[WikiEN-l] "militant": dishonest euphemism? (was: Re: The word 'terrorist')

[Viajero]

On 02/11/04  at 02:57 PM, Delirium <delirium at rufus.d2g.com> said:

> Consider:
> * A group of Al-Qaeda terrorists crashed a plane into the World Trade 
> center, murdering 3500 civilians.
> * Members of the Islamic militant group Al-Qaeda crashed a plane into 
> the World Trade center, killing 3500 civilians.

> They contain the same information, but the second one is much more 
> neutral, IMO, without being at all conciliatory.

As I've indicated in earlier discussions on this topic, I agree of course
with Delirium. Alas, it appears however that there is far from concensus
on the matter within the community at large. An ongoing revert war has
been taking place over in the first line of the article on Bin Laden:

  [...] is the leader and head of al-Qaeda, widely regarded as the most
  extensive terrorist organization in the world

Adam Carr, for example, insists on "terrorist" while others replaces it
with "militant". Adam wrote on the Talk page:

  However, I don't mind the deletion of the word from the opening 
  paragraph, provided it is not replaced with the dishonest euphemism
  "militant." Adam 06:29, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

It is a pity that Adam Carr isn't here on the list to defend this
argument.


V.