Talk:Annan: Israel violates cease-fire

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Title bias[edit]

Don’t you think the title is just a little bit over the top biased? Apparently Israel itself doesn’t consider it a violation of the ceasefire, so it's not a universally established fact that can be stated as such. How about for example: "Israel raid Hezbollah stronghold in an apparent violation of ceasefire"? Rune X2 16:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the U.N., it was a violation of the cease-fire, and since Israel is an interested party, I think it would not be fair to report as such, based only on their opinion. Anonymous

Seems pretty clear that it was a violation of the cease-fire. Israel justifying why they violated it would seem to confirm that. - Anonymous

reason for revert:[edit]

neither of the two sources lissted with the text claim the firing in Lebanon was a "violation" of the ceasefire. note that Annan has called on all parties to respect terms of 1701. Doldrums 09:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

according to annan?[edit]

"Israel violated resolution 1701 yesterday when troops from the Matkal, a special forces elite unit, launched a commando raid near the Hezbollah stronghold of Baalbek, in the Beka valley, according to Kofi Annan" Israel admitted to it, and the UN agrees on it - and the line was sourced from the observer. I don't think "according to Annan" is appropriate. charmedquark 09:50, 21 August 2006

publication date[edit]

the observer source linked in-text in the first paragraph is dated 20th Aug, while this article is dated to have been "published" on the 19th, but continues to be added on to, on 21st. Doldrums 12:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amnesty Intl. June article[edit]

I put it in "related article" but I suppose it could be a source as well. It addresses other incidents of apparent Israeli cross border violations 2 months ago. Neutralizer 23:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]