New York Times Shills for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood


Pages: 1 2

In a recent New York Times article titled “As Islamists Gain Influence, Washington Reassess Who Its Friends Are,” one Scott Shane does what the MSM does best: objectively list and discuss facts, but then offer an interpretation that has little grounding in reality.

The prevailing theme of his article is that there is “great change” in the Middle East, which certainly is true, though he fails to explain the fundamental factors behind this change, including the primary one that should interest Americans—namely, a counterproductive, if not irrational, U.S. Mideast policy.  Nor does he explain the philosophical underpinnings of this failed policy—namely, the belief, pounded in every American child’s head upon entering school, that all violence is a product of some grievance or material want: hence, all Islamic violence is a product of grievance and wants, all of which the U.S., under Obama, is going to satisfy by ensuring Islamists gain control of Egypt—even as many Egyptians yesterday protested against Hillary Clinton’s visit, insisting that “Egypt will not become Pakistan,” a reference to the U.S. administration’s obvious meddling in Egypt to empower the Sharia-enforcers.

Shane spends some time contrasting the Bush administration “stark” Mideast policy, including its unwillingness to meet with the Muslim Brotherhood, with the Obama administration’s willingness to meet, not only the Brotherhood, but members from the terrorist organization Al Gama’a al-Islamiyya, which Shane describes as having  “renounced violence.”  Likewise, he argues that during the Bush years, “American officials did not always carefully distinguish between Islamists, who advocate a leading role for Islam in government, and violent jihadists, who espouse the same goal but advocate terrorism to achieve it.”

Shane fails to acknowledge that what both “Islamists” and “violent jihadists” want—“a leading role for Islam in government,” i.e., Sharia law—is in many respects the legal codification of terror: “a leading role for Islam in government” means whippings, beheading, amputations, sexual segregation, religious discrimination, death for apostates, and international hostility, even if only concealed, for the rest of the non-Islamic world, including the United States and especially its ally, Israel.

That Shane cannot—or will not—make this distinction is evident in the fact that he actually states that the Blind Sheikh’s “guilt is questioned by many Egyptians, who see him as the victim of a conspiracy by the United States and Mr. Mubarak.” Thus, here is the NYT giving voice to yet another “Muslim conspiracy theory” about how the terrorist sheikh—whose many terrors include his once issuing a fatwa permitting Muslims to ransack churches in Egypt to fund the jihad—may actually be “innocent.”

And what was the Obama administration’s excuse for secretly allowing another member of Al Gama’a al-Islamiyya—a group that, among other atrocities, slaughtered some 60 European tourists during the Luxor Massacre—to the White House?  Simple: according to the State Dept, “It’s a new day in Egypt. It’s a new day in a lot of countries across the Middle East and North Africa.” Adds Shane: “Long-held assumptions about who is a friend of the United States and who is not have been upset.”

What does this utopian talk of a “new day” mean?  What new event has caused “long-held assumptions about who is a friend of the United States” to be “upset”? In fact, a foremost factor is that, unlike former U.S. presidents, Obama threw the West’s traditional Mideast allies under the bus, helping empower America’s traditional enemies, the Islamists—all under the banner of “democracy.” This is why there is a “new day.” Yet Shane continues getting it backwards, writing, “American hostility to Islamist movements, in fact, long predated Sept. 11, in part because of the United States’ support for secular autocrats in Arab countries. During the 30-year rule of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood was officially banned…”

Pages: 1 2

  • Advocatus

    Excellent analysis. Thank you for this, Mr. Ibrahim.

    Those of us who have followed, however sporadically, Scott Shane's outpourings in the NYT should not be surprised that he is engaged in advocacy journalism, not in any honest appraisal of the facts. He reports developments in the Middle East as he'd like them to be seen, not as they really are and what they truly mean. Such is the gold standard of journalism at the Old Grey Lady. I expect a Pulitzer prize to be coming his way one of these days….

  • Anamah

    The spectacle name is Treason, and we know main personages….

  • mrbean

    I know I am not the only one who sees how the mainstream media and entertainment industry sides with our enemies. Their propoganda deliberately keeps many of the American people ignorant through selective and dishonest reporting of both domestic and foreign news and events. The MSM fails to provide the truth critical to health, safety, and welfare of the American people and the nation because they have a leftis agenda.

  • Ar'nun

    Well the mystery of why no one reads the NYT anymore is once again solidified in Scott Shane's fairytale of friendly Jihad. MY Brothers/Sisters and I under the American flag fought against al Qaeda in Iraq. We fought against them and the Taliban in Afghanistan. When the Arab Spring begun in Egypt Obama and his lapdogs immediately supported them even after their leader (Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi) was quoted as saying he and his men fought against the USA on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama and his lapdogs are entertaining discussions with the reemergence of the Taliban as they re-rise to power in Afghanistan. Of all the horrible nightmares I brought home with me, this is the worst. And as the Republicans sit idly by and do nothing about it, my anger grows. Treason is not an accurate descriptor. He was never on our side and never will be. Espionage would be more accurate. He has always been on their side and an enemy of this state. He infiltrated our government and is destroying us from within. And our Law Enforcement officials have known since 2004.

  • Ar'nun

    This would be like if in 1948 the US helped the NAZI's come back to power in Germany.

  • Schlomotion

    Mr. Ibrahim, who routinely publishes hoax stories on the internet, now asserts that there is a Muslim conspiracy controlling the New York Times causing it to write articles biased in favor of Muslims. If one claimed that there is a Jewish conspiracy controlling the New York Times and causing it to write biased articles in favor of Jews, that person would be laughed offstage. Similarly, Mr. Ibrahim should be laughed offstage.

    Typical of this loopy conspiracy theorizing, Mr. Ibrahim takes on the whole newspaper, one writer, and everybody the writer cites. What a vast and inclusive tapestry this hallucination is. I am amused reading this man who is my same age and who meticulously and anonymously cultivates his own Wikipedia biography, which of course copiously refers to the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

    I want to contend with any of the less wild claims in this article, but even his claim (that American schools hammer an ideology into students that violence is linked to goals) is so wild a grasp at a straw that it assumes no Americans who went to American schools would read this article and then make a crazy circle next to their head with their finger.

    • Amused

      Gosh you're so lame, Schlomo — so tedious, like a broken record. Give it up, already.
      Oh yea, since youre so fond of the "hoax" excuse, why don't you amuse us by responding to this piece by Ibrahim? http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/07/raymond-ibrahim

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      Happy Eternal Nakba Schlocky!

    • eddie

      Schlomo, once you read the Quran and understand it, you will appreciate every word, Mr. Ibrahim wrote on this subject.

  • Fred Dawes

    All part of the Globalists plan to take down this country and make it into some third world hell on earth, the muslim is one tool in this evil plan and the mulism understand with monkeys like obama you can take parts off the USA One city at a time.

  • Ghostwriter

    To me,"The New York Times" is among the same group of people living in a fantasy world that believes that Islamists are decent people. They're not. I also count President Obama and Schlockmotion in that same category. We need people and that includes the media who live in the real world not the fantasy one of Schlomind,President Obama,and Secretary Clinton.

  • RUI

    Can we return Obama to the Muslim brootherhood and get our money back?

  • eddie

    Great job Raymond of exposing this dangerous stealth Jihad.
    This is not only treason, but dangerous continuous tactics to de-focus our attention on the most dangerous ideology against humanity (not only the west). It serves to mislead public opinion, white wash Islam, play down the threat of Jihad, till we wake up one day and it is too late.
    No one in our government is willing to learn from history, and look at the consistent track record of Islamic ideology wiping out civilizations, and ethnic-cleaning one nation after the other.

    What NYT's Shane, needs to think about: Is the Muslim Brotherhood charter going to change, and they will denounce the Quran 100 plus verses, and all all the hadith, now that they are embracing democracy????

    • JAson

      Sadly no one believed that hitler was up to no good until it was too late. How many more planes have to fly into buildings before people wake up to ISHMAEL