The killing of Iraqis by Iran's Revolutionary Guard should not be one a surprise to any who have followed the course of the Iraq war (and postwar). While Tehran is raising the outcry that the Kurdish freedom fighters (known as the PJAK) are "a terrorist outfit being sponsored and armed by the US to increase pressure on Iran" -- the IRGC is itself conducting a terrorist campaign within Iraq itself.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22032
Day after day, we hear the word "Terrorist" being mentioned. Nowadays, unlike the past, news with the word "Terrorist" in it, effects people's political opinion, and moves markets. After 9/11 a "Terrorist" became a seriously legitimate entity, freely able to do what he or she wanted, and had loads of camera men and journalists chasing him or her everywhere.
It was not like that. You needed a national army to do things, to get the attention of the markets, politicians and public opinion. In many respects, it is all part and parcel of the development of the world media, that has created this situation. A stockbroker now sits behind a screen, has various news wires updating all the time in one window, and with a click of his mouse, he can change his investments in another window. The media knows this, and feeds his curiosity. So is it the terrorist or the media's fault?
And then you get the situation where terrorists are ruing a plot of land, control drugs and guns, or in the case of Iran, have subjugated the country, after tearing its national flag and history. But once you get the media mixing the terrorist with the national army, that becomes seriously damaging. When you get the name of Iran associated with the terrorists, that becomes very nerve racking. After all the media are supposed to be intelligent.
I blame the media
