We have much deeper ties to europe and new zealand than we do Nigeria. Thats why the “degree” is larger. Not some stupid grand conspiracy from the “left wing media”. Grow up.
There’s quite a bit of truth in that. But it’s not absolute.
Christians have been nearly eradicated in Muslim-controlled Bethlehem for instance.
But you’re right. We don’t pay a lot of attention to most parts of Africa. Nothing much there for the western world to take interest in. And I agree with someone earlier who said New Zealand would still be getting the same coverage today had the shooter and victim roles been reversed.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/03/13/teenage-gunmen-kill-brazil-school-shooting/
Why didnt the leftist media do wall to wall coverage of this?
Why arent bombings in Syria “wall to wall” coverage?
Translation: why is the media soooooo upset about muslims being killed. What about myyyyyyy religion
2 Likes
What’s interesting is to contemplate what kind of coverage that event would have gotten here, on this board. The tune would be, uh, a little different.
And that is all it is. We simply dont have the same economic and social ties to africa like we do europe. Thats why european terror is highlighted because europe and the US have deeper ties. If it was Christians getting killed in NZ, the “degree” of coverage would be the same.
Then what in the world are you on about?
I didn’t know about the 50, but I did know about this situation, as it’s been ongoing for a LONG time now.
Like I said before, this isn’t a NEW incident to Nigeria, which is why it’s not going to receive the same coverage NOW as an isolated incident in NZ.
If 50 Christians being killed in Nigeria were some new thing that literally just happened for the first time, and it was not being covered, MAYBE you’d have a point. The entire reason I was able to find those CNN article so easily is BECAUSE it’s been covered for YEARS now. And I didn’t have to stop at just 3, or just at CNN.
For example, last June the NYT covered the situation, detailing violent attacks in which more were killed than the 50 who were killed recently.
By some estimates the clashes have taken more than 500 lives this year.
In recent days, at least 86 people were killed in several villages in Plateau State in the middle of the country, among the deadliest of the episodes.
This specific violence in Nigeria has been going on for what, 20 years now?
One of the cited reasons this story won’t get “the same degree of coverage” some seem to be complaining about it not getting is because Nigeria’s president, who himself is Funali, has tried to downplay it as just 'local squabbles over farm land."
Nigeria’s president, Muhammadu Buhari — himself of Fulani background — has been accused of downplaying the violence as local squabbles over farmland, with no wider religious significance.
Western coverage reflects this framing.
The “farmer/herder” conflicts in Nigeria are neither new, nor have they been lacking in being covered in the first place. They have been ongoing for decades now, and have received a lot coverage, despite attempts by Nigeria’s president to downplay it.
OP’s, and Gateway’s, attempt at comparing these two sitaution ignores a lot of factors, the least of which being this story has been widely covered as it has continued for years and years.
Exactly. Its why we didmt have wall to wall coverage of every suicide bombing in Iraq
1 Like
Sounds like the tune would be more on par with the normalities of this forum, like every other time a Muslim goes on a murder fest.
You know, “Muslims are bad because XYLBG.” or ," Christans are bad because ZTIQ."
Never mind, that’s already what’s happening. lol
Bravo. Very good point.
Unfortunately violence, like the “herder/farmer” conflicts have been ongoing for years. An isolated attack in a place where this doesn’t regularly happen is going to make headlines, but after a week or so, we’ll stop hearing about it. There will continue to be stories covering the violence in Nigeria, as there has been for years now.
Which is why the “whataboutism” from some in this thread is nothing more than petty partisanship from people who haven’t been paying attention or didn’t do their homework.
In other words, you disagree with your own partisan grand “point”
What ever you do, do NOT blame Islam for Islamic terror, but by all means, blame White Nationalism every time a psycho with pink skin makes the news.
1 Like
What
10whats
Admittedly I don’t watch Fox News, so this is more a question than a statement:
Does Fox provide regular if not hourly updates of Muslim attacks against Christians throughout the world?
I’m still waiting for a previous reply to pass the grace of the forum rulers. I accidentally used an acronym for W and P when referring to that wannabe in Charlottesville.
Thanks for the update. What did he want to be?
A wannabe [insertcolorhere] power warrior, or something to that effect.
Oh, we can rely on Todd Starnes to tell us if anybody farts towards a Christian in a public school.
2 Likes
I think he succeeded. He wielded substantial power over the woman he killed.
