What happened in Southern Lebanon?

Despite the BBC's attempts to even-handedly report the claims of the Lebanese Army and Israel, their loyalty to anyone but Israel shines through. The BBC first report that:

'

An Israeli incursion into Lebanese territory provoked a clash near the border between the two countries, Lebanese State Minister Michel Faroun has said.

Three Lebanese soldiers, an Israeli officer and Lebanese journalist were killed in the fighting.

Lebanon says troops opened fire after Israeli soldiers entered its territory. Israel denied the charge.'

The BBC reluctantly have to put the Israeli side of the argument:

'Israeli Defence Forces spokesperson Lt Col Avital Liebovich has described a clash near the Israel-Lebabon border as "an ambush".

Three Lebanese soldiers, a senior Israeli officer and a Lebanese journalist were killed in an exchange of fire in the border area.

The Lebanese say they opened fire after Israeli troops entered Lebanon. The Israelis deny crossing the border.'

You might think that seems even-handed, but compare the two headlines chosen for these reports. Whilst the Lebanese side is presented as fact - 'Israel 'provoked Lebanese army' at border clash', the Israeli side is just a claim - 'Israel claims Lebanese 'ambush' on border'. The bias is subtle but invidious.

Of course the BBC have to report the UN's reaction and it's not helpful to the BBC's chosen side, so the BBC report this under the (fault on both sides) headline 'UN urges restraint after Israel-Lebanon border clash'. However if you read into the story you learn that

'UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon say they have seen no evidence that Israeli soldiers had crossed into Lebanon, reports the BBC's Wyre Davies, from the border between the two countries.'

Isn't it odd how the BBC loudly report every hint of a criticism by the UN of Israel but when the UN back up Israel in a dispute, the coverage becomes rather more muted.