Aug 26, 9:08 AM EDT
France's top administrative court overturns burkini ban amid shock and anger worldwide
PARIS (AP) -- France's top administrative court overturns burkini ban amid shock and anger worldwide.
This is the second AP story I’ve reprinted, of late, which has no story, i.e., the body of the text simply repeats, verbatim, the headline. Period.
That both stories are concerned with jihad, aka Islam, is no coincidence. The earlier story was about the murderous Moslem attack, in which they killed 86-year-old Father Jacques Hamel, in his Church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray, Near Rouen in Normandy, France, while shouting “Allahu Akbar!,” wounded a nun, and took several parishioners hostage. Police shot and killed the two Moslems.
The first no-story story read, “FRENCH OFFICIAL: ASSAILANTS TAKE HOSTAGES IN CHURCH NEAR NORMANDY CITY OF ROUEN.”
The word “assailants” was meant to hide from readers that the attackers were Moslem terrorists.
In the second story, read literally, “amid shock and anger worldwide” is ambiguous as to was outraged, and at what—the initial burkini ban, or its judicial repeal?
Why not publish an informative article, without the forcing readers into a guessing game? That’s because the AP is a racial socialist political outfit and, as an ally of Islam, wishes to leave readers as confused and confounded as possible.
Thus, since we know that Moslems are evil, and that they can be found in much of the world, while Frenchmen are no longer so conquest-oriented, the “shock and anger worldwide” must refer to Moslems. But what were they shocked and angered over? Like blacks, Moslems are shocked and angered by everything, and thus could have been angered both by the Burkini ban and its judicial rescinding, but based on longtime study of the AP, I’m going to wager that the latter was talking about the initial rescinding.
But I shouldn’t have to wager.
And the AP operative’s phrasing, “amid shock and anger [riots] worldwide,” leaves no doubt that he means that the ban was responsible for the violence, and that the violence was justified.
Why should Moslems outside of France have any say in the matter? Why should the Associated Press support jihad? Beats me.