Imagine what the New York Times’ coverage will be like when some prominent foe of jihad violence and Sharia oppression dies. “Far-right”…”Stoked anger”…”Courted controversy”…even “Incited violence.” There will be nary a sympathetic word. But for Osama bin Laden, sure. After all, his world view and that of the New York Times are simpatico, at least in terms of the evils of the United States and the Judeo-Christian tradition.
“Completely Despicable: Pravda NY Times Calls Notorious TERRORIST and 9/11 Mastermind Osama Bin Laden a ‘Devoted Family Man,'” by Julian Conradson, Gateway Pundit, August 5, 2021:
Remember when the Washington Post glorified an evil terrorist as an “austeer religious scholar?”
Well the New York Times just told them: ” Hold my beer”
In an unexplainable and abhorrent headline, the NY Times actually referred to Osama Bin Laden, one of the most notorious terrorists and the man responsible for 2,977 Americans dying on 9/11, as a “devoted family man.”
Yes, in case you were wondering, their slogan still reads “All the news that’s fit to print.”
The article, written by Louise Richardson, was a review of Peter Bergen’s book “The Rise and Fall of Usama bin Laden.” Richardson seems to admire the “man” behind countless terror attacks, and calls the book a “page-turner that weaves back and forth between the man and the terrorist.”
She writes: “Two of bin Laden’s attributes that shine through in Bergen’s account are his extraordinary self-belief and the ways in which he modeled his life on that of the Prophet Muhammad. Rather than try to explain where bin Laden’s self-confidence came from, Bergen simply describes it. It is all the more fascinating as a result”
She compares bin Laden to other “revolutionaries” and cites his inability to “articulate a positive vision” as to why the rest of the world could not get on board with the dictatorship that he was using terrorism to create.
Her disdain for America is also apparent, but hey she wouldn’t be a writer for the New York Times if it wasn’t.
“In all of his speeches and papers, bin Laden, like most revolutionaries, never articulated a positive vision of the new world he wished to create. The American counterrevolutionaries, for their part, invariably stretched the emergency powers they were accorded”…
Walter Sieruk says
So what ? Osama Bin Laden may have had “family values” So did that murderous gangster chief John Gotti have “family values.”
What “family value” Bin Laden had sure didn’t carry over to him feeling sad , even a little bit ,about about all the families he destroyed and ruined because he had in sinister insidious and evil hand in those heinous affronts which occurred on September 11, 2001 ?
All he could do that day while watching, on television those al Qaeda jihadist terror murder attacks is sit around a grin.
gravenimage says
He didn’t even have family values, Walter. Please see my post below.
bill says
Walter
All Muslim fathers are devoted family men as long as the family toe the line and accept his every word and command. If not then they are likely to beat them severely or often just murder them for straying from the true path of Islam. This applies mainly of course to the female members His sons usually assist the father in whatever he does to the women
Wellington says
The New York Times has a long lineage of supporting tyrants who are enemies of freedom. Walter Duranty exculpating Stalin while this monster starved at least a million Ukrainians is one example. Herbert Matthews in the late 1950’s extolling that magnificent rebel, one Fidel Castro, is another. And now this, never mind the very recent exculpation of Hamas as detailed by High Fitzgerald just a month or so ago here at JW.
What is most unfortunate in all of this is that the Western Left never seems to learn just how awful and slanted, even outright deceitful, publications like The New York Times and The Washington Post really are. Well, ideology surpasses all other realities and pseudo-realities. Facts are optional.
Front and center of this verity is The New York Times. Once again.
mortimer says
So true. The rulers at the NYT have been sick boot-lickers of tyrants. The newspaper has so often supported tyranny that its general reputation is undeserved.
NYT has been and remains the sycophantic minion of moral monsters.
By the way, the supposedly ‘devoted family man’ OBL had a large porn collection and held one of his wives ahead of him as a human shield as he was targeted by a Navy SEAL.
What sort of ‘devotion’ is that? How about a retraction from NYT?
gravenimage says
True, Wellington and Mortimer. Here’s Navy Seal Robert O’Neill on this ugly insanity:
“Robert O’Neill knocks New York Times book review referring to Usama bin Laden as ‘devoted family man'”
https://www.foxnews.com/media/robert-oneill-new-york-times-osama-bin-laden-devoted-family-man
Louise Richardson is supposed to be an expert on terrorism–seems that she has come to admire terrorists. *Ugh*.
Here’s a review of her book “What Terrorists Want”. Jihad terrorists seem to be mentioned only in passing–Hezbollah–and there seems to be no mention of Jihad terror and its aims at all (not even in some somewhat bowdlerized form, like “Islamic extremism”). Worse than pointless–more like deliberate obfuscation.
https://as.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu-as/faculty/documents/How_Not_to_Explain_Terrorism.pdf
Walter Sieruk says
Regarding that evil Muslim terrorist chief of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, it’s best to just all just let his heinous and cursed name rot . For “the name of the wicked shall rot.”
Proverbs 10:7. [K.J.V.]
john smith says
Thank you for these links Gravenimage.
revereridesagain says
Right. Is anyone even surprised, considering all the other reprobates for whom they express nothing but glowing admiration? Facts aren’t just optional, they are inconvenient and therefore disposable.
They’d probably praise this guy for his devotion to his girlfriend as expressed in his sincere desire to employ his “faith” and call upon the “jinns” to help his girlfriend deal with her issues:
https://www.foxnews.com/world/doctor-girlfriend-drug-fueled-exorcisms
Keith O says
Bin Laden had “family values”. So did Joseph Goebbels, so did Saddam Hussein, so does Assad!
Just because someone is a good family man does not mean they aren’t mass murderers!
I was taught in the army to admire an enemy who was intelligent and who was a good leader, so as to never underestimate them.
This wanker admires terrorist mass murderers because they hate America and what it represents.
In her twisted mind islamists are “freedom fighters”.
Well if firefighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?
The only reason that I can see for the existence of the NYT is due to the first amendment.
James Lincoln says
Keith O says,
“I was taught in the army to admire an enemy who was intelligent and who was a good leader, so as to never underestimate them.”
You learned very well…
Keith O says
Thanks James, My tutors were Viet Nam vets and highly intelligent men who wanted that us diggers never made the mistakes of past leaders.
gravenimage says
He didn’t even have family values. Please don’t accept this claim at face value.
Keith O says
GI, We have to take into account that western “family values” and those of the individuals I listed above are two entirely different things.
Jim says
Well, the fascination of leftist media journalists or actors and academics for Castro or other dictators seems perverse. Joseph Conrad mentioned early in Heart of Darkness “the fascination of the abomination”, although the people who admire dictators have a cleaned up version of them that does not seem so horrifying. But perhaps they have a certain fascination for dangerous people. Perhaps more like groupies who admire drug addicted rock stars or the women who idealize criminals on death row or with life sentences, like the Boston marathon bomber or the Israeli assassin of Rabin.
gravenimage says
New York Times hails Osama bin Laden as a ‘devoted family man’
……………………..
Not just grotesque–a mass murderer’s being a “devoted family man” doesn’t change things–but this is also a lie. He was a polygamist who married six women–the last one unnamed–and divorced several of them. At least the first of these marriages was forced on the woman–his first wife Najwa Ghanhem was “promised” to him, with no consent on her part.
He was notoriously cold to his children, and neglected and abused them–he fathered between 20 and 26 of them. How is a man who didn’t even keep track of how many children he had a “devoted family man”? One time when one of little sons tried to get his attention, he lined up all of the boys and beat them with a cane.
Does Louise Richardson admire this?
More:
She writes: “Two of bin Laden’s attributes that shine through in Bergen’s account are his extraordinary self-belief and the ways in which he modeled his life on that of the Prophet Muhammad. Rather than try to explain where bin Laden’s self-confidence came from, Bergen simply describes it. It is all the more fascinating as a result”
……………………..
Note that she doesn’t say how modeling your life on a warlord, pedophile, rapist, and mass murderer is a *good thing*…
More:
She compares bin Laden to other “revolutionaries” and cites his inability to “articulate a positive vision” as to why the rest of the world could not get on board with the dictatorship that he was using terrorism to create.
……………………..
So trying to conquer the civilized world and impose the horrors of Shari’ah law is not an intrinsic problem. but just a failure to “articulate a positive vision”? Good lord…
More:
The American counterrevolutionaries, for their part, invariably stretched the emergency powers they were accorded”…
……………………..
So opposing the slaughter of almost 3000 innocent people makes you a “counterrevolutionary”? Is Richardson good with the “revolution” bin Laden murdered to impose? Note that she says nothing citical of mass murdering innocent people–but she is critical of “stretching emergency powers”.
Moral insanity.
john smith says
+1
tim gallagher says
Who would write such crap about a mass murdering piece of shit like bin Laden. And who gives a shit whether bin Laden was OK around his family members or not. I think I heard somewhere that Hitler treated his dog well, but so what, the man was an evil monster. Also, I don’t believe that the father in any Muslim family is anything good. They are monsters who treat their wives and daughters like crap, honour killings for their children and beatings for their wives, etc. There hardly ever seems to be anything resembling love or devotion among Muslim fathers. This journalist who says bin Laden was a “devoted family man” must be one sick human being.
gravenimage says
Hitler treated his dog well until lhe poisoned her. He could have let her survive–perhaps have given her to some low-ranking Nazi who could take care of her after he committed suicide–but he preferred to kill her.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for the information, gravenimage. Actually, I could imagine that Hitler might have been a bossy, overbearing dog owner, but I did hear somewhere that he was OK with the dog. You’re right, he could have saved the dog, when he killed himself and Eva Braun. But, with evil mass murdering monsters like Hitler or bin Laden it is pretty irrelevant that they were nice to some person or pet at some time. As I said up above, I don’t see Muslim fathers as being likely to be loving or “devoted” because islam instructs them to be control freaks and monsters with their wives and kids. Love seems to be a very rare commodity in islam and in Muslim families.
john smith says
Many years ago I remember seeing a clip of Hitler with his dog, I remember him going to stroke or pat it, the dog was cowering I could tell it was frightened of him.
So I believe you were correct in assuming him as being a bossy overbearing dog owner.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for the comment, john. Yes, I can imagine Hitler being a harsh type of dog owner. He seemed like someone who would tend to be a harsh disciplinarian. ON what i said about fathers in Muslim families not showing much love or devotion, I was thinking that, as I wander around and see Muslims in local shopping centres, etc, I don’t see much enjoyment or smiling or joking, the way you sometimes do see among other non-Muslim people. Maybe that Muslim man who said that there is no joy in Islam was right. Maybe Muslims do joke around at home, but they seem pretty stern out in public. Then again, we have been in lockdown against this Covid virus for quite a while where I live in Australia, so everybody is pretty depressed and joyless these days.
john smith says
Tim thank you for your reply, and I also agree with your views on muslims. Many muslims have been nurtured with hatred from the day they were born. They don’t feel love the same as most of us do, it’s just a word to them. That is why many of them are capable of murdering their own children, or their brothers of sisters, they have never loved them, because if they did, they would never commit such an evil crime.
On the other hand, many us non muslims, don’t know what its like to hate. I for one have never hated anyone, and I hope I never do. Having said that no one has ever harmed any of those that I love, and I pray that it stays that way, because I am sure that I would feel different if they did. I pray that I never have to feel hate.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for the reply, john. I agree with your comment. I believe that there is a lot of hatred and not much love, as far as I can see, in Islam. As you mention, parents killing their own children in Muslim honour killings, and other types of actions, display a distinct lack of anything we would recognise as love.
James Lincoln says
gravenimage,
I think it falls under the category of “if I can’t have her – nobody can…”
Infidel says
As Rob O’Neill tweeted:
gravenimage says
+1
Raja says
+1
wpm says
Saying Bin Laden was a good family man with over 6 wives(we do not know how many women of the right hand he had) and over 25 children is like saying Jeffery Dalmer the serial killer and cannibal was a good interesting exotic chef .
gravenimage says
+1
nicholas tesdorf says
At some time, the New York Times probably thought that Adolf Hitler and Josef Goebbels were ‘devoted family men’ It makes as much sense.
Krishna says
Same thing Indian leftist scroll news site made an article about Osama bin laden
gravenimage says
Do you have a link. Krishna?
Raja says
Hitler was an ardent politician, so much so he married at the age of 56 young !!! So what? His devotion to his nation was impeccable but got everything every wrong for his country, so much so even today the Germans are ashamed of him !!!
With Osama it is no different, his pious “religiosity” to islam was detrimental to America and the West. He succeeded in killing only 2996 people but was aiming the skies. He did a commendable job for the devil and the world has not shamed him nor his so called religion, especially NYT
When Left runs the country every rat can have his day !!!
Mae~mae says
How Islamic compliant of them.
#IslamicInfiltration
#IslamicIndoctrinationIsABitch
Crusades Were Right says
“… A stern upholder of his country’s interests, this self-made man left his mark in the field of international politics, often controversially.
Adolf, we hardly knew ye.”
lol