You Say Homicide, I Say Suicide

Fox News persists with calling crazy people who atomize themselves and murder others in the process "homicide bombers" rather than suicide bombers. This is clumsy and pointless, as the headline of the story demonstrates.

"Homicide Bomber-Mom Kills Four at Gaza Border" only tells us that four people died via bomb. The bomber, from this description alone, could've made an escape. The body of the story has to backtrack to advise us that the bomber "blew herself up," the very info that the word "suicide" conveys.

Further on, as someone at Fox evidently winces at completely re-working an Associated Press dispatch, we get this sentence: "Authorities believe this was the first mother to act as a homicide or suicide bomber."

So which is it, or does it matter? Is there a difference? Or are there simply standing orders at Fox to never let "suicide bomber" pass, confusion be damned?

Comments

[Julian Sanchez]

I always thought "homicide bomber" was redundant. When people blow things up without murderous intent, we usually call them "demolitions experts."

[amr]

There could always be a "dismembering bomber" or "injury bomber" if none of the victims perish.

Yeah, it's a really stupid construction, so stupid that OpinionJournal makes fun of it repeatedly. I could be inclined to like Fox News, but they really try hard to alienate conservatives who don't want to hear their own side's propaganda.

[Todd Fletcher]

"Homocide Bomber" is just inverse political correctness.

[dude]

I think Bush decided some time back that we should start calling them "homicide" bombers. Don't remember why exactly. Fox is the only news outlet that picked up on that. Make of that what you will.

Unless you're targeting buildings you've searched and know to be empty, pretty much all bombings are homicide bombings. Whereas "suicide" bombings captures the peculiar tactic in its essence.

[Mike H.]

I always thought "homicide bomber" was redundant. When people blow things up without murderous intent, we usually call them "demolitions experts."

Exactly.

After many hours of tedious research, I've discovered that media semantics annoy the shit out of me.

[Jesse Walker]

Every time someone says "homicide bomber," I think, "As opposed to what? A terrorist who only sets off stink bombs?"

[Swamp Justice]

If a bomber's bomb kills people but not himself, is he still a "homicide bomber"? If a bomber's bomb kills himself but no other people, is he a "suicide bomber" or a "homicide bomber"?

[ed]

They do it because they don't want to lend legitimacy to what many consider a noble act: self sacrifice.

Incidentally, self sacrifice is the cornerstone of the Christian church.

[dude]

Swamp Justice - yeah, I wondered about that. Sometimes they go off prematurely and only succeed in blowing up themselves. In addition to being amusing, this also provides quite a suicide/homicide dilemma.

Also, if woman blows herself up, does she get 72 virgins too? Would that be a good thing? 72 clueless dudes?

[Ron Hardin]

Is ``suicide bomber'' stressed on the first or second word? In the Mideast I think the first. At the Golden Gate Bridge, you'd stress the second.

``Comedy bomber'' would be best. It's a shame you have to use words at all.

[Douglas Fletcher]

Yeah, they should just call them pathetic dupes.

[alma hadayn]

You shouldn't need special terminology to convey the message that one who blows himself up for the sole purpose of murdering others is bad- it shows a lot of contempt for the consumers of news.

[dhex]

the new york post also uses homicide bomber, fyi. one of their more endearing traits.

[digamma]

The logic, I believe, is that by calling them suicide bombers, we're supposedly playing into their hands by focusing on their own sacrifice rather than their victims.

Japanese suicide bombings in World War II were called kamikaze, "divine wind". For 60 years, we've been using that word in our history books, and somehow the moral ambiguity of the term hasn't destroyed our national resolve.

I worry less about inadvertently complimenting an enemy than about a language polluted by pressure from the left and right not to call things what they are.

[Baylen]

This is the same PC pablum that makes some aliens "illegal," "undocumented," and now "guest workers."

I hear that "Homicide Bombers" is also the name of the Fox News flag-football team.

[Gordon Shumway]

I believe Fox started doing this to cowtow to Muslim special interest groups. Suicide being a sin in Islam, the Western Media had for years insulted Muslims by using the culturally insensitive term "suicide bombers" to describe mighty heroes. Although they originally lobbied for "martyr bombers," the Muslim special interest groups settled for "homicide bombers".

Quick quiz, which is more fitting for the term "attempted suicide bomber": The one who's bomb fails to go off, or the one who kills five people in the blast, yet survives?

[ed]

Somehow "Rock 'n' Roll Homicide" doesn't do it for me.

[crap-action-jackson]

my favorite is "Islamakazi"

[R. C. Dean]

I always liked "splodeydopes", myself.

[heh2k]

i like foxnews (in general), but this annoys me everytime i hear it. it's REALLY stupid pc crap.

how about those 21 soldiers who killed themselves? has that hit fox yet? i wonder if they'll call them "homicide shooters". i guess that depends on the unknowns discussed above.

[Jesse Walker]

I believe Fox started doing this to cowtow to Muslim special interest groups.

If so, the phrase taken an interesting path. In my experience the "homicide bomber" locution is most popular among, and in fact limited to, the hardcore supporters of Israel.

[ralph]

So many people with too much time.

[Beth]

Considering Fox News actually made a point to change the widely used "Suicide Bomber" to "Homecide Bomber" there has to be some sort of "Conservative agenda" behind it. Unfortunately for them, no one seems to be getting that message.

[Andy D.]

I think that the "conservative agenda" behind the term "homocide bomber" comes from the notion that homocide is more vile than suicide. To be sure, I have a lot more respect for the Tibetan "suicide burner" who killed himself in political protest than I do for those who blow themselves up in an attempt to kill their enemies. And I would feel more sympathy for a Palestinian who blew up only himself than I do for those who blow themselves up in a crowded area in order to kill others.

Still, I find the term "homocide bomber" quite stupid.

[Blixa]

Jeff,

No label can convey all information. "Homicide bomber" conveys both the action (homicide) and method (via bomb) taken by the actor in question. These things (and how many other people they killed) seem most relevant to me. Your main complaint is that the term "homicide bomber" fails to convey whether the actor himself *also* died, or whether he survived, in the act of committing homicide via bomb. I suppose that's true but, not to sound callous but, who really cares what happened to the murderous bastard? If he's dead, great; if he's alive, I am no happier. We can read about that in the story if we care about his fate, but the immediate focus should be on the victims' health, not that of the frickin' murderer.

I am less than thrilled about the term "homicide bomber" but I do think there is a problem with "suicide bomber", and that is, it makes it seem as if the most important, noteworthy thing the actor in question did in the process of the murderous act was to commit suicide. I reckon that the motivation for the intentional term-shift was to attempt to shift the focus back on the crime (homicide) and method (bombing), where, by all rights, it belongs. In that respect "homicide bomber" seems appropriate to me.

Were I to try I could probably think of terms I would like better though. "Human bomb", for example; "seven people were killed by a human bomb". I like this because it conveys how the brainwashed murderer has partially dehumanized himself and turned himself into, literally, a tool to do the dirty work of others. I wouldn't object to "suicide-murderer" because, really, it gets to the heart of the matter; your complaint is addressed, and the only complaint left is that we don't know the murder was committed *with a bomb*... but does it matter? Another term I would love to work in there somewhere, somehow, is "kamikaze"; even though I know that connotes aircraft, seems like it could be co-opted to, say, "seven people were killed by a kamikaze-pedestrian bomber" or "kamikaze-car bomber". Associations with the original Japanese kamikazes are not unwelcome. I could go on but I really don't see the point. "Homicide bomber" may not be perfect and for Fox to have a rule about it may be silly, but it's really no worse than "suicide bomber" (the term "suicide bomber" doesn't actually make it clear that he *killed* anybody besides himself, does it?), and if you really want to complain about networks having silly or obtuse naming conventions I would think you'd want to start by talking about all the media sources who insist on referring to terrorists in certain places as "militants"....

[joe]

I dunno, Blixa, when I hear "suicide bomber," the fact that he killed other people seems to be implied by the word "bomber." I do not get the image of someone blowing himself up in an isolated sand pit.

[Jon H]

"Homicide bomber" sounds like a good description of the alleged person who put the bomb around that Pennsylvania pizza deliverer/bank robber's neck.

[Gen. "Blackjack" Pershing]

re: Muslims being insulted by calling them suicide bombers.

In my day we used to bury the fuckers in pigskins so they wouldn't get the 72 stany holes. Served those bastards right in Mindinao.

[Michael]

I first heard the term from Israeli officials on tv after one of the major attacks last year. Different officials on different channels over the same weekend pushed the phrase, continuously repeating in remarkably similar words, "This is not a suicide bombing...this is a homocide bombing."

It was clearly a coordinated attempt to change the terminology.

[Blackjack]

Sorry, I stutter when I'm channeling. It was probably the damn wogs fault anyway!

[Mark Borok]

When we say that someone was sent on a "suicide mission", it's understood that suicide was not the primary goal of the mission.

[Evan McElravy]

>>I always thought "homicide bomber" was redundant. When people blow things up without murderous intent, we usually call them "demolitions experts."

[Mark]

Fox adopted this construction when our Idiot-in-chief did. To renounce it now might lead someone to understand that an only idiot would speak in such terms--and they wouldn't want that.

This usage alone tells you all you need to know about Fox News.

[Larry]

">>I always thought "homicide bomber" was redundant. When people blow things up without murderous intent, we usually call them "demolitions experts."
Or "redneck.""

Or "environmental terrorist." There's room on both sides.

Then there's the Unibomber- another homicide without suicide.

[Shultz]

The sole intent of a suicide is to kill yourself. The sole intent of the agents in question is to kill civilians.

Making the distinction isn't insulting to anyone, certainly not news consumers.

Perhaps we should attack the term murder-suicide next?

Let's re-write the history books and call kamikazes suicide bombers...wait...that would be an insult to kamikazes.

Kamikazes didn't target civilians.

[Dan]

Neither "homicide" nor "suicide" is adequate; the attacks are murder-suicides.

Just say "Palestinian terrorist" (in Israel) or just plain "terrorist" (in cases where you don't know) and be done with it. That's honest, straightforward, and gets right to the point. You can describe the method of the attack in the body of the article.

Because, really, who gives a shit? It's no better to be shot or stabbed or set on fire than it is to be blown up by some suicidal dipshit with Allah on the brain. Just stick to the facts: "Palestinian terrorist kills four".

[obvious]

Joe = Dickus

[Gawdamman]

I call the vermin "crazy sons/daughters of bitches"........feeding their remains to hogs would be an insult to pigs world wide!

[Will Spencer]

Very well said Blixa!

[jeff]

This is just the first phase of FOX's plan to get us to use "death-wish freedom haters".

[DFH]

By publicising their idiocy at all, we are only serving their cause.

Instead of calling them anything, we should devote our news to issues of local, national, or international importance.

Media attention encourages homicide bombing.

[david]

Blixa: excellent comment.

[Dan]

a people who have lost the moral high ground,
a people whose homeland is not their own.

You know what? Boo fucking hoo. So they lost the "ancestral homeland" they'd lived in for thirty years. The Native Americans took it up the ass about a thousand times as hard when the European colonists swarmed over North America. Yet somehow I'm able to go to the mall without Joseph Exploding Bull trying to murder me and my family.

The Palestinians never had the moral high ground. "Butcher all the Jews" was the plan from Day One, even before the state of Israel was declared, and even when it existed solely on Jewish land. What they "lost" was not the moral high ground, but the military and political advantage. They continue to exist solely because the Israelis are better and more moral people than they are.

[Rick Barton]

Gordon Shumway:
"I believe Fox started doing this to cowtow to Muslim special interest groups."

I'm pretty sure that's not the reason. Any way, if Fox was really worried about offending Muslim sensibilities they wouldn't have that idiot bigot, Daniel Pipes on.

Not so many years ago that redundancy would probably offend most folks with an eighth grade education.

[Robert Hutchinson]

Todd, Andy, Michael, and Vic: I'm almost afraid to ask what, exactly, the phrase "homocide [sic] bomber" is supposed to convey.

Anyway, why in the world should we care so much about finding a phrase that covers all of this so very properly and exactly? The only bias this is perpetuating is that among people who only read headlines, and they hardly need much of a push in the first place.

Let's call them "SuiCide-HoMicide BOmbers", or schmobos for short.

Dan: That was a useful reminder of the dangers of talking about groups of millions of people as though they all hold identical beliefs. Thank you.

[AJMB]

How about 'suicide killers'. Sums up what they did, and that there was more than one death involved in the action taken. You're welcome

[Rick Barton]

Dan:
"You know what? Boo fucking hoo. So they lost the "ancestral homeland" they'd lived in for thirty years"

It's obvious you don't know anything about the history of the area but that doesn't keep you from voicing strong opinions. There was a dispossession of approximately 750,000 Palestinians. Ever hear of the "Right of Return" issue? Your ignorance is no excuse for insulting the Palestinian people. But, if you educated yourself about the history of the region perhaps you wouldn't post such hateful drivel.

[Rick Barton]

AJMB,
Well 'suicide killers' is better than "suicide bombers" but it leaves out the bomb part, which is how they commit their barbarity.

[Rick Barton]

Make that ...better than "homicide bombers"

Sorry about that. Getting tired, better crash.

[old ari]

A homicide bomber is also an airman, who drops bombs on civilians, like Iraqis, do you know someone who has helped to kill Iraqi civilians?

[trainwreck]

Dan,

Your comments seem to suggest that Israel is basically committing genocide against the Palestinians. Why else would you compare the plight of the Palestinians with the plight of the Native Americans?

And you know what, one reason there's no Joseph Exploding Bull blowing up the malls is because the US, after nearly destroying the natives, took responsibility for clothing, feeding, and finding employment for them. But do you think that would have happened if, by doing so, the US population would have become a majority Native?

The Israel situation is way more complicated than your flawed analogy, which seems to be a substitute for thought.

[Shawn]

"It's obvious you don't know anything about the history of the area but that doesn't keep you from voicing strong opinions. There was a dispossession of approximately 750,000 Palestinians. Ever hear of the "Right of Return" issue? Your ignorance is no excuse for insulting the Palestinian people."

First, repeat after me. There is no such thing as a "Palestinian". They are Arabs. There has never been a seperate Palestinian people. There is no Palestinian ethnic group. There is no Palestinian language. There was never a seperate and soveriegn Palestinian nation. They are ARABS. They speak ARABIC. And the Arabs already have all of North Africa, the Arabian peninsular, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq. In fact, those Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza did have a homeland of their own and still do. Its called Jordan. The argument that they also need to a tiny sliver of land west of the Jordan river is nothing more than an historical fraud to justify Arab warmongering and terrorism against Israel.

I have been studying the history of the area since I was 15, and I'm now 38. I have read more than fifty books on the founding of Israel and the history following, and in fact Dan is spot on. 750,000 were not dispossessed. They could have chosen to live in peace with the new Israeli state, but as Dan rightly says, the Arab plan from day one, and in fact from long before even the founding of Israel, was to wipe out all Jews in the area. During WW2 the Arabs in the area were amongst the most passionate supporters of Adolf Hitler outside of Europe. From the very begginning peace was in the hands of the Arabs, and they have chosen war. I have not a shred of sympathy for them. They have brought their own suffering on themselves, and they could end it tommorrow by giving up terrorism.

[joe]

There is no such thing as an "American." They are Anglos. There has never been a seperate American people. There is no American ethnic group. There is no American language. There was never a seperate and soveriegn American nation (before it was created). They are Anglos. They speak English. And (in 1776), England had...blah blah blah. Please Shawn, tell me more about how the Koran doesn't mention Jerusalem and God sent you an email about Judea and...what's that other word? Ivernia? Gaul? Dacia? Oh yeah, Sammarra.

Anyway, I think "suicide terrorist" would address all of the semiotic issues raised above, but it doesn't roll off the tongue that way "suicide bomber" does.

[Vic the Appraiser]

Sorry, but "suicide bomber" is at least as inadequate as "homocide bomber". Call somebody a suicide bomber, and all that tells you is that he killed himself (or herself).

A lot of people see something romantic about self-sacrifice, even unto death, and the phrase "suicide bomber" plays to those emotions. Some people even see something noble about these chaps' murder-suicides - "Fighting with the only weapons they have left, their own bodies" etc etc.

Suicide doesn't have the stigma that homocide does. So I think we need a new term, but "homocide bomber" doesn't do it either.

[Rick Barton]

Shawn,
The ignorance you displayed in your post would even embarrass the most extreme nut ball supporters of the Sharon Regime.

"750,000 were not dispossessed. They could have chosen to live in peace with the new Israeli state."

What nonsense! The dispossession is a fact that is well documented:
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/cup/catalog/data/023112/0231129785.HTM

http://www.ipsjps.org/final/en/books/item.php?id=214&PHPSESSID=67eb5e7d063758f1dcfbfb51eb93fd0d

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1859844421/reasonmagazinea-20/

It is the first operating fact of the situation, even in Israel. The "Right of Return" issue!

" There has never been a seperate Palestinian people."

What?? You wish! There is even a separate Palestinian dialect:
http://semitistik.uni-hd.de/seeger/english/skg_e.htm

http://www.dalilusa.com/arabic_course/syrian_arabic_lessons.asp

In having to address your woeful ignorance of the basic facts of the situation I don't want to take the focus off the reality that the injustice that has, and is being done to them is real, regardless of what ever name you wish to call the Palestinians. What I want is for my government to stop financing the Israeli governments occupation of Palestinian land.

[dj of raleigh]

> They do it because they don't want to lend legitimacy to what many consider a noble act: self sacrifice.