about Adam Mynott’s shoddy report and two-way on the BBC Six O’Clock News, here’s a transcript of what was said, and video of the start of the Six, complete with textual annotations:
Adam Mynott: “Gillian Gibbons insensitivity… a good natured
protest… smiling faces… almost theatrical…” – Yeah, right.
Sian: Good evening, and welcome to the Six O’Clock News. The British teacher, Gillian Gibbons, imprisoned in Sudan for letting her children call a teddy bear Mohammed, has been moved to another jail for her own safety, that’s according to her lawyer. Around a thousand protestors have been demonstrating against her fifteen-day sentence, calling it too lenient. Some have even said she should be executed.
Ben: Tonight there is a glimmer of hope for Gillian Gibbons, the Labour peer, Lord Ahmed, is on his way to Sudan to try to press for her early release. He’s leading a private delegation, which is expected to meet the Sudanese president. Our correspondent Adam Mynott, is in Khartoum for us tonight, Adam…
Adam: Ben, yes, Gillian Gibbons first day serving her sentence for insulting islam by allowing her school children to name a teddy bear islam, eh, to name a teddy bear Mohammed, I beg your pardon, er, has been, er, a day of, er, silence from the Sudanese authorities here and the British, but a day of noise and anger on the streets of Khartoum.
Fluffed lines Adam? That’s the trouble with ‘going live! We then cut to Adam’s filmed report:
Adam: Insults to islam in Sudan cannot go unpunished and unprotested, and hundreds poured out of Friday prayers in Khartoum to vent their anger on the streets.
Apoplectic man: We cannot accept it from anybody. If they can do it in Europe, they cannot do it here in Sudan.
Adam: But this was, for the most part, a good natured protest.
Good natured? What was all that angry ranting and waving of machetes and swords we saw about then?
Banners were waved and sticks shaken, but the smiling faces showed this was not a furious outpouring of anger.
Emphasis from the original. Smiling faces? Not Angry? What about those swords and machetes Adam? What about the angry shouting and mob tension we saw? You were there, weren’t you?
However, there’s no question that some had been offended by Gillian Gibbons insensitivity
Gillian Gibbons insensitivity? How about ‘perceived insensitivity’? Or, more accurately, ‘islamic hyper sensitivity’?
Angry youth: Our prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him, we love him very much, and we have a big, uh, great red line in talking about him…
Red lines? An interesting choice of idiom. I wonder where he picked that up.
Adam: And she crossed the red line?
Ah, could’ve been from Adam…
Angry youth: Yes, yes.
Adam: Most people in Khartoum were not up in arms. The court case has not received much media coverage, many had heard little of it, and some Sudanese even felt the prosecution of the 54-year old school teacher had been an over reaction.
Considerable diplomatic pressure is still being applied by Britain on the Sudanese government here in Khartoum, and I understand that the British authorities feel that there is still room for a compromise where Gillian Gibbons can be released ahead of serving her full fifteen day sentence.
The street protest lasted a full two hours, and it dissolved as quickly as it had started. It had the look of an orchestrated, almost theatrical event, as the streets echoed to the sounds of public demonstration [Audio of angry ranting inset]…
A theatrical event, ‘almost’ – with that ‘almost’ covering a multitude of spins.
Adam: Gillian Gibbons began her term in an overcrowded women’s jail in the capital, but it’s understood she’s now been moved to another location.
We then cut back to Adam, live:
Adam: And we understand, according to sources here, that she was moved for her own safety, and we’ve also heard tonight that diplomatic pressure has been ratcheted up a notch with the news that Lord Ahmed is leading a parliamentary delegation to Britain, which has set off. Back to you Ben in London.
Ben: Okay Adam, many thanks.
Curiously, the BBC Ten O’Clock News report of the same past events took a quite different line. Mynott’s report was thoroughly remixed, complete with previously unseen footage and audio and the lame Mynott two-way was dispensed with, in favour of a more rigourous analysis from Frank Gardner in the studio, revealing along the way that Lord Ahmed’s group also includes Baroness Warsi, the Conservative peer – an interesting fact entirely omitted from the Six. Here’s a clip of the relevant part of the Ten O’Clock News:
Remixed: an improved report of the same events. Most curious.
Many thanks for posting this – the spin is startlingly obvious. Mynott must be a complete imbecile if he thought people would be fooled by the description of an armed and chanting mob as ‘good-natured’ with ‘smiling faces’! I wonder how may of his other reports peddle such lies. There must have been some eyebrows raised somewhere at the BBC which forced the remix.
I’m sorry to say that I suspect Frank Gardner is right – Gillian will be released to Lord Ahmed by Sudan as a means of thumbing their nose at Britain. They know full well the that this is the man who earlier this year slammed Salmon Rushdie as equivalent to the 9/11 terrorists and charged him with having ‘blood on his hands’ by ‘insulting’ Islam. Now we can look forward to days of BBC propaganda telling us how Islam is such a wonderfully merciful religion, and promoting Lord Ahmed as an humanitarian idol.
I’m new to this site, but it is absolutely clear to me that this case proves the importance of your work.
Matthew, just to bring to your attention, the BBC also sought to rebrand the 7/7 mass-murderers as “militants” and not terrorists.
NEVER FORGET!
Yes, it’s a cultural bias; and it’s a bias so closed-minded that it doesn’t conceive of any idea being rational except those that trash anyone to the right of Rosie O’Donnell or John Kerry. It’s a bias so warped that it accepts any slander on any Party not on the Left. I had a cousin who was a correspondent of BBC Radio; half of my extended family is on That Side; I know them well. Come out of your rabbit hole of denial.
As for the teacher and the teddy:
from now on, all Presidential pets will be named Mohammed. Or maybe just Mo for short.
“a good natured
protest… smiling faces… almost theatrical…”
I’m betting al-Beeb wouldn’t use such terms to describe a National Front or KKK gathering.
Personally, I wouldn’t call the despatch of a Labour peer to Sudan as “ratcheting up the pressure”, unless it was an enormous ratchet with millions of tiny notches barely distinguishable from another.
Still conditioned by ‘moral equivalence’, the BBC doesn’t see what’s wrong with its reporting of Sudan:
” The teddy bear sentence was not disproportionate ” (Daniel Finklestein) –
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2007/11/the-teddy-bear.html
It is a shame that there is no video of the BBC 1PM news from yesterday which is when I made my first comment about Mynott.
That was when he claimed that there were only about 200 protesters and that it was all rather chummy.
What alerted me to this BBC spin was the reporter that SKY NEWS used (an independent) who was on a mobile phone and had said he had to leave the area as the crowd were making cutting gestures to their throats at HIM.
Very different from the smiling friendly faces the BBC would have us believe.
This just proves you can’t trust the BBC reporting. It also sounds like even some of the BBC don’t trust their own reporters.
Do we know about Mynott’s background? Is he a Nu Labour luvvie or Guardian reader type?
Why blame Mynott? He’s just another BBC serf, towing the lefty ideology because his livelihood depends upon it.
Why not blame the producer and editor of BBC news? They are after all the ones that shaped the report. No doubt briefed Mynott with the flavour of his report. Or are we expected to believe that reporters trump News producers and editors with their reports nowadays.
Has anything really changed in Sudan since Kitchener was there ?
1. “Gillian Gibbons began her term in an overcrowded women’s jail in the capital, but it’s understood she’s now been moved to another location.”
To many women not wearing veils, or rape victims, waiting for the lash before finishing their sentences?
2. I read a report (I think it was AP) quoting the judge a saying that his decision would be based upon what the intent was. He then finds her guilty?
3. “Why not blame the producer and editor of BBC news? They are after all the ones that shaped the report.”
I agree. The editors are the main ratbags here. Nothing woule get on if it did not meet their high ethical standards. Live broadcasts would b followed up with an apology or disclamer if anthing appropriate was broadcast.
4. Why has the BBC not interviewed the UK equivelent of the NAG’s (National Organization of Gals). The feminists seem rather subdued. There was a time when the Redraves of the world would be marching in the streets over this. I suppose Cheri Blair is holding because it may effect hubby’s work in the Middle-East.
Buy Mynott’s first report at 1PM was done witohut any editing. It was a live piece from a studio. The Sky report was from a reporter AT THE SCENE.
I also agree with the comments above about the leftie feminists. Why so quiet?
AS much as I hate Ms Clinton at least she’s had the “balls” to stick it to the Saudi’s about the girl that was gang raped.
Mind you the usual suspects in Nu Labour (like Harpie Harman) have got other things on their minds at the moment.
oh and latest update from Liberty homepage. Still nothing on the case in the Sudan or Saudi Arabia. So much for Human Rights there then Shami?
As always when Al Beeb feels that their pet religion has scored an own goal and is at risk of being ‘misunderstood’ by the masses, they scramble various factions of the Beeb to find something – anything – from the mouths of muslims condemning their own faith.
No mean feat by anyone’s standards. But this time they’ve put BBC Monitoring onto the case. A division of the Beeb that quite probably employs the beloved talents of John Reith.
So where do you think BBC Monitoring found proof that the Sudanese condemn their own government for all this?
Sudanese newspapers perhaps?
No.
Random web blogs by Sudanese teenagers. (Well those Sudanese teenagers westernized enough to be maintaining blogs in English anyway.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7119391.stm
Yup. It’s all okay. Everything is in order. The BBC have found at least 2 blogs of Sudanese citizens condemning the ‘Teddy Bear Scandal’. So that proves conclusively that muslims aren’t as militant as we thought they were. They think just like us see!
Meanwhile here’s a take on the story you won’t see from Al Beeb, because it’s from the “Sudan Tribune”. Hardly an 18 year old wanna be D.J web blog I know, but it was the best I could do.
http://www.passionofthepresent.com/
“November 28, 2007 (PARIS) — Sudan Tribune was flooded with angry emails following the verdict on a British teacher accused by Sudan of insulting Muslims. The primary source of the emails appears to be Britain.
(GIF)
Sudan Tribune
Mohamed Nagi, Sudan Tribune editor in chief, expressed regret at “the profanity and hatred incited by these emails”.
“The Sudanese people are the daily victims of the mentality that led to the imprisonment of Gibbons. The regime encourages this line of thought” Nagi said
Gibbons was charged on Wednesday with insulting Islam, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs because of the toy’s name. Under Sudan’s penal code, she could have faced 40 lashes, a fine, or up to one year in jail.
In court, Judge Mohamed Youssef listened to two accounts — one from school secretary Sarah Khawad, who filed the first complaint about the teddy bear’s name, and one from the official who has been investigating the case, court sources said.
“While it is understandable that people feel outraged by the verdict, it is inexcusable to direct these feelings in this obscene manner” Nagi said.
“Sudan Tribune represents the fight against extremism and fanaticism and preaches for peaceful coexistence and tolerance in the Sudan. This has been and will continue to be our mission” he added.”
Reg Hammer,
Yup. It’s all okay. Everything is in order. The BBC have found at least 2 blogs of Sudanese citizens condemning the ‘Teddy Bear Scandal’. So that proves conclusively that muslims aren’t as militant as we thought they were. They think just like us see!
Yes, I saw that and I got the same impression as you. I also noticed that the BBC only published comments sent to the blogs, not the bloggers’ own opinions.
Did anyone else hear the Sudan embassy guy on Radio 5 yesterday AM explaining that toy teddy bears don’t exist in Islamic culture because bears are regarded as vicious wild animals?
Completely accepted by the culturally cringing beeboid hack of course.
However, on the BBC website there’s a pic of a veiled muslim lady buying a teddy (bear not lingerie) at a Sudanese street market.
Also, someone on LGF has dug out the “Adam the Muslim Prayer Bear” link – yours for £7.99 – describes as “an ideal learing tool for young muslims” and he says “Allah Akbar” (although he is mysteriously “discontinued” at the moment).
http://www.simplyislam.com/iteminfo.asp?Item=56174
Does anyone else get the impression that these cultural sensitivities are invented on demand whenever political considerations require it?
Does anyone else get the impression that these cultural sensitivities are invented on demand whenever political considerations require it?
Yes, and often it seems to be simply a matter of Muslims testing Western resolve to see how much they can get away with – like objecting to a work colleague having a tissue dispenser in the shape of a pig on her desk or insisting on teaching children through a veil.
I heard the guy going on about bears on the World Service on Thursday. He seemed to be mocking a culture that would regard bears as cuddly.
I was listening to the Jeremy Vine show (preesented by Matthew Bannister) and he had two muslim guests both agreeing with each other. NO guests to challenge what they were saying, and Bannister himself adopted a deferential tone when interviewing them. There was the usual stuff about Islamophobia and how they are all victims etc etc, and the media only reporting the negative aspects of Islam.
Yes, you naughty media, please ignore a woman rape victim being sentenced to 200 lashes for having the audacity to sit in a car with a man, and a teacher jailed over the naming of a cuddly toy.
Do you remember when Fatso Prescott got caugh shagging his secretary?
Where was the Nu Labour sisterhood then? Not one of them thought to condemn Prescott for a) cheating on his wife and b) having sex with a junior employee
Any Tory or Manager of a large firm would have been slaughtered by the likes of Harpie Harman.
Same with Bill Clinton. The Nu Labour feminists love him. For what? Cheating on his wife?
So I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that the Nu Labour feminists haven’t said a word against Islamic traditions that treat women like second class citizens.
I guess at the end of the day so long as Muslims vote for them in large numbers that’s fine.
Oh and if you really want a laugh you should take a listen to George Galloway on Talksport Radio. Last night was a classic.
It’s all the fault of the right wing press (I kid you not) for stiring this story up?
Oh really? Was the Teddy supplied by Rupert Murdoch?
Galloway was on fine form defending Muslims for this “silly story”
Galloway is both a thug and an ignoramus: nothing in the world would induce me to listen to a programme of his. Fortunately, he will be out of Parliament at the next election, and his ‘Respect’ party has broken up in schism (even members of his own party thought he was too much of an Islamist!).
I suppose we should be grateful the BBC haven’t given him the same opportunity for self-promotion.
Rob:¨ Personally, I wouldn’t call the despatch of a Labour peer to Sudan as “ratcheting up the pressure”, unless it was an enormous ratchet with millions of tiny notches barely distinguishable from another.¨
Have you seen him? He is probably going to sit on the Sudanees government.
Of course the Sudan crowd waving weapons were smiling: they saw a BBC camera crew and knew they’d get great coverage, kind words and complete support for their poisonous ideas.
Thanks Beeb for letting me pay for this.
Anyone else read this BOLLOCKS by Amber Henshaw?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7123517.stm
I loved the quotes that the protest had been “pre planned” because the signs were printed? No shit. You mena they have COMPUTERS in Sudan?
Really? So that’s where our aid money goes.
Oh and I like the way she makes a big point aobut someone coming up to her and asking if she were a teacher? Wouldn’t it be obvious she was a journalist? from the BBC?
Some chanted “threats” apparently? What like we’re gonna take your teddy away? Er no. More like we’re gonna cut your head off infidel.
In fact according to Ms Henshaw this SMALL group of protesters (she clearly has been talking to that idiot Mynott) are SO friendly it was surprising that Ms Gibbosns couldn’t have walked amongst them signing autographs.
SO WHY WAS SHE MOVED THEN YOU SILL COW?
“Some analysts believe that the majority of people were pacified because she had got a jail term”
Evidence of this please Henshaw or just YOUR opinion dressed up?
Oh and she was jailed for letting children call a teddy bear Mohammed you stupid dopey cow, not for anything serious.
Martin,
Yes, I noticed that attempt at whitewashing the outrage of the mob by Henshaw – this has clearly become the BBC party line. I did laugh when she suggested that a large proportion of the population are ‘upset’ by the punishment, but couldn’t offer any evidence other than her absurd teacher encounter.
The BBC has spun itself off the rails here – I’ve not seen any other news agency report the unrest in Sudan in this way. The line about this being the work of a ‘few hotheads’ is a direct quote from the Sudanese ambassador. I think it is probable that the protests did have the encouragement of the mosques and government, but that doesn’t mean that threats against Ms Gibbons can then be dismissed as insignificant. Even the Guardian (!) adopted a more balanced line:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sudan/story/0,,2220180,00.html
‘The crowd responded with traditional Islamic chants, extolling Allah, urging the death of anyone who insulted the prophet Muhammad. Newspaper pictures of Gibbons were burned on a makeshift stage in the heart of Martyr’s Square… Men wearing traditional robes and turbans leaned out of car windows waving swords and machete-like blades, shouting threats at western journalists, shouting: “You must go”, and drawing their fingers across their throats.’
I think that “glimmer of hope” will come 15 days after her incarceration… or whenever the press realize that they really can’t make a weepy-weepy issue out of this and notice that we are dealing with a thuggish culture in charge of Sudan.
There’ll be no hand-holding and singing over the vegan feast to be found in this story.
If as the BBC “claim” this was just a minor demonstration by a few “hot heads” why is the Sudan Government crapping itself about letting her go?
Would not the idea of Islam being shown as “merciful” be of more value?
This is where the BBC spins its own lies so much it loses sight of the story.
The BBC say it was a good natured demonstraion with a few hot heads present. Yet at the same time the BBC also says it would be difficult for the Sudan Government to let her go as they would be seen as backing down to thier own people. Yet the same BBC “claim” that most people in the Sudan don’t even know of the case!!!!
So which is it BBC?
Martin,
You’re right about all these bizarre inconsistencies. How can the BBC pretend on the one hand that few people know about the case, and on the other report that Sudanese newspaper pictures of Gibbons are being burned in the streets? I can understand that the literacy rate in rural areas might not be high, but that doesn’t hold in Khartoum, where their report even relayed street scenes of locals browsing the papers.
The only part of The Sudanease population that were against jailing her etc Are the Christians in the South of the country. Where none of our British millions of aid money goes, because Khartoum won’t send money to the non muslim infidels.
Any chance of the above facts being reported by the Beeb?
The BBC tells us on every possible occasion that the two peers concerned are Muslim ie “the two Muslim peers do this, the two Muslim peers do that, the two Muslim peers get in a car, the two Muslim peers get out of a car” and on and on and on. OK OK we get the message that “our” Muslims are “moderate” (not that I would describe Ahmed as moderate but, there again, calling the 9/11 bombers “martyrs” as reported here is, I suppose, “moderate” in BBC terms): and not only moderate Muslims but doing their bit for a Christian – wow! how “moderate” can you get!
Although Ms Gibbons has been unjustly imprisoned, it’s only for, at the most, another 10 days. The sight of Ahmed (and friend) crawling round the slime constituting the Sudanese government to cut that sentence down by a few days (and make Ahmed and, by extension, Gordo, look good) is quite sickening. Although this is, apparently, a “private” initiative any distinction between this and an “official” crawling exercise is lost on the Sudanese and the world at large.
Just in case you hadn’t seen, the BBC website’s Sudan coverage is now promoting apartheid views, devoting a whole page to the view that ‘Muslim pupils need Muslim teachers’:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/71…/uk/ 7123723.stm
We have juicy propaganda for some Islamic segregationalist group telling us that “Muslim children need Muslim teachers. “A non-Muslim teacher is not in a position to provide any kind of Islamic guidance to young children” he said.
Yes, just like we need Muslim doctors for Muslim patients, and Muslim police for Muslim crime. The BBC seems to think that being impartial means giving airtime to every lunatic under the sun. I wonder if they would ever have dreamed of giving space to a BNP official telling us that we need ‘Christian teachers for our Christian children’?
Matthew | 02.12.07 – 10:18 pm |
they probably would have
replete with interruptions (more like speeches with the other view constituting the interruptions!), sneering, tut-tutting and worse…
On a personal level I wish for the speedy safe return of Miss Gibney from the The Soudan. However I cannot help being bemused by the hypocritical cant being spouted by self-righteous people here about intolerance and barbaric attitude in the The Soudan. We should look to our own country first and examine how we have arrived at a stage where, in Mid Wales, an Irishman received a prison sentence for referring to a Welsh woman as English bitch. In the words of Jeff Thomas of the CPS ” The Police took the view that this was a racially aggravated incident. We looked…and agreed.” He went on to say it was ‘in the public interest”. For the barbaric attitude of the crowds baying for her blood look no further than the crowds of British citizens baying for blood outside the Oxford Union. All in all it makes me proud to be British. Not.
Anonymous: you seem to labouring under some kind of misconception. Hypocrisy involves using different standards in similar situations. I am sure many of the posters here would also condemn the aggressive tactics used by the mob who broke into the Oxford Union, or the ways in which racial discrimination legislation can be abused. But, since you haven’t noticed, this happens to be a thread on BBC reporting in Sudan, not on these other issues.
And you could at least do Gillian Gibbons the courtesy of getting her name right; I think you’ll find she is not a ‘Miss’ either.
The criminalising of speech is a form of jihad.
Anonymous: I saw the Wales story too. I think most people on this blog would agree that was pretty barabaric too.
Anonymous:
Actually it’s quite easy.The same left wing/liberal idiots that infest the BBC also infest Nu Labour and their “think tank” friends.
is there anywhere where there can be found a succinct listing of all ex-bbc now with labour and ex-labour now with bbc, with former/current positions in each case?
forgot to mention token tories too
Credit where credit is due on the Sudan story: the BBC website is finally posting a sensible critique of the appalling Sudanese government:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7125514.stm
Unfortunately, this was marred by Mynott on BBC News at 6, who again displayed his bizarre apologetics, suggesting that the small crowd of angry protesters outside the British Embassy were there because they were pleased Ms Gibbons had gone home!
Matthew,
Yes it’s a good article. Might be instructive to compare it with the stuff he was obliged to write while in Sudan.
Matthew | 03.12.07 – 4:47 pm
Hypocrisy involves using different standards in similar situations. I am sure many of the posters here would also condemn the aggressive tactics used by the mob who broke into the Oxford Union, or the ways in which racial discrimination legislation can be abused.
I wonder if this Anonymous hasn’t inadvertently hit on a larger point that many here have made before.
Anonymous | 03.12.07 – 11:22 am
However I cannot help being bemused by the hypocritical cant being spouted by self-righteous people here about intolerance and barbaric attitude in the The Soudan. We should look to our own country first and examine how we have arrived at a stage where, in Mid Wales, an Irishman received a prison sentence for referring to a Welsh woman as English bitch. In the words of Jeff Thomas of the CPS ” The Police took the view that this was a racially aggravated incident. We looked…and agreed.” He went on to say it was ‘in the public interest”. For the barbaric attitude of the crowds baying for her blood look no further than the crowds of British citizens baying for blood outside the Oxford Union. All in all it makes me proud to be British. Not.
No B-BBCer needs to be reminded of the dangers of fascist, totalitarian mindsets. There isn’t a whole lot of difference in the mindset of the caveman version of Islam on evidence (most recently) in Sudan, not to mention Saudi Arabia, and the extremist PC attitudes that lead to someone getting fined £200 for using English as a modifier in an insult to someone who had just damaged his car, or see similarities between protesting against Holocaust denial (with admittedly a bit of vandalism) and actually calling for the death of someone on false religious pretenses.
The same thought process can guide one into extremist religious ecstasy, or into extremist post-modern relativist lotus eating. We all know what the former looks like, and Anonymous has just given us an example of the latter. It is ridiculous to compare a smallish group of people protesting actual hate speech – speech which denies and denigrates historical realities – only a fraction of which were in fact anything but peaceable, with large violent crowds who actually are “baying for blood” over perceived slights and at times non-existent incidents.
I think you all know how Britain got into a stage where such ridiculous PC laws are blindly enforced. And you probably also realize how people are slowly indoctrinated into moral relativist thinking that values Holocaust denial and Holocaust reality equally, simply because both are “opinions”. I wonder if this Anonymous (BBC?) does.
David,
I am with you on the mistake of ‘relativist lotus eating’, and I agree it was one of the disturbing features of the post I attacked. But you do realise, don’t you, that many, if not most, of those people ranting outside the Oxford Union were not there because they had any interest in protesting Holocaust denial? One of the ringleaders of the protest, Asghar Bukhari, has even funded David Irving in the past; others, including Galloway, and other Respect and MPAC nutcases I met there, were praising Columbia University earlier this year for giving the Holocaust denier Ahmedinejad a platform to speak, a man who, you will remember, invited a whole host of neo-Nazis to revise the genocide last year. Do you think the BBC asked these ‘protestors’ the obvious? Of course not. Most of that far-left mob were not protesting Holocaust denial, but criticism of Islam.
And having witnessed the way Union members were abused and assaulted by large elements of the crowd, I am hard pressed to describe them as peaceable.
That said, I think your warning is a sensible one to all who post here.
About 2:25 minutes into the first clip you can hear the Sudanese protesters shouting “Khaybar Khaybar ya Yahud” – this is a common slogan at anti-Israel protests, “Yahud” meaning Jews and “Khaybar” a reference to a 7th century battle where Muslims defeated a Jewish tribe.
This battle and slogan are quite popular in contemporary Islam: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaybar_Khaybar (a Hezbollah missile and Iranian assualt rifle are also named after it)
Interesting to see this here, given that no Jews are involved in the incident. Less surprising to see the BBC report completely ignores this – although anyone covering the Mid East recognizes this slogan. Political inclination or plain ignorance?