the person of whom that question was asked stated in his reply that he thought it was more important.
*Evidently referring to myself* - Yes it was more important to me only because of the reason I stated. If I had grown up under Islamic rule and lived in the middle east, my perspective might be the same of the Islamic leaders as it is of Bush. But I'll never know. And neither will you.
So once more, would it be fair to label those Americans as "terrorists" in my previous hypothetical example? If not, why not? And if the answer is No, then why do we automatically label the rebels in Iraq as "terrorists" for doing the exact same thing some Americans would do on their own soil, namely, attacking the military occupation? This is the question I would like to see Pro-Bush followers answer.
Remember the film Red Dawn? Were those kids rebels/freedom fighters or terrorists for attacking the Russian military?