'The christian attack' never had any religion background when it came down to it, therefore that is the reason christian was never named in the head title.
I think you just told yourself that the media is screwd up didn't you?
(When Muslims do terror (ISLAM TERRORISME CNN) if Christians do Terror ( "There was an Attack")
It's like: US Army bombs islamic states, no one bothers, binladen tries to tell US that they do not give up so fast, 9/11 happens, each single muslim is blamed. Well gege.
"A swiss in my work calls us: Ticking bomb, all act nice one day all will blow up each city" LOL
The difference between those is: The guy happened to be christian, just like someone happens to be jewish or an atheïst. They did what they did because they are simply ****** up.
With these current attacks: They also happen to be muslim. The difference however is, most of the time they did what they did because of religious reasons.
If a christian kills 20 muslims: head title will be: christian kills 20 muslims.
If a christian kills 20 people: ****** up insane dude went full retard
So why the difference? Both situations a christian kills 20 people. It is because of his intention to do so, whereas in one situation he did it because of religious reasons (and being fucked up) and in the other he did what he did because he simply is: fucked up
This is not media being ****** up, this is just using what is actually important to the subject and leaving things out what is not.
Also, that guy at work is simply retarded. Would also be a generalisation to think every white boy thinks like that. A percentage of people are simply retarded. I have always said i petty the actual muslims because what IS and Al Qaida shows us, is not the true religion. It would be too big of a generalisation to say all muslims are like that however, terrorist attacks lately have a high percentage of muslim involvement.