NationStates Jolt Archive


No really, they're insurgents. Not terrorists.

Armed Bookworms
05-02-2005, 11:10
Warning: RCOB moment.















http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/2005/02/new-techniques-of-resistance.html



New techniques of the "resistance".
I strongly believe that terrorists are cowards but the cowardice you’re going to see in this story is just exceptional.
The suicide attack that was performed on an election center in one of Baghdad's districts (Baghdad Al-Jadeedah) last Sunday was performed using a kidnapped "Down Syndrome" patient.
Eye witnesses said (and I'm quoting one of my colleagues; a dentist who lives there) "the poor victim was so scared when ordered to walk to the searching point and began to walk back to the terrorists. In response the criminals pressed the button and blew up the poor victim almost half way between their position and the voting center's entrance".

I couldn't believe the news until I met another guy from that neighborhood who knows the family of the victim. The guy was reported missing 5 days prior to elections' day and the family were distributing posters that specified his descriptions and asking anyone who finds him to contact them.
General Mike
05-02-2005, 15:02
I think they're now being referred to as rebels. :confused:
Peopleandstuff
05-02-2005, 15:25
Is there some reason why an insurgent cant be a terrorist? Or a reason why a terrorist cant be an insurgent?

The two words are not mutually exclusive, and the fact that one is or is not applicable, tells us nothing about whether the other is or is not applicable.

I for one wish people would quit terrorising the English language.

At this rate given another decade we'll bring about the fall of our own cultures simply because we will have degraded our language to the point of non-functionality. :headbang: