27-09-2003 01:17									#1
	Censorship in Iraq Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: So This is What Freedom Means? By ROBERT FISK The Independent Sewage is coming through the manhole covers, there's still only 15 hours electricity a day and anarchy grips the streets of Baghdad, but yesterday America's toothless Iraqi "interim council" roared like a lion, issuing a set of restrictions and threats--against the press, of course. Aimed primarily at the Arab satellite channels al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, which always air Saddam Hussein's tape recordings, the almost Orwellian rules -- each of which begins with the words "do not" -- mean Iraqi or foreign press and television news organisations can be closed if they "advocate the return of the Baath party or issue any statements that represent the Baath directly or indirectly [sic]". The council, which was appointed by Paul Bremer, the US proconsul, admitted yesterday that it had consulted his legal advisers before issuing its set of restrictions. True to the chaos that governs Baghdad, the council's spokesman Intefadh Qanbar--Ahmed Chalabi's man--initially said al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya were to be closed in Iraq. Within two hours, news emerged that the two Arabic-language channels would be punished for their alleged transgressions by being refused all co-operation from the "interim council" for two weeks--a punishment many journalists here would wish to have inflicted on them. But the list nevertheless provides an intriguing reflection on the "democracy" that Mr Bremer--who ordered his legal advisers to draw up censorship rules in the late spring--wishes to bestow on Iraqis. Some of the restrictions are so self-evident as to be naive. "Do not incite violence against any person or group," for example, could have been enshrined in any civil law. But the references to the Baath party are clearly intended to prevent Iraqis hearing Saddam's voice. The rule shows just how fearful the US authorities have become of his sympathisers. After telling the world that most Iraqis are delighted with their "liberation" and forthcoming "democracy", the authorities are obviously aware that many Iraqis don't feel that way at all. Journalists must also inform the authorities of "any acts of sabotage, criminal activity, terrorism or any violent action ... before or after an attack takes place". Journalists--even those with al-Jazeera--do not receive advance warning of ambushes. The rule is in effect asking them to become assistants to the occupation authorities. There have been instances in the flourishing new Iraqi free press--there are now more than 100 newspapers in Baghdad--of incitement to "jihad" against the occupation authorities and false information on the behaviour of American troops. As it is, even reporting yesterday's killing--or killings--near Falujah by a missile-firing American helicopter could fall into "incitement to violence". US forces say they came under fire from a house in the city and killed "one enemy" (sic). But hospital doctors gave the names of three men killed, all members of the same family.

http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk09242003.html

	27-09-2003 01:23									#2
	Remove this text

"True to the chaos that governs Baghdad, the council's spokesman Intefadh Qanbar--Ahmed Chalabi's man--initially said al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya were to be closed in Iraq. Within two hours, news emerged that the two Arabic-language channels would be punished for their alleged transgressions by being refused all co-operation from the "interim council" for two weeks"

An inexperenced government spokesperson makes a mistake - this should be the worst "chaos" any country suffers from.

	27-09-2003 01:25									#3
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

"there's still only 15 hours electricity a day "


Interesting, last i had heard Baghdad had electricity only 12 hours a day. Slow but steady improvement. So Fisk CAN be a useful source

	27-09-2003 01:25									#4
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Thankfully, I don't need anyone to tell me that I can fully ignore mr. Fisk.

	27-09-2003 01:27									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

"As it is, even reporting yesterday's killing--or killings--near Falujah by a missile-firing American helicopter could fall into "incitement to violence"."


"Could fall into" I suppose they could. That PROVES censorship, and that the the so called "liberation" of "Iraq" is actually just a grab for oil.

What would we do without Fisk?

	27-09-2003 01:27									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The interim council blocks these papers from all official coverage just because they covered Saddam's alleged tapes. Doesn't that seem a tad bit totalitarian to you?

	27-09-2003 01:31									#7
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo The interim council blocks these papers from all official coverage just because they covered Saddam's alleged tapes. Doesn't that seem a tad bit totalitarian to you?

no - totalitarian would be banning all non-government controlled press from printing or broadcasting. (which is what the baathists did) Authoritarian would be banning select newspapers or networks for open opposition to the govt. Banning a network from official functions cause they oppose the govt is just thin skinned. banning a network from official functions cause they are the principal way that a man leading an armed resistance communicates with his followers sounds like a reasonable policy - or even an overly mild one.

	27-09-2003 01:35									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

But i forget the rules. A democratic state is REQUIRED to give its enemies a fighting chance. After all, if Al jazeera (a network,not a paper) DOESNT broadcast Saddam tapes, how will Saddam manage to rally his troops? And perhaps even give them coded messages of strategy. And most important, scare the rest of the people with the idea that Saddam is coming back, and so its dangerous to deal with the governing council? The governing Council MUST allow him to do all those things, or ITS NOT DEMOCRATIC.

Democracy MUST be suicidal - didnt some great man once say that? Was it Von Papen? or maybe Hindenburg?

	27-09-2003 01:39									#9
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

From Fisks article:

"There have been instances in the flourishing new Iraqi free press--there are now more than 100 newspapers in Baghdad"


This sounds totalitarian?

	27-09-2003 01:40									#10
	Full PM-box? Change here!

well, don't you think that calling the new Iraqi government "democratic" is a bit of an overstatement?

	27-09-2003 01:41									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

1. It sure doesn't seem reasonable to me. If I were an Iraqi, I'd like to be kept informed about what the hell is going on. I don't want the gov't to bully papers into stopping covering what the Ba'athist resistance is saying just because the gov't is paranoid.
2. It's a taste of things to come. Look at the actual press restrictions. Obviously they're overly broad and could be easily misused. Which seems likely given the authorities' little stunt with regards to the union of the unemployed.

	27-09-2003 01:43									#12
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: But i forget the rules. A democratic state is REQUIRED to give its enemies a fighting chance. After all, if Al jazeera (a network,not a paper) DOESNT broadcast Saddam tapes, how will Saddam manage to rally his troops? And perhaps even give them coded messages of strategy. And most important, scare the rest of the people with the idea that Saddam is coming back, and so its dangerous to deal with the governing council? The governing Council MUST allow him to do all those things, or ITS NOT DEMOCRATIC. Democracy MUST be suicidal - didnt some great man once say that? Was it Von Papen? or maybe Hindenburg?

That's right. A democratic state doesn't bully newspapers into not covering things that might hurt the gov't's position.

	27-09-2003 01:45									#13
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Tad bit totalitarian = a little totalitarian. I don't mean the occupation is Nazi Germany.

	27-09-2003 01:47									#14
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Al-Jazeera is unpatriotic

	27-09-2003 01:47									#15
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Hey, being a little totalitarian according to Ramo's standards is being a pinko liberal for the average person.

	27-09-2003 01:49									#16
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ramo 1. It sure doesn't seem reasonable to me. If I were an Iraqi, I'd like to be kept informed about what the hell is going on. I don't want the gov't to bully papers into stopping covering what the Ba'athist resistance is saying just because the gov't is paranoid. 2. It's a taste of things to come. Look at the actual press restrictions. Obviously they're overly broad and could be easily misused. Which seems likely given the authorities' little stunt with regards to the union of the unemployed.

First it would help if you followed international affairs enough to know that Al jazeera is a TV network, NOT a newspaper. For one it just makes you sound uninformed. For another it matters to the issue at hand. Theyre not banning news outlets that told ABOUT the Saddam tape - just ones that actually play the Saddam tape.

IIUC you can get in trouble in Germany today for displaying Nazi regalia. Does that make Germany "totalitarian"?

If they were playing rough they would have just tossed Al - jazeera and al - arabiya out of the country - thats what just about any other country in the arab world would do. That they didnt shows that they are well, democrats ....

	27-09-2003 01:51									#17
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Tad bit totalitarian = a little totalitarian. I don't mean the occupation is Nazi Germany.

Totalitarian - from the english word total. Implying not partial, but total, complete.

A little bit total, is like being "a little bit" absolute, or a little bit perfect. It doesnt make sense.

There are other words for what youre trying to say. Go look them up.

	27-09-2003 01:53									#18
	Support Apolyton

That was a bit patronizing, wasn't it?

	27-09-2003 01:57									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: First it would help if you followed international affairs enough to know that Al jazeera is a TV network, NOT a newspaper. For one it just makes you sound uninformed.

I assumed they printed too since I'd imagine satellite TV is not too easy to come by in Iraq. So I might be wrong, BFD.

quote: For another it matters to the issue at hand. Theyre not banning news outlets that told ABOUT the Saddam tape - just ones that actually play the Saddam tape.

Yes they are.
"mean Iraqi or foreign press and television news organisations can be closed if they "advocate the return of the Baath party or issue any statements that represent the Baath directly or indirectly [sic]"."

quote: IIUC you can get in trouble in Germany today for displaying Nazi regalia. Does that make Germany "totalitarian"?

The German gov't isn't doing that to insure they stay in power, so no.

quote: If they were playing rough they would have just tossed Al - jazeera and al - arabiya out of the country - thats what just about any other country in the arab world would do. That they didnt shows that they are well, democrats ....

They have the power to do just that. That they didn't do that the first day the press restrictions have come into play doesn't mean anything (and I think it's clear that there's an agenda within the council to do just that as indicated by the initial policy).

	27-09-2003 01:58									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Azazel That was a bit patronizing, wasn't it?

"totally" deserved.

Shana tova u metukah.

	27-09-2003 01:59									#21
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Totalitarian - from the english word total. Implying not partial, but total, complete. A little bit total, is like being "a little bit" absolute, or a little bit perfect. It doesnt make sense. There are other words for what youre trying to say. Go look them up.

Do you know what a literary device is? Or sarcasm. Go **** yourself.

	27-09-2003 02:00									#22
	Remove this text

quote: I assumed they printed too since I'd imagine satellite TV is not too easy to come by in Iraq. So I might be wrong, BFD.

a little factoid:
you ARE wrong. sat dishes are everywhere around the ME.

	27-09-2003 02:14									#23
	Increase Your PM Length

Ok, how 'bout dealing with the actual argument instead of attacking minor facts irrelevent to the thread or taking literary devices out of context? Let's review:

quote: Iraqi or foreign press and television news organisations can be closed if they "advocate the return of the Baath party or issue any statements that represent the Baath directly or indirectly [sic]".

Clearly the governing council wants the power to close press that reports all available news on the Ba'athists, even if it hasn't used this power yet.

quote: Within two hours, news emerged that the two Arabic-language channels would be punished for their alleged transgressions by being refused all co-operation from the "interim council" for two weeks--a punishment many journalists here would wish to have inflicted on them.

Two major TV orgs are currently being bullied into doing this, including the primary Arabic TV station.

	27-09-2003 02:34									#24
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Ramo 1. It sure doesn't seem reasonable to me. If I were an Iraqi, I'd like to be kept informed about what the hell is going on. I don't want the gov't to bully papers into stopping covering what the Ba'athist resistance is saying just because the gov't is paranoid. 2. It's a taste of things to come. Look at the actual press restrictions. Obviously they're overly broad and could be easily misused. Which seems likely given the authorities' little stunt with regards to the union of the unemployed.

the union of the unemployed? I missed that. what is it? what happens if u dont give into their demands? will they go on strike??!?

	27-09-2003 02:38									#25
	Tired of ads?

An organization that was trying to pressure the occupation authorities into hiring Iraqi companies with Iraqi workers friendly to unions for reconstruction instead of bringing in US companies that are completely anti-union and bring in foreign workers to minimize labor standards. When they peacefully protested in front of a ministry, their leaders were arrested after they refused to stop the protest.

	27-09-2003 02:41									#26
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Ramo An organization that was trying to pressure the occupation authorities into hiring Iraqi companies with Iraqi workers friendly to unions for reconstruction instead of bringing in US companies that are completely anti-union and bring in foreign workers to minimize labor standards. When they peacefully protested in front of a ministry, their leaders were arrested after they refused to stop the protest.

whats wrong w/ anti union? should a company want to pay more than it has to? I wouldn't have arrested him. but I hardly see the big deal w/ the US wanting to keep unions out. we are probably dreading what we have to pay already. unions cut both ways. if we let a union in and they jack us w/ a strike what then?

	27-09-2003 02:42									#27
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Then good for them. If we don't want unions, we should drop the pretense of bringing democracy to Iraq. Likewise if we can't tolerate peaceful protest, we should drop the pretense of bringing democracy.

	27-09-2003 02:45									#28
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Then good for them. If we don't want unions, we should drop the pretense of bringing democracy to Iraq. Likewise if we can't tolerate peaceful protest, we should drop the pretense of bringing democracy.

u r confusing western social values w/ democracy. there is nothing inherent in democracy that demands a union. so get off your damn horse.

when they can vote they can pass legislation that allows unions. then everyone will be happy.

	27-09-2003 02:48									#29
	Got spare money?

Sure there is. Unions are the basis of a free society. Worker and non-worker organization is a prerequisite for a free society. Economic self-determination is a fundamental right.

	27-09-2003 02:49									#30
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

You're confusing real democracy with a kleptocracy that has elections.