Email This
| 
Print This
Who is Bill Gertz, you might say? Well, he is either unable to report actual news or an evil faux-news generating boogeyman that lives in the basement at the Washington Times. Either way his professionalism is lacking, like so many journalists in today’s realm of news panderers. This is a pure example that mouth-breathing hottentots are allowed to run amok with PRESS passes, and they are either merely inept or willfully ignorant.
Let’s analyze the contents of the article linked up there, and see what we can see.
U.S. intelligence officials say a high-profile political assassination, triggered by the public release of a new message from Osama bin Laden, will lead off the next major al Qaeda terrorist attack, The Washington Times has learned.
The assassination plan is among new details of al Qaeda plots disclosed by U.S. officials familiar with intelligence reports who, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the killing could be carried out against a U.S. or foreign leader either in the United States or abroad.
Apparently going to J-School allows you to be able to say things like “could be carried out against anyone anywhere. Maybe.” The fact that al Qaeda wants to kill people either here or abroad is a foregone conclusion, right? They are not nice guys. You should not invite them over for snacks. Especially since they will try to kill you.
So, we know they are killers and terrorists. This isn’t much of a warning.
The officials mentioned Saudi Arabia and Yemen, two nations that are working with the United States in the battle against al Qaeda, as likely locales for the opening assassination.
The planning for the attacks to follow involves “multiple targets in multiple venues” across the United States, one official said.
Oh, okay. Now it is multiple attacks. The “opening assassination” and “multiple venues” are a nice touch, in that it implies that they are going on an assassination world tour. Also, the bit about Saudi Arabia and Yemen working with the United States should be tightened up a bit, so that it more accurately reads “SAUDI ARABI AND YEMEN TRYING LIKE TO HELL TO AVOID GETTING BOMBED ALL TO SHIT + INVASION.” Okay, this wouldn’t be much better as far as reporting goes, but it would at least be terribly slanted AND entertaining, as opposed to just terribly slanted.
As for “multiple targets in multiple venues”: I plan on winning an Oscar someday. I’m just warning the other film composers out there that I’m gonna make a run at it. However, John Williams’ “new competition” warning level should probably not be raised to “Elevated” just yet. Do you see what I’m saying? I realize this guy is reporting something that many people will get all squishy in the shorts about, and he does too. That’s what makes him a bad man.
The new details of al Qaeda’s plans were found on a laptop computer belonging to arrested al Qaeda operative Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan of Pakistan.
Ha ha. Those guys should stick to goat carcass polo! Obviously they don’t know how to set a screensaver password!
“We’re talking about planning at the screwdriver level,” one official said. “It is very detailed.”
Not to nitpick, but I hope its more detailed than “someplace, at some time, against anyone, there will possibly be an attack. We found it on a laptop.” My detractors will say that these ARE the details, and I will say “Lord, why am I beset on all sides with such a sharply defined lack of intellectual competition?” Yes, even to you, Bob Novak. And you tell that smug nancy Tucker Carlson I said bring it on.
And “screwdriver level”? What the hell does that even mean?
But I digress. Back to the sillyness.
Khan was arrested July 13 in Lahore, Pakistan, along with Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian who was indicted in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa and was on the FBI’s list of most-wanted terrorists.
If I’m reading this right, it says that they arrested Khan along with a guy that did some very bad shit and whom the FBI was after; however, the first time I read it I thought it said that Khan was the really bad guy. I’m sure that happens to a lot of people, and I see sentences built like this all the time: someone minor is caught but they have intel so instantly we have to know who they got arrested with and how bad the other guy is. Its like People Magazine’s Stars At Night! pages but for political validity instead of publicity. God help Kumar the next time he’s out with Tony Shalhoub.
U.S. and allied counterterrorism officials are pursuing leads on other terrorists based on the data from Khan’s seized laptop. At least one arrest in Britain has been made so far, and others are expected, the officials said.
Additionally, U.S. intelligence officials said they think that several al Qaeda terrorists already in the United States are part of the plot, although their identities and locations are not known.
How does this read? It reads, to the general US citizen, like this: OMG THERE ARE TERRORISTS AT WORK BUT WE DON’T KNOW WHERE HELLOK BE SCARED LIEK WHAT
People who write understand the concept of how something can come off, how interpretation can be manipulated. Even though he says the words “they think” most people will not take that into account when they are buying their duct tape. It isn’t what is said but how it is said that I have a problem with.
Stay with me though, because this is where things get really good.
The targets, in addition to the financial institutions in New York, Washington and Newark, N.J., that have been the subject of public warnings, include such economic-related targets as oil and gas facilities with a view toward disrupting the November election.
“The goal of the next attack is twofold: to damage the U.S. economy and to undermine the U.S. election,” the official said. “The view of al Qaeda is ‘anybody but Bush.’ ”
Bingo bango! Really read what that sentence says, and how the math of it works out. Go ahead.
Right. What the official is saying here is that the undermining of the US election is equal to the concept of “Anybody but Bush”; if Bush loses, the terrorists win! If you’ve ever said you want “Anybody but Bush” then you park your car in the same philosophical garage as the terrorists, you fucker! Is it possible that our intrepid reporter took this official’s comment out of context? It certainly is! So then who is at fault for this grammatical equation?
The officials also said the terrorist group has begun using female members for preattack surveillance and possibly as suicide bombers, thinking that women will have an easier time getting past security checkpoints at airports, borders and ports.
The al Qaeda attack plans call for bombings using trucks and cars, and hijacked aircraft, including commercial airliners and helicopters.
“There is a particular concern that chemical trucks will be used,” one official said
In the interest of fairness, here are some details. I think.
- CHECKLIST OF THINGS TO BE FEARED
- Women
- Trucks
- Cars
- aircraft
- checmical trucks
- attacks
- bombings
- Tucker Carlson
Regarding the new bin Laden message, the officials said there are intelligence reports, some of them sketchy, that a new tape from the al Qaeda leader will surface soon.
In the past, video and audio messages by bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, were broadcast days or weeks before an attack, the officials said.
“The message likely will be the signal for the attack to be launched,” one official said.
A second U.S. official said one intelligence agency was aware of unconfirmed reports of a new bin Laden tape. “There may be such a tape, but it hasn’t surfaced and we haven’t seen it,” this official said.
Okay. What you’re saying, Bill Gertz, is that the Bin Laden taped message you lead your damn report with may or may not actually even exist? Are you fucking kidding me? Where is your sense of journalistic responsibility? What kind of a professional are you? This story is intentionally misleading. I’m smart and I thought there was a new taped message out!
Why would I think that? Maybe its because IN YOUR FIRST SENTENCE YOU MENTION THE PUBLIC RELEASE OF A NEW TAPED MESSAGE BY OSAMA BIN LADEN. In your title you say that “Bin Laden hints major assasination.” To someone who speaks English, this means that Bin Laden himself is actively hinting. Possibly in a taped message. Only 15 paragraphs later do you say that the tape is mere speculation.
Is this honestly how reporting works? I see so much of this kind of “suppressed cable” journalism lately its like the USS Maine is sunk every day.
So, for the rest of the article:
Contrary to what some Democratic critics of the Bush administration have said, intelligence officials said the new details of al Qaeda planning were obtained from the Khan laptop. The terrorist group was in the process of updating older attack plans, the officials said.
On Aug. 2, the Bush administration raised the terrorism threat level from “elevated” to “high” for five finance-related sites in the District, New York and New Jersey, based on the intelligence in Khan’s computer, as well as other intelligence.
I’m guessing this is in reference to the Democrats’ assertion that much of the information from the laptop (which triggered the heightened terror alerts last month) was from three or more years ago. But who cares, because the word “Democrat” is in a sentence with a bunch of negative words.
Frances Townsend, a White House homeland-security adviser, said Sunday that the government has received a steady “stream” of intelligence indicating that an al Qaeda attack is planned.
“What we know now that we didn’t know six months ago is that they’ve done a good deal of planning and surveillance work to accomplish that goal,” she said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
Since I have spent an hour ripping your piece apart, Bill, I will afford you the opportunity to defend yourself. If I am totally remiss in calling you out on your tactics, please use your journalism skills and professional integrity and riposte forthwith, so that I might print a retraction and admit I was wrong. I’ll keep my readers updated as to how you and your paper respond.
All italicized paragraphs copyright News World Communications. Quoted for analytical purposes only
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...