To AP, only Israel endangers peace

AP's Josef Federman writes:

Israel has opened a new front in its attempts to halt weapons smuggling to Hezbollah, striking one of the group's positions inside Lebanon for the first time since the sides fought a war eight years ago.

Hezbollah attacked Israeli soldiers in a border incident in 2010. An IDF soldier was shot and killed on that border in December. There have been a dozen rocket attacks on Israel from Lebanese territory in recent years.

But Arab attacks from Lebanon to Israel are meaningless, in AP's estimation. Only Israel acts aggressively and recklessly. Just read on:

This week's airstrike, meant to prevent the Islamic militant group from obtaining sophisticated missiles, is part of a risky policy that could easily backfire by triggering retaliation. But at a time when the Syrian opposition says Hezbollah has been striking major blows for President Bashar Assad's government in neighboring Syria by ambushing al-Qaida-linked fighters there, it shows the strategic importance for Israel of trying to break the Syria-Hezbollah axis.

Hezbollah firing rockets or shooting soldiers isn't a risky policy. Hezbollah illegally acquiring advanced missiles isn't a risky policy that could backfire. Israel having the audacity to defend itself, though, is a risky policy.

While Israeli experts agree that Israel would never want to help al-Qaida, in this case Israel and the al-Qaida-linked fighters have as a common goal opposing Hezbollah and its alliance with the Syrian government. This puts them at least indirectly on the same side.

Say what?

Would AP ever report that the EU and USA, by demanding that Assad step down, is "indirectly" on the same side as Al Qaeda??

What is sad is that this sort of biased, amateur reporting is the norm.

(h/t Irene)