Rebels without a cause...

I was watching the news the other day, and saw the story about the Moscow subway bombing. In case you don't know what I am talking about: On March 29th, two women blew themselves up on the subway in Moscow. They killed about 70 people. There were apparently some more bombings today, but I haven't been home to watch the news yet.

What stood out for me is that whenever these stories have been done in the past, they have always referred to the people involved as "Chechen Rebels." However, on Monday they were referring to them as "militant Muslim insurgents" and "Muslim rebels." When I talk about in the past, I am referring to these people storming a theater and an elementary school. Both of these escapades ended horribly. In the school attack, hundreds of little children died.

What is up with the change in phrasing? At first I thought it was maybe pre-9/11 and post 9/11 language.

Nope, both of the other attacks happened post 9/11.

Then I thought, maybe this is some other Chechen group separate from the people who want Chechnya to be an independent state.

Don't think so, that seems like a lot of groups that want to bomb and kill Russians in a small area. And I'm pretty sure those separatists have always been primarily Muslim.

And it's not two different news outlets reporting it either. Because as die-hard fans of this blog know, I am a long time watcher of the CBS Evening News.

Is it the suicide bomber piece?
The martyr videos?
The women covered head to toe in black fabric?
The general tie-in to the War on Terror?
New writers on the program?

Maybe.

Do I even need to say this next part? I do not condone the indiscriminate killing of people who are on their way to work or school by people who strap on explosives and blow themselves into little pieces.

At the same time, I can't help but wonder how the change in phrasing affects the conscious or unconscious mind of the CBS Evening News viewer.

(Hint: probably not well, folks.)

What do you think? Leave me your comments.