This is pretty hypocritical coming from Aljazeera. Most Muslim faiths destroy archaeological relics from other religions. We’ve had almost entire mountainsides blown up, destroying artifacts that went back millennia. For them to now go “Muh relics! Archaeology!”…yeah. Gonna fall on deaf ears.
I mean, don’t get me wrong – I don’t think their stuff should be destroyed either, I’m just saying they aren’t exactly arguing from a strong point.
Muslim cultural sites are the ones being targeted and destroyed in Palestine. It’s true ISIS has destroyed Muslim sites; they also certainly don’t represent the vast majority of Muslims in any respect. You think Al Jazeera is an advocate for Christian or Jewish sites getting destroyed? Because I’ve never seen them be.
They are saying that in this particular opinion piece focussed on this particular topic, yes. It’s disingenuous to argue they only speak out for Muslim heritage when you could easily search their site and find many reports and commentaries on the destruction of historical sites all over the world.
What’s your point here, Israel is deliberately erasing the history of Palestinians.
“Libraries serve as cultural repositories, and attacking them is an attack on cultural heritage. What is happening now is a war crime. It goes against the first Hague convention,” Sabrine said. “Israel is trying to erase the connection of the people with their land. It’s very clear and intentional. Gaza’s heritage is part of its people, it’s history and their connection.”
AJ is still a credible news source. Do you think Al Jazeera is pro Christian or Jewish sites getting destroyed? Because I’ve never seen them be. So how are they hypocritical by reporting on Israel destroying hundreds of cultural sites in Palestine?
From MBFC:
In review, Al Jazeera reports news with minimally loaded wording in their headlines and articles such as this: UN approves team to monitor ceasefire in Yemen’s port city, and Erdogan delays Syria operation, welcomes US troop withdrawal. Both of these articles are properly sourced from credible news agencies. When reporting USA news, there is minimal bias in reporting such as this: Pentagon chief Mattis quits, cites policy differences with Trump. In general, straight news reporting has a minimal bias; however, as a state-funded news agency, Al Jazeera is typically not critical of Qatar.
Al Jazeera also has an opinion page that exhibits significant bias against Israel. In this article, the author uses highly negative emotional words as evidenced by this quote: “Europe is increasingly sharing Israel’s racist approach to border security and adopting its deadly technologies.” This article, however, is properly sourced from credible media outlets. Another article, “How many more ways can Israel sentence Palestinians to death?” also uses loaded language that is negative toward Israel. Further, the opinion page does not favor US President Donald Trump through this article: ‘Barbed wire-plus‘: Borders know no love. In general, opinion pieces are routinely biased against Israel and right-wing ideologies.
And the two articles that failed fact checks were an article about India and an article about South Africa both in 2018.
Ad Fontes Media rates Al Jazeera (website) in the Skews Left category of bias and as Reliable, Analysis/Fact Reporting in terms of reliability.
When it comes to Qatar, India, or Africa then AJ is not a good source to turn to. I think it’s fair to not go to AJ for any news on Saudi Arabia, but these AJ reports are about Palestine from on-the-ground reporting.
Add comment