First up, Reuters "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom-figher" news service is making some news again.

*start digression*
Just a quick note on the terrorist/freedom-fighter issue. As my father, the first teacher of Hoystory, has pointed out, there can be some truth in that statement. During the Revolutionary War, British loyalists would likely have considered Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Roger Sherman and other revolutionary colonists terrorists for their attacks on British interests. Nowadays we consider them freedom fighters and patriots.

There is a difference, however. Freedom fighters, by definition, fight for freedom. Are Muslims oppressed in the U.S.? No. Is there anyone in the U.S. who doesn't have freedom? Criminals, yes. But they had it and lost it after due process of law.

Therefore, anyone attacking the United States by, say, flying an airliner into a skyscraper, is NOT A FREEDOM FIGHTER -- THEY ARE A TERRORST.
*end digression*

There is disturbing evidence that Reuters is not the unbiased, balanced, middle-of-the-road news service it presents itself to be. In a Thursday story regarding the seized arms ship with 50 tons of weapons destined for the Palestinian Authority, the following paragraph appeared:

(State Department Spokesman Richard) Boucher said the United States, which gives Israel about $2 billion a year in weaponry used to kill Palestinians, objected to the $100 million shipment to the Palestinians on the grounds that it contributed to the escalation of violence. (emphasis added)

The United States sells Israel weaponry to protect itself. This makes it sound like the American people are in some sort of conspiracy to wipe out the Palestinians. It's not the case, and that clause is a twisted, biased cheap shot. It is reflective of a radical Islamist mindset that the Great Satan and the Little Satan are plotting to wipe them out.

Reuters is just becoming more and more useless as an information source.