Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: BGHater

Dear Lord help us!

The term “terrorist” didn’t even exist until the nineteenth century and wasn’t in common parlance until the latter half of the twentieth, furthermore the document is in Latin so of course the English word “terrorist” is not used, that is why I suggest that the 13th Century term “bandit” with all its connotations would be roughly equivocal to the 21st century term “terrorist”; ie a politically loaded term used by pro-government media.

Try to keep up.


30 posted on 03/14/2009 8:54:40 AM PDT by PotatoHeadMick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: PotatoHeadMick
‘13th Century term “bandit” with all its connotations would be roughly equivocal to the 21st century term “terrorist”’

Not at all. A bandit in the context of those days was a clear definition.

Perhaps you are looking for a usurper or someone who is trying to over throw the King. But, there is no reference to that at all. You implied from the very beginning terrorist. That context was not used at all for RH any word form.

34 posted on 03/14/2009 9:03:27 AM PDT by BGHater (Tyranny is always better organised than freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson