Your “Underneath Lebanon, Israel sees hidden battlefield” is absolutely wonderful. This kind of reporting makes what is great about AP. It is truthful, informative and makes one understand the situation and where things are heading. We find this characteristic of your work except that it is often marred around Israel reporting. Often but not now.
- About anti-Israel bias, nine cases/twist are in (but not enough to ruin the report).
- They are serious because they all come at the beginning of the report.
- Most are AP’s attempts to insert rewritten history into the fresh report.
- This is probably done by editors “improving” the reporter’s work.
“With tensions mounting” – Tensions don’t mount – people act in a way that does tensions mount. This is a stylistic trick to hide that there is an aggressor, as we have seen already before in many AP reports.
“the volatility” – See the previous remark.
“when Lebanese troops fired at Israeli soldiers clearing brush” – The Lebanese did not fire at soldiers clearing bushes but at officers far removed and not involved it this routine maintenance.
“on their side of the border” – Whose side is “their side”? This is the most misleading AP formulation in weeks; though it matters little on whose side it was as the tree trimming was just a pretext to the Lebanese sniper attack, the question to AP gets even stronger: why hide that the tree was on the Israeli side of the border?
“retaliatory helicopter strike” – Soldiers the world over shoot back when attacked, except for Israelis – they “retaliate”! This feeds the old stereotype that Christians turn the other cheek but that Jews have the old-fashioned revengeful God of the Old Testament.
“Neither side has signaled that another war is imminent” – Very misleading as the Israeli leaders have all signaled that another war is NOT imminent. So what you write is true and still false. You employed “Neither” again, hiding the aggressor – again.
“use to civilians for cover if war erupts” – Where is AP’s indignation? How is AP as a prominent member of the free press going to protect these poor civilians? Using human shields – THERE now is a cause for AP to start a firestorm – instead of the unworthy cause trying to ignite anti-Semitism the world over by slandering Israel.
“Several guerrilla command posts” – Guerrilla – American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: “A member of an irregular, usually indigenous military or paramilitary unit operating in small bands in occupied territory to harass and undermine the enemy, as by surprise raids.” The qualification “indigenous” does not apply here and neither is the area “occupied territory.” Hezbollah are the intruders. That’s why it’s relatively easy for Israel to find locals that are willing to risk their lives by telling on them. (See also An example of a choice of words: “Take Hezbollah” in “Course – 18 points to bear in mind.”)
“It’s difficult to independently confirm the allegations on the ground.” – Now, this is an issue by which we will be able to tell the men from the boys in reporting. How could we determine which of the parties is most likely lying? The answer: Israel has nothing to gain to fabricate these charges, and it has also not the infrastructure to do so as a considerable portion of its armed forces consist of conscripts that are left-wingers if not pacifists, that will not allow warmongering empty stories to be launched. The other party has everything to win by pretending it’s not violating Security Counsel Resolution 1701.