Talk:Al-Manar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Lebanon Portal This article is part of WikiProject Lebanon, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Lebanon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

	Islam Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Islam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Al-Manar has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Al-Manar was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: April 16, 2007

	Al-Manar is part of WikiProject Iran, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Iran-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's importance scale.
	After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.

Talk:Al-Manar/Archive 1

Contents 1 Useful sources 2 Explanation of Executive Order 13224 3 Article order 4 moving old unsourced political remark here 5 Arabic clips 6 Rearrangement 7 Suggestions... 8 Good enough? 9 Ahmad Husseini 10 Questionable Sources 11 ____________________________________________________________ 12 Al-Manar's 9/11 claim

[edit] Useful sources

Say thanks to this editor for these links User:Carabinieri/Al-Manar/sources should be useful.Hypnosadist 00:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation of Executive Order 13224

U.S. President Bush signed Executive Order 13224 on September 23, 2001. Executive Order 13224 gives the U.S. Government a legal tool to impede terrorist funding and is part of the U.S. commitment to lead the international effort to bring a halt to terrorist activity. The Order provides a means by which to disrupt the financial support network for terrorists and terrorist organizations by authorizing the U.S. government to designate and block the assets of foreign individuals and entities that commit, or pose a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism.

U.S. President Bush issued Executive Order 13224 pursuant to the authorities of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), section 5 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as amended (22 U.S.C. 287c)(UNPA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code. geraldshields11

[edit] Article order

I kind of liked "content" coming before "history". Could we move it back the way it was? Elizmr 16:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually there are several reasons why I changed the order. 1) All the other articles about television stations/networks, I checked (American Broadcasting Corporation, NBC, BBC, Das Erste, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and Global Television Network were just the first I could think of) had the history of the station first and then information about programming, etc. 2) WP:TVS's list of what an article about a telivision station should include begins with a good introduction followed by the history of the station (I assume, but am not sure that this order was intentional). 3)Personal preference (Ok, that's not a very good reason, but I think the preceding two were.)--Carabinieri^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 19:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense Elizmr 19:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] moving old unsourced political remark here

How weak is the former so-called "Free Western World" to close Manar tv? First: The westerners shut down freedom; Then they(The British Military Government) undertook an assassination attempt to the Iranian President at Ahwas. UK & US Press biased? Answer:24th January 2006 it was the proof. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.72.47.238 20:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Arabic clips

Apparently these are Arabic clips:Al-Manar#Al-Manar TV (Lebanon) broadcasts. Is it usual to put their links in the English wikipedia. Please check them and delete them if they're in Arabic.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rearrangement

This is former structure of this article:

   * 1 History
         o 1.1 Satellite broadcasting
               + 1.1.1 Banning of broadcasts
         o 1.2 Designation as a 'terrorist entity'
         o 1.3 Anti-Semitic Programming
         o 1.4 Satellite transmission
         o 1.5 Israeli Air Force strike
               + 1.5.1 Criticism of bombing
   * 2 Content
         o 2.1 Programs
         o 2.2 Religion and politics
   * 3 Journalistic standards and neutrality
  

I found it illogic to put "Banning of broadcasts", "Designation as a 'terrorist entity'" and "Anti-Semitic Programming" under history and separated it. Also I gathered "Israeli Air Force strike" and "Criticism of bombing" in one section. I merged "Satellite broadcasting" and "Satellite transmission". This is my suggestion:

1 History
   * 1.1 Satellite broadcasting
   * 1.2 Al-Manar during 2006 Lebanon War
         o 1.2.1 Israeli Air Force strike
         o 1.2.2 Criticism of bombing
2 Content
   * 2.1 Programs
   * 2.2 Religion and politics
3 Journalistic standards and neutrality
4 Accusations and Restrictions
   * 4.1 Designation as a 'terrorist entity'
   * 4.2 Designation as an Anti-Semitic Programming
   * 4.3 Banning of broadcasts

What's your idea?--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 04:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I like it, except I think 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 should be under "Journalistic standards and neutrality" and the "Accusations and Restrictions" heading can be done away with. --GHcool 06:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Also, I think that "Designation as an Anti-Semitic Programming" should be changed. The English is a bit off, and the Anti-Semitic and Programming shouldn't be capitalized. Also, the Antisemitism article seems to favor the non-hyphenated spelling. Maybe something like "Allegations of antisemitic programming". Not 100% sure what title would be most accurate, but I think it's more accurate to say that Al-Manar has been accused of airing antisemitic programs than to say it has been classified/designated as an anti-semitic organization (that sounds more like the Ku Klux Klan to me). — George Saliba ^[talk] 07:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you agree with this--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 07:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

1 History
   * 1.1 Satellite broadcasting
   * 1.2 Al-Manar during 2006 Lebanon War
         o 1.2.1 Israeli Air Force strike
         o 1.2.2 Criticism of bombing
2 Content
   * 2.1 Programs
   * 2.2 Religion and politics
3 Journalistic standards and neutrality
   * 3.1 Accusations and Restrictions
         o 3.1.1 Designation as a 'terrorist entity'
         o 3.1.2 Allegations of antisemitic programming
         o 3.1.3 Banning of broadcasts

How about this:

3 Journalistic standards and neutrality
   * 3.1 Designation as a 'terrorist entity'
   * 3.2 Allegations of antisemitic programming
   * 3.3 Banning of broadcasts

--GHcool 17:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions...

Hi guys, GHcool, George, and Sav. Some things that I would suggest... Propaganda, I've been watching this channel since I was born, from Baalbek to Beirut to Canada. Let's talk about their Hezbollah's Psychological warfare. I've been browsing Wikipedia, and I've seen that people post music, and video downloads. Why don't we do that... I can pick some clips from Wa3ad, wa3ad english doesn't have has like 4 clips, so I can go on the Arabic one and find a view Anasheeds (hezbollah music) and some al-Manar infomercials (ie Propaganda clips) they've got lots of stuff , and they're good stuff that can prove our point on al-Manar not being neutral and infact balancing things up in the media, like Hassan Fadlallah said. Also, can we please change the line in the religion and politics section "radical islamic form" to maybe somethiing less insulting?? How about "they follow the same brand of revolutionary islam introduced by Ayatollah Khomeini, and adopted by Hezbollah" something along those lines, Sav/George can u guys work on something ??? Anyways Most important of all is the videos/??? how about it? Ahmad Husseini 22:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, on the side box, its also available in North America... (revision please, my friend pays big bucks to get it) Ahmad Husseini 22:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too familiar with copyright rules on Wikipedia, but you should take a look at this. As for the "radical Islamist" statement, I've tagged the whole section to try to get references. This section makes a lot of broad statements which need sources cited. Anything that can't be backed up by a reliable source should be removed. Regarding the availability in North America, can you find some websites that state such? Maybe the website listing al-Manar for the cable company your friend uses, or any web site that states that it offs broadcast in a country in North America. We need some source to add this, and it may be more accurate to say "Canada" or "parts of North America," rather than "North America" in general. — George Saliba ^[talk] 22:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

George, I'm on it, but my friend pays a free to air provider like 10 bucks a month to get it so its not impossible. Ahmad Husseini 00:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanx George for tagging that section, I guess we can remove the attacks on America part, since Hezbollah has condemned the attacks on the trade centers, Guys? Sav, I need help with those copyright permits on the videos. I guess there is no copyright on them since they're offered to the public, and Wa3ad promotes downloading them? Ahmad Husseini 00:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

George, Intelsat doesn't carry anything on their website but here's something explaining how al-Manar is broadcast. Marketing of terrorism: Hezbollah’s use of the Al-Manar TV station to spread incitement and hatred across the globe, pretty much, it says al-manar gives broadcasting rights to Arabsat and Globecast, and they make up Arabic channel packages (including al-Manar) and they sell those rights to Satellite providers in other parts of the Globe. Ahmad Husseini 01:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

There were some clips which I removed.[1] I think it's not appropriate to use Arabic clips in English wikipedia as I told before.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 01:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently working on a neutral reworded intro, bare with me guys it will take 3 days, since I'm pretty busy now, the intro btw is rediculus, as George pointed out. Ahmad Husseini 17:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good enough?

I think this page should be nominated for Good article status, what do other editors think?Hypnosadist 03:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the lead section should be expanded to mention all of the article's major points, which it currently does not do. -Fsotrain⁰⁹ 17:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, having re-read the intro the section on the bans could be lengthend. Could you say what else specifically you think needs adding to the intro. Hypnosadist 08:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we should add something about the journalistic standards in the lead. Elizmr 19:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Partial Review:

1. Adding rationale templates on logo of Al-Manar

It has done.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 07:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

1. Verification of the sources: Because some of the news sources doesn't exist anymore like [2] you should check the sources and substitute dead sources with new ones.(Please look at Talk:Hezbollah#Verifying the references)

Thanks Mceder, It has done.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

No problems. Fixed the last one today, looks much better now. mceder (u t c) 15:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

1. Adding enough explanation wherever clarification tag is added.
2. Rearrangement: I suggest to separate some parts of History like Designation as a terrorist entity, Anti-Semitic Programming and Satellite transmission.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 07:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

After a quick review, I don't think this article is anywhere near GA quality. The intro has repeated, incomplete quoted sentences, and the references at the bottom are all messed up. — George Saliba ^[talk] 07:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think its getting very close. The biggest problem I had was with the lead. Its missing punctuation and could be better in terms of spacing. The "Content" section is top notch. Fix the lead for punctuation and readability and I think you guys are on your way. --GHcool 18:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

My reason to fail this article:

• We haven't reach consensus about structure yet.
• Lack of references as George.Saliba has mentioned by adding a tag
• It hasn't coveraged all major aspects if we compare it with a similar GA like BBC.

--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 01:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Sav, It's not really neutral, it needs clean up of a bunch of "radical islams" and like George mentioned: this paragraph could get some clean up:

Like Hezbollah, al-Manar promotes a radical Islamist ideology. Its primary message is the promotion of "resistance" and "jihad". It regularly legitimizes violence against the United States, Israel, and other enemies, not only by Hezbollah, whom it generally glorifies, but also by Palestinian militants. It always glorifies martyrdom in the fight against its enemies. The station regularly broadcasts speeches by Hassan Nasrallah and conveys statements from the Hezbollah. Islamic tradition is often invoked to justify suicide bombings, which Nasrallah called "a modest weapon and does not warrant that a world war be waged against it." Fatwas justifying this type of violence are often broadcasted and Muslim clerics such as Sheikh Babil al-Halbawi, imam of the al-Sayida Rikiyya Mosque in Damascus, explain their morality with quotes from the Quran. Suicide missions themselves are often aired on al-Manar as well as the video tapes made by the bombers hours before the attack. The station often asserts that it is not impossible to destroy Israel.[32] Until the Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon, al-Manar's programming political focus was mainly against the Israeli presence in Lebanon. The withdrawal in May 2000 left a void in the station's programming, however Hezbollah and al-Manar consider the Sheeba Farms to be Lebanese territory occupied by Israel, and this became a focal point for political programming. In September of that year, the al-Aqsa Intifada broke out, and al-Manar began to cover the issue of the Israeli Palestinian conflict more extensively, overtly propagandizing to support the Palestinian militants.[33]

Tell me the author of this paragraph isn't biased "like Hezbollah(?)," "however Hezbollah and al-Manar consider the Sheeba Farms to be Lebanese territory occupied by Israel" you know what this sounds like to me... It sounds like Hezbollah and al-Manar were having lunch, or a coffee, and outta the blue al-Manar said: "Hey, Hezbollah, how about we just say the shebba farms are lebanese territories? that would work!" Dude u gotta be kiddin, hezbollah asked the Lebanese gov't and it confirmed that Shebba was lebanese and then they continued from there, they continued the march, they didn't stop freeing lebanon at the blue line and one day they dicided to start again, these borders were set before 2000. Ahmad Husseini 02:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

"Hey, Hezbollah, how about we just say the shebba farms are lebanese territories? that would work!" Dude u gotta be kiddin, Nope thats just how it went but not in english (or using the word dude). Ahmed its called an EXCUSE, then you can use the excuse that the sheba farms is lebanesse(its syrian land, it was when the isrealis captured it and still is) to start a war that kills lots of people. Its called the BIG LIE, just keep repeating it (say on a TV station you control) and people will believe it. This is one of the prime examples of the job of Al-manar in facilitating genocide, just like the lie about jews not going to work on 9/11 or showing the protocols of the elders of zion 11 part TV show. Hypnosadist 01:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Keep the insults to yourself, and do spell my name right. Lebanon decided that the Shebaa farms are Lebannese, not you, not me, not al-Manar, nor Hezbollah, the people that live on that land and that own the land are Lebanese and have lived there before Israel was created. Ahmad Husseini 04:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That's why we do not believe that this page should be nominated, lots of claims no hard facts. When did al-Manar personnaly decide Shebaa is Lebanese? Do answer. That's why editors like George and Sav and GHcool are actually spending their time to clean this page up. Have you read the intro? It was pretty much repeating everything over and over, with sentance fragments here and there. Ahmad Husseini 04:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you ask the UN who they think Shebaa belong to Ahmad, whats that oh syria, its one of the reasons that there is only a cease fire between syria and isreal as opposed to peace. Oh and there promoting of the lie about jews not going to work on 9/11 or showing the protocols of the elders of zion 11 part TV show are all sourced. Plenty of hard facts!Hypnosadist 06:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

If you're so quick with info, why don't you re-write the article in a non-biased way? You can't that's the problem. You have to insert your POV, and you just hate Hezbollah with a passion. Ahmad Husseini 11:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Whatever.Hypnosadist 13:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think some parts of the article don't have any problem. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 12:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ahmad Husseini

The Slogan I added was found in this PDF file: Bombs and broadcasts: Al Manar’s Battle to Stay on Air in the file search for the word "slogan", and you'll find it, it's about half way through. Ahmad Husseini 01:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questionable Sources

Some of the sources are questionable:

Any publication by Avi Jorisch. He is a 'senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defence of Democracies' (see end of article as of 4/20/07 http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/jorisch200412220812.asp). 'The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies is dedicated to winning the war of ideas through communicating, influencing, empowering and educating.' (from http://www.defenddemocracy.org/about_FDD/about_FDD_show.htm?doc_id=321476&attrib_id=7615) In a list of the Foundations 'successes' (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/usr_doc/FDD_at_a_Glance.pdf) is this:

'FDD is the only organization that created a global campaign—comprising Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and secular organizations—to shut down Hezbollah’s al-Manar terrorist television station. Through numerous media appearances and briefings to more than 650 government officials and private sector executives in the United States, Europe, and the Middle East, our Coalition Against Terrorist Media has been instrumental in removing al-Manar from eight satellite providers around the world. As a result, al-Manar can no longer spread hatred, recruit suicide bombers, and support terrorism in North America, Central and South America, Asia, Australia, and most of Africa. We are working to remove al-Manar from the two remaining satellite providers (Egyptian and Saudi) that broadcast the station into Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa'

It is amazingly obvious that this organization, or any of its 'fellows', are not only non-objective, but actively hostile to the topic of this Wikipedia entry. Any part of this entry using sources quoted from any affiliate of the FDD should be deleted. This includes Avi Jorisch's book 'Beacon of Hatred', and any of his writings. Sources include 3, 15-18, and 26-34. Another strike against this book as non-objective reference is the fact that it is published by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which itself was founded by a former research director for AIPAC.

Source number 32 includes a reference to a report by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Center for Special Studies. This center

...is part of the Israel Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center (IICC) , an NGO dedicated to the memory of the fallen of the Israeli Intelligence Community...

(http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/site/content/T1.asp?Sid=18&pid=121) Any source taken from the Center should obviously be deleted.

Also, source number 4 is extemely dubious. Al-Manar maintains a current web site, which shows no signs of the inflamatory language quoted in #4. If this was a statement actually from Al-Manar, it should be properly attributed from a reputable source.

Jeffrey Goldberg, author of #5, is in fact Jewish, and served in the IDF. While it would be wrong to assume that no Jew could be objective, or a person who served in the IDF, he has a poor history of accurate reporting, particularly in regards to the Middle East.

I must say that this is really something. If the authors of this article must write propaganda, there are appropriate places to do so. Providing a biased, one-sided hack job as fact is churlish and of questionable taste. It shows a complete, naked lack of respect for the reader. I will wait to make changes, if anyone wants to respond.

ThurstonZ 21:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, there are editors like me and Sav who tilt the scale just enough to make it neutral. We are also working on this page, as you can read above, we wouldn't pass this article for GA, so, please if you want to edit this page, discuss it first, tell us what you are changing, because a lot of the stuff you might find biased, has probably already been talked about. Ahmad Husseini 21:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry friend, I do believe that Jefferey Goldberg is an ok source, if we do not use partisan sources half of the articles on Wikipedia would have to get deleted, and that line is in fact true, al-Manar does not aim to be neutral, I know that for a fact, being a life long viewer of al-Manar, they say they want to be biased, not in a completely negative way, but in a way that shows off more to the side of the West's "enemy" (ie, Hezbollah, Palestinian cause, and the Iraqi war). Being 'fair' gives both sides a chance to speak, al-Manar believes that the one side of the argument gets to hold the mic for a while longer, and gets to open up his accusations freely, that is why al-Manar aims to be biased, they only give the mic to the one who sat by recieving accusations from the other side, and not given a chance by the "free" media to say what he has to say. Also, please explain your point about al-Manar web site. Ahmad Husseini 21:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

There's no Wikipedia policy that states that POV sources can't be used. It's the article that has to be NPOV not the sources it cites. I mean, the Wikipedia articles on fascism all cite sources written by authors opposed to fascism, that does not necessarily make them POV. And Avi Jorisch's work just happens to be the only English-language sources on al-Manar known to me.--[[User:Carabinieri''''Bold text''''Bold text''''|Carabinieri]] 22:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Is this aimed at me? I never said that, I just said it is partisan, but it outlines main points that we can use, it's not like al-manar denies to be biased, I'm too busy btw to fish through official arabic statements. Ahmad Husseini 22:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ____________________________________________________________

Did you read what the FDD said was a success? 'to shut down Hezbollah’s al-Manar terrorist television station'? Using any connection to the FDD as a source is obviously biased. If you would keep 'Beacon of Hatred' et.al. as sources of information about Al-Manar, why not use Mein Kampf as a source of factual information about Judaism? The first paragraph of the entry is fact mixed with anti-Al-Manar propaganda from spurious sources. And it gets worse from there.

Your assertion that al-Manar aims to be biased in its reporting is unsubstantiated. That link on archive.com, even under cursory scrutiny, is weak in comparison to Al-Manar's real webpage. Your opinions about Al-Manar have no relevance here. Perhaps you can voice your opinions on a personal web page, blog, forum, etc. Wikipedia was not invented so you could spread your personal views.

Carabinieri, fascism and a television station are two very different things. Again, Avi Jorisch is a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defence of Democracies. The FDD blatently states in the .pdf linked to above, that they are actively attempting to shut down all access to Al-Manar. They state :

FDD is the only organization that created a global campaign...to shut down Hezbollah’s al-Manar terrorist television station.

It is clear that any literature released by anyone associated with the FDD will be biased(at the least) or not factual.

ThurstonZ 22:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

WO ok buddy, why would I be trash talking al-Manar? If I have been a Lebanese-born-Shia born into a Hezb family, one of the most elite families in Lebanon when it comes to being a Hezb supporter? and oppose it? I said it is considered good for them to be slanted. They do see things as good vs. evil, which in the M.E. is considered good! THAT's what I said. Ahmad Husseini 22:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

As you probably have not read before, This article was not considered GA material, and we are working on it, but we are not the nerdy-type, sitting in our parent's basement editing Wikipedia all day, WE HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO. Give us time and we will address everything. Ahmad Husseini 22:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

How much time do you need? Simple googling revealed the bias I pointed out. I can clean up this entry. I don't really care about al-Manar, the obvious propaganda just sickens me. God forbid there should be a source of information that Israel resents.

ThurstonZ 04:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Go nuts man, we are slowly editinf this page, but if you feel you can contribute, be bold. Ahmad Husseini 04:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Al-Manar's 9/11 claim

I just want to make sure that we all agree this. the claim was started by the Jerusalem Post, and Al-Manar ran that claim later on, from which they concluded that 9/11 was an Israeli plot. So it really wouldn't be accurate to say that Al-Manar started the claim... in the article 9/11 Conspiracy, the Jerusalem Post is stated as the source who first claimed that 4,000 Jews did not go to their posts in the World Trade Center... Let's get this fact clarified please... Thanks guys... Ahmad Husseini

No we don't agree, the JP said that 4000 jews were missing after the attack. Al-Manar misrepresented this for anti-semitic reasons to 4000 jews missed work BEFORE the attack. Hope that helps you understand what happened. ^{(Hypnosadist)} 13:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Arabs are semitic, calling almanar antisemitic is wrong in the first place; it's like saying anti-my-self radiant guy (talk) 03:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)