[Pontiac]

"We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist," he wrote in an internal memo. "To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack."

These men, these terrorist (I will use the term), do not fight for freedom. They fight for conquest. They fight for domination. They fight Christianity. They by their own words fight to make the whole world an Islamic Republic. They can hardly be called Freedom Fighters

When one sets out to report on an event one must define the event in terms that can be understood by the target audience. The attack on the World Trade Center attack was an attack on building predominately occupied by civilians. This is a target with out any military or strategic value. This attackers only conceivable purpose is to strike fear in to the populace of the target country and destroy the will of the people to resist the attacker and accede to attackers political demands. This in the understanding of the general population of this country would in popular parlance be termed as a Terrorist Attack

[ChocChipCookie]

These men, these terrorist (I will use the term), do not fight for freedom. They fight for conquest. They fight for domination. They fight Christianity. They by their own words fight to make the whole world an Islamic Republic. They can hardly be called Freedom Fighters.

Excellent point! I don't think that ANYONE, even someone highly imaginative, could describe the people of Afghanistan as "free". From my perspective, there aren't many differences between those who practice Islamism and the Nazis of WWII.