Investor's Business Daily, May 10th, 2007
Media: In covering the Jersey Jihadists case, pundits did their best to play down the religious factor that screamed as loud as the suspects' "Allah Akbar!" shouting and shooting in the Poconos.
Others yawned at the news of several Muslims plotting to kill 100 soldiers on U.S. soil. "Lot of hoopla," sniffed a spokeswoman for the NYU Center on Law and Security during a segment on the "CBS Evening News."
Such skepticism was music to the ears of left-wing bloggers who posit that such publicized arrests are part of a Karl Rovian conspiracy to frighten Americans into supporting the Iraq War. Apparently they also think the Circuit City clerk who tipped off the feds was in on the conspiracy.
The Philadelphia Inquirer chimed in that such anti-terror arrests are "often overblown." The same paper ran a long piece interviewing neighbors and relatives of the six Muslim suspects that studiously avoided mentioning that anyone involved is Muslim. After making a point 15f saying the FBI "alleged" the men are "Islamic radicals," the article proceeded to try to shoot that description down.
Sources close to the men were "shocked" and "blown away" that they could be tied up in terror. They were so "nice." One even shared backyard-grown cucumbers with his neighbors!
The Los Angeles Times also seemed skeptical the terror suspects were motivated by jihad. "The FBI says the 'radical Islamists' wanted to 'shoot up' Ft. Dix in New Jersey," read the headline on its one-column, below-the-fold story (quote marks in the original).
MSNBC's Chris Matthews couldn't figure it out. What's their motive? he bellowed. Iraq? What is it?!
Apparently the media elite spent too much time on the phone with CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) apologists to bother reading the FBI affidavit, which makes it clear they were motivated simply by Islamic jihad (as if that were anything new).
It records the men saying they were willing to die killing infidels in the name of Allah. One asks who'll take care of his family. Not to worry, another responds, "Allah will take care of your wife and kids." They watched speeches by Osama bin Laden calling for jihad, videos of jihadi attacks, and videotaped messages from two of the 9/11 "martyrs."
Yet the media would have none of it. AP quoted one of their fathers insisting his son "is not a terrorist." Of course not. He's a "mujahedeen," a freedom fighter. And we are the terrorists. A friend of his son confirmed he's a religious man, but he "wasn't violent at all." They never are -- until they decide to slit your throat.
CAIR immediately issued a warning to the media to "refrain from linking this case to the faith of Islam." And the media dutifully obliged. By defining terrorism down to appease such Muslim groups, they are committing professional malpractice, which is unconscionable in time of war. They're abdicating their duty to report the facts to a public still under threat of terrorism.
As a result, they're not helping educate other common citizens like the Circuit City hero who can help police disrupt other terror plots. By bending over backward to look tolerant of Islam, they are actually helping the bad guys -- who just happen to all share the same faith.
