Terrorism? Or sabotage?

Editor,

I have no sympathy for murderous madmen of any persuasion, be they violent Islamic extremists or George Bush and his Genghis gang. But I am passionate about American values ( -- perverted from day one in practice but still the most remarkable set of national aspirations in history -- ), and I am passionate about using language accurately to convey facts.

Sabotage, like the dream recently of some conspirators to blow up PATH tunnels in New York City, is the sort of attack to which a hopelessly out-gunned adversary turns to inflict damage, partially symbolic ( -- as in the case of Palestinians' "rockets" -- ) and to a certain extent practical, on his enemy. Proof that an attack like this is not "terrorism" lies in the fact that the Bush administration and the media use this sort of thing to terrorize an otherwise composed public.

"Terrorism" is making an example of certain unlucky individuals -- beheading them or torturing them, then displaying their mutilated bodies or their murders to scare other people into leaving town. Sabotage is not intended to scare anyone into leaving town. So I personally would appreciate it if our government and the media would stop terrorizing the American public by labeling the plans and acts of saboteurs "terrorism."

Good police work, as in the case of thwarting the plan to bomb PATH, is to be applauded and should continue. But terrorizing the American public with some crazies' wish to engage in sabotage and using that fear as an excuse to wage wars of aggression is a cynical misuse of the word "terrorism."