One way to effectively lie in an op-ed is by using lies as secondary information, rather than highlighting them. Even when the reader knows that the writer is biased, the subconscious assumption is that he is twisting real facts to make his point - and those "facts" can easily be believed.
Here is what Omar said:
Radical groups like the Islamic State target the vulnerable and alienated. While some in Gaza are attracted to the jihadist ideology, their numbers are extremely low. The failure of the Islamic State to take root here is partly because of nationalist sentiment and the focus of Palestinian demands for freedom from this remote-control occupation and endless siege.Omer is distinguishing betweee the Islamic State and other Gaza groups, calling only IS "jihadist."
Which means he is pretending that Hamas and Islamic Jihad< are not jihadist groups!
No matter that Hamas' Al Qassam Brigades attracted 26,000 youths to its summer camps this summer to learn - jihad. The head of military training in these camps calls himself "Abu Jihad." Press releases from the Qassam Brigades end off with "JIhad victory or martyrdom."
Not to mention that the idea that Islamic Jihad isn't a jihadist group would be funny if it wasn't for the fact that the NYT accepts this propaganda as legitimate. (Here's their Saraya Brigades webpage banner.)
By accepting Omer's whitewashing of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the New York Times is pushing the idea that these groups are somehow "moderate" because there are groups that are more extreme. This downplaying of extremist groups because others are worse is a path towards acceptance of some forms of jihad as somehow justified as long as the enemy is the "extremists" of Israel.
Hamas is an extremist jihadist terror group by any objective measure - their actions, their words, their goals. The fact that the media is unwilling to say that in recent years shows the effectiveness of propaganda pieces like this one.
(h/t Ronald)