NY Times Refuses to Call Mumbai Massacre Terrorists "Muslims"

Search
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
45,000
Tokens
[ Liberalism is a Mental Disorder]

NY Times’ Politically Correct Coverage of Mumbai Massacre
By Don Feder
Monday December 1, 2008


<!--
article_photo_1.jpg
--> In a series of six alleged “news” stories on the Mumbai massacre, from November 27 to December 1, The New York Times (America’s newspaper which sounds like a broken record) refused to call the terrorists Muslims or Islamic extremists.
The killers were variously described as “terrorists,” “gunmen,” “militants’ and “assailants,” but never Muslims. The only time readers could catch a glimpse of the terrorists’ motivation was when the paper quoted them directly - as when they complained about the treatment of Muslims in India and the Kashmir or called for the release of “mujahedeen prisoners.”
The Times adamantly refuses to recognize a connection between Islam and worldwide terrorism, even though most terrorist acts are committed by Muslims, terrorist groups have names like jihad-this and Islamic-that, and terrorists regularly quote the Koran’s kill-the-infidels verses.
Collectively, this constitutes the greatest denial of reality in the history of journalism.
That aside, The Times frequently got the facts wrong or omitted important details. In a November 30 story, the paper described the murders as “indiscriminate.”
Hardly. When a Turkish couple told their captors they were Muslims, they were immediately released. The terrorists targeted Mumbai’s Chabad House (a center of Jewish activity in the city) for one reason and one reason only - they wanted to kill Jews.
The only terrorist captured by Indian commandos said he and his comrades were told to target foreigners (particularly Americans and Brits) and Jews. Indiscriminate, did you say?
In thousands of words of coverage, The New York Times never mentioned that victims’ bodies frequently bore the marks of torture. One of the doctors who performed post-mortems was quoted on the Indian news website Rediff.com as saying “of all the bodies, the Israeli victims bore the maximum torture marks.”
For news of the latest developments in the terrorist war on civilization, the last place you want to look is The New York Times.
 

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
39,612
Tokens
What do you expect from a paper with no comics. I was always a Daily News guy.
 

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
26,039
Tokens
Who gives a fuck about New York times...a dying newspaper with no fucking sense.
 

Everything's Legal in the USofA...Just don't get c
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
2,199
Tokens
It is rather ironic that NY Times leaks of classified operations may well have compromised intelligence gathering, which in turn may have enabled the Mumbai massacre. Or maybe it's not ironic at all.

I totally believe in freedom of the press, but one must really ask themselves which side the NY Times is on in the war on terror. The only conclusion one can draw is that they have an agenda - one that is at best indifferent to and at worst at odds with the national interest of the country.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
So the cats who did the Mumbai massacre wouldn't have acted without having a subscription to the NY Times?

The NY Times hates Pakistani children
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,917
Messages
13,575,193
Members
100,883
Latest member
iniesta2025
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com