Belligerence: is it too in the eye of the beholder?

I was kinda shocked to read the following headline in JP this morning:

Hague: 'Belligerent' Israel should tame its rhetoric

I confess, it was for two reasons: first of all I couldn't figure our why the Dutch folks from Den Haag have suddenly decided to get on our case in this manner. Then, when I learned that Hague in this case means the British FM, I couldn't believe that the British chief diplomat will use such an unbridled language. After all, Lieberman is not yet the official beacon for diplomatic behavior in Europe as far as I know.

Well, the article itself repeats this claim:

British Foreign Secretary William Hague on Wednesday warned that "belligerent" Israel should tame its rhetoric and said unrest in Arab countries may hinder the peace process.

However, there is no direct quote that would confirm this unusual figure of speech. The only reference to the world "belligerent" appears here:

"This should not be a time for belligerent language," Hague argued when asked about Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's call to ready for "any outcome."

So it is not the whole Israel that is belligerent in Hague eyes, only our PM. And even not our PM, but only his language.  Then I have checked Ynet report on same subject, and here it goes again:

According to the British minister, "This should not be a time for belligerent language. It's a time to inject greater urgency into the Middle East peace process."

So he didn't even refer directly to our PM, but did refer to the need for greater urgency in the peace process - which point JP has also "modified" a bit. For some reason I believe the Ynet version of the quote. And the reason is that it's not the first time that JP's scribes display an especially belligerent, hysterical and provincial style of reporting - not doing any favors to anyone.

Too bad.