Blow [what blow?] for Sharon as Gaza plan rejected
Consider the following paragraphs from Conal Urquhart's report on the Likud party membership's rejection of Sharon's partial annexation of the occupied territories.
CONAL URQUHART: But the prime minister hinted he would not take no for an answer, promising merely to "examine" the result before proceeding with a plan to deliver peace and security. [my italics].
ARIEL SHARON: One thing is clear to me - the Israeli people did not elect me to sit on my hands for four years. I was elected to find a way to bring the peace and security. [my italics] that (Israelis) so deserve.
Then consider the headline: "Blow for Sharon" What blow would that be? The fact that the Likud membership has made Sharon's plan look like the "painful. concessions" he has said he is willing to make? Is that a "blow for Sharon"? I'm thinking about this. Aha! the penny's dropped. The Likud movement has struck a "blow for Sharon", hence Urquhart's celebratory headline.
Why doesn't The Guardian just cut out the middle man and let Ariel Sharon write up his own reports?