Terror vs. terrorism

An insight into our prime leader's use of the word "terror": I used to think that this was a personal, untreatable tick, like his inability to pronounce the word nuclear. However, I now know that his use, and his commandeering, of the word "terror" is very deliberate, and right in line with his other efforts to scare the American people into supporting his policies.

Simply put, terror is what an individual feels. Terrorism is what someone else does. Thus, using the word "terror", instead of terrorism, transfers the action from those who bomb cafes or checkpoints in Iraq to people in the heartland who become sitting ducks, not just for terrorists (highly improbable), but for the fear (or terror) they engender. It is in Bush's interest to allow terrorism to persist, because that supports the existence of terror among the American people.

Very clever. But, as a previous president once noted, the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. And, thanks to Bush's use of the word "terror", and other mechanisms designed to scare the people, Roosevelt's pronouncement has now come to pass. But we know that our current prime leader doesn't know much history, so why should we be surprised at his craven use of words to instill fear, and thus support for him? He'll do whatever it takes.