View Full Version : Homicide Bomber: Fox News Gets it Right
revtj
03-06-2007, 02:10 PM
While channel-surfing the other night, I overheard a Fox News anchor use the phrase "homicide bomber" in place of what we have been calling a "suicide bomber." Rarely when they go spinning the truth do they get it right IMHO.
I like "homicide bomber" and think we should replace "suicide bomber" with this more accurate phrase.
Anybody with me on this?
suzer1013
03-07-2007, 09:05 PM
TJ -- I've had to think about this one, and I'm not sure I've come to an opinion on it. I almost don't have a word for those who blow themselves up with the intent of taking as many with them as possible. It seems so much more complicated than any two words could describe. "Suicide bomber" or "homicide bomber" -- neither seem to really indicate the horror, the rage, the hopelessness, the grief, the loss, the pain, the disenfranchisement, the evil, of such a thing. (And that's both "sides" experiencing all those things, in my opinion.)
So, I can't say. And it's not just because I'm loathe to agree with Fox News about anything. ;) But I saw there had been no responses yet, and didn't want you to think it hadn't sparked some interest. Perhaps others are having a hard time putting it into words, too.
Blessings,
Susan
marutidas
03-08-2007, 10:15 AM
How can you call something that tragic, sensationalized to pump up ratings "News"?
WillySF
03-11-2007, 04:03 AM
I think "homicide bomber" is a more apt description, but I still won't watch the news on television – especially "Faux News". I think Marutidas sums it up succinctly.
BruceChris
03-11-2007, 06:30 AM
It probably causes more people to think, or re-think the situation, and does not allow as much denial. Like the time that many news people switched from saying that a terrorist group had "taken credit" for an act of terrorism, to saying that they had "taken responsibility".
To say that an act is utterly abhorrent to us does not mean that we should escape facing it.
P&L, BC
Alecto
03-15-2007, 10:12 PM
On a linguistic level, I think "homocide bomber" is ...redundant, and not as specific. Most people who are going to use bombs of any sort, anywhere, do so with the intent to hurt or kill people. Not all of them plan to take themselves out in order to do so. On a linguistic level, I'll stick with suicide bomber.
WillySF
03-19-2007, 09:51 AM
How about "fundamentalist, religious zealot, pathetically deluded, suicide-bombing murderer"?
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.