NYTimes goes with style that terrorism by definition depends on whether Muslims involved
The NYT has this in the version of the Norway story online at the moment:
Initial reports focused on the possibility of Islamic militants, in particular Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or Helpers of the Global Jihad, cited by some analysts as claiming responsibility for the attacks. American officials said the group was previously unknown and might not even exist.In previous cases the NYTimes has used "terrorist" and "terrorism" inconsistently. In this case, the article is outright saying that it doesn't consider the acts of a Norwegian right-wing dude -- capable of killing 80 people! -- as being "terrorist". But if an Islamic group is linked to the crime, than "terrorists" will indeed have been responsible.
There was ample reason for concern that terrorists might be responsible.
Not a good day for the Times.
Lots more on this from Glenn Greenwald.