Propaganda Unfold

 right-wing extremist who shot dead at least 85 people at a youth camp

Most probably you  have heard the explosion in Oslo on 22nd July 2011. Instantly news media were started to claim that it is alqaeeda’s work and this attitude is not a shock. Main stream media is always portrait what ever bad happened to Alqaeeda. This is it’s ill-tactics started from 9/11 than in London bombing , after that in Stockholm bombing and now in Oslo. 

right-wing extremist who shot dead at least 85 people

Despite all of their propaganda the voices backfold when right after 1 hour a Christian Norweign Fundamentalist massacred 85 people . Now Government sources claim that these both events are connected and due to a political agenda internal to Norway’s diplomacy. 

Media on other side now aplogizing and present the low tone that what they have try to allege in the explosion was indeed wrong. This is clearly a sign for us as a citizen not to blindly follow what present in main stream rather wait and use some gray-matter in head.  

The hypocrtical role of media in this case is of vital importance and a term-card for our future reliance on them as reliable sources. 

sources: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8657475/Norway-killings-The-laughing-gunman-who-shot-85-young-victims-one-by-one.html

 

Facebook drops ‘intifada’ page pressure from Israel

A screen grab said to show the Third Palestinian Intifada Facebook page before its removal  Facebook has removed a page calling for a new Palestinian uprising against Israel after more than 350,000 people signed up to it.

The page which appeared on the social networking site was called Third Palestinian Intifada after two previous uprisings against Israeli occupation.

It was removed for due to pressure from Israel, a company spokesman said.

Israel had raised concerns about the page. Facebook has helped spread calls for protests in Arab states.

The Third Palestinian Intifada page had called for an uprising after Muslim prayers on Friday 15 May.

“Judgment Day will be brought upon us only once the Muslims have killed all of the Jews,” a quote from the page read.

According to AFP news agency, three new copycat pages have appeared, with more than 7,000 Palestinians signing up to them.

‘Red lines’

Facebook said the page had begun as a call for peaceful protest, even though it used the term “intifada” with its connotation of violent revolt.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

It seems that [Israeli] Minister Yuli Edelstein needs lessons in human rights and freedom of expression as he is not aware of the world’s respect for individual opinion”

End Quote Demtri Deliani Fatah official

“However, after the publicity of the page, more comments deteriorated to direct calls for violence,” said Andrew Noyes, Facebook’s public policy communications manager.

The creators of the page eventually made calls for violence as well, he added.

“We monitor pages that are reported to us, and when they degrade to direct calls for violence or expressions of hate – as occurred in this case – we have and will continue to take them down,” Mr Noyes said.

In a letter last week to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, Israeli Public Diplomacy Minister Yuli Edelstein said the page featured “wild incitement” with calls to kill Jews and talk of “liberating” Jerusalem through violence.

“I asked Mr Zuckerberg that the red lines of freedom of expression and incitement and violence should not be crossed,” he said.

“I welcome that decision even though I am sure that more cat-and-mouse games await us and there will be attempts by our enemies and those who hate us to enter Facebook in other ways.”

Demetri Deliani, a leading member of the Palestinian party Fatah, mocked Israel’s request to remove the page.

“It seems that Minister Yuli Edelstein needs lessons in human rights and freedom of expression as he is not aware of the world’s respect for individual opinion,” he told the official Palestinian news agency Wafa.

Un-Worthy victims, even Un-Worthy to report

At a time when media and spin are arguably as powerful as armies, the outcomes of battles for hearts and minds often shape the world we live in.

This is truest when it comes to the Palestinian struggle for liberation. As a journalist I’m aware of the simple nuances that can, and are, often used which ultimately affect the lives of millions of people. For example,  a “war” can be described as a “conflict”, or civilians “killed” in an air strike could also be referred to as civilians who “died” in an attack etc.

Whoever said words were just words was lying.

From Mark Regev, to Press TV, as spin doctors and media outlets decide how to react and report on the Freedom Flotilla in the coming days, it’s important that one scrutinises their words (or lack of) in every way possible.

For starters, one must ask why such a big story is not being covered by many of the large international news networks. Surely one of the biggest demonstrations of collective international civil resistance, involving 50 nationalities, more than 30 parliamentarians, and costing millions of dollars is news worthy.

This Flotilla directly affects the lives of 1.5 million Gazans who have been living under siege for over 3 years; in fact it also affects the lives of many Israelis too, as they struggle to cling onto a two faced fallacy of democratic colonisation. It baffles me how some news outlets think the European launch of Apple’s i-Pad is more of a story.

When it comes to Arab media, the case is similar. In Egypt for example, there is little mention that were it not for Cairo’s collaboration with Israel, the siege on Gaza would never have succeeded, and this Flotilla would probably not be necessary.

Instead, newspapers and talk shows alike, label the Flotilla organisers as disingenuous for refusing the benevolent offer by the Egyptian government to allow the ships through Alarish and into Gaza.

And Egypt is not alone, even those in the Arab world who have commended the passengers on board the Flotilla in their attempt at breaking Israel’s inhumane and illegal siege on Gaza, have failed to question why their governments have not done more.

Why have a few hundred individuals taken it upon themselves to relieve a besieged people, whilst their “brother” nations with all their wealth and military might do nothing?

In the coming days, as journalists and politicians alike ponder on what words to use (or not to use) let us not forget that beyond all this, 1.5 million people remain besieged.

Un spin the spin and you will find that a territory ravaged by 23 days of Israeli bombardment remains crippled.

Read between the lines and you will see that this Flotilla is nothing more than a flame of hope, for people who possess little more than just that. Hope. Just a word.

The Role of the Media in Politics

The Role of Media in Contemporary politics forces us to ask what kind of a world and what kind of a society we want to live in , and in particular in what sense of democracy do we want this to be a democratic society ? Let me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy .

One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free. If you lookup democracy in the dictionary you’ll get a definition something like that.

An alternative conception of democracy is that the publich must be barred from managing of their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy, but it’s important to understand that it is the prevailing conception . In fact, it has long been, not  just in operation , but even in theory .

There’s a long history that goes back to the earliest modern democratic revolutions in seventeenth century England which largely expresses this point of view. I’m just going to keep to the modern period and say a few words about how that notion of democracy develops and why and how the problem of media and disinformation enters within that context.