On October 16th, in Conflans (about 20 miles west from Paris) a teacher's been *********** by a radical muslim terrorist because, during a class about Freedom of Speech, he had shown, Muhammad cartoons (the same that were published in Charlie Hebdo and caused the massacre of the journalists wotking for the satyrical newspaper 5 years ago). He was later shot and ****** by the police.
Here's the New York Times' take on the story :
Premium Link Upgrade (they've since change the title of the article).
Notice that the emphasis is on the fact that the french police fatally shoot a man, not on the fact that the man had *********** a teacher. And they don't evn say why he had him ***********...
The ************ came after a some parents were unhappy about the the teacher showing this cartoons and shared their outrage on social networks, where it was heavily supported and shared by some muslim organisations who called for retaliation. Due to that, the french governement decided to disband some of these organisations.
Here's how the New York Times' reacted to that
Premium Link Upgrade
Now, after President Macron restated that France will not surrender to the radical muslims on Freedom of Speech, some muslim countries are extremely irrate about it, and are calling for a boycott on french products. Turkey is particulary onboard with this as Erdogan publicly questioned Macron's sanity...
Here's how the New York Time's treating this :
Muslim Countries Denounce French Response to ******* of Teacher, Urge Boycott
Premium Link Upgrade
Is it me, is it the American way to treat information and me not being used ot it or is it, as it seems to me, the New York Times siding with the radicals muslims and their supports against the french government ?
Here's the New York Times' take on the story :
Premium Link Upgrade (they've since change the title of the article).
Notice that the emphasis is on the fact that the french police fatally shoot a man, not on the fact that the man had *********** a teacher. And they don't evn say why he had him ***********...
The ************ came after a some parents were unhappy about the the teacher showing this cartoons and shared their outrage on social networks, where it was heavily supported and shared by some muslim organisations who called for retaliation. Due to that, the french governement decided to disband some of these organisations.
Here's how the New York Times' reacted to that
Premium Link Upgrade
Now, after President Macron restated that France will not surrender to the radical muslims on Freedom of Speech, some muslim countries are extremely irrate about it, and are calling for a boycott on french products. Turkey is particulary onboard with this as Erdogan publicly questioned Macron's sanity...
Here's how the New York Time's treating this :
Muslim Countries Denounce French Response to ******* of Teacher, Urge Boycott
Premium Link Upgrade
Is it me, is it the American way to treat information and me not being used ot it or is it, as it seems to me, the New York Times siding with the radicals muslims and their supports against the french government ?
