[wat0n]

Usually in journalism a second source is required to verify a news story and I've found nothing else. Let me know if you do.

I find it funny you say this, given that you have no trouble in taking YouTube, Twitter and Facebook as legitimate sources.

I also find it odd you didn't know about Ma'an...

Israeli media would eat up anything that demonizes Palestinians as you well know. That this story isn't reported anywhere in Israeli media (or Western MSM) suggests it's BS.

Or they simply don't care or even know about this.

But that's not to say this type of thing couldn't happen. Although it'd make more sense if it was a Palestinian kid who attacked an Israeli baby (motive being frustration/revenge because of living under occupation and/or imprisonment). Or an Israeli/settler attacking a Palestinian baby (motive being racism towards the natives with the view that god owes the land to him and not the native he attacked).

Oh come on, so the only motive of why a Palestinian could attack an Israeli baby is revenge over grievances arising from the conflict (not racism or religious extremism) and the only motive for an Israeli to attack a Palestinian baby are racism or religious extremism (not revenge over grievances arising from the conflict)?

This smells like some strong double-standard to me: You are labelling a random Israeli as racist or religious fanatics because they are Jews (it's not like you apply this to Israeli Arabs) in a way that is not too different from those who say that a random Muslim attacker who kills Westerners is driven by a hatred of Western freedom. Care to explain how this isn't simply bigotry?

[Saeko]

Why would it? It has no political significance as there doesn't seem to be a known political motive involved in the attack. The attacker may have as well had a psychotic break or whatever.

Unless the Western-Capitalist-Imperialist-Racist-Anti-Muslim-Israeli-Controlled media says something is true, it isn't true.