Terrorists or Bombers?I listened to Laura Ingraham on the way into work today, and she had a hilarious clip of one of the BBC's talking heads referring relentlessly to the terrorists in London as "bombers". Michelle Malkin makes the same point in
today's column:
Across the pond, the British Broadcasting Corporation is taking well-deserved lumps for whitewashing the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London. Editors have reportedly expunged the word "terrorist" from the BBC website and substituted the sanitized "bomber" to describe the killers.But how sanitized is the word "bomber"? Yes, the BBC is probably trying to be PC here, and they could certainly argue that bomber is more precise than terrorist, since bombing is what they did and terrorism was their intent. But "bomber" certainly has negative connotations to me.
Maybe the New York Times has a better idea with
this headline:
Experts Fear Suicide Bomb Is Spreading Into the WestTake the person out of the equation; it's just a bomb, not a bomber.
