The New York Times can do better

Today's New York Times' story of two men charged with conspiring to aid Al Qaeda runs with this headline:

Anti-Muslim Bias Seen in Charges Against Man Linked to Al Qaeda

The anti-Muslim bias charge is made by one of the men's lawyers. He offers no facts to support his charge, instead just saying things like his client "wouldn't be here if he wasn't a Muslim."

Lawyers are given wide latitude when defending clients. But news organizations are supposed to stay close to the facts, and never propagandize on their news pages.

So why didn't the Times run a headline like:

Defense Attorney Says Al Qaeda Suspects Victims of "Anti-Muslim Bias"

Can't the Times to be more evenhanded? Wouldn't being so better serve its readers?