An interesting article and something I had wondered about (but naively assumed that the people saying "terrorism" had knowledge that I did not).
Why is Boston 'terrorism' but not Aurora, Sandy Hook, Tucson and Columbine?
This is an issue that covers many area, notably, being both political and linguistic.
At what point does the meaning of a word change to fit with how it is mostly being used? What are the legal and social implications?
Can there be justice if someone is falsely accused (in this case: of "terrorism" rather than "murder")? If the media and society makes a decision regarding which crime was committed, yet legally this cannot be processed, will the verdict be accepted? What are the long-term repercussions? Will people feel ultimately that justice was note served? Will they seek revenge?
None of this negates or in any way attempts to diminish the horrific events that took place in Boston. Those affected deserve justice, and the search for justice relies upon facts and evidence.
No comments:
Post a Comment