Thursday, April 08, 2004

Semantics and BushSpeak

I have a big problem with the language being used by the Administration regarding the latest uprising in Iraq:
'U.S. forces are on the offense. The United States and our partners and free Iraqi forces are taking the battle to the terrorists,' Rumsfeld told a Pentagon news conference in Washington.
The problem I have is throwing around the term "terrorist." When a car bomb blows up the UN building in Iraq, that is terrorism. When grenades are launched at civilian hotels, that is terrorism. When a "militia" rebels against an occupation army, that is not terrorism. Call it a rebellion, call it an insurgency, call it an illegal gang, but don't try and lump it in with al Qaeda, because their actions are not the same.

I am not defending the extremists, but I am defending the use of language in proper communication of factual situations. All to often the government spin things to fit their point of view. "Homicide bombers" was just such a term created for political reasons. That term is propaganda, but it was at least an attempt that announced as a change in terminology. The way the Bush Administration throws around "terrorist" is about as bad as Islamic extremists throw around the term "infidel."

No comments:

Post a Comment

Don't be an idiot or your post will be deleted.