I prefer the term "homicidal bomb-using swine."  It has the advantages of being
both accurate and deeply offensive to any Muslim to whom it might be applied.
(And of course it applies *only* to terrorists, not to all Muslims, most of whom
are as peace-loving as anyone else.)





Chris Dunlop <[log in to unmask]> on 05/30/2002 07:46:30 AM

Please respond to Chris Dunlop <[log in to unmask]>

To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Wayne Brown/Corporate/Altec)

Subject:  Re: [HP3000-L] How To Stop Suicide Terrorists...  __`_  juspu w ih



"Otterbein, Gerald L." <[log in to unmask]> wrote in message
news:ad50pe0psh@enews4.newsguy.com...
> I think it is time we realize the implications when we refer to these
> religious radicals as "suicide bombers". That term carries connotations of
a
> person sacrificing themselves for a worthy cause. Since when is killing
> innocent people a worthy cause? Even the much debated Koran says that
> innocent people are off limits for revenge.
> We need to call a spade a spade. These misguided people are without a
doubt
> "Homicide Bombers".

All bombers, just about, are 'Homicide Bombers'.  Perhaps those aiming
'oh-so-accurate' precision weapons at, say, bridges, don't intend to be.
Usually though they end up with 'colatteral damage' (now there really is  a
disgusting term), so they too are 'Homicide Bombers', also killing
innocents.

Suicide bombers is a far more accurate term.  If you think it carries
dangerous connotations you'll have to come up with a better alternative than
the catch-all 'Homicide bombers'.  I quite agree that suicide bomers are
misguided, but if, as you say,  you want to call a spade a spade, the
existing term is the right one.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *