Did New York Post Scrub 2001 Story Because It Supported Donald Trumps Claim?

The Conservative Tree House ^ | 12-1-2001 | sundance

[smoothsailing]

December 1, 2015

Did New York Post Scrub 2001 Story Because It Supported Donald Trumps Claim?

by sundance

This is interesting. Mike M via twitter notices a Page Six story from September 2001 disappears from the New York Post.

On September 14th 2001 the New York Post ran an article (Op-Ed) with the headline: “The Issue Is Radical Islam“. Within the article you find the following paragraph(s) [emphasis added]:

[…] In Sudan, the Islamic militants impose slavery on captured Dinkas – but wherever radical Islam is in power, it subjugates people it regards as infidels. The Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights, an organization supporting those persecuted by militant Islam, argues that “radical Islamism is a world ideology, fielding a world terror-army, which oppresses millions with a racist ideology” that deems non-Muslims less than fully human.

Here in New York, it was easy to get angry listening to Egyptians, Palestinians and the Arabs of nearby Paterson, N.J., celebrate as they received word of the murderous attacks in New York and Washington. But Mayor Giuliani (who has been tireless and magnificent in this crisis) rightly warned New York- ers that it would be wrong to take their anger out on the city’s Arab and Muslim residents. Attacks on Arab-Americans in Paterson or elsewhere are utterly indefensible.

Omar, a Muslim New Yorker and former student of mine at Cooper Union, e-mailed me to say he was “sickened to watch Middle Easterners celebrate our sorrow.” He is an American who has imbibed our values while maintaining his Muslim faith. He wants no truck with those who kill in the name of Islam. (link via Wayback Machine – Web Archive)

However, if you search the New York Post – the actual article is no-where to be found on the New York Post website. Current search HERE – Compare to WayBackMachine HERE

It would definitely appear this article was removed (no longer available) at the Rupert Murdoch owned New York Post. Why is that?

As Mike M states, which is the bigger issue? That Trump would exaggerate the number of people celebrating, or that the New York Post would delete evidence of the protest itself?

Fair question.

This New York Post report is also confirmed in an unrelated caller to the Howard Stern Show:

Howard Stern VIDEO

And here’s another story within the New York Post specifically discussing how video of Muslims celebrating the 9-11-01 attack was confiscated and deleted. In a massive note of irony, their concern at the time was “censorship”:

New York Post “Now P.C. Means Censorship”

[…] The PC concern is that the Israelis will somehow 'take advantage' of the attacks and therefore that negative stories about Palestinians are to be handled as gingerly as stories about American Arabs and Muslims.

That's why you probably don't know about the Palestinian Authority's death threat against a videographer who took footage of a 4,000-person celebration on Sept. 11 – which led to the seizure of the news footage and its erasure. The fact that bin Laden's allies on the West Bank targeted a news photographer for death for filming Palestinians dancing at the news of the death of 7,000 Americans didn't make it anywhere near the front pages.

The news media usually make a stink when the media are threatened. Not this time. (link)

 

This second New York Post report about journalist censorship and having footage deleted/destroyed is also confirmed by an independent notice from the Committee to Protect Journalists. READ HERE

[smoothsailing]

[Excellence]

Good find.

[smoothsailing]

THE ISSUE IS RADICAL ISLAM By FRED SIEGEL

---

September 14, 2001 -- IT was predictable. The sad sacks at the BBC were sure that if only President Bush had done more to curb Arab-Israeli tensions, the World Trade Center attacks might have been avoided. And no doubt we will be hearing more of this in the coming weeks as the apologists for Arab terrorism at the Economist, the Nation and the New York Review of Books weigh in with equally flimsy explanations.

The issue is not Israel. Osama bin Laden blew up a U.S. embassy when the Oslo "peace process" was at the height of its "success." The issue is the inability of Islamic regimes around the globe to come to grips with the modern world.

What did Israel have to do with the recent Islamic jihad murders in Nigeria? While Islamic terrorists were hitting New York, Muslim militants in northern Nigeria were killing Christians. The violence occurred in the majority Christian city of Jos, where the Nigerian government has imposed the Sharia (Islamic law) on the largely Christian population. The violence began when a Christian woman was attacked after she had the temerity to cross the street in front of a group of Muslim men who had gathered near a Mosque. What followed was three days of killing and burning churches.

Around the world Islamic militants are engaging in a holy war against the infidels - from Coptic Christians in Egypt and the Dinkas in the Sudan, to Hindus in Kashmir, Bahais in Iran, Catholics in the southern Philippines and Christians in East Timor.

In Sudan, the Islamic militants impose slavery on captured Dinkas - but wherever radical Islam is in power, it subjugates people it regards as infidels. The Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights, an organization supporting those persecuted by militant Islam, argues that "radical Islamism is a world ideology, fielding a world terror-army, which oppresses millions with a racist ideology" that deems non-Muslims less than fully human.

Here in New York, it was easy to get angry listening to Egyptians, Palestinians and the Arabs of nearby Paterson, N.J., celebrate as they received word of the murderous attacks in New York and Washington. But Mayor Giuliani (who has been tireless and magnificent in this crisis) rightly warned New York- ers that it would be wrong to take their anger out on the city's Arab and Muslim residents. Attacks on Arab-Americans in Paterson or elsewhere are utterly indefensible.

Omar, a Muslim New Yorker and former student of mine at Cooper Union, e-mailed me to say he was "sickened to watch Middle Easterners celebrate our sorrow." He is an American who has imbibed our values while maintaining his Muslim faith. He wants no truck with those who kill in the name of Islam.

But it's fair to ask this of those non-Muslims at the BBC, the Nation, the New York Review of Books and other rationalizers of Palestinian and Islamic terror: Why is it that everywhere in the world where Muslims are in the majority, their minorities are persecuted?

And where were these publications, not to mention respectable European leaders, when Yasser Arafat, ranting in front of a world conference at Davos, insisted that Israel was using depleted uranium and nerve gas against Palestinian civilians?

And where were the Europeans at the U.N. "hate" conference in Durban, when Islamophobia was denounced, while Muslim discrimination against non-Muslims was passed over in silence?

It's also time to ask Arab-American spokesmen like James Zogby, who rightly criticizes anti-Arab bigotry, why he's silent about the hate that spews daily from the Egyptian and Palestinian media, as with the current hit song "I Hate Israel."

In Commentary, Fiamma Nirenstein asks if the silence from the West isn't what Bush, in another context, called "the soft bigotry of low expectations." No doubt our multiculturalists will explain that, while even mild anger at Arabs by Americans is sign of deep-seated racism, venomous hatred in the Arab world is merely a part of a different culture that can't be judged by our standards.

For all their grievances against America, there have been no Cuban, Vietnamese or Serbian suicide bombers bringing death to our shores, and their people haven't been celebrating in the streets at the sight of American blood.

America, not Israel, is The Great Satan. It was hard to acknowledge before the World trade Center attacks, but radical Islam has been at war with us for a long time.

Fred Siegel teaches history at the Cooper Union.

Print this story	Previous articles on this topic
Email this story	Click for permission to reprint

Back to Post Opinion Index | Columnists Index | Home

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc. NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc. Copyright 2001 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Very interesting.

Just one question, does the NY Post save articles for 15 years?

Are other articles from that time period still on the website?

If so, this appears to have been scrubbed. Indeed.

[smoothsailing]

I’ve found articles dating back to 1999.

I wouldn’t call what they have an archive, more accurately a selective memory.

[RoosterRedux]

The NY Post is owned by News Corp (Rupert Murdoch).

[babygene]

bookmarked

[Wilhelm Tell]

We are in an odd sort of fascist situation. In the bad old days, the secret police would go to a newspaper and confiscate a news story that they found offensive. They would destroy all copies of the story they could find and maybe arrest a reporter, editor or publisher, or at least threaten them. Now the news media is part of Big Brother, so they automatically censor any story that does not serve their master. No secret police have to visit and threaten. Most of the journalists and publishers see themselves first and foremost as agents of Big Brother and they are happy to censor things without even being asked.

[Ronin]

I distinctly remember seeing a pic of two Arabs hugging and giving thumbs up to the camera from across the bay as the smoke billowed out of the ruins of the tower, but I haven’t been able to find it.

[smoothsailing]

Jeb Bush, Rupert Murdoch, and Valerie Jarrett at Chamber of Commerce Dinner (December 2014)

[DocRock]

Bookmark

[BigEdLB]

The guy standing next to his car looking across the river pumping his fist at the smoke coming out of the WTCs

[Balding_Eagle]

For screenshot save later.

[BobL]

Obviously it was true, and this is why Obama stayed clear of going after Trump on this. Just because a Washington Post editor cannot find anything in a 5 minute search does not mean it will never show up.

[T-Bird45]

You and I are on the same page. I made a similar post about the Colorado Springs shooting (note I didn’t call it the Planned Parenthood shooting) and the complicity of the media about advancing the narrative.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3366689/posts?page=8#8

Click above to see a specific example of a shooting incident in NOLA that’s nearly as bad as CS but didn’t advance the white, crazy “Christian” guy with a gun narrative.

[LS]

I'm only half-way being facetious here, but does Trump pre-plan to set these idiots up?

We now have dozens and dozens of eyewitnesses, including Fox's Steve Doocy, who are coming forward saying they saw Muslims celebrating on 9/11 IN NEW JERSEY. Now this story.

Trump moves the Overton Window yet again, introducing the topic, getting the outrage, followed by, "Well, he may be onto something," followed by sudden and widespread discussion of the REAL topic, i.e., the Islamic threat to the US from American citizens.

[Fhios]

One bad thing about the interenet. It has made us lazy, we no longer collect facts, just memes. Articles and Commentary that becomes controversial for the left are simply removed or edited out of existence.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

No what has happened (I’m being completely serious here) is the leftists have become so used to bullying people constantly every single day in so many ways, that Trump is confusing the ever-living bejeebers out of their entire process of communicating.

Trump just isn’t PC.

That is priceless. There is so much these days, which is couched and carefully coded or simply never mentioned.

Trump doesn’t do that. He is very, very refreshing.

I am sure glad, he is on our side.

[LS]

Yes, they absolutely are baffled at how to deal with him---on both sides.

First the NRO/ "Conservative"/GOPe approach was to dismiss him as a buffoon, but that Arizona rally of 15,000 people really woke them up. They stuck with that for about a month.

Next, they brought out the "he's not conservative enough" stuff. Interestingly, had Ted Cruz or Jeff Sessions come out with this immediately, it might have worked. But coming from Jonah Goldberg, Charles Cooke, Jim Geraghty, and the NRO crowd, it was just funny. These were the people who gave us Mittens and McCain.

Then it was, "he says too many offensive/outrageous things. He'll turn off voters." Well, five months of polls say just the opposite. As you point out, he is so anti-PC it is changing the landscape.

At the second debate they began trying to stop him with other candidates---ALWAYS in the back of their minds they would have Marco or Yeb waiting in the wings. First Fiorina, but she flopped even faster than I expected. Then it was Carson, who had a brief moment of glory. Now they are reluctantly writing puff pieces about Cruz. They hate Cruz, but are so desperate to stop Trump now they'll do anything then take out Cruz later. Won't work.

People who liked Cruz were already with him, those who don't wouldn't go near him. Who knows if the latter will go to Trump, but he continues to get people "in the middle," Dems, blacks, blue-collar types, indies.

[xzins]

This is so damning that other candidates who don’t acknowledge it will lose all credibility with me.