The Gross Misrepresentation of the word "Terrorism"

I've heard countless questions from interviewers on when it was suspected that the bombings were a result of terrorism. Questions like, "Did you suspect right away that it was a terror attack?", or "When did you realize that this was an act of terrorism?" The problem isn't the question, it's what is obviously meant by the question, "When did you suspect this was an act of Islamic terrorism?", or "At what point did you think that the bombings were a part of the 'War on Terror'?"

It's fairly disgusting how this word has been turned around. Of course the bombing were an act of terrorism. 4 bombs went off in a coordinated plan. Innocent people were targeted. Why is this even a question? Was this a terrorist attack? Yes, yes, it was. Although, it doesn't necessarily mean it was an Arab attack. The IRA had many terrorists. Oklahoma City was a terrorist attack. We have no idea who is behind the bombings. Sure, it is Al-Qaeda type, and some "new" Al-Qaeda group is claiming responsibility. This group could be 2 high school sophomores in Topeka for all we know. Fact is, we don't know, yet it is already public opinion that these bombs were an extension of our administration's war on the abstract.

Our media and our administration is successfully turning the word "terrorist" into a racial identification. It sickens me.

Mind reading is a dangerous venture . . .

all violence that is coordinated and against the western world is not only terrorism (whiich it is), but it also must only be Islamic Terrorism and is an attack on our "way of life". Pure crap.

when they don't talk about Muslims or Arabs.

to Muslims and Arabs. And when I say "they", I mean anyone who promotes the immediate idea that the culprits are part of an Islamic terror network without a shred of credible evidence.