LGF: jumping to conclusions

Charles Johnson holds up as further evidence that the media are biased against Israel a Reuters report about the case of a Palestinian taxi driver who ran over an Israeli and was promptly shot dead by IDF soldiers (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=15621).

Why does this demonstrate Reuters' bias? Why, clearly the fact that Reuters gave the story the headline "Palestinian, Israeli Killed at West Bank Roadblock" indicates that they are on the side of the Palestinian, because the Pali MUST have hit the Israeli on purpose, and the IDF only shot him in self-defence, but the headline makes it seem like both are 'equal' victims.

The problem with this reading is that it says more about the bias of Charles 'Icarus' Johnson, than about Reuters. The headline, in fact, is perfectly neutral. Two people killed at road block: one Palestinian, one Israeli.

What is more, if Charles had done some digging on this story he might have found that the version of events where the Palestinian deliberately hit and killed the Israeli is disputed. In fact, the IDF itself has suggested that the Israeli may have been killed by friendly fire, not by the taxi. But minor details (alright, lets call them FACTS) like this don't concern CJ when he's got another piece of so-called NEWS to put on his weblog. Just don't moan if Google ignores you, Charlie-boy...

UPDATE: It took Charles only 48 hours to get the red hot news out to his lizard loons that Israeli soldier Tziki Eyal WAS in fact shot dead by his fellow soldiers (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=15656). Of course, the LGF crew still maintains it was the Palestinian's fault because he clearly wanted to run over Eyal. Proof? None needed. And a retraction of his comments about "al-Reuters"? No, not from Charles...