The narrator in the video asks, "Why did the BBC edit Ms. Stevens' remarks about Allah and the Koran?"
Well, what does the BBC report the woman as having said to them, not a different organization? It reports:
Ms Stevens, who runs Little Diamonds nursery in Hermon Hill, said the woman told her that she was attacked while on her way to work from Wanstead High Street.
The attackers slashed her arm from the wrist upwards before running off down the street, she said, and shouted out "something to do with Allah and the Koran".
Say what? "Something to do with Allah and the Koran?" That's far from a coherent, or even simultaneously incoherent and unambiguous, thing to say. Were I the editor, I wouldn't include that in the video because to leave it in the video makes Ms. Stevens look and sound like a nincompoop -- the event occurred at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday in England, and the BBC posted the story at about 9 o'clock a.m. on Thursday -- who cannot accurately recount events from less than 24 hours prior.
Is it the victim who said to Ms. Stevens "something to do with Allah and the Koran?"
Is "something to do with Allah and the Koran" Ms. Stevens' paraphrasing of what the victim said?
Is "something to do with Allah and the Koran" a reflection of Ms. Stevens' not being able to recall precisely what the victim said to her?
Then there's the matter of Ms. Stevens to a different news organization changing her statement to say the girls "were 'behind her chanting the Koran, "Allah".' So "something to do with Allah and the Koran" at some point became a chant. Well, what was it, "something to do with Allah and the Koran" or "chanting the Koran, Allah?"
If there's anything to wonder, it's why any news organization even bothered publishing Ms. Stevens' comments. The woman doesn't even consistently retell the details of her own account of things.
Careful observers will note also that Ms. Stevens did not witness the attack. Thus, whatever she has to say about it is purely hearsay. The fact of the matter is that based on the information in the video and printed story, there's no telling who attacked the injured woman or what they in fact said. All we know for sure from the story is that Ms. Stevens says the victim told her "thus and such." Nobody who was actually present to observe the attack itself is quoted in the BBC's story. (Why that is makes for a far better question that does "why did the BBC not include a small phrase Ms. Stevens uttered?")
Lastly, and most importantly, the BBC's story about the event does share Ms. Stevens' "Allah and Koran" comment; thus they didn't leave it out.
It's funny how the right, who have plenty of people who struggle to get through a paragraph, then suddenly get outraged that things they won't read don't say what they want them to say.