Bush Facing Legal Action

[Cathexis]

[Link, the Hero of Time]

[Republican_Man]

Ah-ah-ah. It's not your average "civilian" building It's a big-time outlet for bin Laden and Al Quaeda. It's hurting our efforts, and should be considered part of the War on Terror. It's terrorist-enabling and terrorist-supporting. It's no different, from where I stand, than the US going into a country to stop its support of terrorism. It's giving the terrorists support on a level equal to any other country, what with its propoganda workings and all.
So, no, that's not a terrorist ideal. There is a difference between the horrific, evil acts against innocents perpetrated by the terrorists and us going after a terrorist-supporting organization.

[Link, the Hero of Time]

so then by your logic, all media should be destroyed because it hurts our efforts.

And no matter how you portray it, it's still a civilian building. By bombing it, you'd be no better then Bin Laden himself. It's still killing innocents for the sake of an ideal.

[Republican_Man]

I disagree, on both levels.
First of all, I do submit to you that all media hurts our efforts by the way they portray the news, oftentimes, but are they a mouthpiece for Al-Qaeda? No. There's a huge difference.
Secondly, that's the point. This isn't your average, run-of-the-mill media outlet. It is a mouthpiece for the most dangerous terrorist organization of our time, and therefore is the most dangerous media outlet in the world.
It is the primary outlet for news and information in the Arab world, and that type of situation brings them great power. If you couple that with the fact that they are the mouthpiece of Al-Qaeda, giving the organization the publicity it needs and aiding them greatly, they pose a danger to our country. Therefore, bombing their HQ would not be killing people for an ideal, but ending a propoganda tool for the terrorists. Just today, for instance, bin Laden released a tape. The organization consistently lets out tapes and somehow, for some mysterious reason (sarcasm) they always end up in Al-Jazeera's hands...hmmm...Curious as to why that is...
Here's my "guess:" They have a relationship with the terrorist organization, which is why they are always not only receiving tapes but displaying the tapes, making a key tool for the terrorists--an uncountered mouthpiece for Al-Qaeda. If that's not a danger to America, and a terrorist-supporting organization, I don't know what is.
We need to do something against it--whether it's bomb their headquarters or dismantle the abilities for people to receive their programming, I don't care. Something needs to be done against the outlet, or we will continue to have an uncountered mouthpiece for our enemies in the region we especially can't have that.

I can see your point. You believe that, since those that are working at Al-Jazeera are "innocent" civilians, we shouldn't dismantle their facilities. I can respect that, and see where you're coming from.
However, I disagree in light of the fact that they aren't merely "innocents," as they are almost as "innocent" as the countries that harbor terrorists, or quite possibly the terrorists themselves. Now, of course this is on a media level, which is different, but nonetheless: when you have an unabated mouthpiece for our enemies over there, that's always broadcasting the tapes of the terrorists rather than taking what they've heard over to the US government and what have you...IMO, you've lost your innocense and ability to continue your programming. You're aiding and abetting the terrorists, which is, for all intents and purposes, a crime, and all terrorist-enablers are our enemies, in a very real sense.
They're a danger to the US and Al-Qaeda's best friend. Something needs to be done to stop them.

Feel free to disagree, but in light of how their programming works, and the things they do...I sincerely think that the outlet's HQ needs to be dismantled, in some way, shape, or form.


I have a question, if I might pose it to you, Link: What do you think qualifies to be considered a terrorist-enabler? Does it need to be helping them train and use weapons only, or could it be pushing forth their ideas through mouthpiece and propoganda methods? If the latter qualifies as well, to what extent should, IYO, the US and its allies go in stopping their continued enabling and propoganda-spreading of the terrorists?

[Seven of Nine]

If Bush and Blair had this conversation, they deserve punishment for it. Want to anger the Muslim community, turning those that are currently playing a large, necessary part of society into those who might go against the countries they live in? Bomb a CIVILIAN news station. That's terrorism, and it would make Bush and Blair no better than any other terrorist.

Al Jazeera is controversial, yes, but it also works as a lifeline for people in the Muslim community who want to know what's going on in a language they use and understand. It also gives us information about some of bin Laden's activities, which hopefully will lead us closer to him.

If Blair called for this, I'd call for an overthrow of the government here.