I saw this headline pop up on Google News, and had to click through and read it. It’s from the English Al Jazeera:
So, from the headline, what can I infer?
- There’s a truce, likely between Hamas and Israel, in Gaza.
- That truce is holding, meaning that it’s not being broken.
- While the truce is holding and not being broken, it might break at any time.
Sound reasonable? Paragraph five, though, reads this:
The Israeli military said three rockets were launched into southern Israel since the Hamas-led truce announcement.
Huh. That would sure indicate to met that the truce is not holding. I don’t see how three rockets being fired into Israel could mean anything but the truce is not holding. Rockets are not like bullets from an AK-47 or some rocks: they always involve groups like Hamas, and/or countries like Syria or Iran. In other words, they count.
This is the stuff that just annoys me and confuses me to no end. I’m honestly mystified: why would the media say the truce is holding at the beginning, and then say it’s not — in so many words — paragraphs later? How am I supposed to interpret this in anything but cynical ways?
