Reuters Newspeak: Arab or Muslim occupation of another sovereign state = "presence"

In 2005, Syria finally ended its nearly three-decade occupation of Lebanon that had involved the illegal stationing of thousands of troops, tanks, and warplanes in the country for the explicit purpose of suppressing anti-Syrian sentiment, securing geopolitical leverage against its enemies in the Middle East, and providing economic gains for the Syrian population.

So how does Reuters characterize 30 years of Syrian systematic and structural occupation of Lebanon?

Lebanon's Maronite leaders have had tense relations with Syria and led calls for an end to its military presence in Lebanon in 2005.

Reuters correspondents demonstrate the same obfuscatory rhetoric when describing the nearly four-decade Turkish occupation of Cyprus:

Cyprus has been split since the 1974 invasion in the aftermath of a brief Greek-inspired coup in Nicosia, and Turkey maintains a military presence in the Turkish Cypriot state.

For its control over a tiny unallocated swathe of territory, originally pledged in international law for a Jewish state, won in a defensive war against its marauding neighbors, only one country in the entire world apparently warrants use of the "O"-word by Reuters.

Yep, you guessed it.

"Military presence"

In yet another example of a propaganda mantra demonstrating Reuters transparent bias, correspondent Alistair Lyon characterizes the relationship between Syria and Lebanon between 1976 and 2005:

The turmoil in Syria has fuelled tensions in neighboring Lebanon where Syria has many allies, including the powerful Shi'ite group Hezbollah, as well as foes who resent the nearly three decades of Syrian military presence which ended in 2005.

That "military presence" involved the illegal stationing of thousands of Syrian troops, tanks, and warplanes in Lebanon for the explicit purpose of suppressing anti-Syrian sentiment, securing geopolitical leverage against Israel, and providing economic gains for the Syrian population.

Yet, Lyon willfully downplays it as a mere "military presence".

Apparently, "occupation", the agency's favorite word to employ when describing Israel's quite legal presence in the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank") doesn't apply when referring to illegal Arab control of the sovereign territory of other states.