One argument I have heard is that the Arab states are not ready for democracy and no one wants democracy. Well, I refuse to believe that. They said the same things about Germany and Japan after WWII. So, the issue should be, how do we support people like this.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2004/11/11/arafat-abbas-succession-041111.html Let's ignore that "under the auspices of the israeli occupation" who looks like dark sarcasm.
http://www.memri.org/aboutus.html mmmm FOX news saying they are wonderful is not the best advertising you can get. Anyway it's good to hear all the POV. I was just looking for infos about possible bias.
Selective Memri - Brian Whitaker investigates whether the 'independent' media institute that translates the Arabic newspapers is quite what it seems It seems I was right to be suspicious. An article talking about palestinian supposed first elections ('under the auspices of israeli occupation') did ring the warning bell.
So basically, it is all a bunch of neocons, AKA "bagel snarfing warmongers." The Jewish conspiracy again. MEMRI's Israeli connections have been long known as Israel is the only Western country that has depended on knowing what was going on in the Arab media for 55 years. OK. As for the 1996 election comment: (1) Israeli troops were all over the West Bank at the time (as now) and besides, a Palestinian election has been part of every peace plan since Camop David in 1978. (2) The 1996 election was very flawed and controlled by Arafat. With Arafat gone, the elction process is more open, and maybe that is what he meant. (3) The comment was made by the speaker. Maybe he forgot about the 1996 election, maybe he thought the 1996 election was flawed. In any event, MEMRI is a tool to translate the Arab media. Pretty much the only one. Yes, the organization translates a lot of bad things. But they also translate a lot of articles and calls for reform and democratization in the Arab world. Calls made by Arabs and Moslems. In any event, some Arab radicals have a tendency to say one thing in the Western media (English and French languages) and something entirely different in the Arab media. Arafat, for example, was notorious for being conciliatory and calling for talks in English, while calling for increased "resistence" in Arabic. FInally, let me ask you this. MEMRI claims it is just translating articles. If MEMRI was so anti-Arab that it is making things up, why make up articles about Arab liberals calling for democracy and free elections? Wouldn't be in the interest of those horrible Jews controlling MEMRI to print only articles shouting "kill the Jews" and "death to people from Sardinia" to make Europeans and Westerns think there was no hope for the Arab lands?
Selective Memri - Brian Whitaker investigates whether the 'independent' media institute that translates the Arabic newspapers is quite what it seems
That's fine and undersatndable -- all things have biases and I think MEMRI's agenda is well known. However, MEMRI fills a need, namely that some of the movers and shalers in the Arab world (and people connected to the mvoers and shakers) have a tendency to say one thing to the Western press and another in the Arabic press. Also, MEMRI publishes a lot of of transltions of articles by Arab democrats and liberals calling for reform and democracy. If MEMRI was trying to turn the West against the Arab states, why publish those articles? Why not simply publish articles calling for death on Sardinians and other Westerners?
MEMRI cherry picks. They present the Arab world at its most extreme and racist. But the fact is that there are quite a few cherries to pick out there. It also provides a useful tool to show that the "we're just criticizing Israeli policy" argument is a shell game. And as noted, they do not simply demonize Arabs, they highlight articles and columnists that support reform in the Arab world. Anyone with half a brain knows MEMRI's agenda, Whittiker has a complete non-story on his hands if he thinks he's educating congressmen or state department officials about MEMRI. More accurately, he's playing to anti-Semites like Sardinia who like to have their conceptions of evil Zionists manipulating public opinion massaged. It wasn't MEMRI that used the term "under the auspices of Israeli occupation," it was the article writer. And furthermore, he wasn't referring to the 1996 elections, he was referring to the upcoming elections in January. Perhaps some people do not think that these elections will be free and fair, this man obviously does. Take it up with the author, not the translator.
The author overlooks the fact that there have been free and general elections in Lebannon....although, under the auspices of Syrian occupation.