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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (37562)	11/19/2001 9:22:04 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

There wasn't anything emotional about my response. I am using a logical analogy. One that you failed to follow, so I will walk through it again. I didn't say that what the hijackers did was cowardice, I said what OBL did was cowardly. As a matter of fact, I specifically excluded the actual hijackers from the definition. It really doesn't matter what the enemy thinks for this to fit the definition of cowardice. -There was no warning of attack -The people attacked were essentially defenseless -The person that directed the attack did it without having to fear that the victims would fight back. In my analogy of someone shooting another in the back. The WTC/Pentagon is the victim, the planes were the bullets, the hijackers were the guns, and OBL is the cowardly shooter. If OBL had made a declaration of war, at least the U.S. citizens would have known to be on guard so that they could take steps to mitigate the threat. If he would done that, then I would not call him a coward. I don't think for a minute that you don't understand the rhetoric of propaganda, I am sure that you know a lot about the technique, like you say. But try to looking at what I have written without the influence of emotion and use logic this time.