SLATE’S CRAVEN CORRECTION

By Michelle Malkin  •  November 10, 2004 06:20 AM

Shortly after I posted this two weeks ago, Slate issued the following correction:

Correction, 10/28: The authors originally stated that there has been no domestic terror conviction since 9/11. This was an overstatement, since there have been some convictions under a questionable new law prohibiting Americans from offering “material support” to foreign based terrorists. However, there has not been a single conviction for an act of domestic terrorism itself, including Richard Reid�who was convicted for an attack on a trans-Atlantic flight originating outside the United States.

This correction leaves much to be desired.

First, Slate is wrong when it describes the authors’ error as an “overstatement.” It was an error, not an overstatement. Slate itself concedes as much when it notes later in its correction that “there have been some convictions.”

Second, Slate is on questionable ground when it says the 1996 law prohibiting Americans from offering material support to foreign-based terrorists is “new.” The law was enacted eight years ago–the same year Slate began publishing.

Third, Slate misleads when it says that no one has been convicted for an act of terrorism on U.S. soil since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. I can recall only one act of terrorism on U.S. soil since Sept. 11–the LAX shooting–and the perpetrator in that incident was killed at the scene. The nineteen 9/11 hijackers, obviously, also are dead. Slate insinuates that Ashcroft has failed to win prosecutions for acts of domestic terrorism since 9/11, but there were no such prosecutions to pursue.

Update: Reader Clinton Watson Taylor writes:

There have been at least three acts of terrorism on US soil you left out. The first was the anthrax mailer, who is still at large. The second was a young September 11 copycat named Charles Bishop in Florida who ran his
plane into an empty skyscraper, killing only himself. His suicide note
cited Osama bin Laden as his influence.

The third was the DC sniper shooting spree by John Allen Muhammad and Lee Malvo. I am uncertain why it isn’t recognized as Islamic terrorism since they called it jihad themselves…

I’m not sure I agree that all three qualify as terrorism, but maybe these are the acts of domestic terror that Slate had in mind. If so, Ashcroft can hardly be faulted for failing to secure prosecutions. Charles Bishop is dead; both John Allen Muhammad and Lee Malvo have been convicted. That leaves only the anthrax mailer, who, as Taylor notes, is still at large.

Posted in: Media Bias

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

  1. ativan

Trackback URL

You must be logged in to post a comment.

When will the Left retract the Kentucky census worker case smear?

November 24, 2009 02:16 PM by Michelle Malkin

1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks

“We believe it was an intentional act on his part to take his own life.”

Racial terror in Denver that won’t make national news

November 24, 2009 10:31 AM by Michelle Malkin

87 Comments | 1 Trackback

P.C. strikes again.

The indelible whiteness of MSNBC

November 23, 2009 05:07 AM by Michelle Malkin

107 Comments | 9 Trackbacks

Palin-bashers of pallor.

Connecting the “media justice” dots

November 3, 2009 01:50 PM by Michelle Malkin

19 Comments | 2 Trackbacks

MoveOn demands that Democrats stay off Fox News

October 20, 2009 02:36 PM by Michelle Malkin

138 Comments | 3 Trackbacks

Obama’s Fox News policy: Isolation over engagement

October 19, 2009 12:02 PM by Michelle Malkin

59 Comments | 5 Trackbacks

Plus: Anita Dunn on getting around the “filter.”


Categories: Media Bias



Pundit & Pundette

» Various and sundry
Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook