Reuters should stop trying so hard

This is a really mind blowing example of how much some media outlets twist themselves into pretzel shapes to defend the Palestinians.

A horrible terrorist attack yesterday at a bus stop in Jerusalem killed one and injured 30. In Reuters report on the attack, we get this bit of disconnect:

Police said it was a "terrorist attack" -- Israel's term for a Palestinian strike. It was the first time Jerusalem had been hit by such a bomb since 2004.

Gee, I don't know...A bomb planted in a bag goes off in an area where only civilians are expected to be and it's only Israel who defines it as a "terrorist attack? "Such a bomb" can then be defined as what? A goodwill gesture?

The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg:

Those Israelis and their crazy terms! I mean, referring to a fatal bombing of civilians as a "terrorist attack"? Who are they kidding? Everyone knows that a fatal bombing of Israeli civilians should be referred to as a "teachable moment." Or as a "venting of certain frustrations." Or as "an understandable reaction to Jewish perfidy." Or perhaps as "a very special episode of 'Cheers.'" Anything but "a terrorist attack." I suppose Reuters will mark the 10th anniversary of 9/11 by referring to the attacks as "an exercise in urban renewal."The mind reels.

 Indeed.



This is a really mind blowing example of how much some media outlets twist themselves into pretzel shapes to defend the Palestinians.

A horrible terrorist attack yesterday at a bus stop in Jerusalem killed one and injured 30. In Reuters report on the attack, we get this bit of disconnect:

Police said it was a "terrorist attack" -- Israel's term for a Palestinian strike. It was the first time Jerusalem had been hit by such a bomb since 2004.

Gee, I don't know...A bomb planted in a bag goes off in an area where only civilians are expected to be and it's only Israel who defines it as a "terrorist attack? "Such a bomb" can then be defined as what? A goodwill gesture?

The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg:

Those Israelis and their crazy terms! I mean, referring to a fatal bombing of civilians as a "terrorist attack"? Who are they kidding? Everyone knows that a fatal bombing of Israeli civilians should be referred to as a "teachable moment." Or as a "venting of certain frustrations." Or as "an understandable reaction to Jewish perfidy." Or perhaps as "a very special episode of 'Cheers.'" Anything but "a terrorist attack." I suppose Reuters will mark the 10th anniversary of 9/11 by referring to the attacks as "an exercise in urban renewal."

The mind reels.

 Indeed.



RECENT VIDEOS