Al-Qaeda's 'Extreme Makeover: Homegrown terrorist Edition' and Newspaper Disinformation

In the aftermath of 9/11 the world had (or at least thought it had) a good idea of what a terrorist looked like. In short - it was a male of Arab descent. As Representative John Cooksey so open mindedly stated: "If I see someone come in and he's got a diaper on his head and a fan belt around that diaper on his head, that guy needs to be pulled over and checked."

Ann Coulter put the sentiment even more succinctly: "Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims."

Evidently, racial profiling and rampant discrimination ensued.

However, in 2008 there was a new enemy on the horizon. They were not Muslim or Middle Eastern looking men, far from it! They were individuals with blonde hair and blue eyes...

The New Al-Qaeda: Blonde Haired, Blue Eyed Westerners

The story, which is based on a comment by a single MI5 source (must be true then) that was subsequently picked up in a Scotsman article, claims that Al-Qaeda have recruited 1,500 white Britons to carry out attacks in the UK.

Source

Apparently the issue even made it onto the 2008 Bildeberg meetings agenda.

As quickly as it the story came it went away again.

Recently it reared it's head again...

'Blond-Haired, Blue-Eyed' Terrorists: Warning In Upcoming Senate Report On Yemeni Terror Threat

Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe today report in the Washington Post on a forthcoming report from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that assesses the threat posed by "as many as three dozen American citizens who converted to Islam in prison and moved to Yemen after their release in the past year."

An additional concern, it says, "is a group of nearly 10 non-Yemeni Americans who travelled to Yemen, converted to Islam, became fundamentalists, and married Yemeni women so they could remain in the country." One U.S. official, it reports, described them as "blond-haired, blue-eyed types" who "fit a profile of Americans whom al-Qaeda has sought to recruit over the past several years."

Source

That was in early 2010.

The issue would next raise it's head in July of this year...in the immediate aftermath of the Norway Massacre.

We now know that Anders Breivik was the perpetrator of the horrific attack which claimed the lives of 77 people. We also know that Breivik is a Christian terrorist with extreme far-right views who was also described as having anti-Muslim views and a hatred of Islam.

Which makes the following front page rather puzzling:



They just couldn't resist, could they? Despite the fact that ALL current evidence pointed to the fact that these were most definitely not the actions of Al-Qaeda, it was labelled as an "Al-Qaeda Massacre."

And the newspapers did everything they could to push the blame on Muslim extremists.

The front page of Saturday's Financial Times referred to 'Islamist extremism fears', while the Sun mentioned a 'homegrown al-Qaeda convert' and a 'homegrown Islamic convert' in its coverage:

From The Sun:

UP to 20 people were feared dead last night after two terrorist atrocities rocked Norway.

A gunman dressed as a cop massacred teens camping on an island – two hours after a huge car bomb wrecked government buildings in capital Oslo.

Cops fear Islamist fanatics were out to kill PM Jens Stoltenberg, who was due to visit his political party’s youth camp on Utøya island – where a man was arrested. Witnesses claimed the gun manica was blond with blue eyes and spoke Norweigan – raising feers that he was a homegrown al-Qaeda convert.

Predictably the online version of the article differed vastly from the print version. A common tactic is to publish an article online (usually containing disinformation) and then amend the article at a later date without showing anything has been changed.

This is highlighted superbly by this blog, which concludes:

So despite admitting they did 'not know' if al-Qaeda was responsible, they put ''Al-Qaeda' massacre' on the front page anyway.

This version of the editorial has been deleted from the Sun's website and the 'new' version contains no mention of the fact it has been amended.

At best it is bad journalism.

At worst it is an obvious attempt to push a specific agenda for a specific purpose.

Who's doing the make over?

I hope its Gok Wan, he knows a thing or two about high street fashion.

reply to post by Johnze


Indeed.

reply to post by LiveForever8
When you have woken up to the truth of it all, this looks like a joke and I am waiting for the punchline.So sad and desperate that they'll play this out to the end.

reply to post by TWILITE22


Funny thing is (perhaps it is a joke after all?) that it can only happen if we let it happen. I for one am very thankful to those people out there who are pointing out these inconstancies and blatant forms of mis/disinformation.

It might not seem like much but it serves an as indicator. A nugget of proof.

"It gets worse."