- Joined
- Jul 2, 2024
- Messages
- 637
- Likes
- 1,926
Biased Western narrative of Tourists murder in Kashmir
No Western tourists were killed in the terrorist attack at Pahalgam, Kashmir. Yet, apart from a handful, Western leaders delayed in offering sympathy to India. The Western media was even more disgraceful. They refused to call the perpetrators terrorists, opting instead for the euphemism “gunmen,” and came dangerously close to parroting Pakistan’s narrative. It took them days to even acknowledge the attack as an act of terrorism.
The whitewashing continued unabated. Despite the brutality being as big in magnitude than even the death of a pontiff in Rome, the Western press reduced it to just another “routine” event in India. The terrorists had clearly demanded that tourists recite Muslim prayers, shooting those who could not comply. Some victims were humiliated, forced to strip before being murdered. Yet the media, ever proud of its supposed independence and integrity, chose to ignore the sheer barbarity flimsy religious nature of the event.
The post-attack debate over the terms “terrorist” versus “militant” intensified when a U.S. House Committee openly rebuked The New York Times for its disgraceful coverage of the Indian terror attack. Muslim reporters working for the paper deliberately omitted critical facts—such as the terrorists testing victims’ faith before executing them. This wasn’t journalism; it was ideological posturing at the expense of truth. The House Committee’s reprimand was long overdue.
Elsewhere, in Britain, Canada, and other Western nations, media coverage was even more muted. No Westerners were dead, and a historical bias favouring Pakistan once again dictated the narrative.
The question is no longer about incompetence; it is about intent. Whose interests are these media houses truly serving? Nationally they are happy to trade with India, to recruit Indian engineers to fix their outdated systems at a fraction of the local cost, yet their governments and media arms continue to treat India with open hostility. ….. Why?
It is high time India took decisive action. Bias must no longer be tolerated under the pretext of “press freedom.” Mao Tse-tung expelled Western media from China in the 1950s, banning their return for twenty years. When they were finally readmitted, it was on clear terms. India must now do the same. The era of indulging these dishonest and biased correspondents must end — with or without Western approval.
No Western tourists were killed in the terrorist attack at Pahalgam, Kashmir. Yet, apart from a handful, Western leaders delayed in offering sympathy to India. The Western media was even more disgraceful. They refused to call the perpetrators terrorists, opting instead for the euphemism “gunmen,” and came dangerously close to parroting Pakistan’s narrative. It took them days to even acknowledge the attack as an act of terrorism.
The whitewashing continued unabated. Despite the brutality being as big in magnitude than even the death of a pontiff in Rome, the Western press reduced it to just another “routine” event in India. The terrorists had clearly demanded that tourists recite Muslim prayers, shooting those who could not comply. Some victims were humiliated, forced to strip before being murdered. Yet the media, ever proud of its supposed independence and integrity, chose to ignore the sheer barbarity flimsy religious nature of the event.
The post-attack debate over the terms “terrorist” versus “militant” intensified when a U.S. House Committee openly rebuked The New York Times for its disgraceful coverage of the Indian terror attack. Muslim reporters working for the paper deliberately omitted critical facts—such as the terrorists testing victims’ faith before executing them. This wasn’t journalism; it was ideological posturing at the expense of truth. The House Committee’s reprimand was long overdue.
Elsewhere, in Britain, Canada, and other Western nations, media coverage was even more muted. No Westerners were dead, and a historical bias favouring Pakistan once again dictated the narrative.
The question is no longer about incompetence; it is about intent. Whose interests are these media houses truly serving? Nationally they are happy to trade with India, to recruit Indian engineers to fix their outdated systems at a fraction of the local cost, yet their governments and media arms continue to treat India with open hostility. ….. Why?
It is high time India took decisive action. Bias must no longer be tolerated under the pretext of “press freedom.” Mao Tse-tung expelled Western media from China in the 1950s, banning their return for twenty years. When they were finally readmitted, it was on clear terms. India must now do the same. The era of indulging these dishonest and biased correspondents must end — with or without Western approval.
