The video of the terrorist charging a civilian passenger vehicle with a young child inside while in the process of throwing a stone at the driver, along with five other terrorists doing the same, and getting upended, made media waves and probably even vibrations (I don't mean to be be too crude, but I am sure there were some anti-Zionists and anti-Semites who reached a level of hate orgasm on this).
Let's reframe that picture.
Think this way:
The kids were actually Jews and the person in the car was a middle-level Palestinian Authority official returning from a visit to Rawabi.
Now, to turn a phrase, do you get the picture?
Would the media get the picture? (see this)
It's not the violence, for that seems to be permitted, to be photographed, for photojournalists to stand on the side and wait along with the terrorists to get a good shot (pardon the pun).
For the term "occupation" is the turn-rod on this.
If you are "occupied", almost all is permitted. Actually all, because the world wants us to negotiate with Hamas now.
Just one frame. One take.
Haaretz can't make up its mind. "Allegedly"?:
(Kippah tip: DF)
- - -