A rose by any other name

On a number of occasions, we've noted Reuters use of the propagandistic lede "Analysis" to tag its op-eds with a pseudo-scientific-sounding term and enable the agency to peddle spin as dispassionate investigation for subsequent syndication to hundreds of other media outlets.

Reuters has adopted a new propaganda mantra to disguise these type of agenda-driven stories: Insight.  So, when you come across this banner attached to a Reuters story in the future, you'll know immediately you are about to read a piece of one-sided claptrap masquerading as cool, trenchant reporting.

The Insight format is a perfect vehicle for Reuters kingpin propagandist Tom Perry.

When we last visited Perry, he was busy lying about the Muslim Brotherhood, asserting that the group had only announced it was going to reconsider Egypt's peace treaty with Israel in response to suggestions that U.S. financial and military aid to the country might be reviewed (if Americans currently detained in Egypt are not released).  In fact, the Brotherhood has been issuing threats to reconsider the treaty since it first became clear the group was going to accede to power in Egypt.

Here's what the Brotherhood said in early January, weeks before U.S. aid became a contention:

According to Essam al-Erian, deputy head of the Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice party, the accords "are under the responsibility of the people and state institutions, and it would not be right for anyone to speak on behalf of the Egyptian people."
Speaking to the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Hayat, al-Erian said, "We are not in a position to give assurances."
Rashad al-Bayoumi, the Brotherhood's second in command, told Al-Hayat las week that "the Muslim Brotherhood will not recognize Israel under any circumstances and might put the peace treaty with the Jewish state up to a referendum."
The Brotherhood, he added, "did not sign the peace accords… We are allowed to ask the people or the elected parliament to express their opinion on the treaty, and (to find out) whether it compromised the people's freedom and sovereignty. We will take the proper legal steps in dealing with the peace deal. To me, it isn't binding at all. The people will express their opinion on the matter."

And here's Perry serving as mouthpiece for the Brotherhood, conveying the false message (again) that the group's threats to renege on the treaty have only arisen as a result of the U.S. aid issue:  

While saying it will respect Egypt's international obligations, including the peace deal with Israel, the group has said Cairo could review the treaty if Washington were to hold back the aid that came with the agreement.
"We don't owe anyone any favors," said Hishmat, the lawmaker on the foreign relations committee. "Even with the threat to the U.S. aid, we are not intimidated in the way the previous regime used to be," he said.

Whether packaged as "news", "analysis", or "insight", a lie remains a lie.

And whether Reuters gives Tom Perry a beat in Ramallah, Cairo, or Timbuktu, a liar remains a liar.

Reuters, public relations wing for Iran

Reuters continues with its ludicrous and journalistically indefensible efforts to downplay the Iranian nuclear weapons program and conceal explicit Iranian threats to commit genocide.

The agency runs three stories, two by self-censoring Iranian correspondent, Parisa Hafezi, the third by hardcore propagandist, Alistair Lyon, employing a combination of euphemisms, egregious factual omissions, and sanitized reporting to portray a fantasy world where Iran is merely pursuing electrical power and where the regime's military threats are solely a defensive response to Western aggression.  Here's Hafezi running interference:

Still, a top U.S. intelligence official said last week that while U.S. spy services believed Iran would respond if attacked, they thought it was unlikely to start a conflict.
Israel and the United States do not rule out military action against Iran if sanctions and diplomacy fail to rein in its nuclear energy campaign.
Senior U.N. inspectors have begun their second round of talks in Tehran in three weeks, seeking Iranian explanations with respect to intelligence about "possible military dimensions" to the Iranian nuclear program.
Iran denies Western accusations that it is covertly seeking the means to build nuclear weapons and in recent weeks has again vowed no nuclear retreat, but also voiced willingness to resume negotiations with world powers without preconditions.
Iran says it is enriching uranium solely as fuel for a future network of nuclear power stations, not for bombs.

And again here after Iran refused yesterday to allow U.N. inspector access to its nuclear sites:

As sanctions mount, ordinary Iranians are suffering from the effects of soaring prices and a collapsing currency. Several Iranian nuclear scientists have been killed over the past two years in bomb attacks that Tehran has blamed on its arch-adversary Israel.

In response, Iran has issued a series of statements asserting its right to self-defense and threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil tanker route.

The collapse of the nuclear talks came as Iran seems increasingly isolated, with some experts seeing the Islamic republic's mounting defiance in response to sanctions against its oil industry and financial institutions as evidence that it is in no mood to compromise with the West.

Elections on March 2 are expected to be won by supporters of Khamenei, an implacable enemy of the West.

The failure of the two-day visit by the International Atomic Energy Agency could now hamper any resumption of wider nuclear negotiations between Iran and six world powers as the sense grows that Tehran feels it is being backed into a corner.

And here's Reuters correspondent Lyon, writing of Iran's Supreme Leader (we love the Orwellian ring of that sobriquet):

This month Khamenei said sanctions would not alter Iran's nuclear course, military threats would "harm America" and any nation or group fighting Israel, thought to be the Middle East's only nuclear-armed power, would have Tehran's backing.
"In response to threats of oil embargo and war, we have our own threats to impose at the right time," he declared.
Khamenei has in the past denied that Iran seeks atomic bombs, saying: "It is against our Islamic thoughts."
But he has shown little interest in genuinely assuaging Western worries about Iran's activities, authorizing what the U.N. nuclear watchdog regards as only incomplete cooperation, as well as intermittent talks with six world powers that Western officials suspect Tehran pursues primarily to gain more time to attain nuclear "breakout" capability.
The bespectacled cleric, who ultimately decides all matters of state, including nuclear and foreign policy, simply does not trust the United States, once described by his late mentor Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as a wolf to Iran's lamb.

Ah yes, poor Iran is being unfairly persecuted for a perfectly innocent "nuclear energy campaign" (to which it refuses to allow independent inspection under its NPT obligations) and only "in response", has the country "issued a series of statements asserting its right to self-defense".  You know, like threatening to commit genocide against the Jews.

The Iranian lamb.  And its Reuters udder.

Reuters compares Islamists to Republicans

Reuters stable of Middle East reporters has been out in force over the last year, each correspondent taking his respective turn at bat, sanitizing the ideology of the Islamists who have been voted into power in Tunisia and Morocco, and who are on the verge of power in Egypt and Algeria.

The various Islamist groups vying for control of these countries go by different party names and, for the purpose of distinguishing themselves in the eyes of the electorate, emphasize different aspects of the Islamist raison d'etre.  But, like multiple brands of bug killer, while the directions for use may vary, the end result remains the same.  Institutionalized discrimination against women and non-Muslims, capital punishment for open homosexuals, and a genocidal hatred for all things Jewish are what these groups are all about.

Notwithstanding the incontrovertible barbarism inherent in this program, Reuters correspondents continue with their efforts to whitewash the Islamists for gullible western audiences.  Here's the latest irrational comparison from Reuters religion editor Tom Heneghan:

Still, in a Western country, Muslim Brothers [Brotherhood] would be among the staunch social conservatives, something like the evangelical wing of the Republican Party in the United States.

Simply mind-numbing.

Jonathan Wright explains the fundamental difference between the fundamentalists

Former Reuters Cairo Bureau Chief and long-time Arabist, Jonathan Wright, who has been busy whitewashing the Islamists in Egypt for gullible Western audiences since before the fall of Hosni Mubarak in February, parses for us the critical distinction between the Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamists of the Nour party:

Nasser Khodeir, a civil engineer and Brotherhood supporter in the town of Tansa, said Brotherhood members were also Salafi in their beliefs but didn't share the importance Salafis attach to physical appearance, such as clothing and the cut of the beard. Salafis favour robes or trouser cut off above the angle and long beards, usually with the moustache short or shaved off.

Well, now that we know they will be using different barbers and tailors, please note that both the Brotherhood and al-Nour seek the imposition of strict sharia law (as outlined in Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law) and, ultimately, a global caliphate.

Both groups are deeply antisemitic, treat women like chattel, advocate death for homosexuals, despise Western democracy, seek the destruction of Israel, and believe in permanent underclass status for religious minorities in countries where they have power.

Wright won't tell you any of this of course; he's far too lost in translation:

"Reporters of course, they work very fast and they don't think too deeply about what they're doing."

Yes, we've noticed that.

Reconstructing the godfather of terrorism

In what is without a doubt, the most mendacious, twisted, selective, ahistorical tripe from a Reuters correspondent ever to leap from the page, Andrew Hammond, whose bio indicates he was formerly in charge of Reuters Saudi operation (surprise!), reconstructs the image of Yasser Arafat for us based on a new documentary.

The public image of Arafat, the godfather of modern terrorism, inspired by his Nazi-collaborating uncle Husseini, an unrepentant Jew-hater, pathological liar, and committed to the destruction of Israel right through his dying days from sexually-transmitted disease, is miraculously rehabilitated by Hammond with his fatuous review of the film by British director Richard Symons, just screened in -- where else?  Dubai.

We have to run to an appointment but let's take a quick look at Hammond's account of the life of Arafat as seen through his eyes and reportedly, that of director Symons:

DUBAI, Dec 12 Reuters) - Associates of Yasser Arafat offer personal recollections in a documentary screened in Dubai this week on his search for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal that descended into violence and failed to lead to a Palestinian state. [...]

Arafat was depicted by his Israeli and U.S. detractors as an obstacle to bringing the peace talks to a resolution and who sought to take advantage of the violence of the Palestinian uprising which followed the breakdown of critical talks in 2000.

There's that passive voice Reuters has mastered in its propaganda on the Middle East; the peace deal "descended into violence" -- no active agent required.  And Arafat is merely "depicted" by his "detractors" as someone who "sought to take advantage" of Palestinian violence.

Apparently, Hammond, who has years of experience working in the Middle East and has purportedly written two books on the Arabs, is unaware of the admission by a Palestinian official that the terror war launched against Israeli civilians in 2000 was masterminded by Arafat and his cronies.

Rather, Hammond wants us to see the cuddly side of Arafat: 

Nasser al-Kidwa, a nephew who is now Palestinian envoy to the United Nations, recounts Arafat's gloom after Rabin's death. Kidwa found a quiet, dejected figure when he visited Arafat in his office several days later.
"Before leaving I said something to the effect of 'why are you so upset? Okay Rabin was an important leader, but Peres is coming and Peres has an even better position than Rabin'," he remembers in one of the film's most poignant sections.
"He didn't answer me, but he gave me that look that obviously meant that I didn't understand anything. And I didn't, he was right, clearly."

And the Reuters correspondent is quite clear who he believes is responsible for there being no peace between Israel and the Palestinians:

Shimon Peres lost the subsequent 1996 election to Likud leader Benyamin Netanyahu, signaling a shift to the right in Israeli politics and a stagnation in the peace process that has lasted to this day.

Right... Israel elects a strong leader to fight a relentless Palestinian terror war which has taken the lives of over 1,000 Israeli men, women, and children; a Palestinian state is conceded; the Palestinians refuse to even negotiate on the contours of this state; but Netanyahu and rightist politics in Israel are to blame for the stagnation of the peace process.

Finally, Hammond introduces a bit of levity into this tragedy:

Shunned by Washington and besieged by Israel in his Ramallah compound, Arafat died as the uprising was winding down. His widow is in tears as she recalls those final days.

Yeah, his widow, who would have liked to abscond with the billions of dollars in Western aid Arafat stole during his reign, is in tears.

Must have missed the Gucci sale in Paris.

Litotes of the day

In a story about Israel replacing its ambassador to Egypt this week, following the near lynching of the last ambassador by an Egyptian mob in September, Reuters correspondents Edmund Blair and Ori Lewis demonstrate their genteel sensibilities:

Many Egyptians view Israel, which signed a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979 after four wars between the two countries, with hostility. Anti-Israeli sentiment, muted before President Hosni Mubarak was overthrown in February, has become more vocal.

Uh-huh:

Islamists are "softly-spoken", "pragmatic", "conservative". So says Reuters

The extent to which the Reuters Middle East crew will go to provide public relations for, and polish the image of, the most retrograde political movement this century, is truly astonishing.  Bordering on unintended satire, Reuters correspondent Tom Perry writes about the Salafi movement, which has just won 20-30 percent of the vote in the first round of Egyptian elections:

The indications so far are heartening for Hazem Salah Abu Ismail, a Salafi planning to run for the presidency in a June election. He sees the results as "a map" of how young Egyptians going to the polls for the first time had voted.
"There's no doubt this is pleasing," said the softly-spoken lawyer-and-politician with a long, grey beard, wearing a suit and tie in an interview on Egyptian television on Thursday. 

Voters had realised the Islamists' discourse was "logical and reasonable", he said, at the same time outlining a conservative view typical of the Salafis.

He said men and women should be segregated at work and displays of public affection must stop. There must also be a halt of the sale and production of alcohol.
As in Saudi Arabia, Salafis would want to bar women and Christians from executive posts. They might also ban "un-Islamic" art and literature, as well as mixed beach bathing.  [...]

"I believe they can bring change," said Mohammed Hussein, 30, who works in commerce, explaining why he voted for the Nour Party in the city of Alexandria, where Salafi banners urge women to wear the Islamic veil. "It is a party that loves religion."
Hussein's enthusiasm for the group is the result of years of listening to Salafi clerics in the mosque. Across the Middle East, the mosque has provided Islamists with a platform for politics denied to secular parties now trying to regroup.

Political platforms like this:

Reuters whitewash of the Muslim Brotherhood continues

It's only 267 miles as the crow flies between Ramallah and Cairo, and Reuters correspondent Tom Perry, whose beat has shifted from the former to the latter, proves that's just a stone's throw away when it comes to transmitting Arab propaganda.

And with the Muslim Brotherhood on the verge of power in Egypt, Perry is busy cleaning up the image of the group for western consumption:

Headed by doctors, engineers and teachers, the Brotherhood's slogan is "Islam is the solution." Yet it talks the same language as other reformists when it comes to the need for democracy, an independent judiciary and social justice in Egypt.

Actually, the Brotherhood's slogan is, “Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, Jihad is our way, and dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu-akbar!”.

That chilling manifesto has been carefully concealed in the run-up to elections in Egypt but remains the Islamist group's raison d'etre.

And note how Perry attempts to bring respectability to the Brotherhood by asserting it is headed by "doctors, engineers and teachers".  This is of course, irrelevant to the group's extremist agenda nor can one forget that the Nazi Party in Germany was also led by many in upstanding professions.

Perry then parrots the Brotherhood's feigned rejection of violence:

Though the Brotherhood disavowed violence in Egypt in the 1970s, state suspicions lingered over its goals. 

Perhaps the reason "state suspicions lingered over its goals" is because the Brotherhood was implicated in the assassination of former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981 and the terrorist attack in 1997 which killed 62 tourists in Luxor.

To soothe western fears over what the Brotherhood has in mind for Egypt, Perry interviews one of its members:

Ali Khafagi, a 28-year-old Brotherhood activist, says fears about the group are overblown. A member since high school, he describes the Brotherhood as "very moderate and open minded."
"The Brotherhood's goal is to end corruption and start reform and economic development and that is what attracted many of its supporters to join it including myself," he said.
Khafagi dismissed talk about the Brotherhood banning alcohol or forcing women to wear headscarves if it came to power.
"That could only be done by a mad group and the Brotherhood is not a mad group, but a decent logical group with a good understanding of the Egyptian people and Islam," he added.

A good understanding of Islam.  Indeed.