Slashdot Mirror

Precisely how they did it is yet to be revealed by a truly independent investigation with full subpoena power. This timeline leaves no doubt that the official story is a crock of lies, and indicates a number of people who should be taken in for questioning. For a longer exposition including proof of controlled demolitions, details of disinformation tactics, and information on moving companies, a "factoring company" that specializes in "unconventional transactions worldwide" and deals with the Pentagon, the CIA and the FBI, and possible links to organized crime, see here.

Pre-9/11 Timeline

1946: July 22. Menachem Begin's Irgun Jewish terrorists dress as Arabs and bomb the King David Hotel, killing 92 people. The Irgun also plot to assassinate British foreign secretary Ernest Bevin; fortunately, this conspiracy is foiled by MI6.

1948: May 14. David Ben-Gurion declares the independence of the new Zionist State of Israel, born from deception and from the blood of victims of Jewish terrorism hours before the British Mandate is due to expire. It takes effect at midnight, Tel Aviv time. May 15. Eleven minutes after midnight, U.S. President Harry Truman officially recognises the proclaimed Jewish state in Palestine.

1954: July. An Israeli spy ring is arrested in Egypt. These Israeli secret service agents have been assigned to attack U.S. and British interests in Egypt. "Operation Susannah" is a typical example of false-flag terrorism in which the perpetrators pin the blame on another party - in this case, Egypt and "the Arabs" - for political gain. The operation is unsuccessful, the Israeli defense minister Pinhas Lavon is forced to resign as a result of the scandal, and the incident becomes known as the Lavon Affair.

1967: June 8. Israel carries out a sustained air and naval attack on the USS Liberty for over an hour, employing torpedoes, machine guns and napalm rockets, even to the extent of machine-gunning lifeboats launched to save the most seriously wounded. 34 men are killed and more than 170 wounded.

1983: Christopher Bollyn marries

All of this does not matter to the question of artists canceling appearances. If an artist does not want to appear in Israel, that's fine. An artists who cancels is being suckered into making a political statement under the guise/threat of avoiding making one.

More so than other artists that cancelled, I think Gil-Scott Heron would have delivered strong messages in his performance. As much as any performer I can think of, he has a long history of fighting racism. I'm not sure Santana and Elvis Costello would have delivered significant messages in their music had they not cancelled.

It's unfortunate that Gil-Scott Heron won't be around to perform either for the troops or general public there at some future date.

I can appreciate that the rest of the world may underestimate how difficult some policy decisions can be when we mostly lack diverse and in depth news sources. (showing more violence isn't showing more depth) I think it would be to Israels advantage to make LBA and/or other English language broadcasters more widely available (direct streaming, livestation etc.) While some internal political conflict and problems may seem an embarrassing thing to show internationally, those who have seen conflicts between political parties and groups elsewhere might at least be a little more sympathetic to the political pressure (suicide?) that sometimes cripples major policy changes.

The high level of activity in the middle-east is motivated more people to try and look a little deeper than the 'short on facts, long on pundit posturing' coverage we're mostly handed.

There are some serious issues that should at least be discussed widely. Failure to do so erodes credibility. Even friends question friends.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/report-44-of-israeli-jews-support-rabbis-edict-forbidding-rentals-to-arabs-in-safed-1.333825

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/23/world/la-fg-israel-intolerance-20110123

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=219464

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20Editorials/2010/July/12%20o/Deteriorating%20Conditions%20for%20Israeli%20Arab%20Citizens%20By%20Stephen%20Lendman.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yermi-brenner/learning-from-the-rabbis-_b_821393.html

you just confirmed everything I have learned about the Wahabbi Sect of Muslim
There is no such sect. There are people who call themselves Salafi, means following first 3 generations of Muslims.

nd am saddened to see how MUCH more extreme it is than the Islam that my Muslim friends practice. There are two questions. First, who is practicing Islam correctly, those who "adapt" the commandments of The Creator to "modern times", "environment", "West" or those who stick to those commandments no matter what? Second, what is extreme is subjective, right? I find it quite extreme to expose a human body Western men and women do, I find it quite extreme that Westerners get drunk in pubs and bars and expose their drunkedness to the public, but I am ok with that. I understand why they behave like that, and I am living in a Western society. Now understand that countries like Afghanistan have their own notion of what is extreme, what is decent, what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. So your statements is actually translate to "I saddened to see how MUCH more different it is from Western culture than the Islam that my Muslim friends practice."

About Pagans. I do not know what deities or Deity your cult believes. Islam recognizing magic and witchcraft as a reality, but involvement in those practices is considered a sin, see more here. Pagans associating The Creators with any kind of partners, helpers, etc. are indeed strongly condemned in Islam, because that is the greatest and only unforgiveble sin. The person who dies in the state of Shirk (associating partners with The Creator) will be hold in Hell eternally, while all other sinners will eventually will become purified in Hell and saved from the Hellfire.

Does that make me the ultimate infidel? Infidel, yes, but not ultimate, since your life is not over yet and you still have a chance to recognize the Creator as such. Right now you are just a sinner.

But that said, what about being a FREE WHITE WOMAN, making all the money, supporting the home and NOT having children yet at the age of 33?

What is "free"? As a human you have a free will granted by Creator as anyone else. "White" or "black" has no relevance in Islam, Prophet, sal Allahu 'alaihi wa-sallam, said it in his famous Farewell Cermon. "Woman": men and women have equal religious responsibilities in worshipping Allah (but different roles in society in accordance with His commandments). "Making all the money" is not prohibited for a Muslim woman. "Supporting the home" is also a responsibility of a woman, meaning that she needs to support her parents and siblings if she has means. "not having children YET" - well, this depends on your free will from one side and the health granted to you from the Creator. If you are married, then the only case when Islam allows to use prevention is poor health pf the would be mother. If you are not married, then you would be committing a major sin by having sexual relationships. You are responsible for your actions only and as long you have a free will in performing those actions. I am not sure I am answering this question.

We have no evidence that there IS a God, let alone God-creatures come to Earth. We do not have unequivocal scientific evidence, that is true, but certainly all kind of signs are there, you just have to look at them with unbiased eyes. There are tons of beauty and harmony in this world which is quite different from anything that humans ever have done or are capable of doing. There is also a remarkable logic and unity in the whole world structure on all levels of organization, that many physicists were amazed at. We are showered with miracles in our everyday life being quite ungrateful by not recognizing them as such.

I just think that the entire world needs a whole lot more love and tolerance, and a lot less hate and violence. Well, you a

This comes as no surprise to any of us who edit in Wikipedia land. As of late, I've been focusing on the negative systemic bias introduced on articles covering topics related to Islam and Muslims. For months, editors of Islam related Wikipedia articles have been driven out if any of their edits, while based upon academic journal articles, resulted in anything positive being said about the faith. There have been many discussions and articles written amongst students and professors of Islam over the past few months regarding the fact that Wikipedia's articles on Islam are tainted with negative propoganda at the behest of the same set of editors. These articles cannot be considered reliable sources of information and an open-letter is set to be released criticizing Wikipedia's policies of letting editors with negative agendas litter articles on Islam with what "feels right" instead of the facts. One of the biggest battlegrounds right now is the Islamism article. A look at the talk page shows a particular editor by the name of Timothy Usher has censored comments on the talk page critical of his position. So much so that the Islamism article's talk page earned Protection status! This is unheard of in Wikipedia where contested articles generally earn protection status. The battle continues on. Now any editor echoing negative sentiments against this band of anti-Islam editors is erroneously labeled a sockputtet in the hopes of having the account banned. So far, one editor has been banned on these grounds. Other editors have complained but not much is being done even when Administrators are alerted.

This development of creating another Wiki shouldn't surprise anyone. Wikipedia goes against its own policies of not being a democracy regularly. Users regularly violate policies of civility, no personal attacks, and trolling but are usually not met with a harsh response as long as editors agree ideologically with these attacks. The only way to balance this out is to start a Wikipedia where censorship of opinions doesn't take place and this is exactly what these editors have done.

The other problem is Wikipedia's pervasive presence online. Multiple sites mirror Wikipedia's database so any unsubstantiated "fact" quickly spreads around the internet. For example, the Prophets of Islam article mentioned Islam had 313 messengers. As a Jewish scholar of Islam, I found this fact strange. Most Wikipedia editors tend to erroneously regard Google as a great source of unbiased information so I began my search there. The phrase 313 messengers returned results mostly pointing to mirrors of Wikipedia's article. Searching the Qur'an netted nothing. However, it was only when I went to our campus library did I discover cryptic Sufi texts mentioning the number 313. A bunch of my schoolmates working on their doctorates and I had a discussion on this and one of them made the changes. This illustrates that an editor of Wikipedia can have their information disseminated far and wide. Anyone seeking to abuse this power could easily do so.

The idea of collaboration works great when every fact can be backed up with the scientific process but it breaks down whenever social com

I thought your question at first was innocent. Just another Jew baiter 'eh?

How convenient, the previous poster points out the lack of equal rights given to Arabs in Palestine/Israel areas, and he is immediately labeled a Jew baiter.

Not me, I just hate you fucking Zionists.

For others reading this post:

Keep in mind that Zionists can come from any religion. Here's a good explanation of what a Zionist is:

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Hassan%20El-Najjar/Zion ism,%20the%20highest%20form%20of%20imperialism.htm

A comparison can be made between Christians, and the lunatics on the religious right who call themselves Christians. Feel free to replace "Christians" with the religion of your choice.

As for Jews, peaceful, god-fearing, compassionate Jews, I love them. Not just for their disgust of Zionists either.

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/

There is no denying that Israel's long-term goal is to completely take over Palestine (as long as Israel is Zionist controlled that is). A cursory look at historical maps from partitioning to now will show how Israel has stolen Palestinian land over the last 60 years.

As an aside, Gaza is beginning to shape up nicely as a Palestinian concentration camp, don't you think?

http://www.al-bab.com/arab/maps/palestine.htm#HIST ORICAL

And for us Americans, just check out the stats over at http://www.ifamericansknew.org/ to see what is really going on.

This is the statistic that concerns me the most, the fact that we empower Zionist butchery and genocide in the name of spreading democracy.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/cost_of_israe l.html

Zionists proudly declare that the salvation of their state came at the hand of God. What they don't say is that it was his hand writing on an American checkbook that actually did the saving.

It kinda puts a different light on the divine will of God, doesn't it?

And wasn't it your people that were treated this same way in WWII as you are treating Palestinians today? Are you not ashamed?

And don't try to justify Israel's imperialism/genocide/apartheid by comparing them to the numerous (as in legion) sins of America either. What our government has done in the past, and what it is doing now, is every bit as bad as what is going on in Israel. That doesn't excuse us, and it hardly provides cover for you.

Ban American/Israeli goods!

I'm quite sure a lot of these: http://aljazeerah.info/Cartoons/Cartoon%20Links/Ca rtoon%20links.htm are more "offensive" that the Muhammad cartoons they're all busy rioting about.

Is Al Jazeera reputable enough?

Don't forget the fact the Yanks give God knows how many billions of Dollars to a regime that's in violation of over 100 UN Resultions and has killed over 3000 innocent civilans since 2000... oh the fucking irony.

Nobody ever gives the other size of that particular equation--over a thousand innocent Israeli civilians will killed by palestinian terrorists in the same time frame. Also, the EU has given over a billion dollars to the Palestinian Authority over the last decade, some of which has been diverted to terrorist organizations. But blaming America is an international sport, so what the hell.

I used to be... let's not say anti-Israel, but rather of the opinion that there was no "right" side in that particular conflict. And then it was presented to me that Israel isn't trying to kill civilians--the terrorist leadership make their homes in highly populated areas so that if Israel ever comes knocking they either have to take ALOT of trouble to do so surgically, otherwise they risk killing large numbers of civillians. Sometimes Israel does the former, but usually the latter.

The Palestinians, on the other hand, intentionally kill civillians--it isn't collateral damage, they're the primary fucking target.

So excuse me if I don't feel the outrage others do when Israel assassinates the leader of the Islamic Jihad, or when they blow up the leader of Hamas and bystanders get caught in the crossfire. It also never ceases to amaze me how anybody can regard things like the above as "crimes."

All of the above said, I still think there are some things Israel does that are horrible--personally, I find things like destroying the homes of families of terrorists to be barbaric. I also don't like the amount of money my country sends to them each year. But all-in-all, Israel certainly has the moral high ground.

They basically admit they're not going to be unbiased, but only want to give news that depicts Arabs and Muslims in a positive light, and Israelis in a negative light.

This site has a whole archive of photos: http://www.aljazeerah.info/

There is a daily photos page which is quite comprehensive, plus all the recent photos. Daily Photos Collection

This site has a whole archive of photos: http://www.aljazeerah.info/

There is a daily photos page which is quite comprehensive, plus all the recent photos. Daily Photos Collection

It looks like the parent link is a copycat site, like aljazeerah.info

Poll: 75% of Palestinians support Haifa restaurant attack: Respond or Ignore! Don't mod down.

Thats because 66% of the israelis reject the idea of an independent state, also another poll shows that over half (53%) of the Jewish population of Israel is opposed to equal rights for Arab Israelis. read it here.. so please remove this lame sig. it is not fair to tell one side of the story.

Indeed.

CNN reports that "Iraq still controls airport" in what Al Sahaf called a "slaughter", but Al Jazeerah actually reports a bodycount of 200-300 US soldiers killed fighting over the airport.

What can I conclude? That the airport is still being fought over, and that the bodycount is higher than CNN's int("slaughter")==0 and less than the number the Iraqi's would exagerate.

--

The english version of the Al-Jazeera TV's website was online since Monday. The adress is:
http://english.aljazeera.net

I could see it on Thursday and now it is gone. Washington Post has a article about a hack attack. Apparently the name of the website does not resolve.

What i found very suspicious are these imposter sites:
http://www.aljazeerah.us/ and http://www.aljazeerah.info/
Only the latter has a little headline that the website is not connected in any way to Al-Jazeera TV.

These sites can be easily confused with the original site and it already happened.
Imagine something like foks.news in a arab country without a clear statement that it is not us media.

ps: I already submitted the story about the imposter sites but slashdot did not post it. That's why i am posting it here...

http://www.aljazeerah.info/

It contains also links from the main arab sources. I don't know if is really the TV station because actually I read also the http://english.aljazeera.net (this is down since the other one is up) and is really not keeping the same tone. They are more anti-american as the first version was... But it worths a look.

Anyway if you have the ability to mix up information you will be able to put up your own opinion based on all the news.

Also I have noted a very big difference between CNN, FOX and other stations. Just look at the NOTE from the end of CNN's pages on war pages. MSNBC, on the other hand, seems to balance the lack of accurate information with stronger opinion articles and editorials.

While other people have posted links to various sites that are hosting images and the Al-jazeera news feeds and images, I decided to mirror the news feeds as an attempt to help move these feeds to people who are curious about the hype circling this situation, but unable to see it in the news.

I've rarely been moved like this situation moved me. After reading about these Al-jazeera clips showing dead American soldiers and captured American POWs, I wanted to actually see them to see if the hype matched the furvor. They aren't completely gruesome, but they definately show that this war won't be a week jaunt through the Middle East.

I don't mind having the news censored for security reasons, but when the rest of the world can view these clips, and Americans can't, my whole opinion of the situation changes.

Posted anonymously. Mod accordingly.

aljazeerah.

and here is more

and a nice picture on top of it of our dead boys here

and more here

I just hope those cocksuckers still yelling for more WAR enlist themselves to go fight since their pussy opinions got us their WAR in the first place. Time to be a man and fight for what you believe in, right? Fucking retards.

before some stupid shit comes and lectures us about how Iraq supposedly has chemical weapons, I would ask 'where are they?'. Since Iraq would have used them by now if they had them.

I think this may be the original. It has more text than what you posted. Maybe you got the 'edited' version? Couldn't read salon -- I have no subscription.

FWIW, I really like Drudge Report. He tends to sensationalize his headlines, but he gets stories quickly, and he uses a good share of international, non-US news links.