SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RMF who wrote (11801)9/10/2006 9:45:01 AM
From: MrLucky  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 71588
 
The POINT is, we have had "terrorist" attacks on our soil, but they were small and we don't like to use the T word if we don't have to.

WAPO and the NYT have rarely used that word. Why is that?

WAPO did not even use it in the article they wrote a while back about the murder of a muslim teacher in Bagdhad. In front of his students, yet. These two dailies are real good at sanitizing the word terrorists but heavy handed when describing anything which is negative Bush.

Americans use the terrorist word freely. It's the media who do not! I'm not sure if Rueters has ever used the word.



To: RMF who wrote (11801)9/11/2006 2:29:23 AM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
If a crazed man shooting up the Seattle Synagogue is a terrorist attack then Columbine must have been a terrorist attack, as were many others. You can define lynchings as terrorism if you want to. Most people agree that we have not had any terrorist attacks since 9/11.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News