ANd that is why the UK will soon mean the United Kaliphate.

Posted by: Elric66 at November 20, 2007 12:35 PM

The "war on terror" can simply be renamed "the mission to understand why the religion of peace is being misunderstood by infidels as well as the faithful and why it's really our fault". Kind of long, but it sums up exactly what Western "leaders" really have in mind.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 20, 2007 12:43 PM

This article far eclipses any humor one could try to make about it. I guess it wouldn't be as funny for those living in the UK. And no, we're not doing any better here in the States.

Posted by: special_guest at November 20, 2007 12:44 PM

"Another said that the terrorist threat must not be described as a "Muslim problem"."

I agree. Muslims have no problem with Islamic terrorism.

Posted by: Elric66 at November 20, 2007 12:48 PM

I expect to see the "positive" results from the change in nomenclature, any minute now.

Posted by: awake at November 20, 2007 12:52 PM

I've seen apologists for islam say they we should just as well refer to the 7/7 bombers as "British", "Yorkshiremen", "Cricket fans" etc as "Muslim".

They are so intellectually smug, patronising and arrogant when showing their PC credentials.

Posted by: Celsius at November 20, 2007 12:55 PM

Would it be too much to ask those "counterterrorism officials" to meet with the most intelligent and articualte apostates from Islam, to see what they would recommend? Could someone in brief or long authority -- a Queen will do, if she knows what's good for her --invite in for meetings with Lord West and Gordon Brown and David Cameron and tutti quanti, such people as Ibn Warraq and Wafa Sultan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and a half-dozen others of those who signed the St. Petersburg Declaration, and who still call themselves "Muslims" (clearly, Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only Muslims), such as Magdi Allam?

Too much to ask? The plane tickets too dear, and then there are the hotel rooms to pay for, and the food? Is that it? What is keeping security services all over the Western world from meeting with those who are the new equivalent of the defectors from the KGB (and before it the NKVD), from whom so much was learned about Soviet Communism, and the plans of the Comintern?

What's the problem? What's holding you back? Afraid of giving offense? To whom?

Posted by: Hugh at November 20, 2007 1:07 PM

http://www.nobodyasked.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/WindowsLiveWriter/PullMyHair...Please_6A8F/hairpull4.jpg

That is all.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 20, 2007 1:08 PM

The Canadian mainstream media always use the phrases "so called war on terror" or "the war on terror, according to the US". Ridiculous.

However, "the war on terror" is inaccurate and should be re-named "the fight against Islam" or something similar. But then, NO ONE in the gov or media would ever mention it at all. Instead, they would have to attribute all the terror to "islamophobia" and rain down hard on it's citizens.

Oh, wait, I forgot, that's what's going on right now.

You will see increased persecution of anyone who is disgusted with Islam.

For those who would like a look into the future, go here:

http://sioe.wordpress.com/2007/11/18/a-look-into-the-future/

Posted by: sounder at November 20, 2007 1:17 PM

The phrase "War on Terror" refers to Bush's war. Any thing that belongs to Bush is bad.

Bush is bad for the counter jihad.

One day we will get Guliani as Prez. He will (mark my words) put aside prepared remarks one day to vent on Islam. He'll simply lose it one fine day and tell the American people that we are in a war against Islam.

Yes, he can do it, and he will do it.

Then those Britishers can call their war against Islam whatever the hell they want.

I say, throw the Labor party out and vote BNP!

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at November 20, 2007 1:28 PM

I'm guessing they would consider this offensive and inappropriate language too:

Two Muslim mothers are sitting in the cafe chatting over a pint of goat's milk.

The older of the moms pulls out her bag and starts flipping through pictures and reminiscing.

"This is my oldest son, Mohamed. He would be 24 now."

The other mom replies, "I remember him as a baby."

Mom says, "He's a martyr now."

"Oh, so sad, my dear."

Mom flips to another picture. "And this is my second son, Kali. He would be 21."

"Oh I remember him. He had such curly hair when he was born."

Mom sighs, "He's a martyr, too."

"Oh gracious me" says the second mother. "And this is my third son. My beautiful Ahmed. He would be 18" Mom whispers.

"Yes" says her friend enthusiastically, "I remember when he first started school."

"He's a martyr also" Mom says, with tears in her eyes.

After a pause and a deep sigh, the second Muslim mother looks wistfully at the photos and says: "They blow up so fast, don't they?"

Posted by: Infidel at November 20, 2007 1:34 PM

To our British cousins: It's your government, I suggest you all take control ASAP.

Since UK (IK?) does not have a written constitution, Islamification by changing some laws here and there will be easier.

A prediction - One hundred years from now, historians will call this era the beginnings of the Great Islamic War. Of course, assuming Western historians are alive to write that history and also assuming that it is over by then.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 20, 2007 2:02 PM

"We hadn't got the message right," said one senior official.

That's for sure, now it's even worse.

He added: "We must talk in a language which is not offensive."

Will it offend you to be beheaded? How about being enslaved?

Posted by: RalphInfidel at November 20, 2007 2:11 PM

I can see Swedish authorities replacing the word ”rape” soon because it automatically evokes association with Moslems in an average Swede’s mind.

Although Moslems represent about 10% of the population they are doing the majority of rapes – a crime almost unknown in Sweden before the arrival of the Moslem barbarians hordes.

The next word to go will probably be; murder, theft, shamelessness, bigotry and stupidity as there is a strong suspicion that they, too, trigger the same association as “rape”.

Posted by: thomas. h at November 20, 2007 2:14 PM

I'd be okay with Crusades Redux

Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at November 20, 2007 2:36 PM

I am offended by the 21st century. That about sums it up.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at November 20, 2007 2:37 PM

Counter-terrorism officials now believe that what was a non-descript name for an ideological foe we face is or was too provocative, offensive and even inappropriate.

And who finds this offensive.. Islamic terrorists?

Sorry ermm... criminals?

Yes that's right criminals just like all the other 'criminals' we have in all our societies, Islamic terrorists are just criminals; a pain nothing more.

I despair at the idiots who are actually responsible for tackling Islamic inspired conquest in my country.

I say to all counter-terrorism officials who may read this site - wake up!

Posted by: Geeza at November 20, 2007 3:31 PM

eve_anne_gelical,

"I'd be okay with Crusades Redux"

So would I if we do it right this time.

Posted by: Elric66 at November 20, 2007 3:37 PM

Changing the meaning of your words does not change the outcome of what is getting ready to happen.

But like liberals that is exactly how they are changing society.

With words that have or are being 'redefined':
Living Constitution
Illegal Immigrant
2nd Amendment
Fetus
War on Terror
Equality
Religous Freedom
Hate Crimes
Palestinian

This list could go on.

All we are doing, is allowing for the 'big lie' to intertwine into our society so that truth is so hard to prove and so unpopular, that no one would do it. History, past and present, is being rewritten.

Notice how liberals have ever tried to change the meaning of 'TAXES'.

Posted by: alaskan1000 at November 20, 2007 3:41 PM

The "War on Terror" is actually the

"Half-Assed Defense Against The Unprovoked Jihad Terror War Firmly Rooted In Islam."

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

The "Iraq War" has been over for years, having been won after only 3 wks. The current operation is actually the

"Benign Occupation In Which America Is Spending A Half Trillion Dollars To Prove That Moslems Cannot Be Civilized."

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

They can't be. Never have been; never will be. For they are the Energizer Bunny in a Darth Vader get-up, beating a Moslima instead of bass drum.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at November 20, 2007 3:42 PM

"less emotive", huh, lemme see,

How 'bout defense against a wretched cult devoted to worshipping and emulating a vile, despicable, filthy, murder, liar, thief, rapist, and pervert. That better?

(p.s., sorry, that should be 'defence' in UK

Posted by: Infidel33 at November 20, 2007 4:16 PM

I should be less harsh on the British, Mr Bush used Islamo-something and was told by his Saudi handlers to use something kinder, and he did.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 20, 2007 4:38 PM

Infidel33, it's true in football and warfare; the best defense is a good offense.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 20, 2007 4:41 PM

The government in future, they add, will talk of a "struggle" against extremist ideology, rather than a "battle". ... "We must talk in a language which is not offensive."

Hey, I have a great idea! Instead of calling for a "struggle" against "extremist ideology", why doesn't the British government call for a "jihad" against "offensive language." Maybe that would end the problems!

Posted by: Karl2 at November 20, 2007 4:43 PM

Take a look at this update on Saudi Arabian rape victim and her 90..no...200 lashes. 200 lashes on a woman...no less a rape victim. Very Interesting.

If I were in charge, I would immediately order the exact same punishment for every Guantanamo prisoner. And every muslim male who commited the slightest crime here in the west. Immediate revocations of all muslim male driving priviledges...we must treat them exactly as they treat women in Saudi Arabia, no matter where they are from..for that is the center of gravity for all of Islam..is it not?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/11/19/saudi.rape.victim/index.html

Posted by: AmericanTiger at November 20, 2007 4:43 PM

'less emotive language' against the global jihad? They are insane over there. This is the milkmaid-intelligence of the BLiar/Brownnose government, but also that of the Muslim infested EU of Franco Frattini, where it originated.

I am offended by 'the kuffar is the vilest of creatures, strike terror in the hearts of the infidels, kill them wherever you find them" and the rest of Muslulmania that want's me dead or forcibly converted.

Dangerous, incompetent idiots in charge. Unfortunately we seem to be getting a KRudd government in Australia who will follow suit. This Saturday we're going to vote and it doesn't look good for the conservatives...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at November 20, 2007 5:07 PM

"He's a martyr also" Mom says, with tears in her eyes.
After a pause and a deep sigh, the second Muslim mother looks wistfully at the photos and says: "They blow up so fast, don't they?"
Posted by: Infidel

Good one! :) But there’s more where they came from, baby factories cranked full steam. Too bad they can’t recycle the belts, get too shredded in the process? Ah the love, the humanity! The jihad brings tears to my eyes… but don't ask, don't tell.. Shushh..

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at November 20, 2007 5:25 PM

Might I suggest either "The Current Misunderstanding", or the "Current Unpleasantness".

Posted by: MP at November 20, 2007 5:38 PM

It does seem that they just want to disassociate themselves from "War on Terror" because it's a Bushism of sorts.

Interesting to see what they'll use instead. "Kickass Annihilation of All Enemies Using Coked-Up Midgets"? Not likely...But you never know.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 20, 2007 6:29 PM

"I say, throw the Labor party out and vote BNP!"
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2

Say what you want, but you, TBTG, are not British. If the country of my birth votes in one group of racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist pigs to combat another, all is indeed lost.

And don't start giving me that rubbish about how the BNP has changed its ways; I've heard it all before.

Posted by: angloirishslav at November 20, 2007 7:14 PM

Hugh asks, "What's the problem? What's holding you back?"

Some of the officials perceive that there is an "integration problem" and that Muslims are as likely as Christians to be vile. So the problem (in this mindset) is not Islam and therefore, why talk with Warraq and Ali and Sultan? What do they know about police work and political realities. By the way, we are being helped by a handful of Muslims, so bug off with your claptrap about "Islamic ideology."

Something like that.

Posted by: StillBreathing at November 20, 2007 8:58 PM

sheikyermami - so far as I could tell from the minimal mention of Islam on the Howard-Rudd debate, I don't think either of them has begun to 'get' our danger. They both ducked using the M-word or the I-word. And Howard has continued the policy of appeasement toward, and dangerous liaison with, Muslim Indonesia. Wasn't he going to sell them our uranium?

In fact - though I haven't been following the campaign in detail - the whole business of Islam and the jihad and our (Australia's) involvement in what Hugh calls Tarbaby Iraq, seems to be very far from the top of the agenda, for both parties.

I'd vote for anyone who publicly pledged to
1. end Muslim immigration (while making it clear that we have NO problem with immigrants of any other faith or none - it's about keeping out a specific, demonstrably dangerous religio-political ideology).
2. take a good long hard look at all the Muslims already entrenched in Intelligence, Defence, the Public Service, Public Utilities, Education, Transport, Media, Universities, and every-bl***dy-where else (and preferably search every mosque from top to bottom - they can search all the churches and synagogues and temples etc while they're at it, they KNOW they won't find anything sus there, and I won't complain if MY church basement is searched and our parish finances audited with a fine tooth comb, so long as I know the mosque down the road is getting a going-over at the same time!)
3. support Israel - such as, by voting NO loud and clear to every 'let's hate Israel' symbolic lynching party at the UN. This could require guts - I'd like to see us prepared to back Israel even if the USA wimps out. In 1947 we voted for partition despite being a British Commonwealth country - we didn't let the UK tell us what to do.

4. get out of Iraq - no use wasting time herding kilkenny cats, Saddam's dead, time to leave. Oh, and we could open our doors to the persecuted Christians of Mesopotamia (subject to sensible background checks to weed out Muslims-pretending-not-to-be-Muslims, of course).

5. re-institute a national draft, for homeland defence first and foremost (no adventures,unless to help people like the Thais or the Filipinos to squash the jihad), with instructors from Switzerland, Singapore and ...the IDF, to tell us how to do it.
6. resolutely defend freedom of speech and freedom of religion, by squelching every attempt at sharia-by-stealth, and protecting the right of every non-Muslim Australian to question, criticise, and downright ridicule the 'prophet', teachings, practices and history of the Empire of Islam, and resolutely protecting bona fide Apostates.
7. Find out how much Australian real estate belongs to Muslims. The Sultan of Brunei, I understand, owns HUGE cattle properties. Stop Muslim money from buying anything else, and bear in mind what can be done with enemy assets during war time. Would we have let the Nazis or the Japanese, during WWII, buy up thousands of acres of farmland, or city blocks?

8. Beef up our back door defences (hire and train every Aboriginal Australian from the Pilbara to Cape York, for Norforce and Coastguard - the coastal tribes are already hopping mad about the incursions of the Indonesian fish-thieves and would LOVE to be able to defend their sea country).

Unfortunately, I don't think either party is going to do ANY of this. We have a LOT more educating to do, people like you and I.

In WWII both parties were agreed on who and what the enemy was, and that it should be resisted by a concerted national effort. We have GOT to get to that point of awareness, again.

Howard certainly hasn't done very much to educate the public about the nature of Jihad and Sharia and how we can defend ourselves. D'you think he's even read Quran Surah 9? (Unless you've sent him a letter, that is?) At least I know that one of Rudd's constituents is a fan of Robert Spencer and has been trying to bring Rudd up to scratch).

They're obsessing about stuff like interest rates and other items of secondary importance, while the Jihad looms over them like a category 5 supercyclone.

Look. All Australians reading and lurking here. Another jihadwatcher, traeh, in America, was organising a mass mailing of copies of Spencer's 'religion of peace?' to American politicians (was it the senators or the congresspeople?).

Would it be possible, regardless of which party gets in on Saturday, for us Australians to organise ourselves to send, or even personally present, a copy of the 'PIG to Islam and the Crusades', with a personal covering letter, as a Christmas gift/ election gift/ re-election gift, to EVERY SINGLE sitting Senator and MP? I could give one to MY federal MP. I'd be prepared to give one to my state rep, too.

Sheik - would you be able to organise something like that, from your website? Once the election's over, make a list of our elected representatives and their electorates, then try and find people from each electorate to send the books.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 20, 2007 9:23 PM

dumbledoresarmy,

Lots of interesting info in your post.

BTW:

I sent, as one of Traeh's volunteers, a copy of RS's 'Religion of Peace', and would probably have sent two. They went to Senators, mainly. Note, too, one of Traeh's benefactors was an Australian woman (as I recall)--so the desire to accomplish a book campaign exists down under.

Maybe you and the Shiek really could put something like that together.

Let me suggest, however, that perhaps a few of those books should go to really deserving folks, like Al-Hilali.

I would also be tempted to vote for whomever realizes that 'moderate' Muslims read the same version of the Qur'an as Usama bin Laden.

Good luck.

Posted by: PRCS at November 20, 2007 10:09 PM

So they want to find an alternative catchphrase to the term "war on terror", because it may be offensive to you-know-who?

"The government in future, they add, will talk of a "struggle" against extremist ideology, rather than a "battle".

Ok, I have a suggestion...

Jihad.

There's something really absurd here, but I just can't seem to put my finger on it.

Posted by: ixysi at November 21, 2007 12:50 AM

And now we too are being told to be more like the dhimmi UK authorities:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/too-tough-for-our-own-good/2007/11/16/1194766958585.html?page=fullpage

Care to do a take on this, Hugh? I could imagine your writing style taking apart this unsubstantiated garbage.

Posted by: EnricoDandolo at November 21, 2007 2:44 AM

" Another said that the terrorist threat must not be described as a "Muslim problem".

.....and just who does this moron think is creating the many terror incidents we seen across the globe?....

....with politicians who cannot identify the problems that beset the country, it is no small wonder that the number and severity of the terror attacks will increase....

...of course, he can help reduce the "Muslim Problem" by voting to Ban Muslim Immigration....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 21, 2007 6:14 AM

...I find "covert or die", "you are a filthy kuffar", and "your children will be Muslim" offensive and inappropriate language....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at November 21, 2007 7:11 AM

And don't start giving me that rubbish about how the BNP has changed its ways; I've heard it all before.

Posted by: angloirishslav at November 20, 2007 7:14 PM

So who are you going to vote for? Please tell us, so we can all vote for them.

Or how about if you dont have a solution, you keep quiet.

I am going to post a link to 'OldAtlantic's' blog outlining the 10% voter threshold hypothesis for reversing current governement policy and structure.

http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/11/16/re-vlaams-belang-thread-at-jihad-watch/

Britain it is your choice.

Live or die, which is it to be?

Posted by: km at November 21, 2007 7:15 AM

Another said that the terrorist threat must not be described as a "Muslim problem".

It's not their problem, it ours.

Reminds me of the drunk who said; "Some people say I have a drinking problem. I don't. I get drunk, I fall down, no problem."

I blow up, kill kaffirs, no problem.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at November 21, 2007 9:06 AM

HALT!!!!! STOP THE PRESS!!!

This story may not be factually correct.

look, read the article, tell me what's wrong with it.

what sticks out to me is that there are no names for these "officials".

look...
"Counter-terrorism officials" "They say" " they" "they add", " said one senior official." "MI5 chiefs were among the first to argue that the term "war on terror" was inappropriate" "Whitehall officials are being asked to draw up "counter-narratives""

NO NAMES??? just officials? whitehall officials??? i worked in whitehall, many officials all over the place, which officials? which departments?

this story is bogus, just lazy journalism. probably some hack desperate for a story so meets his civil servant contact/mate in a pub in whitehall, probably the one closest to trafalgar. square and after a few pints his mate tells him a story which he heard from some of his mates down the pub, last week.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 21, 2007 9:33 AM

95% of those asked said their cats prefered dar el harb

http://chromatism.net/current/images/stgeorge.gif

Posted by: MrTommyAtkins at November 21, 2007 12:21 PM

km: "So who are you going to vote for? Please tell us, so we can all vote for them.

Or how about if you dont have a solution, you keep quiet."

km, you can KMB*

I can't vote in Britain because I emigrated as a child and am no longer a British citizen. However, I can get my citizenship back if I want to, and may yet do that, for this very reason. In the meantime, I believe I retain the right to express my opinion.

People who really believe in democracy don't just sit back and wait for a political party that they can really trust to do the right thing to materialize out of thin air. Nor do they vote in a bunch of knuckle-walking fascists because they hope they will do just ONE right thing. Democracy doesn't work that way, my friend. Like Pete Townsend said, "There's no easy way to be free." If you really want change, you have to work like hell for it, either by forming your own political party or working with and changing the parties that exist so they reflect and respect ALL your values, not just some of them. But for me, the whole history and core values of the BNP make them beyond redemption.

* Kiss My (AngloIrishSlavic) Butt

Posted by: angloirishslav at November 21, 2007 10:33 PM

Are all brits stuttering apologetic fools like Hugh Grant in 'Four Weddings and a funeral?

Posted by: aggiegabe at November 24, 2007 9:10 PM