The New York Times doesn’t want you to see what they said about this Islamic terrorist

The New York Times claims to be the paper of record.

Yet, they often get caught pushing partisan propaganda.

And The New York Times doesn’t want you to see what they said about this Islamic terrorist.

There doesn’t seem to be a limit to the despicable lies fake news outlets like The New York Times will spread about Donald Trump and his supporters.

They will completely make up stories just to make people they don’t like look bad.

And once their lies are exposed, they will either refuse to correct the record, or quietly remove their lies from the Internet.

But in a rare case, they were just forced to correct the record because they were too nice to somebody.

And that person is Islamic terrorist Osama bin Laden, who planned the terrorist attacks on 9/11 which killed 3,000 Americans.

The New York Times came under fire for an article about the terrorist, where they seem to attempt to humanize him as a “devoted family man.”

Their original title for the article was: “Osama bin Laden, the Fanatical Terrorist and the Devoted Family Man.”

After facing intense backlash, they changed the article headline to “A Fuller Picture of Osama bin Laden’s Life.”

The most notable bit of criticism came from the former Navy Seal who killed bin Laden.

Robert J. O’Neil called out The New York Times before the headline was changed, writing: “Family man. He used his wife as a human shield. Lucky for me he was taller than her.”

The article in question was a review of Peter Bergen’s book, “The Rise and Fall of Osama bin Laden.

In it, the book highlights bin Laden’s family life, including him being one of a whopping 55 children, and about how he ended up having 24 children of his own.

It explains how bin Laden was a “man of contradictions,” specifically citing his relationship with his daughters.

While he “required his daughters from the age of 3 to be separated from males and insisted that females leave the room when men appeared, even on satellite television,” it explains that “two of his older wives were highly educated” and “helped write his public statements and curate his public image.”

Anything interesting in that article is completely negated by their headline.

They would never refer to somebody like President Donald Trump as a “devoted family man” in one of their propaganda articles, but saying the same about a terrorist leader is fine.

Previous articleThis one poll left Nancy Pelosi kicking and screaming
Next articleMark Levin just shocked every Republican in Congress after issuing this call to action