“The camera that was confiscated illegally broadcasts on the Aljazeera channel live the northern Gaza Strip, including the activities of the IDF forces and endangers our fighters,” Karhi said in a statement. “It should be noted that a warning was given to the AP agency already last week that according to the law and the government’s decision they are prohibited from providing broadcasts to Al Jazeera, however they decided to continue broadcasting on the channel causing a real harm to the security of the state.”
Seems like quite a stretch to essentially accuse the AP of espionage when they are simply watching something that presumably anyone, on either side of the conflict, is able to see.
The move comes weeks after Israel shut down Al Jazeera’s operations in the country, raiding the news outlet’s offices and seizing its communication equipment, prompting swift condemnation from the United Nations and rights groups over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s moves to restrict press freedoms.
Yeah, that's whack. To play devil's advocate, though, I do wonder what the exact rationale was for this. Was Al Jazeera engaged in legitimate espionage, using their news organization as a front? That's the only case where it might seem plausible to do this, but, even still, wouldn't you just arrest those who were engaging in the act of espionage? Why take down the entire organization?
To play devil's advocate, though, I do wonder what the exact rationale was for this. Was Al Jazeera engaged in legitimate espionage, using their news organization as a front?
Even then, it's a broadcast that Al Jazeera could just go view somewhere else and get the same info. Its a very thin excuse, and I think it just is what it is at face value. A poor justification for limiting coverage of the the war
To play devil’s advocate, though, I do wonder what the exact rationale was for this. Was Al Jazeera engaged in legitimate espionage, using their news organization as a front?
Even then, it’s a broadcast that Al Jazeera could just go view somewhere else and get the same info.
If I understand you correctly, you seem to be conflating the two quotes; however, they are both referring to different (and, as far as I am aware, unconnected) events. The raid on Al Jazeera happened prior to what was done to AP, and, afaik, has no connection to the stream that AP was hosting.
Seems like quite a stretch to essentially accuse the AP of espionage when they are simply watching something that presumably anyone, on either side of the conflict, is able to see.
Yeah, that's whack. To play devil's advocate, though, I do wonder what the exact rationale was for this. Was Al Jazeera engaged in legitimate espionage, using their news organization as a front? That's the only case where it might seem plausible to do this, but, even still, wouldn't you just arrest those who were engaging in the act of espionage? Why take down the entire organization?
Even then, it's a broadcast that Al Jazeera could just go view somewhere else and get the same info. Its a very thin excuse, and I think it just is what it is at face value. A poor justification for limiting coverage of the the war
If I understand you correctly, you seem to be conflating the two quotes; however, they are both referring to different (and, as far as I am aware, unconnected) events. The raid on Al Jazeera happened prior to what was done to AP, and, afaik, has no connection to the stream that AP was hosting.