Maddening: U.S. Media "Spikes" Arrest of Terrorists Targeting U.S.

By Robert A. Hahn Posted in Comments (23) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

If you're a regular reader of Turkish Press or Geo in Pakistan, you already know that on December 23,

    Three Algerians arrested in an anti-terrorist operation in southern Italy are suspected of being linked to a planned new series of attacks in the United States, Interior Minister Giuseppe Pisanu said Friday.

    The attacks would have targeted ships, stadiums or railway stations in a bid to outdo the September 11, 2001 strikes by Al-Qaeda in New York and Washington which killed some 2,700 people, Pisanu said.

But if you have been relying on the U.S. media to warn you about things like this, you haven't heard anything about it.

More below...

You would think that the arrest of terrorists planning to "outdo 9/11" would warrant some news coverage in the United States, but that's not what the editors at your Ministry of Truth decided. On that day in history, they thought the important news was that six Sudanese were abducted in Iraq, that Fidel Castro said that Bush is 'very much a fool,' that there was a vast US effort on eavesdropping (the NSA), and that the federal government was running a top secret program to monitor radiation levels at over a hundred Muslim sites in the Washington, D.C., area.

So the news that day was not that terrorists had been planning to blow up ships, stadiums or railway stations in the United States, but that things were going badly in Iraq, that President Bush was thought to be a fool, and that the government has been spying on people in the U.S.

Do you ever wonder whose side these people are on?

« Toward an Understanding of the Obamian LanguageComments (4) | DeLay Steps Down PermanentlyComments (35) »
Maddening: U.S. Media "Spikes" Arrest of Terrorists Targeting U.S. 23 Comments (0 topical, 23 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

I know perfectly well the MSM is not on the side of a free, self-determining, informed and powerful U.S.

Michelle Malkin has an excellent blog post about the media burying the Saddam/terrorism link:

Thanks goodness for the new media.

hurt Bush?  

You silly man.  

Earth to Nick, Earth to Nick. Please come home now Nick its time for your meds.

At least you didn't write this with some sort of surprise or shock :-)

I almost forgot to be afraid today.

If I had a dime for everyone who "plans" to harm the USA...

"suspected of being linked..."?  This is News?

'Bouhrama, 32, had been in jail in Naples since November 15...'

Give me a break!  I expect better than this from a front page poster at RedState.

Contrary to popular belief, it is probably better to look directly at the one who is pointing a gun in your direction than to keep your back turned and pretend no one is there, even if it is a little more nerve-wracking.

So by jsteele

you think that because you accept that there may be bad guys out there is justifcation for the press not to report this plot?

    "suspected of being linked..."? This is News?

It sure was when Karl Rove was suspected. Then it was Front Page News for months. Of course, that being news was useful to The Party. This was not, which is why your Ministry Of Truth decided not to tell you about it.

Hey, Powerline, you made RedState!


Or the Turkesh press.  I seem to recall a problem with our original plan to invade Iraq.  The Turks would not allow US forces to use their air-strips or land.  

Some middle east governments have taken advantage of the war on terror to label polictical opponents terrorists as an excuse to take them out, and curry favor with the US.  The article you linked to was long on accusations, but did not cite any physical evidence of a planned attack.  No bombs, no weapons, just some people talking about how much they would like to do something...

...or the Pakistani press, or the Italian press, the South African press, Xinhua, or even the Voice of America... all of which ran stories on this.

You're being a troll — and a twit — in the pursuit of making lame excuses for a dishonest media in the U.S.

Lose it.

I did not mean to rip on you.  I have reviewed my comments, and I see what you mean.

The point I was trying to make, is that this threat seems pretty minor compared to whats going on right now in Iraq.  Its just fine with me if other countries are doing their part to investigate and arrest suspected terrorists!  I just have so little faith in the governments involved in this story.

You complain that this story is not getting enough attention in the USA press, but I have to disagree.  This is just allegations, not convictions.

I am much more concerned about the terrorist groups in Iraq that have been caught and prosecuted, and we never hear about it in the USA press!  I'd like to see the NYT run a story on that!

You complain that this story is not getting enough attention in the USA press, but I have to disagree.  This is just allegations, not convictions.

That the press should never cover stories about cases until there are criminal convictions?

No doubt Tom DeLay and Karl Rove will be thrilled. For that matter, I suppose that Clinton being impeached shouldn't have made the NBC news.

I've been thinking alot lately about what constitutes a reliable source. I think you are right to be skeptical of this story. The fact is was repeated in any number of papers is irrelavant to it's authenticity.

What's a reliable source?  I don't know. Everytime I think I've reached the depths of cynicism a newspaper headline like, "All miners found Alive" pops up everywhere.

"It is our wish to see America become a isolated, helpless country where people sit around laughing at the misfortunes of other countries and tries to make peace with terrorists. We do our part by only showing bad news and exaggerating it, making fun of Bush and the government, and supporting the Democratic party. Enjoy your day!"

Correction: "Welcome to one of the greatest internal problems in the USA!"

Silly Wabbit.  Of course Delay, Rove, and Clinton make the press!  I'm just not so sure that haaji A, B, and C, are worth the same sort of ink.

It's odd that a Google search for "Giuseppe Pisanu three Algerians" turns up so many articles published back on December 23 and 24.

The difference seems to be something that could be clarified by someone who can get the written statement issued by the Interior Minister.

He either said the terrorists were suspected of planning attacks in Iraq and Italy or he said they planned attacks in the U.S.A. that would top 9/11.

Which did he say?  The LA Times, the Voice of America, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, etc., etc., reported the arrests.  Who quoted the press release correctly?

 Indeed, even CNN ran the story on December 23rd. Per Google the Washington Post did as well but now the only evidence is Google's link to a WP page that doesn't exist and I couldn't find the article in their archives.

 At first glance, this may or may not be a good example of the media burying a story, but what did pique my interest is how all the different versions got around, and following up on that may (ok, or may not) speak to motives.

 The CNN posting credits Reuters, and is shorter than the other postings, draws a link to Al Qaeda, and portrays the threat as aimed toward Italian interests (though citing "international terrorism" as the charge against the suspects).

 The Las Vegas Sun and many other outlets ran a posting attributed to the AP on December 23rd which is longer, suggested the suspects were engaged in a plot against targets in  Iraq and Italy, were even planning to move to Iraq to carry out their role. The AP story includes what appears to be a direct quote from Giuseppe Pisanu that talked about other countries, but still no mention of a direct threat against US interests.,5478,17656877%255E1702

 The Turkish Press posting is also found many other places, word for word, including the Herald Sun (AU) for example. This is the story cited in the OP and portrays Pisanu as stating there was a clear threat to US interests, specifically the stadiums, railways, etc. It doesn't mention any targets or intentions towards Iraq, as opposed to the AP story. The Herald attributed the story to "correspondents in Rome" which would seem to suggest theirs was more direct from the source.

 Voice of America runs a completely different story than the other three. It makes the Al Qaeda connection, cites possible targets "abroad" and in Italy; it cites no specific US interests but there's an interesting bit about a wiretapped conversation looking into the bombing of a large ship which does harken to at least a bit of the Turkish Press story.

 So what interests me, is how do we get four similar stories that each show up on the 23rd or the 24th in a large number of domestic and foreign media outlets (save for the VoA report which I couldn't find duplicated anywhere else)? And where each have some different details - perhaps nothing directly contradictory but definitely painting a different picture insofar as what/where the immediate targets were for the suspects and the organization they were part of (which was universally cited as linked to Al Qaeda)? Which story is most correct? One would assume the story broke first in an Italian outlet, probably in Italian - so did all four stories above get derived from the original Italian story and did Reuters, AP, and VoA all choose to downplay or outright spike/bury any mention of US targets? Did the Turkish Press "enhance" the story? Or was the original report short on facts to begin with, and the Turkish Press (or whatever their source was if it wasn't their own reporter) just did an outstanding job of digging deeper and providing more relevant information by way of speaking with Pisanu or his representatives (or perhaps simply providing a direct translation to English from the original report).

 It's an interesting situation, to me at least.

All the news that's fit to print?

Apparently, the subscribers to the Bradenton Herald Today are better informed than those foolish enough to rely on the Gray Lady.

Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)

©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service