Why do you have to impose your propaganda on others?

Originally posted by WisdomMaster
Dr. Bryan K. Kruta, your statements is not democratic at all.

We get a republican administration to promote democracy and to liberate countries from dictatorship, and what do you get? See Iraq for yourself and tell me how much death and fear have we brought to innocent people?

Liberation and democracy = invasion and dictatorship

So going back to your point, why should the poeple of the world tolerate your unilateralism? Why do you have to impose your propaganda on others?

I dont know what exactly your making out of all this , but I am saying in the "democratic" way they should make a descision themselves to abide by their own ethics policy. My problems lay in the fact they refuse to follow those policies themselves.

My opinion is that they do abide to their ethical policy.

Originally posted by WisdomMaster
My opinion is that they do abide to their ethical policy.

I dont see it read it closer then think of what they are broad casting only a blind person cant see the hypocracies there in.