« | »

AP: Don’t Call It The ‘Ground Zero Mosque’

An fatwa ‘advisory’ from the Associated Press to its ‘reporters’:

[AP photo and caption:] People participate in a rally against a proposed mosque and Islamic community center near ground zero in New York, Sunday, Aug. 22, 2010.

AP Standards Center issues staff advisory on covering New York City mosque

AP Advisory

AP Standards Center issues staff advisory on covering New York City mosque

Associated Press Deputy Managing Editor for Standards and Production Tom Kent sent the following note to the staff about covering the New York City mosque story and then discussed the guidance and reaction in a Facebook entry headlined "Behind the News: Describing the proposed NYC mosque."

Aug. 19, 2010


Here is some guidance on covering the NYC mosque story, with assists from Chad Roedemeier in the NYC bureau and Terry Hunt in Washington:

1. We should continue to avoid the phrase "ground zero mosque" or "mosque at ground zero" on all platforms. (We’ve very rarely used this wording, except in slugs, though we sometimes see other news sources using the term.) The site of the proposed Islamic center and mosque is not at ground zero, but two blocks away in a busy commercial area. We should continue to say it’s “near” ground zero, or two blocks away.

The landing gear and part of the fuselage of the the terrorists hijacked United Airlines Flight 175 crashed through the roof of the building. (Click on the diagram to the right to enlarge it.)


In short headlines, some ways to refer to the project include:

–  mosque 2 blocks from WTC site
–  Muslim (or Islamic) center near WTC site
–  mosque near ground zero
–  mosque near WTC site

We can refer to the project as a mosque, or as a proposed Islamic center that includes a mosque.

It may be useful in some stories to note that Muslim prayer services have been held since 2009 in the building that the new project will replace. The proposal is to create a new, larger Islamic community center that would include a mosque, a swimming pool, gym, auditorium and other facilities.

Exactly why is this “useful”?

2. Here is a succinct summary of President Obama’s position:

Obama has said he believes Muslims have the right to build an Islamic center in New York as a matter of religious freedom, though he’s also said he won’t take a position on whether they should actually build it.

You see how important it is that the Associated Press keeps its reporters in line with Mr. Obama’s views.

For additional background, you’ll find below a Fact Check on the project that moved yesterday.


Here is just one of the ‘facts’ from the laughable propaganda ‘Fact Check’ piece Tom refers to:


No mosque is going up at ground zero. The center would be established at 45-51 Park Place, just over two blocks from the northern edge of the sprawling, 16-acre World Trade Center site. Its location is roughly half a dozen normal lower Manhattan blocks from the site of the North Tower, the nearer of the two destroyed in the attacks.

If the landing gear and fuselage from one of the hijacked planes almost destroyed the building – it is at ‘Ground Zero.’ (Which is why the current buyers are able to snatch it up for $4 million dollars when its pre 9/11 price was $18 million.)

Samuel Adams once observed: “How strangely will the tools of a tyrant pervert the plain meaning of words!”

Obviously, that goes double for Mr. Obama’s lickspittle slaveys in the press.

This article was posted by Steve on Sunday, August 22nd, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

15 Responses to “AP: Don’t Call It The ‘Ground Zero Mosque’”

  1. tranquil.night says:

    They’re just JournoListing in public now that the cat is out of the bag. How tasteful.

    I actually hope it keeps up. We can just stop trying to cut through the BS of the Associated Propogandist writers altogether and get a handle on their talking lying points right out of the Snake’s mouth.

  2. beautyofreason says:

    No wonder Obama sent Bo on a separate plane for the family vacation. Seems he already has his hands full with lap dogs.

    P.S. I remember the AP stories that flooded the Yahoo news site when people began to criticize the mosque plans. AP printed an article titled “Fact check: Islam already lives near ground zero,” (later retitled “Islam already a part of WTC neighborhood”) and TIME wrote a story on the horrors of Islamophobia.

    Seems like the media has already decided what we should believe – against 70% of the American public. A liberal might say in response that “popularity does not constitute truth,” but we are dealing with an opinion on the placement of a mosque and the extremism of its imam. To hold a critical opinion doesn’t make someone a bigot, an _______phobe, or opposed to freedom of worship. Yet the left wing media is fine painting conservatives with that brush. Just as they accuse us of doing to Muslims when we oppose this clearly provocative mosque on ground zero.

    • canary says:

      beautyofreason, yes, reports muslims chose this area as their community prior to ground zero, as if they were there first. In my opinion all the more alarming in light of the 1st bombing of the World Trade Center prior their 2nd bombing that destroyed the WTC and miles debris covering Manhattan leading to Ground Zero.

      Apparently, thousands of new photos and footage was released in February, and this clip shows the debris & destruction. Haven’t had a chance to look through pics. The city most definitely has photos and video of the Burlington Coat Factory as terrorist crime scene.


      I was looking for the female relative that moved from NYC just prior to 9/11. I read in an interview she had written a book on 9/11 just the beginning of terrorist
      attacks, which I don’t think was ever published. Did find this on wiki-pedia

      Wafah Dufour (née Wafah Bin Laden) born in Los Angeles, California) is an American singer-songwriter, socialite and model (1.60 m). Her father, Yeslam bin Ladin (half brother of Osama bin Laden), is Saudi Arabian (father of Yemeni origin and mother of Iranian
      origin) and her mother, Carmen bin Ladin, is of Swiss father and Iranian mother from a noble family (mothers name: Mirdoth/Sheybani)….

      Wafah Dufour spent the early part of her life in Los Angeles, then Jeddah, Saudi Arabia but later moved to Geneva, Switzerland…
      In 1988, her parents separated and finally divorced only in January 2006. Her father and his family have reportedly not spoken to either her or her two younger sisters… She changed her last name to her mother’s maiden name, Dufour.

      She earned a law degree from Geneva University and a masters degree from Columbia Law School in New York…

      In early 2006, publisher Judith Regan signed Dufour to appear in a reality television show which will follow her battle for chart success in a fly-on-the-wall documentary,

      At present she is recording her first album and she lives now in London. She is also set to collaborate with Atlanta rock band Black Lips.



      Guardin.uk.co:Pop career for bin Laden niece
      16 March 2003

      Her uncle might be the most feared terrorist in the world, but Osama bin Laden’s niece is about to try and take the world of pop music by storm.

      Miss bin Laden – an American-trained lawyer – has become a player on the London party circuit since she moved to the capital six months ago from New York.

      … 11 September terrorist attacks. At the time of the atrocity she was living less than a mile from the World Trade Centre [sic].

      She described how she had met bin Laden only once, at their home. ‘I just got a glance and he turned his back because I was unveiled,’ she said.


  3. liberalfreeamerica says:

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but there is no more ‘WTC’. But there is a ‘GZ”

  4. hushpuppy says:

    The comrades at Assorted Propagandists are trying their best to brainwash indoctrinate us as to what their words mean on any given day. What has irritated me for years are the intentional blurring of words so that a message can mean ten different things to ten different people. Deconstructionism at its best!

    e.g: phalangists, insurgents, or my current pet peeve: islamists. What in hell is an islamist? If some benighted camel humper is muslim, then refer to the camel humper as a muslim, not as a islamist!

    One thing people are going to have to wake up to is that the satanic verses otherwise known as the koran teaches all muslims to hate non-believers, to kill them wherever they find them, to lie and misrepresent islam as a benevolent entity when the opposite is true: remember Beslan when all those school children were murdered? Islam. In fact even though the media tries very hard to hide the fact – everywhere you find fighting and wars, you’ll find islam in there somewhere.

  5. GetBackJack says:

    Fine, we’ll call it the Tagiyya Associated Press Mosque – both are sanctioned to lie to unbelievers.

  6. Liberals Demise says:

    Does anyone need more proof who the spin doctors are and who they work for?

  7. Petronius says:

    SG: “Samuel Adams once observed : ‘How strangely will the tools of a tyrant pervert the plain meaning of words!’”

    There is an important difference between the lies told by a corrupt democratic politician and the lies of a tyrant.

    Corrupt democratic politicians will tell ordinary lies, perhaps to hide something unseemly in their pasts, or to fool the citizens about their agenda, and they hope that their lies will not be detected, or that they will at least have plausible deniability. In such cases they are telling routine, run-of-the-mill, political lies. For example, Bill Clinton says, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky!” And he hopes to be believed, or at least to muddy the waters, so that he may avoid impeachment or criminal charges.

    Nerobama, on the other hand, tells lies on a totally different scale. He tells big whoppers –– obvious, blatant, transparent, in-your-face lies. And he tells them gratuitously, when he has no apparent need to lie. And he tells them in the certain knowledge that, although his lies will be detected, he will not be contradicted. He knows that he will not be called to account for his lies for several reasons. First, because the media is his tool for propaganda. Second, because the citizens, either through fear or lack of moral virtue, will capitulate and accept his lies. Any critic, such as Joe Wilson or Joe Barton or Sarah Palin, will be quickly silenced or discredited. And third, because the stream and sheer volume of his lies makes contradiction impractical. His America-is-evil tours, his speech at Cairo University, and his Ramadan dinner speech are examples of many such lies, in which he rewrote the history of America, Islam, and Israel.

    In this case the tyrant does not lie to hide something from the people, but instead to manipulate them, humiliate them, and corrupt them after the fashion of Soviet dictators and all totalitarian states everywhere. It is one of the weapons that he uses to “transform” America.

    • proreason says:

      Another interesting post, Petonius.

      It is certainly difficult to understand the outrageous lies in any context that honorable Americans are familiar with. There are numerous theories on it, ranging from he thinks we’re too stupid to detect the whoppers to he longer cares since he is now focused on becoming UN General Secretary in December 2011. In that role, of course, he can continue his career as a movie start without the annoyances of governing, and happy in the knowledge that he did more damage to the country in 4 years than anyone else, friend or foe, was able to do in the prior 230 years.

      But the idea that he does it as a sort of “I can F**g say anything I want rubes. Eat it.” is an insight. It fits like a glove with his whole smoky baritone thug egomaniac psychopath persona.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      I sometimes wonder if the socialists perceive the presidency as “the boss of everything”. Naturally, with a republican president, the attacks are continuous and relentless and they hold them accountable to the rules as set forth but only as they can use them. But when a socialist is sitting there, and the boy shows this side very often..starting with “I won” in his first expose’ as prez….I think he actually believes he’s “Bossman” now. It certainly seems that way. So yes, he thinks he CAN say whatever he wants and because he’s the boss, you have to believe it.

      His motivation for lying is more obscure. Placating the people? Why would he care? Placating the rubes who he expects to continue supporting him? He doesn’t really play favorites so much as his goal is to undermine any structure the US has that works. So, everyone is expendable as long as his long-term goal of implosion is met. And to that end, he’s been very effective.

      Perhaps his motivation is —none— he’s just a pathological liar. The problem with that, and with his many other glaring flaws is that he cannot recognize it. At any given moment, he seems to be caught up in the “flow”. So if he’s standing in a room full of conservative people, he will espouse what he thinks is a conservative point of view. When the room is full of socialists, he will emit radioactive effervescence decrying the “abuses the right has committed against him”. Like I’ve said before…much the way a salesman “reads” his customers and tailors their pitch to appeal to their sensibilities.

      However, one thing is necessary. You have to be smart, first of all because if you try to talk in familiarities with someone, you have to know where you DON’T know anything about it or you suddenly become a buffoon. This he also does regularly. The U.S. invented the automobile and so forth. Not just gaffes…but glaring displays of personal ignorance. Like Rush says and I concur, “He’s the least experienced guy in the room”.

      His dysfunctionality is then compounded by his trying to sound authoritative. Those speeches might work if he stuck to generalities but he cites specifics and they are not sometimes wrong, they are ALWAYS wrong because, helping him along are his speechwriters who, like good little socialists, use talking points instead of facts, emotions instead of reality. I would like to think there are enough people in the nation to recognize crap when they hear it. More “independents” seem to be heading that way but….that alluring music that the utopiasts play is oh-so-intoxicating. Clean air forever, no fossil fuels, no crime, no hatred, no this no that. La la la la la la….ppphhhththtttt.

      He also suffers from the mistaken notion that his BS, although possibly effective in a classroom of say, 30-40 people…is also effective over the national airwaves. This is due to his living mostly inside his own head. Like Pro has said, he’s probably so angry about his childhood that he’s gone into himself and is really very antisocial. Everything is personal. Someone looks at him in a manner he finds unfavorable and right away, he believes it concerns him. Has nothing to do with the fact that someone just stepped on the offending glance-giver’s foot or that they are experiencing indigestion. Nope….it’s about him.

      Trouble with insecurity is that it never rests. That sets up a whole litany of other problems and sets the foundation for great conflict. Turmoil…unrest. Frustration. Rome had many leaders who suffered from this to varying degrees. All nations have. However, this guy is really off the charts.

      Sorry for the long post…I get started and can’t seem to stop stating the obvious.

    • confucius says:

      Malignant narcissists behave this way. They lie to elevate and maintain their lofty self images–no matter how unrealistic.

      It’s also difficult to break this cycle because their particular psychopathology interprets challenges as further evidence of their greatness. For example, criticism is often interpreted as, “They hate me because they’re jealous.”

      They do break, though. All Ponzi schemes crash under the weight of reality.

      The problem with malignants is how they break. Narcissists usually just withdraw. Malignants lash out. With the power of the White House behind him, who knows what Obama will do.

    • proreason says:

      “Malignants lash out”

      He already is.

      But as you say, confucious, it can get much much worse.

      I’ve been expecting something before the election, but it now appears it is too late for anything less than cataclysmic, and he seems resolved (perhaps happy) to no longer have to share the throne with Queen Nancy and Prince Harry.

      As the evidence of the hatred the country has for him continues to mount after November, and even seeps through the msm protective shield, it will be interesting to see what he will do. He probably already sees that he isn’t dealing with an Argentina. 90% of the arms in this country are in the hands of people who despise him……and I include the military in that assessment. At the moment, I lean more towards massive destruction by executive order. Amnesty by fiat, Card Check by executive order, foreign affairs where there are few controls on his edicts, further subversion of the bureaucracy, etc.

  8. confucius says:

    ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . .

    • Rusty Shackleford says:


    • wardmama4 says:

      should be ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . . ground zero mosque . . .

« Front Page | To Top
« | »