It sounds to me a little bit like CNN correspondent John King hates to use the words "Al Qaeda" in reporting on the air terror threat for fear of being seen as supportive of the Bush administration when, uh, hello John, they are trying to help us not get blown up...John, do us all a favor and lay off impressing us with your hardcore political cynicism for at least a couple days, ok? Witness this exchange he had with Daryn Kagan this morning:
KAGAN: So, John, when we listen to official in that news conference that was a couple of hours ago with the Homeland Security chief and the FBI director and others, when we listen to that, they -- I don't want to say danced around the al Qaeda question. They say there's hints of al Qaeda. Sounds like al Qaeda. But when you talk to officials off-camera, behind the scene, they're a little bit more forward in that thinking.
KING: They're a little bit more forward. But I also want to be very careful. We are asking them, well if you're going to say al Qaeda, al Qaeda is a loaded term, of course. Al Qaeda is a term that would rally the alarm, the fears and the support for the political structure of the American people no doubt.
....these officials are saying this is too sophisticated for them to believe it doesn't trace back to an international terror organization. And because it so closely mirrors plots al Qaeda has allegedly tried to pull off in the past, they are pointing the finger at al Qaeda. But, Daryn, that's one of the frustrating things in our business, they say al Qaeda, we say how do you know that, and they essentially say trust us.
John, at this point, when the good guys say "trust us," I honestly don't think we have a choice. What's the alternative?
