An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
‘Militants’ VS ‘Terrorists’
They are ‘militants’ or ‘freedom-fighters’ when they create carnage among strangers far away.
They are ‘terrorists’ when they create carnage among those you know and love at home.
In other words, there is no difference except hypocrisy and self-delusion.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
6 Responses to “‘Militants’ VS ‘Terrorists’”
Gee Holly, what fringe sources are you finding that are calling them anything but terrorist? Or are you just launching into another pointless rage over your hyper-sensitivity?
Terror acts of 9/11, bombings in London, Paris, Madrid, now in Bombay may look like a children's picnic, once the Al Qaeda, Jamal Ismailia, and the rest decide to inject a poison or a virus into a Reefer container carrying Halal meat to Arab Middle East from Australia or Frozen marine products to USA, EU, Japan.
Instead of dozens of terrorists and suicide bombers showing their faces, a few perpetrators may inject the poison or virus into a container and disappear.
When the products reach the food value chain and the consumers engage in consumption, the results could be awesome.
What actions are DHS, CBP of USA, and World Shipping Council (WSC), International Maritime Organization (IMO) taking to prevent a disaster of a global magnitude?
Who's calling them “freedom fighters?”
And many militants are terrorists. All terrorists are militants.
Don't forget “cycle of violence,” which unwittingly or intentionally places Israel in a morally equivalent position with its evil enemies, if not implicitly or explicitly worse.
I've seen reports where they are referred to as militants but not one calling them freedom fighters.
As opposed to air force pilots dropping bombs on weddings, or on power plants, in which case they are called war heroes.