When did suicide bombers become "homicide bombers"?

For the second day in a row now, I saw a story about a "homicide bomber". Is this supposed to make them sound more evil? As if, with the original terminology they were only killing themselves, but now we recognize that they are out to kill others? Didn't we realize that they were killing other before? Faux News, gotta love em!

It's a sign you're reading a rightwingnut's take on something.

can't say i have a particular problem with this one though

"Hmmmm. What if the American people start thinking that Suicide Bombers are good guys? What if they just don't understand that murdering dozens of civilians is a bad idea (unless done by us of course)? Maybe we need to underline that they are murdering people--call them homocide bombers or something."

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

I have a problem that it's a redundant descriptor. All bombers are intending to commit homicide. That's the whole point!

So, it's completely a completely redundant adjective. The term SUICIDE bomber is not. It's certainly possible to be a bomber without giving one's own life to the effort. (Roadside car bombs, missiles, aerial bombs, mortar rounds, etc.) The term SUICIDE bomber is truly descriptive of something different, since the person was willing to commit homicide with a bomb, and take their own life in the process.

One makes sense, the other does not. How could you not have a problem with it?
The Professor

I have a problem with it descriptively, semantically and ethically.

It's like - you mean the bomb killed someone?? I know it's right wing terminology, and I know the goal. Do they really think we're that stupid?

As I stated yesterday, I don't watch Faux News, but my repuke bosses insist that it be the home page.

many important points, the truth is that many bombers have not targeted people. It does happen. I believe, for example, that some of the Weather Underground targeted empty buildings in order to make political statements, but not kill people. They were obviously not always successful.

They bombed what they thought(!) was an empty building in Wisconsin. That worked out pretty poorly, didn't it. (9 or 10 Undergrads killed.) I don't think the Weathermen were as careful as you suggest, and DID have the attitude that sacrifices had to be made.

Figuring only "some" chance of killing people is acceptable is no better than "collateral damage". Both are preposterous, and the Weathermen might have SAID they tried to destroy only empty buildings, but were OK with the killing if that happened. That is a homicidal tendency, no matter how one slices it.

So, i would say your example does not obviate the redundancy of the term.
The Professor

He called the homicide bombers once and Faux News has been calling them that since.

Homicide bomber is less accurate and more aimed at evoking antagonistic feelings against the suicide bombers motivation and goals.

Anyone setting off a bomb can be a Homicide bomber. But an individual or group so driven by despair and oppression they make of themselves a bomb detonated in the midst of their enemies is something else. In journalism it is more accurate to label them Suicide Bombers but it is more than that.

What appears insane to an outside observes are motives and beliefs so potent and incomprehensible to the typical consumerist mid set of a Westerner (unless you are a Pro-life abortion doctor assassin!)

"Homicide" takes the bomber out of context of the extremes of human condition that causes a bomber to go suicidal. Both are the aims of the Right: Ignore the conditions that caused the suicide bombers privation while protecting the system that caused it.

they've realized that words do change perceptions.

Suicide Bomber could be interpreted as someone whose life is so fucked up, that they rationally think strapping a bomb will help end it. That also leads the viewer to examine WHY a person would strap a bomb to themselves (and when they do...they see the brutality of the Israeli occupation).

HOwever, homicide bomber makes it seem like he's just an unthinking killer, no rationale, no reasons, no cause...and therefore, "move along...nothing to see here...he's just a terrorist".

One thought process leads to examination of the underlying roots of occupation resistance violence...the other just leads to the continuation of unthinking support of oppressive regimes in the world.

FAUX is trying to make a point. Pay no attention to it they've been trying that line for years, first with Palestinian bombers now with Iraqi resistance fighters. It's been pointed out how stupid the term is. Every bomber that kills someone is a homicide bomber, when they kill themselves in the process it's a suicide bombing, but that doesn't make any difference to them. It's stupid news for stupid people.

They'd have us believe that if the bomber dies in the blast up close, it's somehow 'worse' than a bomber who kills civilians from 10,000 feet.

I'm still trying to figure that one out...

Fox picked it up only because they're under contract to the Bushistas as the Ministry of Truth. The rest of the media retained "suicide bomber."

"Suicide" has a tinge of "martyrdom and sympathy" to it, so HOMICIDE sounds meaner and tougher...

Most of the other networks resisted at first, but eventually started calliing it that too..

It's like the morphing of "soldier" to "war-fighter"...

and Estate tax/Death tax
and aid recipient/welfare queen
and late term abortion/partial birth abortioon
and anti-abortion/pro-life
and mean-angry-selfish twit/republican

Picked it up from Fox. It's a New PC "Patriotically Correct" doublegood phrase.

It is an idiotic term. Um, is there anyone wielding a bomb who DOESN'T intend to kill with it? I supposed our soldiers are dropping 500 pound blobs of ice cream?

I guess it is supposed to remove the nobility of personal sacrifice from Arabs.

But its stupid, because it is in fact very relevant that people are willing to systematically explode themselves as acts of war. Ignore that to your peril --as the US and Israel and now Iraq have discovered.

It started on the Nazi News hour on FauxNews and has now been adopted even by NPR (Neocon Public Relations). Would the analog be "Chistianist"? If so, what would something that is Christianist be? What about something "Judaist"?

that they kill people besides themselves. While I believe that FOX News is an evil growth upon our culture, I think that most people will agree that it is a terrible tactic. While I know it is often seen as the only weapon that an oppressed minority has, it is still an ugly weapon.

I think it was a year ago, give or take, when a young Palestinian lady acted as a suicide/homicide bomber. People in the US watched the news report it with horror .... and of course it is. But it turned out that lady had been at her home maybe 9 months earlier, and watched as Israeli troops kicked in their door, and as I remember it, killed her brother and cousin. So I think that we can see why she would hate, and then take those terrible steps she did. But then the families of the victims of her violence will also be understandably filled with hate.

Somehow, as Rev. King said, this madness must stop.

Saying "suicide" might cause some Americans to wonder what would make someone so desperate, that they would be willing to strap a bomb to themselves. A suicide bombing is a political act of despair, with definite causes. (i.e. Occupation, oppression or invasion.)

The phrase "homicide bombing" does not invite the question "Why did this happen?" It implies that the assailant was insane, hateful and acted randomly. Since every society has homicidal people, a "homicide bombing" can be viewed as an act of nature, such as an earthquake or flood; Such events hold no politician culpable.