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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (67173)	9/5/2004 10:56:29 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793978

I'm saying that the difference becomes irrelevant for people who have been touched by them. One should be dealt with as a criminal matter and the other as a military matter. That works for me. The reason I've been making a big deal of the difference was simply to resolve the question of whether terrorism is an absolute no-no. People keep wandering around on garden paths rather than deal with that. The axe-murder/terrorist thing was a tangent. The relevance of the question to the discussion has to do with the stance taken by the media when reporting terrorist activities. If terrorism is absolutely unacceptable, then it is appropriate for the media to display bias against terrorism just as it does against axe-murders. If it's not absolutely unacceptable, then how the media handles these stories becomes more complicated. To discuss the subject we first have to resolve the question of the absolute.