A family own a home and squatters have lived in it without paying rent for years. The family sue, and the police evict the squatters.

There is nothing wrong with the picture, except it happened in Jerusalem and the home owner was Jewish, which was enough for Reuters to side with the criminals, as this blog article shows:

Nearly a month ago, Palestinian Arab squatters were evicted from a home in Jerusalem pursuant to an order from the Israel High Court. The squatters had failed to pay rent for several years.

Advocating for the evicted family, Reuters runs a human interest story replete with classic propaganda tactics, errors of commission and errors of omission that have become a Reuters' hallmark in their Middle East reporting.

...

Jerusalem is a single city with Jews composing over two-thirds of the total population and 42% of the population in the east. This latter number would likely be even greater had Jordan not ethnically cleansed thousands of Jews from the Old City (whose families had lived there for centuries) after invading in 1948. To describe Jews now living in this area as "settlers" with its obvious colonialist connotation is both intellectually dishonest and morally repugnant.

http://r-mew.blogspot.com/2009/08/reuters-continues-to-advocate-for_30.html

I know many liberals will tell me that this has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. Reuters would have sided with the squatters if they had been Jewish as well and if the land lord had been an Arab, as the many, many stories of Reuters siding with Israeli "settlers" building on "Palestinian" land will easily prove, if only your average liberal had time to look for them or bothered to base his opinions on actual evidence at all.

The point is that to the Israeli High Court, the nationality, religion, race, and ethnicity of the people involved didn't matter. It was solely about the owner of the property and the tenant who didn't pay rent. Israeli police have also evicted Jewish tenants who don't pay rent to Arab land lords.

But to Reuters, nationality matters.

To Reuters, this was not "squatters evicted by land lord", it was "_Arab_ squatters evicted by _Jewish_ land lord" and it made a difference. Since the property owner is Jewish, he is the bad guy and that's it.

I have a message for Reuters, which, being journalists, they will not understand:

It's the 21st century. Race doesn't matter. Leave the 1930s mindset behind, grow up, and live in the now.

But that wouldn't be "progressive", would it?