On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Daniel Mayer wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
It should be taken out because it is both a characterization and unnecesary for identifying the incident.
It should only be taken out if it is deemed unnecessary for identifying the incident. Otherwise we would have to rename [[My Lai Massacre]], [[Boston Massacre]], (many, many other 'massacres'), [[Holocaust]], [[Racism]], and [[Terrorism]] itself.
Speaking of massacres, a few other incidents where the term is commonly applied -- but doesn't actually fit would be the Saturday Night Massacre (where, in fact, no one died), & the St. Valentine's Day Massacre (where less than a dozen people died -- far less than at, say Katyn Wood).
For those rusty on their US history, the "Saturday Night Massacre" was an episode of Watergate, where President Nixon attempted to fire a number of lawyers investigating Watergate. The St. Valentine's Day Massacre occured when either Al Capone or one of his henchmen killed a number of members of a rival gang in Chicago.
Katyn Wood is an event in Polish history. The mass graves of a number of army officers, government officials, & other intelligensia were found in Katyn Wood. The Soviet Union claimed for many years that these people were killed by Nazi Germany; the Nazis claimed that the Soviets killed them. Communist Poland refused to discuss the event, & I have no idea if the post-Communist government has made an official statement concerning the event. I have not seen it referred to as a "massacre", though.
There are numerous other incidents which might be qualified as "terrorist", but where that term might be more hotly disputed.
Then we dispute those! But please no blacklisting of terms. That is Newspeak and censorship.
I would recommend that we follow usage. If the word "terrorist" frequently or commonly is used to refer to an event, we either offer a link with that in the title, or put the word in the name of the article; if certain groups use the word & others don't, then that fact is mentioned in the article (& who calls it that).
By completely avoiding the term "terrorist", even when it seems obvious, we can avoid the need to set boundaries that define what is and what is not a terrorist act.
Self-censorship is the worse kind.
I am reminded of a saying, sometimes attributed to St. Augustine. "Without justice, what difference is there between a brigand and a king?" Almost every terrorist is a freedom fighter in someone's eyes.
Geoff