Grading PolitiFact: Glenn Beck and the Muslim Brotherhood

We always try to get the original statement in its full context rather than an edited form that appeared in news stories.
--About PolitiFact

The issue:

The fact checkers:

Robert Farley:  writer, researcher
Bill Adair:  editor


Analysis:

Let's jump right in with PolitiFact's fact check:

As Americans watch the Egyptian uprising from afar, politicians and pundits have speculated about whether the Muslim Brotherhood, an opposition group, will gain power.

On his radio show on Jan. 31, Glenn Beck said listeners should know that conspirators of the 9/11 attacks were part of the group.

Writer Robert Farley nearly fashioned a perfect beginning.  The main problem is the ambiguity of "were part of the group."  "Were" as in currently or "were" as in formerly?  The nature of the "al-Qaida links" may be quite different depending on what is meant.  So what did Beck say?

"So the Muslim Brotherhood, they're nothing to worry about," Beck began sarcastically.

That's an odd place to begin.  Does Beck's audience automatically possess functional knowledge of the Muslim Brotherhood, that Beck can begin the tale more-or-less in the middle?  We have a major clue here indicating missing context.  I was able to locate the relevant segment of Beck's radio program at YouTube:



The video appears to show that Beck "began" talking about the Muslim Brotherhood following a commercial break.  Beck's opening provides a strong indication that the preceding program segment provides additional context for his remarks.  From a journalistic standpoint, it is inexcusable not to consider that full context as it colors the meaning of Beck's statements.  It is nearly as inexcusable for the journalist to consider that full context without giving the reader any indication that the author considered the full context.

After watching the video, it is also clear that PolitiFact left out much of the more immediate context.  Beck was lampooning the presentation of the Muslim Brotherhood as presented by the mainstream media, specifically by an unnamed CNN anchor who had described the organization as "tirelessly and many times courageously campaigned for elections.  It has campaigned against the government.  It has campaigned on behalf of the poor."

So maybe Beck was just trying to helpfully distinguish between  the Muslim Brotherhood and the March of Dimes or maybe the Peace Corps?  Let's return to what PolitiFact says Beck said:

"Abdullah Azzam and Muhammad Qutb, they taught in Saudi Arabia," Beck said. "…Their star student? Osama bin Laden."

"Then, from the Egyptian Brotherhood, you have (Ayman) al-Zawahiri," a prominent leader of al-Qaida, he said.

"And another star pupil that has come out of the Muslim Brotherhood? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed," Beck said, referring to the al-Qaida leader described in the 9/11 Commission Report as "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks."

Beck did say those things.  What now?

The Muslim Brotherhood, the largest opposition movement in Egypt, seeks to establish an Islamic state governed by sharia or Islamic law. It's true that many al-Qaida members, and 9/11 conspirators specifically, can trace their roots through the Muslim Brotherhood at one time. But the two groups are now bitter rivals. While the Muslim Brotherhood has evolved into a group that says it seeks a gradual and peaceful path to power, al-Qaida has pursued a violent holy war. The Muslim Brotherhood has repeatedly denounced al-Qaida, and vice versa.

Astonishingly (or not so astonishingly for those of us who follow PolitiFact's shenanigans on a regular basis), Farley's summary paragraph on the Muslim Brotherhood flatly ignores the set of his own expert sources who happen to disagree with the center-left Brookings Institution's Bruce Riedel's assessment.  The other linked sources--the ones quoted less or not at all--provide plenty of material contradicting (actually not quite contradicting, depending on whether we take what the Brotherhood "says" as the truth--bww) Farley's claims.

Riedel is correct in saying that the Muslim Brotherhood has drawn the ire of al Qaeda’s leaders for being “too soft.” But this glosses over the many ideological similarities between the two organizations. They both want to conquer lands in the name of Islam and establish Sharia law everywhere they can. They simply disagree about how to best accomplish that goal. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri, who were recruited by the Brotherhood as young men, did not leave the organization because they disagreed with its long-term goals. They were simply unwilling to compromise at a tactical level. 

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has been willing to use non-violent tactics, whereas al Qaeda has endorsed violent jihad to the bloody end no matter what. This does not mean the Muslim Brotherhood eschews violence (as illustrated by the quotes above). It simply means that the Brotherhood is more practical than al Qaeda when it comes to achieving its long-term goals, and is willing to use non-violent tactics as well as violence. 

(Thomas Joscelyn in the Weekly Standard)

(L)ike other mass social movements, Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood is hardly a monolith; it comprises hardliners, reformers, and centrists, notes terrorism expert Lydia Khalil.  And some hardline leaders have voiced support for al-Qaeda or use of violent jihad. For instance, as recently as 2006, Khalil points out, a member of Brotherhood elected to parliament, Ragib Hilal Hamida, voiced support for terrorism in the face of Western occupation. Instances like these  raise questions over the group's commitment to nonviolence.

(Jayshree Bajoria, Council on Foreign Relations)

To put a point on it, PolitiFact is doing precisely what it later faults Beck for doing:  telling only part of the story.

After delving into the cases of bin Laden, al Zawahiri and Mohammed, PolitiFact returns to the claim in question:

Beck is technically correct that many al-Qaida terrorists were once members of the Muslim Brotherhood, said Evan Kohlmann, a terrorism expert who consults for the Department of Justice, "Unfortunately, this analogy is a bit like saying that the Boy Scouts are a paramilitary organization because a certain percentage of them later go on to enlist in the U.S. military.

Beck is "technically correct," but Evan Kohlmann, the expert who says so, follows with a caveat.

PolitiFact does Kohlmann no favors by using his statement.

Beck wasn't making any analogy.  Beck was ostensibly talking about reality in real terms.  Kohlmann was the one making an analogy between Beck's argument and one involving the Boy Scouts.  Substitute "argument" for "analogy" and Kohlmann has a point if Beck is arguing for concern about the Muslim Brotherhood based solely on former affiliations by members of al-Qaida.  The latter appears to assume quite a bit and ought to fall outside the purview of Kohmann's expertise.  Let Kohlmann share his knowledge regarding the Muslim Brotherhood.  Let others parse Beck's argument.

Conclusion time:

... Beck is right that many 9/11 conspirators have come out of, or once ascribed to the teachings of, the Muslim Brotherhood -- including Osama bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for sure, while the case for al-Zawahiri is less clear. But Beck's comments ignore the sharply different approaches of the two groups. Each has disavowed the other, and each has charted a different path to power (at least publicly).

(...)

But by failing to even mention the divide between the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida, Beck has left out key context in his history lesson, and so we rate his statement Half True.

By failing to even mention that the divide Beck didn't mention isn't so clear--even though the list of cited works made it clear--PolitiFact's fact check of Beck can't exceed its subject's performance on the "Truth-O-Meter."

Russia's Bolsheviks perhaps offer a suitable analogy.  The organization seized control of Russia after a popular revolution, and one of the several threads of thought within that group eventually dominated, eventually leading to Leninism and Stalinism.  The evidence suggests Beck made that kind of point about the Muslim Brotherhood.  PolitiFact obscures Beck's probable intent and fails to provide a fair sampling of expert opinion.  The latter omission unfairly undermines Beck's point when it ought to strengthen his argument.


The grades:

Robert Farley:  F
Bill Adair:  F


Feb. 18, 2011: Added a caveat to my charge that Farley wrote a paragraph contradicted by many of his sources. Farley reported that the Muslim Brotherhood "says" it eschews violence. Farley's statement, in context, encourages the reader to accept the claims of some in the Muslim Brotherhood on that point.