This kind of language, common in the press lately, shows gross hypocrisy:

Madrid was put on high alert following the London bombings. There were fears here that terrorists might strike again.

Terrorists? Terrorists? What terrorists? I though we were told such people were "millitants" or even "insurgents." Suddenly, they're terorrists again!

That is so amazingly condescending. As long as people far away are being blown up -- eh, they're foreigners -- we need to minimize the emotional words which might make us identify with the victims, and become angry at people who commit such acts. Screw those victims and their families. Our sympathies are with the 'millitants.' ("Militant", as if each terrorist were the same as a soldier, one who follows rules, and tries to make efforts to spare innocent casualties.)

But blow up a few Londoners or New Yorkers and watch how quickly those New York Times, Guardian, or BBC reporters suddenly start deciding it's "terrorism" again.

Update: After I wrote the above, I discovered Hitchens had said the same thing, albeit a bit more succinctly, as usual:

FOR a few moments yesterday, Londoners received a taste of what life is like for the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, whose Muslim faith does not protect them from slaughter at the hands of those who think they are not Muslim enough, or are the wrong Muslim.

And for a few moments, those acts became "terrorism".