In the wake of Tuesday’s tragic acts of terrorism, the nation watched as the president addressed the attacks. Unfortunately, the statements, interpretations and opinions promoted by largely unqualified sources have also saturated us. One excellent example was a journalist covering the Pentagon being treated like a foreign-policy expert. When asked by the anchor how and when we must respond, the journalist promptly replied, violently and quickly.

The United States upholds a policy of no tolerance for terrorism, but it does not establish scapegoats before all of the necessary information has been attained and processed. Sadly, the media tends to fill this presumptuous role. The coverage of Tuesday’s attacks was no exception. The journalist covering the Pentagon likely knows little more than you or I about the intricacies of international relations. In any case, he certainly doesn’t have the capacity to grasp the overwhelming significance of Tuesday’s attacks if our high-ranking government officials themselves are at an utter loss for words. The only logical conclusions about Tuesday’s tragedies will be reached after unbiased facts and statistics are reported. Until this happens, it will become increasingly important that concerned citizens remain wary of inconclusive reporting.