The Name of Our Enemy
Hat tip to the Drudge Report. The Telegraph has a story (here) in which Tom Leonard claims the BBC is editing out word "terrorist" out of stories involving the London transit system attacks. This is being done in accordance with the BBC guidelines for such things, says Leonard because, "the word 'terrorist' itself can be a barrier rather than an aid to understanding" and its use should be "avoided." They recommend the use of the word "bomber."
I actually agree with the editors that agree the use of the word "terrorist" can be misleading and be a barrier to fully understanding the circumstances of the bombings. That is why I call the "perpetrators" Muslim terrorists, or Islamofascists, or Islamic Jihadis. I think that is much clearer, don't you?
To those who say that the terrorists do not represent Islam because Islam is a religion of peace, I note that the people detonating these bombs sure as hell ain't Presbyterians. They may not be "good" Muslims, but Muslims they are. In fact, arguments can be mustered that they represent the orthodox variety of Islam, not the mainstream.
This is not to suggest that the majority of Muslims in the West like, or support, the terror activity, but many do and it is best to name the enemy. Your chances of dealing effectively with "the bombers" are greatly enhanced if you do and we Canadians will not confuse our sworn enemy with a certain prairie Canadian football team.