>>>My grandfather, an IRA member and a hero to his people, would probably have been called a terrorist by some.
>
>If people want to check out Police shootings of civilians, Ireland in the 1960s-1990s makes US shooting of suspects look like small beer. All over the world, people with Irish names sympathized, singing "For the Wearing of the Green" and other rebel songs well into the 70s and IRA fundraising in the US alone raised millions. Also worth observing that there were serious IRA bombings (e.g. in the Canary docks) as recently as the 1990s, with deaths attributed to "the Troubles" still 20 per annum as of 2002. After which it stopped almost completely.
>
>IMHO: the lesson from Ireland is that whatever you label it, there can be oppression and unfairness and all sorts of injustice... but it's unemployment and inequality that creates the conditions for rebellion and conflict. Wealth and a property boom ended the tolerance for violence in Ireland, even amongst those who had dedicated their life to and knew nothing different from a struggle that in the end was solved by tax advantages for the likes of Intel and IBM.
>
>Calling somebody a "terrorist" never solved much AFAICS. Seems to me you cannot decry "terrorism" while still clasping all the wealth to yourself or telling the desperate that if they have no bread, then they should eat cake.

Indeed, John.
Well said.

>> you cannot decry "terrorism" while still clasping all the wealth to yourself or telling the desperate that if they have no bread, then they should eat cake.
If fact, you certainly can if you're a despot or a demagogue and the masses let you do it.
Here we see a member of a town council diverting attention from the fact that his administration is rife with nepotism and corruption by talking about terrorism.
Demagogues like Nixon and Reagan used irrelevant issues like school prayer and flag burning to rev up the masses while shafting them with the tax code.