Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 30 May 2002 07:46:30 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
"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 *
|
|
|