But it seems very similar to skys news.Is it edited /censored.I was expecting the raw stuff the middle east get.

try this:

 http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1313#

Not sure what I'm meant to make of Sceptics' 'enlightening' hypelink? He makes no comment himself but gives us a link to website full of remarks by people from the Middle East when most white people in the UK would regard these remarks as mad.

What conclusion are we supposed to make? That Al Jazeera will air such 'mad' remarks? That the Middle East is full of mad people? That you can't take anything Al Jazeera says seriously because it's a Middle East broadcaster and Middle Eastern people are mad?

Al Jazeera gives people an opportunity to see an alternative perspective on the world. It will reveal alternative facts and alternative views in comparison to the Western media. In terms of the debate on Iran and the nuclear issue this can be valuable because there is no evidence that Iran has breached any part of the Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty and according to that treaty Iran is entitled to pursue nuclear technology. You get none of this from the Western media.

So, what is Sceptic's response? To seek to smear Al Jazeera. The nastiness of Sceptic's post is breath taking because he makes no comment himself. We are supposed to think it is difficult to attack Sceptic on the basis of anti-Arab (or is that anti-Semitic) racism because he makes no comment. But the conclusion you come as a result of looking at the website is Arabs and people from the Middle East are mad.


insidejob

Any television station that is prepared to broadcast such blatantly rascist material does not deserved by any with the remotest sense of decency. I'm sorry if that precludes you.

Thanks Sceptic for your entertaining link.

It reminds me of Fox News. You know, Ann Coulter saying we should invade all the muslim countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity. And I quite like the air-time given to Pat Robertson, saying the US should assassinate Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.

How can anybody take TV stations that give air-time to those lunatics seriously?

Fox News, CNN...these stations seem to churn out hundreds of commentators you spew out such garbage like 'Saddam Hussein is a threat with weapons of mass destruction'. The Dodgy Dossier, like our own little version of the Protocols, a load of garbage cooked up in order to demonise another people, pave the way for their murder, and the seizing of their resources.

I am happy to see Al Jazeera in English. I was getting worried that I would have to learn Arabic properly. For those that can speak Spanish, Telesur is also good

 http://telesurtv.net/

Please link to the 'blatantly rascist material' on aljazeera.net please

In case you missed it first time:  http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1313#

I must apologise for my 'nastiness' in posting this link. But, if you have a mind, you can make it up for yourself.

Ah yes, another meme: 'such garbage like 'Saddam Hussein is a threat with weapons of mass destruction'.'

Well, quite.

Try  http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/nuke/program.htm

 http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/dkay100203.html

Apologies for my 'nastiness' in bringing this to your attention.

So the new al--Jaz English will really tell it like it is?

Do you know how much western pump prime has gone in to this project and the original al-jaz? Of course Doha and Qatar have governments that are willing client states ready to promote an oppositional view in order to quell their increasingly militant peasants and fool people from the west into thinking this is something new and not at all like the western pro war corporate media. It may bark on about this and that raise the odd embarrassing issue in the name of independence but when the real big stuff comes its way even from its own reporters it says nothing and speaks the voice of its masters!

shame that so many decent reporters from al-jaz have been slaughtered purposely to earn its authenticity

Thanks again Sceptic. But your link didn't explain where the nuclear weapons actually are now, or the other weapons of mass destruction that were ready to fire upon the UK within 45 minutes notice, and all the Uranium Saddam purchased from Nigeria. Also, your link didn't explain very well the strong contacts and friendship Saddam had with Al Qaeda, and the evidence behind the fact that he was responsible for 9-11.

I seem to remember a lot of that on the television before the invasion.

Still, tell you what, if you can find some evidence that all those things weren't actually blatantly false, I'll see if I can prove that the Protocols were actually genuine, and we can post to each other again in a couple thousand years to see what we actually found out.