al-Shariyah Archives - Victory Girls Blog

December 29, 2013

NYT Fails at Journalism, Pushes Benghazi Video Hoax Story Again – UPDATED

Scroll down for updates!

I’m not sure when the New York Times decided to try publishing news again, but they’re still an example of epic fail. Their latest attempt at journalism comes in the form of an “investigative report” claiming that the responsibility for Benghazi falls on a local militia group affiliated with Ansar Al Shariya, not al Qaeda. What’s more, they claim that the entire attack was over the same video that Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, and half the Obama Administration lied about over and over. There’s only one problem.

Ansar al-Shariya is part of the al Qaeda network. They make no denials of this.

The NYT ignores this, claiming that al-Shariya “had no known affiliations with terrorist groups.”

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) has gone on record against the report, calling it “misleading.”

“They are saying that al-Shariah is involved, but al-Shariah is a part of the al Qaeda umbrella, the al Qaeda network,” King said…“Al-Shariah is a pro- al Qaeda terrorist organization,” countered the congressman, a member of the House Intelligence Committee.

This isn’t the first time the NYT has made this claim. Back in October, they published the same premise. Charles Johnson instantly jumped on the bandwagon, saying “nearly everything about this right wing narrative is wrong.” The New Yorker is calling those of us demanding justice “Benghazi Truthers.”

Thankfully, FrontPage Magazine steps up and calls the NYT report what it is: “a voluminous multi-part essay that claims to be the product of intensive reporting, but doesn’t really offer much of anything new, except an attempt at reviving a discredited liberal narrative, which its own reporting doesn’t support.” Daniel Greenfield’s expose of the report is a must-read.

Perhaps the NYT should stick to covering Obama’s Christmas vacation in Hawaii.

UPDATE, 0840 EST: Fox News has done a great job of going point by point against the NYT tripe, including pointing out that it was known way back in October that two of the main suspects in Benghazi worked for al Qaeda senior leadership as early as 2001; one as a courier and one as a bodyguard. They also point out that independent analysis of social media in Benghazi show that no one—no one—mentioned anything about the so-called inflammatory video until the day after the attack. (They did, however, find a post by someone who put up a picture of himself shooting an RPG at the facility. Because nothing says “great night” for these animals like “photos from last night’s attack on Americans.”)

UPDATE, 0850 EST: Power Line Blog mentions the motivation behind the NYT’s actions…”The Times story tells us little or nothing about Benghazi, but it does remind us that Hillary Clinton is the Times’s preferred nominee for president in 2016, and therefore the Democratic Party’s. The Times article is a preview of the Benghazi defense that Hillary will mount over the next two years. It is, I think, pathetically weak, but then, memories are short. And the Democrats believe that hardly anyone really cares about foreign affairs. If they nominate a former Secretary of State for president, that theory will be tested.”