This was on the BBC News website on:
27 March 2011 Last updated at 21:48
Israeli air strike kills two militants in northern Gaza
An Israeli air strike has killed two militants in the northern Gaza Strip, Israeli and Palestinian officials say.
The Israeli military said its strike targeted militants attempting to fire rockets into Israel.
Palestinians said that both victims were members of the Islamic Jihad group. Another militant was injured.
The air strike comes a day after militant groups in Hamas-run Gaza said they would halt rocket attacks on Israel if the Israelis reciprocated.....
Let us analyze the above headline and opening to the article. If you go to the Middle East section of the BBC News webpage the link is the headline above:
Israeli air strike kills two militants in northern Gaza’
What is clear is that Israel has killed. The starting point of the article is an ‘Israeli air strike’. The airstrike has ‘killed two’. Who are these two? The BBC calls them ‘militants’. The fact proffered in this sentence is substantiated by Israel I and Palestinian officials who ‘say’. If they both ‘say’ it simply must be true!
The next line is what Israel confessed by what it said, that its strike ‘targeted militants’. This is a ‘well known ‘fact. Israel ‘targets’. Israel seems constantly to be reported as ‘targeting’. By the way the Israelis, not backed up in this regarded by the saying of the Palestinians, say that the militants were merely attempting to fire rockets into Israel. Why did the BBC not report that Israel had thwarted an attempt to fire rockets into Israel that, by the way no one says was targeting anyone at all?
The deceased militants, notwithstanding the Israeli saying they were involved in attempted rocket firing into a sovereign state, are called ‘victims’ in the next sentence This sentence is ever so slightly ambiguous. Is the BBC writer calling the deceased ‘victims’ and reporting that the Palestinians ‘say’ that they are members of Islamic Jihad? Alternatively is what follows the word ‘said’ in this sentence merely a report of the words of Palestinian officials? Perhaps the BBC should be judged favourably here, after all they are wont to ‘say’ they are impartial.
Perhaps we should put aside the fact that Islamic Jihad openly wish to destroy Israel by military means. Let us put aside that they may, just may, have been aiming at civilians, or even military targets in what is a sovereign country.
What are we told next :
‘The air strike comes a day after militant groups in Hamas-run Gaza said they would halt rocket attacks on Israel if the Israelis reciprocated.....’
You see! Naughty, naughty Israel. The kindly, ever compromising militant groups of Hamas-run Gaza, those unashamed advocates of tolerance, democracy, human rights and lovers of their fellow men, offered to stop attacking Israel if Israel would ever so kindly ‘reciprocate’ by stopping its military attacks on Gaza. Is that not a sincere heartfelt expression of their desire to seek a non-violent compromise in the morass of the Middle East turmoil? We can have no doubt that before we know it the militants will accept the existence of Israel and stop declaring the desire for its obliteration. Tolerance will replace anti-Semitism in Palestinian school curriculum and holocaust denial will become extinct among those who realise Jews may not be swine or canine. Israel, if you did not ‘strike’ at ‘victims’, even if they are ‘militants’, all would be well. Those victims could not have been trying to fire rockets into Israel, they were trying to pack them away as a gesture of goodwill.
Really, Israel, you are not reciprocating! BBC you are impartial! Israel is wrong!
Give me a break!
write a comment