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: Michael M who wrote (37576)	11/19/2001 11:49:05 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

I don't agree with X that often but Osama knew he was putting himself at some risk by bringing together an attack like this and probably either planning or at least giving his blessing to the specific 9/11 attacks. Since other people threw their lives away in the attack or fight for him, I don't know that I would call him brave but I'm not sure coward is justified either. Evil, perhaps crazy, definitely dangerous and someone we should target, but maybe not quite a coward. And even if he was a coward and X says he isn't, that doesn't mean she is defending or supporting him. If a laser guided bomb should hit him in between the eyes, I hardly think she would be crying about it. Tim

To: Michael M who wrote (37576)	11/20/2001 3:09:25 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

My objection to the use of the word "coward" is not a defense of OBL. I have no objection at all to the use of words like "lunatic", "mass murderer", or "fanatic". I have no objection, for that matter, to "scumbag" or "motherfucker". I object to "coward" not because I like OBL, but because I think it is inaccurate. I feel the same way about "stupid". One of the dangers of propaganda is that those who repeat it enough often come to believe it. If we keep proclaiming that OBL is a coward or a fool, we may start acting as if he were. That is potentially a very dangerous thing to do.