Tonight I logged on to the Star Tribune (Minneapolis) website and decided to read
its take on the supposed death of Osama bin Laden. What I read--and what I was optionally not supposed to read--really got me to thinking about how much news is actually left on the newsroom floor, figuratively speaking.
Things became interesting because I noted that some of the editors' comments remained in the online document as of 8:15 p.m. CST Saturday. In several places, editors suggested leaving out paragraphs or just ending the story several paragraphs short of what they left on the screen.
Let's take a look at what was considered "optional":
An American intelligence official, who requested anonymity because the issue is highly classified, said U.S. intelligence analysts consider the report bogus. He said there's "no evidence to support or reason to believe" that bin Laden is dead. He added that U.S. officials were aware of the unconfirmed report before it was made public by the newspaper.
(EDITORS: BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM)
Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of the CIA's Counter-Terrorism Center, said he was deeply skeptical of the French report.
"There's no confirmation of the report" from U.S. officials Cannistraro said, adding that the sourcing "appears to be very soft."
He said that if bin Laden had died, U.S. intelligence agencies would have picked up "indicators," such as condolence messages from grieving relatives.
"If someone had really died, there are public grievances by relatives and there is no such thing here," he said. "You can hide things among your followers, but not among your relatives."
(END OPTIONAL TRIM)
Yet even before the French report emerged, speculation was mounting among al-Qaida analysts over why it's been two years since the terror chief has appeared in a video message.
Just to be fair, I don't think the StarTribune's editors were the ones who left the text in. My best guess (kindly share your wisdom, folks) is that the Strib picked up an AP story here, and didn't scrub things well before popping it onto their site.
Either way, it's interesting to see how the editors considered it optional that readers should know what factors the intelligence community weighs in the course of measuring the validity of the French claims.
The next instance of arbitrary news comes here (long block quote, pardon):
"He's been living a very rugged life for 15 years, and it's probably taken a toll on him," Lawrence said. "(But) if you're an intelligence person and your target is al-Qaida and bin Laden is one of the most important people you track, the question now becomes: Why haven't we seen bin Laden in two years?"
(EDITORS: STORY CAN END HERE)
Lawrence said it would be "disastrous" for the Bush administration to focus on bin Laden's absence, only to have the al-Qaida leader issue a new tape to prove he's alive and still eluding a massive manhunt.
"It doesn't serve the government to say bin Laden is dead unless someone can take credit for killing him," Lawrence said. "Suppose all this speculation is wrong and bin Laden is just on sabbatical?"
Even if the reports are true, U.S. and foreign analysts say, bin Laden's death is unlikely to dent the global jihadist movement he helped create. Through the years, al-Qaida has metastasized into a loose confederation of groups inspired -- but not directed -- by him and his second-in-command, the Egyptian-born Ayman al Zawahiri.
Al Zawahiri has emerged as the most visible al-Qaida leader in the past two years, but even he hasn't been directing attacks such as those in Bali, Madrid and London, according to two senior U.S. counterterrorism officials.
(EDITORS: BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM)
Two American officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the matter involves classified information, said bin Laden's death, if true, would do U.S. interests little good.
"The sorry truth is that if bin Laden is dead, he's now a very large martyr in what a lot of Muslims have come to believe is a war against Islam," one of the officials said.
(END OPTIONAL TRIM)
Chirac announced a probe to find out how the document was leaked to l'Est Republicain, a regional newspaper known for its investigative reports on security matters.
The DGSE, or Direction Generale des Services Exterieurs, sent the document to Chirac and other top French intelligence officials, according to the published account. The claim of bin Laden's death came from a single source, the DSGE document indicated. It said that Saudi agents were pursuing more detailed information, including the location of bin Laden's alleged burial site,
"The chief of al-Qaida was a victim of a severe typhoid crisis while in Pakistan on August 23, 2006," the newspaper quoted the intelligence document as stating. His remote location made medical assistance impossible, the French report said, adding that his lower limbs were partially paralyzed.
If you've read this far, you might be somewhat irritated. The world's most hunted criminal may be dead, and yet his death is politically meaningless for those who've been vowing to bring him in "dead or alive?" Meaningless, because the movement has grown over the years "despite" the efforts of Bush and co. I'm not a tinfoil-hat person, but wouldn't one think that this part of the story deserves inclusion in any proper discussion of this topic?
I'd be interested in hearing what others have found in their local news reports. How is this story being spun as a matter of journalism?