Headline is a quote. ‘Shelled UN Building Used by Hamas’

Cognito is right, my OMG retracted.

Nowhere in the article does the quote appear, nor does the article explicitly (or even obliquely) state what is stated in the headline. Unless they count on the reader to know that Hamas, by being near the UN compound, was ‘using’ it. I believe this is the case, but the article does not make that plain at all. Of course firing from near the building IS using the building, just as firing from near a school with class in session IS using the school, or firing from near a hospital IS using the hospital. We know this, because we know Hamas and the M.O. of Hamas. It would have been more clear had the author explained the M.O. of Hamas. The article also does not explain who spoke the quote in the headline. We can assume that one of the “IDF Officials” mentioned in the story as sources spoke it, but the author assumes that the reader needs no explanations for anything. I really hate it when the headline does not match the article, or when the headline is not supported by the article. The only thing which supports the headline is facts that we know without reference to the article.