@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:As with any topic, you make the decision to comment your positive or negative opinion, lurk and say nothing or just ignore the topic all together.
The topic is about 9/11 families disagreeing with what president Obama is doing with GITMO. What are your thoughts on the subject?
Actually, that's why topics are posted in general, and you're correct. But the question -- at least my question was, why this
particular article?
Me, my thoughts on the subject are that this is a group of people who had something tragic happen to them. I am not dismissing nor am I disputing that. But I hardly think that carries any more weight than anyone else's opinions on the matter and wonder why, years later, this group is often brought up as somehow either being experts in suffering or special examples of victimhood.
Why not ask people who lost their grandparents to cancer? I am one of those people. One-quarter, actually -- it was only my maternal grandfather. He had, I think it was pancreatic. That makes me no expert on cancer nor on suffering and God knows it doesn't make me an expert on Guantanamo. And having lost a loved one on 9/11, while undeniably horrible, confers about the same degree of expertise in such matters, I'd say.
Do you believe these people's opinions carry more weight than, say, yours or my own? Does the suffering of my grandfather count less than the suffering of their loved ones? Somewhere in there, this is a calculus of pain that doesn't make sense.
Perhaps I'm rambling -- and this is not a dig at you -- but I do wonder, beyond the obvious binding tragedy, what places their opinions into the automatic newsworthy bucket? What about the families of the victims at Lockerbie, if you want to go at least with people who lost a loved one to terrorism? Do their opinions count more, less, or the same? Or is that perhaps a red herring that's meaningless in this context?
What do you think?
We sure have a growing number of ignorant people asking stupid questions here on A2K.
