Thoughts, comments, musings on life, politics, current events and the media.



Blogroll Me!


Comments by YACCS

 

Keeping up with the news

Israel and the Palestinians agree on one point:

Both IDF and Hamas spokesmen announced this evening that the suicide bombing in Jerusalem and the IDF elimination of a car full of terrorists were unrelated to the events of the last 24 hours. The Hamas spokesman, while warning that the organization intends to take revenge for yesterday’s IDF helicopter attack on Abdel-Aziz Rantisi, admitted that his organization is incapable of organizing an attack on such short notice and called the timing ‘a fortuitous coincidence.’

(Via Damien Penny.) That story was dated June 11th.

So why is the New York Times, in a story published on the 13th, commenting otherwise:

In the intensifying struggle between Hamas and Israel, Mr. Shabneh's attack is widely viewed, though Israeli officials dispute it, as retribution for the attack on Mr. Rantisi.

Though Israeli officials dispute it? How about Hamas disputing it? I won't even attempt to address the question of whether a reporter can accurately talk about what is "widely viewed" without doing any polling. That sounds to me like reporterspeak for "I believe this, but I'm not supposed to say that."
posted by David Nieporent at 6/14/2003 10:37:00 PM |