The first W

When a big story breaks — like, say, a major arrest foiling a frightening terrorist plot in peaceful Canada — the first question anyone wants to know is “who?”. Who did it? That is, after all, the first of journalism’s five Ws: who, what, when, where, why (and how).

But The New York Times on my doorstep this morning didn’t bother answering the who question in its story today until a spare mention of “Islamic” in the 22nd paragraph and “Muslim” in the 31st and even those were not terribly informative. In the fifth paragraph, the suspects were merely “mainly of South Asian descent.” India? Burma? Thailand? Indian? Southeast? Southwest? French-speaking terrorists from Vietnam coming to join their Quebecois confrères, perhaps? Who’s to know?

The Times wasn’t the only one. I heard the report on radio and they didn’t answer the first W, either. This is not journalism. Journalism answers the most basic questions, especially the tough ones.

A later story in The Times used the word “mosque” in the lead. Well, that helps.

Various stories also fell over themselves to say there was no known connection to al Qaeda. So? Is that the exclusive franchiser of islamofascist terrorism? And one of the Canadian stories I read said that a man with ties to al Qaeda came to the courthouse. Sounds like a link to me.

In World War II, we called the enemies Krauts and Japs and far worse.

Maybe we need a nickname for terrorists to get around the new PC effort not to offend anyone esxcept Americans. Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs, perhaps?

  • Andy Freeman

    How about “Republicans” or “theo-cons”?

    After all, we blame Repubs for Jim Crow, which the Dems created, so why not terrorism.

  • Kat

    I just call the slime ‘muslim gutblowers’.

  • nikto

    What difference does it make who THEY are—They’re fer-ners, right?

    They must be guilty.

    Put ’em in an English-only prison for life.

    Yeah, that’s the ticket.

  • What a sh*tty prejudiced piece of journalism (??) this later NYT article is.

  • Kat

    nitko–no, most are Canadians, plotting to kill fellow Canadians and they speak English quite well as most were educated there. I read everything I could find yesterday and isn’t it amazing that the muslim community says they are model citizens. And the bigger story is that someone broke some windows in a mosque some attended and now the victims are the poor muslims–just like in the US. Next we’ll learn the RCMP monitored their calls or something and the case will be thrown out and Harper will be blamed. They’ll go home and build more bombs.

  • Jeff —

    The real underreported issue here is how biased the NY Times has become under Pinch’s leadership. It’s not just this story — it’s the entire stance of the paper. It’s not about the facts any more, it’s about supporting an agenda that allows one to be received better in certain New York social circles. Check out this article for more terrible reporting by the Times:

  • Old Grouch


    No Jeff, you racist pig insensitive person, that sort of characterization implies judgement (and who are we to judge?) that such Islamic terrorists adherents to the Islamic faith (who, by coincidence and through no fault of their own, happened to be caught preparing to kill people trapped by possibly illegal government action and subsequently accused of “suspicious behavior”) are, in fact, (1) Islamic, (2) facisistic, (3) murderers, and (but only from our secular, western perspective) (4) nutjobs persons having a non-western mental and social orientation which, while it may be termed “irrational” by bigoted westerners, reflects the reality of their traditions and culture, and the continuing efforts by white male westerners to supress both. ;-)

    Glenn R. pointed out a comment thread over at Roger Simon’s blog in which one poster suggests (and several agree) that one reason for the Times sort of coverage is fear of accidentally goading the red-state yahoos into an orgy of anti-muslim bloodletting:

    Do media elites see Americans as hardcore racists, ever ready to flame into nightriders when they learn of Muslim youth on the prowl? Do they see themselves as social monitors holding back a tide of bloodletting vengence?

    Such efforts, if true, only serve to diminsh the perceived reliability of the media (to anyone who is paying attention), and, over the long term, they will lead to the media being coupled with the enemy in the eyes of many. At the least it will lead to increased skepticism: “The Times didn’t tell the whole story then. Why should I believe they’re telling the whole story now?”

  • Eileen

    Jihadists have no better friends than the MSM. You have to search high and low for basic information about Islime because the media’s agenda is not really geared toward truth telling. Propaganda machines such as the NYT twist themselves into pretzels in order to ‘pretend’ that Islime is our friend while the Islimes continue to play them like a fiddle.

    Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs = ‘disaffected youth’ in France
    Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs = ‘security officials’ in Gaza
    Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs = ‘militants’ in Indonesia
    Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs = ‘rebels’ fighting warlords supported by the evil U.S. in Somalia
    Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs = ‘gunmen’ or ‘insurgents’ in Iraq

    And so on and on and on all over the globe every day.

    Basically, Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs, according to the MSM, are anything BUt Islamofascistmurderingnutjobs. They are always VIctims, don’t you know. Where’s my baby violin when I need it? I know. I forgot it’s just that ‘tiny fraction of extremists’ which give Islime a bad name.

    War on Terror? There ain’t no stinkin’ War on Terror, and there never will be as long as left wing loons run the MSM.

    If it weren’t so serious, their transparent attempts at propaganda and information suppression would [almost] be funny. But the more Islime rears it’s ugly head, the more obvious the efforts at obfuscation become.

    Fortunately, the truth seems to be getting out in spite of them: Enemy, thy name is Islam.

    I guess not enough journalists have been kidnapped or had their heads chopped off for that very same truth to sink into MSM brains yet.

  • Ravo

    Seems we are expected to as townspeople viewing the naked Emporer. We are commanded to look thru the veil of political correctness – to disbelieve reality.

    Following are a multitude of copy/pastes from other commentors on other boards, who have dropped the PC veil.

    Much food for thought, as they comment on the Canadians being “d..mned if they do, and d…mned if they don’t” … just so long as they throw money at the “problem”.


    Islam is a supremacist cult. Does not the Koran call for the slaying or enslavement of ANYone who will not join it? How dare we continue to let those claiming to belong to such a cult into ANY western country!

    RE: blaming the Canadian government for not showering enough money on the problem:


    Why should the people of the West import these sociopaths and then be expected to diffuse their Islamic ideology inspired propesity to engage in violence here in our countries?

    Do Muslims in Canada or even elswhere need more training to understand and follow the law?

    Why do Muslims need special treatment or otherwise they are not responsible for blowing up you and your infidel friends?

    That would indicate that there was some sort of problem with young people that were muslim, it would have singled them out as troublemakers, simply because they follow a certain ‘religion’….what do they think we are…some kind of islamophobes?

    “Imagine the seething and cries of “racism” and “islamophobia” if the Canadian government were to have implemented such a study.

    Why is it that they need integration? What is it, exactly, in their views, attitudes, beliefs, that needs to be integrated? Do Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, etc., need to be “integrated”?

    “This is exactly the thing that needs to be questioned. WHY do MUSLIMS need SPECIAL INTEGRATION? I’ll tell you why, because they don’t fit in with anyone else ANYWHERE on the face of the planet.”

    “If and when any individuals are proven guilty under Canadian anti- terrorism legislation, then they are criminals. Canada’s 750,000 Muslims should not be made guilty-by-association, either in the Canadian media or through any public pronouncements;”

    On the other hand, there is this statement:

    “But our governments have refused to share in the cost of research that could benefit all Canadians. They have said, in effect, ‘this is your problem, you solve it.’ . . . This is a short-sighted attitude. If other social problems, such as the high rate of crime among inner city youth, received millions of dollars in research funding over the past decade, why are proactive Muslim initiatives being ignored?”

    So while the first statement insists that this is not a Muslim problem, the second statement implicitly admits that it is. ”

    How many times has it been pointed out by experts on Islam that the problem with the jihadist ideology rests with the Muslim community itself.

    It is their responsibility and their problem alone to address it […] more of the opposite is occurring as muslims follow the teachings of Mohammed through the quran and the hadiths.

    It’s become harder to convince people to believe that “tiny minority of extremists” twaddle. The politically correct idiocracy will have to work harder to keep up the “Religion of Peace” myth alive.

  • Gregdn

    Although I do agree that the Times bends over backwards for “PC” the important thing here is that the guys were caught, apparently through good police work. The fact that the media failed to identify them as Muslims is hardly earthshattering.
    If you guys need something important to worry about, try figuring out how we’re going to get out of Iraq.

  • Old Grouch

    “If you guys need something important to worry about…”

    Look, a Wookie!

  • Pingback: CaNN :: We started it.()

  • Pingback: California Conservative » Murtha’s Memorial Day Tribute: Accusing U.S. Military Of “A Coverup”()

  • Pingback: California Conservative » Racial Profiling MSM-Style: Terrorists Represent A “Broad Strata”()

  • Well said, Jeff. But what are you still doing subscribing to the NY Times?

    Recognition is the first step to betterment.


  • Jim C.

    “Medieval barbarians” works for me.

  • Here in Detroit, we call them:


    I’m told that’s what the military in the Sand Bowl call them too.

  • Scott Free

    How about ‘splody-dope’ – or is that too LGF?

  • Pingback: Don Surber()

  • Ravo

    Read the first few lines in this scan of page A3 of Sunday’s Toronto Star.

    It would be hard to even make this stuff up.

  • penny

    Oh, but, Jeff, in the pc and muliti-culti muzzled editorial room of the NYT’s anyone identifying a minority groups dysfunctional behavior can only be a racist at heart. (nitko’s above bizarre utterance, in lock step with the NYT’s attitude, makes my point.)

    How ludicrous, 30 years into Islamofascism’s global reign of terror, is it that the white men at the Times can’t utter the words Muslim terrorist? The body count keeps mounting and these guilty little white boys at the NYT’s are forbidden to identify the perpetrators. How would that have played during WWII?

    Like their self-censorship during the Cartoon War, where they could report the incident but not show the cartoons to us, reporting on a major terrorist plot and not describing the suspects as Muslims is just as lame. We all know they weren’t Swedes affiliated with the Lutheran church.

    The sniveling burqa clad journos at the Times surrendered logic, reason and honesty a long time ago.

    And, Gregdn, you worry about getting out of Iraq. It’s not a worry of mine. I approve of us there. I worry more about how pc has aided and abetted the enemy over the years.

  • TVD

    “Anti-gay activists.”

  • Foobarista

    All I’ll say is that NYT stock will be trading on the pink sheets soon and maybe you’ll buy the company for a buck and a half and fix it up. They have some nice Manhattan real estate, in addition to various old-media properties that can be remarketed or closed as convenient. They may even have a buzz machine or two!

  • Orson


  • Porkpie

    Is “Serial-homicide cultists” too descriptive? It’s kinda technical.

  • HA


    not to offend anyone esxcept Americans.

    Actually, the only Americans you can offend are straight, white, Christian, males. Everybody else, comprising approximately 65% of the population is off limits, being members of one PC protected class or another.

    Ooops, I forgot to mention the Jews. You’re encouraged to offend Jews as long as you refer to them as Zionists. Jews good. Zionists bad.

  • sbw

    Abstract one level of thought to see the real bigotry which is the Times prejudice that readers haven’t the intellectual horsepower to distinguish between Muslims (in this case) who throw bombs and those who don’t.

    If readers don’t have enough intellectual acumen to discern the difference, then the problem is a failure of education. Oe the other hand, if reporters do not report clearly and completely enough to give readers the opportunity to disccern the difference, then the problem is a failure of education.

  • Gerald

    not an original term but I like ‘Islamonazis’

  • Isn’t it ironic that the main purpose of the liberal media is not to deliver the facts but to obscure them?

  • I also read about the imam begging for “money for research” into this puzzling (to PC idiots) problem. He has adapted well to the West! He is following in the steps of all the other race-based organizations like LULAC, La Raza, and even Jesse Jackson, who line their pockets with the fruits of white guilt.

  • “Caliphascist”, because they’re fascists who want to bring back the Caliphate.

  • Maybe we need a nickname for terrorists to get around the new PC effort not to offend anyone esxcept Americans.

    I think the press should call them ‘Zionists’. The term has fallen out of favor anyway, particularly among the left and the media, so it’s at least theoretically available.

    Another advantage: the day a major publication announces that Islamofascist terrorists are all Zionists, heads will explode all over the Arab world… which will make it easy to round up what’s left of the terror cells.

    Daniel in Brookline

  • Ken

    Let’s do a mind experiment and imagine that 19 fundamentalist Christians were arested after ordering several tons of fertilizer to blow up abortion clinics, and that 6 of the persons arrested belonged to the same fundamentalist church in Omaha. You think the NYT might reveal the “first W” in those circumstances? Or if members of a white southern religious group plotted to blow up black churches?

  • AST

    Don’t bother trying to find a new name. The same thing will happen to whatever euphemism you come up with, because the original meaning will still attach, e.g. gravedigger, embalmer, undertaker, mortician, funeral director, etc.

    Terrorist, insurgent, militant, jihadi, disaffected, unassimilated, fascist Muslims, Islamofascists, Islamoimperialists. Whatever you call them, it boils down to two common factors: 1. they claim to be Muslims, and 2. they seek to violently overthrow the western societies in which they live.

    They certainly don’t understand what Sharia law would do to these societies (India v. Pakistan). It seems that the subtext of Islam is that people aren’t equal; Muslim men deserve to be at the top and live lives of leisure. They don’t seem to grasp that the result of their activities would ever be poverty for everybody. But there are so many contradictions within Islamic teachings already, that logic doesn’t have to apply.

  • Barry 0351

    Take your pick as long as eventually they are called “dead”

  • Mark McLemore


  • Kat

    Maybe beheading koranimals–they supposedly planned to behead the Canadian PM. What sick SOBS these f’ers are.

  • Pingback: Yankee Wombat | An American in Oz()

  • Laika’s Last Woof

    “Religious extremists” should work just fine — no one is fingering the Religion of Peace(TM) here; that’s left up to the audience to figure out, at least until Muslim terrorists start bombing abortion clinics.

  • Kat

    no, not religious extremists–muslim extremists. Only an idiot or terrorist enabler would use the abortion excuse and be blind to the common thread in the murder of innocents in New York, Bali, Spain, Britain, etc. and the plan to kill innocent Canadians.
    Let’s call these terrorists what they are–muslims.

  • The number of Americans murdered every year by guns is much more higher than the number of people killed during terrorist attacks on September 11.

    What is the religion of these murderers?