The BBC respond, inadequately as usual

Late in July I complained to the BBC about their, seemingly deliberate, misrepresenting of Egypt's new President's views on Israel.  Here's the complaint that I submitted: '{Complaint title:} Misleading analysis of Muhammad Mursi's views {Complaint:} You state: 'Relations with Israel and the US are among the most difficult challenges facing Mr Mursi. As a pragmatist, he will likely be keen to respect the peace treaty with Israel and maintain good relations with the US and the West. In his first televised address, he emphasised that he will honour all international treaties and agreements signed by Egypt.' Why do you not report what Muhammad Mursi means by what he said and what he has said subsequently? 'Mursi is careful to qualify his statements and say that Egypt's acceptance of the peace agreement depends on Israel's honoring of this agreement - an assertion that is open to various interpretations. For example, in a televised interview before the elections, he said that Israel's honoring the agreement meant making peace with all the peoples of the region, implementing the Palestinians' right of return, and establishing a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.[3] On another occasion, he said that Israel's attack on Gaza constituted a violation of the peace agreement.[4] These qualifications to the acceptance of the peace agreement with Israel might serve Mursi and the MB as a means of exerting pressure on Israel and the U.S., by demanding concessions in return for a continued honoring of the agreement on Egypt's part. ' The BBC's habit of taking at face value one sentence from one speech and ignoring all else that an Islamic leader says means that you are misleading your readers. RE URL:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

world-middle-east-18582746

 The BBC have replied to me and it's the sort of reply that the BBC specialise in:

Dear Sir/Madam,

The article you cite
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

world-middle-east-18582746) is intended as a
succinct overview of the challenges facing the Egyptian president.

After reviewing the article, we do not believe that we have
misrepresented President Mursi's statements and interviews on relations
with Israel and the US. We do not agree that stating that one party's
honouring of an agreement depends on the other party doing the same is
open to interpretations. The passage you quote from our article -
"Mursi is careful to qualify his statements and say that Egypt's
acceptance of the peace agreement depends on Israel's honouring of this
agreement" - is in fact a reasonable paraphrasing of Mr Mursi's own view
of the challenges facing his administration with regard to Camp David, as
outlined in the passage you cite from his televised pre-election
interview.

Regards,

BBC Monitoring
I have responded:

Dear BBC Monitoring

I am sorry but your response just doesn't properly answer my complaint.

Someone reading the original BBC article, with no other information to go on, would be lead to believe that President Mursi wants to respect and honour the peace treaty with Israel; no doubts, no queries, no conditions. In fact there is ample evidence from President Mursi's own mouth that his definition of respecting and honour the peace treaty is not quite what an innocent reader might expect.

President Mursi said in a televised interview before the elections that Israel's honouring the agreement meant making peace with all the peoples of the region, implementing the Palestinians' right of return, and establishing a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. The second and third of those conditions are somewhat controversial to the Israelis, to say the least.

By ignoring the conditions that President Mursi openly puts on his honouring and respecting Egypt's peace treaty with Israel, the BBC misrepresents President Mursi's position and makes his position seem more reasonable than it actually is.

Please reconsider your initial response to me.

Regards

NotaSheep MaybeaGoat

Let's see what they have to say this time...