In the 80's Osama was fighting against the conquest of Afghanistan. Today he's targetting worldwide civilians for death in as spectacular a fashion as he can devise. Are you able to appreciate this distinction, or are you as intellectually bankrupt as your comment suggests?

Drat you, whoever just deleted that!

Doug,

Sorry, that was me :) I think he's just a kid. And I don't like it too much when kids come here to make fun of 9/11. Trolls have to be disciplined sometimes ;)

A woman in stiletto heels dispensing discipline. Don't people usually pay money for sites like this? ;)

Oh, look - something more dense than osmium. Since you can't trouble yourself to reach for a dictionary, pay close attention:

A freedom fighter is one who fights for freedom. One could infer from this that Osama would be a freedom fighter for whatever duration which he might have fought for freedom. Keeping Afghanistan from being conquered by the Soviets -- for expansionist conquest was what they invaded for -- was a fight for liberty, of a sort. He no longer asserts himself to create or retain the liberty of anything or anyone.

A terrorist is one who uses terror among the civilian population to achieve a desired end. Osama today attempts to terrify populations into Islamist acquiescence. He is fighting his own war of expansionist conquest now.

When historical context is applied to the words you chose, you seem unaware that words have meaning. I recommend that you pay closer heed to their meanings in the future; your consternation was nothing that simple education could not fix.

Doggone it! You've done it again! :)

Oops :)

I swear, if I had known you were about to answer, I wouldn't have...

It's at this point that I'll stop pretending that you might be capable of cogent discussion. Take you own advice - it'll keep you mute.