Monday, August 16, 2004

Americans: why do you hate us??:*(

there is onething i have in comon with french people, is that americans ask us all the time: Why do you hate us?
well, i dont know about the french, but i knwo about myself, thats what i intend to talk about, if you have time.
ok, do you want the short answer or the long answer?
ok, lets start with the short and move to the full version after.
the short answer is: i hate americans? that is so not true!
the long answer is:
i hate americans? believe me that is so not true!
oh not long enoug?:)
ok, i will again:

Its very important to me, that you know that i respect American people, if i want to write a list of 50 close friends, at least five of them would be american, and i have so much american friends outside the "close friends: list too, my experience with American people is very good, i find them simple, sincere and caring people, hardworking i may add too.
that applies too on most, if not all of the other nationalities, there always exceptions, but i am talking generally, as i was meant to "be" in this time and place, war time, in Iraq, i had the chance to meet so many foreigneres, probably any person who lives a normal life in a normal country, wont meet half the number of foreigneres i met unless he works in a border center:)
anyway, after this experience with all these people, and the online-people who i know too, i cant say anything like, all people are nice, except those from a certain country, that just cant happen, because every country in the world have the good and the bad, mixed together, that is life.
but as i am acused of hating Americans particulery, i will talk about them particulery:
i know a very nice, very active poletician American woman, who i consider my vertual auntie, i have a very lovely old lady who i consider my vertual grandma, i have a very wonderful friend who i consider my vertual brother, all americans, and i have a list of other people who i open my computer and check my mail hoping to find something form them, all of those are american people, who i love and respect, you check my mail and you would find akkadia, connie, lena, mary, julie so many others, all american, all dear and precious to me.
its the goverments that i a stand against, and that comes from the policy they chose to have towards us, arabs, and you all are seeing what kind of policy it is, and you all are seeing its results.
thank you for your time:)


#8/16/2004 07:44:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

I'm glad you don't hate Americans. Whoever asks you that, should not assume that you do before they have a reason to ask the question. I agree fully that there are good and bad in every race and country.

When I lived in the Suburbs of Chicago, I noticed that people of different nationalities tended to take over their own parts on the city. I often thought that they were doing it all wrong. It would be better if everyone who loved peace and safety, and wanted to be an asset to the community, live together. All who wanted to rob and cheat and take advantage of others, you all live somewhere else.

Then what you would find, you be people of all races and nations living in both places.

Iraq won again in football (soccer). Congratulations! Go Iraq. :^)

Tom in Wisconsin

#8/16/2004 10:42:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


If the Multinational Forces pulled out of Iraq tomorrow, what do you think would happen in Iraq?

This is a basic question.


#8/17/2004 01:09:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger avid007

I thought you might be interested in just how stupid us Americans can be at times.....take a look at this gem I shot over the weekend.

#8/17/2004 02:12:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger khalid jarrar

Big celebrations.

#8/17/2004 04:37:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

so Khalid? are you going to ignore my previous comments? my email?

#8/17/2004 04:37:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger Michele


I have prayed for your country and your people every day now for many years. I now pray that someday all of you may know and enjoy the freedom of living in a democracy where each citizen can pursue their dreams without having to bribe a party leader or seek favors from a more fortunate relative. I pray that you will know what peace, prosperity and happiness is and that children can dream of limitless possibilities. In spite of what happened to me and my friends on 9/11 I do not hate arabs and I do not hate muslims. I respect your country and its long rich history. I pray that someday we are able to learn more about each other.

And lately, I have also been praying for your wonderful soccer team, may the most wonderful of miracles happen as your people need something positive right now to hold onto. May peace come soon and stay long.

#8/17/2004 04:38:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger julieann

sorry, that was me asking you Khalid, if you are going to ignore my comments, my email.

#8/17/2004 06:34:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


Okay, Big Celebrations. And then what?

How much do you know about Iraqi history?

Iraq will break into civil war within weeks. Iraq's history is one of the bloodiest in a region of bloody-minded people.

Just finished the Cockburns' "Out of the Ashes." Just a lot of nasty recent history of Iraq.

You are very young and naive, Khalid.

Learn a little about the last thirty years of Iraq's history. The brutality of the main actors is truly hard to believe. Uday is simply the most notorious Iraqi sociopath, but by no means the only one.

Iraq has never had a real democratic vote. You know that right? A bogus vote for King Faisal in 1921 and then later Saddam's two bogus votes. In all of these "votes," there was no other candidate!

I have a lot of Iraqi friends now, but I have to say I'm not sure if Iraqis will ever become either a unified nation or a democratic nation.


#8/17/2004 11:44:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Jeffrey --

"If the Multinational Forces pulled out of Iraq tomorrow, what do you think would happen in Iraq?"

Aaah, I see you are employing the old 'forced dilemma' trick of the colonialists. It works like this:

First, remove all indigenous authorities. Secondly, appoint your own authorities, and get the natives at each other's throats using ethnic, religious divisions and stirring a little. Thirdly, justify your own military presence in order to maintain security. So, the neutral populace is given the choice: occupation under us, or chaos as an alternative. Classic.

The irony is readily apparent.

In Iraq, it is the statement "as soon as the Iraqis stop fighting us, we will leave". If the guerillas stop fighting to get the US to leave (on the basis of the untarnished, never-broken promises of America) , then in reality they will hand power to a US proxy government like Iran's old Shah. (Once the insurgency's momentum is gone, it would be very hard to regain it later.) But, while they keep fighting, the US uses that struggle as justification to remain. This dilemma is smoke and mirrors to present the US as the "good guys" while glossing over the fact that *it* launched an unprovoked invasion in the first place.

In reality, such a proxy government would be a closed circle - Washington tells it to request military assistance, the Iraqi proxies do so ... voila! US troops never leave Iraq, because an eye must be kept on those treacherous Arabs, in case they get nefarious ideas of independence again.

And, judging by the copious amount of lies and distortions the US public has swallowed to date ... there would be a minimal outcry by those who actually care.


#8/17/2004 11:45:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Khalid --

"You are very young and naive, Khalid."

Don't sweat the insult, Khalid. It's been tried before, and this latest version of False Appeal to Authority (age, wisdom) is an attempt to add import to his words, while diminishing yours. It fails now, as before.

What does his post imply?

That a brutal hand is needed to control Iraqis, and that excuses US excesses? In that case, why not leave Saddam in power in the first place?

Or ... is he saying Iraqis either don't understand democracy, or are unworthy of it? Implying, of course, if this is the case, that it will be your own fault if Iraq slides into chaos, because you are too stupid to grasp this golden opportunity at becoming an American lackey.


#8/17/2004 04:59:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


Different groups in Iraq have been killing each other for hundreds of years. Take a look at Zeyad's multi-part series on tribalism on his blog Healing Iraq. They were slaughtering each other long, long before the Coalition forces showed up. If you don't know this, then you know NOTHING about Iraqi history. A good example of typical behavior is Muqty's goons grabbing the 80-year-old father of Najaf's police chief, dragging him through the streets, beating his brothers, and then slicing a few throats just for good measure. Again, if you think this behavior is anomolous, then you don't know Iraqi history. When tribes fight each other, they will use any means to gain the upper hand. Alliances are quickly made and quickly dropped.

Saddam came from the al-Bejat clan, which itself belongs to the Albu Nasir tribe. Out of the Bejat clan came the al-Majid family and the Ibrahim family. They were always at each other's throats, even when united under Saddam and controlling all of Iraq for thirty years. And of course, there was lots of inter-marriage to make the bonds closer and in the end bloodier. Raghad and Rina were married to their al-Majid cousins, Hussein Kamel and Saddam Kamel. And we all know what happened to them, right?

Brunhilda, wake up and smell the blood.

Listen, democracy does have a slim chance in Iraq. Arabs are watching Iraqis engage in debate at the conference and, believe me, there are many groups in Egypt and Syria that are envious of even these beginning signs of progress.

But democracy is Iraq is in conflict with Iraq's long history of local allegiences creating constant warfare.

I would love to see the Multinational Forces come home tomorrow. We've already killed Uday and Qusay and destroyed all of Iraq's military hardware. Iraq will NEVER again threaten the US. We've already accomplished what we set out to do. So I agree with you and Khalid: Americans out of Iraq!

See, we agree.


#8/17/2004 05:31:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger madtom

we hear that complaint all the time "It's the American policy towards us" but I have no idea what that means.
I wish someone would explain to me what they mean by Policy. I mean is it the interest rates or what?


#8/18/2004 12:30:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Would you please all of you stop this, this guy don't represent Iraq or the Iraqis remember he is a palestinian not Iraqi and I don't know what he is doing here in this blog ?


#8/18/2004 09:17:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey

Now THIS is good news!

Ali and Mohammed of Iraq the Model will be running for the National Assembly at the end of the year with their newly-formed Iraq Pro-Democracy Party (IPDP)! Check out the new website! Contribute! Link to it! (I already have.)


#8/18/2004 10:24:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Jeffrey --

OK, so Iraq has a long, bloody history. We all know this. Why are you regurgitating this as if it were some sort of 'point' you are scoring? Oh, I get it ... Iraqis don't "get" democracy, so it is not the US's fault if Iraq is in chaos, because they would just kill each other anyway. Your troops are there, nobly civilising these savages at great cost to themselves. But, if you fail, then it is the natives' fault, right? Any unfortunate Iraqi casualties will have to be excused in the light of this humanitarian enterprise, right? ("Besides, they would have killed each other anyway", I hear the US rightwingers whisper again ... )

"Iraq will NEVER again threaten the US."

More humour a la Jeffrey. So, are you feeling safer yet? Now that Iraqi forces have been chased out of US cities, and their huge NBC stockpiles destroyed, you can breathe easily. Welcome one, welcome all to Jeffrey's fantasy world, where Iraq was on the verge of conquering the US, not to mention the rest of the free world.

"So I agree with you and Khalid: Americans out of Iraq!
See, we agree."

Oh, God, Jeffrey's agreeing with me? I feel as if my brain has just been molested. Maybe he's "grooming" me. The sicko.


#8/18/2004 03:37:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre


Hmm, interesting comment. I don't believe any one person can represent any country, we are all so different.

Perhaps a country must be represented by a group of people. Perhaps that is why every blogger has a place in the blogosphere and why all contributors here have a place in this blog.


#8/18/2004 05:56:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


Yes, as a matter of fact, I DO feel much safer. Pulling Saddam out of his Spiderhole had immediate results. Krazy Khaddafi took one look at that and turned over his WMD programs. The funny thing is that he really said that. Google it. It's very funny. "I don't want to get pulled out of a spiderhole like Saddam." Hey, did you ever check out Khaddafi's Super-Chick Posse of Bodyguards? Man, that was something! Arab Charlie's Angels on Steroids! And all of them wearing matching suits! I'll get ya a link later.

Your other comments are good. I don't disagree.

BTW, what the heck is an "NBC stockpile"? Is this something to do with Nielsen Ratings for Primetime?


Please look in your crystal ball? What is Muqty's future?

OT for Brunhilda: Do you like Frank Zappa?


#8/18/2004 05:59:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Emigre --

I tend to agree with your sentiment. I don't think Khalid is trying to portray himself as an archetypal Iraqi (whatever *that* is) ... and criticism on his heritage does little to discredit any arguments he may put forth. What would be the point of reducing discussion to "who is the 'Iraqiest'" ? What scale would we measure these intangibles by? Would 2 Iraqi parents, but living in another country outweigh 1 Iraqi parent but actually living in Iraq?

The discussion would become a farce.


#8/18/2004 06:46:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Sean

A few words that say so much: "i hate americans? believe me that is so not true! ... its the goverments that i a stand against".

We ARE our government. Everybody doesn't agree, but everybody in America is responsible for it's actions. That's the whole point.

Providing some abstract "government" to hate is so easy, and just so broken.

#8/18/2004 09:51:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous


One big problem you fail to consider is that Iraqi oil is both a blessing and a curse. The blessing part is obvious. The curse is that, if you can't protect it from your envious neighbors, you may well lose it.

If U.S. troops withdraw prior to the Iraqi army being rebuilt, Iraq's fate is likely to worse than it is now. One likely scenario is that Turkish troops roll into northern Iraq to "protect" the Turkomen minority, while Iranian troops roll into the southern oil fields to "quell violence" in the Iraqi south. Once in country, such forces are unlikely to ever leave, just as Syrian troops are still in Lebanon. The net result would be an Iraqi rump state shorn of most of its oil.

I would love to the bring U.S. troops home now, but in my view, it would be irresponsbile to do so until the Iraqi army is rebuilt.

#8/19/2004 12:03:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

This is an interesting discussion, but I am concerned about Al Jazeera. I think the last 100 people interviewed on the channel have all expressed extremely anti-American sentiments.

When Abu Gharaib was mortared, killing 22 Iraqis, the Al Jazeera headline was, 22 killed at American prison. And they never corrected the record by indentifying who actually attacked the prison, all they did was talk about the attrocities there.

In Fallujah, Al Jazeera has employed stringers that have reportedly been working with the terrorists and kidnappers. One Al Jazeera cameraman filmed an Iraqi hostage who was threatened with beheading. We only know about this because he escaped. And an American journalist of Arab descent, saw an Al Jazeera reporter helping a terrorist write one of his speeches before giving it to the press.

In Najaf, how many times has Al Jazeera reported the Iranians or Syrians caught fighting in the Mosque? Zero. Did they mention 400 out of 1000 people arrested in one of the earliest days of fighting were released from prison by Saddam? Did Al Jazeera report that Sadr wired the Imam shrine with explosives? Did Al Jazeera report 3 attacks on Najaf police that started the violence? Did Al Jazeera report on the butchering of the Najaf police chiefs family, and the kidnapping of his grandfather and beating of his brother?

Al Jazeera is stoking the hatred against all non-Arabs, and it is the most popular satellite channel in the region. The Iraqi government should ban them from Iraq permanently.

#8/19/2004 02:35:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre


Very interesting comment from you. While i understand what Khalid is talking about, i tend to agree that yes perhaps something is broken. when a government is elected on such slim margins that it barely represents 50% of voters, then certain policies become almost dictatorial to the other 50%.

Perhaps webloggers instinctively try to readdress the balance and become more a part of democratic process.

#8/19/2004 10:06:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Hate is easy....look around......Love is another thing all together!

If man can learn to love even his enemies....his enemies will be brought down to their knees!

The war in Iraq is seen as a physical war.....there is a war occuring around the world that is being fought in the spiritual realm!

The only way true peace will come in this world is when the spiritual war is won......and it must first be won in you!

#8/19/2004 01:57:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Jeffrey --

(1) Ghaddafi is the king of fools. Let me suggest to you this perfidous idea ... that the glacial isolation he has been subjected to since Lockerbie has finally worn him out, and his was an attempt to butter up the US and to get back into international circles. Anybody who considered Lybia a threat due to their dodgy efforts at producing WMD is uninformed. Rather, countries on the US's 'hit list' have accelerated their WMD programs in order to have a deterrent. Europe thinks you suck. Asians think you suck. I won't even mention the ME. Your actions have isolated you, and it is going to be harder than ever to combat AQ from now on.

(2) NBC is the military term for your WMD. It means "Nuclear, Bacteriological, Chemical".

(3) My comments about Iraqis not 'getting' democracy were actually sarcastic. But, your viewpoint begs the question ... if these 'savages' can only be ruled by brutal force, why not leave Saddam in power in the first place? Is it worth killing 20 odd thousand Iraqis just to impose another dictator? (Because they don't 'get' democracy?).

(4) Frank Zappa? Yes, I've vaguely heard of him. No, I don't listen to his stuff.


#8/19/2004 01:58:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Anonymous --

Possibly your scenarios of Iranian and Turkish invasion are correct. But ... you are making assumptions here, like: (1) Such an invasion would occur (2) Such an invasion would be more destructive than US occupation.

A third point I would like to make is that: an efficient Iraqi army automatically assumes a stable, strong central government. That implies that the US has managed to install a puppet. Now, the question is, will such a puppet (Allawi at the moment) be better or worse for Iraq than Saddam was being, just prior to his removal? If he kills 100 000 Iraqis in order to pull the country together, do you feel that this is justified? Because ... this is what Saddam resorted to, no?

Anonymous 2 --

Sure, Al Jazeera spews out propaganda. So do practically all the major US TV networks. *Their* propaganda resulted in a sovereign country being invaded and thousands of Iraqis being killed. Who is really worse here?

Is only the US allowed to have a propaganda network? You are making the assumption that the US is automatically the "good guys" and basing your argument on that. Your assumption is wrong.


#8/19/2004 04:40:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre


Not sure if you're still around to read this. Anyway, did you intend your last comment re propaganda be possibly interpreted along "s/he pushed first" playground logic lines? Isn't that the very same logic behind almost every war? "They starved our people" "They bombed our towers" "They shelled our city relentlessly" and so on and so on and so on.

I am tired of it. I am tired of all such propaganda, who's ever it is. I am not interested in propaganda, i am interested in the human element. I am interested in such inexplicable elements as that which had me laugh helplessly as i read Anonymous describing "an Al Jazeera reporter helping a terrorist write one of his speeches before giving it to the press", the same element that forces a grim chuckle from me after reading almost anything quoted of George B Junior. It is all just too tragically funny. I am not really sure what else to do but giggle about it.

#8/19/2004 05:53:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Faisal ...

"Propaganda". This is the backbone of the west Emigre. I do not like it and like you prefer human elements.

#8/19/2004 06:28:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Emigre --

I do not like propaganda per se. It is partisan and reduces rational discussion. What I do support is that each side has a chance to say their say. At the moment I feel that the US has a monopoly on news distribution, and that it thinks that by quashing all other voices it can somehow convince people that the reality on the ground is not what it is.

I believe that if the American people knew the extent of the consequences of their support for these wars, they might seriously rethink their ideas.

That is why I support stations like Al Jazeera - not because I believe their commentary is balanced in itself - but because their commentary provides a balance to the crud that partisan US controlled networks spew forth.

Basically - what is good for the goose is good for the gander.


#8/19/2004 06:47:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


You are much worse than an Islamic terrorist. You seem to be a fairly intelligent person, and yet you "support stations like Al-Jazeera" because in your eyes their coverage balances the extremes coming from the West. How many countries are there in the West, Brunhilda? They all have independent media and they reflect a wide range of political stances. And the Middle East? The Dictators R Us Club have state-controlled media and then there are the new independents like Al-Jazeera whose cash cow is inciting hatred of the West in general and America in particular.

All of the Iraqi Bloggers despise Al-Jazeera -- even the anti-Coaltion Iraqi Bloggers. Why? They all know that the station's goal is to create as much chaos in Iraq as possible. Nothing would make Al-Jazeera happier than Iraq devolving into civil war. Al-Jazeera is without question part of Al-Qaeda's propaganda arm. You support Al-Jazeera, you support Al-Qaeda.

Here's Big Pharaoh from Egypt on Al-Jazeera:

>Al Jazerah Gone Crazy!!

>Al Jazerah is now focusing all its energy and resources on fighting the Iraqi government. I have never seen the mouth of horror channel with such hatred and anger towards an Arab government. I totally admit that before closing its office in Baghdad, Al Jazerah's rhetoric against the Iraqi government was a little bit less sensational. Now it is all out war against Iyad Allawi. It is rather quite funny to notice such a dramatic shift after getting its butt kicked.

Brunhilda, although you are part of the problem, I do appreciate the way you argue point by point. We will never agree. You know that and I know that. You hate America and Americans. That's okay with me. That's life. These debates help pass the time as I wait for Muqty to join Uday and Qusay in the morgue. Indeed, let's make sure we see photos of his bullet-riddled and broken-legged fat corpse so that everyone will have PROOF POSITIVE that the Fat Boy has finally sung his last aria!


#8/20/2004 12:43:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous


#8/20/2004 01:12:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger khalid jarrar

The history of Iraq is a VERY peaceful history, go read some books, and you will discover that there have never been internal fights, Sunna and Shea NEVER fought, even during the war with Iran, even when Saddam tried to give the war a religious meaning (like bush did) there have never been fights between sunna and shea, and there have never been fights between Muslims and Christians, never, and there have never been fights between Muslims and Jews, who lived in Iraq till 1948, and there are few of them still living in Baghdad, peacefully with Muslims and Christians, and there have never been any fights between them.
The only Simi-civil war that happened, is at 1963, when president Abd Alsalam Arif, wanted to kick bath out of the government, so the armed baathists, headed by Saddam (yes the same saddam) fought against the government for a weak or so, before the government defeate them.
Other than that, there have been revolutions, revolutions made by the whole populations, never included internal fighting, but were mostly against an occupation, or a dictatorship, or a government that is appointed by the occupation, to know all about them, read mom's blog about the history of iraq, right before she talked about the history of America in .
This legend you wrote about the fights between the families you mentioned, is a nice story some grandmas tell when they are really bored, its a story about internal fight insidee Saddams family, a corrupted family that has some envy members for, but it was never shown on the urface or spoken about officially off course, i agree with you that Saddam tried to win the envy-fight by including two men in his family, Hussein Kamil and Saddam Kamil, who he killed after that in the famous accident that happened few years ago, but this all is a small stupid story that people don’t talk about, who cares? A fascist family having envy-trouble that were solved by shading blood, which is not strange for people like them, but the nasty thing is when someone come and tries to say that all Iraqis are like them, and that is a typical thinking from the narrow-minded Bush supporters, narrow minded or benefiting from Bush personally. Just like Saddams supporters, who always think that they KNOW, they think that they are supersior, that they are THE nation, that only them deserve to live, worse than that, they read one book and claim they know more about iraq history than i do, pul-leeeas.

besides, talking to jiff, you put my last name in your URL, now you are using my * for signiture, whats next? will i wake up to find you next to me?
Bruno, sometimes i am just too busy to answer (or lazy, when stupid points are said), then i check the comments section to find comments from you saying EXACTLY what i wanted to say, most of the time.
damn i talk alot.

#8/20/2004 01:21:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger khalid jarrar

OMG!! you are horrible, really horrible, the way you talk that you wish to see Alsadr dead, your expression, the feelings behind it, what are you? my two worse enimies in the world, Bush and Sharon, i only want to see them out of office, but that awful discribtion you just made...oh my GOD, you are filled with hate and fear, you are the product of the hate and frea culture, "raise the alert degree to red and hate everyone", that is your motto and life style, Bush is sitting in his room laughing at you now, and telling himself : GOD i am good.

#8/20/2004 02:06:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

#8/20/2004 02:09:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

#8/20/2004 02:11:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre


Sorry, i am dissolving into pedantry. Perhaps propaganda is not so much the backbone of the west as it's former diet.

*pauses to consider the many countries that comprise the west. muses over the seditious journalistic tributaries flowing into the catchment we call western mainstream current affairs*

Yes we have western propaganda but there is i think a largely unremarked upon journalistic backlash to it. I don't know what sort of propaganda you are served in your part of the west but i can bet you and many others are chosing to eat and produce less of it.

I know we are not the only two who are tired of propaganda.

#8/20/2004 04:02:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Jeffrey --

While sorely tempted to rap your knuckles for your deliberate distortion of my words, I shall bow to Emigre's request and refrain from unseemly tirades. I am referring to:

"... you "support stations like Al-Jazeera" because in your eyes their coverage balances the extremes coming from the West. How many countries are there in the West, Brunhilda?"

My words: "... I feel that the US has a monopoly on news distribution" and "... provides a balance to the crud that partisan US controlled networks spew forth."

As you can see, I am not talking about Western media, but US media specifically. Again, my point is: The US public mainly derives its news from TV, (and because they are not in the ME to see the effects of your little adventure) they believe what they are told. BUT, there is a resonance that spreads from outlets like Al Jazeera to "Western" media and thence to US outlets, no matter how much they would like to ignore that news. (Case in point : Abu Ghraib.)

Secondly, it amuses me to see that you think Al Jazeera is soley responsible for stoking anger in Iraq with its coverage. My question to you is : Where do they get all this incendiary material FROM? Do they make it all up?

(Cut to visions of arabs rushing about in fake US uniforms shooting civilians on camera in the Qatari desert. In the background I can hear the extras shouting for more money to act the role of US troops. In the foreground there is a dummy M1 tank crushing a papier mache' civilian truck. Artists throw buckets of blood over it for dramatic effect.)

No. The fact is, the news they get is REAL, it is the presentation that is inflammatory. They are doing their business as a news service, and catering to their market. If they were purely telling lies then who would watch the service at all? My advice to Americans trying to improve the image of the US in the ME : if the war crimes stop ... so will the negative coverage. I consider AJ the equivalent of your 'embedded reporters'.

Thirdly, you mentioned the "Dictators R Us" club. Pretty sick club huh? You wanna tell us how many members of the Club have their membership sponsored by the US? Or would you rather not go there?

"You hate America and Americans."

Only those that think invading other countries is cool.


#8/20/2004 04:04:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Khalid --

Thank you kindly for your compliment.

Your "will i wake up to find you next to me?" re. our friend was some much appreciated humour. On second thoughts, though, make sure you check behind the pot plants before going to bed tonight ...

Re. Jeffrey's ideas about Muqtada: Those sentiments are sort of like what I wish for Bush, not to mention his supporting staff that tell him what to say (perhaps they wind him up before his speeches) so I can empathise w/ Jeff there. But .... yes ... you guys are right ... one ought not think like that.

My condolences regards the devaluation of your 'Soviet Dinar', btw.



#8/21/2004 05:44:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


I have lived in 3 European countries and two Asian countries. The US does not dominate the news in these countries. Every country has its own newspapers, magazines, and networks that reflect local issues and views. What? You think the US controls Xinhua News? Ha ha. Believe me, it doesn't. People in Shanghai don't read the New York Times, nor do they watch NBC. Chinese television has some very good international news but local news of course is constrained by the CP. All the journalists, you see, must belong to the Party. Their comedy-teams are really deadly dull, though.

Okay, let's hear from an Arab who has some critical remarks about the media in the Middle East. This comes from Salameh Nematt, writing for Dar Al-Hayat (2004/08/19):

>What is striking in Arab media, the influence of which is almost nonexistent outside of the Arab world, is that it is incapable of addressing the issues of national priorities. It still holds on to the slogan "no voice should be higher than the voice of battle," or it is forbidden to deal with the real issues that affect the Arabs' daily lives. The Arab media, which is mostly owned by Arab governments or the ruling elite or their allies, defend the situation of paralysis and superficiality, and so they make up for the absence of official action by fiery rhetoric. What the politician cannot say about another politician, the journalist will, and what the politician wants to conceal would be attributed to journalism's fabrications. In this way, there are "colleagues" who lie in their profession with the justification of politics, and lie in politics with the excuse of professionalism.

Read the whole article.


#8/21/2004 08:03:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Khalid, it's a very wise opinion.
I totally agree with you.

Carol (Carola ;)

Ps: I can't read all your posts! you're too fast for me!

#8/22/2004 03:12:00 am Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

the problem is most people who chose to remain ignorant will stereotype people by the country they are from or their race, etc. the important thing to remember is while there are evil people in this world, that come in all sizes, shapes, countries and colors, we are all individuals and are not defined by our location or ancestry. it's just too bad more people don't view the world with that perspective.

#8/22/2004 10:30:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger nofrills

Sorry to interrupt, but I couldn't remain silent.

Jeffery said:
I have lived in 3 European countries and two Asian countries. The US does not dominate the news in these countries. Every country has its own newspapers, magazines, and networks that reflect local issues and views. What? You think the US controls Xinhua News? Ha ha. Believe me, it doesn't. People in Shanghai don't read the New York Times, nor do they watch NBC.

I say:
The basic fact is, China is not a good friend of the US, and there's no wonder that their press is not under control of the US.

It's a bit tricky thing to do to talk about China when you talk about Asia as a whole. Though I don't think there's one Asia at the moment, but if you insist so, look at Japan, South Korea, Indonesia etc, instead of China. If I may add, it is not about "which paper they read" or "which news channel they watch," but "what source their press depends on."

I can't fully express what I am feeling right now, because English is not my native language... At least I think it's very stupid of me to say something you have already known very well, and at the same time, I can't resist.

all the best,
nofrills (a Japanese national), from Tokyo

#8/22/2004 11:44:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Blogger Jeffrey


There is absolutely NOT one Asia. You mean unified Asia, right? Again, absolutely not. The anger of many Chinese toward Japanese for many, many abuses in the past take a long time to heal -- if ever. Don't forget that. Japan tried to be the imperialist power in Asia back in the 30s. Don't worry. Each Asian country has its own history and takes care of its own interests. Why do you think Japanese fans needed police escort out of the Chinese stadium recently.

Japanese have nothing to fear in the US. You do, however, have a lot to fear from China. I can tell you from first-hand experience in China that China is getting stronger and without question will be a power to be reckoned with. Right now Japan is being protected by the US -- don't EVER lose our friendship or the Chinese might be on your islands to Nanjing your behinds back into the stone age.

Just a friendly warning, sir.


#8/23/2004 01:05:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

Jeffrey --

I see you are dodging my commentary once more, though if it be out of guile or ignorance I know not.

I said:
"Again, my point is: The US public mainly derives its news from TV, (and because they are not in the ME to see the effects of your little adventure) they believe what they are told."

... and you, of course, try to argue about the media in *other* countries not being controlled by the US. *They* are not the problem, no matter how scary you want China to look. *You*, the USA, are the problem. My entire argument is based around the fact that the US wants to ban Al Jazeera and independent press in Iraq, so that only the 'official' reports exit the country. This makes it easy to ignore any atrocities committed by 'Coalition' forces, not only in the world, but especially in the US.

Nice extract from the Al-Hayat, though. What seemed most pertinent to the matter at hand, though, was this:

"... The Arab media, which is mostly owned by Arab governments or the ruling elite or their allies, defend the situation of paralysis and superficiality ..."

Now, I ask myself, how many of these Arab governments are supported by the US? These ones that want to maintain the status quo? And, why does the status quo suit the US? Easy. If there were real democracy in these countries they would likely steer an anti-US course, and a populist, anti-US government is NOT what the States wants, now is it?

I love your hypocrisy.


#8/23/2004 01:08:00 pm Assalam Aleikom Anonymous Anonymous

nofrills --

A lot of what Jeffrey says is ' sort of ' true. Like "Japanese have nothing to fear in the US. You do, however, have a lot to fear from China."

The reality of the situation is that Japan is a key power projection point in the Far East for the United States. There is nothing wrong with that per se, except for the fact that the US has imposed a very pacifist constitution on Japan (after WW2), and has effectively disarmed Japanese armed forces in relation to bigger rivals like China. The dilemma is clear - Japan is reliant upon US power for protection against China ... yet it is the US that disarmed Japan. The situation has coercive elements to it.

This is analogous to the situation in Iraq where the same dilemma has been imposed : "If the US leaves, Iran will invade. (or similar consequences) Ergo, the US must stay to protect Iraqis from Iranians"

I also notice that some Americans (nudge nudge wink wink) are always eager to point out how magnanimous they are with their 'protection' and how you had better be grateful or else.

Nice, huh?

Also, I find this bit you wrote to be very true:

"If I may add, it is not about "which paper they read" or "which news channel they watch," but "what source their press depends on." "

That is what is being tried in Iraq : quash the bad news at its source, and nobody will know that anything bad is happening. Only the Iraqis on the ground will know, and what influence do they have, right? I think some big countries are finding out ...


#8/24/2004 12:55:00 am Assalam Aleikom Blogger emigre


you have not at all interrupted, it is a pleasure to hear a fresh voice.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Weblog Commenting by