Watering Down the Threat of Jihad in Egypt: The New York Times Displays Major Dhimmitude

2/4/11 - Click to Enlarge

In a stunningly one-sided article published under a large banner headline on the front page of Thursday's paper, the fiendish reality contortionists at Amerika's newspaper of record continued their
goosestepping parade of lies down the Boulevard of Misinformation about what is really happening in Egypt. 

"Mubarak's Backers Storm Protesters as U.S. Condemns Violent Turn," screams the headline. Further reading reveals that Times communists David D. Kirkpatrick and Kareem Fahim are solidly on the side of the "protesters," and are no longer even trying to hide their bias. 

If one were to believe the Times, the protesters consist of nothing but dentists, teachers and other non-threatening bourgeois types who are all holding hands and singing peacefully, while US-backed anti-Islamist Mubarak and his peeps are raining sticks and stones down upon the Islamists' innocent heads. 

From the article: 

"The anti-Mubarak protesters had organized themselves to try to avoid violence. Men held hands in long chains to keep the two groups apart. Others, with effusive apologies, searched those entering the square for weapons. Some stepped in with whistles to break up arguments that had grown heated." 

Amazing, ain't it? The Times wants you to believe that the only violence being committed in Egypt right now is by anti-Islamists. What is wrong with this picture? How is it possible for America's newspaper of record to take sides like this? 

From the article: 

"Rocks and sticks began to fly from the pro-Mubarak forces int the crowd of anti-Mubaral demonstrators. Even then, many tried to avoid retaliation. A line of a half dozen unarmed men stood quietly, waving their hands in the air while the pro-Mubarak forces rained rocks down on them." 

The dangerous liberals who set the record for American policy-making are on fire with glee; their lies are becoming more and more over-the-top. Make no mistake: the NYT is accelerating the pace at which they are pushing for a New World Order, wherein further chaos and instability will enable them (they hope) to further even more effortlessly their globalist, pro-"oppressed", redistributionist, historically revisionist agenda. 

In Cairo and throughout the country, the Bronze-Age primitives of Egypt are reverting to their ancestors' favorite dispute resolution techniques - throwing stones. What is it btw with muslims and stone-throwing? (The Israeli army took so many to the noggin that they had to develop a stone-throwing machine to fight back on equal terms. [Even though the New York Times wanted to make them put the stones in bubblewrap]). 

Today's article is unique, though, in the way that the authors insist over and over that the anti-Mubarak demonstrators are non-violent, even if it means presenting evidence of this improbability in the most convoluted of ways. For example, like this: 

"Abandoning any attempt to avoid violence, thousands of anti-Mubarak protesters used scraps of steel to rip up the pavement into pieces, carrying them in milk crates and scarves to hurl back at their attackers." 

WTF?! "Hurl back at their attackers"?! These lying bastards at the Times really do have no shame.