Moral relativism at the Washington Post

I don't know how many of you saw the front page of Monday's Washington Post, but here's some of the moral relativism that's typical of news coverage of 'Palestinian' terror.

The list of prisoners who may be released in coming days includes militants who threw firebombs, in one case at a bus carrying children; stabbed and shot civilians, including women, elderly Jews and suspected Palestinian collaborators; and ambushed and killed border guards, police officers, security agents and soldiers. All of them have been in prison for at least two decades; some were serving life sentences.

The Israeli public views these prisoners as terrorists who have blood on their hands. Palestinians see them as freedom fighters struggling to reclaim their homeland and oust the occupiers. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his leadership refused to return to the negotiating table without their release.

Two equally valid viewpoints, no? I wonder if WaPo would publish a description of the 9/11 hijackers who crashed a plane into the Pentagon as "freedom fighters struggling to spread Islam all over the world." Would they use the morally neutral term 'militants' to describe them?

I suppose maybe they would.

More here.