Where is the link to Riyahd, Cairo, Beirut and Damascus indymedia?

by Pietro Ingrao Sat Nov 23, 2002 19:59

I believe there's a project currently under way to establish a Lebanese IMC, but I don't know at what stage it is at the moment. Last I heard there was some talk of going live within a few months, so keep your eyes peeled.

by Rich Hall Sun Nov 24, 2002 03:42

I think every IMC is launched by local volunteers on the ground in wherever, with of course technical supports from the international group. It's not the decision of a centralised authority.

by floating and stinging Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:39

there is a Beirut IMC
http://beirut.indymedia.org/
there is also an Israeli IMC
the link is at the bottom of the page, but has its own security firewall thingy, to discourage people being really trolly and using the cliché passé zionist tags too much.
the jerusalem IMC which served Palestine is offline.

by Devil Dog Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:59

and one I've pondered frequently myself. Perhaps it's beacuse the "Zionist Entity" is a democracy whereas anyone trying to set up an Indymedia in Cairo or Riyadh would quickly find themselves languishing in some dungeon. I also await with bated breath the creation of Indymedias in N. Korea, Iran and, my anticipated favourite, Cuba.

by Joe Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:48

It's always a bit bizarre when right wing trolls bring up this sort of thing.

Why?

Well

1. Everyone involved in indymedia would love to see indymedia's in those countries and would help to set them up where that was useful. As mentioned there is a Lebanese IMC project to which I've donated money.

2. Egypt is pretty much under the thumb of the US and is by far the most Israel friendly of the Arab states. These two facts are not unconnected..

3. In terms of free press in the middle east the outstanding example is of course Al Jazeera http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

Of course when Al Jazeera got going it was the darling of the western right and liberal set. But then once the latest imperialist intervention got underway they discovered that presenting both sides of a story was no longer cool and proceeded to start murdering its journalists.

Likewise I suspect Devil Dog would love to see indymedia.egypt up to the day indymedia.egypt actually went online.

by Devil Dog Wed Feb 16, 2005 14:33

is that the majority of IM's are located in western democracies and I'm sure they denigrate these democracies as much as the Irish version does ("Police state" etc etc), as, of course, it is your right to do so.

I love the way anyone who deviates from the party line on this site is immediately labeled a right wiing troll - c'mon Joe, surely you have a bit more imagination than that.

As for the ME, the "imperialist intervention" is an attempt to bring some democracy to the failed Muslim states there...I'd love to see IM's all over the place - I wouldn't agree with most of what they propagated no doubt, but at least it would mean these countries were finally permitting some freedom to their citizens.

by Joe Wed Feb 16, 2005 14:59

Ok Deveil Dog maybe I'm being a bit hard on the 'right wing troll' thing but its more of a reacton to the 'oh so clever' original article then your (perhaps unthinking) clap for it.

But I'm afraid you do show something of the troll mentality. For instance just how often is the Irish state referred to as a '"Police state" even in the comments on indymedia.ie? The only time I can think of any such comments was in the run up to Mayday last year and in the situation where people giving out leaflets were facing a sustained harassment campaign by uniformed and secret police there was something in that exageration.

It is a simple fact that indymedias across Europe and the USA (and Israel) have been the target of both open and covert state intervention. Most brutally in Genoa - that looked a lot like the actions of a 'police state' - with dozens hospitalised and fake charges and planted evidence used as an 'excuse'. In other words people have been raided, beaten, framed and had their equipment delibretly smashed. At the first Irish demo I covered for indymedia I had the experience of having a plain clothes cop punch my camera out of my hands.

But we don't live in a police state - certainly not in the sense that people in Egypt or Saudi or Burma or indeed Cuba do. If we did then this site could not exist in the form it does.

But by troll here I meant the really weird idea implicit in the article and echoed in yours that indymedia people would somehow not want indymedias in Cairo, Riyahd or Damascus. This makes no sense except to someone so propagandasised that they can only conclude the whole of indymedia is really some vast conspiracy to undermine George Bush or something.

The troll nature of the original article BTW is demonstrated by the fact that the troll had not even checked what indymedias did exist as the link to indymedia Beirut is exactly where it should be, at the bottom of the page along with all other indymedias.

BTW I only mentioned 'Al Jazeera' because the regime you fought for started with praising it and ended with bombing its offices, killing its journalists and banning them from the country it occupies. Your not the regime but I'm curious what you think of this.

by jsr Wed Feb 16, 2005 17:41

Jane, Have a look at the bottom of the page. As for helping 'em start indy's in downtrodden countries would you care to get the ball rolling by donating your 'puter, Im sure they could put it to better use than you.

by not surprised Wed Feb 23, 2005 03:14

If any of you bothered to check the date of the original article you would see it was written almost two-and-a-half years ago!!! So the Beirut IMC mightn't have been set up when it was written. So less of the "troll" attacks, eh?!

Joe - Devil Dog had a fair point. The overwhelming majority of IMC's are in democratic countries. So I think it is fair to say that freedom of speech, demonstrated by the existence of IMC's and their ilk, is better upheld in Western-style democracies than in other countries. I don't think Devil Dog was making any point about Indymedia folk not wanting IMC's in these countries. Correct me if I am wrong?

As for JSR, shut the fuck up, smartarse. Go back to Obit's plagiarising article on Leb/Hariri and make me laugh again by unwittingly praising the Sindo as "fair and accurate", you plonker. My ribs still hurt from chortling.......

by telegraph obit contributor Wed Feb 23, 2005 04:16

sorry writing.
well we do all try to be fair concise and honest.
even Geraldine.
we work to emulate the angel of our age, George Bush.

Beirut imc records are available on line for you to peruse as our all imc records. not a single word dissappears.

by R. Isible Wed Feb 23, 2005 16:43

1. Many of those places don't have IMCs because as you point out they're not democratic. This is often because they are states supported by the USA or Israel which viciously repress political viewpoints hostile to the USA. (Mubarak of Egypt has been sitting on top of an anti-democratic regime that has bread Islamic insurgency for years. (Remember the Luxor massacre? ). A similar situation is occuring in Algeria and Morocco. The only outlet for political organising is through the whacko Islamic groups. Similarly with Saudia Arabia ( the USAs big undemocratic friend in the middle east. Even when US citizens were being arrested for religious proselytising in Saudi prior to 9-11 the USA did nothing because they didn't care as long as the oil kept flowing and the troops had bases ).

I'd take you, and the USA a lot more seriously if I saw a history of US opposition to tyrannical regimes like Saudi Arabia, Indonesia etc. There's no historical evidence to support that idea: instead it's clear that the USA goes where their short term interests are and human rights and democracy be damned.

2. The "democracies" aren't all that great either although they're better than the 3rd world dictatorships propped up by the "democracies".

DevilDog wrote "Perhaps it's beacuse the "Zionist Entity" is a democracy whereas anyone trying to set up an Indymedia in Cairo or Riyadh would quickly find themselves languishing in some dungeon"

Hmmm. Supposing dungeons are just a last resort in a a "democracy" and there are all sorts of other harrasment, intimidation and discouragement techniques available? And what happened to IMC Palestine?

For instance in (what I'm sure you'd call a democracy) a kid that ran a website called "RaiseTheFist" was jailed for not deleting material that was widely available all over the internet about making petrol bombs. He ended up copping a plea bargain after he was held against his will.

Or if we look further back in history to the "legal" prosecution and economic blacklisting and harrasment of communists during the McCarthy era (in what I'm sure you'd call a democracy) then we see another example of the suppression of political freedom by "democracies".

Or look even further back and look at the use of Pinkerton goons to attack union organisers in the earlier part of the century, the institution of laws which make effective union organising illegal etc.

3. As has been amply pointed out above it's not any one's job except people in the concerned countries to start IMCs. That's the whole point of IMC. Organise yourself, do it yourself. I'll be happy to support them if they do it, but I can't do it for them.