Hamas official says they will repeat Oct. 7 attacks
news.yahoo.com
Quote: "We must teach Israel a lesson, and we will do it again and again. The Al-Aqsa Deluge [the name Hamas gave its 7 October onslaught - ed.] is just the first time, and there will be a second, a third, a fourth. Will we have to pay a price? Yes, and we are ready to pay it. We are called a nation of martyrs, and we are proud to sacrifice martyrs."
You are viewing a single comment
MEMRI may have an agenda, but they literally just translate public statements from Arabic to English. If you think there's an inaccuracy in the translation, please let me know.
Edit: Someone here is implying that Hamas official Ghazi Hamad didn't say what he said, so let me also share these additional links:
Link to the original unedited broadcast
Link to the source article (Dated Yesterday)
Link to the Reporter's bio
Link to an English Interview with Ghazi Hamad on NBC in which he defended his words and reiterated, "What do you want us to do? To stop? No, I am talking about we want to continue (fighting) against the occupation."
Go to the Wikipedia, click on Reception, load the archived sources 40 thru 45 and then ask yourself how credible MEMRI is.
How Memri translates is here in the debate on source 45:
In your Special Dispatch 151, for instance, you translated an interview given by the mufti of Jerusalem to al-Ahram al-Arabi, shortly after the start of the Palestinian uprising.
One question the interviewer asked was: "How do you deal with the Jews who are besieging al-Aqsa and are scattered around it?" Memri translated this as: "How do you feel about the Jews?" - which is a different question. That left you with a reply in Arabic which didn't fit your newly-concocted question. So you cut out the first part of the mufti's reply and combined what was left with part of his answer to another question.
Wow, thanks for the lesson!
For sure. I love Wikipedia and hate genocide ♥
Wikipedia isn't without bias, either.
No but their bias is at least sourced hehe
Is it?
Yes
Using sources to justify bias isn't the same thing as referencing the source of your bias.
As it's referenced you can look at references for bias.
Very true, thats why its great to check out primary sources. Note this yahoo article never out right says the translation is from MEMRI. The author listed by yahoo is actually a different newspaper Ukrainska Pravda. They attribute quotes to The Times of Israel, which does actually disclose the source of translation as MEMRI. The author on pravda.UA is listed as editor Iryna Balachukwho very clearly spun the original article. The times of Israel actually shows the headline itself is paraphrasing a tweet by MEMRI. The whole chain of plagiarism is to legitimize propaganda by getting it over to yahoo while hiding the source of the quotes knowing most people wont dig so deeply into it.
If you do happen to dig a little for sources and havent heard of the "Middle East Media Research Institute", the name itself doesnt betray any bias. It is a psy-op and it has been since its inception, which is very easily gleaned by reading the sources in Wikipedia if you havent yet seen their works over the years showcasing the absolute craziest moments in Arab TV.
FYI, that may be an example a Wikipedia editor found, but it is unrelated to this event. Some people will do anything to hide who Hamas is, up to and including denying their documented words and actions. I also shared these additional links:
Link to the original unedited broadcast
Link to the source article (Dated Yesterday)
Link to the Reporter’s bio
Link to an English Interview with Ghazi Hamad on NBC in which he defended his words and reiterated, “What do you want us to do? To stop? No, I am talking about we want to continue (fighting) against the occupation.”
Please have a look for yourself