WaPo's Josh White Can't Figure Out 'Motive' of Jihadist Military Site Vandalizer, Shooter, and IED Preparer
By Tom Blumer | January 27, 2012 | 02:23
Would someone please buy the Washington Post's Josh White a clue? He can't seem to get a handle on the "motive" for the actions of Yonathan Melaku (actually, I think White is pretending).
Melaku has just pleaded guilty and will be sentenced to 25 years in jail. Authorities say he vandalized military grave markers, shot at the Pentagon and military museums, and was working on an improvised explosive device. But the headline to White's story (HT Atlas Shrugs) and the reporter's content act as if no one has the foggiest idea what drop Melaku to do what he did (words which betray motivation are bolded):
Story Continues Below Ad ↓Motive of shooter who targeted military sites is unclear
Yonathan Melaku was sneaking through Fort Myer and Arlington National Cemetery, his backpack filled with plastic bags of ammonium nitrate, a notebook containing jihadist messages, and a can of black spray paint. The 23-year-old former Marine was heading to the graves of the nation’s most recent heroes, aiming to desecrate the stones with Arabic statements and leave handfuls of explosive material nearby as a message.
Before police foiled the plan in June, the vandalism was to be Melaku’s sixth attack, months after he went on a mysterious shooting spree that targeted the Pentagon, the National Museum of the Marine Corps and two other military buildings in Northern Virginia. A video found after Melaku’s arrest showed him wearing a black mask and shooting a 9mm handgun out of his Acura’s passenger window as he drove along Interstate 95, shouting “Allahu Akbar!”It was all part of a solitary campaign of “fear and terror,” federal prosecutors said.
But authorities and Melaku’s defense attorney said no one knows for sure what led Melaku — a naturalized U.S. citizen from Ethiopia, local high school graduate and former Marine Corps Reservist — down that path or what message he was trying to send.
Melaku stood in U.S. District Court in Alexandria on Thursday morning to plead guilty to three counts, including shooting at the Pentagon on Oct. 19, 2010, and attempting to injure veterans’ memorials on U.S. property. As part of a plea agreement, Melaku admitted to using his legally obtained 9mm handgun to shoot the National Museum of the Marine Corps, the Pentagon and two military recruiting offices in October and November 2010.
The agreement calls for Melaku to serve 25 years in prison. Judge Gerald Bruce Lee accepted the plea, and Melaku is scheduled for sentencing on April 27.
Although Melaku acknowledged shooting at the buildings — attacks that did not injure anyone but caused an estimated $111,000 in damage — it still remains unclear why he did it. In a video entered into evidence and released by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, Melaku says that he was targeting the museum as a military building, to “turn it off permanently.”
FBI officials and prosecutors said Melaku was on a personal terror mission. They said he researched jihadism on the Internet and had references to terrorism in a notebook and on his computer. It also seemed like he was gathering materials to make an improvised explosive device, though there was no indication how he would have used it.
Melaku wanted “to create fear and terror, which is what terrorists do,” said Dana Boente, first assistant U.S. Attorney in Alexandria.
... Gregory English, Melaku’s defense lawyer, said after the hearing that Melaku’s family is of the Coptic Christian faith and that they were stunned to learn of his involvement in the crimes and the references to Islamic jihad.
Dictionary.com carries two primary definitions of "motive":
1. something that causes a person to act in a certain way, do a certain thing, etc.; incentive.
2. the goal or object of a person's actions: Her motive was revenge.
White and WaPo really don't have any wiggle room here. Anyone with an ounce of sense will also know that even if they are banking on the first version of the definition to controlling, they can't really claim that "motive" hasn't been identified. The evidence based on the material presented is that exposure to and adoption of jihadist teachings caused Melaku "to act in a certain way." We don't have to sit the guy down on a couch and ask about his family history to know this.
It seems like the Washington Post and most of the establishment press is so bound and determined to look the other way and otherwise minimize how the very real and intensely dangerous phenomenon known as homegrown terror has arisen. Jihad is the motivation, and that's all we really need to know.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Oh No...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 2:29am.
...more workplace induced stress not in any way connected to Mooslum extremists or terrorists.
You're kidding.
Submitted by jon_torlin on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 2:28am.
Boy, those people really think Denial is a river in what was formerly Egypt. (Watch for a name change to that country by the way, just like Persia became Iran)
Years and years of experience and information has taught us that this guy's actions are those of a jihadist Muslim, and they couldn't just admit that little thing??
-Jon
Sherlock Holmes...NOT!
Submitted by P.J. Gladnick on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 6:33am.
Josh White is a prime candidate for the "Sherlock Holmes...NOT!" award.
Typical WaPo
Submitted by HockeyKid on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 7:32am.
When the headline should have been "Islamic jihadist convicted", they go with "Motive of shooter who targeted military sites is unclear". The tortured logic used to concoct that headline goes against every rule of headline writing--at least the rules I learned 30 years ago.
Oh, well. What are you going to do? It is, after all, the Washington Politburo.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Textbook example of political
Submitted by motherbelt on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 8:02am.
Textbook example of political correctness run amok.
Natalie Morales took it a step further this morning.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 9:00am.
When recanting the story, she actually had the nerve to say "the shooter yelled "GOD IS GREAT!", not Allah Akbar, which if course is what he really said. Perhaps she was hoping the dolts watching might think Hey, maybe he was a Presbyterian.
I just about spit out my coffee.
Once upon a time...
Submitted by tadchem on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 9:53am.
...potential terrorists, subversives, and saboteurs were recognizable by their use of Nazi slogans, Fascist sympathies, or support of Japanese Imperialism. Nowadays potential terrorists, subversives, and saboteurs hide behind religious rather than nationalist slogans, and our own overapplication of the First Amendment lets them get away with it.
Freedom of Religion does not give one the right to commit crimes against the very people who provide that freedom. Danté reserved the lowest level of Hell for those who betray their benefactors.
In 25 years...
Submitted by tadchem on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 9:57am.
"The agreement calls for Melaku to serve 25 years in prison."
I wonder what will be happening when some judge lets him walk out of prison after he's 'served his time.'
Will he still be a threat to anybody in the non-Jihadist world?
We get what we deserve.
Submitted by MacWell on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 11:55am.
We the people continue to sit back watching American Idol instead of a debate. We continue to allow the few, (sometimes less than 1% of the population), to dictate to us. It started long ago with the war on cigarettes, and has transformed into the beast we now have. They, the career politicians, pandering for votes, will trade their, NO, OUR votes, like baseball cards. They only care when it's election time, then, they're our bestest friend.
We may only have one more chance this November, we must rid American politics from the very idea of a career. We must revert to the model the framers left us, citizen government. We need more "Joe the plumber"s running, more plumbers and paperhangers, and librarians, and CPA's and carpet cleaners, people from all walks of life in America.
As it is, our Congress is run by lawyers, (not that there's anything wrong with them), lawyers play a role in many things, politics should not be one of them, at least not to the percentage that they are.
We the people have allowed those we sent to speak in our stead, to lie to us, steal from us, and make fools of us, daily.
We the people MUST take America back in November, end careers in politics.
my Opinion and then......I have an Idea.................
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 12:16pm.
OK this "reporter" is OBVIOUSLY either an IDIOT or a LIAR! How can you NOT know what his modivation was.... he said it its TERROR! when you carry explosives with intent to cause someone harm YOU ARE A TERRORIST! This has nothing to do with his religion per se (Other than it is called for in the Quran.) He OBVIOUSLY HATES AMERICA and was trying to kill its citizens through acts of terrorism
Since this MORON is a Marine (Yes once a Marine always a Marine..... even with TURDS like this) It should be up to us Marines to take care of this. OK ALL YOU JARHEADS! BLANKET PARTY FOR THIS DIRTBAG 0300 TOMORROW MORNING! Everyone grab your lava soap and your green wool socks! I'll bring the Green blanket!
This sounds like a bad joke
Submitted by LinTaylor on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 12:25pm.
It's like a scene from a comedy where a murder victim is lying there with a knife sticking out of his back and the police say "At this time, the cause of death is unclear, but we're not ready to call it foul play."
I don't really have much of a problem with this...
Submitted by Rover on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 12:50pm.
Aside from the TITLE being a little too pithy, the article itself was very clear about presenting the facts that would allow any reasonable reader to conclude that this was an islamic extremist conducting his own, personal terror campaign. Of course, spinning the title might have been a technique to get readers to skip over the article, or to keep it from popping up in online searches, but if White wanted to white-wash (pun intended) this, he could easily have omitted the details that Tom recorded in bold.
If anything, White seems to be intimating that the "authorities" who said that they didn't know what led him "down that path or what message he was trying to send" needed to open their eyes, considering the details of the case that he then presented.
I think it IS vitally important to figure out WHY an ostensibly-assimilated Islamic-American, who'd served in the Marines, would radicalize like this. I said the same thing about the Time Square bomber, when the press DID work feverishly to spin the story to remove any hint of a radical Islamic side to the event. If we don't begin to understand why young Islamic Americans, apparently assimilated, can turn radical, we can't learn warning signs or take both preventive and protective measures.
So I don't have a problem with the write-up. While it says that the authorities didn't know why he took this path (which I feel is something OTHER than "motive," rather it speaks to an evolution in the way he thinks, which IS important but currently unknown), it also relayed the FBI statement that he was on a personal terror mission. If the TITLE of White's article were something saying that the reasons this terrorist chose this path are unclear, I would have no complaints. And given White's relaying of the multiple indicators of a radical islamic terrorist, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that the short title was an attempt to make it more succinct, or even an editor's choice which may or may not have been agenda-motivated.
I think you're being way too kind
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 12:55pm.
The motive was jihad.
What specific influences sucked him into carrying out his own personal jihad would be useful to determine for future deterrence and homegrown terrorist-identification purposes. But no matter what they find, the underlying motive remains: jihad.
Thus, I am far from okay with how this story was covered.
I see what you're saying, but...
Submitted by Rover on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 3:06pm.
Tom,
Thanks for the research that went into your article.
I see what you're saying; but as I read it, the motive was clearly Jihad, and White laid out the evidence in a way that would allow the reader to come to that conclusion, without spoon-feeding us HIS (White's) conclusion. That's what a good journalist should do, I believe. If this had been an article about some event that could, at least arguably, support some LIBERAL talking-point, and he'd spoon-fed us the liberal conclusion, we'd be writing about THAT.
Let me ask you this: reading the article WITHOUT the misleading title, is there still anything wrong with it?
Yes, there is still something wrong
Submitted by jon_torlin on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 3:59pm.
It's part of the media's attempt to downplay the Islamists involvement in incidents like this, just like they tried to say that the Ft. Hood Shooter wasn't motivated by Islam. In short, they keep pushing the idea that Islam is a religion of peace(started wrongfully by Bush and held up to this day) despite evidence and I mean LOADS of evidence to the contrary.
So by following that meme that Islam is a religion of peace, they (seemingly) can't understand what the motivation might have been when in fact if you look at and understand the Koran and the very core of what Islam is, what this guy did was in fact motivated by Islam.
They also try to hide the fact that anyone who is of Islam means the rest of us harm(sooner or later, not if but when) and that's why they try to make something like this and the Ft Hood Shooter and other incidents as "isolated" incidents, even though we've had plenty of incidents in the past 3 years ALONE to the contrary.
That's what's wrong with it. And I'm with Mr. Blumer on this, I think White was being deliberately obtuse on seemingly not knowing why this happened, but on the other hand, when it comes to liberals, they don't let facts get in the way of what they believe in or try to continue to manipulate people regardless of the facts.
-Jon
Rover
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 11:50pm.
I agree that it doesn't read as badly without the headline first hitting you with the predisposition.
Having said that, this is pretty weak: "it still remains unclear why he did it." This is with people saying it was about fear and terror three different times.
So is this, even though it's White interpreting Melaku's lawyer: "whether his client suffers from a psychological problem." Yeah, it's that he accepted jihad as a guiding principle.
I'm relatively sure
Submitted by NOLAgirl on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 12:56pm.
that if the shooter had been a Christian of any denomination and had perpetrated the crimes in the name of said Christian denomination then that information would have been repeated ad nauseum.
It's simple to see
Submitted by ammo john on Fri, 01/27/2012 - 1:07pm.
It's another Washington Post "White" wash!