babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
'Al Jazeera gaining favour in Canada'
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/659527
"Bernie Farber, head of the CJC, said Burman alleviated some of its fears when he proposed a consultation committee made up of the CJC and B'nai Brith Canada, to serve as a conduit for immediate complaints.."
Gross!
Gross? Sounds pretty savy of Burman.
No it sounds like whatever the CJC and BB object to will be censored. It is gross and undemocratic. Who gave these people the option to be the voice of the Canadian people, or Jewish people for that matter?
Funny how these two have no issue whatsoever with media bias as it is currently - very pro-Israel - but want to be our watchdogs on what is deemed acceptable. A "conduit for complaints"? And then they have the power to do what? Determine if and what news is anti-Israel? Determine if that news should be censored.
These two organizations have no right to determine jack shit fort me, or anyone else. Turn the channel if you don't like it. You would think they would be far more concerned about Fox News and that station's hate speech but no, let's silence any Arab voices we can. After all there isn't enough pro-Israel bias in the media. We definitely need more!
thats a little ridiculous to me. free press doesn't mean 'free press once bernie farber has had its say', it means free press. period.
This is all very tolerant of you. Jewish groups actually are aloud to express an opinion are they not?
LOL
Thanks for the link to the Avi Lewis piece, it was very interesting. Sorry, I don't remember who. I then followed the link to one on private cities, also very interesting, definitely the kind of news I am interested in.
Oh, they're "just expressing an opinion"? Do they speak for you Winnifred? Are you capable of seeing any wrongs whatsoever with these groups? None?
I do believe in freedom of speech. I want to be a committee to be a conduit for immediate complaints too! After all, I have a conciet that I speak for the entire left in Canada. Stargazer can be on it too if she likes.
I understood this consultation committee came as a recommendation from Al Jazeera.
The BB and CJC are going well beyond expressing an opinion here, winnifred, moreover your comments and theirs indicate a sense of privilege and gall, that go well beyond the acceptable threshhold.
OGS (OldgoatStargazer) Committee to Review Complaints That Really Piss Us Off.
Clearly Berman's taming and domestication of AJE is going swimmingly.
...there are limits to patience however, and you test those limits repeatedly.
Just to be sure: You believe that it is their right to act as a censor/filter on the expression of others? And you believe this has something to do with supporting free speech?
Their right to limit free speech? So is this sort of like that lame argument that somehow we must tolerant bigots?
I'm seriously amazed at the pro CJC BB no matter what costs crowd on here. Doesn't the CJC have it's own PR people?
If this were a Israeli station and the CMC wanted to "review" the complaints you'd be up in arms over this. Now it's all about free speech. Funny how it's okay for one group but not for another.
Winnifred, I urge you to exercise your rights and just don't listen to the channel. Instead, you presume us to be complete idiots who can't tell who the bad guys are.
Why would you think you have a right to limit our rights? Or better yet why do you think your rights outweigh our rights, winnifred and jaku?
As it actually has nothing to do with limiting "Jewish groups" rights, it has to do with attempts to limit our rights.
What audacious crap, and cynical fart for "freedom of expression" .
"Expressing an opinion" is just that.
But allowing a lobby a review panel as gatekeeper for OTHER peoples expression is oppression.
Is the oil lobby to have a "review panel" for all environmental stories as well?
How exactly are BB and CJC limiting your rights? Actually both are on record as not opposing AJE. It was Tony Burman who offered the consultation committee, why arent you dumping then on him? All CJC ever said in relation to Al Jazeera English is that they have concerns. And this to you is over the top?
No, seems to me you are the ones trying to limit the rights of Jewish groups. Had CJC or BB opposed the license that would be one thing. Had they both demanded a consultative group that would be another. None of that happened so get a grip and try to see your own bias for a change.
Actually Winnifred, your blind adherence to all things CJC, BB and Israel is pretty sickening. You really should have a look in the mirror. All this bullshit about needing the CJC to "watch" what comes out of AJE is bullshit and one-sided. Apparently Winnifred and Jaku both believe the media is currently unbiased. What world do you live in? Certainly not the one the rest of us live on.
Where's Stockholm to ask for names and addresses of the Israel Lobby that he says doesn't exist?
I don't have a link, but I recall that when Al-Jazeera was last refused a licence, the CBC radio report on the story said something to the effect that Bnai Brith was satisfied with the ruling. When babble's old threads become available again you can find the exact quote, as I posted it at the time...in a thread in which we were aguing with Bernie Farber about some hysterical nonsense he was spouting.
You're welcome, ennir.
Again, what crap.
The "generous" position of Farber was only a fallback position when the CJC decided they might not, this time, manage getting the same impossible restrictions that prevented the non-english version from being carried:
http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16346&
This CJC and BB do not represent all Jewish positions, they are a subset of "Jewish Groups", a subset that endorse the policies of the state of Israel--and prevent Jewish Groups such as the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians from affiliating because they don't toe the line.
It is the CJC and BB, the pro-Israel subset of "Jewish Groups", that Tony Brumet felt the need to go cap in hand to molify with a "consultation committee"--not Independent Jewish Voices or other Jewish peace groups.
I am assuming that Tony Burman understands what most others understand and that is the fact that Canadian Jewish Congress and B'nai Brith are the two main groups that most Canadian Jews have a commonality with.
And what exactly is the problem with the Jewish Congress changing its position? Should it be prevented from doing that as well? I'm not saying that cjc is always right, far from it. But this thread is about trying to stifle Jewish groups, that seems pretty clear. If you don't like the CJC or B'nai brith position, write, scream, don't post here that these groups have too much power (which is how I read this thread) and should be silent or silenced.
What the hell does this have to do with freedom to express opinion? At what point in this thread did anyone's freedom of expression become threatened? Winnifred and Jaku, you've been free to express opinion here within stated babble policy, and have done so in your own hive-mind sort of way. Bernie is and will remain free to express his opinion, and I'm sure if he had to go 5 minutes without expressing an opinion he'd explode or something. We're all up to our wazoos in BB CJC opinions, and will continue to be indefinitely.
What I object to is living in a juristiction where political expediency involves outfits like the CJC BB to inserting themselves as filters in the public broadcasting of the news. It is not a compromise that should have had to have been made. We have an organisation supposedly responsible to the taxpayer for that purpose already. How dare Bernie Farber and his unaccountable organization impose themselves as a "conduit for complaints"
http://www.cjc.ca/template.php?action=itn&Story=2695
Bernie and his "angst".
Old goat you make my point. Farber et al have the right to have an opinion in a free society. So do you and all other Canadians. The thing that you refuse to see is that you disagree with their "opinion". Great, so do I. Heck, I even have the right to write to the CRTC as did the CJC and give voice to my opinion. I can write a dozen times a day if i want, that's what it means to live in a free society. Sometimes authorities will agree with me and at other times they won't same with CJC and B'nai brith.
I read that B'nai brith wanted the city of Toronto to stop the play "Seven Jewish Children". A dumbass move to be sure. By the way I didn't see that the Jewish Congress asked for it to be stopped but such nuance means little here. The play is still going strong, as it should be, across the country. Surprise no one listened to B'nai Brith. And that's my point we lessen our country's beaurty by complaining that Jewish groups speak out too much. More importantly those here (the majority it seems) who supportv a call for groups like Congress to be less out there, diminish themselves.
There is absolutely no way al jezzara will be allowed to operate in Canada on a mass scale anyways. They would undermine all the mid east propaganda the MSM rams down our throat on a daily basis. Sure Canada will entertain the idea to look(optics) like a democratic and free speech mecca but that's about it a big charade.
Can you imagine a tv or news channel airing how karzai thinks nato soldiers should be charged like common criminals for doing vriminal acts and god forbid the sentance is beheading....and airing it 24 /7 ...no way. Or how Isreal used chemical weapons on civilians and made it a debate that lasted months and months instead of a burried blurp. Ther is no way they will allow a news service to depict the truth...the msm here has got it too good and cozy with the powers that be.
I think they should be allowed to operate here..finally there would be a voice for truth that is totally lacking in the MSM. Good luck al jezzara
There is absolutely no way al jezzara will be allowed to operate in Canada on a mass scale anyways. They would undermine all the mid east propaganda the MSM rams down our throat on a daily basis. Sure Canada will entertain the idea to look(optics) like a democratic and free speech mecca but that's about it a big charade.
Can you imagine a tv or news channel airing how karzai thinks nato soldiers should be charged like common criminals for doing criminal acts and god forbid the sentence is beheading....and airing it 24 /7 ...no way. Or how Isreal used chemical weapons on civilians and made it a debate that lasted months and months instead of a buried blurp. There is no way they will allow a news service to depict the truth...the msm here has got it too good and cozy with the powers that be.
I think they should be allowed to operate here..finally there would be a voice for truth that is totally lacking in the MSM. Good luck al jezzara
Burman's AJE only looks good if you've previously been dependent on Burman's CBC
Pro-Israeli editors seek to influence Al-Jazeera International English
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5735.shtml
"there are already ominous signs that pro-Israeli sympathizers, some of them with a background in the BBC, are exerting control on the editorial positions of the new channel.."
and then along came Tony ...