Shocker: After being proven wrong, useful Muslim Sisterhood idiot Nicholas Kristoff still has no Intellectual Curiosity about Benghazi

Whistleblowers at the House Oversight Committee hearings into what happened at Benghazi revealed some shocking realities relative to the lies told by UN Ambassador Susan Rice on 9/16/12. These realities included the firsthand account of Gregory Hicks, the State Department’s top guy in Libya after Christopher Stevens was murdered.

The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes presented smoking gun evidence that the State Department knew the attacks did not spring out of a demonstration but was a terrorist attack perpetrated by Ansar al-Sharia and Al-Qaeda linked Islamic fundamentalists. The testimony of Hicks and two other whistleblowers only further solidified concerns about Rice’s statements.

That is, unless your name is Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times. In November of last year, he tweeted the following (h/t Red Alert Politics):


To even the most biased of individuals, Kristof was quite wrong at the time. Rice’s statements constituted rather large potatoes but Kristof is not interested in looking at them; he’s interested in hiding them. While it doesn’t appear that Kristof has written about the hearings just yet (hold your breath), as of this writing, he has sent out two tweets about the Benghazi hearings.


The first was sent out after the hearings concluded; it was a link to a New York Times article that had been published before the hearings and included blatantly biased perspectives that offered no insight.

The other article Kristof tweeted was one from the Washington Post that shockingly began with excerpts from the Post’s ridiculously erroneous reporting in the days after the Benghazi attacks that only serve to impugn the credibility of the entire article; it’s quite laughable.

The writer – Glenn Kessler – essentially admits his paper’s reporting about the Benghazi attacks was entirely wrong in the days after the attack but wants you to keep reading about what happened at the hearings (incidentally, whistleblower Gregory Hicks knew the truth then and has told it publicly now).

Nonetheless, the Post article tweeted by Kristof did include elements that fly directly in the face of Kristof’s claims from last November. For example, via the Post article:

While the political fallout long has been clear from Rice’s appearance on the Sunday shows, what’s new is Hicks’ description of the diplomatic impact — that Libyan cooperation into the probe was greatly hindered because the president of Libya, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, who also appeared on Face the Nation, was so angry that Rice disagreed with his description of a “preplanned” attack.

Magariaf was “insulted in front of his own people,” Hicks said. “His credibility was reduced. His ability to lead his country was damaged.”

Hicks’ description of his reaction to Rice’s comments — “I was stunned. My jaw dropped. And I was embarrassed” — is also rather telling, given that previously administration officials had asserted that Rice’s remarks reflected a consensus that no one would dispute at the time.

Small potatoes, Nicholas? Really? It is noteworthy that Kristof himself linked to that article that contradicts what he said in November, thereby implicating himself. That fact is apparently lost on Kristof as he has not seen fit to admit it. Such an admission might imply further digging is required and we can’t have that. Instead, perhaps Mr. Kristof would rather demonstrate that he’s not totally blowing off the hearings while simultaneously showing zero intellectual curiosity relative what came out of them, especially after the hearings proved him wrong.

Unlike Kristof, we have a bit of intellectual curiosity about his lack of it.

Let’s introduce a demonstrably provable premise that says:

Ansar al-Sharia and Al-Qaeda are offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The distinction between these groups and the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t come with much of a difference. Both share the same objective – Islamic domination – while choosing far different tactics – terrorism vs. politics. Therefore, any spotlight that is shone on groups like Ansar Al-Sharia and Al-Qaeda is a little too close for the Brotherhood’s comfort.

This brings us back to Kristof, who in 2011, wrote an article entitled, “Joining a Dinner in a Muslim Brotherhood Home”. In that article, Kristof talks of practically being smitten with a woman who happens to be the daughter of Muslim Sisterhood leader:

First, meet my hostess: Sondos Asem, a 24-year-old woman who is pretty much the opposite of the stereotypical bearded Brotherhood activist. Sondos is a middle-class graduate of the American University in Cairo, where I studied in the early 1980s (“that’s before I was born,” she said wonderingly, making me feel particularly decrepit).

If a bit of vomit has touched the back of your throat at this point, don’t worry. It’s a perfectly normal physiological reaction.

Here’s where Kristof reveals who his hostess was:

Sondos rails at the Western presumption that the Muslim Brotherhood would oppress women. She notes that her own mother, Manal Abul Hassan, is one of many female Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated candidates running for Parliament.

“It’s a big misconception that the Muslim Brotherhood marginalizes women,” Sondos said. “Fifty percent of the Brotherhood are women.”

Uh, Manal Abul Hassan is one of the Muslim Sisterhood’s top leaders; she is a colleague of Saleha Abedin, another leader in the Sisterhood who is also the mother of Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief Staff when the former first lady was the Secretary of State.

The Stated passion of Sisterhood member Manal Abu Hassan is “woman’s activism”. She actually ran as a Muslim Brotherhood candidated to help further it. She is also a Professor at October Sixth Journalism University. A link to her facebook page goes to a page with the Muslim Brotherhood’s logo. Her daughter is Sondus Chalabi, also a Muslim Brotherhood activist who once expressed her hope that “Obama (will) open the door for (our) hope to advance political Islam.” The Case FOR Islamophobia – Muslim Sisterhood chapter, p. 112

By not showing interest in what happened in Benghazi or in the hearings which proved him wrong, Kristof is doing the bidding of the Muslim Brotherhood and Sisterhood.

By definition, that makes him a useful idiot for both.


, , , , , , , , ,