This dickhead explains why it is ok to kill taxi drivers!

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/4634.htm

---

What about Muslim taxi drivers, Caliph? Can we kill them?

we can at least ban them K

then deport them.

Good point.

Maybe then we can nuke them.

Adamant wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:03am:

This dickhead explains why it is ok to kill taxi drivers! http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/4634.htm

How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers?

Does he have a widespread following amongst Muslims around the world?

Is his message "on message" with what mainstream Muslims believe?

Inquiring minds need to know why you've posted this link.  Is there a point to it?   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 3:22pm:

How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers?

I don't know. Do you think that a muslim is allowed to kill "aid" workers??????????????

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 3:22pm:

Does he have a widespread following amongst Muslims around the world?

He must have, you responded.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 3:22pm:

Is his message "on message" with what mainstream Muslims believe?

Killing your ilk is OK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 3:22pm:

Inquiring minds need to know why you've posted this link

That would leave you out for a start!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) :D :D :D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) :D :D :D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 1:40pm:

we can at least ban them K then deport them.

Dickhead statement from a muslim fascist, what more could one expect?

Young fascist league statement now. The Nazis are back, forget Hitler we now have gAndalf as our apologist!

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/4633.htm

Quote:

Brian Whitaker, the Middle East editor for The Guardian newspaper at the time, wrote in a public email debate with Carmon in 2003, that his problem with MEMRI was that it "poses as a research institute when it's basically a propaganda operation".[6] Earlier, Whitaker had charged that MEMRI's role was to "further the political agenda of Israel." and that MEMRI's website does not mention Carmon's employment for Israeli intelligence, or Meyrav Wurmser's political stance, which he described as an "extreme brand of Zionism".[4] Carmon responded to this by stating that his employment history is not a secret and was not political, as he served under opposing administrations of the Israeli government and that perhaps the issue was that he was Israeli: "If your complaint is that I am Israeli, then please say so." Carmon also questioned Whitaker's own biases, wondering if Whitaker's is biased in favor of Arabs—as his website on the Middle East is named "Al-Bab" ("The Gateway" in Arabic)—stating: "I wonder how you would judge an editor whose website was called "Ha-Sha-ar" ("The Gateway" in Hebrew)?[6] Norman Finkelstein has described MEMRI as "a main arm of Israeli propaganda".In 2006, Finkelstein accused MEMRI of editing a television interview he gave in Lebanon in order to falsely impute that he was a Holocaust denier. In an interview with the newspaper In Focus in 2007, he said MEMRI uses "the same sort of propaganda techniques as the Nazis" and "take[s] things out of context in order to do personal and political harm to people they don't like".[42] Selectivity Several critics have accused MEMRI of selectivity. They state that MEMRI consistently picks for translation and dissemination the most extreme views, which portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, while ignoring moderate views that are often found in the same media outlets.[4][39][39][40][41] Juan Cole, a professor of Modern Middle East History at the University of Michigan, argues MEMRI has a tendency to "cleverly cherry-pick the vast Arabic press, which serves 300 million people, for the most extreme and objectionable articles and editorials... On more than one occasion I have seen, say, a bigoted Arabic article translated by MEMRI and when I went to the source on the web, found that it was on the same op-ed page with other, moderate articles arguing for tolerance. These latter were not translated."[43] Former head of the CIA's counterintelligence unit, Vincent Cannistraro, said that MEMRI "are selective and act as propagandists for their political point of view, which is the extreme-right of Likud. They simply don't present the whole picture."[44][45] Laila Lalami, writing in The Nation, states that MEMRI "consistently picks the most violent, hateful rubbish it can find, translates it and distributes it in email newsletters to media and members of Congress in Washington".[39] As a result, critics such as Ken Livingstone state, MEMRI's analyses are "distortion".[46][47] A report by Center for American Progress, titled "Fear, Inc. The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America" lists MEMRI as promoting Islamophobic propaganda in the USA through supplying selective translations that are relied upon by several organisations "to make the case that Islam is inherently violent and promotes extremism".[48] MEMRI argues that they are quoting the government-controlled press and not obscure or extremist publications, a fact their critics acknowledge, according to Marc Perelman: "When we quote Al-Ahram in Egypt, it is as if we were quoting The New York Times. We know there are people questioning our work, probably those who have difficulties seeing the truth. But no one can show anything wrong about our translations."[44]

[Cont'd next post]

Quote:

In August 2013, the Islamic Da'wah Centre of South Australia questioned the "reliability, independence and veracity" of the Middle East Media Research Institute after it posted what the centre called a "sensational de-contextualised cut-and-paste video clip... put together in a suggestive manner" of a sermon by the Sheikh Sharif Hussein on an American website. According to the two-minute video, which was a heavily condensed version of the Sheikh's 36-minute speech delivered in Adelaide on 22 March, Hussein called Australian and American soldiers "crusader pigs" and stated "O Allah, count the Buddhists and the Hindus one by one. O Allah, count them and kill them to the very last one." According to MEMRI's translation, he also described US President Barack Obama as an "enemy of Allah, you who kiss the shoes and feet of the Jews" and predicted that "The day will come when you are trampled upon by the pure feet of the Muslims."[49] MEMRI's rendition moved leading Liberal senator Cory Bernardi to write to the Police Commissioner charging that under Australia's anti-terrorism laws, the video clip was "hate speech", and requesting that action be taken against Hussein. The South Australian Islamic Society and the Australian Buddhist Councils Federation also condemned Hussein's speech. Widespread calls from the public for the deportation of Hussein and his family followed news reports of the video. A police spokeswoman stated "Police will examine the entire content of the sermon to gain the full context and determine whether any crime has been committed." Hussein himself declined any comment on the contents of the video. However, the Da'wah Centre charged that by omitting the context of Hussein's statements, MEMRI had distorted the actual intent of the speech. While admitting that the Sheikh was emotional and used strong words, the Centre stated that the speech was delivered in relation to the mass rape cases in Iraq, the birth defects due to use of depleted uranium and the Burmese Buddhist massacre. This, the Centre claimed, was omitted from the edited MEMRI video.[50][51][52][53][54] Alleged translation inaccuracy See also: Tomorrow's Pioneers § Translation controversy The accuracy of MEMRI's translations are considered "usually accurate" though occasionally disputed and highly selective in what it chooses to translate and in which context it puts things,[55] as in the case of MEMRI's translation of a 2004 Osama bin Laden video, which MEMRI defended.[6][47][56][57][58] Following the 7 July 2005 London bombings, Al Jazeera invited Hani al-Sebai, an Islamist living in Britain, to take part in a discussion on the event. For one segment of the discussion in regard to the victims, MEMRI provided the following translation of al-Sebai's words:     the term civilians does not exist in Islamic religious law. Dr Karmi is sitting here, and I am sitting here, and I’m familiar with religious law. There is no such term as civilians in the modern Western sense. People are either at war or not.[59] Al-Sebai subsequently claimed that MEMRI had mistranslated his interview, and that among other errors, he had actually said:     there is no term in Islamic jurisprudence called civilians. Dr Karmi is here sitting with us, and he's very familiar with the jurisprudence. There are fighters and non-fighters. Islam is against the killing of innocents. The innocent man cannot be killed according to Islam. By leaving out the condemnation of the "killing of innocents" entirely, Mohammed El Oifi writing in Le Monde diplomatique argued that this translation left the implication that civilians (the innocent) are considered a legitimate target.[46] Several British newspapers subsequently used MEMRI's translation to run headlines such as "Islamic radical has praised the suicide bomb attacks on the capital"[60] prompting al-Sebai to demand an apology and take legal action. In his view, MEMRI's translation was also "an incitement to have me arrested by the British authorities".[61] Halim Barakat described MEMRI as a "a propaganda organization dedicated to representing Arabs and Muslims as anti-semites". Barakat claims an essay he wrote for the Al-Hayat Daily of London titled The Wild Beast that Zionism Created: Self-Destruction, was mistranslated by MEMRI and retitled as Jews Have Lost Their Humanity. Barakat further stated "Every time I wrote Zionism, MEMRI replaced the word by Jew or Judaism. They want to give the impression that I'm not criticizing Israeli policy, but that what I'm saying is anti-Semitic."[42][45][46] According to Barakat, he was subject to widespread condemnation from faculty and his office was "flooded with hatemail".[62][63] Fellow Georgetown faculty member Aviel Roshwald accused Barakat in an article he published of promoting a "demonization of Israel and of Jews".[64] Supported by Georgetown colleagues, Barakat denied the claim,[65] which Roshwald had based on MEMRI's translation of Barakat's essay.[64]

[cont'd next post]

Quote:

In 2007, CNN correspondent Atika Shubert and Arabic translators accused MEMRI of mistranslating portions of a Palestinian children's television programme.     Media watchdog MEMRI translates one caller as saying – quote – 'We will annihilate the Jews'," said Shubert. "But, according to several Arabic speakers used by CNN, the caller actually says 'The Jews are killing us.'[66][67] CNN's Glenn Beck later invited Yigal Carmon onto his program to comment on the alleged mistranslation. Carmon criticized CNN's translators understanding of Arabic stating: "Even someone who doesn't know Arabic would listen to the tape and would hear the word 'Jews' is at the end, and also it means it is something to be done to the Jews, not by the Jews. And she (Octavia Nasr) insisted, no the word is in the beginning. I said: 'Octavia, you just don't get it. It is at the end.'" Brian Whitaker, a Middle East editor for the Guardian newspaper (UK) later pointed out that the word order in Arabic is not the same as in English: "the verb comes first and so a sentence in Arabic which literally says 'Are shooting at us the Jews' means 'The Jews are shooting at us.'"[55] Naomi Sakr, a professor of Media Policy at the University of Westminster has charged that specific MEMRI mistranslations, occurring during times of international tension, have generated hostility towards Arab journalists.[68] Brian Whitaker wrote in a blog for The Guardian newspaper that in the translation of the video, showing Farfour eliciting political comments from a young girl named Sanabel, the MEMRI transcript misrepresents the segment. Farfour asks Sanabel what she will do and, after a pause says "I'll shoot", MEMRI attributed the phrase said by Farfour, ("I'll shoot"), as the girl's reply while ignoring her actual reply ("I'm going to draw a picture").[69] Whitaker and others commented that a statement uttered by the same child, ("We're going to [or want to] resist"), had been given an unduly aggressive interpretation by MEMRI as ("We want to fight"). Also, where MEMRI translated the girl as saying the highly controversial remark ("We will annihilate the Jews"), Whitaker and others, including Arabic speakers used by CNN, insist that based on careful listening to the low quality video clip, the girl is saying "Bitokhoona al-yahood", variously interpreted as, "The Jews [will] shoot us"[69] or "The Jews are killing us."[70] MEMRI stands by their translation of the show, saying: "Yes, we stand by the translation by the very words, by the context, by the syntax, and every measure of the translation."[70] In response to accusations of inaccuracies and distortion, Yigal Carmon, said:     As an institute of research, we want MEMRI to present translations to people who wish to be informed on the ideas circulating in the Middle East. We aim to reflect reality. If knowledge of this reality should benefit one side or another, then so be it. In an email debate with Carmon, Whitaker asked about MEMRI's November 2000 translation of an interview given by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem to Al-Ahram al-Arabi. One question asked by the interviewer was: "How do you deal with the Jews who are besieging al-Aqsa and are scattered around it?" which was translated as: "How do you feel about the Jews?" MEMRI cut out the first part of the reply and combined it with the answer to the next question, which, Whitaker claimed, made "Arabs look more anti-semitic than they are". Carmon admitted this was an error in translation but defended combining the two replies as both questions referred to the same subject. Carmon rejected other claims of distortion by Whitaker, saying: "it is perhaps reassuring that you had to go back so far to find a mistake... You accused us of distortion by omission but when asked to provide examples of trends and views we have missed, you have failed to answer." Carmon also accused Whitaker of "using insults rather than evidence" in his criticism of MEMRI.[6] Whitaker claims that although Memri's translations are usually accurate, they are selective and often out of context. He stated: "When errors do occur, it's difficult to attribute them to incompetence or accidental lapses... there appears to be a political motive."[55] Response by MEMRI MEMRI responds to criticism by saying that the media had a tendency to whitewash statements of Arab leaders,[7] and regularly defends its translations as being representative of actual ME viewpoints, even when the translations themselves are disputed: "MEMRI has never claimed to 'represent the view of the Arabic media', but rather to reflect, through our translations, general trends which are widespread and topical."[6]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute#Accusations_of_bias]Source[/url]

MEMRI is hardly the unbiased source for any information, something which they, themselves essentially admitted.    ::)

Adamant wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 5:14pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 3:22pm: How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers? I don't know. Do you think that a muslim is allowed to kill "aid" workers??????????????

It depends if they’re taxi drivers.

Adamant wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 5:14pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 3:22pm: How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers? I don't know. Do you think that a muslim is allowed to kill "aid" workers??????????????

It depends if they’re taxi drivers.

Karnal wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:00pm:

Adamant wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 5:14pm: [quote author=Hot_Breath link=1417564999/4#4 date=1417584172]How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers? I don't know. Do you think that a muslim is allowed to kill "aid" workers??????????????

Dilawar was a taxi driver.  Do you know who killed him?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 9:47pm:

MEMRI is hardly the unbiased source for any information

What part of the ENGLISH speaking persons vile rant was misrepresented Brian? ::)

Having learnt from the Master at troll baiting, Herbert, I thought I would throw a line out to see what troll would take the bait. Brian  ::)  appeared on the scene and attempted to discredit MEMRI without any comment on the content of the video. He also claimed that the translation was incorrect even though it was in English. The best bit was his troll mates gandy and the kernel they stuck up for the convicted terrorist.

Ignorance is bliss.

Mizanur Rahman (alias Abu Baraa, born 1983 in London, England) is a British Islamic activist of Pakistani descent. He was convicted in 2007 of charges of solicitation to murder and sentenced to four years in jail. He was released from jail in late 2010 and re-arrested for terror-related offenses in September 2014.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizanur_Rahman

Come in suckers. ::) ::) ::)

Here is the Guardian just for you Brian ::)

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/03/siddeeq-academy-radical-islam-group

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 10:09pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:00pm: Adamant wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 5:14pm: [quote author=Hot_Breath link=1417564999/4#4 date=1417584172]How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers? I don't know. Do you think that a muslim is allowed to kill "aid" workers?????????????? Dilawar was a taxi driver.  Do you know who killed him?   ::)

Looks like Christians killed him.  Nasty American Christians.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 1:34pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:09pm: Karnal wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 10:00pm: Adamant wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 5:14pm: [quote author=Hot_Breath link=1417564999/4#4 date=1417584172]How representative do you think he is of general Muslim opinion on the issue of killing taxi drivers? I don't know. Do you think that a muslim is allowed to kill "aid" workers?????????????? Dilawar was a taxi driver.  Do you know who killed him?   ::) Looks like Christians killed him.  Nasty American Christians.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

That explains it then. He must have been a Muslim taxi driver after all.

Kill them.