Be careful what you translate
The UK blog Harry’s Place is being sued by Hamas — or at least Hamas’ British sister organization, the British Muslim Initiative — for translating into English a story on al-Jazeera’s Arabic-language website.
Considering I myself recently translated a story from al-Jazeera and posted it on this blog, this story is especially alarming.
At issue is the blog’s recent translation of an al-Jazeera article that described Mohammad Sawalha, president of the British Muslim Initiative, using the phrase “evil Jew” in a speech.
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”.
After the Harry’s Place translation appeared, the BMI sent Harry’s Place a letter, in which he threatened legal action alleging that the blog had “deliberately skewed” its translation of the al-Jazeera story.
The BMI — and the al-Jazeera reporter who wrote the original story — insisted that the word was simply “misspelled” and that that Mr. Sawalha had actually meant “Jewish lobby,” not “evil Jew.” There was a bit of skepticism over that:
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”.
As Harry’s Place points out, it would be believable if the word “اللوبي ”, “lobby” was misspelled as “الوبي” (simply missing the initial “ل” and producing gibberish, a meaningless word). But to have “mistyped” it by adding “ل” at the end of the word, the al-Jazeera reporter produced not only an actual word, but a word that fits perfectly in the context of the sentence. It takes quite a bit of faith to swallow the explanation that it was simply a misplaced keystroke.
The BMI is claiming that Harry’s Place has “chosen a malevolent interpretation of a meaningless word.” But the word was clearly not “meaningless,” and the truth is that Harry’s Place simply translated — correctly — the original version of the story that appeared on the al-Jazeera website.
Harry’s Place also finds it “astonishing” that BMI is offended that the “controversial” translation implies that it is a racist organization when, as the blog points out, Hamas is a proudly, openly, and violently racist organization.
In addition:
It used to be the case that groups like the Muslim Association of Britain and its sister organisations, the British Muslim Initative and the Cordoba Foundation, would angrily deny that the were the British franchise of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, so it seems, they’re happy that the close links between these groups, and their members, be known. What Mr Sawalha is objecting to is not the reporting of his activism in Hamas. It is the suggestion that he is a racist. That is very telling.
Indeed.
Guess I better be careful what I translate from now on.
Perhaps Mr Sawalha and his sympathizers will recognize this phrase:
“Lan astaslem”
Go_fish:
Nice. I like it.
All the hate, how sad. Its the same hate that I see right here in America. In fact, I see regularly a White American young man with a swastika tattooed on his body. Asked him why he tattooed this symbol on his body for everyone to see and he was very honest and stated that it was because he hated Jews.America is filled with White citizens who hate Jews and Blacks as much as Hamas. But, this ugly truth and the White groups here who hate, our local governments sweep it under the rug. There is a lot of hate in the hearts of a great many Whites in the St. Louis metro area against Jews and Blacks.
There a have been violence against Blacks in the St. Louis metro area with these racists being protected from being labelled and charged with racial hate crimes. Their violent hate crimes are usually covered up by authorities. Hate is a poison that is very destructive and dangerous and authorities not calling it what it is are doing these violent racists no favors and are also bringing judgment upon themselves for turning a blind eye to it.
We can’t control or do much about the hate in the Middle East, but much can be done here in America concerning violate acts due to racial hatred. Americans are such hypocrites, we don’t want hate crime laws here, THESE AMERICAN RACISTS ARE TERRORISTS, but we want to drop bombs on Iran because they hate and may hurt or kill us and say that they want to wipe Israel off the face of the map.
White racists in America say things that are just as bad concerning Jews and Blacks. I say first acknowledge and clean up America’s own closets before digging into other countries closets. Maybe if we were not such hyporites people all over the world would not have so little respect for us and others would not hate us so much.
D-Walker. So only white people in America are racist? What about the hate Rev. Wright was spewing from the pulpit? Does that count? Sounded pretty racist to me.
In regards to the gentelman wearing the NAZI symbol, I agree it’s disgusting and deplorable.
GTB,
You a very twisted person in much denial if you are attempting to compare Rev. Wright to a racist.
I will say as fact that White Americans have more of a history of racism and more of a history of causing harm and violence against others here in America due to ones race or religion. Do you think otherwise?
D-Walker. I will grant you the point that in the past white america has been guilty of what you have said. Being in my mid-30s, I couldn’t fathom the thought process of fire bombing a church, or house, or hanging someone because of skin color. I would guess that about 95% of white america agrees with that.
Having said that, I sense that the underlying tone in you earlier post is that white america, and white america alone, is responsible for violence in America. That simply isn’t the case. And you make it seem that only whites can look at another race and feel racism. Wrong. There are plenty of people of all races creeds and colors that don’t lke another person simply because of their skin tone.
In an perfect utopian society, everyone would hold hands and play nice. But that’s not reality. Since the begining of time, race has been a fator in the social fabric of society — and will continue to be.
And I am not twisted because I think Rev. Wright is a racist. Just because someone does good deeds for a particular segment of society — black america — doesn’t mean that person isn’t racist. Or are you saying only white people can be racist?
Good point D. Walker,
It is really sad to see this kind of hatred from Americans. The kind of hatred that leads an employee of a major newspaper to declare that an organization is the moral equivalent of Hamas simply because that organization has the audacity to sue for something they thought was a racially insensitive remark. I guess we can just lump “them” all together as “terrorists” whenever “they” do something we dislike.
And Alex, I’m very sad that this needs to be explained to you, but just because a group sues for being called racist but not for suggested links to Hamas does not mean that they are admitting they are a part of Hamas. By that logic if someone claimed that you were a member of the Weather Underground and you decided not to sue them you would be tacitly admitting that you’re part of the organization.
Adam,
I’m also very sad that I need to explain this to you, but if you’d actually read the story, you’d know that the British Muslim Initiative does not deny its links with Hamas.
- HP documents the Hamas-BMI connection very clearly — a fact not disputed in the resulting letter from BMI threatening legal action:
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/04/legal-threats-from-hamasbritish-muslim-initiative/
[BMI's] 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 (http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news_lite.php?id=205496) who once expressed a desire to commit a suicide bombing.
- The London Times has also reported on Mr. Sawalha’s extensive ties with Hamas:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article513868.ece
- From the original HP article that started the controversy: http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/02/british-muslim-initiative-we-resent-the-evil-jew-in-britain/
“Sawalha was also one of the subjects of the BBC Panorama documentary (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/5234586.stm) on Hamas fundraising in the United Kingdom [better formatted here]. That documentary made the following claims:
* Sawalha is said to have master minded much of Hamas’ political and military strategy.
* Sawalha was one of the senior activists in the dawah portals of Hamas. He was involved, let’s say, with the background of the finance, the logistic assistance.
* In London, Sawalha is alleged to have directed funds, both for Hamas’ armed wing, and for spreading its missionary dawah”
Again: the Hamas link is not what is being challenged — it’s the allegation that BMI is racist.
I quoted this in the original article above, but again:
“It used to be the case that groups like the Muslim Association of Britain and its sister organisations, the British Muslim Initative and the Cordoba Foundation, would angrily deny that the were the British franchise of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, so it seems, they’re happy that the close links between these groups, and their members, be known. What Mr Sawalha is objecting to is not the reporting of his activism in Hamas. It is the suggestion that he is a racist.”
BMI is offended because the Harry’s Place story quoted an al-Jazeera story that originally cited their senior executive as referring to “evil Jews,” which obviously would lead many people to believe that the BMI is racist. Whether or not it was a “misspelling” on the part of the al-Jazeera reporter, the fact remains that the original al-Jazeera story DID in fact read that way. In my opinion, the BMI has no case.
Alex, BMI is an organization, which means that by claiming that it is equivalent to Hamas you are claiming much more then saying that one person in the organization had ties to Hamas in the early 90s. You are essentially claiming that everyone involved in the organization is a terrorist-supporter. However, just looking at the link you provided for BMI, it is clear that the organization does nothing remotely similar to Hamas. It is a political group that uses tactics like advocacy and litigation, rather than violence, to achieve its ends. Your decision to label it a terrorist group simply because it is suing a right-wing blogger you agree with is nothing more than than the intimidation tactics and thuggery we’ve seen over and over from conservatives after 9-11.
Two big, big problems:
1) I never claimed BMI was a “terrorist group.” I said 1) they were a Hamas sister organization (they are), and that 2) I think based on the facts of this case, they have no basis for their impending lawsuit against Harry’s Place.
You say that BMI is different than Hamas because Hamas uses violence and BMI uses only “advocacy and litigation, rather than violence, to achieve its ends.” But you fail to mention that both organizations are working towards the same ends. Mr. Sawalha wouldn’t even condemn Hamas’ tactics when he was asked if he supported them, saying he had “no comment on the question of military activity.” The fact that the two organizations use different methods does not mean they have “no connection” — they clearly do.
In addition, I think if the ties to Hamas were significant enough for the London Times to put the headline “Hamas link to London mosque” on a story about Mr. Sawalha and the BMI, then that’s pretty good reason to think that Mr. Sawalha and the BMI have strong ties to that organization.
2) Harry’s Place is not a “right-wing” or “conservative” blog — it’s actually a left-of-center blog. It’s founder and namesake was a former communist member and activist in Great Britain in the 80s and 90s. Harry’s Place is described as representing a moderate “social-democratic” worldview, according to it’s wikipedia page. It’s definitely not Tory (the British equivalent of “conservative”/”right-wing” in the U.S.)