WaPo’s outrageous headline: ‘al-Baghdadi austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48’

(Getty file photo)

Following the elimination of ISIS’s top leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, one of America’s most notoriously left-wing papers rushed to portray the now-deceased terrorist mastermind in a way that seemed like many to be sickeningly positive.

“Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48,” the since-deleted headline from The Washington Post reads.

As of noon Sunday, the headline had been updated, though evidence of the paper’s stunning decision to portray the terrorist leader as a “scholar” remains:

So does the backlash:

The latter Twitter user, Josh Jordan, was accurate about Baghdadi murdering his own three children. In a speech Sunday morning, President Donald Trump explained that when U.S. Special Operations Forces surrounded him, he fled into a tunnel with his children and then detonated a suicide vest, killing all four of them.

He died like a dog. He died like a coward,” the president said.

After backlash ensued over its headline, the paper finally changed the headline to read, “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, extremist leader of Islamic State, dies at 48.”

The Post declined however to change the wording of its stunning piece.

Besides praising Baghdadi’s “canny pragmatism,” the paper’s report also describes him as a “shy, nearsighted youth who liked soccer” and argues that he — a man responsible for countless deaths — had “no known aptitude for fighting and killing.”

These descriptions have also attracted backlash:

The most stunning part of this debacle is the fact that the Post had it right the first time, in that its “austere scholar” wasn’t its original headline.

“Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Islamic State’s “terrorist-in-chief,’ dies at 48,” the original headline read.

Yet for reasons that remain unclear, the Post chose to later soften the headline. Why? Was it to appease ISIS? Was it to throw shade at the president for killing Baghdadi? Or was it simply because Trump is president?

When then-President Barack Hussein Obama’s administration eliminated Sept. 11 mastermind Osama bin Baden in 2011, the Post employed the following far more clear-cut headline:

(Source: The Washington Post)

Yet with Trump in office, it chose an entirely different angle. Why?

What does seem clear after this fiasco is why the president has chosen to discontinue the federal government’s subscriptions to virulently left-wing papers like the Post.

According to the president, these papers act like “the enemy of the people.” They claim otherwise and have maintained that this rhetoric amounts to an attack on the press.

Yet based on the way these papers act — from calling for the elimination of free speech to smearing children — it seems like they often do indeed act like the “the enemy of the people.”

And well, it seems the Post’s decision to tacitly stick up for al-Baghdadi hasn’t helped its case:

Vivek Saxena

Senior Staff Writer
[email protected]

V. Saxena is a staff writer for BizPac Review with a decade of experience as a professional writer, and a lifetime of experience as an avid news junkie. He holds a degree in computer technology from Purdue University.
Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles