Staff Reports
In the early hours of January 1, a horrifying scene unfolded in New Orleans when a man transformed a festive celebration into a nightmare by ramming his truck into a crowd and subsequently shooting at bystanders. The death toll has now tragically risen to 15, with many others injured. The perpetrator, one Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a 42-year-old Texas-born U.S. Army veteran, was ultimately killed by police in a confrontation that many are questioning whether it was handled with appropriate urgency or clarity. The press conference that followed was something of a disaster, leaving the public guessing if this violent act was even being investigated as an act of terrorism.
With President Biden still filling his role for another few weeks, his response was as lackluster as one could imagine. Hours passed without a peep from the Oval Office, and when he finally made his brief, damp remarks, they seemed devoid of the gravity such an event warranted. Biden’s aversion to taking questions during such circumstances raises eyebrows and leads many to wonder whose side he’s really on.
Wow… that is crazy— the look the Police chief has when the Mayor calls the New Orleans Terr*r attack what it actually is — A Terr*rist Attack‼️‼️‼️
They couldn’t keep the ISIS flag under wraps because of Mass Citizen journalism—we are the news.
— 𝕊𝕔𝕒𝕣𝕪 𝔼𝕝𝕖𝕔𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝔻𝕖𝕟𝕚𝕖𝕣 🇺🇸 (@nomandatesco) January 2, 2025
Meanwhile, the Associated Press took the opportunity to demonstrate what many have pointed out as a consistent inability to hold the Biden-Harris administration accountable. Early reports called the tragedy a “vehicle driving into a crowd,” which sounds more like a scene from a poorly written movie script rather than a deliberate terrorist act. It’s rather astonishing that, despite being called to cover a brutal attack where multiple people lost their lives, the AP struggled to find suitable language to convey the gravity of the moment. If a truck can drive itself into a crowd, perhaps it should be given a driver’s license next.
Or consider their fantastic attempt at dodging responsibility when describing the incident. A headline announcing “suspect in New Orleans crash and shooting is dead after a firefight with police” makes it seem like the mighty pickup truck accidentally became sentient and launched itself into innocent revelers. The lack of urgency to label Jabbar’s actions for what they are—a calculated attack—lingers like a bad odor throughout their reporting. The language used, vague and evasive, serves more to obscure the horrifying truth than to inform the public.
The bizarre trajectory of coverage didn’t stop there. A Google search for terms related to the incident shows the Associated Press and other outlets still focusing on the “crash” rather than highlighting the reckless intent behind the act. It was more than a mere crash; it was a purposeful assault on innocent civilians. One can shake their head in disbelief as mainstream media continually skirts the glaring reality, fluffing headlines while dismissing the urgency of the situation. By the time Friday rolled around, the narrative framed by the big outlets still painted the picture of a tragic misstep rather than an act of terror orchestrated by a disturbed individual.
It’s bewildering that even publications like the Washington Post, which managed to acknowledge the actual ram-attack on their paper, echoed earlier morally-fuzzy headlines that gave Jabbar an oddly safe public portrayal. The inconsistency across various media platforms—coupled with the apparent refusal to label this event for what it is—whispers of a larger narrative that prefers to downplay violent acts that don’t fit a particular agenda. As the country navigates through tumultuous times, this event serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance surrounding not just facts, but the responsibility to report them accurately.
