The Oct. 22 rampage in Canada was highlighted with a large article and headline, Killing another ‘terrorist attack.’ Another rampage in a different part of the world was barely mentioned.
The headline above a tiny article buried on Page 8 reads, Palestinian motorist kills baby. The driver, a known terrorist, mowed down eight people who were waiting for a train, killing an innocent 3-month-old baby, seriously injuring her father and seven others.
Why is the second article given significantly less importance than the first? Why is the murderer of a Jewish baby called a “Palestinian motorist” as opposed to a terrorist? Why was this contrast echoed in practically all print and TV news coverage of the events? Could it be because Jewish blood is cheap?
The contrast in coverage tells the story; you be the judge.
Lori Wittlin, Hollywood