It’s called “fill in the blanks”. Which countries are missing from the following sentence?
In a televised speech, Nasrallah praised revolutionaries and protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, and Yemen for their “faith and high spirituality.
You guessed right. But Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is not the only one doing the some-revolutions-are-more-noble-than-others thing. Take Aljazeera for instance. The cheerleader of Arab revolutions cut off Sayyed Nasrallah in mid sentence when he started talking about Bahrain.
You see, Aljazeera and Alarabiya don’t find anything wrong with calling armed Libyan rebels “freedom fighters”, while treating peaceful Bahraini protestors like 5th column parasites who don’t even deserve to be listened to. It’s as if they learned that trick from the Iranian president who in the same breath denounced Iran’s demonstrators as CIA instigators and saluted the Egyptian and Bahraini freedom fighters.
I really don’t mind politicians and media championing their favorite revolutions and ignoring the others. But what has been getting under my skin lately is the fact that they haven’t lost their sense of moral superiority. They still speak as if they own the clarity of true conviction. They still preach that they’re the fairest in their coverage and the closest to our hearts. They wholeheartedly ignore the fact that we’re seeing right through them.
Here’s a statement you won’t hear in Alarabiya anytime soon:
We are the official propagators of Saudi policy. There’s a cold war of influence between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Our job is to support the revolutions that topple unfriendly regimes (like Syria and Iran) and undermine revolutions that target our close allies, especially if they lived in our own backyard. (Bahrain) But don’t worry, we’ll still keep the illusion that we’re on the side of Arab peoples seeking freedom. After all, we don’t want you to switch to BBC and France24
This logic also applies to Iranian media and Hezbollah’s priorities by the way.
Here’s the takeaway from all of this: There is no such thing as independent and balanced media. I found myself recently watching France 24 for coverage of the region. They covered Bahrain well and seemed generally balanced. But then today, as the French jets started bombing Tripoli and Benghazi, they too wore their “I will speak for my government” mask. They suddenly lined up the right experts and became in charge of explaining why the French bombings are the right thing to do in these difficult times.
Twitter
Facebook
RSS
“There is no such thing as independent and balanced media” Absolutely true, which is why you have to read a wide variety of sources across the entire pol spectrum, then apply common sense…
where is that 2nd quote from?
The sentence right above the quote reads: “Here’s a statement you won’t hear in Alarabiya anytime soon:”. I’m making up a quote which represents what Alarabiya would have said if they were telling the truth..
it comes from the bermuda triangle. that’s where your sense of humor disappeared
Here’s a thought: Remember how AlJazeera used its coverage of the Egyptian revolution to get a social media hype in its favor ?
How about turning the same tables against it ? Why not use social media to (cleverly) tarnish that clean reputation Al Jazeera seems to have ? Maybe, just maybe, that will make them rethink things..
I’ve lost all respect for Aljazeera since these uprisings began. Very opportunistic organization. They also lacked any real coverage of the March 14 protests.
I never thought i’d say that, but I agree with this post 100 %. This is your best analysis ever. This is how you should be Mustapha: Criticizing everyone, supporting no one. Only then you will be at your best, not bound by the awkward position of defending certain parties (like KSA, or M14, for instance).
Also, if you want to be an analyst, i suggest you actually watch the footage of Nasrallah. I watched it yesterday. He actually did not ignore the protests in Syria and Iran. He arrogantly said that protesters there should know their priorities because the regimes are anti-Zionist (more or less). Go back and find this bit because it’s interesting
I didn’t watch him. Did he actually say that?
This is my main problem with HA, Syria and Iran. Anti-Zionist doesn’t automatically make you legitamite and doesn’t automatically make you rightoeus.
Justice, liberty, equality, strenghtening the civil individuals, eliminating sectarianism and triabalism (will take time) by building open and empathetic socieities, developing economies etc. are all MY priorities. You can’t fight an enemy until you have your own problems sorted out. You can’t fight an enemy until you become economically, socially and militarily superior. I’m not going to throw stones at my neighbor if my own house is made of glass.
mido, so the vietnamese people should have waited until this happened before they fought the French and U.S occupation? Your argument is flawed
CopyCat,
“This is how you should be Mustapha: Criticizing everyone, supporting no one. ”
I am now convinced that you are in fact Saif-Al-Islam Gaddafi. You share the same intellectual depth, which is rare.
there’s nothing wrong with Saif al-Islam. He’s a very reasonable dude. okay i’m just kidding.
I don’t know. whatever do you mean? What’s wrong with criticizing everyone (by which I meant our political elite) and support no one (by which I meant our political elite)? I do not believe that there is any figure in Lebanon worth supporting, personally. From the wikileaks/sukleen alliance (wi2am wahhab’s words) to the mut3a & orange camp. i do support the people who protested today however
lol my argument is flawed?
Is Iran occupied by anyone?
Syria has some occupied land. Yet, it hasn’t fired a bullet in decades. I’m pretty sure the priority isn’t liberating the Golan Heights now is it? Maybe I’m missing something.
We’ve liberated pretty much everything.
And anyway all of that is besides the point.
First. Yes. I strongly believe in strengthening your core before going out and fighting wars.
Second. Don’t give me completely unrelated examples. Different context. Different circumstances. Different conditions etc.
Third. Fighting an occupying force is one thing. Using the same arms to impose political choices on the rest of the country under the banner of “resistance”. Resistance to what? I have no idea. Countries evolve after “resisting” occupations to forming “armies” from all the factions in the society.
Fourth. Since you’re fond of giving me examples. Can you please give me an example of a “resistance” group in history that liberated its country and was made up of only one sectarian faction of that population, maintained it’s own social institutions, had a political wing and maintained its military wing just in case the occupier decides to strike again. I think countries just formed modern armies out of their cross-factional resistance movements. Also, I’ve never heard of resistance movements that had political representation. Resistance comes from the entire population. Its not supposed to have a political agenda. It has ONE agenda. Liberation. After that they disintegrated and assimilate as part of ONE society. They don’t form a gang of bullies who want to protect their narrow interests so they get involved in local politics and pursue their own interests falsely legitimizing their possession and use of weapons as necessary to counter external aggression.
hey mido, chillax dude. I wasn’t talking about hezbollah and the resistance. i was talking about the arab-israeli struggle in general. I believe in liberation BEFORE state building. You can’t build a state under occupation, like in Palestine. Don’t lecture me on hezbollah, it wasn’t my intention. I’m not defending hezbollah. I’ll give you an example: Egypt and Sinai. sinai was a priority before building democracy, and they’re lucky they got it by negotiations (but after a war in which they made breakthroughs and improved their hand in the poker game that’s negotiations).
Then I apologize. I thought you meant Lebanon, Syria and Iran.
Yes. I agree to an extent. Palestinians have every right to resist. And obviously I’m not saying they should be nation building. I meant Lebanon should. The Palestinians should be supported and reinforced by nation-building and development in other Arab countries.
And btw I wasn’t talking about “democracy”. I wasn’t advocating any specific system other than the fact that any system or form of democracy needs to consider justice and equality and needs to appreciate differences instead of using them as a reason to be divided. Diversity is good if the system encourages people equally to prosper within its institutions.
By “core” all I meant was that I wanted the mindsets to change and that we are able to create societies and institutions that empower individuals, civic societies and are development driven.
also, Russia’s stalin defeated germany without democracy in WW2. Would you have told Russia to wait until they build a ‘core’ before they fended off Germany?
I said it once and i’ll say it again … Nasrallah had the golden chance to attract me into his side last night *IF* he had been brutal against the Syrian and Iranian governments oppressing the demonstrators…
Syria’s killing for 2 or so protestors a day before Nasrallah’s speech was the perfect opportunity to show us he’s not just talk… but he is.
He is one excellent phony with an effective charisma … pitty