EU to ban Islamic terrorism

[germanos]

Originally posted by Sandman
Daft, although I suppose I do sympathise. After all, nobody says 'Islamic stealing' or 'Islamic murder'.

They do over here

[Provost Harrison]

That does sound like a case of political correctness gone mad...

[Dr Strangelove]

Next I think they should look into banning the use of the word 'radicalization'. I mean after all is said an done who are we to determine what is radical and what is not?

[Vesayen]

Double plus good!

[Dr Strangelove]

I think they should ban the word 'lexicon' too. Superman's arch enemy might get his feelings hurt by people using that word.

[BlackCat]

When religious terrorists now are political terrorists, what are we then supposed to call political terrorists ? Pillars of society ?

[Az]

Originally posted by Vesayen
Double plus good!

[Vesayen]

God I hate the EU.... on the bright side they are also incompetant beyond all hope and quite doomed.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Arrian


Now it's 1984. Knock, knock on your front door. It's the suede/denim secret police! They have come for your uncool niece!

See, this is one of those times when an obscure Dead Kennedy's song is so appropriate.

-Arrian

I was all set to quote B!itchin' Camaro when I realized that was the Dead Milkmen.

Damn.

ACK!

[DAVOUT]

This lexicon creates a semantic problem.

Till recently, terrorism was referring to bloody attempts directed against police, army, governement services, occupying forces, which were all considered as ennemy forces by revolutionnary organizations (ETA, Irish movement, etc).

"Islamic terrorism", as an expression, was used to describe bloody attempts directed against ordinary people, including women and children, which is significantly different from attacks against security services. The word terrorism alone does not depict this horror.

Consequently, I suggest that we call attacks against innocents either horrorism or dastard terrorism.

[germanos]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
This lexicon creates a semantic problem.

Till recently, terrorism was referring to bloody attempts directed against police, army, governement services, occupying forces, which were all considered as ennemy forces by revolutionnary organizations (ETA, Irish movement, etc).

"Islamic terrorism", as an expression, was used to describe bloody attempts directed against ordinary people, including women and children, which is significantly different from attacks against security services. The word terrorism alone does not depict this horror.

Consequently, I suggest that we call attacks against innocents either horrorism or dastard terrorism.

Terrorism has always been tied to attacks on civilians or civilian infrastructure. Hence the root of the word: it is violence intended to strike terror in the hearts and mind of the populace and/or government.

Attacks on police, armed forces etc. are much better refered to as armed resistance, guerilla or similar.
Offcourse groups as ETA, IRA etc. mixed both terrorism and guerilla, and thus became torrorist groups, making attacks on 'occupying forces' acts that were carried out by terrorists.
Thus the term 'terrorism' has suffered from inflation.


There is a lot to be said in favour of this proposal, whose principle aim (as I have understood it) is to make clear that 'islamic terrorism' is nothing better or worse then any other form of terrorism.

[Nacht]

By making a thread about this on apolyton some people might be tricked into thinking that this is in any way considered or meant to be a major step in fighting terrorism.

Keeping the terms islamic and terrorism somewhat apart seems sane to me. Can't remember that IRA acts were always referred to as Roman Catholic Terrorism.

[Nacht]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Till recently, terrorism was referring to bloody attempts directed against police, army, governement services, occupying forces, which were all considered as ennemy forces by revolutionnary organizations

Luckily Germanos has already answered this.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by BlackCat
When religious terrorists now are political terrorists, what are we then supposed to call political terrorists ? Pillars of society ?

The jihadists are political terrorists. They have political aims (the renaissance of a great Muslim empire), and they use a political mean to achieve that (terrorism)

[Pekka]

omg... I like please someone wake me up, this is a bad dream.

Somehow this is all I expect from EU these days.