British Ministers Told To Not Call Islamic Extremists Extremists

The dhimmitude of Britain continues

MINISTERS have been BANNED from using words like Islamist and fundamentalist – in case they offend Muslims.

An eight-page Whitehall guide lists words they should not use when talking about terrorism in public and gives politically correct alternatives.

They are told not to refer to Muslim extremism as it links Islam to violence. Instead, they are urged to talk about terrorism or violent extremism.

Fundamentalist and Jihadi are also banned because they make an “explicit link” between Muslims and terror.

Ministers should say criminals, murderers or thugs instead. Radicalisation must be called brainwashing and talking about moderate or radical Muslims is to be avoided as it “splits the community”.

Islamophobia is also out as it is received as “a slur that singles out Muslims”.

Nothing I can add to this, except for, read the last three paragraphs of the story, and the comments. Also, how long till we start seeing the same thing coming from the Democrats in our country?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

12 Responses to “British Ministers Told To Not Call Islamic Extremists Extremists”

  1. reasic says:


    Did you even make the effort to look for and read through the report? If you did, you’d see that it makes clear that the purpose of these actions is to better fight extremism and terrorism. In order to do that, we’re going to need the help of the Muslim community. Even Bush recognized that. They will be much less likely to do so, if we are always demonizing them. It also talks about avoiding certain terms, so that they can’t be used by the terrorists themselves as recruiting tools. It also mentions avoiding certain terms so that we don’t glorify the terrorists’ actions, by calling them fighters or warriors, rather than thugs or criminals. It also mentions avoiding repeating messages from terrorists themselves, and thereby spreading their messages to an even wider audience.

    All of these seem like common sense measures to help fight terrorism. Are you for fighting terrorism in any way possible, or not?

  2. TFMo says:

    Common sense tells us that, once again, you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about, Reassic. This is appeasement policy at its worst. “Oh, we’re totally against what some of our Muslim brothers are doing, killing innocent people and inflicting terror on everyone and all, but HOW DARE YOU point out the fact that these murderous thugs come from our Religion of Peace!”

    Bullshit. These are ISLAMIC TERRORISTS who are butchering people in the name of their religion, which is condoned and ENCOURAGED by the very core of their religion. Calling them the Cute And Fluffy Bunnyists isn’t going to change their minds, and it isn’t going to do a damn thing to “encourage” the so-called moderate Muslims to stamp out these scum. We’ve shown more than enough tolerance for these monsters, and all it has done is encouraged them to more evil acts.

  3. Otter says:

    Give him a break, reasic is practicing dhimmitude! He understands that one has to live as a second-class citizen if they are to survive in the coming Caliphate.

  4. TFMo says:

    The funny thing is, Liberals are in far greater danger from Islam than Conservatives. Look at all the things in our society that Islam is against; promiscuity, women’s rights, abortion, homosexuality, free speech, nudity, alcohol, most art…all things that Liberals claim to champion.

    And yes, those of us on the Right are against many of these things too. The penalty for doing these things in the US is a stern talking-to; it isn’t illegal. The penalty for doing these things in Islam is death.

  5. Trish says:

    Let’s call them pussy cats. Suicide vest wearing pussy cats.

  6. TFMo says:

    Kitties with no Pity

  7. Reasic says:

    So, rather than discuss the merits of my argument, you all would rather avoid the actual report cited, generalize about its contents, and demonize Muslims? Wow. I’m sorry, but this is mindnumbingly idiotic.

    Never mind that muslims have paraded, given speeches, protested, ran websites, etc., in the name of fighting extremism. Never mind that a simple Google search for “muslims against extremism” turns up over a million hits. You guys just “know” that Islam is evil.

    Use your brains, people.

  8. …how long till we start seeing the same thing coming from the Democrats in our country?

    I think we’ve already seen a bit of it with the renaming of the ‘War On Terror’ to the ‘Overseas Contingency Operation’. You know its just going to get worse the longer the Leftists are in control in Washington.

    Quoted from and Linked to at: ROTTING FROM WITHIN

  9. TFMo says:

    Use your brains, Reasic. A religion that encourages child rape, murder, genocide, theft, lying, and enslavement? Yeah, we call those things evil.

  10. Reasic says:

    It doesn’t encourage those things, TFMo. Are you a Christian?

  11. TFMo says:

    Agnostic, leaning towards Christian. And yes, it does.

    Child Rape: Muhammed took a bride when she was 9, consummated when she was 12. He recommended that the best time to take a woman is before she starts menstruating, so she is “clean.”

    Murder: Muhammed declared that the greatest praise one can give to Allah is the death of unbelievers, particularly during Jihad.

    Genocide, Theft, Enslavement: Muhammed had three ways of “dealing with non-Muslims: Convert, Dhimmitude, or Death. If you would not convert to Islam, then you must submit to Dhimmitude, a form of slavery which makes the pre-Civil War slavery in the US look like a Barney sing-a-long. If you refused to submit to Dhimmitude, well then you have to die.

    Lying: the practice of Taqiyya, in which a Muslim is allowed to lie, even to the point of denouncing Islam and spitting on the Quran, if it furthers Islam.

    These are at the core of Muhammed’s teaching, Reasic.

    And before you start that idiotic argument about how heinous things were committed in the name of Christianity, there is one key difference: Christ did not encourage or preach the atrocities that were later done in his name. Those who committed those SINS were doing so for their own gain. Muhammed, on the other hand, was a very big fan of such things, and personally engaged in those practices.

  12. Reasic says:

    These are at the core of Muhammed’s teaching, Reasic.

    Where is this found in the Quran? Please provide your source information so I can look it up for myself.

    Christ did not encourage or preach the atrocities that were later done in his name.

    That’s right, but not everyone understands that as Christians (I am Christian), we should read the Bible through the context of God’s love through Jesus Christ. There are very harsh words in the Old Testament, much have which can be, has been, and even continues to be taken out of context. And that is the key for me with the issue of Islam and terrorism. I have seen first hand people taking God’s Word out of context for various reasons, so I first want to be sure that any reading of the Quran is accurate in the context of the entire Scripture.

    So please, provide me with your sources. I want to see the quotes in the Quran for myself, which support your argument.

Pirate's Cove