Harry’s Place

Religion of Peace…..

Wonder if the crazy Palestinian in the bulldozer today in Jerusalem was a MB member?

Today’s news:

The military wing of Lebanese political party Hezbollah has been added to the government’s list of organisations banned under the Terrorism Act 2000.

It means it is now a criminal offence for anyone in the UK to be a member of the party’s military structure, raise funds or encourage support for it.

But the ban does not apply to Hezbollah’s political, social or humanitarian activities.

I often wonder why Israel doesn’t have a hit squad for these evil cancers in our society. Surely incitement to disparage Jews, however expressed is an encouragement to kill/harm Jews.

The same with incitement by Palestinian and Hamas TV (Al Manar). Why doesn’t Israel bomb their broadcasting ability before more Jews/Israelis are killed by incitement.

HP becomes a clipboard for Antisemitic attacks verbal/physical. What is the point of reading another one, and another one …. without any ability to stop it.

Where is the “Star Chamber” when you need it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star_Chamber

The military wing of Lebanese political party Hezbollah has been added to the government’s list of organisations banned under the Terrorism Act 2000.

It means it is now a criminal offence for anyone in the UK to be a member of the party’s military structure, raise funds or encourage support for it.

Doesn’t this mean that displaying Hezbollah flags or shouting “We are all Hezbollah now” is a criminal offence?

I look forward to Brian Whittaker explaining why the translation is wrong; Seumas Milne explaining why Sawalha is misunderstood; and Deborah Fink claiming that he means Those Zionist Jews not All The Jews.

“But the ban does not apply to Hezbollah’s political, social or humanitarian activities.”

… Because there is a very clear dividing line between the political, social and humanitarian activities of Hezbollah, and the military activities. They’re in no way connected at all.

“We are all Hezbollah, just the social sevices wing, you understand.”

Lets have a sweep as to who’s the first person to try and get themselves arrested under this one.

Doesn’t this mean that displaying Hezbollah flags or shouting “We are all Hezbollah now” is a criminal offence?

The banners now need to read:

We are all Hezbollah (in a purely political, social or humanitarian sense clearly) now!

But the ban does not apply to Hezbollah’s political, social or humanitarian activities.

So the ban is totally unworkable then. Twats, the lot of them.

Wonder if the crazy Palestinian in the bulldozer today in Jerusalem was a MB member?

Was the bulldozer a Caterpillar? If it was then all Israelis and Jews should divest from this vehicle (sorry) of terrorism!

It was a Caterpillar.

Not quite on topic but still…

Some of the inane views attributed to UK Moslems turn out to be untrue and just reflect desperate attempts at political correctness by minor bureaucrats. This latest incident is however a corker.

Dundee police have seen fit to apologise to the local Moslem “community” for a postcard campaign featuring their popular trainee police dog Rebel, (a German Shepherd).

Mohammed Asif, a Dundee councillor who sits on the Tayside Joint Police Board, raised the issue of the postcards with the local Chief Constable John Vine. He said “My concern is that it is not welcomed by all communities with the dog on the cards and it was a waste of resources going to these communities”.

Those familiar with these situations will realise that “community” is a New Labour euphemism for an ethnic community with more than its usual share of trouble makers. Cllr Asif was objecting to the use of the police dog in an advertisting campaign because all dogs are unclean to Moslems.

Cllr Asif explained “‘They (the police) should have understood. Since then, the police have explained that it was an oversight on their part, and that if they’d seen it was going to cause upset they wouldn’t have done it.’

Councillor Asif, who is a member of the Tayside Joint Police Board, said that the force had a diversity adviser and was generally very aware of such issues. (Deep Sigh)

Police force “diversity advisors” are another New Labour scam, usually involves appointing an ethnic (usually Asian) police officer to a senior role to liaise with “our communities” (see above).

A spokeman for Tayside Police said Rebel had proved “incredibly popular with children and adults. He attracted record visitor numbers to our web site. ”

Meanwhile as a nation of animal lovers, why should we be dictated to in this way by bombastic British Moslems?

Because there is a very clear dividing line between the political, social and humanitarian activities of Hezbollah, and the military activities. They’re in no way connected at all.

Is this sarcasm?

Yes

Meanwhile as a nation of animal lovers, why should we be dictated to in this way by bombastic British Moslems?

SHUT UP! If you EVER again suggest that the tiny minority constituency of 1.8m Muslims shouldn’t be allowed to dictate to the other 60m of us then you put your own life in danger when Shariah Law comes in.

In fairness its probably only about 30,000 Islamists or so who are pushing this.

Be quiet!!! Do you want us all to be targetted on the justification that we don’t accept something as serious as a puppy on a postcard??

Already Islamist are picketing Andrex and also demanding that the Canine Defence League be banned. Police forces are changing real dogs for robo-dogs which have an Islamic seal on them (a bit like Kosher Food).

Any Muslim found to be involved with a dog-fighting ring will be ignored as will all Asian shops owned by Muslims which sell booze and top-shelf mags.

If you DARE raise any glimmer of a mention of hypocricy or suggest its all a test to see how compliant we are to small suggestions and then larger ones like “Change Foreign Policy” then you are too smart my lad and a charge of apostacy will be swiftly executed.

Maven: Are you suggesting Israel use death squads like the ones US organized among Iraq’s Shias and used against the Sunnis?

Wonder how long before the New Statesman, Guardian, the Independent, etec will call for all Zionists, i.e. Jews to be expelled once again from Britain?

Wonder how long before the New Statesman, Guardian, the Independent, etec will call for all Zionists, i.e. Jews to be expelled once again from Britain?

Obviously the natural destination will be Israel, thus putting further pressure on Israel not to relinquish the OT and to build settlements on them to house these immigrants fleeing persecution. Probably require a few Israeli Arabs to be ‘relocated’ too. Once again the Palestinians will have a great reason to thank the West’s intervention in the area.

David T: Yes

Wait, how do we know that wasn’t sarcasm as well?

Oh dear. This is the problem with sarcasm, isn’t it?

Hardly a surprise - this kind of thinking is mainstream amoung British muslims - you may remember that poll last year in which a plurality of the British Muslims questioned, responded that British Jews were “legitimate targets”.

This finding got little coverage (the MSM focussed almost exclusively on the more positive findings of the poll), and there even seemed to be something an unwillingness to digest this finding here at HP. I can only imagine the reaction if a comparable attitude towards British muslims has come out of a poll of British jews.

On the evidence available, not only are a plurality of British muslims anti-semites, but that this plurality would cheer on murderous violence against British Jews. To put this in context, this is a much larger proportion of the UK population than have ever voted BNP - and such views are obviously at least equivalent to the filth that is the BNP political philosophy.

So, Britain has no problem importing large numbers of anti-Semites (and doubtless haters of British culture as well) and then pretending nothing is wrong. No wonder people are looking favorably on the BNP. When did national suicide become a good thing?

The words jew and zionist are used interchangeably in Arabic. Likewise Christians. People of whatever their ideaology are identified by religion so the Americans will be called “the nasara” the Christians and Israelis “al yahood” the Jews.

Saying “evil/noxious Jew” isnt worse than saying “evil/noxious Muslims”- something we often hear from zionists- Melanie Phillips even used Nazi like language to report this story -comparing Muslims to insects.

So taking a word that has one context in one language then translating it and applying the context of your translation is pretty pathetic. We see it is the use of words like “Islamist” (sic)

At least he didnt call for a “shoah” against Palestinians as the Israeli govt has

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7270650.stm

DaveW
“On the evidence available, not only are a plurality of British muslims anti-semites, but that this plurality would cheer on murderous violence against British Jews.”

this is a disgraceful, libellous comment. Using anti-semitism to stoke up hatred of Muslims is pretty de rigeur these days though.

LOL -a post intended to protest demonisation of Jews turns into an anti- Muslim hate fest. Welcome to Harry’s Place- where irony goes to diw..

The words jew and zionist are used interchangeably in Arabic. Likewise Christians. People of whatever their ideaology are identified by religion so the Americans will be called “the nasara” the Christians and Israelis “al yahood” the Jews.

that sounds like b.s. to me. me is saying that Arabic cannot distinguish between Zionists and Jews? What did they do before the late 1800s? And Arabic can’t distinguish between Christians and Jews? Just a pile of crap. And, were it true, it would only mean that Arabic speakers are idiots, which is probably not the case.

Seymour Paine

“that sounds like b.s. to me. me is saying that Arabic cannot distinguish between Zionists and Jews?”

no that many Arabs use yahood (Jews) to refer to zionists -this is clear from speaking to them and clarifying.

“And Arabic can’t distinguish between Christians and Jews? ”

You clearly didnt understand my post.

But you DO understand some comments in Arabic.
LOL

ignore “me”: He is just Flanker’s latest pseudoym.

By the same token, when a person says “all Muslims should be deported”, all they’re really saying is that they’re objecting to the presence of Islamists?

Uh huh

yeah best ignore “me”, he’s here to provoke a reaction

he’s thick arse racist and certainly doesn’t speak arabic, whereas DaveM does

according to Google translations, Jew in Arabic is:

يهودي

whereas Zionist in Arabic is rendered as:

الصهيونى

so they are different.

Perhaps a more accurate translation would be:

“The Jew who refuses to pay the Jizya when we create our glorious Calpihate”

And then, if he said that, “me” could come on here to explain that a Jizya tax was a progressive form of taxation designed to compensate the working class Muslim world for their losses at the hands of the Jews. And the Caliphate, hed explain, was a sort of socialist welfare state thinggy.

@me is just a stupid Antisemite.

The words jew and zionist are used interchangeably in Arabic. Likewise Christians. People of whatever their ideaology are identified by religion so the Americans will be called “the nasara” the Christians and Israelis “al yahood” the Jews.

Bollocks, as someone said earlier “What did they write before the word Zionist in the 1800’s”.

Saying “evil/noxious Jew” isnt worse than saying “evil/noxious Muslims”-

Antisemites always get this wrong. Especially Muslim-supporting or Muslim-based Antisemites (like you). A Jew is a member of a racial/ethnic group. A Muslim is anyone. Any race, nationality,colour, ethnicity etc.

something we often hear from zionists- Melanie Phillips even used Nazi like language to report this story -comparing Muslims to insects.

An obvious slander.

At least he didnt call for a “shoah” against Palestinians as the Israeli govt has

Lying c*nt! The word ’shoah’ means ‘disaster’. He didn#t even CALL for a disaster, he said the Palestinians were bringing a disaster upon themselves.

Hatred like yours is like a cancer. I wish you hatred

So why is you tolerate the genocidal hate speech of Mark Elf and his JSF? In the US most people would clearly see him for what he is; a neo nazi ‘Jew’ (and I put it in quotes since I’m no more convinced of Mark’s cries of “But I’m Jewish you CAN’T condemn me!!!” than I am of any other nazi who claims to be a super-Jew either) on the payroll of the Arabs? It’s all well and good to agree that self appointed ‘clerics’ scream and foam at the mouth in Arabic about their infinite retarded antisemitism. That’s like saying water is wet. It’s quite another for the clapped out ex Soviet Marxists to tell you why it’s a good thing that all Israelis should be exterminated, as Mark Elf often does.

Well done Modernity, I was beginning to fret.

“me”? ha!ha!ha!ha!ha! are you serious when you wrote “The words jew and zionist are used interchangeably in Arabic. Likewise Christians. People of whatever their ideaology are identified by religion so the Americans will be called “the nasara” the Christians and Israelis “al yahood” the Jews.”

really? They’re interchangeable if you’re an Antisemite. If you’re an Arabic speaking Antisemite then you say Zionist to the foreign audience, and say Jew to your local audience.
If you’re an English speaking Antisemite you say Zionist to the cameras and Jews when you’re attending a BNP/Combat 18 committee meeting behind closed doors.

Oh and Americans are called Americans. At least that’s what they called them in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Yemen. Just as French are called French, Spanish are called Spanish etc. etc. And non Antisemites (those that I met) called Israelis Israelis.

Oh “me” if you’re going to lie, at least do some proper research first. The word you used for Christians ‘nasara’ نصارى is a Quranic word that hasn’t been used for hundreds of years and it’s not a word people now use. I had to look it up because I hadn’t heard it. Today was the first time I even heard of that word.

The word people use that means Christians is مسيحيين sort of pronounced misseeheen (but writing it in Latin script doesn’t really do it justice).

Though as I mentioned, people call Americans Americans. (Whatever you’re on “me” can I have a smoke?)

“The words jew and zionist are used interchangeably in Arabic.”

Nope.

“Saying “evil/noxious Jew” isnt worse than saying “evil/noxious Muslims”- something we often hear from zionists- Melanie Phillips even used Nazi like language to report this story -comparing Muslims to insects.”

So, does the fact that some call Muslims evil make it alright to call Jews evil? Based on your logic, you should have no problem in condemning Sawalha’s description of Jews as dastardly. An Iranian government newspaper compared Azeris to cockroaches. Would you accuse the Iranian government of using Nazi language?

“So taking a word that has one context in one language then translating it and applying the context of your translation is pretty pathetic.”

Sure, but the context was pretty clear and the translation was correct.

Mohammad Sawalha may not be the most saintly of people but libel is libel and if you are going to broadcast, not a mis-translation, but a flagrant addition to this mans interview prepare yourself for a long an expensive case in the high court.

Furthermore as the only people referring to British jews as noxious is Dave M then obviously he is guilty of spreading racial hatred designed to cause a breach of the peace.

It is fairly ironic that the harshest criticism of the celebrations were by Israeli citizens and jews. Why are you not making a fuss about their comments? I’d suggest racism.

“On the evidence available, not only are a plurality of British muslims anti-semites, but that this plurality would cheer on murderous violence against British Jews.”

The president of the British Muslim Initiative has just under-written that analysis, with his attack on the ” evil/noxious Jew in Britain”. This is hate speech directed against Britons who are Jewish, whose families have lived peacefully and productively in our midst for many generations. He said it in arabic because he is not entirely confident he could get away with saying it in English. Yet.

If a plurality of British muslims wish to repudiate Jew-hatred, they could start by calling for the dismissal and prosecution of this man for racist provocation. I don’t reckon they will.

This is not about Israel. It isn’t even about supporters of Israel.
It’s about the hatred and aggression which permeates islam.

Monty
“If a plurality of British muslims wish to repudiate Jew-hatred, they could start by calling for the dismissal and prosecution of this man for racist provocation. I don’t reckon they will.”

Given that the plurarity of British Muslims have never even heard of him or his organisation (for one thing they are generally from the subcontinent and he is an Arab speaking Arab a language not many understand) why would they do that? Its not as if Britains Jewsih community has repudiated Muslim-hatred - look at who’s head of a major Jewish charity!

If what he said was true he should be dismissed but “prosecution of this man for racist provocation”- why when people say far worse about Muslims (look at Mark Steyns genocidal rabtings) and get away with it recall the Daily Telegraph compared Muslims to dogs)

Sorry but there has to be equality -if Muslims are going to prosecuted for verbal abuse on non-Muslims the reverse must also happen. You and your ilk excusing venemous hatred against Muslims under “freedom of speech” is just a mask for your hatred.

Yes Brett ‘Cohen’; surely a long and expensive case in the high court beckons and Im sure the folk at Harrys Place are watching the fax machine with baited breath.

And then…

“It is fairly ironic that the harshest criticism of the celebrations were by Israeli citizens and jews. Why are you not making a fuss about their comments? I’d suggest racism.”

Did you not see the (earlier) post on ‘Debs’ Fink? Quite a fuss was indeed made of her comments.

Not engaging brain before posting is a prerequisite for cretins like TheIriot, Fwanker et al. So you are in good company. But even they tend to read the bloody blog before posting.

Twat.

Brett was being ‘ironic’ of course……wasn’t he???

Whereas ‘me’ (Flanker/Flankers best friend) wasn’t being ironic.

He is just genuinely thick and not a little unpleasant.

” (look at Mark Steyns genocidal rabtings)”

I’m rather surprised to see you accusing Steyn of advocating genocide. I dare say Steyn’s lawyers would be similarly fascinated by this rather defamatory allegation.

David T

“Perhaps a more accurate translation would be:

“The Jew who refuses to pay the Jizya when we create our glorious Calpihate””

Why not ? you and your MEMRI style friends translate Arabic however you want

“And then, if he said that, “me” could come on here to explain that a Jizya tax was a progressive form of taxation designed to compensate the working class Muslim world for their losses at the hands of the Jews. And the Caliphate, hed explain, was a sort of socialist welfare state thinggy.”

And David T would explain Israel is a democracy where Jews and Gentiles have equal rights. Your putting words into my mouth shows dishonesty and desperation. Jizya was a tax paid by non-Muslims who could afford it. Muslims had to pay another tax zakat. Its funny that the main target of Muslim mistreatment of non-Muslims you can produced is they made non-Muslims pay tax!!! Shocking -can you imagine a non-Muslim country demanding Muslims pay tax. No Muslims in the UK pay tax. Jizya excused non-Muslims from obligatory military service.The Jews (oooh can I say that) in the Ottoman Empire once went to the Sultan and asked to be excused paying it - he explained that they could if they agreed to enlist . They said theyd rather pay tax.

“By the same token, when a person says “all Muslims should be deported”, all they’re really saying is that they’re objecting to the presence of Islamists?

Uh huh”

Saying you resent someone and saying you want them deported (please tell us David where can British Muslims be deported to?) are categorically different. What is it with you and deporting Muslims?

Maven

“me is just a stupid Antisemite.”

Whereas you are a smart Muslim-hater
well done Maven.One nearer the quota.

“The words jew and zionist are used interchangeably in Arabic. Likewise Christians. People of whatever their ideaology are identified by religion so the Americans will be called “the nasara” the Christians and Israelis “al yahood” the Jews.

Bollocks, as someone said earlier “What did they write before the word Zionist in the 1800’s”.”

yahood - which is also used for zionists

Saying “evil/noxious Jew” isnt worse than saying “evil/noxious Muslims”-

“Antisemites always get this wrong. Especially Muslim-supporting or Muslim-based Antisemites (like you). A Jew is a member of a racial/ethnic group. A Muslim is anyone. Any race, nationality,colour, ethnicity etc.”

Ok thats ok then to kill Muslims cos they aint a race- there was nowt wrong with the Serbs exterminating the Bosnian Muslims because they were the same race after all. Maven was his chosen anti-prejudcie to be above others - a kind of chosen peoples prejudice worse than any other

In any case its untrue-Jews are a religion not a race= you can convert into Judaism- you cant convert race - and one look at the Israeli population shows people who are white to people who are black.
As another poster on here said to me Jews arent a race but a religion.

“something we often hear from zionists- Melanie Phillips even used Nazi like language to report this story -comparing Muslims to insects.”

An obvious slander.

Really -read her post then
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/811236/just-look-what-crawled-out.thtml

“Lying c*nt! The word ’shoah’ means ‘disaster’. He didn#t even CALL for a disaster, he said the Palestinians were bringing a disaster upon themselves.”

Great so if someone said “Israel is bringing a shoah upon itself” youd be a OK?

Yes and the BMI mean zionist when they said yahood.

“Hatred like yours is like a cancer. I wish you hatred”

Judaism in action. Is there no forgiveness of or mercy towards gentiles in your religion at all?

” recall the Daily Telegraph compared Muslims to dogs”

Keep digging!

Do you need an extra shovel? JCB? I doubt that you need either. You have the approach of a super-twerp who could dig himself into hell with a teaspoon.

Monty

“I’m rather surprised to see you accusing Steyn of advocating genocide. I dare say Steyn’s lawyers would be similarly fascinated by this rather defamatory allegation.”

Thatd be hilarious - zionist wet dream Mark “free speech” Steyn sues someone for what they said! Would the butterball Mr Steyn grace us with his rotund presence during proceedings?
Perhaps I could share a lawyer with Kenan Malik who wrote:

“Not many would go along with Steyn in suggesting that genocide might be the answer to the Muslim problem, if only we could find someone to carry it out. Others, however, are quite happy to treat all Muslims as criminals and to inflict collective punishment. ”
http://www.kenanmalik.com/essays/weltwoche_islamophobia.html

Who would Harrys Place back in the case ? I can just see the opening lines - freedom of speech is precious..but of course it has its limits

“me” will now demonstrate the courage of his convictions by revealing his true identity…..

Me
” recall the Daily Telegraph compared Muslims to dogs”

Monty
“Keep digging!

Do you need an extra shovel? JCB? I doubt that you need either. You have the approach of a super-twerp who could dig himself into hell with a teaspoon.”

“All Muslims, like all dogs, share certain characteristics.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/07/25/do2504.xml

““me” will now demonstrate the courage of his convictions by revealing his true identity…..”

Luke …I am your father

“All Muslims, like all dogs, share certain characteristics.”

Good luck with that submission by the way….

Who did you say you were? And where are you posting from?

And your lawyer is who?

I’m not interested in persecuting Kenan Malik right now.

Let’s get back to you…

me

Judaism in action. Is there no forgiveness of or mercy towards gentiles in your religion at all?

Eff of back to Stormfront, will you?

“me”, I wouldn’t be so focussed on who you are, and where you are, if you had not seen fit to defame several named persons, plus a national newspaper, on this website. Which is not your website.

It is the equivalent of messing in someone else’s knickers and then creeping away pretending it was them, and not you.

It earns you the rank of Class 1 Category A dirty bugger.

HP admins,

these neo-nazi wannabe (”me” and friends”) are very disruptive on these threads, I do wish they spend more time at Lenin’s tomb, etc

“Jizya excused non-Muslims from obligatory military service.”

- This, like most of the comments of “me” is a gross generalisation and innacurate.

You’ve really got to wonder when “me” posts and he makes TheIrie or Flanker start to look good.

I’m sorry but is there something I’m missing here? I know Arabic well and I’ve just looked up the link to Al-Jazeera you provided .There is no such wordالوبيل . In fact Sawalha clearly uses the term ‘Lobby’ اللوبيand not this odd and awkward word that DaveM claims that he has ‘translated’الوبيل, i.e. ‘al-wabeel’…that doesn’t even mean anything, let alone ‘evil/noxious’ as DaveM stupidly puts it.

Seriously, is this just stupidity at play, or are you guys just sensing
that you’re losing the war out there and have resorted to what can only be termed…reaching??
This is a clear lie! It is better for you to take this hoax translation off your website before Sawalha take you to court!

It’s strange. The Al-Jazeera article may have been changed. I am pretty sure I read “disastrous Jew” (الوبيل means disastrous) before, but now it appears to refer to the Jewish lobby (اللوبي). I think the article has been rewritten after Sawalha complained and perhaps Al-Jazeera misquoted him. But DaveM original translation was, in essence, correct - it was a racist slur on Jews.

Of course DaveM translated it correctly. We’ve saved the original. Al Jazeera has simply changed the text.

It makes a lovely change to have neo Nazis and Hamas supporters threatening us with a mere libel action. Usually they just try to murder us.

An arabic speaking friend of a friend checked the original piece, and said it was 100% correct. He’d have translated the key phrase as “Jewish evil in Britain” rather than “Evil Jew”, though.

Al Jaz changed the words to “Jewish lobby” after we spotted it. The words “evil” and “lobby” do not look remotely similar. This is not a matter of one small spelling mistake. They’re different words.

In other words, they’ve been found out.

David T: We cannot know whether Sawalha actually said those words or he was misquoted. Even so, the phrase “Jewish lobby” in the rewritten text is not without controversy as it is often used to imply a Jewish conspiracy. It would have been more accurate to say “pro-Israel lobby” (which includes non-Jews but does not encompass all Jews, eg the absurd Netauri Karta), but instead he casts an entire people as a single entity and speaks of his resentment of them. Incidentally, I would have just the same problem if a speaker at a BNP demonstration spoke of his resentment of the Muslim community and the “Muslim lobby”. Resenting an entire people because of current political events is highly prejudiced and Al-Jazeera’s “corrections” don’t put Sawalha in a better light in my opinion.

Again in the link to AlJazeera it talks about “lobby” nothing else .Any Arabic speaking will know that.That word “Wabeel” is very odd in Arabic to be used and has no meaning in this context.Clearly you made it up to justify your predetermined agenda.It is formed with the same letters in Arabic If you keep up this very inaccurate translation you will definately end up in court!

“If you keep up this very inaccurate translation you will definately end up in court!”

You obviously did not read the original article, before Sawalha’s quote was changed.

Google’s cache has the page with the original quote attributed to Sawalha (the phrase is highlighted): http://74.125.39.104/search?q=cache:To2S4jlCTAsJ:www.aljazeera.net/NR/EXERES/C4889FEE-E9FE-4EAB-BCC2-4806F823427B.htm+%22%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%84+%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%87%D9%88%D8%AF%D9%8A+%D9%81%D9%8A+%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%A7%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3

Just read it soon, or the cache will be updated with the revised article.

Here is a screen shot of the original: http://i27.tinypic.com/15gqs91.jpg

British Muslim Initiative
http://www.bminitiative.com

News release
Attention: news desk
For immediate use

Zionist Racist website lies in order to justify its hate-rhetoric

While ‘Harry’s Place’ may not be known as a bastion of truth and balanced comment - not even in the remotest sense of these words - its latest blunder shows it as an entirely incompetent source of information.

In ‘reporting’ the anti-Israel demonstration that took place at Trafalgar Square on Sunday the 29th of June, the moderator of the said blog quoted BMI president Mohammed Sawalha’s comment to Al-Jazeera as: “We, the Arab and Islamic community, gather here today to express our resentment at the celebrations by the Jewish community and the evil/noxious Jew in Britain” – Translated by DaveM.

What is beyond doubt is that DaveM seems to be an entirely incapable and dangerously incompetent translator, clearly failing to understand and hence translate the simple word ‘Lobby’. This word is pronounced in Arabic identically to the way it is in English, and is written phonetically in identical style.

It is of course possible that DaveM and the moderators of this vile blog-space - which has made it its mission to attack Islam and Muslims in whatever underhand methods it can get away with - deliberately skewed the word ‘Lobby’ to turn it into some other word and make it seem as though it means ‘evil/noxious’, in order to portray not only Mohammed Sawalha, but BMI and all the projects that Mr. Sawalha is linked to, as ‘Jew-haters’ and ‘anti-Semitic’.

This was immediately picked up by the likes of Melanie Phillips who wrote in The Spectator, quoting this error and using it as fact to further her campaign to demonise an individual who has done for community relations and cultural dialogue far more than she can ever lay claim to.

Anas Altikriti, spokesman of BMI, commented earlier: ‘This particular blog-space and its moderators are nonentities and insignificant. However, its danger lies in that in the past some corners of our mainstream media have picked up on its drivel and used it as fact.

This is another example of not only very basic incompetence at play, but pure evil that sees no shame or wrong in plainly lying for the purpose of demonising certain individuals and organisations, regardless of reality or facts”.

BMI have alerted its legal advisors to this matter and will be monitoring the blog-site in question as well as any quoting of this error by any other media outlet, and will be pursuing measures to bring those who do to account.

What is beyond doubt is that DaveM seems to be an entirely incapable and dangerously incompetent translator

Isn’t that libellous?

The writer has very obviously intentionally exploited the ignorance of his audience in the Arabic language.

lets look at the sentence:
والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا

Any able Arabic speaker would tell you that this sentence has no sound meaning due to its lack of structure.

lets not do a ‘google translator’ style of translation, where each word is taken on its own and the grammatical structure of the sentence does not come into play.

In Arabic, the word اليهودي (Jew) in this sentence is termed a ‘description’ of the word before it.

The word الوبيل would also be a ‘description’ in this sentence. And while it is correct in Arabic for a ‘description’ to ‘describe’ another ‘description’, there has to be an original word being ‘described’.

ie. it is possible to have:
[word] [description] [description of description]

what is NOT possible, is to have no [word] at the start, such as what is in the sentence given above.

it is **almost** like saying “evil Jewish in Britain” which is not grammatically correct. Although in English there is a clear-ish meaning to the sentence which is not the same in Arabic.

On the other hand the sentence:

واللوبي اليهودي في بريطانيا

is grammatically sound in Arabic, and is regularly used by Arab politicians.

Secondly, the writer claims:
“The words don’t look at all similar. So this isn’t a spelling mistake.”

if as a computer litterate person you can claim that you do not sometimes write ‘there’ as ‘terhe’ or ‘theer’ when typing very fast, then you must be a liar aswell as a deciever.

The only difference between the words الوبيل and اللوبي is the letter ل which is in position 6 in the first word, and in position 3 in the second word. A mistake of three positions when typing is not at all impossible, infact it is average.

Finally lets look at the whole sentence:

نجتمع اليوم جالية عربية وإسلامية لنعبر عن استيائنا من احتفالات الجالية اليهودية والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا

The writer translated it as:
“We, the Arab and Islamic community, gather here today to express our resentment at the celebrations by the Jewish community and the [evil Jew/Jewish evil] in Britain”

Note 1: The writer himself is unclear of the meaning, which stresses my point.

Note 2: Logically if someone wanted to claim a group of people was ‘evil’, they would not say…. The [Group] community and the [Group] evil.

Infact if that **WAS** the case, then the use of the word community FISRT is dividing them into two seperate groups… the [Group] Community and the [Group] evil. So if it **WAS** the case then it is not claiming that all Jews are evil.

But that is NOT the case and the word was clearly typed up incorrectly.

Therefore it is very very clear that this writer has an agenda, and i would not be surprised if this whole article was prepared beforhand and when the quote was found on aljazeera, the writer simply added a sentence or two about this incident, because most of the article is waffle about irrelevent and repeated stuff anyway.

Interesting how this isn’t on the BMI website yet.

Now, it’s entirely possible that Sawalha was misquoted by al-Jazeera. That happens - although the words are spelt similarly, “al-lawbi” and “al-wabeel” do sound kind of similar, so perhaps the Jazeera journo misheard.

But the BMI haven’t said they were misquoted, oh no. Instead they have:

got al-Jazeera to amend the article
denied that the article ever used “al-wabeel” at all
called HP liars
threatened legal action

It is a course of extreme stupidity, becuase it’s so verifiably wrong. It’s a shame David T is so opposed to using libel laws, because the BMI statement is a libel against him and the blog. And worse, they know - they must know - it’s a lie too, because they must have seen and changed the al-Jazeera article.

Hopefully BMI will sue because they’ll lose.

Interesting how this isn’t on the BMI website yet

Yes, it’s nice of Sarah to send it to HP before it is published by BMI, if only because we get to laugh at it before anyone else.

Actually, read this exchange on the BBC board :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbreligion/F2213236?thread=5628212

…..you guys must be psychic :)

David Irving tried to use libel laws to silence his critics. That failed.

I think it very unlikely that a man who was identified by the BBC as a Senior Hamas activist will get very far, if he follows the same route.

OK, legal threats. Great fun. Always the last recourse of the desperate. Regardless of whether or not you believe is was a misquote, a misspelling, poor grammar, a typo or whatever, DaveM translated correctly the quote attributed to Sawalha. BMI could have said that Sawalha was misquoted by Al-Jazeera and the latter made a correction. But instead they lied and said Harry’s Place was inventing the quote. Whether you like it or not, the quote was there and as such is not actionable, regardless of the changes subsequently made. The fact that the BMI is being so dishonest about the translation and heaping the blame on Harry’s Place and not Al-Jazeera casts doubt on their claim that Sawalha did not refer to “evil Jews”. As it is, the whole “Jewish lobby” stuff in the amended quote is borderline racist and highly suspect. I don’t think it lets Sawalha off the hook at all.

Here is the original quote without the yellow highlight: http://i30.tinypic.com/15my4ux.jpg

Will BMI’s Livingstone-supporting Anas Al-Tikriti also be sending out a public statement condemning Al-Jazeera as an evil Zionist organisation for misquoting Sawalha?

Abdullah,

‘the Jewish evil’ is a perfectfully sound translation.

The only difference between the words الوبيل and اللوبي is the letter ل which is in position 6 in the first word, and in position 3 in the second word. A mistake of three positions when typing is not at all impossible, infact it is average.

I think on the webpages of mainstream media organisations (as opposed to the comments threads of blogs) it is pretty uncommon.

Try putting the third letter in sixth place with some other 6-letter words:

letert instead of letter

prttye instead of pretty

theadr instead of thread

You don’t see mistakes like that very often on, say, the BBC or Guardian websites, do you?

Anyway, the typo excuse doesn’t explain why the BMI don’t just say ‘al-Jazeera made a typo’. Their crazy rant - if it is a real BMI press release, as Sarah has not yet told us where she got it from - actually undermines their most plausible excuse. Perhaps they will withdraw the press release and then threaten to sue HP for making them look like idiots as well as racists.

Perhaps Sarah is an evil Jewish lobbyist sending out fake BMI news releases to make them look like idiots. This is the next excuse.

Abdullah,

the literal translation is thus:

نجتمع اليوم جالية عربية وإسلامية لنعبر عن استيائنا من احتفالات الجالية اليهودية والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا

‘We have gathered today, a community Arabic and Islamic, to express (the fact of our) our resentment of the celebrations of the Jewish community and the Jewish evil in Britain’.

’sorry mate. We can read Arabic too.

Igor Says:
You don’t see mistakes like that very often on, say, the BBC or Guardian websites, do you?

care to comment on these then Igor?

http://guardiantypowatch.blogspot.com/
http://www.osirra.com/category/1/20
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drewbuddie/2574324994/

these are results of superfast google searches, and only on the two sources you claimed to be the ideal.

Zkharya i dont see what you are trying to prove?

You simply reworded DaveM’s translation while removing the square brackets of uncertainty.

You can claim to be able to read Arabic all you want, but you seem to be slightly foggy on english, is it that hard to understand that the actual phraze you are ‘attempting’ to translate is not even possible in Arabic…. let alone an english translation!!!

Abdullah: Do you accept that the original article contained the controversial statement and was subsequently changed? Do you believe that DaveM has provided a fair translation of the sentence you claim is ungrammatical and misspelt?

The original Aljazeera article may or may have not contained the ‘controversial’ statement i did not see it and thus am unable to give my word on it. (BTW the link to a screenshot above is clearly tampered with and can not be taken as proof)

What i do claim is that DaveM clearly has no right to be translating from a language he can not translate from. His ‘Translation’ as i have prooved is illogical and lacks an understanding of the original Arabic text.

By original Arabic text i mean here the text provided by DaveM with his translation.

care to comment on these then Igor?

Happy to.

None of the examples you presented are of the kind of typo you claim al-Jazeera made. Letters get left out of words, or mistyped, quite often, more commonly in print media than electronic. Sometimes you see words with all the correct letters, but one letter one place removed from where it should be. It is very uncommon to see a word with a letter three places away from where it should be.

Now will you comment on why the BMI have not just said ‘al-Jazeera made a typo’, but instead have claimed that Harry’s Place invented the quote and/or deliberately mistranslated it? Have you noticed that your explanation of what happened is completely different from theirs?

BTW the link to a screenshot above is clearly tampered with and can not be taken as proof

Perhaps the evil Zionists have tampered with it?

Perhaps the evil Zionists are causing the voices in your head. You know, the ones that sing to you, through the metal in your fillings?

Abdullah: Here is the screenshot without the yellow highlights: http://i30.tinypic.com/15my4ux.jpg
Here is the Google cache with the original comment in:http://74.125.39.104/search?q=cache:To2S4jlCTAsJ:www.aljazeera.net/NR/EXERES/C4889FEE-E9FE-4EAB-BCC2-4806F823427B.htm+%22%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%84+%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%87%D9%88%D8%AF%D9%8A+%D9%81%D9%8A+%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%A7%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3

It is not tampered with, this is the original article. Please translate the comment attributed to Sawalha, which is:
نجتمع اليوم جالية عربية وإسلامية لنعبر عن استيائنا من احتفالات الجالية اليهودية والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا

If you can do a better job than DaveM, then I would like to see how you would interpret this quote.

http://74.125.39.104/search?q=cache:To2S4jlCTAsJ:www.aljazeera.net/NR/EXERES/C4889FEE-E9FE-4EAB-BCC2-4806F823427B.htm

Actually, I’m wrong, the translation, ‘the Jewish lobby’ is perfectly plausible, most likely even.

’sorry, Abdullah.

“It is very uncommon to see a word with a letter three places away from where it should be.”

note you did not say it was impossible.
+ i have proved that even BBC and the Guardian make typos.

That is sufficient to prove my point; if it WAS on al-Jazeera as was quoted by DaveM… then clearly the following statement is false;

“The words don’t look at all similar. So this isn’t a spelling mistake.”

thus proving my point.

To David T: Nope, i have no fillings, but maybe you should keep an eye on your mouth next time you go to the dentists.

You know as well as i do that recreating the al-Jazeera site and changing that word, is not rocket-science, and can infact be done in a matter of 3 minutes if not less. So it is not ‘evil Zionists’ singing to me, but rather Zionists at work, **IF** it has been tampered with.

Zkharya

Are you looking at the original Al Jaz piece which contained the word “الوبيل ” or the updated Al Jaz piece which now contains the word “اللوبي”

How would you translate this phrase:

والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا

“but rather Zionists at work, **IF** it has been tampered with.”

Yes, Zionists have broken into Google, and changed the cache. In fact, Zionists may well run Google.

You can see why people don’t take you seriously. You think “Zionists” are to blame for everything that goes wrong in your life?

I agree: الوبيل اليهودي ‘the baleful Jewish’ doesn’t make sense: it’s two adjectives’ qualifying each other, not a noun pluse an adjective.

“You know as well as i do that recreating the al-Jazeera site and changing that word, is not rocket-science, and can infact be done in a matter of 3 minutes if not less.”

I cannot break into Google’s cache of web pages and change words around. I am not sure if it is possible. Please go to the cache’d page I linked to and read it for yourself and then translate the disputed quote. I’ve made it simple for you by copying and pasting it above. I’ll do it again, if you are unable to see it:

نجتمع اليوم جالية عربية وإسلامية لنعبر عن استيائنا من احتفالات الجالية اليهودية والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا

Please attempt your best translation.

Baleful is great!

Here is the page: http://74.125.39.104/search?q=cache:To2S4jlCTAsJ:www.aljazeera.net/NR/EXERES/C4889FEE-E9FE-4EAB-BCC2-4806F823427B.htm

David T,

I would translate:

‘and the baleful the Jewish i.e. the baleful Jewish (thing, possibly) in Britain’.

What Abdullah says about a typo is plausible.

Thanks Dan

In light of the new evidence, il give you that it was on the al-jazeera website, but that does nothing to the rest of my arguments, infact i did not claim that it was never on al-Jazeera. I simply said i did not know.

Now you said:
“If you can do a better job than DaveM, then I would like to see how you would interpret this quote.”

you seem to still be deliberatly using some of my points and not others. I clearly say, the original phraze on aljazeera does not have a proper ARABIC meaning, and so CANNOT be translated into english.

its like saying translate “and nice beautiful in wales” to spanish, although i do not speak spanish i am more than certain you will get an inaccurate spanish translation.

All it would require is for an initial Lam to be accidentally typed at the end of the word.

“I agree: الوبيل اليهودي ‘the baleful Jewish’ doesn’t make sense: it’s two adjectives’ qualifying each other, not a noun pluse an adjective.”

Perhaps the writer had intended to write “baleful Jew” rather than “Jewish lobby”. Seems more likely to me. Nevertheless, the problem is not with DaveM but with what Sawalha is quoted as saying on Al-Jazeera. I don’t see why he and others should be threatened with legal action when they were not responsible for the quote, whether or not it was a correct quotation of Sawalha. The fact that certain people are so quick to turn around and accuse DaveM of Zionist/Jewish conspiracies to deceive - the Jews are, after all, portrayed as cunning and deceitful in Hamas propaganda - reveals their racist prejudices.

the original word is

AL (the) WBYL = the baleful

But it could have been, is most likely to have been

AL LWBY = the lobby

A typo is all it would take

“the original phraze on aljazeera does not have a proper ARABIC meaning, and so CANNOT be translated into english.”

So, you are saying that if you were faced with this quote, you would not be able to extrapolate any meaning from it and it would be completely incomprehensible? I have read many ungrammatical statements with poor spelling in English and other languages, but the meaning can always be ascertained. Please give it a try at least.

Abdullah: What I am getting at is whether DaveM could reasonably have assumed that the text referred to “evil Jews”. Even bearing in mind what you say is a grammatical mistake caused by a spelling error, can DaveM be accused of deliberately misleading people when he was not responsible for the error or can you accept that he is giving his best translation of what he saw before him? Perhaps Sawalha never said “evil Jew” and perhaps the amended text is now a correct quotation, but I think it is absolutely wrong that BMI should deny the original ever existed and accuse DaveM of libel and racism for what is, at worst, the best translation of a miss-quotation. Wouldn’t a more level-headed person in BMI have written to HP pointing out that Al-Jazeera had made the change because the quote was wrong and suggested that the website add a footnote highlighting this fact? Instead, they have apparently (and we still don’t know if this is an official BMI press release) launched into an incredible diatribe. I look forward to seeing what crops up on BMI’s website if this is not a hoax press release.

David T: Be cautious. This press release may not be all it seems. It could be posted here to cause trouble for you and prompt a legal dispute. Conspiracies within conspiracies and all that.

The point is that BMI (if their press release is genuine) have not mentioned a typo. Their press release (if genuine) is written as if the al-Jazeera text never changed. If you are looking for deceit, that is the place to start.

I am told that that “يهودي” is used to men both “Jew” and “Jewish”

Perhaps Sawalha said “the evil Jewish lobby in Britain”, and Al Jazeera accidentally left out the word “lobby”. Who knows.

Put it this way.

1. Hamas do talk about “evil Jews”. There is nothing surprising in a man who the BBC have identified as a Hamas activist using this phrase.

2. As Dan has pointed out, even if he didn’t say “evil Jew” or “Jewish evil”, he is not disputing that he railed against the “Jewish community”.

3. For that matter, rambling on about the “Jewish Lobby” isn’t much better. There’s no pretence that he’s talking about “Zionists” here!

The BMI would do much better to put their efforts into denying that they are a sister organisation of Hamas, or denying the BBC’s report that their president is a senior Hamas activist.

But, obviously, they can’t do that.

Dave what **I** am getting at is that if you see

“and nice beautiful in wales” quoted on a site, you will NOT translate it as it is, you will ask for clarification. Why did DaveM not write to al-Jazeera and ask them why they have a phraze with no coherrent meaning??

Look at it from the BMI perspective; a site claims thier president said somethign which he denies and they as a organisation deny.

They go to the site where it is quoted from (aljazeera) and they see that there is nothing of what the writer said.

why dont you send them the google cache link, because maybe they dont know what happened on aljazeera.

“The BMI would do much better to put their efforts into denying that they are a sister organisation of Hamas, or denying the BBC’s report that their president is a senior Hamas activist.”

The writer has said nothing new when he claimed the above, as you said, it was already mentioned on BBC…. with nothing proved so far, so i would assume that this is not the ‘annoying’ bit in this article, because it is simple copying and repeating of unverified info from other sources.

Well, as they’re posting here, so they can see it themselves.

And as they’re the sister organisation of Hamas, which murders their political opponents - Jewish and Arab - can you see why I wouldn’t want to have any direct contact with them?

In fact, you should be rather worried about them yourself. Unless you’re a Hamas supporter, that is.

“why dont you send them the google cache link, because maybe they dont know what happened on aljazeera.”

If their lawyers are paying close attention to this thread, as the statement implies, then there would be no need to send them the link.

Do you think DaveM’s approximation of what was written in the original article was a fair translation? If you’re unable to translate it, then please say whether you think he was way out or was as close as one could get to a translation?

Do I take it, now, that Arabic does not use metaphor or double ententre, and has perfect distinction between noun (proper or otherwise) and adjective?

Dan you’re still ignoring my point.

if a sentence has no meaning in the language you are translating FROM you cannot talk about being ‘as close as one can get to a translation’

I wrote the report that has been misquoted, I mispelt one word in arabic, الوبي instead of اللوبي (lobby). The mistake renders the word meaningless in arabic and english except to people who can actually read arabic and posess intelligence who would understand the mistake to read as ‘lobby’. It is fairly obvious that the author of the piece we are discussing has a deliberate agenda, cannot read arabic and has no common sense.

if a sentence has no meaning in the language you are translating FROM you cannot talk about being ‘as close as one can get to a translation’

The point is though is that this phrase does have meaning, albeit a confused one, possibly borne out of a typo.

If I was to hear or see the phrase “and nice beautiful in wales” I would very likely assume the person writing or speaking it meant “nice and beautiful in Wales”.

So, to recap, the BMI are claiming that “Evil Jew” was a typo when they actually meant to write “Evil Jewish Lobby”? And they think this gets them off the hook?

Well, putting aside the question of malevolence versus ignorance in the “mistake”, it is now clear that what was actually said was not as quoted in this piece, and its high time David included another Update: all the above is in fact wrong, and I apologise. Won’t happen though - David is a fantastically dishonest, textbook Orientalist, as proven time and time again here.

The only reference to jews as evil is on this site. Could you please get a grip. This is a non story.

“It is fairly obvious that the author of the piece we are discussing has a deliberate agenda, cannot read arabic and has no common sense.”

It is fairly obvious to me that you cannot type and should choose a different career. The BMI statement, if it is genuine, claims that DaveM is a “Zionist racist” because he made the best translation of your cock-up. But at least we now know the truth: there was an original article that referred to “evil Jew” or “Jewish evil”, even if it was a mistake. HP should recognise this, BMI should apologise and this whole debacle caused by your carelessness and be forgotten.

It is a non story. It was a typo.

So it should have read:

“We, the Arab and Islamic community, gather here today to express our resentment at the celebrations by the Jewish community in Britain”

Much better. No anti-semitism to see here

Oh look, TheIrie is rushing to defend anti-semitic nuts again. Now there’s a surprise.

Except for the fact of complaining about Jews’ celebrating Israel’s 60th birthday party and the alleged ‘Jewish lobby’.

“all the above is in fact wrong, and I apologise”

He’s got nothing to apologise for. It was an honest mistake. The fact that Sawalha didn’t say it should be recognised, but he came to an obvious conclusion based on an article by an amateur journalist and a sub-editor who cannot spot mistakes in copy submitted to him. Medyan Dairieh should be the one apologising to Sawalha!

Herman said:
“If I was to hear or see the phrase “and nice beautiful in wales” I would very likely assume the person writing or speaking it meant “nice and beautiful in Wales”.”

You would assume, but you would check with them first to make sure that is what was meant… and you wouldnt base a whole article on it…

in the your other comment Herman, you are correct, but you also tottaly removed any reference to Jewih lobby, which must be added for a complete meaning.

Abdullah, so it should have read:

“We, the Arab and Islamic community, gather here today to express our resentment at the celebrations by the Jewish community and the Jewish lobby in Britain”

“If I was to hear or see the phrase “and nice beautiful in wales” I would very likely assume the person writing or speaking it meant “nice and beautiful in Wales”.”

… and had never been to Bridgend.

If even that are true, Abdulla, it plaices responsibilty on Al-jaz, not DavidT or DaveM. (Can you see what I just did? They were intentional, unlike those above which have passed you.)

Leave it out. English uses puns and word play as well. The one about Arabic being an incorruptable language understood only by native speakers is so 2004. Derrida would Would Derrida have said baneful lobby?

It seems to me that Davem acted honestly, BMI maliciously and Medyan Dairieh incompetently.

Medyan, I assume you are the same Medyan Dairieh who wrote this report on a Palestine Society Conference at SOAS last October.

Did Dr. Haidar Eid, of the Al-Aqsa University, Gaza, really say that “Gaza is becoming the Auschwitz of our times”, or was that a typo too?

Did Ilan Pappe really say that “When a synagogue becomes an embassy and when academics become ambassadors they should be treated as ambassadors of a rogue criminal state”? Because for Pappe to equate synagogues to Israeli embassies is an extraordinary statement, one that opens up the possible justification of all manner of antisemitic acts against synagogues and their congregants, and I would hate to attribute it to him when it might be, you know, a typo?

Medyan Dairieh:

You say:

I wrote the report that has been misquoted, I mispelt one word in arabic, الوبي instead of اللوبي (lobby).

However, the original Al Jazeera piece did not use the word “الوبي “. It used the word “وبيل”.

The latter word means “evil”. It is not “meaningless”

You may have reported the man correctly, or there may have been a typo. However, that typo did not produce a meaningless word. It produced the word “evil”.

Correct?

It seems to me that Davem acted honestly, BMI maliciously and Medyan Dairieh incompetently.

And TheIrie predictably.

Certainly, يهود means Jew and يهودي means Jewish. However, يهودي can also be used to signify “Jew”.

If I look up the standard reference point which is “A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic” by Hans Wehr - on page 1109 is written the following

اليهود al-yahud - the Jews, Jewery
يهودي yahudi - Jewish; Jew
يهودية yahudiya - Judaism

In the Al Mawrid Al Waseet Concise Dictionary (English - Arabic / Arabic English) by Munar Baalbaki and Dr . Rohi Baalbaki on page 815 of the Arabic to English section is written

اليهود - Jews; Jewry, Judiasm
يهودي - Jew, Judiastic, Jewish, Judic(al), Judiastic

on page 318 of the English to Arabic section is written

Jew [joo] اليهودي: واحد اليهود

(underneath that is written)
Jewish - يهودي؛ عبري
[translates as Jewish; Hebrew]

Now as you know there is no single way to interpret / translate Arabic into English - in fact a lot of terms in Arabic are fluid thus providing the speaker with some sort of wiggle room.

There are many ways to interpret / translate something. So long as the meaning is conveyed then the translation is correct.

In Arabic when people want to make a specific point with no ambiguity then they’ll reinforce one word with a synonym - that’s why especially when speeches are written down - direct translations often contain 2 or more adjectives which mean the same thing.
This is how some people use Arabic.

This also allows some people room to retreat when they’re called to account, and claim that they’re”taken out of context”.

If Sawhala did indeed say what the Jazeera website wrote then he knew what he was saying, maybe with a bit of a nod and a wink.

If he didn’t say that then the fault is with Jazeera for the typo/ Fruedian slip.

But the meaning that I conveyed by translating the sentence that appeared on Al Jazeera, was in fact correct.

So this means that the entire argument as to whether يهودي means “Jewish” or “Jew” is now settled, right?

يهودي can mean Jew.

I’m happy to put an update stating that Medyan Dairieh who wrote the piece has confirmed that the phrase was a product of his innocent typo, if he can tell me how the word “Lobby” (”اللوبي “) was printed as “Evil” (”وبيل”)

It would be nice if Hamas/BMI apologised as well. Oh, and promised to stop murdering their political opponents. But that’s unlikely to happen.

“This also allows some people room to retreat when they’re called to account, and claim that they’re”taken out of context”.” It also allows those like you who are always ready to try to “prove” how evil these Arab’s are, to put your selective, Orientalist interpretation on the quote - and later claim they are retreating from their original language.

Medyan: ok, so it was the Jewish lobby, not the evil Jews.

But what are we to mean it as:

the (evil) Jewish lobby?
the (good) Jewish lobby?
the (straightforward same as everyone else’s lobby) Jewish lobby?
or, the Jewish lobby as in the shadowy global conspiracy Zionist lobby that subverts nations and ideologies throughout the world?

Has TheIrie just had a blowjob by Edward Said or something? He can’t currently construct a sentence without using the word “Orientalist” sneeringly ever 3 words.

If I described Dylan Moran as baneful, would y’all accept I meant baleful? (He really is.)

Morgoth - that Brian Whitaker article (link in post above), hit my mental resonant frequency. You, however, are not an Orientalist. You are a straightforward blood lusting racist - no sophisticated concepts required to understand that.

Irie, to describe Morgoth’s blood-lust as racism raises the question of whether you understand the term.

Mark, Jewish lobby, simple as. How you choose to percieve them is completely up to you.

If the author of the Al-Jazeera article insists it was a typo, I don’t think anyone can really continue to claim otherwise, since no-one here was present when Sawalha made his speech. That doesn’t exonerate Sawalha from engaging in the bog-standard anti-semitic nonsense about the “Jewish lobby”. If he had said “we, the Arab and Islamic community, gather here today to express our resentment at the celebrations by the pro-Israeli lobby” or simply stop after “celebrations”, I’d not really have any problem. The fact is that he used communalist propaganda to incite tensions - we the Arabs and Muslims resent the Jewish community for their celebrations. In his article, Dairieh suggests that the turnout for the celebrations was lower than the organisers had expected, so one cannot claim that the entire Jewish community was there celebrating.

Medyan -

You accept that the word ‘evil’ appeared in the original article, as a typo, instead of ‘lobby’?

Medyan

I very much do want to update this article

If you are saying that you meant to write “Lobby” (”اللوبي “), then I will print that as an update.

However, I really need to know from Medyan why the original article included the word “Evil” (”وبيل”), rather than the word “Lobby”.

interesting dialogue (with the notable exception of TheIrie’s meaningless contribution)

David T,

if you or DaveM are attacked via any libel act, I’ll chip in £10!

“You know as well as i do that recreating the al-Jazeera site and changing that word, is not rocket-science, and can infact be done in a matter of 3 minutes if not less. ”

The fascinating thing I find this kind of, quote, “anti-Zionism”, unquote, is how it always strangely holds up Jews (and their allies) to be some kind of super-intelligent uber-mensch.

Here, Abdullah honestly believes that Zionists can hack into Google’s secure servers and change page caches with impunity.

It’s rather sad when you think about it, going through life with this kind of inferiority complex.

P.

You know as well as i do that recreating the al-Jazeera site and changing that word, is not rocket-science, and can infact be done in a matter of 3 minutes if not less

As someone who is above average in web savviness (try translating that into Arabic), I can honestly say I’d have no idea how to replicate a website, let alone in “3 minutes if not less”.

Paul

Yes, I find this incredible. The notion that Zionists are incredibly powerful, and Arabs weak and foolish is a horrendously Orientalist one.

modernity

Thank you. However, I don’t think that Hamas activists who don’t even make the pretence that they’re talking about “Zionists” when they rail against “the Jewish Community” have a cat’s chance in hell of bringing a libel action against me.

“The notion that Zionists are incredibly powerful, and Arabs weak and foolish is a horrendously Orientalist one.” It is David - that is true, though I would say inverse Orientalist - which is of course just as bad. Then again, the only person who said it is you, all Abdullah said was “(BTW the link to a screenshot above is clearly tampered with and can not be taken as proof)”, and note that when provided with more evidence he happily accepted it. So, think on with that one - unless you’re trying to prove my assertion that you are an Orientalist - in which case, thanks.

Is Sawalha an Occidentalist?

TheIrie,

do you think that the Google cache has been tampered with, and if so, by whom?

TheIrie:

Abdullish posted that comment after Dan had shown him the Google cache.

Sure, if they can get cows to dance…

P.

It was David who went on about “Evil Zionists”, until Abdullah replied “So it is not ‘evil Zionists’ singing to me, but rather Zionists at work, **IF** it has been tampered with.” just before conceding that it was in fact correct. This made David very happy, writing “You can see why people don’t take you seriously. You think “Zionists” are to blame for everything that goes wrong in your life?”. David - it was you that was hammering on about Zionists - not Abdullah - and he certainly said nothing to suggests that he blames Zionists for all that goes wrong in his life. Like I say, another utterly dishonest and shameless performance from David T.

Steer clear of zebra crossings, Irie.

“In fact, Zionists may well run Google.” Actually, bit of trivia for you - try googling “Jew” and see what you get.

TheIrie

You are very odd. The most damning thing about you is also the most endearing: that everything you produce on this blog is written with complete honesty.

Medyan,

I do fear that the rabid anti-Israel and anti-Zionist rhetoric of Sawalha and so many others must inevitably mean that many, perhaps most, of your viewers and readers don’t need to be told that the Jewish lobby is evil, because they simply take that for granted.

Nevertheless, a sincere thank you for your reply, and I’m curious as to whether or not you think I’m correct in assuming that many, perhaps most, of your audience believe the Jewish lobby to be evil, rather than good or nuetral.

“many, perhaps most, of your viewers and readers don’t need to be told that the Jewish lobby is evil, because they simply take that for granted”

Orientalism. Is anyone getting it yet?

Yes, there seems to be terrible prejudice against these oriental Jewish types.

There seems to be an organisation called the BMI, whose President attends a cultural celebration, and makes unpleasant speeches attacking, if not about Evil Jews, the “Jewish Community” and “the evil Jewish Lobby”.

The BMI seems to be a terribly Orientalist organisation.

Irie - dont be such a bloody plonker.

I’m not saying Al Jazeera’s Arabic audience is genetically predisposed to regard the Jewish lobby as evil, rather that they are force fed a diet of ceaseless hatred from Sawalha & his ilk.

You think anti_israel and anti-Zionist propaganda has no effect on Muslims? You think it doesn’t part reflect the environment it comes out of. You fuckwit.

“I’m not saying Al Jazeera’s Arabic audience is genetically predisposed to regard the Jewish lobby as evil, rather that they are force fed a diet of ceaseless hatred from Sawalha & his ilk.” Ok, so in your view that Arab’s hate Jews is not nature, but nurture. Arab societies raise their children to hate Jews then. This is a) not true, and b) classic Orientalism.

Irie, sadly I won’t be able to maintain our constructive dialogue as I have to catch a plane. Happy screechings.

Have a nice day as the American’s say.

Arab societies raise their children to hate Jews then. This is a) not true, and b) classic Orientalism.

Well said TheIrie

Arab TV stations are well known for the many many programmes that they broadcast, extolling the virtues of Jews.

I can only think of one example: YemenTV’s series, “Our Cousins the Lovely Jews”

Can you remind me of the others?

“Ok, so in your view that Arab’s hate Jews is not nature, but nurture.”

TheIrie, imagine I said that the right-wing UK press consistently prints unbalanced articles about immigrants that portray them in a negative light.

Would you give _any_ credence to a retort to this saying “Ok, so in your view that Brits hate foreigners is not nature, but nurture”?

P.

“Arab societies raise their children to hate Jews then. This is a) not true:”

I work with a Jewish group mentoring Darfuri refugees in England. We are told not to mention we are Jewish at first, as it will initially be a barrier. Those already further on in the process say that when it does arise once the relationship has been established, the response is of surprise, as, say the refugees, they have been taught all their lives that Jews are evil. Demned Orientalist Darfuris for spreading this notion.

In the Arabian Gulf there is a growing realisation that Iran, but Israel, is a threat to their security and prosperity. I look forward to reading an article on Al-Jazeera by Mr Dairieh on Iran’s threat to Qatar.

Ok, so there is a consensus here that “Arab societies raise their children to hate Jews”. At least that is clear.

ami - your comments are anecdotal and I have no way to test your assertions, so, no offence, but I’m disregarding that comment.

“Arab TV stations” are not equal to “Arab society” David. The Daily Mail constantly prints all kinds of hateful stuff. But one doesn’t say as a result that Britain raises its children to hate women or foreigners. you will counter that these TV stations are state run. Well, Arab states are nearly all dictatorships, and hence “Arab states” are not equal to “Arab society”. Arab society, by and large, is ordinary people, like you and me, going about their business, concerned with raising a family, earning a living and enjoying their lives. They do not, on the whole, hate Jews. That portion of the Arab population that is politically aware, will probably feel strongly about Israel, and a small section might extend this to “Jews”. As is often pointed out, historically, apart from a few scattered incidents, the history of Jews and Arabs getting along together is good, and much better than the history of Jews in Europe.

So this view is completely wrong. There is a difference between the vocal haters in the Middle East and the population. There is also a difference between the I-P conflict and Jews and Arabs as people. David above demonstrates to Abdullah that he would like to obscure this difference - Zionist, zionist, evil zionist - come on Abdullah say the word, we know your thinking it. But the Arab populations are not fanatics like David. They are ordinary people, and they don’t hate Jews.

TheIrie wrote:

“but I’m disregarding that comment.”

please, PLEASE, everyone, let’s disregard TheIrie, as he continually steams into threads and ruins them

his modus operandi is:

1) to make a provocative, but semi-intelligent comment
2) when that is refuted, he’ll drag up some other obscure point
3) when people make genuine comments to him he either considers them to be a) irrelevant b) dishonest
4) goto 1

it is a waste of time and effort trying to debate complex issues with him, as TheIrie constantly argues in bad faith, is so ill informed and adds nothing to our understanding of these issues.

Medyan Dairieh, you wrote:

‘Mark, Jewish lobby, simple as. How you choose to percieve them is completely up to you.’

No, Medyan. If you report on an alleged ‘Jewish lobby’ there is no question on how you perceive them. Especially if you report on the BMI complaining about them, and the celebrations of the specifically Jewish community.

No less disturbing was Abdullah’s admission, of a sort, that Arab politicians regularly talk of the ‘Jewish lobby’. Which may have something to do with the fact that there are, to all intents and purposes, no Arab Jews left to listen to them.

Or vote for them. Sorry, only joking.

“On the other hand the sentence:

واللوبي اليهودي في بريطانيا

is grammatically sound in Arabic, and is regularly used by Arab politicians.”

Not only grammatically sound. Politically sound, for their constituents, such as they are.

Mod - all you do is show up and abuse me, then shirk off when I try to engage with your abusive point. I’m still waiting for you to explain what’s wrong with what I wrote about Orientalism in the thread above.

Ami, I have a black Sudanese Muslim (nyet Darfuri) acquaintence who was distraught that his Scotland-raised sons were using Jew as a casual insult. He brought them to me (?). It descended to my calling him a shaytan, and them djinns, yet I managed to tell them about the refugees in Israel. What does our resident scourge of sick murdering bastards think of that?

Now, I am sitting in the Beanscene watching helicopters depart from Holyrood. Natalie Portman has stood me up.

John Wight, I’m lonely!

“What does our resident scourge of sick murdering bastards think of that?” - that it contradicts ami’s assertion.

It also allows those like you who are always ready to try to “prove” how evil these Arab’s are, to put your selective, Orientalist interpretation on the quote - and later claim they are retreating from their original language.

The quote in question read as ‘baneful Jew’ or ‘baneful Jewish’.

It was translated, correctly, as such.

I am quite happy to accept that the word ‘baneful’ was meant to be ‘lobby’, and that this was an innocent typo.

But I don’t quite see how Dave M deliberately or selectively ‘interpreted’ it.

He translated the word correctly.

Get a grip.

Of course the original typo may have arisen because what was originally said was a punning

اللوبي الوبيل اليهودي في بريطان

‘the baleful Jewish lobby in Britain’

But that would be mere speculation.

“If you report on an alleged ‘Jewish lobby’ there is no question on how you perceive them.”

To be fair to him, he didn’t write about a Jewish lobby, he was quoting Sawalha. Another interesting quote in the article - presuming I am not mistranslating it or there is no spelling mistake - comes from Hafez Karmi of the Palestinian Forum in Britain ( http://pfb.org.uk/ar/ ) who called the pro-Israeli demonstrators a “group of criminals celebrating the crime that was committed in Palestine”. I think, for the sake of balance, he should have interviewed people on the pro-Israel celebration about the anti-Israel demonstration, but I wonder whether Al-Jazeera would have published what they had to say.

Another interesting quote in the article - presuming I am not mistranslating it or there is no spelling mistake - comes from Hafez Karmi of the Palestinian Forum in Britain ( http://pfb.org.uk/ar/ ) who called the pro-Israeli demonstrators a “group of criminals celebrating the crime that was committed in Palestine”.

This deliberate and selective quotation is fantastically dishonest, textbook Orientalist, as proven time and time again here.

You’re just trying to prove that all Arabs are evil, because you’re stuck in an Orientalist mindset, whereby ‘the Other’ is externalised.’

Classic Orientalism.

Dishonest and shameful.

TheIrie wrote:

“Mod - all you do is show up and abuse me, then shirk off when I try to engage with your abusive point.”

quite the contrary, many of us have engaged with your comments over the past two years with vigour, only to find that when you are ultimately refuted that you stalk off and sulk

many of us have taken up the point concerning antisemitism to you on dozens of occasions only to receive your ignorant comments that essentially

1) Irish anglophobia was the equivalent of antisemitism
2) antisemitism is simple, you understand it so don’t need to read any books
3) anti-Jewish racism is not a big issue, and HP shouldn’t bring it up
etc

your dismissive attitude to ami is just one further indicator of how intellectually worthless you really are

Mod - so you’ve got nothing to say on any topic apart from the topic of me. Stop bothering me.

TheIrie -

Can you accept that Dave M translated the original piece correctly?

(Please don’t use the word Orientalist in your reply, if you can help it).

“You’re just trying to prove that all Arabs are evil, because you’re stuck in an Orientalist mindset, whereby ‘the Other’ is externalised.’”

Are you for real? I’ve not heard such nonsense since taking an under-graduate course in “post-modernism and the ontology of the self”.

Dan, I think that was a piss-take…

Would that it were, Mark.

TheIrie is intelligent, honest, kind and constantly makes everyone here see the error of their ways.

He is worthy of both our respect and our thanks.

Re: my earlier quote on TheIrie.

Im afraid it was an error/typo/misquote/wheteverything.

It was also downright orientalististic.

What I actually said was … TheIrie is thickasshit, dishonest, creepy and rather unsavoury. So badly does he argue and so frequently does he dissappear tail between his legs when his dishonesty has been shown up; that personally I do not engage with him.

I am, however, happy to come on every now and then, call him an unpleasant wanker and then go off and make the tea - without the slightest inclination/need to see his response.

Personally Im surprised some here still bother to engage; but it is a free country. I have no desire to change TheIrie’s mind about anything - hence I do not engage. He is living proof of why I believe in everything I do and why I feel that the causes I believe in are so right. The more cretins like TheIrie come here and say what they do; the easier it is to be a zionist and a jew. So TheIrie…thanks. I really mean that. And thank god you are not intelligent enough to actually get it.

Apologies to our visitors from that Muslim group thing if the above offends you. But I must say your various wafflings above and rather embarassing threats of legal action (Im genuinely unsure if that is a joke) kinda do the same.

Whatever side you are on, on any issue; I’ll be on the other team thanks.

DavidT, keep up the good work fella. A lot of good people are reading this blog and finding it very enlightening.

I understand a lot of people are firmly committed to the notion that Arabs and Muslims hate Jews - it is part of their personal identification - and don’t like it when this falsehood is challenged. However, I can’t understand why David has yet to issue an update or change the title of this post, given that is now abundantly clear that what was said at this rally was nothing like “We Resent the Evil Jew in Britain”. What’s worse is that I can guarantee that even though this post is demonstrably wrong, it will be back cited by David and others in the future as yet more proof for their Orientalist worldview.

However, I can’t understand why David has yet to issue an update or change the title of this post, given that is now abundantly clear that what was said at this rally was nothing like “We Resent the Evil Jew in Britain”

Err… he has issued an update.

You berk.

This morning, in fact.

Do you accept that the translation of what was originally posted was valid?

The Irie: Do you actually know what Orientalist means, beyond what Edward Said has written in a book and which is itself a matter of intense debate and controversy? You use it loosely as a perjorative, when it could mean anything from an interest in Chinese jugs to expertise in Japanese feudal history. Call me an Orientalist if you want. I’ll wear the badge with pride.

How’s this for real Orientalism?

there was nowt wrong with the Serbs exterminating the Bosnian Muslims because they were the same race after all.

If you knew anything about the former Yugoslavia, “me”, you’d know that ‘Muslim’ had been used as an ethnic label since the 1940s. Millions of Yugoslavs, notably Albanians and Pomaks, professed the Islamic faith who were not described as Muslims.

Dan,

of course, TheIrie doesn’t know what Orientalist meansm and certainly not Edward Said’s opinions on the topicm as TheIrie has an almost pathological aversion to reading quality literature,

TheIrie was quite happy to pontificate on Irish history having only seen one Ken Loach film! so it’s safe to assume he’s probably read the word Orientalist somewhere on the web or at Wiki and is throwing it around to appear knowledgeable

whereas it’s bloody clear that TheIrie does not know his arse from his elbow

I wish you would all just take a deep breath and consider what really matters…
Arabs, Jews, Christians… If they have a poonany they we’d do them. Right ?

Actually I do have point, a sensible one I’d like to make. The other day I was watching TV (Ceebies) and then the news came on about how the first chick in the BF was killed in Afghanistan. They then did a whole blab and showed a list of names and pictures of brit squaddie bodies being flown back home.. Over this they ran really heart breaking music and pics of their faces and a narrative of how family members described them. All very moving. Then it struck me !
Change the narrative to Arabic, the music to some cool belly dancing tune,.. Put pics of dead Hamas AND BINGO from BBC to Al Jazeera is 3 easy to follow steps.

What i do claim is that DaveM clearly has no right to be translating from a language he can not translate from. Abdullah

Uppity dhimmis.

Sure, only you have the ‘right’ you backward supremacist tit.

You did not see the original posting, as you admit, and so you’ve no claim to understand the issue.

You understand everything, except that which should be understood.

I am really amazed how people do not understand a language feel happy to argue they understand it more than those who speak it!Now what we read in AlJazeera report is different from the words translated.There is only the word “lobby”no more. The word claimed to be translated has no meaning in the context at all.Regardless if that word was miss written initially and then corrected by AlJazeera or imagined by the translator the conclusion of the Harry’s place is totally wrong as Sawalha only said “Jewish Lobby” and no other word, this is the fact.Either you have the courage to admit it or this website has no credability at all which I believe is the case! One final thing ,be sure you will face trouble at court for one simple fact”Alwabeel” has no such meaning,your self-claimed translator or self-deluded Arabic speaking supporters will not be able to help you in the court when experts of language speak!The problem not if AlJazerra initial report wrote that word or not(even if that the case they changed it because they knew it is wrong and not said)but in the bad intension to put a wrong meaning which is clearly a lie.You can try your luck in court,no argument here will help you! I am really pleased you did such clear mistake!

I think you misunderstand the way the English legal system works.

Following on Pabuiski:”None are so blind as those who will not see.” History shows that there are some who should never, ever, be given the benefit of the doubt.

Italian Stallion, you don’t have a point.

What amazes me, Selva, is when non-native speakers of English assume they’re understood but designate their language as inscruitable. It smacks of cultural imperialism.

I love the way Selva says “*only* said ‘Jewish lobby’”.

And the original Arabic does have a meaning: ‘the baleful Jewish (thing)’. Adjectives are often used as substantives or nouns in Arabic.

It’s odd, isn’t it? The most straightforward thing for Al Jazeera to do would be to issue an apology for any offence caused by writing ‘the baleful Jewish (thing)’ and say what was really intended was ‘the Jewish lobby’.

The problem is, for the most part, most Arab Jews being no longer in the Arab world, there are very few people they would directly offend in either case.

You don’t have to apologise to a constituency that does not, for the most part, exist.

I was bored so I went through almost all of the comments here, it is now 2:20 am in Syria. Anyway, I will have my say.

Arabic is a flowery language, I mean the standard. The Dilaect tends to be more fun not like the Standrad which gives you a feeling to be more eloquent and to show more respect especially if you are a Muslim (like me). Now those who use the flowery langauge and the most difficult terms are the religious fuckwads here.

Lobbi makes more sense than Wabeel as Abdulla suggests, yet , I will not wonder at all if the BMI has said Wabeel.

You guys all turned into liguistists and forgot the main point of the whole thing. ok, lets say that the BMI didnt say that, surely he will say it once.

I wonder what difference does it make?!

As a linguist of sorts, it bears all the hallmarks of a simple typing error, and one which would have been seen as such by Arabic speakers. There are real issues out there where we will disagree fundamentally, but let’s not fabricate evil where none seems to have been intended.

“A simple typing error…”

Yeah right. The error is allowing these Islamist cretins to organize and operate in your country with impunity. I hope the British public wakes up before it is too late…

BEST WISHES FOR SUCCESS AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISTS, HP!

I’ll give this one a stab. I know some Arabic and am near fluent in Hebrew, which has very similar grammatical rules. “Evil Jew” makes little sense grammatically because the word with the root “Jew” is written as an adjective, especially given its placement. However, the idea that Abdullah brought up of separation between “Jewish communities” and “Jewish evil” would not have been so obvious. Perhaps this would be correct if this were a formal document, where grammatical structure would be carefully watched; but this was a speech, and probably given to achieve the greatest auditory effect. Given that factor, the initial translation seems a responsible enough attempt at grasping the sense of what was spoken.

Translating from Arabic to English is difficult enough given that the languages are based off of entirely different systems, and BMI should recognize that Harry’s Place was considerate enough to update their website to include the correction in Al Jazeera. Besides that, Islamists should be happy to see that we’ve gone through an extensive discussion over the merits of a translation from the Arabic language.

The fact that BMI has resorted to threatening legal action against Harry’s Place is disturbing (see further posts on this site regarding the BMI). If this is what they pull against Harry’s Place, I’d hate to see what happened to the poor Al Jazeera typist that transcribed typist in the first place. Given Hamas’s record, I wouldn’t be surprised if Al Jazeera’s executives haven’t been placed on warning for this.

Blogs around the web have jumped on this for good reason. The case is simple. In the most positive light for BMI, Harry’s Place made a strong effort to translate a piece that contained a typographical error produced by Al Jazeera. BMI saw the mistake and got Al Jazeera to correct it, assumed that Harry’s Place was dangerous but a pushover, and tried to force Harry’s Place to apologize for responsible semi-journalistic reporting.

Besides, I think if mistranslation is now a case for legal suit, I think the Jews have a pretty good case against the British crown for the King James translation of the Bible! If that seems ludicrous to you (it does to me), then so is this action by BMI, and it shows the organization’s true colors.