Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE BIN LADEN LOVERS' HALL OF SHAME AKA THE BIN LAUNDRY LIST -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (23)	11/19/2001 2:04:37 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 383

Rosi O'donnell for dissing that hunk Tom.

To: Neeka who wrote (23)	11/19/2001 2:15:29 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 383

Reuters News Service To Reuters, there are no terrorists. As of last week, suicide attacks that deliberately kill thousands of innocent civilians cannot even be described as acts of terror. Stephen Jukes, the wire service's global head of news, explained his reasoning in an internal memo: "We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist. . . . To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack." Except for the little detail that a terrorist assault is what it was. So why the value-neutral approach? "We're trying to treat everyone on a level playing field, however tragic it's been and however awful and cataclysmic for the American people and people around the world," Jukes says in an interview. Besides, he says, "we don't want to jeopardize the safety of our staff. Our people are on the front lines, in Gaza, the West Bank and Afghanistan. The minute we seem to be siding with one side or another, they're in danger." Not everyone at the London-based news agency, which employs 2,500 journalists, is happy about the policy. Jukes acknowledged there had been "an emotional debate" with news editors around the world. After the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and again after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Reuters allowed the events to be described as acts of terror. But as of last week, even that terminology is banned because "we felt that ultimately we weren't being logically consistent," Jukes says. References to terrorism are allowed only when quoting someone. "We're there to tell the story," Jukes insists. "We're not there to evaluate the moral case." Dishonorable mention to Peter Jennings for snideness and smirking.