That's because TFA didn't bother to tell you that the movies involved depictions of statutory and forcible rape. One was about a journalist being gang-raped by Osama bin Laden and henchmen. Another graphically portrayed the rape and murder of a woman by a serial killer. Yet another depicted a 12-year-old girl being molested by an older man, which in some states constitutes child pornography.

This is shoddy journalism. The article makes it sound like this is just perfectly normal pornography. It is not. These are rape fantasies and snuff films.

That's fine and dandy, but what about this story, or this story, or this story? The New York Times is quick to cite responsibility when it comes to one of their own, but when anyone else is kidnapped they're full steam ahead.

Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

I find it ironic that the Slashdot community makes fun of his "tubes" analogy, considering that every network technician I've ever known has, at some point in his or her life, used the word "pipe" to describe an internet connection.