U.S. and France Agree: Turn Off That Dang TV

|

They hate us for our freedoms, chapter XXIII:

Al-Manar, one of the most popular television networks in the Arabic-speaking world, has been removed from U.S. airwaves after the State Department designated it a supporter of terrorism.

State Department officials placed the satellite television network, run by the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, on its Terrorist Exclusion List on Friday because of what they described as its incitement of terrorist activity. The designation means foreign nationals who work for the network or provide it any support can be barred from the United States, officials said.

"It's not a question of freedom of speech," State Department spokesman Richard A. Boucher said. "It's a question of incitement of violence. We don't see why, here or anywhere else, a terrorist organization should be allowed to spread its hatred and incitement through the television airwaves."…

The U.S. action had the effect of banning al-Manar in the United States, where its programming had been beamed via GlobeCast, a company that sells access to foreign television programs by satellite. "As of Friday last week, that channel is no longer on the satellite," GlobeCast spokesman Robert Marking said.

This follows a similar decision earlier this month in France, where the government prohibited Al-Manar's broadcasts because of their anti-Semitic content.

Advertisement

NEXT: John McCain's Multi-Front Wars

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. People who finance and oversee terrorist networks really do hate us mainly because of what’s left of our freedoms. They understand that when people perceive a crisis (especially a crisis caused by an attack instigated from abroad) they tend to perceive successful politicians as good leaders, and they become less resistant when those same politicians (and their political allies) violate their liberties, and especially the liberties of others. If people would keep their heads and not accept as a matter of faith what their supposed leaders tell them, the spokesmen paid for with your taxmoney wouldn’t be able to blur the objective difference between incitement as a third party and actually ordering an attack as a boss in a terrorist network. As Republicans and Democrats continue using terrorism as an excuse for this sort of thing, they reward those members of bin Laden’s inner circle who are still on the loose and encourage the creation of additional terrorist networks in the future. If violating civil liberties prevented terrorism, there wouldn’t be half a dozen separate networks terrorizing Israel.

  2. Freedom = $1.05

  3. This is unconstitutional! And, what hypocrisy! I can turn to Fox and hear all manner of justification for the death toll of innocent civilians in Iraq. (Which, of course is my, and Fox’s right)

    This is a clear violation of freedom of speech, part of which is a violation of our freedom to hear that speech. This is being done with the pretext of fighting terrorism. But, our government is so supportive of certain governments that engage in terrorism, the attacking of innocent civilians. This state terrorism racks up far more victims and carnage.

    Among the governments that engage in terrorism yet receive US tax dollars are the Israeli government. They get by far the most every year. Egypt also gets billions. Jordan receives one half billion. Uzbekistan is another a brutal regime that also gets US tax aid and their savagery against innocent civilians is actually excused with the line that they’re “fighting terror”!

    It’s tragically ironic that US tax aid to state terror regimes, especially that which goes to the Israeli government, is what motivated the terror of 9/11.

  4. This “war on terror” is being used as an excuse to exclude speech that people who are influential with the government want excluded. And our 1st amendment rights are being trampled as a result.
    If we don’t speak out against this outrage, more of our free speech liberty will likely be denied.

    http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

  5. We’re all doomed.

  6. Rick Barton,
    I am not a big fan of our policies with Israel, and I am definately a big fan of giving Israel 3 billion dollars a year.

    But still, I don’t think that Sept 11 had anything to do with the palestinians. That was a completely different set of Arabs. I think (but could be wrong) that most of Sep 11 was about Saudi types being indignant that Americans were in their homeland challenging their racial and religious supremacy with our mere existance.

  7. kwais,

    Actually, you are quite wrong. OBL & crew have stated on a number of occassions that one of their chief grievances was with Israel.

  8. kwais,

    Note that the 9/11 commission findings reveal:

    “Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, said the final report of the Sept. 11 commission.”

    http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/nation/9222612.htm

    Also, Merry Christmas and happy holidays, everyone!

  9. Rick Barton,

    Happy Holidays. 🙂

  10. First they came for Hezbollah, and I said nothing…

    You know why I said nothing? Because they’re FUCKING HEZBOLLAH!

  11. LOL joe.

    hey kwais: at least it’s not the iraqis who were behind 9/11. does anybody really believe that? or is there some sort of monolothic arabism going on here?

    did anybody see the NRO article where they were begging for politically correct (neocon style) labeling of the insurgents in iraq? they wanted to call them “islamofascists” and giving a nice semantic link to those fuckers from 9/11. go fucking figure.

    merry christmas all!
    drf

  12. drf,

    General Richard Myers on the Mosul attack: “This attack, of course, is the responsibility of insurgents, the same insurgents who attacked on 9/11…”

    I, for one, am horrified. He didn’t call them “kitten choking, Chirstmas hating terrorist poopy heads.”

  13. dude!

    i guess you didn’t see the idiotic article at NRO. but you get another round for the good myers potential comeback.

    🙂

  14. Rick Barton & Gary Gunnels,
    Sept 11 commission duly noted. And I know OBL mentioned the Palestinians, but when he did, it seemed as kind of an afterthought.

    I talked to a couple of Palestinians in Saudi, and they said that they were more a subject of predjudism in Saudi Arabia than in Israel. (I know anecdotal evidence means nothing really, specially given that he knew he was talking to an American).

  15. AIF, Anti Iraqi Forces.

    i see that the national addiction to orwellian euphamism doesn’t stop when we get overseas, mr kwais.

    “It’s not a question of freedom of speech,” State Department spokesman Richard A. Boucher said. “It’s a question of incitement of violence. We don’t see why, here or anywhere else, a terrorist organization should be allowed to spread its hatred and incitement through the television airwaves.”…

    lol — good thing the brits didn’t do that to tom paine.

    hypocrisy, thy name is america.

  16. mnmarcomdeal.com It makes me think of something out of order cat food High Fidelity, which is a movie I liked, mens underwear although a part of that is certainly because web mens underwear it was a movie about, partially for, and hosting potentially by, music people. I want to direct tv read the book it was adapted from, too…the buy prom dresses original setting of London as opposed to dog food Chicago is bound to read differently. Doing bedding online this would be a good exercise. That brings buy bras online marcomdeal.comnm

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.