Why is the media so friendly to terrorists. In reading today's Reuters' story about Israel killing a Palestinian terrorist, the recap recent events leads one to think Israel broke the cease fire. Amazing how they can state the facts but still mislead:
"Islamic militants renounced a seven-week-old truce a week ago after Israel assassinated Hamas's second-ranking political leader, Ismail Abu Shanab, by destroying his car with a missile. That followed a suicide bombing that killed 21 in Jerusalem."
Reuters reports the events, but not chrnologically. The result is to make Israel look like the rogue state. So this is the real order of events:
1. Terrorist kills 21 Israelis. Notice Reuters does not mention that 21 Israeli civilians were killed. Just that "21" were killed. Whatever that means.
2. Israel retaliates by killing a terrorist leader. Notice Reuters paints him as a "political leader".
3. The terrorists renounce the cease-fire. Notice again, Reuters calls them "militants". How are they militants when they target civilians? Their bombings have no military connection.
Beware when you read an article. They may state the facts, but not present them accurately.
