It's apparently Surreal Anti-Israel media day here at MR. Next up: the Associated Press.

Let's assume that Israel should give back the Golan. We think that's an awfully unjustifiable and kind of mendacious idea, but let's assume it. Let's even assume that Syria would be justified in attacking Israel to get the Golan back.

That still wouldn't be "resistance". It would be a "war" conducted by one state to get back territory - rightfully or not - from another state. The reason that people label certain violence "resistance" is to make it seem like something positive or legitimate. In the past, it's usually been applied almost exclusively to Palestinian atrocities against Israel.

But now we have an official evolution in the term: it seems that any attack against Israel by an Arab state, provided that it can be justified under some theory of territorial division (no matter how one-sided) can be labeled "resistance":

Now of course, the AP would claim that they were just quoting the Information Minister. Not that there's any indication in the headline that it's a quote. And not like there are any quote marks in the lede that would tell you what the quote was. But that's what they'd claim.

We're not sure what they'd claim if they were pushed on this to explain why they'll drop the biased and slanted word "resistance" into a headline but not the word "terrorist". They'd probably make something up about how you're a Fox-News-watching fascist who ought not ask such questions.

Previously: AP Identifies Root of Muslim Violence in France: Non-Muslims!, Associated Press: "We are all Hezbollah" is Not Anti-Israel, With the AP, It's the Little Things That Scream Anti-Semitism