It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Al Jazeera English Blacked Out Across Most Of U.S.

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
If you want to watch the program, you can head on over to the Al Jazeera English website & watch it. Now, what else are you gonna fuss about? It's their company, they can show what they want. The song Money For Nothing by Dire Straits is banned from radio airplay in Canada.

english.aljazeera.net...
edit on 31-1-2011 by soaringhawk because: cause i had to edit. what business is it of yours?




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by purplemer
 


You do understand that the reason Al Jazeera stopped broadcasting is because the Egyptian Government yanked their broadcast license. Al Jazeera got in trouble by the Egyptian Ministry of whatever for interviewing people who had been injured and the families who had members killed in the protests.

Al Jazeera has been accused by several MIDDLE EAST governments, not the US or Western, of antagonizing the protesters and "inciting riots" or whatever BS reason they want to use.

Western Media continues to report from Egypt, and their are pro Egyptian groups here in the States who have marched outside large cities to show solidarity with the Egyptian people. Our Government has called on Mubarik to respect the rights of those who are peacfully protesting, we have suspended aid to Egypt (about 3 Billion a year), and Western Media has been interviewing protest leaders so they cn get their message out to the World.

Why oh why do you want to continallu lay blame at our doorstep before finding out all the facts? Also people can drop the BS Mubarikis a US puppet installed by us. Mubarik came to power when Islamic radicals assasinated President Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel.

Its a pro democracy movement by the people. Hopefully they will be more succesful than their IRanian counterparts.


The Middle East is full of tyranical governments and dictators. Of course they're going to accuse Al Jazeera of inciting revolution.

The point is the US has traditionally backed Mubarik. Look at Obamas outright support for Tunisia in the State of the Union adress, and contrast it with his response to the Egyptian revolt. There's a notable difference.

The American administration has a long history of supporting Dictators who tow their line. And condemning Dictators who refuse to fall in line.

The government is merely backpeddling and walking the line to save face.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
The song Money For Nothing by Dire Straits is banned from radio airplay in Canada.


I know this is not the topic of the OP, but I had to clarify, as it was encouraging to me that, in this rare instance, common sense was victorious. After being bombarded by letters opposing this ridiculous stance, the decision has been overturned, that epic guitar riff is free once more!



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Billmeister
 


The song wasn't banned, they censored a lyric, it was overturned, song was never banned.

Anyways, good to see people posting up different methods to get at Al Jazeera because right now, that's about the only non-partisan reporting you are going to get on the subject.

Anyone else suspect this giant meeting of US ambassadors has something to do with the global unrest?



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


But the radical Muslims are taking advantage of this too and that's bad. I think we should just mind our own business.
edit on 31-1-2011 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


It was banned. All the news networks said it was banned. The fact that it happened is wrong and I was bringing to light the hypocrisy in trying to show supposed censorship here in the U.S.A, when there's plenty done in Canada.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
nevermind
edit on 31-1-2011 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by xuenchen
watching now

english.aljazeera.net...

it seems a lot of present or former US officials are being interviewed by Al-Jazeera !

or is this all part of a Hollywood show ?


does the US media have any influence or financial interests in A.J. ?


I dont think they do, but it does make sense. If you were Egyptian, or Syrian, or Iranian and you wanted to find information about the United States you have a few choices, none of which are going to be CNN International or FoxNews.

In order to get the American message out (so to speak) it makes sense to use a media outlet that is accepted by the people of the area you are wanting to get the message to.

Take a US politician, have them interviewed with the exact same questions, one interview by Al Jazeera and one by MSNBC, and air both in the Middle East.

Chances are, anyone who watches the MSNBC interview will question the motives or legtimacy of the information, where as those watching Al Jazeera might give it a little more thought or trust.

A perfect example is PressTV from Iran. I despise that media source as nothing more than Iranian Government Propoganda. To the people of Iran though who dont have amny other options, they trust it (and we see it here in the forums on occasion as well as a source).

All politics are local and because of that, so are the trusted media outlets.



makes perfect sense

great explanation !



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
I don't mean to sound like a smart ass but is it possible that not all these people receive their signal by paying for it? I've been watching and visiting al Jazeera online with zero problem since this all started.

Most of people I know that get al Jazeera on t.v. don't pay for it, and every couple months the satellite side job guy has to come back and reposition it because the provider changes things around to discourage this type of behavior. Could it just be coincidental? Because like I said I have had no problem.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
... the media in the uk is controled too they are just a little bit more sublte about it...


There speaks someone who does not know what he is talking about. The BBC (for example) is not controlled, nore is ITN or the press generally.

Regards



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


well i do believe thi is one of the best examples of tyranny yet to be seen!



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 



There speaks someone who does not know what he is talking about. The BBC (for example) is not controlled, nore is ITN or the press generally. Regards


All of the press in the Uk is controlled. Many stories never make it to press. What makes you think the bbc is not cenored. what happened the other year when the bbc reported that there were no wepons of mass destruction in iraq. People lost there jobs for telling the truth.
here is a little food for thought....


Each week the Government tries to block the publication of approximately five news stories through Defence Advisory Notices (DA Notices). DA Notices are an official request to news editors not to publish or broadcast reports for reasons of national security. DA Notices are a request and therefore not legally enforceable – news editors can choose to ignore them, however the majority editors in the British media comply with requests.


www.disclose.tv...

and do you think that corperations dont have similar powers also...
what happened with the news reports and the gulf oil spill... you had to go all the way to china to get the best footage....

regards

kx



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
All of the press in the Uk is controlled. Many stories never make it to press. What makes you think the bbc is not cenored. what happened the other year when the bbc reported that there were no wepons of mass destruction in iraq. People lost there jobs for telling the truth.
here is a little food for thought....


US did find Iraq WMD


and the reason Peirs Morgan was fired was not for telling the truth, but for fabricating information for a story based on his personal opinion.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by purplemer
... the media in the uk is controled too they are just a little bit more sublte about it...


There speaks someone who does not know what he is talking about. The BBC (for example) is not controlled, nore is ITN or the press generally.

Regards


Really? They don't mention the death of David Kelly very often...

Sorry to hear you're not getting AJE. It's kickass. Makes the BBC look like Fox.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:29 AM
link   
i pay the extra money for AJE, and it is a very good news channel. I flip between the usuals, cnn, bbc, cbc, msn, etc and its always typically the same thinly spread coverage. I am not surprised they did this to AJE; they have been going after the middle east issues fairly accurately, and some of the things the guests say you just know would not happen or would be cut off quick on the so called "mainstream" media's in canada/britain/us/euro.

I heard it was difficult for AJ to even get in to the US to start, I heard on daily show (yes that clown) that lots of ppl had to help for them even to get in, so it appears they were on thin ground to begin.. Freedom of speech.. ya right

I also suspect the situation in egypt/tunisia has much to do with the banning. The egyptian forces are using american weaponry, and the american politicians need the suez and other things from egypt it seems and AJE is reporting away about it. On the mainstream news agencies no one is supporting the rioters/poor, they are all saying they want "stability" (ie at the cost of freedoms) and not taking any stance against the current dictatorial governments. If the middle eastern pattern continues and we see more and more knockouts of totalitarian regimes, this hurts the US, and will lead to more media crackdown I suspect
edit on 1-2-2011 by Naeem82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




and the reason Peirs Morgan was fired was not for telling the truth, but for fabricating information for a story based on his personal opinion.


hehe very good but i think you got this the wrong way round...maybe what your were trying to say was this..
and the reason Peris Morgan was fired was for telling the truth, but the government fabricated information for a story based on personal opinion and funky inteligence reports that they did have wepons of mass destruction.
Really though you cannot deny the political motivation behind the firing.....
further your point about the wepoons of mass destruction acutaly existing..them ones dont count...why because the americans sold them. thats why they kept hush, those were the wepons used on the people. they were not the kind of wmd that premised the attack on iraq...
haha i



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 

It was banned. All the news networks said it was banned. The fact that it happened is wrong and I was bringing to light the hypocrisy in trying to show supposed censorship here in the U.S.A, when there's plenty done in Canada.


Again, this is quite a tangent from the OP, but phishyblankwaters is correct. I tried to correct your original post and confirm that the decision has been overturned, but failed to correct you that the song was not banned, the "offensive" word was to be censored. Like many rap songs for example, or dark lines on TV... there is a difference.

"See the little *beep* with the earring and the makeup,
Yeah buddy that's his own hair,
That little *beep* got his own jet airplane,
That little *beep* he's a millionaire."

I agree that some level of censorship exists everywhere, but you may be surprised as to what extent it exists in the U.S.A. as compared to other western countries. Unless, of course, you are well travelled, than this would be no surprise. Remember, the internet is the great equalizer.

the Billmeister







edit on 1-2-2011 by Billmeister because: repetition



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
hypocritical much? where is your contribution to this thread other than crying?



Ignorant much, or just having trouble keeping a civil tongue in your head?


Originally posted by apodictic
I'll elaborate. Obama is scum for the fact he chooses to censor information from us that pertains to the situation effecting the rest of the world in fear that Americans will wake up and the same will happen here. He uses propaganda like FOX and CNN to spew his geyser of lies and fear to the American people rather than getting it from a first hand source so we think we're getting the full story, but we're really getting their watered down BS version of the "truth."


And you honestly believe that what you're getting from them is any different than Fox and CNN? It's just another form of propaganda; unfortunately, a lot of people seem to forget this little fact.


Originally posted by apodictic
Get a happy meal, dry up your tears and move on now little girl


Oohhhh, I'm sorry, did getting slapped down like that hurt your little feelings?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Open up a dictionary and read the word ignorant. There was nothing ignorant about me calling you hypocritical lol. It was in fact the truth. Sorry for pointing out your flaw.

Yes, it is different. Watch Al Jazeera, then flip on Fox and see Fox conveniently "leaves" parts out and only presents parts of stories.

Hurt feelings? From someone sitting behind the computer? LOL please you're giving yourself too much credit here.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
Open up a dictionary and read the word ignorant. There was nothing ignorant about me calling you hypocritical lol. It was in fact the truth. Sorry for pointing out your flaw.


Sorry, Highspeed. I guess my posts are just way too over the top for you to understand. "Ignorant" is making a one line, "Obama is scum" post on a thread. Wow, how long did it take for you to type that out with your thumbs?

And hypocriticial? Ace, if I only type a single sentence, that might be hyprocritical. If you go back, you'd see I actually took the time to type out several sentences explaining your BS one line post.

Your malfunction is that you don't know the meaning of the words "hypocrite" and "ignorant". Sorry for pointing that out for you. Stings, huh?


Originally posted by apodictic
Yes, it is different. Watch Al Jazeera, then flip on Fox and see Fox conveniently "leaves" parts out and only presents parts of stories.


And you honestly think that Al Jazeera isn't presenting only part of the story that they want you do see? Do you think that they are not involved in some sort of propaganda of their own? That they are not pushing their own agenda for people to see??


Originally posted by apodictic
Hurt feelings? From someone sitting behind the computer? LOL please you're giving yourself too much credit here.


Whatever, Craftsman.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join