Hundreds Held Hostage in Russia School

Originally filed 3:49 a.m.
Terrorism was a favored Russian tool used against the West in the 1970s and 1980s. Now terrorism has come to Russia. Story.

"There were 17 attackers, both male and female, and the gang included some who were wearing suicide-bomb belts, Interfax said, citing Ismel Shaov, a regional spokesman for the Federal Security Service." They are holding 200 children and 200 adults. They chose the opening day of school when more parents were likely to be there to escort their children. So far, three teachers and a police officer have been wounded in the raid. China Xinhua reports them dead. ""One body lies near the entrance and two others are on a road near the fence," he was quoted by Itar-Tass news agency as saying,adding that "all the dead are civilians. The militants do not let recover the bodies, opening fire as people appear in front of the school," he noted. One of the dead is "a father who brought his child to the school and had challenged the attackers." Children, according to Tass, have been placed in the windows to prevent anyone from storming the building.

The Guardian reports on the Chechen "rebels." As long as you are fighting for freedom, no matter that you don't represent any one, you are a rebel to the Guardian. Not terrorists. Not murderers. Not killers. It evokes the Romantic Revolutionary so beloved by the Lefties. Even when they attack little children. Reuters refer to them as "armed attackers" and "militants." Bloomberg news refers to them as "terrorists." Independent Online(South Africa) had to stretch to call them "A group of attackers bearing guns." While Ireland Online had to perform verbal gymnastics to avoid calling them terrorists. They were "Gunmen and women." AP feed refers to them as "attackers." South London, UK, calls em "terrorists." Times of India refers to them quaintly as "hostage takers." Rediff, India has settled on "extremists."

BBC on the Chechen "rebels" history. "They have often used civilians to draw international attention to their demands for independence from Russia, ratchet up pressure on Moscow - and at times simply to extract hefty ransoms." If that doesn't qualify them as terrorists, I don't know what the hell would. In their telling of the theatre siege, "One hundred and twenty nine hostages and 41 Chechen fighters died..." Continuing story: Xinhuanet: Seven wounded died in hospital.

11:00 a.m. UPDATE: Breakthrough. Los Angeles Times calls them " armed terrorists." Scotsman: "armed terrorists"
But then,
Sydney Morning Herald: " heavily armed people ".
News24 (South Africa): "The gang, which includes women".
International Herald-Tribune: "insurgents" and "guerillas".
Waterloo Cedar Falls, IA: "militants".
CBC gets a prize for the headline: "Militants strapped with explosives". "Attackers" "hostage-takers."
Boston Globe: "school attackers". Also "separatists" and "rebels". This took some language twisting: "Previous hostage-taking involving Chechen rebels, seeking withdrawal of Russian troops from their region, have all ended with huge loss of life."

Any word but "terrorists" because it might, just might justify a war on such outrage. Not when the media have so studiously avoided it in connection with Yassir Arafat for decades, not when it is used so successfully against Israel and, by extension, the United States. And certainly not it if implies any support for President Bush's war against terror.