http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/s...445924,00.html
Quote:
Rumsfeld: Don't Call Them 'Insurgents'
Tuesday November 29, 2005 9:16 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) - More than 2 years into the Iraq war, Donald H. Rumsfeld has decided the enemy are not insurgents.
``This is a group of people who don't merit the word `insurgency,' I think,'' Rumsfeld said Tuesday at a Pentagon news conference. He said the thought had come to him suddenly over the Thanksgiving weekend.
``It was an epiphany.''
Rumsfeld's comments drew chuckles but had a serious side.
``I think that you can have a legitimate insurgency in a country that has popular support and has a cohesiveness and has a legitimate gripe,'' he said. ``These people don't have a legitimate gripe.'' Still, he acknowledged that his point may not be supported by the standard definition of `insurgent.' He promised to look it up.
Webster's New World College Dictionary defines the term ``insurgent'' as ``rising up against established authority.''
Even Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who stood beside Rumsfeld at the news conference, found it impossible to describe the fighting in Iraq without twice using the term `insurgent.'
After the word slipped out the first time, Pace looked sheepishly at Rumsfeld and quipped apologetically, ``I have to use the word `insurgent' because I can't think of a better word right now.''
Without missing a beat, Rumsfeld replied with a wide grin: ``Enemies of the legitimate Iraqi government. How's that?
|
Actually, they ARE insurgents, and rebels, as well. Rumsfeld is seeking to remove any measure of sympathy anyone has for those Iraqis who are against the current occupation. Those who rebeled under Saddams rule were also insurgents (often the same people!!).
I don't want Rumsfeld to be able to backpeddle again. I'm sick of it. Write your ficticous story and stick with it. Anyone who's paying attention already knows what's going on.