

You really don't despise the media enough.
Remember when terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died and The Washington Post called him an 'austere religious scholar'? They always give away the game, and Reuters is no better.
Check out their headline on the death of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh:
Really? The guy who presided over the largest terror attack in Israeli history is the 'moderate' face of Hamas?
All the more reason for Israel to annihilate that terror organization.
But despite the rhetoric, he was seen by many diplomats as a moderate compared to the more hardline members of the Iran-backed group inside Gaza.
Appointed to the Hamas top job in 2017, Haniyeh moved between Turkey and Qatar's capital Doha, escaping the travel curbs of the blockaded Gaza Strip and enabling him to act as a negotiator in ceasefire talks or to talk to Hamas' ally Iran.
He was the nice guy, you see?
He probably doesn't.
Oh well.
But if you clicked on the story above, you'll notice the headline is different.
They changed it.
Can't imagine why.
They love terrorists. Change our mind.
Look at how they memorialized late Jim Inhofe when he died.
You don't despise them enough.
The post continues after the cutoff:
It's 300 days later and where is the deal? If he wanted a deal, a deal would have happened. Which leads to the question:If he was a moderate, and he was the lone voice of reason, maybe the hardliners of Hamas killed him?
And if this moderate didn't take a deal, why will a hardliner?
The media are so disingenuous. We all know what they're thinking and doing when they pull this stuff.
It's plain as day.