Thursday, July 14, 2005

PC War: Conservative are constantly having hissy fits about the terms used to describe our enemy. Newspapers can't say "insurgent" or "suicide bomber" without some right-winger correcting them with "terrorist" and "homicide bomber".

Sure, they are all terrorists, judging by the battle techniques they use of blowing up civilians using hidden bombs. And it is pretty ridiculous that news organizations such as Reuters and BBC refuse to use that term. But using a neutral term doesn't indicate bias.

For starters, there are two types of enemies in Iraq: the Sunni insurgency and the foreign Al Qaeda terrorists that are pouring across the borders to fight. The insurgency is becoming less of a menace now that the political dealings among Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis are taking away the insurgents' incentive to fight. This leaves Al Qaeda terrorists as our main enemy.

But conservatives get wrapped up in the word "insurgent" as if it's a compliment. Mr. Webster defines it as "a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government." These people are attacking the sovereign democratic government of Iraq with the hopes of overthrowing it in favor of an extreme Islamic dictatorship. How is that word inaccurate?

And "homicide bomber" is the most absurd term I've ever heard. The Bush administration started using it, and Fox News loyally began parroting the phrase immediately. The idea is that the term "suicide bomber" brings to much attention on the terrorist and not enough on the victims.

But almost all bombs are used for homicide -- killing human beings. "Homicide bomber" then becomes redundant. To accurately describe the killer as a "suicide bomber" doesn't give the terrorist any glory. It just shows how messed up these people are in the head.

Fox got caught in a mess by adopting the "homicide bomber" term after the British terrorist attacks were found to be conducted by suicide bombers.

The latest development backs the theory that the attacks were carried out by homicide bombers. There had been initial speculation that the explosives were detonated remotely, with timing devices.

So until we learned that the terrorists blew themselves up along with women and children, they had not conducted a homicide? Remote detonation of bombs doesn't count as homicide?

We have plenty to argue about in this war. Let's not get caught up in semantics.