FNC Chides NYT for Downplaying Muslim Extremism of NYC Terrorists


UPDATE: MRC's Times Watch site tackled the Times's strange omission of the Muslim extremism angle last week: TimesWatch.org

On Saturday's Fox Newswatch, host Jon Scott led the panel in a discussion of the New York Times's coverage of the terror plot against synagogues in New York City, as the paper downpayed the extreme Muslim beliefs of the plotters. Even liberal analyst Jane Hall took the New York Times to task, arguing that the conversion of the plotters to Islam while serving time in prison was "an important part of the story."

Scott opened discussion of the topic:

Coverage of the stories in the New York Times seemed to gloss over the group's openly expressed desire to commit jihad, even though the police commissioner mentioned it at a news conference. Why did the New York Times decide to shy away from mentioning the suspect's extreme Muslim beliefs?

Conservative analyst Andrea Tantaros complained about a trend toward oversensitivity in talking about Muslim extremism to the point of omitting key facts in a story:

They're afraid to call it what it is. We've seen terrorist attacks are now man-made disasters. We can't talk about the war on terror. We can't call things out for what they really are for fear of blowback or we might upset somebody's feelings.

The normally liberal Hall agreed with the panel's criticism: "I think this criticism of the New York Times is valid. They did this once before. It's not that they didn't mention it, but it's not the lead."

Referring to the New York Post's reporting that the terrorists had been converted to Islam in prison, she continued: "It read something like that, thatthey have been converted. That is also a scary thing, and an important part of the story. And it's considered, we don't want to, most Muslims are not terrorists. And you can just see the logic of the story."

Below is a complete transcript of the segment from the Saturday, May 30, Fox Newswatch on FNC:

JON SCOTT: Last week, on this program, we discussed coverage of the debate over our national security policy. On one day, we witnessed a sitting President and a former Vice President expressing almost opposite views about how we should fight the terrorists who want to harm us.

The speeches delivered on the same day that the FBI and New York police announced they had foiled a homegrown terror plot. Coverage of the stories in the New York Times seemed to gloss over the group's openly expressed desire to commit jihad, even though the police commissioner mentioned it at a news conference. Why did the New York Times decide to shy away from mentioning the suspect's extreme Muslim beliefs? Do you have a thought on that, Andrea?

ANDREA TANTAROS, CONSERVATIVE ANALYST: Absolutely, this is a move that the country is going in. And the Obama administration is setting the tone. We're more concerned with being sensitive than actually reporting the facts here. And I think it's particularly when you're talking about radical Islamic Jihadism. They're afraid to call it what it is. We've seen terrorist attacks are now man-made disasters. We can't talk about the war on terror. We can't call things out for what they really are for fear of blowback or we might upset somebody's feelings.

SCOTT: Jane, the White House has officially stopped using war on terror.

JANE HALL, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: I think this criticism of the New York Times is valid. They did this once before. It's not that they didn't mention it, but it's not the lead. The New York Post was like, jailhouse jihad, maybe. ... I don't know if that's the headline, but it read something like that, that they have been converted. That is also a scary thing, and an important part of the story. And it's considered, we don't want to -- most Muslims are not terrorists. And you can just see the logic of the story.

SCOTT: Jonathan?

JONATHAN MARTIN, POLITICO.COM: Yeah, I was struck by the fact that President Obama did not incorporate this foiled plot into his speech last week. I think it's a reminder of the threat that's still out there even to this day.

—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

No, no, they're not Muslim extremists

They are just "disenfranchised youths."

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.  -Bart Simpson

 

The Army Times is reporting

The Army Times is reporting the following:

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — A man with “political and religious motives” killed a soldier just out of basic training and wounded another Monday in an attack on a military recruiting center, police said...

...Police arrested Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, 23, along a crosstown interstate moments after the shootings at the Army-Navy Career Center in a shopping center in west Little Rock.

Muhammad acted alone, the police chief said, and based on an interview with officers, the suspect “probably had political and religious motives for the attack.” He lived in an apartment just 1½ miles from the recruiting center. A search warrant had been obtained for the apartment.

Thomas said Muhammad, previously known as Carlos Bledsoe, would be charged with first-degree murder, plus 15 counts of committing a terroristic act. Thomas said those counts result from the gunfire occurring near other people.

Anybody wanna bet that the nature of the crime is NOT laid out as an Islamic Fascism attack by the MSM, but will rather be laid out as a economic crime?

NYT on side of murderers

The NYT believes the jihadis are acting rightly. Therefore they protect them every chance they get.

Natural like a snake bite, those man-made disasters.

Nothing you can do about nature, you know.

Most moslems in the world do not have the funds to purchase a C-4 suicide belt, or an RPG.

A slect few do have the funds to buy an A-bomb. 

They will be used soon, naturally.

Everyone back to sleep now. Wake up in moslem paradice AKA, 700 AD.

Reagan VS Carter and 0bama

The NY Slimes is truly sickening

I'll bet they have proprietary software running on their networks that detects anytime anyone types 'jihad', 'terrorist', 'islamist' or 'radical.'

A short burst of 20 amps is then administered to the offender via the keyboard. 

I saw this - there was a

I saw this - there was a lively debate between Hall, Tantaros, and Jim Pinkerton the whole show, while Jonathan Martin gave an excellent portrayal of a potted fern sitting in the corner. I still say they should staff this show with the NewsBusters all stars.

The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.

I wonder if they would also

I wonder if they would also downplay the American patriotism of returning Iraq and Afghanistan war vets, who are considered a threat by the current misadministration.