Parolski.com

Well, if you get a sudden urge to go out and buy stocks in an energy firm in Qatar, then yes. Or if you buy a new Toshiba Tecra, then yes. Then again, thats probably because you’ve been watching the advertisements and not the news.

So why is this news channel controversial? Put quite simply, they don’t have a watershed. They will show any clip, no matter how scary/bloody/happy at any time of the day. If Bush says something, they show it. If Bin Laden says something, they show it. In fact, theres not much they won’t show. When the Russian Georgian conflict/invasion/defence operation/<insert your opinion here> kicked off, they interviewed the following people:

• Dmitry Medvedev - President of Russia
• The Georgian Foreign Minister

A short list of other people that are have conducted interviews with in the past few months are:

• Hans Blix - Former UN weapons inspector
• Hamid Kharzi - President of Afghanistan
• Nigers Environment Minister
• Anwar Ibrahim - Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia
• Ehud Barak - Current Isreali Defense Minister, former Prime Minister
• Chimon Peres - President of Israel
• David Cameron - Leader of the Conservative party, UK
• Jaime Bermudez - Columbian Foreign Minister
• Mahinda Rajapaksa - Current Sri Lankan President

So does AlJazeera brainwash? Maybe a better question would be, how many other news outlets make as many interviews? Of course, everyone should always read a broad spectrum of news, but for international relations, this is a good start.

Recently President Bush has made in a visit to the middle east, principally to call for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. This is a worthy effort, and all calls for peace should be listened to. However, the question to ask is, why. Not why should we call for peace, but rather, why would a man who has led two major invasions and occupations of foreign lands want to work for peace? Maybe he has decided that killing is not the way forward. Or maybe, just maybe, there is something about the securing the interests of the American people that requires him to be there. Perhaps to make Tel Aviv nicer for holidays.

Calls to establish peace should and will be applauded and supported. Hypocrisy should not.

Its interesting to see how the President was greeted by Officials of the Arab nations. In Islam, it is recommended to give pleasant greetings and gifts. Offering of food and water is a stapple when you enter any muslim home. The prophet Mohamed PBUH would look after his neighbours and extend hospitality to his guests. I wonder if he would invite a man to his house, who led an administration responsible for the deaths of thousands of Muslims, or whether he would even have one of his officers goose step for him. Mind you, given that leaders of Arab states struggle to represent the interests of the Muslim people they rule, its not very surprising.

Once the placebo of a peace agreement begins to anaesthetise parts of the middle east, maybe we will see the levels of violence to non-combatants fall. The incredible thing about Bethlehem, seems to be the lack of effort on the part of the catholic church to defend the land and people in which Jesus was supposed to have been born. Now that Tony Blair is a Catholic and has showed signs of interest for peace in the middle east, he can go over there and work some secular magic on behalf of the Church to rescue his people from persecution.

Whilst the peace process is underway, we are likely to see continued efforts to arm the Palestinians with weapons and not intellect. The question I would want to ask would be whether or not they fight for their people in the way of God, understanding the non-secular nature of Islam, or whether they are simply furthering a Patriotic/Nationalistic doctrine.