NY Times Lies About Sri Lanka Protests Being More Peaceful Than Jan 6

We witnessed liberal media trying to sell us the story that they were “mostly peaceful” during the BLM riots. However, flames were consuming buildings behind those reporters trying to sell that lie.

Why? They were leftist riots, so violence had to be downplayed in the liberal media.

However, Jan. 6 is a year and a half later and we still see the media obsessing about it. The Democrats are hoping to use it for a future President, even though that has not been happening well.

How far has the media pushed the boundaries? The NY Times provided a great example with a recent article on the fall of Sri Lanka’s government.

Protesters have been protesting against the government for months over how they had decimated the economy partly because of climate goals.

Myron Ebell is the director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Energy and Environment. He noted that the Tea Harvest has been so low that all the crop yields have fallen and they no longer have tea to sell. They don’t have the funds to purchase stuff from abroad and there is no food production in Sri Lanka for them to eat. They are starving to death.

Ebell stated that this was all due to a government decision to restrict access to fertilizer commercially.

This month, the government was overthrown by protestors who stormed the presidential palace forcing the president and his staff to resign.

According to the NY Times, the events in Sri Lanka were more like a party at a park and more peaceful than the Jan. 6 riot. German Lopez, a New York Times reporter, interviewed Emily Schmall, a colleague about what transpired.

After 24 hours, the place was filled with gleefulness and people began to swim in the pool of the president. They had done it: They forced the president, who was suspected of war crimes and was feared, to flee his country and home. They did it peacefully and without using arms.

It was a mixture of joy and disbelief with some comedy and absurdity — a very Sri Lankan kind of revolution.

This reminds me of the uprising at the U.S. Capitol. This was much more peaceful.

Oh, yeah. It was something I thought of too.

There were many differences. One difference was that these people weren’t armed. The act was spontaneous and had no leader. They didn’t do it with any politician or party.

The big difference was the widespread support these protesters received. They were even being applauded by ordinary Sri Lankans. People who wouldn’t otherwise be involved in activism and protests were enjoying their time on the property, basking in the success this movement had achieved.

We reported that at least 39 people were injured in the takeover of the presidential palace, and at least 75 others were hurt, including clashes at the parliament and the house of the prime minister being set on fire. The NY Times may be trying to convince us that we are in “mostly peaceful” territory. All the violence that took place in the months before the attack on the palace. More than 200 people were injured, eight were killed, and 50 homes were destroyed by government officials.

Imagine the NY Times cheering a coup where people rose up to overthrow their government, but calling it “more peaceful than Jan. 6”. You can also call Jan. 6 an “armed” attack. Talk about a gaslighting job.

Sri Lanka is a warning tale about what happens when climate goals are put before the survival of the population. This is one that our government seems to be ignoring. It’s not surprising that Schmall also left out the part about fertilizer when describing what happened to Sri Lanka. Instead of blaming COVID. It’s also evident in protests by Dutch farm workers. The NY Times is free to push propaganda, but they don’t have to report on the news.