>>>>>>>>To me there is a clear distinction between a freedom fighter and a terrorist. I wonder whether someone up here could give me a reasonable explanation between the two. And really it should not be depended on which side you're on.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Walter,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'll give it a shot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Terrorists, by their policy, will intensionally target innocent civilians to cause terror, thus they are called "terrorists". That's one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That is a very good start... so how does this contrast the usage of the word terrorist practised all too often?
>>>>>
>>>>>Not sure what you're asking, but many words are used too liberally/loosely.
>>>>
>>>>We sure wouldn't want to do anything liberally <g>.
>>>
>>>damn, you got me again.
>>>
>>>wait, that's a word. it's in the dictionary.
>>
>>But the root word (liberal) is no longer in the dictionary. Common usage seems to have replaced it with "taxandspendliberal"
>
>If you think the 'spend' part is an exlcusive property of the liberals, take a look at the national debt increasing over the last 8 years.
>And wasn't it bill clinton who had its financial matters in order? We all know what happened when the republicans took over. If the rich were taxed better and financials were taken in control a bit better you would not have the huge debt right now.

It is very indicative when someone uses "we all know" clause.