In most contexts, at least in the USA, if someone starts stabbing people to death, they most certainly can be stopped with deadly force.
However with the Israeli situation, it seem like peoples broader political beliefs are placing a filter over the events, sometimes to the point of blaming the Israelis for unjustified violence in shooting their attackers. MSNBC had a now infamous segment where a reporter insisted that a Palestinian, who had been shot by Israeli security forces, was unarmed. While he stated this, a picture of said Palestinian was shown on screen with the assailant clearly holding a huge knife.
I am not fond of conspiracy theories. I think that usually the things that look like a conspiracy are really just people being people. I believe that the MSNBC reporter was being honest, but that his own agendas effectively made the knife invisible because that fit better into his own narrative.
And so it is with the press one gets. If the narrative that one lives by is that huge greedy corporations are out to destroy the planet and enslave the population, then any reporting done on that company will like,y shoehorn the facts into that narrative. How else to explain these movies with wildly different takes on Steve Jobs? Or the demonization of Wall Street in the current presidential campaign?
So when we are worrying about how to look better in the press, whether it be after an even such as the BP spill, or through our "commitment to being green", I wonder how much we can really alter the press. Sure, we can get favorable pieces, but will the facts really change the perception among those who are looking to find fault in capitalism?
And does it truly matter at the end of the day? If I am being actively stabbed by a homicidal maniac, should my concern be how the press will feel if I kill the assailant?
My point is, it might be that our detractors will remain detractors and what truly matters is survival.