BBC tones down Morsi’s support for terrorism against all Israelis

It has taken far too much time, but the US State Department’s recent condemnation of Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi’s antisemitic, terror-glorifying statements – shown in a video from 2010 which was released almost two weeks ago by MEMRI – has left Western journalists no choice but to begin reporting the story. 

However, in its own report on the subject which appeared in the Middle East section of the BBC News website on January 16th, the BBC apparently could not resist ‘tweaking’ Morsi’s words. 

Morsi article

The BBC article states: [emphasis added]

“In the clip from Palestinian broadcaster Al-Quds TV, Mr Morsi referred to Jewish settlers as “occupiers of Palestine” and “warmongers”.

He called for a “military resistance in Palestine against these Zionist criminals assaulting the land of Palestine and Palestinian”.”

Firstly, Al Quds TV is not merely a “Palestinian broadcaster” – it is a television station owned and run by Hamas. Of course this is not the first time that the BBC has elected to conceal from its audiences the terror connections of Al Quds TV and its sister organization Al Aqsa TV

Secondly, Morsi makes no reference whatsoever to “Jewish settlers” in his antisemitic, terror-glorifying rant: that phrase is an invention by the BBC. In fact, Morsi speaks of “Zionists”, by which he means all Israeli Jews – regardless of whether they live on one side or the other of the ‘green line’ – the existence of which Morsi clearly says he does not recognize.

So, the question is this: does the BBC follow the party line expounded by Hamas and other terrorist organisations whereby all Jewish Israelis are considered “settlers” no matter where they live? That is certainly one possible explanation for the choice of wording above. 

And if that is not the case, then we must ask why the BBC is trying to tone down Morsi’s support of terrorism in the whole of Israel by pretending that his statements encouraging violence ‘only’ refer to the use of terror against a specific group of people.  Did the BBC perhaps consider that Morsi’s words would go down a little less badly with its audiences if they were framed as relating to “Jewish settlers” whom – according to the bien pensants of certain circles in the West – it has become perfectly acceptable to demonise, dehumanize and stereotype? 

If that is the case, then it also means that we cannot avoid asking the rather unpleasant – but necessary – question of whether the BBC considers there to be a difference between the palatability of terror attacks inside and outside the ‘green line’.

 

 

About these ads

30 comments on “BBC tones down Morsi’s support for terrorism against all Israelis

  1. It is appalling to read this. One can get used to the constant mis-representation of the BBC on matters relating to Israel and Palestinians and we need you Hadar, to point out these atrocious manipulations which otherwise would pretty well not be noticed..

  2. So we have two translations of a TV interview. One by the BBC, which is regarded throughout the world as a reliable and unbiased source, and the other by MEMRI, a deeply political, pro-Zionist organisation, whose translations have often been criticised as being inaccurate, selective and geared to promoting the Israeli agenda.

    Which one is more credible?

    • Ah Sencar. What is great about these posts by Hadar Sela, is that they will be used sometime in the future, as a quick reference by those investigating the BBC for radical delusional left wing bias.

      It will all end very badly for those who have seized control of the BBC editorial management to promote their delusional world view to unsuspecting audiences..

    • Sencar you are a moron! In case you don;t understand the word I’m using I’ll rephrase it – an idiot, a twit, a dumb shit. I just hope that my meaning is clear to you.

      If the translation of what he’d said had been wrong, do you think that this would have been the first defence the Egyptians would have used to justify Morsi’s remarks?

      As has been shown by many ‘throughout the world’, the BBC is clearly biased with a whole range of agendas. The only ones who refer to it as a ‘reliable and unbiased source’ are those who have a stake in its agenda.

      So long as you have to keep clutching at such poor attempts to defend the immoral and unethical vile BBC, you demonstrate just how valid are the points raised against it.

      Keep ‘em coming idiot!

      • “If the translation of what he’d said had been wrong, do you think that this would have been the first defence the Egyptians would have used to justify Morsi’s remarks?”

        Have the Egyptians used ANY defence to justify Morsi’s remarks? Please let me have details.

        Incidentally, why do so many of you feel the need to resort to vulgar abuse? The first sign of a moron, it seems to me, is calling everyone with whom you disagree ‘a moron’.

          • OK, I’ve started here, as you advised:

            http://news.yahoo.com/egypt-morsi-comments-jews-taken-context-160238322.html

            This is a general defence of Morsi’s criticism of Zionist policy and a denial of his making anti-semitic remarks. It doesn’t refer to the possibility of mistranslation because he is responding to ‘the Obama administration’ and not to MEMRI’s version of the interview in question (of which Morsi may have been completely unaware anyway).

            I stand by my definition of a moron. Another definition might refer to one incapable of following a logical argument. Do you recognise yourself by any chance?

          • Do you ever really read the material you’re presented with before you attempt to justify the outcome that you want to have?

            This is from your beloved and trusted world recognised as fair and impartial BBC –
            The controversy erupted after the Washington-based Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri) translated and released Arabic footage of interviews Mr Morsi gave in 2010, as a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

            Do you see where you got that wrong now?

            I notice you write This is a general defence of Morsi’s criticism of Zionist policy
            not settler policy, as the BBC would have you think, and as Hadar pointed out.

            As for the not being anti-Semitic, the comments below the article pretty much show how much scorn that can be taken with. I know ‘descendants of apes and pigs’ is really a term of endearment, but some people are sensitive about it.

            Just think, I only called you a moron, and see how sensitive you are.
            But really, if you want to avoid getting slurred, take more care about what you come out with.

        • sencar, all you do is bitch about Israel, and rush to defend outright Jew haters like Morsi. You’re a joke.

        • Sencar, if you don’t wish to be regarded as disingenuous, try to give evidence that MEMRI’s translation is less accurate than the BBC’s. Don’t merely assert it and then complain of abuse when you are shown to be unable to do so.

          As for MEMRI’s alleged bias: someone’s got to monitor middle eastern, Arabic and other antisemitism, and since it largely affects middle eastern Jews, why should they be penalized for doing so?

          After all, if it was left to you, nothing would be monitored at all…

    • Sencar, can you please give us links to who has criticised MEMRI translations, to back up your statement. That is, “credible” critics.
      BTW, it’s the BBC itself that says it the most “reliable and unbiased” source…..as a licence payer I had a little snigger at that.

    • that’s right sencar, play the man instead of the ball.

      With which translation do you disagree?

      BBC respected by who? For your info, recent polls have shown that less than half of Britons now have trust in the BBC.

    • sencar,
      The BBC has also been criticized for being political, and not just by Israel’s supporters. I’m sure you just forgot to mention it; a small oversight on your part. In fact, there is a long history to the BBC shaping the news to fit certain political narratives. Is your trust of the MSM limited to a narrow set of issues or do you by into everything they say? I wonder. As far as your claims about MEMRI’s translations, I noticed that you used the passive voice, “has often been criticized.” This assertion begs the question “criticized by whom?” There is also a well documented history of Morsi’s organization “The Muslim Brotherhood.” Don’t you think the U.S. State Department is capable of translating Morsi’s words?

    • There’s nothing wrong with MEMRI’s translation. Morsi refers to ‘Zionists’, not ‘Jewish settlers’. I don’t doubt for a second he regards, at some level, +all+ Israeli Jews as ‘settlers’, but that isn’t the point the BBC were trying to make. They were acting as whitewashing apologists on behalf of that particular statement by Morsi, making it seem considerably less bad than it was.

    • There is simply no argument. The video of him talking is in clear arabic. The translation the BBC posted is simply incorrect, as in fact they have now stated – “Correction 17 January 2013: This report was amended to take out the reference to settlers from the comments made by the Egyptian president.”.

      I assume you are happy to admit you were talking bullshit?

    • sencar,

      We now have the BBC, who you said “is regarded throughout the world as a reliable and unbiased source” retracting their earlier translation of Morsi’s remarks in favor of the one used by MEMRI, whom you called “a deeply political, pro-Zionist organization, whose translations have often been criticized as being inaccurate,”.
      Care to comment?

      • “Care to comment?”

        Of course. If the BBC gets it wrong they make a correction. That’s one reason why it “is regarded throughout the world as a reliable and unbiased source”.

        I take back nothing I said about MEMRI. As the article below makes clear: “the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel.”
        http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/12/worlddispatch.brianwhitaker

        Please read the full article if you want to know more about the very dubious nature of MEMRI and those behind it.

        • Sencar – you never learn!
          Here’s a reminder of what you wrote at the beginning of this thread:
          and the other by MEMRI, a deeply political, pro-Zionist organisation, whose translations have often been criticised as being inaccurate, selective and geared to promoting the Israeli agenda.

          The part I highlighted is a lie. The basis for your criticism on this thread is YOUR PURE FABRICATION. You have provided no proof that this is so.

          Memri operates from the values of our society, and reports on what is going on in the Muslim and Arab world relevant to those values. If it surprises you that it includes support for Israel, the only nation in that area of the world that also shares the same values as our own, then you only display your own dubious character and mindset.

          The Guardian article you link to tries to make so much out of something that is entirely understandable to those of us who are not trying to appease a mindset that is completely hostile and alien to our own. Perhaps (dim)Whitaker is looking for a job with the BBC, as his own ludicrous article would certainly fit in well there.

          By not acknowledging your need to correct your statement regarding Memri you merely highlight your own dubious character. Whether you do or not is immaterial to most of us here, but it should be important to you if you want any credence.

    • I think “sencar” would be surprised to learn that the BBC is a deeply political, anti-Zionist organisation whose translations have often been criticised as being inaccurate, selective and geared to promoting its anti-Israel and pro-Islamist agenda.

      Most BBC license fee payers are well aware of this, a shame he’s not!

  3. Speaking of morons, how can Muslims insult Jews and Christians as being descendants of apes and pigs?
    Was Abraham an ape and pig?
    Since Muslims are also descendants of Abraham, it would appear that they’re also insulting themselves.

    As Homer SImpson would say – DOH! :roll:

  4. 15 January 2013 Last updated at 21:18 ET Share this pageEmail Print Share this page

    ShareFacebookTwitter.Morsi’s anti-Semitic slurs ‘deeply offensive’, US says Mr Morsi called on Egyptians to nurse “our children and grandchildren on hatred” in a 2010 TV interview Continue reading the main story
    Egypt changingPolitical pulse
    No easy way out
    Q&A: Crisis explained
    Who holds power?

    The US has strongly criticised Egypt’s Mohammed Morsi for anti-Semitic remarks he apparently made before being elected president.

    TV footage shows Mr Morsi in 2010 referring to Zionists as “bloodsuckers” and “descendants of apes and pigs”.

    US officials want the leader to clarify his “deeply offensive” comments, which they say run counter to Middle East peace efforts.

    Egypt receives around $1.5bn (£900m) in annual US military and economic aid.

    The financial support is linked to Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel, which the US considers a cornerstone of regional stability.

    ‘Occupiers of Palestine’

    The controversy erupted after the Washington-based Middle East Media
    Today at 6:47 EST on the BBC website the red-circled quote above reads as follows:

    Research Institute (Memri) translated and released Arabic footage of interviews Mr Morsi gave in 2010, as a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    In the clip from Palestinian broadcaster Al-Quds TV, Mr Morsi referred to Jews and Zionists settlers as “occupiers of Palestine” and “warmongers”.

  5. Pingback: BBC Corrects Report on Morsi Video « Commentary Magazine

  6. Pingback: BBC corrects Morsi video article | BBC Watch

  7. morsi will control the world it is promise sooner than you think……islam returns to take upper hand in the world before 2027.

Comments are closed.