Valuable analysis, thx. This one was a classic:

*****

Meanwhile Palestinian contentions, however obviously true, are treated with skepticism. In "Israel's dilemma over sick Gazans", the caveated testimony of a maimed child even comes with its own ready-made justification to exculpate the IDF.

"Crying out in pain, Ahmed lies in a hospital bed in Barzilai Medical Centre, his blood-encrusted lower limbs heavily bandaged. Two weeks earlier, the 17-year-old became another victim of the violence between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants when he lost his left leg, he says, in an Israeli missile strike against militants in Bureij refugee camp in the Gaza Strip."

Did you spot the precision-guided hasbara? In Berg's telling, this "sick Gazan" wasn't the "victim" of an Israeli air strike, but "of the violence between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants". Not only that: we are expected to believe Ahmed acknowledged his injuries resulted not from the illegal and indiscriminate bombing of a densely populated civilian area, but "he says, in an Israeli missile strike against militants". Through deftly worded reported speech, Berg has the child owning up to being collateral damage himself!

*****

Such a sly, underhand way to undermine the truth of what just happened. I admit I missed the worst part where he implies the child himself names 'militants' as the target for the isr**li strike that maimed him. Something incredibly sinister about putting IOF talking points retrospectively into the mouth of a wounded child. There's no way it was done accidentally, either. Conclusion: rescuing urban foxes notwithstanding, Raffi Berg is an evil, racist f***. No wonder he's floated to the top of the beeb's propaganda cesspit.

jeers,
I