New York Times Reports On Muslim Proselytizing During Charlie Hebdo Attack, Then Deletes ItAnd here's what they couldn't bear for anyone to know:
"So, imagine yourself as an NYT editor for a moment, if you can withstand the nausea. Why would you specifically take out the part about the Islamic terrorist proselytizing for Islam in the middle of the terrorist attack? Why delete this woman’s account of being threatened at gunpoint and being told to convert to Islam?
That’s easy. Because you’re one of America’s moral, ethical, and intellectual betters, and you don’t want it to be true. Your reporter hastily left that inconvenient truth in her story by accident, so you airbrushed it out, without any acknowledgment, to preserve the narrative. You turned it into, “Hey, maybe these guys aren’t so bad after all. They didn’t kill the women, right? Let’s not be too hasty.”"
"Sigolène Vinson, a freelancer who had decided to come in that morning to take part in the meeting, thought she would be killed when one of the men approached her.This was changed to:
Instead, she told French news media, the man said, “I’m not going to kill you because you’re a woman, we don’t kill women, but you must convert to Islam, read the Quran and cover yourself,” she recalled."
"Here’s what it says now:Muslims are SUCH feminists, doncha know?
Sigolène Vinson, a freelance journalist who had come in that morning to take part in the meeting, said that when the shooting started, she thought she would be killed.
Ms. Vinson said in an interview that she dropped to the floor and crawled down the hall to hide behind a partition, but one of the gunmen spotted her and grabbed her by the arm, pointing his gun at her head. Instead of pulling the trigger, though, he told her she would not be killed because she was a woman."
DC is right: the NYT could not allow the actual words of the Islamic Mass Murderers to make them appear to be cold Islamics (they ARE Victimhood Category Class victims of white euro-males, of course), so they changed the reported conversation to make the Islamic Mass Murderers seem less, well, Islamic, to soften their appearance for their Leftist psycho-readers.
The NYT is just a den of despicable vermin.
[All emphasis added]
1 comment:
Robert,
I'm afraid I must disagree: Islam is NOT a religion of peace, even amongst the ummah. They are constantly killing each other, despite Qur'anic injunctions against that. All it takes is to be considered (not convicted) of some sort of offense, like being raped, or failing to "pbuh" at the right time, and you get your head whacked off. Further, the Sunnis and Shias kill each other with total self-righteousness, all.the.time.
Killing and violence are the solutions to Islamic problems; the logic is this:
IF [some issue], THEN [kill whoever is handy].
The Islamic propensity for taking offense is very high, as in off the charts and unmeasurable. Apparently this stems from considering Allah too weak to assert justice and thus needing Islamists to do it for Him (pbuh). Because Islam is based on works, the more offense which one takes and killing which one does, the more virgins and small boys await in heaven for sexual exploitation.
This is only the view from the outside because rational humans do not go deeply into Islamic regions willingly and without the threat of dismemberment.
Post a Comment