It's interesting to note how both sides in conflicts such as the present war in Libya use loaded language to insinuate the supposed
correctness of their message. Take Qadhafi, for example: his propaganda consistently speaks of a war against "The Crusaders", a term that harks back many centuries to the religious wars between Christianity and Islam, and is currently much used by Al Qaeda. He couldn't have chosen a better noun in order to influence the Arab and broader Islamic world. On the other hand, it's interesting how, in US and British propaganda, "governments" and "administrations" suddenly become "regimes" in a conflict situation, i.e. the "Iraqi regime" and "regime forces". The classic example of this, of course, is "terrorist" and "freedom fighter", but there are many other examples, e.g. "liberation forces" and "bandits". The most successful examples of such verbal gymnastics are those that persuade an enemy to adopt one's own terminology. When the North Vietnamese and Vietcong succeeded in getting millions of people around the world speaking of "The National Liberation Front" they were already on course to winning the propaganda battle.