You can resolve the paradox by thinking about them as sets, rather than single instances.
GRAND THEFT AUTO ⊂ STEALING
SHOPLIFTING ⊂ STEALING
since not all cases of stealing are cases of grand theft auto or shoplifting. (It is possible to have a case of GRAND THEFT AUTO && SHOPLIFTING, at least if the dealership has a large enough window.)
Of course, I doubt the Globe and Mail is concerned at all with the proper rigor of set theory, or indeed any form of logic whatsoever.
Re: Tautologies
GRAND THEFT AUTO ⊂ STEALING
SHOPLIFTING ⊂ STEALING
since not all cases of stealing are cases of grand theft auto or shoplifting. (It is possible to have a case of GRAND THEFT AUTO && SHOPLIFTING, at least if the dealership has a large enough window.)
Of course, I doubt the Globe and Mail is concerned at all with the proper rigor of set theory, or indeed any form of logic whatsoever.
(untitled comment)