Uh, not true, and Samir is guilty of other things. Let’s start with his public crime: Treason. He openly supports the enemies of the United States in a time of war.
US Constitution Article III, section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

But in the story of the N.J. AQ operatives, the F.B.I. says:

“If it’s somebody who is simply communicating with somebody who is known to be an al-Qaida operative, that in itself is not illegal,” Cruise said. “It’s what they intend to do.”

What has to be said in this “communication” to cross the line, I wonder?

wait he has no problem with our men and women being blown up but he hides his face out of fear of what might happen to him here at home.

Mojack420 on October 15, 2007 at 1:28 PM

Bet his Mamma is sooo proud.

Why do liberals have such annoying voices? This guy Moss on the NYT video has a voice every bit as grating as the announcers on NPR, which I call “The Network of Annoying Voices.”

Rivlax-

It’s so we don’t confuse their voices with those who need to have pleasant voices in order to encourage listeners to suppost their sponsors and therefore earn some filthy lucre.

Thus, annoying, arrogant, sycophantic voices drip honey when interviewing their ilk, and drip venom when interviewing others. I used to support public radio, mainly for the classical music broadcasting, and some fun shows from BBC radio, but no more. (Except with tax dollars unavoidably allocated to NPR, PBS, NEA, etc.)

By the way, the female radio voices are just as grating.

Maybe I missed something since I haven’t read all the links at Jawa… but if it’s just Rusty’s word that there is some sort of official investigation (not that I don’t believe him), and the FBI declined to comment, why shouldn’t Moss have run with this story?

krakatoa on October 15, 2007 at 11:45 AM

You are aware that the FBI never comments on on going investigations right? When there is no investigation the FBI says, hey were not investigating.

Turns out: He asked them to, fearing for the safety of his family.

Of course, fear for the safety of our troops in a war zone is no reason not to reveal every secret plan of the Bush administration they can find.

THe NYT is going to do what they want to do and the FBI telling them there is an investigation just means the story will have a sentence saying so. It might even prod the NYT to edit the story to be more sympathetic to this guy.

As for the “… why shouldn’t Moss have run with this story?”, why didn’t the NYT do a lot more investigation and maybe come up with an ironclad report that would, if Rusty’s points about this guy is accurate, put him in jail for treason? Would they do the same if he was an embezzling industry executive or a bank robber or a kidnapper? If not, then why the human interest story for this guy that might just as well be in the “Living” section of a newspaper?

Like I tell the NYT’s subscription marketers when I tell them “No!” the third time: “You don’t understand. I want the NYT’s to go out of business.”

The siren song of staying in school calls, and so link dump: * Allah predicts that this will make the recent NYT leaks “pale by comparison.” Judging purely from the blistering anger in Rusty’s tone, that sounds like an understatement:……

In Moss’s defense, he seems to have asked the FBI if there was an investigation into Khan, and they declined to comment.

Maybe I missed something since I haven’t read all the links at Jawa… but if it’s just Rusty’s word that there is some sort of official investigation (not that I don’t believe him), and the FBI declined to comment, why shouldn’t Moss have run with this story?

My guess is the NYT saw the problem not through the paradigm of getting the bad guy… but of getting the scoop in front of a competitor.

They don’t care about the security of this country… just about their “ratings”.

Romeo13 on October 15, 2007 at 11:30 AM

No, not even close. Every since Bush was elected the management at the Slimes hasn’t given a rats a$$ about their rating or making money. Thats why they have loss some 60 percent of their subscriptions base since Bush’s election.

All they are about any more is trashing republicans bashing the Bush administration and getting democrats elected. The management has made the deliberate decision to sacrifice what ever it take to ensure that another republican does not get elected to POTUS.

Mr. Kahn is “a young jihad enthusiast who… wrestles with his worried parents about his religious fervor.

“…there is nothing to suggest that Mr. Khan is operating in concert with militant leaders, or breaking any laws.” He only associates with IONA, “a fundamentalist but nonviolent group” and has “also befriended members of the Islamic Thinkers Society, a tiny group that promotes radical, nonviolent Islam.”

See, he’s just overly enthusiastic.

If you must worry, fear the anti-free-speech “vigilante groups opposed to jihadi sites” and “citizen watchdogs who are working to knock sites likes his off the Internet.” Bad vigilantes!

There are many people in America who hope America loses. It is a shame.

ThackerAgency on October 15, 2007 at 11:25 AM

Yeah. See the Pelosi thread. Our own politicians are working against us from positions of power and are being supported by MSM. The enemies within are getting our soldiers killed and put all of us at risk. Thank God for HotAir and other outlets that tell the truth and stand for America.

They don’t care about the security of this country… just about their “ratings”.