For who told Morsi Jews are "the sons of apes and pigs"? The Qur'an did, in three places. The Hadith do, and the Sira. Why can't anyone in the mass press dare to say this? [From Hugh's post here.]
Somebody did: Tim Marshall, Foreign Affairs Editor of Sky News:
Describing Jews as sons of pigs and monkeys is commonplace throughout the Middle East, it is routinely repeated on the street, in mosques, in TV debates, in cartoons, and in newspaper articles. The belief is based on three different verses in the Koran – 7:166, 2:65, and 5:60.
Some open-minded Muslims argue that the verses should be seen in historical context and that they refer to the problems between Jews and the new religion of Muhammad at the time of writing. Many others view them as literal and applicable for all time.
For the Egyptian President to use the phrase in a live TV interview in the 21st century suggests he takes the latter view. Core beliefs such as those he has espoused for decades are not normally reversed by a year in power although this cannot be definitively ruled out.
In Europe, when Europeans say things such as expressed above, we recognise them as ‘Fascistic’. When expressed by people in some other parts of the globe we appear frightened to call things what they are.
Contrast this with the shameful dhimmitude of the BBC. From BBC watch, with thanks to Harry's Place for this and the Sky News link above:
It has taken far too much time, but the US State Department’s recent condemnation of Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi’s antisemitic, terror-glorifying statements – shown in a video from 2010 which was released almost two weeks ago by MEMRI – has left Western journalists no choice but to begin reporting the story.
However, in its own report on the subject which appeared in the Middle East section of the BBC News website on January 16th, the BBC apparently could not resist ‘tweaking’ Morsi’s words.
The BBC article states: [emphasis added]
“In the clip from Palestinian broadcaster Al-Quds TV, Mr Morsi referred to Jewish settlers as “occupiers of Palestine” and “warmongers”.
He called for a “military resistance in Palestine against these Zionist criminals assaulting the land of Palestine and Palestinian”.”
Firstly, Al Quds TV is not merely a “Palestinian broadcaster” – it is a television station owned and run by Hamas. Of course this is not the first time that the BBC has elected to conceal from its audiencesthe terror connections of Al Quds TV and its sister organization Al Aqsa TV.
Secondly, Morsi makes no reference whatsoever to “Jewish settlers” in his antisemitic, terror-glorifying rant: that phrase is an invention by the BBC. In fact, Morsi speaks of “Zionists”, by which he means all Israeli Jews – regardless of whether they live on one side or the other of the ‘green line’ – the existence of which Morsi clearly says he does not recognize.
So, the question is this: does the BBC follow the party line expounded by Hamas and other terrorist organisations whereby all Jewish Israelis are considered “settlers” no matter where they live? That is certainly one possible explanation for the choice of wording above.
And if that is not the case, then we must ask why the BBC is trying to tone down Morsi’s support of terrorism in the whole of Israel by pretending that his statements encouraging violence ‘only’ refer to the use of terror against a specific group of people. Did the BBC perhaps consider that Morsi’s words would go down a little less badly with its audiences if they were framed as relating to “Jewish settlers” whom – according to the bien pensants of certain circles in the West – it has become perfectly acceptable to demonise, dehumanize and stereotype?
If that is the case, then it also means that we cannot avoid asking the rather unpleasant – but necessary – question of whether the BBC considers there to be a difference between the palatability of terror attacks inside and outside the ‘green line’.
Say what you like about Rupert Murdoch -- he won't care much -- but I'd trust Sky News over the BBC any day.