They all seem to have settled on that scummy phrasing: "The assailants, suspected Islamic militants"
The most recent AP article began, "Suspected militants."
What in the hell does that mean? You say of a named individual that he is suspected of a crime, in order to protect him on the outside chance that he is innocent. But you don't say that unknown individuals are "suspected" of committing a known and witnessed atrocity.
These people are not militants. They are terrorists and murderers. And they are not "suspected," you mealy mouthed traitors at AP, Reuters, CNN, AFP, and the rest.
By clinging to such mindless euphemisms, these journalists are holding onto a piece of their ideology, political correctness, which will reassure to themselves and their fellow travelers that they are still "enlightened" beings.
A sad way to prop up their ego.
How true that they aren't militants. The modern history of any Arabic army is pitiful. They can only fight as terrorists hiding behind their women and children. They depend on the Western media to hi-light the one, two, four, etc. Westerners that they kill while not reporting terrorist loses. And for some reason, the Western media play right along with them.