[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
9/11 See other 9/11 Articles Title: Bin Laden - The video of the year: Evidences or manipulation? "Monitor" reveals: US government works with wrong translation On the 20th December, 2001 the ARD "monitor" about the bin Laden's video which had published the US government few days before with big propaganda expenditure reported the political magazine. We have on the 15th December documented the most important passages of the video in the version, as it was officially spread by Washington, (" An amateur's video should prove guilt of Osama bin Laden unquestionably "). It was the 485-th broadcasting of monitor and last under the direction of Klaus Bednarz to whom we owe already so many critical broadcastings. Bin Laden's video: Wrong translation as an evidence? Report: Georg Restle, Ekkehard Sieker Klaus Bednarz: " And also the propaganda war goes on. Last week the American government in English translation presented an amateur's video which shows bin Laden in the circle of followers, and according to president Bush ' destructive Schuldeingeständnis' bin Laden should be. MONITOR has procured the Arabian text version of the videotape for itself from the American foreign ministry and from independent and sworn in Arabian like German linguists and orientalists allow to analyze. And see there: From the US government of the world public presented English translation is manipulated not only partially, but contains even mistake. A report of Ekkehard Sieker and Georg Restle.” Main news of US television broadcasting station CBS on 13.12. Top announcement: The video of bin Laden, sent by the Pentagon in TV stations worldwide. For the presenter is certain: This is the unequivocal proof of the guilt of bin Laden for the terrorist attacks from the 11th September. However, in many Arabian states scepticism spread. Does this video really show a confession of bin Laden, does it contain beyond all doubt culprit's knowledge of the Al Qaeda leader? Power this video the war in Afghanistan to the certainly fair war against a mass murderer? For the US government the case is unequivocal. George W. Bush: " I knew that the videotape would be a destructive confession of guilt for this rogue. " However, what shows the video really? The English translation from the Pentagon seems unequivocal. Here bin Laden accuses itself quite obviously of the action and claims to have been informed already in Ahead about the action expiry. However, is this translation generally correct? Dr. Abdel El M. Husseini, Arabist: " I have checked the translation of the Pentagon carefully. This translation is very problematic. She is at the most important places which should prove the culpability of bin Laden, not identically with the Arabian tone. " Example 1: According to Pentagon translation, says bin Laden: " We have calculated the number of the dead people of the enemy in Ahead. " " In Ahead ", on English: " in advance ". Dr. Murad Alami, certificate translator: " ' In @' is not in it. It is wrong. If one goes out from the original version of the Arabian, and there are no misunderstandings which one cannot understand basically. " In addition, the translators agree in the fact that the sentence in the original precalculating tarpaulins or even on no account Calculate to the number of the dead people includes. Example 2: According to Pentagon translation says bin Laden: " We had received news on the preceding Thursday that the event would take place during this day. " "Preceding": "previous". Dr. Murad Alami, certificate translator: " 'Preceding' it does not exist. The postsentence that this event would take place during the day or during this day is in this Arabian original version not herauszuhören. "Dr. Murad Alami, certificate translator: " This translation with 'us' is wrong. ' It became from them one asked, says in the Arabian original version which I have heard. What comes afterwards, in sentence or post sentence is incomprehensible. " Three examples of many which allow to call into question the evidential value of the video. Thus this also sees the Hamburg Islam scientist professor Rotter. Prof. Gernot Rotter, Islam scientist and Arabist, Asia Africa institute, university Hamburg: " No matter whether bin Laden itself was involved, organizationally, actively in the posters or not: This tape is of a so bad quality that it is not to be understood by sections at all. And that what is to be understood often from the connection has torn that one can construct from it no evidence. The American translators who have monitored the tapes and have transcribed have written obviously at many places things in which they wanted to hear which listen, however, thus - also after repeated ones, are not to be heard." Guilty or innocently? If US government bin Laden of the action wants to find guilty, it must present better proofs. Klaus Bednarz: " In the war the truth dies as the first. This counts to all sides. " Text of the contribution of the homepage: http: // www.monitor.de. There the single contributions can be also downloaded as a pdf file. Use this http://translation2.paralink.com/ to tranlate anything on www.monitor.de. that won't tranlate corectly with google and find the retranlated transcipt of the tape!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|
||