are only Muslims terrorists?!

From The Next Left:

EricRudolph, not a terrorist?

In the War on TerrorTM age, Muslims have been described as terrorists by the government and American media for as little as having used language like "jihad" and in speeches. In the case of Al-Arian, for example, the professor has been described as a terrorist for his rhetoric and accused financial support of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If it turns out that Al-Arian did support the organization with the intent of supporting terrorist acts against Israel, then the label will indeed prove a fitting one. But, Al-Arian has not been accused of killing anyone.

Eric Rudolph, on the other hand, has. His Atlanta Olympics, abortion clinic and other bombings killed three people, including a police officer, and injured one hundred and fifty others. But, search the word terrorist on Google News and despite all the publicity today about Rudolph's sentencing, not one article on Rudolph shows up. Not one.

In fact, I have searched today's articles on the CNN, Washington Post, MSNBC, and New York Times sites, and the only mention of his being a terrorist comes from a quote from a nurse maimed by one of his bombs. In fact, many media outlets have in the past described him as an anti-abortion activist rather than a terrorist.

It would be very difficult to imagine a Muslim detonating a bomb at the Olympics, killing three people and injuring a hundred and fifty others, and not being branded as a terrorist.

So, what gives? Has the term terrorist been restricted to the larger War on Terror, which is in theory about combatting Islamic and Arab terrorism? Or, is the media afraid their use of the term could lead to a backlash from the pro-abortion clinic bombing contingent?

---
"Anti-abortion ACTIVIST"?!?!?! I agree that "activist" is a pretty tame title for a murderous psychopath who killed for religious reasons!