The "qualitative jump" of having aim

The news about the day is that ETA has killed a police officer in France. Many people emphasize in his fronts that it is the first time and, therefore, one speaks about "qualitative jump" like this article about the same title in Abc, his publishing house online, or different news of elpais.com, lavanguardia.es, and of course many others. But the same means tell since this one that it is already the fifth shooting between French police officers and members of ETA. Already in 1996, account Abc, a police officer turned out to be a serious injured man in a pursuit (it is not clear if for shots or for accident), and in 2001 a gendarme received seven shots.
There is no, then, qualitative jump any. Simply, more aim. If the hermeneutics of a clandestine band is already of for itself very complicated, it would be better that we were not tangling it any more reading the result of bullets shot in a shooting as if there were revealing grounds of coffee of nonexistent decisions. In case of need, ETA will get involved to shots with the French police, and therefore, logically, it is ready to kill French police officers. We knew it for many years, and they had demonstrated it. Nothing of that has changed today.
On the other hand, Iñaki writes to me with these four apprehensions of screen of the fronts two French newspapers and Spanish two, of today, some time ago.




The contrast is showy (the news is absent in two French, and it is much emphasized in two Spanish), and the truth is that I do not know very well who does the correct thing. To treat to the terrorism like common crime (if a delinquent kills police officer in a clash after a theft in any place of Spain, it would not be in the front) is a possible way of fighting against him, reducing precisely his aptitude to influence our lives. Do we pass here or the French remain short?