Some of the best coverage of the demonstrations in Egypt were on Al-Jazeera. They were so good, they were cut off by the authorities. Till then, they’d had the cameras in and about the crowds and were getting info that the others – CNN, BBC, etc – simply weren’t wired in to get.
Next best, seemed to me, was CCTV of China. They were practical and objective. They talked of post-Mubarak and the Muslim Brotherhood.
BBC was not too good, at least at the outset. It was all “freedom, peace and democracy” kind of stuff, with the reporters overcome with the atmosphere and talking of their (their) excitement at what was happening. It was only after a few days that they got a bit more realistic and started talking about what might happen after Mubarak, and then got around to mentioning the Muslim Brotherhood.
The best coverage of the Brotherhood was on Hannity on Fox News. That will pain my more liberal readers, but of the coverage I’ve seen so far none has covered the Brotherhood and its background in as much depth as the long program this morning by Hannity.
One of his guests was a lady Democrat who said something like: “the Muslim Brotherhood is not the issue now; the issue is when and how Mubarak will go”. Challenged on this, she said post-Mubarak Brotherhood involvement was “pure speculation”.
No, lady, it’s not. It’s a near certainty. And it’s a fiercely anti-western ideology. The west, the US, simply has to contemplate a post-Mubarak Egypt with the Brotherhood in the driving seat. That’s not to say that the US should – as Obama has done – come right out and encourage the involvement of the Brotherhood.
**************
Related:
“Our World: Clueless in Washington”, Carolyn Glick, The Jerusalem Post, 2 Feb 2011
