Freedom of speech might not be free after all
Few years back, or maybe as late as last year, i remember reading in the mainstream news on attempt by zionist/jewish groups to lobby for a bill to censor the internet due to 'increasing anti-semitism activities on the internet'. I think that was during the summer 06 lebanon war, where Israel had to hire hundreds of people primarily to surf online on forums and discussions and 'counter' any opinion that does not side with Israel at that time. Israel was not very popular during the war.
It is understandable why they want to censor the internet, with most major newspaper being controlled by zionist entities, the only place they can't control and mould public opinion is the internet.
Strangely enough, Yahoo Discuss space was disbanded not long after the war.
I couldn't google any article on the issue, the nearest found was a 2004 writeups at http://zgrams.zundelsite.org/pipermail/zgrams/2004-June/000886.html
If it's true, than middle east internet censorship is nothing compared to the global scale of internet censorships planned by these groups.
Are the west being hypocrite when it comes to freedom of speech?
Jeez I never found CBC to be pro Israeli. Ya goes to show, everyone has different opinions.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
The only overtly Bias I found in Canadian newspapers was in Toronto (pro Israel) and Quebec City (pro Palestine)...but I honestly suspect that at least part of that was the franco-anglo friction :)
I always thought the CBC was ever so slightly more pro Israely LOL (just goes to show you how import YOUR point of view is).
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
I find the east coasts, and the CBC to be quite pro Palestinian, Globe and Mail too. Pro Palestinian in that they write everytime Israel does something in Palestine, and not vice versa so much.
Granted it has been 4 years since I've read to many Canadian papers. :)
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
If anything I would characterize the Canadian press as neutral by and large...very few openly Pro-Israel/Anti-Palestine....and very few openly Pro-Palestine/Anti-Israel.
But that's mainly the papres I read (The National ones and the local ones from: Montreal, Ottawa, and Edmonton)...maybe other cities have different leaning press.
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
By too a fault I guess I mean that they are pro Palestinian to the point of bias. In other words, you never hear Israels side of the story.
The US media is very divided. THe right wing (your CNN, Fox News and New York Times) are pro Israel, but you Washington Post and a few others are pro-Palestinian.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
Interesting. I've heard the European press is less dogmatically pro-Israel too. That makes sense of course: European (and I presume Canadian) economic interests have much less to gain from supporting Israel than US/UK interests.
What do you mean 'to a fault'?
Joe Williams
[email protected]
http://earsopen.blogspot.com/
Sorry Joe, In Canada you would be hard pressed to find media with a pro-Israeli slant. Much of the media is left leaning and pro-Palestinian to a fault.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
As usual you're right although I think in the UK at least you'd struggle to find any daily newspaper that's pro-Palestine beyond vague sympathy. Maybe its different the other side of the Pond but there really is no left-wing media anymore in the UK (besides the extremely marginalised and poorly photocopied publications of progressive politial organisations), if there ever was one.
By whatever means, 'Zionism' does have a very strong hold over the printed word in the UK. Although of course there is a full spectrum of opinions of the Palestinian question in my home country the pro-Israel line of our press can't be justified by consumer demand: support for the Palestinians has been growing quite rapidly over the last five or six years, despite the bias of coverage of the issue of the press in general.
Joe Williams
[email protected]
http://earsopen.blogspot.com/
Yes, there are Western papers that have a anti-Islam BIAS and a pro-Israeli Bias, but there are also those that are pro Islam, and pro Israeli, or anti Israeli and pro Palestinian. It depends if you read the left wing papers or the right wing papers or the middle ground papers. This isn't a conspiracy, this is just the way the media works and has always worked.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
was hatespeech which was defended heavily under the 'freedom of speech', where other newspapers, the majority of them western rushed to reprint even though they knew it was tasteless.. wouldn't want to dwell further into this as i know you're writing about this in other thread..
though you're right, i can't find a western newspaper that print hatespeech towards arabs and islam.. this is due to my own mistake to use the word 'hatespeech' rather than 'bias'..
my entire view on this was based on the truth as i see and read e.g: censorship on USS Liberty, WW2 - maybe,
where as your entire viewpoint will always be restricted towards one thing: it's only a conspiracy..
in the country of the blinds, the one-eyed man is king..
"any hatespeech directed at arabs and islam in general is considered as freedom of speech and more acceptible in your media, where else a hatespeech directed at israel (not jews) is.. a hatespeech, or as stated in the article, antizionism is considered as antijews, antifreedom, antiglobalization, or as jaunted put it, 'anti-usa'?"
Says who? Where are you getting your information? Please find me a Western newspaper today that printed hatespeech against Arabs or Islam? I can gurantee you there was none, Unless of course you consider disagreement with policies as hate speech? And if you do then you can go and read tons of articles with hate speech against Israel since very very few (except for right wing conservative papers) agree with Israels policies.
A Zionist lobby group has every right to try and pass a bill against anti semitism on the internet, that's their whole purpose it life. I gurantee you there are quite a few Islamic lobby groups out there doing the same thing, I don't see you bringing up their bills.
Your entire point of view on this is skewwed by your inability to see past some make believe zionist conspiracy. You are seeing what you want to see, rather then actually seeing what is happening.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
as much as no nuke warhead from tehran landed on tel aviv.. but you still believe and argue that iran is still a threat to israel..
back to the topic, why is it to the west, any hatespeech directed at arabs and islam in general is considered as freedom of speech and more acceptible in your media, where else a hatespeech directed at israel (not jews) is.. a hatespeech, or as stated in the article, antizionism is considered as antijews, antifreedom, antiglobalization, or as jaunted put it, 'anti-usa'?
i don't know the correlation between zionism and USA or freedom or globalization, please enlighten me..
even though no bill was passed, still any opinion that is critical of zionism will surely be subjected to harrasment or ridiculed by (like what you did just now)
Question Straycat, did these "zionist groups" actually manage to pass the bill? I believe the answer is no. Therefore there was no threat to freedom of speech.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
this thread is about threat to freedom of speech by zionist groups.. it has nothing to do with scapegoating, paranoid or what so ever..
there is news article on it, and it's open for discussion or argument rather than plain dismissal..
so if you wouldn't mind, point me the direction to these 'history' so that i could look at things objectively..
The people who go on about Zionist plots are too thick to actually read history and look at things objectively. Scapegoating is much easier.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
The people who go on about Zionist plots are usually anti-USA.
Soon there will be no newsprint to read for Islamism/Zionism/NannyStatism/SaveSacredcowism/BigBhuddaRulesism black ink all over the shop!
in this thread, then don't bother to write anything.
ROFL. Yup sure, whatever you say. Blame my answer on a Zionist conspiracy.
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
what best way to dismiss anything than calling it a conspiracy, without providing any counter arguments.. shows the mentality of an opressed mind, or just plain retarded..
Paranoi raises its ugly head. Next we'll be worried about little green men.
Zionist conspiracies eh? Paranoid much?
"I fight with love and I laugh with rage, you have to live light enough to see the humor and long enough to see some change." Ani Difranco
Um...yeah. We are. You are not as free as you think. Got to watch what you say just like anywhere else. Trust me, there are restrictions.