Hey, great: British counter-terrorism officials think the term "war on terror" is "offensive and inappropriate." So do I! Are they finally ready to go to war against an actual enemy rather than against a tactic? Will they declare that they are engaged in a defensive action against a global jihad?
Not quite. Even the watery term "war on terror," you see, is offensive to Muslims -- as if what happened on July 7, 2005 in London was not terrorism, much less Islamic jihad, but just a criminal action by nobody in particular.
"Counter-terrorism officials rethink stance on Muslims," by Richard Norton-Taylor in The Guardian (thanks to PRCS):
Counter-terrorism officials are rethinking their approach to tackling the radicalisation of Muslim youth, abandoning what they admit has been offensive and inappropriate language. They say the term "war on terror" will no longer be heard from ministers. Instead, they will use less emotive language, emphasising the criminal nature of the plots and conspiracies. The government in future, they add, will talk of a "struggle" against extremist ideology, rather than a "battle".
"We hadn't got the message right," said one senior official. He added: "We must talk in a language which is not offensive." Another said that the terrorist threat must not be described as a "Muslim problem".
Oh, heavens, no! And any discussion of how jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to recruit and motivate terrorists -- that would have to be strictly off limits. Don't want to offend anyone, you know!