By Barry Rubin
What
would you call it if a former vice-president of the United States had sold his
television network to a fascist or Communist front group at a time when such forces
threatened America? Nothing very nice. But now Al Gore has sold out his
admittedly obscure channel to al-Jazeera and taken a position on its board. Here's an interview of myself on this issue.
1.)
Is Al Jazeera a news station a former American vice president should want to
associate with?
Absolutely not. There are multiple reasons.
First, al-Jazeera was originally run by Arab nationalists but these people were
replaced by Islamists about four or so years ago. It is thus a radical media
outlet run by people who are anti-American, anti-Christian, antisemitic, and
anti-Western. In other words, it is an instrument of extremist revolutionary
movements. On a number of occasions it has lent itself to promote and be used
by violent terrorist groups.
Second, while al-Jazeera is more open to dissenting views than previous
state-controlled media this is misleading. It is more open in English than in
Arabic but former staffers in the English-language section have spoken about how it is not a free agent but the news is slanted to please the Qatari
government which owns it. (They wanted to moderate the tone but the management objected because the owners wouldn't like it.) So al-Jazeera is also an instrument of concealed
propaganda.
Third,
when al-Jazeera does have on dissenting views it tends to follow a formula. On a
discussion show there is a radical and a moderate. The host sides with the
radical and the callers always seem to be 100 percent radical (this reflects
reality but also very possibly a selection by the station staff). The moderate
is insulted and threatened. Thus much of the nominal openness is used to create
a frenzy of hatred. Incidentally, the former Berlin correspondent spoke up
publicly about al-Jazeera's lack of function as a free media outlet and
dishonesty just a few days ago.
But there's more! Qatar, except for the (possibly soon to be overthrown) Syrian regime, is the most pro-Iran Arab government. It brokered the Fatah-Hamas deal which soon led to the Hamas coup. Far from objecting to the bloody Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, Qatar supported Hamas to this day. It is also the leading supplier of arms to the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria. On every issue, Qatar has taken a more radical, anti-American positions than all other Arab countries except Syria. It also was a key financier of the overthrow of the Libyan regime. This was in line with U.S. policy but there are deep suspicions that it has its own candidates for Libyan leadership in future more radical than the current regime.
So Gore had every reason to know what he was doing.
2.)
Do you think al-Jazeera is using Gore to gain legitimacy?
Of
course. They did this before by setting up their own organization in the United States and
hiring some legitimate journalists who ended up resigning in disgust--notably David Marash--when they
saw what it was like.
Remember that as a station Gore's property is worthless. No one watches it. The thing is being bought only to gain its access into American homes.
Finally, a speculative point. Who is going to watch al-Jazeera most? Presumably the kind of individual who will find its ideology and indoctrination to be congenial. It will make them hate America, the West, real democracy, and Israel even more. As they watch al-Jazeera's exaggerations and fabrications of anti-Muslim violence as well as its glorification of terrorism, might they be more inclined to engage in violence?
We’d
love to have your support. Why not make a tax-deductible donation (instead of
giving your money to pay for Senator Harry Reid's Cowboy Poetry Festival and
U.S. aid for the Egyptian and Syrian Muslim Brotherhoods) to the GLORIA Center
by PayPal: click here.
By credit card: click here. Checks:
"American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line and send
to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
For tax-deductible donations in
Canada and the UK, write us here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.)
What are your thoughts on al-Jazeera? Do you consider it anti-Israeli or anti-American?
Of
course. And again, Gore should know this. Therefore his behavior is
disgraceful. But consider what it means in this case to say anti-Israel and anti-American. The same might be said of the BBC, for example, but saying that is based on the fact that it is often or usually so. al-Jazeera is always that way because it has a coherent political line that always must be expressed or the program will not be aired and the reporter will be fired. In other words, the former vice-president of the United States cannot tell the difference between a free media and a state-controlled propaganda organ, or--which is worse--doesn't care.
Incidentally, there are even Arab television options to al-Jazeera.
If he had sold to al-Arabiya for example it would have been much more
acceptable since it is more moderate.
In
former, sane, times, doing something like this would have finished Gore's
credibility forever. Needless to say, sanity has long since jumped out the
window.
By the way, remember that al-Jazeera is controlled by an oil-producing state whose goals include maintaining the highest possible use of petroleum, a goal that is contrary to Gore's obsession with what he says is the threat of man-made global warming to destroy the planet in the near future.
4. Finally, do you believe there should be a distinction
between al-Jazeera Arabic and al-Jazeera English (the new network is going to
be al-Jazeera America). Or are they all equally problematic?
Clearly,
al-Jazeera English tries to be more moderate taking care not to offend the
audience. But its main goal is to keep the home office happy by not
compromising any Islamist principles so it is restricted. As the Big Bad Wolf said, "All the better to eat you with!" The Muslim Brotherhood's website is also more moderate in English than in Arabic because of its purpose.
And the basic answer
is no: he is giving credibility to a pro-terrorist, radical, anti-American
enterprise which is only apparently more moderate in its English to better
achieve its goals.
PS, for those interested (as some readers have requested) a bit more in-depth information.
First, as a businessman Al Gore can sell to the highest
bidder. But Gore has never presented himself as a capitalist seeking to
maximize profit but as an activist on issues he deems to affect the future
survival of America and the planet earth. On this basis he received a Nobel
Prize. He has also held high office based on the premise that he understands
the value and importance of U.S. interests. In this context, for him to sell knowingly to
an anti-American station that supports terrorist groups in informational terms
and a front for a country whose (legitimate) interests require the maximum sale
of oil and gas—in other words directly contrary to Gore’s supposed agenda—is,
to put it politely, hypocrisy. Moreover,
in the statement by his business partner the emphasis was on how this deal
served the values of Gore and his enterprise and that he found the purchases to
be politically congenial to his worldview. A purely profitmaking deal did not
require such a statement. I argue then that the “just doing business” argument
does not apply.
Second, do I exaggerate al-Jazeera’s radicalism? I explained
at length that the English-language al-Jazeera is far more cautious than the
Arabic-language version and that it has been more open than other historic
state-controlled media. Nevertheless, as someone who daily monitors al-Jazeera
and knows people behind the scenes, I repeat my contention that it is an organ
with a political line. Of course, this is not present in every story or every
minute. By way of full disclosure, I have rejected invitations to appear on
al-Jazeera because they are always with one or two extremists and I have seen
how the host slants the program in their favor. Former
employees have also spoken out on this point. Subtle propaganda is still
propaganda. Unlike other, Western mass
media outlets (at least historically) al-Jazeera is not in business to make
money but to purvey a political stance. That fact is certainly not a secret.
Finally, if you've read to the end you deserve a reward so here it is. Although I have to be vague here, responsible and reliable people in Israel have discovered in the past that al-Jazeera tried to send into Israel as staffers people with active connections to terrorist organizations. I have heard the names and details on this point and am satisfied that it is true. There's more of this kind of thing than I've explained here.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.