On Tuesday 11 Sep 2007 12:52 am, Amit Varma wrote: > But I'm a bit surprised that while you object to > the government's actions, you don't support such protests. Journalists > should just cover page 3 parties then, no?
Let me split the flow of assumptions here: I object to the government's actions.. but .. I don't support such protests ergo.. Journalists should cover page 3 parties. A more accurate reading of my meaning would be: I object to the government's actions.. but.. I do not support a protest that consists of those specific ill-chosen examples that can be guaranteed to backfire. In this case the protest that is guaranteed to backfire is in support of privacy in a public place to perform ostensibly high security banking transactions: actions that the protestors themselves would not perform under normal circumstances. I would much rather support a protest that hits the government's nosy actions where it would hurt rather than tickle and be dismissed as easily as scratching an itch. ergo.. Ergo nothing. Journalists were never mentioned in my opinion on this issue - but I mentioned them with reference to you. Journalists can do whatever they please, and page 3 seems to please them a lot. shiv
