The journalism of Anne Barnard on Hizbullah: anyone but Israel

This is quite something.  Israel all but admitted that it has killed Hassan Laqqis, but Anne Barnard is not satisfied.  It insists on absolving Israel and I would not be surprised if she even comes up with an article blaming Hizbullah's involvement in Syria for the assassination of Ghassan Kanafani.  Look at this passage:  "Yet as Hezbollah shifted course over the past two years, sending its forces into Syria to support the government, its ally, against an armed uprising joined by foreign jihadists, Mr. Laqees earned new enemies. Even among some Shiites there were whispers of disapproval and concerns that the group had aggravated sectarian tensions and opened them up to retaliation."  But that is not all she ads a "rumor" to the mix which I have not even read in the most vulgar media of March 14:  " There were even rumors that he was killed by Hezbollah comrades in an internal dispute or betrayal..."  Do you think that the word "rumor" would be permitted by the New York Times editors for any article about Israel?