I read the article. As is often the case, the headline is an attention grabber and contradicts the article. The writer, in the first paragraph, states, “The United States voted against a United Nations resolution this week to formally recognize the trans-Atlantic slave trade as the 'gravest crime against humanity’.” Unfortunately, the article is superficial and does not mention other areas of the slave trade or that the EU countries abstained. The writer is the West African bureau chief for the NYT.
I read the article. As is often the case, the headline is an attention grabber and contradicts the article. The writer, in the first paragraph, states, “The United States voted against a United Nations resolution this week to formally recognize the trans-Atlantic slave trade as the 'gravest crime against humanity’.” Unfortunately, the article is superficial and does not mention other areas of the slave trade or that the EU countries abstained. The writer is the West African bureau chief for the NYT.
Yup! The article also does not mention the abstentions, nor the reasons for them. It's awful. And sadly typical for today's NYT!
Excellent article and frankly, I'm sickened by the activist media and their lies and I don't care if they are rw or lw lies.
Thanks! And yes, agreed.