Granted al jazeera is pro Arab and pro Islamic, but they do allow freedom of speech, and show Israeli views from their Tel Aviv Bureau and has excellent reporting. It’s ironic that whilst the Bush administration called it “the mouthpiece of Al Qaeda”, Al Qaeda call it a “Mossad setup” because it shows the Israel side too, and has been banned by several Arab heads of state, because they allowed criticism of their regimes. Thats why it is popular, because people know they are not listening to BS and agenda propoganda.

Max Blumenthal, has written and done video clips for Al Jazeera.

The last administration (Bush) saw it as a threat to neo con ideology, as it exposed their lies. I would suggest that you do your own research about Al Jazeera, as I have a gut feeling that you have formed your opinion about it, on neo con propoganda so please see the 2 Israeli opinions about al Jazeera in the links at the bottom.

My point was that, just as Ray Hanania (who wrote a comment above) writes for israeli media from the Arab perspective, so should you write in Arab media from the Israeli perspective. Otherwise, it is preaching to the converted. If a writer is writing and only yes men are reading, then it’s a waste of time..when it could be educating others. The Arab media as you know often only has government sponsered lies and distortions. Israel has an advantage in that it has a free media, even better than the one in the US.

—————-
Al-Jazeera English scores gains, except in U.S.
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) – Al-Jazeera’s English language TV station has in its six-month existence gained strong viewership across Europe, in parts of Asia, Australia – and even Israel, according to executives and local companies that carry it.

But no major cable or satellite provider in the U.S. is carrying the channel, a decision the network blames on political pressure.

U.S. carriers, however, say there simply is no market.

Nearly 100 million households worldwide receive Al-Jazeera’s English service, almost half as many as CNN, station executives say. Since January, it has been broadcasting news to 550,000 Israeli homes on Yes TV, the country’s largest cable provider.
“It’s extraordinary that while the rest of the world is happy to watch us … the U.S. stands in splendid isolation,” Al-Jazeera English managing director Nigel Parsons said at the station’s headquarters in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar.
And

Interestingly, however, Al-Jazeera English has found an audience in Israel for its mix of extensive African, Asian and Middle Eastern coverage. Viewers in Israel also have access to Al-Jazeera’s original Arabic news channel.
“This is thought of as one of the best news channels in the world,” said Yes TV spokeswoman Libi Zipser, speaking of Al-Jazeera English. “There are those who think that certain channels are less supportive of Israel, but we just let our customers see what they want to see.”
———————
“THEY’RE MUCH BETTER THAN CNN OR BBC”

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000799.html

Reaction to the launch of al-Jazeera in English has been mixed in Israel. Daniel Seaman, head of the Israel Government Press Office (and a longtime subscriber to this list), told the Jerusalem Post that he had, “only the utmost respect for al-Jazeera in Israel. They’ve tried their best to be fair, and even if I disagreed with their coverage at times, it was not one-sided. Given their audience, they show the Arab side, the Palestinian side of the conflict, but they also present Israel’s side.”

When asked if al-Jazeera was fairer to Israel than CNN or the BBC, he replied, “Absolutely, they’re much better than CNN or BBC.” (The BBC plans to launch its Arab TV channel next year.)

Seaman did say, however, that the station often gives too little time to Israeli spokespeople, and sometimes translates their remarks imprecisely. But he applauded the station for “giving Israel a stage [on Arab TV] that it didn’t have in the past.”

Unfortunately, the comment above is incoherent so I don’t know what the commenter intended to say.

Well, CEPA on Wikipedia has only 4 lines of text, no functioning links to their site, and seems to be about central Europe. So CEPA might exist. Then, of CEPA’s Michael Williams’ last 12 CIFs, by title only, 6 are about Afghanistan. 50%! And also, what does central Europe have to do that much with Afghanistan? I see Michael Williams is the CIF man to cover Afghanistan (whyever).

Also, I read on ei the theory that all muslim countries in the ME are targeted PR-wise: Iran is just in between.

Richard, I’m looking forward to your Comment (especially the original one).

Finally, after working this over in my mind many months, I decided to pull the piece and let my editor know I wouldn’t be writing for CIF anymore. It’s damn hard to get a freelance gig and some may say I was foolish in what I did. But I just didn’t see any other way. I didn’t feel my work was receiving the respect I felt it deserved.

Your mind, like the wheels of justice, grinds slowly – but unlike the wheels of justice, not very finely.

“I didn’t feel my work was receiving the respect I felt it deserved. ”

OH YES IT DID!!!!

A few months ago Tom Friedman wrote what I considered an especially condescending NY Times column about the wonders of Salaam Fayyad and the West Bank economic miracle. My editor, who also shared a distaste for Friedman, liked the idea of a critique and I wrote one.

I agree with the point about the Friedman piece. I had the good luck to read that right not long after reading something Angry Arab had posted on Fayyad, about how he got like 2% of the vote the last time elections were held in the Occupied Territories. I was shaking my head through the whole thing – it’s pretty much typical Friedman. You know, “fly into a country for two days, talk to the person most willing to interview you in comfortable conditions from the leadership, then wax in optimistic joy. “