Legal Threats from Hamas/British Muslim Initiative
The British Muslim Initiative is the sister organisation of the terrorist group, Hamas. Its President is Mohammad Sawalha: a man who the BBC identified as the mastermind of “much of Hamas’ political and military strategy”, and as responsible for directing “funds, both for Hamas’ armed wing, and for spreading its missionary dawah”. Its senior members include Azzam Tamimi, the Hamas Special Envoy who once expressed a desire to commit a suicide bombing.
Yesterday evening, we received a letter from Anas Altikriti of the British Muslim Initiative, threatening legal action against us.
It is a great relief to be the subject of mere legal threats. In Gaza, where Hamas is in power, they prefer to settle disputes with political opponents by murdering them.
The reason that the British Muslim Initiate is upset with us is this. This weekend, Mr Sawalha attended a demonstration against a festival celebrating the re-founding of the State of Israel. He gave a speech, in Arabic, to Al Jazeera. In that speech, he stated that the purpose of his demonstration was to:
“express our resentment at the celebrations by the Jewish community”
He also made another statement, which has been the subject of some dispute. Al Jazeera initially reported the phrase in question as containing the word “الوبيل”. That word translates as “evil” or “baneful”, or some variant thereon. The next word was “يهودي “, which means “Jew” or “Jewish”. We translated the phrase, as it appeared, as “evil Jew” or “Jewish evil”.
Some time later, the word “الوبيل ” was removed from the Al Jazeera report. It was replaced with the word “اللوبي ”, “lobby”.
The British Muslim Initiative then issued a bombastic “press release”, which it pasted in our comments section, claiming that we had:
“deliberately skewed the word ‘Lobby’ to turn it into some other word and make it seem as though it means ‘evil/noxious’”
It went on to describe Mr Sawalha as a promoter of “community relations and cultural dialogue”, and object to him being ”demonised” as a “‘Jew-hater’ and ‘anti-Semitic’.”
I do not know Mr Sawalha. However, if he is a senior Hamas activist, and a supporter of that organisation, I cannot imagine he has anything positive to contribute to “community relations”. Moreover, it is very unlikely that any British court would regard it as defamatory to describe a Hamas activist as a racist. Hamas is a proudly racist, and genocidal terrorist organisation.
A little later, an Al Jazeera reporter called Medyan Dairieh appeared in the thread, insisting that Mr Sawalha had spoken of the “Jewish Lobby”. He explained that the original report contained a spelling mistake. However, instead of apologising to Harry’s Place and to the British Muslim Initiative for his hopelessness as a journalist, he accused us of having “no common sense” for thinking that a Hamas activist would use the phrase “Evil Jew”.
I can form no conclusion on what precisely Mr Sawalha said at Sunday’s demonstration. The meaning of the words “وبيل” and “يهودي ” have been extensively discussed in the comments of the thread below. Initially, defenders of Mr Sawalha claimed that in Arabic, “Jew” meant “Zionist”. When that argument fell apart, there was some debate as to whether the word “يهودي ” means “Jew” or “Jewish”. The defenders of Mr Sawalha insisted that the word could not be used to mean “Jew”. However, the leading dictionaries suggest that it can be used in this manner. There was also some disagreement as to how likely it was that a careless journalist would have mistyped the word “evil, “الوبيل” when intending to type the word “اللوبي ”, “lobby”.
It is possible that Mr Sawalha railled against the “evil Jewish Lobby”, rather than the “evil Jew”. What I find astonishing, is that the British Muslim Initiative thinks that it is somehow better to be caught out inveighing against – not the policies of the Israeli Government, not the “Israel Lobby”, not even against the “Zionists” – but against the “Jewish community” and the “Jewish Lobby”. It is clear from their letter that they see no problem with saying any of that. How bold of them.
Here is Mr Altikriti’s letter to us:
Sirs,
Your piece on comments made by Mohammed Sawalha, President of BMI, and published on Al-Jazeera contained a fundamental factual error.
You quoted a piece (translated from Arabic) stating that Mr. Sawalha had described the Jews in Britain as evil/noxious. We have checked the piece that you referred to very closely and contacted the Al-Jazeera office in Doha. It has been confirmed that Mr. Sawalha made no such comment at any time during the interview. This fact can, if you wish, be corroborated by checking for yourself the recording of the interview, which is available in case any further enquiry is made into this matter.
It appears that you have inexplicably grossly mistranslated his reference to the Jewish ‘Lobby’. Whether this mistake was accidental or not, the mistake is extremely serious and the consequences far-reaching.
Therefore, we trust that you will withdraw the said piece with immediate effect and post an explanation of what had taken place, particularly now that some commentators, including Melanie Phillips, seem to have copied your quote, including the error aforementioned and used it for their own purposes. If this is not done immediately, we will have to pursue legal measures.
Regards,
Anas Altikriti
British Muslim Initiative
Mohammed Sawalha will not sue me. He has no case.
It is as likely that a man identified by the BBC as a senior Hamas activists would witter on about the “evil Jew” as it is that he would be cursing the “Jewish lobby”, evil or not. Both versions show him to be a deeply malevolent man.
As David Irving discovered, when he sued Penguin and Deborah Lipstadt, extremists tend to do rather badly when they look to British courts to exonerate them.
The British Muslim Initiative should stop issuing ridiculous press releases, and issuing legal threats. Given that the success of the British Muslim Initiative rests on creating the wholly false impression that it is the moderate and progressive face of British Islamism, it ought not to be drawing attention to the fact that it has close links with the terrorist group Hamas. A public legal dispute over why Al Jazeera used the word “evil” in a report of its President’s frothing at the mouth speech on the “Jewish Lobby” will not help its case. It will merely result in its true nature, and the links of its senior activists with Hamas, being appreciated more widely. As the British Muslim Initiative’s strategy is to partner with mainstream political organisations and parties, in the hope of skimming off large grants from local authorities, that sort of publicity is likely to harm it fatally.
The bottom line is this. We were entitled to publish our translation of the Al Jazeera text as it originally appeared. Mr Sawalha should direct his complaint to Al Jazeera, not to Harry’s Place.
Comments
| 4 July 2008, 12:29 pm |
Very well said.
| 4 July 2008, 12:33 pm |
What a complete bunch of stupid {lobby}ing {lobbyists} they are.
| 4 July 2008, 12:40 pm |
There is certainly a case for a libel writ against Ana Al-Tikriti. The “news release” published on HP’s comments box accused the website of racism and “hate rhetoric” for merely translating the original Al-Jazeera website. He goes further, stating that the translation of the original (which quoted Sawalha as referring to “evil Jews”) was “pure evil that sees no shame or wrong in plainly lying.” There were no lies. It was a translation of a report that was – according to its author – incorrect due to a typo.
HP has no need to apologise and any libel writ will fail. Al-Jazeera should apologise for failing to correct submitted copy, which is the basic role of a sub-editor. Or does it not have any competant subs? Perhaps DaveM should apply for a job with them.
Libel threats should nearly always be ignored because they are a childish attempt to enforce censorship through bullying. Nearly all those who threaten libel action are extremists (Nazis, Jihadists, etc) and they rarely carry out their threats.
| 4 July 2008, 12:44 pm |
Lobby Jewish doesn’t make sense.
| 4 July 2008, 12:45 pm |
Dan, if libel threats should be ignored why are you recommending making one? Oh and as far as I know it is not possible to libel a website.
| 4 July 2008, 12:45 pm |
Now that Anas Altikriti has succeeded in getting Al Jazeera to change its report, perhaps he could tackle this
Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people. “May the cowards never sleep.”
Its the Hamas Charter.
See what you can do old chap.
| 4 July 2008, 12:45 pm |
How many bloggers can say that Hamas is their bitch. Well done.
| 4 July 2008, 12:47 pm |
Baed on recent events, I expect David T and his merry band of HP contributers to be questioned by the fuzz and banged up for 42 days without trial.
Inayat will have something on the Graun site within 2 days. Nothing will come of this and everyone will forget this rubbish.
| 4 July 2008, 12:48 pm |
I can promise you that I won’t let people forget about the nature of the British Muslim Institute.
| 4 July 2008, 12:50 pm |
The position boils down to, we said evil but we meant vile. Simple typo.
| 4 July 2008, 12:52 pm |
The further it goes, the bigger your soapbox. Interesting situation.
| 4 July 2008, 12:53 pm |
“if libel threats should be ignored why are you recommending making one?”
I didn’t recommend one. I said there was a case for a libel writ – certainly a stronger one than threatened by Al-Tikriti. But there is no need to stoop to his level.
| 4 July 2008, 1:00 pm |
Just wheel out the Hamas Covenant . It would be difficult to find a more transparent and visceral diatribe of antisemitism . Pretty much on a par with that other Best Seller ,Mein Kamph
| 4 July 2008, 1:02 pm |
According to Anasal-Tikriti,a friend of Galloway’s and spokesman for the Muslim Association of Britain: “I understand Arabic and it was taken completely out of context. When he said you’ he meant the Iraqi people, he was saluting their indefatigability, their resolve against sanctions. Even the interpreter got it right and, in Arabic, says salutes the stand of the Iraqi people’.”
| 4 July 2008, 1:03 pm |
This is great.
Anas Altikriti is lying and he knows he’s lying. He’s lying because he says:
“It appears that you have inexplicably grossly mistranslated his reference to the Jewish ‘Lobby’”
when he knows that you did neither – you translated a phrase in the article as it appeared. A number of readers (including me) confirm this. The journalist who wrote the article has confirmed this.
| 4 July 2008, 1:11 pm |
Anas Al-Tikriti is an old hand at alleging mistranslation, see for example here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jul/13/standingforconsistency.
He’s got a nerve accusing other people of lying, his guardian profile and wikipedia entry contain a number of ‘errors’. If you can track it down his own homepage used to be pompously hilarious, at the time Al-tikriti was standing for election to european parliament as respect candidate supported by the swp, galloway etc, the main image is a picture of him superimposed in front of the debating chamber to look like he was already a fixture there.
| 4 July 2008, 1:12 pm |
I think I should make the point in the article that his email was posted at 6pm.
The HP piece had been updated by then to make it clear that Al Jazeera had now changed its text.
| 4 July 2008, 1:13 pm |
‘How many bloggers can say that Hamas is their bitch. Well done’ – Seconded, you know ‘own’ the MB. Good Work Comrade T
| 4 July 2008, 1:14 pm |
‘Lobby Jewish doesn’t make sense’…
entrance to the Shillton Hilton?
| 4 July 2008, 1:15 pm |
Here is the wikipedia entry on the use of the term “Jewish Lobby” in the UK:
William Safire writes that in the United Kingdom “Jewish lobby” is used as an “even more pejorative” term for “the ‘Israel lobby’”.[14] Michael Lasky describes the term as an “unfortunate phrase”, and “imagines” that Alexander Walker’s use of it while writing about the “Nazi” films of Leni Riefenstahl was not intended pejoratively.[15]
In 2006 Chris Davies, MEP for the northwest of England was forced to resign as leader of the Liberal Democrats group in the European Parliament[16] after writing to a constituent “I shall denounce the influence of the Jewish lobby that seems to have far too great a say over the political decision-making process in many countries.” In comments to TotallyJewish.Com he “confessed he didn’t know the difference between referring to the ‘pro Israel lobby’ and the ‘Jewish lobby’,” and added “I’m quite prepared to accept that I don’t understand the semantics of some of these things.”[17] Commenting on Davies’ use of the term, The Guardian’s David Hirsh writes Davies “has had to resign because his laudable instinct to side with the underdog was not tempered by care, thought or self-education.” He compared Davies’ rhetoric with the “care to avoid openly antisemitic rhetoric taken by sophisticates like Mearsheimer and Walt and Robert Fisk.”
A 2007 New York Sun editorial accused Richard Dawkins, a British evolutionary biologist, atheist and writer who is author of The God Delusion, of repeating antisemitic conspiracy theories[18] after he used the term in an interview published in The Guardian. In the interview Dawkins said: “When you think about how fantastically successful the Jewish lobby has been, though, in fact, they are less numerous I am told – religious Jews anyway – than atheists and [yet they] more or less monopolise American foreign policy as far as many people can see. So if atheists could achieve a small fraction of that influence, the world would be a better place.”[19] In a National Review column discussing the influence of “high-profile atheists” on the American left, Arthur C. Brooks wrote that Dawkins claim was “anti-Semitic, slanders religion, and asserts victimhood.”[20] David Cesarani, commenting in The Guardian, stated that “Mearsheimer and Walt would doubtless chide Dawkins for using the term ‘Jewish lobby’, which they studiously avoid in order to give no truck to anti-Jewish innuendo.”[21]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_lobby#Antisemitic_and.2For_pejorative_use
| 4 July 2008, 1:28 pm |
hahahaha. He is an utter utter tosser.
| 4 July 2008, 1:32 pm |
There is a typo in Al-Tikriti’s first name: there is no second ‘A’, it should be a ‘U’. Change it or I’ll sue.
| 4 July 2008, 1:34 pm |
http://www.anas-altikriti.com/bannere.swf
Fat men often look good in overcoats. He is no exception.
| 4 July 2008, 1:37 pm |
DavidT,
Let me know if there is anything I can do. Money, muscle, solidarity in any form.
I just spoke to a lawyer friend of mine, and after careful consideration, he said to tell Anas Al-Tikriti that he’s a chicken-shit, pug-nosed twat.
So I think we’ll be alright.
| 4 July 2008, 1:40 pm |
What will poor Peter Oborne make of all this ? perhaps more grist to his mill of defending the hapless, misunderstood Muslims, and as he concludes ‘we urgently need to change our public culture’. Would that change mean less Harrys Place, more Bob Pitt, MPAC and BMI?
| 4 July 2008, 1:46 pm |
Is it significant that none of this has appeared on the BMI homepage?
I think the answer is yes.
| 4 July 2008, 1:48 pm |
That’s a relief, Brownie. I thought that instinctively. My anger management issues will land me in trouble one day.
| 4 July 2008, 1:49 pm |
How very stupid of them. I’d lob in a few quid if required. Obviously won’t be necessary though.
| 4 July 2008, 1:50 pm |
Mark, I recall Gilad Atzmon does the same.
| 4 July 2008, 1:52 pm |
Very well said David T. If they sue for libel I’m happy to pitch in for a legal defence fund.
| 4 July 2008, 1:52 pm |
A relevant section of the Altikriti CIF piece titled “Consistency is what counts”
Once again, [Melanie Philips] read from a quote taken from the infamous Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), in which bizarre articles, statements and quotations appear regularly, paraded as translations of speeches, talks, articles and religious texts. As a post-graduate lecturer in translation and interpreting, I tried to assure Ms. Phillips that the translation from which she read was wrong; of course, to no avail.
Philips seems unaware that her continuous quoting from MEMRI, which was founded and is run by former Mossad officials and is blatantly anti-Muslim and anti-Arab, is comparable to a racist quoting from the BNP website on the state of immigration in Britain today.
| 4 July 2008, 2:01 pm |
David T,
most amusing, but I can’t see that any of them would sue, and if having done so, that they would achieve anything, they are blowing hot-air, but if the BMI does sue, then they’ll lose.
I can’t help but feel that the BMI will feature more on the pages of HP? their aggressive attitude in this matter may ultimately be their undoing?
| 4 July 2008, 2:03 pm |
Bring it on!
| 4 July 2008, 2:20 pm |
If this goes to court, let us know if there’s a defence fund.
| 4 July 2008, 2:24 pm |
“He’s got a nerve accusing other people of lying, his guardian profile and wikipedia entry contain a number of ‘errors’”
With Wikipedia at least, you can always correct those errors yourself.
This whole incident will also make a nice section.
P.
| 4 July 2008, 2:31 pm |
“If this goes to court, let us know if there’s a defence fund.”
It won’t go to court. Al-Tikriti knows it won’t go to court because the action would bankrupt his organisation. It is simple bullying tactics. Al-Tikriti has handled this so badly that the “evil Jews” comment, which now transpires to be a typo in the original article according to its author, is no longer the issue. Going around accusing opponents of racism and threatening them is the surest indication that he is a vacuous personality with little intellectual depth. Pathetic.
| 4 July 2008, 2:41 pm |
Like Irie, then, Dan.
| 4 July 2008, 2:42 pm |
Like the Irie, but with an armed terrorist organisation behind him.
| 4 July 2008, 2:45 pm |
But one which he would not counternance shedding his own blood for.
| 4 July 2008, 2:48 pm |
Maybe you should take them up on their offer to listen to the recording.
| 4 July 2008, 2:52 pm |
Won’t do us any good, TimB, on account of our not speaking Arabic. DaveM is the chap to ask.
Then, again, it’s not the question, as I suspect you well know.
| 4 July 2008, 3:02 pm |
They go to the lengths of getting Al Jezeera to alter their written/broadcast record. The Islamicist School of Falsification. But I expect all those post-modernists and clever people can tell us that truth is what you make it etc and there is no objective record or history.
| 4 July 2008, 3:16 pm |
I think the BMI have got better things to spend their time and money on than to pursue this nonsense. You can’t stop people spreading hatred and lies – unfortunately it is something we have to live with. I think that to most people this kind of thing is completely see through. I shouldn’t get so wound up. You see, my HP friends, there are two types of writer in this world. The writer who has his/her audience, who love him/her, and also has enemies who despise him/her. Melanie Phillips is such a writer. What they write is pretty irrelevant, because it will not change any minds. Then you have writers who have a perspective, but try to put forward a rigorous case, not looking for the best/worst possible interpretation of an event to suit their prejudices, but being conservative, cautious, and testing the evidence carefully. If the test of a good journalistic writer is whether they can change minds, and I think it should be, then there is precious little point in getting worked up about paper thin screeds like this, which are really just fodder for the choir. Enjoy it – I’m past caring.
| 4 July 2008, 3:17 pm |
It should be also mentioned that Anas Al-Tikriti was a Renewal Respect election candidate.
It’s a small world.
P.
| 4 July 2008, 3:19 pm |
“You see, my HP friends, there are two types of writer in this world.”
There are two types of people in this world. Those that believe there are two types of people, and those who are not stupid, cliched reductionists.
“Then you have writers who have a perspective, but try to put forward a rigorous case, not looking for the best/worst possible interpretation of an event to suit their prejudices”
Did I mention that stupid, cliched reductionists are also often hypocrites?
| 4 July 2008, 3:20 pm |
Ditto the fighting fund comments.
| 4 July 2008, 3:22 pm |
“not looking for the best/worst possible interpretation of an event to suit their prejudices”
Considering your regular flights of hyperbole, this is kind of ironic.
Is this going to be like Morgoth’s goodbye?
P.
| 4 July 2008, 3:24 pm |
Maybe you should take them up on their offer to listen to the recording.
That’s rather beside the point, isn’t it? As David T says, our translation was based on the article (since altered) that originally appeared on the Al-Jazeera website. If Al-Jazeera misquoted Sawalha (which is entirely possible), it’s a matter for the BMI and Al-Jazeera to settle. Strangely the BMI’s anger is aimed at Harry’s Place rather than at Al-Jazeera for supposedly screwing up the quote in the first place.
| 4 July 2008, 3:26 pm |
I think the BMI have got better things to spend their time and money on than to pursue this nonsense.
I doubt it.
And I’d say that we’ve been quite successful at unmasking the BMI, IslamExpo, and the other Hamas/MB front orgs.
For example, I understand that something I wrote was directly responsible for a Government minister pulling out of a Muslim Brotherhood sponsored event.
So, with any luck, the BMI will soon be able to devote all its time to delivering flabby threats to bloggers, because it will have nothing else to do with its time.
| 4 July 2008, 3:26 pm |
You can’t stop people spreading hatred and lies – unfortunately it is something we have to live with.
You really are a deceitful, viper-tongued hypocritical creep.
| 4 July 2008, 3:26 pm |
No – I’m not going anywhere – How would I survive without having a forum to throw my weight around in?
Actually Shmuel, I’m prepared to modify my binary proposition to a continuum proposition. That is, there are two extremes, and writers fall somewhere on a spectrum between those extremes. My argument is the same though.
| 4 July 2008, 3:28 pm |
Is this going to be like Morgoth’s goodbye?
TheIrie couldn’t be dramatic if he tried.
Anyway, I did manage to stop posting at HP for over a month, as I recall.
| 4 July 2008, 3:29 pm |
I think the BMI have got better things to spend their time and money on than to pursue this nonsense.
Given BMI’s ties to Hamas, I shudder to think what those “better things” are.
TheIrie, I can’t comment on the rest of your comment because I can’t make heads or tails or it.
| 4 July 2008, 3:30 pm |
TheIrie: Do you spout such drivel in your normal life, or is it just your on-line persona?
“If the test of a good journalistic writer is whether they can change minds, and I think it should be …”
No, you don’t understand journalism. The role of a journalist is not to change minds, it is to inform people and to ensure their facts are correct. Melanie Phillips is not a journalist, she is a columnist. They are not the same thing at all. A columnist’s role is to provoke debate, provide strident opinions and/or give a unique or original insight. It is not journalism as I understand it. But perhaps you are a Socialist Worker reader, in which case you will not be able to discern fact from opinion.
| 4 July 2008, 3:33 pm |
“How would I survive without having a forum to throw my weight around in?”
… like a two year old having a tantrum, you mean? The best way to deal with angry toddlers is to ignore them. Likewise with those who act like angry toddlers.
| 4 July 2008, 3:34 pm |
BTW, surely ” paper thin” an inappropriate metaphor with which to insult a blog.
| 4 July 2008, 3:35 pm |
Dan – thanks for the further constructive comments. I shall refine my thesis further to remove “journalistic writer” to “opinion shaping writer”. Hows that?
| 4 July 2008, 3:35 pm |
Not to mention “throwing my weight around”.
| 4 July 2008, 3:37 pm |
Fuck off, Irie.
| 4 July 2008, 3:38 pm |
What’s that, like a walk off? Not tonight, thanks.
| 4 July 2008, 3:39 pm |
TheIrie -
I assume that you accept that the translation of what was originally posted on Al Jazeera was correct, and in good faith?
And I also assume that you accept David T’s account of what has followed (updates and all) has been correct?
Then precisely what ‘lies’ have been spread?
| 4 July 2008, 3:45 pm |
Irie.
Last time I saw you comment under a well balanced thoughtful and informative piece on Iraq
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/01/iraq-today/
you made a complete tit of yourself.
Why do you bother?
| 4 July 2008, 3:48 pm |
I am still at a loss to explain the fact that the al-Jazeera journalist misquoted his own misquote when trying to explain what happened. From Tuesday’s thread:
David T 3 July 2008, 2:29 pm
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?
Dairieh never answered the question, despite it being put to him three times.
| 4 July 2008, 3:48 pm |
“thanks for the further constructive comments. I shall refine my thesis further to remove “journalistic writer” to “opinion shaping writer”. Hows that?”
I don’t really think you have a “thesis” of any sort. You tend to string together clichés and ill-thought analysis in some form of verbal diarrhoea. I don’t mind debating with opponents who are incisive and challenging, but you aren’t. You are something of a parody of the far-left and at times I have wondered whether you are for real.
Have you ever read Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language”? You really should.
| 4 July 2008, 3:50 pm |
Ah yes, Tim – that comments thread has this particular Irie gem -
It is surely highly unlikely that the American’s will allow such groups as AQI or Muqtada al-Sadr to participate in the election.
Yes, the only reason AQI will not take part in elections is because the Americans won’t let them.
| 4 July 2008, 3:50 pm |
The Irie doesn’t like to answer questions that expose his ridiculousness. He often starts long arguments and then merely quits when the coup de grace is put forward. Like in this thread about Deborah Fink:
David T
1 July 2008, 6:16 pm
TheIrie
Well, there is a point here.
If you took the view that all Muslims were intrinsically wicked, and that all Muslim institutions were pernicious and needed to be destroyed, and that any gathering of Muslims was an appropriate venue for a demonstration, then it would be absolutely right to confront Muslims in the street and lambast them about their beliefs, and turn up at Muslim cultural events with megaphones and placards, in order to shout abuse, then you would certainly regard that as a brave and worthwhile thing to do.
I’d regard somebody who turned up at a Muslim cultural event in order to holler them down, as an extremist and probably a lunatic.
I’d take a different view of a person who demonstrated against a Hizb ut Tahrir rally which called for the attacks on Jews.
The reason that Ms Fink turned up at this event is because she takes the view that everything to do with Israel is pernicious, and that therefore all activities related in any way to Israel ought to be attacked.
She’d make no distinction between a rally by Kahaneists, calling for attacks on Palestinians on the one hand, and a display by an Israeli dance troupe on the other.
I would, and so I hope would you. That is because, I trust, you are not a lunatic. And she is.
| 4 July 2008, 3:55 pm |
Based on simple chance, a typo turning vile into evil is just as likely as veil or ilve (but live is stretching it a bit). As it gave a recognized word, two mental levels of proof-reading would have been required to spot it. So, the best interpretation was that Medyan Dairieh and al-Jaz were simply sloppy.
A test would be to consider what other mistakes he makes. Are typos common, or is one of the very few the one which talks about Jewish evil?
| 4 July 2008, 3:58 pm |
Blimey – what is this, my greats hits compilation? One thread at a time please fella’s. Incidentally, that Iraq thread was one of the best threads I’ve ever seen on HP. The post was well researched, and well thought out. I put forward my point of view, respectfully, and the commenter replied respectfully. It is perfectly possible to disagree and still have a rational discussion – you should try it. Incidentally 2, it is my view, unlike Bruno’s, that a “free and fair” election is simply impossible under occupation. AQI can be considered the extreme case which proves my point – even if its true that AQI would participate in an election (which I doubt is true if they thought they would win it). But, Muqtada al… actually, this is off topic. Another time.
| 4 July 2008, 3:59 pm |
“Dairieh never answered the question, despite it being put to him three times.”
And then a cock crowed.
| 4 July 2008, 4:01 pm |
“You see, my HP friends, there are two types of writer in this world.”
What does this remind me of? Tuco (AKA Eli Wallach):
‘There are two kinds of people in the world, my friend: Those with a rope around the neck, and the people who have the job of doing the cutting’.
The Good, the Bad, and theIrie … Guess which character gets shot first?
| 4 July 2008, 4:04 pm |
The Irie, I will repeat my questions -
I assume that you accept that the translation of what was originally posted on Al Jazeera was correct, and in good faith?
And I also assume that you accept David T’s account of what has followed (updates and all) has been correct?
Then precisely what ‘lies’ have been spread?
| 4 July 2008, 4:11 pm |
When you knowingly join a country club that excludes blacks, even if it’s just for the pool or golf course, you’re gonna have a helluvatime dodging charges that you’re a racist. Same goes here. Tie your cred to a terrorist group that fantasizes about killing Jews hiding behind talking rocks at the end-o-days, and guess what that makes you?
| 4 July 2008, 4:12 pm |
Tell that Anal Al-Pinickity to jump off a cliff!
| 4 July 2008, 4:15 pm |
Funny that Andrew/TheIrie is upset about “spreading lies” when he entusiastically did that in a previous thread, when he copied a primitive revisionist work that denied the expulsion of Jews from Iraq by the Arab government.
| 4 July 2008, 4:15 pm |
This chap doesn’t need to be misquoted. This took me ten minutes.
‘Sheikh al-Qaradawi’s recent visit to Britain would have been a useful chance to discuss how to promote common understanding.’
‘The Evening Standard’s inflammatory slurs will backfire on it. London’s Muslims will show their good sense by voting for Ken’
‘The whole issue with the HMD event is that rather than a mere remembrance of victims of one of the most heinous crimes in history, it has become a political event. It glorifies the state of Israel..’
| 4 July 2008, 4:30 pm |
“what is this, my greats hits compilation? ”
Andy Abraham had more hits than you.
| 4 July 2008, 4:45 pm |
David T and all at Harrys Place – you have my full support.
| 4 July 2008, 4:47 pm |
Not to mention Andrew Ireson’s latest blood libel, when he suggested that the Israeli Shin Bet would intentionally kill the mother of the last Palestinian terrorist.
| 4 July 2008, 4:49 pm |
(me) Oh, here it is, with video. “shahid, shahid, shahid!” May she die very painfully today.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/998404.html
TheIrie
3 July 2008, 12:22 pm
If Shin Bet have anything to do with it, Fabian, she just might.
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/02/which-side/
| 4 July 2008, 4:56 pm |
Interesting that Fabian thinks that last comment is damning of me, not him.
| 4 July 2008, 5:01 pm |
Are Shin Bet in the habit of murdering relatives of ‘martyrs’, Irie?
Would you also mind answering my questions, posted at 3:39 and 4:04?
| 4 July 2008, 5:27 pm |
We are all David Ts!
It’s been a bad day for the anti-racist secular left: Oborne gets carte blanche in the Indy to voice hysterical comparisons betwen Europe’s Muslims and the Jews (persumably the reference is to the 1930s but he has not the wit to make this clear); Bunting emerges from the Black Lagoon to give creepy praise to the Lord Chief Justice Phillips’ multi-culturalist pro-Sharia misogyny; Bunglawala pitches in with similar. Pitt must be laughing – if billious old grunters can do more than slightly titter that is.
Phillips Out, Phillips Out, Phillips Out Out Out!!!
| 4 July 2008, 5:42 pm |
Mark, I fear you have just said the equivalent of “Reichstag” to Irie.
| 4 July 2008, 5:44 pm |
One thing that Oborne said, I agree with.
Oborne claimed: “Much media coverage ignores moderate Muslim opinion and serves only to increase hatred and resentment.”
Which is why the nutjobs need exposing and sidelining.
And David T is doing a very good job.
| 4 July 2008, 5:46 pm |
If Harry’s Place wasn’t an irrelevant blog, it would probably have to apologise to a lot of people, rather like this.
| 4 July 2008, 5:54 pm |
What’s to apologise, TheIrie?
The original Al Jazeera report wrote ‘the baleful Jewish thing’.
Instead of apologising for its typo, and any offence caused, it threatened to sue people who perfectly reasonably translated and published its original report. That ls what would have happened in this country.
But, then, Al Jazeera scarcely has any native Arabic speaking Jewish listeners to whom it should, in the normal course of events, have apologised for offending.
Your defending their behaviour over HP as an example of what constitutes properly legal journalistic conduct is laughable, if typical.
| 4 July 2008, 5:55 pm |
Obourne’s piece in the Indy. Excellent.
| 4 July 2008, 5:58 pm |
Al Jazeera wrote
‘the baleful Jewish thing’.
David T translated, not unreasonably, ‘the evil Jew’.
Al Jazeera say
‘We meant to type ‘the Jewish lobby’, therefore we are going to sue you’.
And TheIrie defends them.
Typical.
| 4 July 2008, 5:59 pm |
TheIrie, you’ve had ample time to document what “lies” you mean, but you waste time with non-sequitors. You said you were going to leave, so bog off.
| 4 July 2008, 6:05 pm |
TheIrie,
you are an idiot.
If that had happened in the UK, the journal would have simply apologised. It is not the fault of the reader for having read and accurately translated its journal. It would not have threatened to sue him.
And if Al Jazeera had valued its (admittedly tiny number of) native Arabic speaking Jewish listeners, it would have taken upon itself even more to apologise.
But, no, any reader who reasonably accurately pulls it up on something that is clearly wrong, one way or another, deserves no apology whatsoever, least of all if he is a Jew, or someone vaguely sympathetic to Jews or the Jewish state of Israel, but, rather, to be threatened with suing.
You pride yourself on your intellect and moral compass, yet you see nothing wrong with that picture.
I disrespectfully submit you are a moron.
| 4 July 2008, 6:12 pm |
The BMI writes
‘It appears that you have inexplicably grossly mistranslated his reference to the Jewish ‘Lobby’. Whether this mistake was accidental or not, the mistake is extremely serious and the consequences far-reaching.’
Mad, completely barking. It is not Al Jazeera who mistranslated the original utterance of the BMI, a mistake, accidental or not (!), with consequences far reaching or not (!), but, rather, HP!
Balmy. Completely flipping balmy.
| 4 July 2008, 6:13 pm |
Fabian,
Are you saying that TheIrie is this man:
DELETED
| 4 July 2008, 6:17 pm |
TheIrie –
For the fourth time of asking, would you answer my questions – posted at 3:39 and 4:04?
I mean, it really is incumbent on you to do so, given that you have accused David T of ’spreading hatred and lies’, to explain where these lies reside, isn’t it?
| 4 July 2008, 6:19 pm |
No, that’s not me.
My point, Zkharya, given what we now know, is that there is no reasonable justification for the headline “British Muslim Initiative: We Resent the Evil Jew in Britain”, since that is not what was said. And maybe fault does lie elsewhere for the original mistake, but David should, by now, have removed that headline.
| 4 July 2008, 6:20 pm |
Islam Expo is hosting the following
Understanding Political Islam
A two-day specialist course organised by British Muslim Initiative and supported by Al Jazeera Centre for Studies, Conflicts Forum, Demos, Forward Thinking and The Cordoba Foundation.
Although much attention has been directed to the violent and radical forms of Islamism -particularly since the 9/11 terrorist attacks-, its more peaceful, mainstream manifestations continue to be largely overlooked.
So guess who’s appearing.
Azzam Tamimi.
That should boost the peaceful side of Islamism.
| 4 July 2008, 6:22 pm |
TheIrie – fair enough, though you did say you were at Imperial the other day.
| 4 July 2008, 6:23 pm |
No, that’s not me.
Given that you have already stated that you are EDIT (on this website!) I find this a little baffling.
| 4 July 2008, 6:27 pm |
TheIrie, so presumably you’re not behind this petition either?
In the light of Tony Blair’s statement to parliament on 18/3/03 that “the oil revenues, which people falsely claim that we want to seize, should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people administered through the UN”, the statement from the Iraqi trade unions that “We strongly reject the privatization of our oil wealth, [] and there is no room for discussing this matter. This is the demand of the Iraqi street, and the privatization of oil is a red line that may not be crossed.”, and reports in the Independent (Future of Iraq: The spoils of war 7/1/07) that Iraq’s oil is “about to be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil companies under a controversial law which is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament within days.” we petition Tony Blair to keep his word, support the Iraqi people and ensure that Western corporations are not allowed to pressure the fragile Iraqi government to sign contracts to privatise Iraq’s oil
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Iraqi-oil/
| 4 July 2008, 6:28 pm |
“Given that you have already stated that you are EDIT (on this website!) I find this a little baffling.”
Amazing! what a lying shit.
| 4 July 2008, 6:30 pm |
People, may I remind you “hate the sin, love the sinner”. And “stalk not thy enemies”. Says so in the Bible – must be true.
| 4 July 2008, 6:32 pm |
Look who’s (s)talking!
[postmodern joke for you Irie]
| 4 July 2008, 6:32 pm |
Listen everybody
You KNOW that, if somebody wants to use a nom de guerre, I respect that.
Please don’t bully TheIrie
| 4 July 2008, 6:34 pm |
My Bible hasn’t that passage.
My Bible, on the other hand, says “I will curse those who curse you, and bless those you bless you”. And since you have called the people of Israel “murdering bastards” I am trying to figure out which diseases will affect you. Maybe rotten teeth?
| 4 July 2008, 6:34 pm |
TheIrie, I’m not stalking you, nor do I wish to ‘unmask’ you.
I’m just a bit amazed you lied about who you were, when there’s a post in the archives here talking about you and your (worthy, lest it be added) petition about Iraqi oil privatisation.
| 4 July 2008, 6:35 pm |
David T – perhaps the post in question should be altered?
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2007/01/16/petition-to-pm-on-iraqi-oil/
Feel free to delete this link…
| 4 July 2008, 6:35 pm |
David: he has linked his real name to his “nom the guerre” on the internet. It is fair to show who this lying shit is. Who knows, maybe he also lied throughout his chalk research and somebody will now go back and read it this time.
| 4 July 2008, 6:39 pm |
Not on this blog he hasn’t.
Really, this isn’t fair! I’m also trying to delete all this on a blackberry while talking to my wife and it aint easy.
| 4 July 2008, 6:39 pm |
Irie has identified himself on HP as EDIT
| 4 July 2008, 6:40 pm |
Not on this blog he hasn’t.
Err… yes he has. See my link.
Apologies for putting you into Blackberry/spouse related difficulties.
| 4 July 2008, 6:42 pm |
I’m going! I really am!
| 4 July 2008, 6:50 pm |
Sorry, David, you tolerate the similar ‘outings’ of Mary Rizzo.
| 4 July 2008, 6:53 pm |
look, I appreciate that TheIrie’s activities here are a bit bizzare, from nearly always defending Hamas to nearly always attacking Israelis but don’t lower yourself to his idiotic level, please
| 4 July 2008, 7:05 pm |
Same goes for Calvin Tucker. That said the TheIrie handle is about as enigmatic as Daniel Davis and Mike Rosen’s.
| 4 July 2008, 7:08 pm |
You watch if I don’t go!
| 4 July 2008, 7:12 pm |
Tories will use City Hall as a dry run for national Government
Whoops.
Ray Lewis has gone.
| 4 July 2008, 7:14 pm |
I think I’ll stay.
| 4 July 2008, 7:17 pm |
To change the subject from TheOisvorf, in this thread
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/02/british-muslim-initiative-we-resent-the-evil-jew-in-britain/
it is stated that the British Muslim Initiative describes this blog as Zionist and Racist. Why don’t you sue them?
Describing the blog as racist would appear to be libelous. I also think that anyone who is described as a zionist should consider raising the issue of defamation unless they actually belong to a zionist organisation, whatever their position on Israel. The term is used in a pejorative manner and if one is sympathetic to Israel but not a card-carrying zionist one should not be falsely identified as such.
| 4 July 2008, 7:18 pm |
Back to the original topic…What is being claimed by the BMI people is exactly what you would expect. Dave M wrote that excellent journal from his stay in Syria where he detailed the difficulty he had in learning colloquial Arabic because the Arabs simply don’t want us (ie non-Arabs) to know what they are saying. I note the pro-comments speakers rush to accuse him of not properly understanding Arabic and obsfucating with talk about grammar. Too bad mate, there are some people in the West who can understand what is being said.
| 4 July 2008, 7:23 pm |
The Irie,
Adjectives are often used as substantive or nouns in Arabic.
You do know what a substantive is, TheIrie? It is an adjective or participle used as a noun. Even in English adjectives are sometimes used as nouns e.g. the Italian, or The Shining.
It is perfectly reasonable to translate ‘the evil/baleful Jewish thing or person’ as ‘the evil Jew’.
Anyhow, how would you know different? Can you read any Arabic?
Al Jazeera wrote ‘the evil/baleful Jewish person or thing’. DaveT translated the phrase on the basis that it meant something, which is perfectly reasonable, given that is what was published. The Arabic for ‘Jewish’, on its own, can certainly mean ‘Jewish person’, and DaveT was perfectly reasonable in translating it as ‘Jew’.
Again, how would you know different?
| 4 July 2008, 7:32 pm |
“Again, how would you know different?” I wouldn’t. I’m only going on what others have said, which is that the word was “lobby”, and was originally a typo. Since the reporter himself seems to have shown up and said so, I see no reason to doubt him over you.
| 4 July 2008, 7:38 pm |
I think that no matter what David T wrote, TheIrie would disagree.
If David T had wrote “there’s sand on beaches”, TheIrie would be tempted to respond with “No there ain’t, and it is the fault of the evil neo-cons and Israelis for taking the sand!”
so you’re wasting your time discussing these issues with TheIrie, he’s just a contrarian parrot and not a bright one at that
| 4 July 2008, 7:50 pm |
TheIrie: you said the word was “lobby”, and was originally a typo. Since the reporter himself seems to have shown up and said so, I see no reason to doubt him over you.
Given this, do you accept that Takriti’s comment It appears that you have inexplicably grossly mistranslated his reference to the Jewish ‘Lobby’. is disingenuous and wrong?
| 4 July 2008, 7:56 pm |
And if it is disingenous and wrong, there is no reason to believe him at all.
| 4 July 2008, 7:56 pm |
For goodness sake, David. References to Irie’s identity and occupation have been made two or three times a week, at least, for two years, without remark
from you or him. There is at least one HP thread in which he says, this is me. Before the migration, his email addy showing this name was freely visible.
Horses and stable doors spring to mind.
Honestly you’re behaving like a muppet baby version of the BMI (maybe more, as I don’t recall your being as intolerant of an outing of Nick Kollerstrom’s handles.)
| 4 July 2008, 8:15 pm |
TheIrie,
you don’t have to doubt the journalist over me. He’s already admitted that what was originally published was al wbyl al yhwdy, which may be perfectly reasonably translated as ‘the evil/baleful Jewish thing/person/Jew’.
Twat.
| 4 July 2008, 8:19 pm |
TheIrie,
BTW, the above post was by me.
‘“Again, how would you know different?” I wouldn’t. I’m only going on what others have said, which is that the word was “lobby”, and was originally a typo. Since the reporter himself seems to have shown up and said so, I see no reason to doubt him over you.’
The original word was not ‘lwby=lobby’, it was ‘wbyl=baleful/evil’, and it was perfectly reasonable of DaveT to translate it as such, just as it was perfectly reasonable for him to translate ‘yhwdy’ as ‘Jew’.
| 4 July 2008, 8:21 pm |
I’m only going on what others have said, which is that the word was “lobby”, and was originally a typo. Since the reporter himself seems to have shown up and said so, I see no reason to doubt him over you.
But none of this been in dispute at any stage. All the updates show the sequence of events.
And yet you accuse David T of ’spreading hatred and lies’.
Furthermore, the basis of Tikriti’s ‘case’, in his words, is that -
It appears that you have inexplicably grossly mistranslated his reference to the Jewish ‘Lobby’
Harry’s Place did no such thing. There was no ‘mistranslation’. There was an accurate translation of a word that has transpired, seemingly, to be a typo.
There is no case to answer.
| 4 July 2008, 8:22 pm |
Yeah, comments such as 2015hrs must be tolerated, but we cannot repeat previously accepted facts. You have no clothes.
| 4 July 2008, 8:25 pm |
Typical TheIrie tortuous logic:
‘I’m only going on what others have said, which is that the word was “lobby”,’
The word was not ‘lwby’ it was ‘wbyl’, which means ‘baleful’ or ‘evil’.
‘and was originally a typo.’
It may have been a typo but there was no way DaveT could have known that and it was perfectly reasonable for him to translate the word that was there as ‘evil’, since that it is was it meant, even as it was perfectly reasonable for him to translate ‘yhwdy’ as ‘Jew’, since ‘al wbyl al yhwdy’ makes perfectly good sense as ‘the evil Jewish thing or person’.
| 4 July 2008, 8:29 pm |
I know Alec, I’ve admitted it to TheIrie. I’m a bad boy. It was true, though.
| 4 July 2008, 8:32 pm |
Moreover, TheIrie, you are passing over, without comment, the fact that the same journalist did not apologise on for the typo and any offence caused, as he would have to do in this country, and that BMI threatened to sue HP for having perfectly reasonably translated the original published material.
| 4 July 2008, 8:35 pm |
The BMI also displayed the same tortuous logic as TheIrie, accusing DaveT of ‘inextricably’ (haha!) mistranslating, rather than Al Jazeera of making a typo.
Farcical.
| 4 July 2008, 8:42 pm |
TheIrie,
perhaps HP should take down the headline, when Al Jazeera apologises for having made the error in the first place, and BMI withdraws its threat to sue.
| 4 July 2008, 10:06 pm |
Blimey, Zhak, you’ve got the algorithm to a tee! Another example: the fascist Exile links to his real name. Then there’s our very own Brownie.
| 4 July 2008, 10:32 pm |
I am sick of religious people like Al-Tikriti screaming “persecution” whenever anyone dares to criticise or question them. The Abrahamical faiths are particularly prone to harbouring a persecution complex, despite the state giving them and funding their exclusive schools, reserving them seats in the legislature, making pains to listen to the concerns of their “leaders” over the wishes of the electorate. Like all secularists and atheists, I am a second-class citizen compared to the religious, yet unlike the religious establishment, I am tolerant of people of different faiths, don’t mind my son being educated alongside Muslims, Christians and others (in fact, I would prefer him to have contact with them) and even participate in their rituals and holidays when invited (I’ve celebrated Christmas, Eid al-Adha and Pesach). I am even willing to put up with their homophobic doctrines and attitudes towards gender equality, so long as they don’t support harming anyone. All I want is the right to criticise religious and religious organisations when I think they are bigoted and taking the piss. We tolerant secularists have a right to condemn people when they engage in hate speech (whether they say evil Jew or castigate the entire Jewish community and the so-called “Jewish lobby”) without being accused of racism and without being threatened with libel action. That’s the minimum I expect of a democratic society. I favour complete secularisation of society so that there is no confusion about the place of religion, which should remain in the home and in the church/synagogue/temple/gurdwara/mosque but not in the school, hospital, prison or parliament.
| 4 July 2008, 11:53 pm |
You guys give it too much thinking. it was Wabeel!
| 5 July 2008, 1:47 am |
I can’t see much that is wrong with your conduct, so it seems that Altikriti is just pickin’ awn the little guy.
I’ve linked to the initial post.
Ben
| 5 July 2008, 2:48 am |
I am not an expert on legal matters, but it was my understanding that in a British libel case, you have three options:
1) Arguing that the plaintiff was misunderstanding the words in question;
2) Arguing that the words were not defamatory;
3) Arguing that the words at issue were true even if they were defamatory.
I read the original post and do not see you calling BMI anti-Semitic. Therefore you can (it seems to me) argue on any of the grounds above. (Assuming it ever came to Court)
Regards,
Inna
| 5 July 2008, 9:39 am |
Brilliant story and linguistic detective work David T and Dave M. Shows anti semites in their true colours.
| 5 July 2008, 10:01 am |
Alec,
I’m not sure I understood you, but I hope you understand that I confessed to my crime.
| 5 July 2008, 10:04 am |
Alec,
I also know I repeat myself a lot. I think I am both
a) not particularly smart and
b) semi-autistic
I think I fall into repetitive behaviour very easily. What I lack in intelligence I compensate for by tenacity. ‘kind of like a smarter than average squid. Or crocadile.
| 5 July 2008, 11:54 am |
Zkh, I meant to say you’ve mastered a mock-up of petulence and low personal morality such that it passes a Ireson-specific Turing test!
| 5 July 2008, 12:58 pm |
Let us not forget that Hamas’ founding Covenant cites the Protocols of Zion as an authoritative text.
Let’s also not forget that despite the current apparent negotiations, that same document proclaims that ‘[t]here is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are a waste of time and a farce’.
| 5 July 2008, 4:17 pm |
Now we do not have to imagine what living under an Islamicist regime would be like (Hat Tip to UKLN Steve):
Schoolboys disciplined for ‘refusing to pray to Allah’
By Nick Britten
Last updated: 12:37 AM BST 05/07/2008
Two schoolboys were allegedly disciplined after refusing to kneel down
and “pray to Allah” during a religious education lesson.
It was claimed that the boys, from a year seven class of 11 and
12-year-olds, were given detention after refusing to take part in a
practical demonstration of how Allah is worshipped.
Yesterday parents accused the school of breaching their human rights
by forcing them to take part in the exercise.
One, Sharon Luinen, said: “This isn’t right, it’s taking things too
far. I understand that they have to learn about other religions. I can
live with that but it is taking it a step too far to be punished
because they wouldn’t join in Muslim prayer.
“Making them pray to Allah, who isn’t who they worship, is wrong and
what got me is that they were told they were being disrespectful.”
Another parent Karen Williams, 38, whose 12-year-old daughter is a
classmate of the boys, said: “I am absolutely furious my daughter was
made to take part in it and I don’t find it acceptable.
“The teacher had gone into the class and made them watch a short film
and then said ‘we are now going out to pray to Allah’.
“Then two boys got detention and all the other children missed their
refreshments’ break.”
She added: “Not only was it forced upon them, my daughter was told off
for not doing it right.
“They’d never done it before and they were supposed to do it in
another language.”
She said the pupils were asked if they had water on them, and when one
girl produced a bottle, the teacher began washing her feet with it.
Her husband Keith, 44, a painter and decorator, said: “The school is
wonderful but this one teacher has made a major mistake. It seems to
be happening throughout society. People think they can ride roughshod
over our beliefs and the way we live.”
The alleged incident, at the Alsager school, one of Cheshire’s top
performing schools, happened on Tuesday afternoon. The teacher, Alison
Phillips, the school’s subject leader in RE, is understood to be
staying away from the school until the furore dies down, although she
has not been suspended.
She is said to have got prayer mats out of the cupboard and also asked
children to wear Islamic headdresses.
Deputy headmaster Keith Plant said: “I have spoken to the teacher and
she has articulately given me her version of events.”
Sources at the school said the incident could have been down to Miss
Phillips instigating a role play and not properly briefing the pupils,
all aged around 12, what she was doing.
A spokesman for Cheshire County Council said they were investigating.
He added: “The headteacher contacted the authority immediately
complaints were received. Enquiries are being made into the
circumstances as a matter of urgency and all parents will be informed
accordingly.
“Educating children in the beliefs of different faiths is part of
Cheshire’s diversity curriculum on the basis that knowledge is, of
course, is essential to understanding.
“We accept that such teaching has to be conducted with commonsense and
sensitivity.”
Story from Telegraph News:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2247388/Schoolboys-disciplined-for-%27refusing-t\
o-pray-to-Allah%27.html
| 5 July 2008, 9:29 pm |
David T, keep up the good work. These scum will get what is coming to them as more and more good people stand up to their lies. Don’t be afraid, stay strong, and keep fighting the good fight.
| 5 July 2008, 9:38 pm |
Not sure whether this has already been confirmed as I’m too tired to read all the posts again.
I caught the ‘original’ text of the snippet from the Jazeera post (Arabic) at Mel Phillips’ Speccie blog:
والوبيل اليهودي في بريطانيا
The word الوبيل here could, to the best of my knowledge, be used as an adjective or a noun (previously, variously translated above as ‘evil, baleful’ etc. or ‘the evil’). Many Arabic adjectives can double as nouns such as demonyms (اليهودي here would be another example – Jewish or Jew sing.), and they are often followed by an attributive adjective if this is the case (it could be the case here). Arabic adjectives always agree with the noun they qualify in number, gender and definiteness (the case here), so the noun phrase الوبيل اليهودي would putatively be translated as ‘the Jewish evil’. It could just as easily be a syntax error and he really did mean to type اللوبي, rendering ‘the Jewish Lobby’. What he is unlikely to have done, unless he’s forgotten his Arabic grammar 101, is to have meant ‘the evil of the Jew’ which would be وبيل اليهودي (note no definite article ال). Again unlikely, is that he meant to type اليهودي before الوبيل as in اليهودي الوبيل which would mean ‘the evil Jew’.
If we google all of these sets of noun phrases, we find that the only ones which co-occur are اللوبي اليهودي (the Jewish lobby). A google of this noun phrase produces more than 1600 results:
(fairly sizeable for a specific Arabic lang. noun phrase search)
As far as the ‘import’ of such a phrase in Arabic, well there are different connotations for this Arabic phrase to the equivalent in English. A brief search of the kind of documents turned up by said search reveals them to be almost comprehensively of a proIslamist bent (not exclusively Islamic religious sites though). This is not unusual in the Arab world where, what would be considered anti-Semitic or anti-Israeli in the ‘West’, is just par for the course among Arab journalists.
IMHO, the journo probably did make a typo, albeit a rather egregious one in light of the context, the highly sensitive subject matter (not in Qatar or other Ar. states remember) and Mr H’s forensic Googling.
| 5 July 2008, 11:18 pm |
Altikriti should be referred to the celebrated case of Arkell versus Pressdram
| 7 July 2008, 1:18 pm |
Has anyone checked with Mark Elf yet to see if the Evil Jew Menace has been defeated by the forces of Genocidal Righteousness? I can’t imagine Mark’s Morons would let this pass w/o commenting that a) All Jews are laughably stupid and b) All Jews are the secret super powerful evil of the world.
| 7 July 2008, 3:22 pm |
Hey, Mr Sawalha. Bring it on over to the USA and try and pull this crap.
We’re waiting for you.
| 7 July 2008, 5:34 pm |
Keep it up DavidT!
Obviously, it would be a great thing if they really sued. Great publicity. It seems fairly unlikely though, but maybe their hatred will get the better of them? Keep pushing them, your doing a good job.
| 7 July 2008, 8:58 pm |
This is a perfect yet common example of Muslim extremists (living within the warm belly of Western society) using the liberality of the West as a trojan horse for their own repressive values. Canada has its “Human Rights” tribunals and the Brits have a “guilty until proven innocent” set of defamation and “hate” laws.
| 26 July 2008, 4:37 pm |
This is all too typical of the very nasty aspect of Muslim “big talk” but which people like this fall for their own rhetoric and come unstuck. Altikriti and Sawalha are typical of the genre because they are incapable (thank heavens) of introspection and of seeing themselves as we might see them. Therefore they think and then they “do” without reflection and because they think it they believe that they are right. There seems not to be the normal disconnection between thoughts and reflections and subsequent action. Instead there is almost always the kneejerk reaction
I am sorry that HarrysPlace has been put through this but it would make an excellent case study of the Arab (and for this you may also read “Muslim”) mindset, as described by Tarek Heggy who describes the most obvious defects from which the contemporary Arab mind-set suffers:
1. A lack of intellectual hospitality;
2. It is steeped in a culture that encourages conformity and discourages diversity;
3. Limited tolerance for the Other;
4. Limited tolerance for criticism and the virtual absence of self-criticism;
5. The adoption of stands not on the basis of their coherence, validity or intrinsic value but on the basis of tribal or religious affiliations;
6. Deep feelings of inequality with others in terms of results and achievements makes for a sense of inadequacy that is sublimated into an exaggerated and unfounded pride;
7. A tendency to indulge in excessive self-praise and to glorify past achievements as a way of escaping our dismal reality;
8. The prevalence of what I call the ‘big-talk culture’, in which overblown rhetoric is used to compensate for the appalling lack of concrete achievements;
9. A lack of objectivity and the growth of individualism;
10. An unhealthy nostalgia for and escape into the past;
11. An aversion to the notion of compromise, which is deemed to be a form of capitulation and defeat;
12. Lack of respect for women;
13. A tendency to unquestioningly accept stereotypes at face value;
14. Setting great store by the conspiracy theory and believing that the Arabs are always the victims of heinous plots hatched against them by their enemies;
15. An ill-defined sense of national identity: is it Arab, Muslim, Asian, African or Mediterranean?
16. The spread of the personality cult phenomenon in Arab societies, where the relationship with the ruler is based not on mutual respect and accountability but on the excessive adulation, not to say deification, of the ruler;
17. The prevalence of an insular culture that knows next to nothing about the outside world and the real balance of power by which it is governed, let alone the science or culture of others;
18. A lack of appreciation for the value of the bond that links the human species together, which is their common humanity. For most people in the region, the only bonds that count are either tribal, sectarian or nationalistic, although humanity is the most exalted common denominator of all;
19. The spread of a mentality of fanaticism due to a number of factors, the most important being the tribalism that dominates the Arab mind-set to varying degrees;
20. Finally, the Arab mind-set is not overly concerned with the notion of freedom for the simple reason that the Arabs have enjoyed only limited doses of political rights and civil liberties.
And yet, as American Mike has said above, they are only too ready to use our civil liberties concepts when it suits them and against us.
| 26 July 2008, 4:43 pm |
Even to rail against the “evil Jewish lobby” is anti-Semitic isn’t it? After all, can you imagine what might happen if anyone railed equally against the machinations of Muslims who want to undermine democracy by engineering the deselection of Jewish/pro-Israel MPs?
Let’s face it, to these people “Israel” and “Jewish” are perceived and used interchangeably whenever they rant.
David T,
Dont let that asshole intimidate you.