A Pakistani man of U.S. citizenship?

Posted on by

After the alleged mastermind — and I use that term loosely — of the attempted Times Squareshahzad.jpg bombing was arrested, I was intrigued to see how he’d be described in the media on first reference. Was he a Pakistani, a Pakistani-American, a Pakistani native with U.S. citizenship, an American of Pakistani descent, or an Ameristani?

Here’s an early AP story (after his U.S. citizenship was established): A Pakistani man believed to be the driver of an SUV used as a car bomb in a failed terror attack on Times Square was taken into custody late Monday by FBI agents and local police detectives while trying to leave the country, U.S. officials said. [Link]

Here’s a later AP story: Seized from a plane about to fly to the Middle East, a Pakistan-born man admitted training to make bombs at a terrorism camp in his native land before he rigged an SUV with a homemade device to explode in Times Square, authorities said Tuesday. [Link]

Here’s the Wall Street Journal: A naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Pakistan admitted to federal agents on Monday that he attempted to detonate a car bomb in Times Square this weekend, according to court documents filed Tuesday. [Link]

Here’s Slate: Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistan-born American citizen arrested on suspicion of being Times Square’s would-be May Day bomber, did not act alone. [Link]

Here’s Al Jazeera: An American former financial analyst has admitted attempting to detonate a car bomb in New York City’s Times Square. [Link]

Here’s the Washington Post: The arrest of a Pakistani American in connection with the failed Times Square bombing again put a spotlight on Pakistan as a global terrorist training hub, raising the prospect of intensified U.S. pressure to break up militant networks. [Link]

Here’s Newsday: Reports that American Faisal Shahzad flew to his birth country of Pakistan to train for the attempted car-bombing in Times Square highlight that nation’s long history as a haven and training ground for terrorists, experts say. [Link]

Here’s Fox News: A Pakistani man from Pakistan with strong ties to Pakistan has been arrested for the attempted car-bombing in Times Square. [Link]

(Okay, I made the last one up.)

Al Jazeera and Newsday were among the few media outlets that called him an American on first reference (though Newsday did immediately make the Pakistan connection). Most were loath to call him an “American,” preferring to go with “U.S. citizen.” I couldn’t help wondering when a naturalized citizen earns the right to be called an American. Perhaps I just needed to have a conversation with my Pakistani friend.

Friend: “American? Are you kidding me? Of course, he’s Pakistani. Just look at what he did.”

Me: “You mean attempting to bomb Times Square?”

Friend: “No, I mean bringing down the price of a car from $1,800 to $1,300. You think an American could do that?”

18 thoughts on “A Pakistani man of U.S. citizenship?”

  1. OK if I didnt overlook this blog item initially, I wouldnt have put my “american” related comments in that blog item.

    judging by the differnet descriptions, I am fine with WSJ’s “naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Pakistan “. The other descriptions do not tell me quickly what kind of person did this. Pakistani American is too vague.

    Remember that guy from Chicago who was involved in the scouting of locations for the mUmbai killings? One of his parents is Pakistani. But I would characterize him as American or an American of Pakistnai origin more than this latest suspect because it gives the readers a quick view of the demographic involved in this. Right off the bat, it gives the reader an idea how shocking is it for someone who lived here all his life had turned to terrorism despite a regular American upbringing.

    In the case of Faisal, that is not the case. He is indistinguishable from a Pakistani green card holder with the exception of his citizenship.

    I challenge you to look at this guy’s profile and convince me he thought he was American when he swearing in the oath or whatever they do at these naturalization ceremonies. He took the oath last year. And yet he goes to Pakistan that very same year to train. And people expect us to bel;ieve that he taking of the citizenship wasn’t nothing more than a better version of a green card to him?

  2. Here is a simple scenario that is not uncommon. A man and woman immigrate from India in their early 20s. They are married. The husband decides to get naturalized at the age of 45. The wife does not. She retains her green card.

    Something happens to them and their background,for whatever reason is part of the story. The news has to report it. Do you think something that says “An American man married to an Indian woman” will give me an adequate description of the party involved if I am skimming the headlines? And if you were to ask any couple where one is naturalized and the other is a green card holder, do you think they consider themselves different nationalities?

  4. Hilarious! And yes I clicked on the fox news link to verify that that’s what they said. I’d totally expect that of them.

  5. It’s obviously relevant that he was born in Pakistan, only a fol would deny that. I’d say that Al Jazeera is deliberately misleeding.

  6. OK if I didn’t overlook this blog item initially, I wouldnt have put my “american” related comments in that blog item.

    I actually posted this item after Amardeep’s, so you didn’t overlook it. Not sure why it ended up below his (perhaps because I started the draft before him).

    In any case, I liked your example of the couple who immigrated from India.

  7. First of all, the quote from Fox news is hi-larious. They really are that wierd.

    Also, does anyone else find it odd that: 1) this guy is immediately identified as a terrorist even though they can’t prove a link to a specific terrorist group or that his actions were at the direction of that group AND 2) that this is getting this level of media attention when the bomb didn’t go off an no-one was injured AND 3) the American who flew a plane into the IRS was NOT called a terrorist (just crazy) AND 4) angry american IRS plane crash guy actually killed someone and injured several other people and he still didn’t get this much coverage.

    So the lesson I’m getting here is brown=terrorist and white=crazy. Isn’t there something wrong here?

  8. SemiDesiMasala, Hehe, you are just grievance-mongering. The point is the Austin incident was a “one-off”–that guy is not part of a network. This bomb, w/ its nails, propane tanks, gasoline is just like the bombs the MI-5 found in London, and the one that went off in Glasgow. This guy is a part of a network–Taliban/ISI/Pakistan military/Qaeda. Some of which your government funds, and some of which it fights. Odd, that.

  9. So the lesson I’m getting here is brown=terrorist and white=crazy. Isn’t there something wrong here?

    More accurately, jihadi = terrorist What the Underwear bomber, Hasan and this idiot had in common is not race.

  10. Has it been confirmed that this guy is actually part of a “terrorist network” yet? Or did he just go home to visit family, talk to a bunch of relatives with anti-American sentiments and/or see drone attacks perpetrated by the US (as has been said in a couple of places), get pissed, and come back with a mission?

    Seems like he learned his bomb-making skills from old episodes of Looney Toones, not LeT or some other more organized group.

    And if being part of an organization is what makes you a terrorist, then I guess the Unabomber wasn’t a terrorist either. Or Timothy McVeigh. News flash: if you try to promote your religion, lifestyle, or opinions with the use of terror tactics, you are a terrorist. Working solo or with a group, doesn’t matter.

    The media is happy to feed into the outrage over the “Pakistani who put one over on the government, got his citizenship and tried to blow us up” but does not deal out the same swift condemnation of homegrown terrorists. This whole episode has made me very uneasy, and it is way less about “being terrorized” than seeing how this is getting set up as a US vs. Islam sort of thing. That’s a very dangerous road to travel.

  11. Has it been confirmed that this guy is actually part of a “terrorist network” yet? Or did he just go home to visit family, talk to a bunch of relatives with anti-American sentiments and/or see drone attacks perpetrated by the US (as has been said in a couple of places), get pissed, and come back with a mission?

    From TIME

    A Pakistani government source, speaking on condition of anonymity, told TIME on Tuesday that the suspect had had ties with militants while in Pakistan. “He was here at a training camp,” the source said. The legal complaint against Shahzad, which charged him with terrorism and attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction, said he admitted to receiving bombmaking training in Waziristan, the lawless tribal region where the Pakistani Taliban operates with near impunity.

    He’s part of the one of the organizations of the Pakistani Taliban. And even if he was pissed at the drones (which he says he was because it killed Taliban leaders! note – not civilians), that does not give him any justification whatsoever to attack the country that he has been given citizenship and on top of that, try to attack innocent civilians!

  12. Nice observation. I’m amazed that you didnt find any headlines with MUSLIM / ISLAMIC instead of pakistani. Atleast the liberal media is not religiously-racist.

  13. News flash: if you try to promote your religion, lifestyle, or opinions with the use of terror tactics, you are a terrorist. Working solo or with a group, doesn’t matter.

    Yes, it’s not that Austin guy is not a terrorist, it’s that he’s less of a problem, b/c a “one off.”

    The media is happy to feed into the outrage over the “Pakistani who put one over on the government, got his citizenship and tried to blow us up” but does not deal out the same swift condemnation of homegrown terrorists. This whole episode has made me very uneasy, and it is way less about “being terrorized” than seeing how this is getting set up as a US vs. Islam sort of thing. That’s a very dangerous road to travel.

    This is way too broad. You’re right, it’s not US v. Islam. That would be absurd. It’s US/India vs. Taliban/ISI/Pakistan military/Qaeda. Nobody is saying US should invade Indonesia or Morocco, right?

  14. The New York Times

    Officials said that after two days of intense questioning of the bombing suspect, Faisal Shahzad, evidence was mounting that the group, the Pakistani Taliban, had helped inspire and train Mr. Shahzad in the months before he is alleged to have parked an explosives-filled sport utility vehicle in a busy Manhattan intersection on Saturday night. Officials said Mr. Shahzad had discussed his contacts with the group, and investigators had accumulated other evidence that they would not disclose. …. American officials said it had become increasingly difficult to separate the operations of the militant groups in Pakistan’s tribal areas. The region, they said, has become a stew of like-minded organizations plotting attacks in Pakistani cities, across the border into Afghanistan, and on targets in Western Europe and the United States. Besides the Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda, groups operating in the tribal areas are the Haqqani Network and the Kashmiri groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad.

  15. I liked the post, especially the research that went into it.

    Just thought I’d mention, allthough I don’t know if it directly applies to this case, that it is possible to have US-Pakistani dual citizenship. (not the case, for example, with India, in anywhere close to the same way).

    I don’t know if the news outlets linked considered this in the least in the way they framed the story.

  18. Pakistan Punjab government funding terrorist groups:

    “Punjab government funding Jamaat-ud-Dawa —Naeem Tahir

    The United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions on JuD, declaring it a global terrorist group. Pakistan’s government also banned the JuD on the same day and issued an order to seal the JuD offices in all four provinces

    The chief minister of Punjab has allocated funds of Rs 86 million to the suspected terror nursery of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) in Muridke, defying the ban on the organisation by the federal government. The JuD is alleged to have been involved in the Mumbai attacks. What message will be delivered to India at a time when peace is being talked about?…Funds to the JuD of Muridke are being provided by the CM of the largest province in the federation, while the amir of JuD is also the founder of Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT). According to media reports, the JuD and LeT have been accused by the US of training the gunmen of the November 2008 Mumbai attacks….” http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\06\26\story_26-6-2010_pg3_3

    The support for terrorist organizations runs to the highest levels. They are seen as a useful proxy military force against Afghanistan and India.