Unbiased headlining, al-Reuters stylean unbiased headline (Hat Tip: Memeorandum):
Israel pounds Gaza despite international peace efforts
Excuse me? Israel has accepted every cease fire offered over the last two weeks. Hamas has refused every one. Within the last hour, Israel Radio reported that John Kerry has given up and that Ban Ki-Moon is about to admit that the reason there is no cease fire is because Hamas is not backing off demands that would turn a rout into a victory and make Israel pay a penalty for winning.
So Israel continues to pound Hamas in the hope that it will agree to a cease fire (or will lose all of its strategic assets if it fails to do so), and al-Reuters makes it sound like we should stop fighting and wait for Hamas to come to terms?
Parts of the article aren't much better. The headline reflects the tone of the article. And that is precisely the problem. You would have no clue from reading the article that the reason that there is no cease fire is that the Hamas leadership in Gaza - safely ensconced in its bunker underneath Shifa Hospital in Gaza City - does not want one. They would rather fight to the last civilian. But don't expect Reuters to clue you in on that.
Shameful. Absolutely shameful.