Editorial Bear

Reuters, reporting on the trial of the failed London suicide bombings.

"The deadly attacks on July 7 were the first by suicide bombers in Western Europe and the government has since increased security to prevent a repeat by home-grown Islamist militants, angered by domestic foreign policy." Full story here.

Maybe I'm just being pedantic, but I don't like this bit: "...angered by foreign domestic policy."

Why on earth does it matter WHY they did it?

What evidence is there to suggest that this was their motive?

It simply strikes me as a tiny, insidious little jab against Britain's foreign policy, while the issue of the trial is a matter of law, not politics. They are supposed to be reporting facts, not speculating motivation.

As an advertising copywriter, I know just how powerful a few additional words can be. Those five words push this article into editorial, not reporting.