What’s not to like about this piece (“Meet the Jewish doctor who saves Palestinian attackers and the Muslim doctor who saves Jewish victims”)?  Jewish and Muslim doctors in Jerusalem treat victims regardless of whether they’re Jews or Arabs.  The main theme – focusing on the variegated staff – is spot on.

But then comes the little poison pill from Washington Post correspondents William Booth and Ruth Eglash:

“For the past month – during a wave of Palestinian attacks on Jews and harsh Israeli responses, including shoot-to-kill countermeasures …”

Two descriptions of recent violence.

First, there are “Palestinian attacks on Jews” a fairly mild treatment of Palestinian killers – just some “attacks” shorn of extent, ferocity, and results. 

Then, second, we get to Israeli countermeasures.  There Booth and Eglash go full blast.  Now, there aren’t just Israeli responses.  Those responses are “harsh” – an adjective or the like missing from Palestinian attacks.  But that’s just for starters.  When it’s Israelis who counterattack, they use “shoot-to-kill countermeasures.”

Palestinians merely “attack” – never mind that they initiate hell-bent violence and use lethal weapons.  But Israelis, in defending themselves, use “harsh” tactics and “shoot-to-kill” countermeasures.

Bottom line: Booth and Eglash soften Palestinian violence but show no such reticence when they report Israeli defensive actions.