I wonder which word describes this text best - biased or unprofessional.
Let's start with the catchy title: Israeli soldier filmed executing wounded Palestinian man. What does it actually say? There was a Palestinian man - wounded by somebody, somewhere, probably wounded for being a Palestinian, maybe - by settlers. Only in the fourth paragraph the readers are informed that the men (i.e. the executed one and his partner, who was killed on the spot) "are alleged to have carried out a stabbing attack on a soldier. " Alleged. Really? But maybe this was not that man with a knife, maybe these were some aliens from the Moon. But since this moment was not filmed we don't really know.
Then we get to know that the soldier was really wounded.
"The video depicts the injured Israeli soldier receiving medical treatment and being evacuated by a settler ambulance seconds before the Palestinian man is executed. The wounded Israeli soldier sits up in a stretcher, indicating that his injuries are presumably much less severe than either of the Palestinian men lying on the ground. " (I especially love this settler ambulance. Are you trying to say that there is a separate network of settler ambulances?).
The text is no less manipulative as it develops.
Yet it is well known that the commanders of the soldier, who killed the wounded Palestinian assailant, immediately informed the superiors and he was arrested and tried by the military investigative police. The top brass, including the Chief of Staff and the Defense minister, as well as the Prime minister, immediately denounced this murder. Despite the public pressure, with many voices calling to release the arrested soldier, as well as a rally in front of the building of the military court, the soldier is to be prosecuted, as of now - for manslaughter.
For journalists, as everybody else, it is legitimate to fight against occupation, but biased and manipulative texts are of no help, to put it mildly.