Here we see the author explaining the logic behind MEMRI and, while he does not strongly make this point, the true reason why MEMRI exists seems obvious: who highlights and condemns casual hatred in the Muslim world? In Israel and the West, Israelis and Westerners condemn themselves. In fact, the articles and op-eds and websites members here use to reinforce their stereotype of non-Muslims are by non-Muslims or Westerners.
There is no equivalent to a liberal counterpart to Haaretz, SPLC, etc., etc in the Muslim world. The only reason we know an Ohio based imam recently appeared on an Arabic satellite television channel calling for the blood of Jews is because of MEMRI.
Frankly, MEMRI is disliked because the Antisemites, conspiracy nutters and all around bigots can't comfortably stew in their hate with MEMRI doing the job of non-existent ME liberals in exposing what they say.
Perhaps it's merely a coincidence why we never get stories from these type of members about extremism on their side? Or am I to believe if American churches call for the killing of religious groups these members wouldn't pounce on a story like that?
In an article originally published at canthink.co.il and later translated by Haaretz, Dr. Assaf David of the Truman Institute for Peace wrote a wide-ranging critique of the work of MEMRI, arguing that its work presents a “one-dimensional choice of anti-Semitic articles, which fits squarely and conveniently with Western interpretations of political Islam.”
His evidence deals primarily with MEMRI’s analysis of Jordan. “While its coverage of Israeli affairs is far from balanced, anti-Semitic articles are not common.” He goes on to show that MEMRI selectively chooses articles which illustrate Islamic fundamentalism, while not sufficiently noting that the “Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood’s daily had published, from time to time, articles calling for the upholding of international agreements, including the peace treaty with Israel.”
ARGUABLY, IN a perfect world, it would be best to have at our fingertips translations of every article that appears in the foreign press – from Russia, China and the neighboring Arab states. MEMRI obviously sets out to show the more interesting, shocking, things that take place in neighboring countries. This is not relegated to anti-Israel statements. One video showed an overweight chef hosting a friendly cooking show who was constantly being abused by Shi’ite callers and who finally told them that had Saddam Hussein lived he would have dealt with them.
Assaf David and others who complain about MEMRI make a mistake in their reasoning. They assert that to show the anti- Semitic articles and TV segments that issue forth from Egypt, Jordan and elsewhere feeds Western stereotypes of Islam. They once again want us to view the Islamic world through a rosy lens and provide excuses for it that no other part of the world gets.
Take David’s analysis that “anti-Semitic articles are not common.” Let’s say “not common” means that there is not more than one anti-Semitic article a month in a major newspaper. Now let’s say we applied that to Germany, France or the US. If, just once a month, the New York Times published an op-ed or cartoon that was deeply anti-Semitic, would that not point to a disturbing acceptance of hatred in American public life. One doesn’t need incitement everyday to reflect a problem in society. Just a low level of incitement in the mainstream media points to widespread acceptance...
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists ... ?id=280429
