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