Posted by
Michael on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 2:52:30 AM
It appears that there is alot of hullaballoo over the use of the term "Islamic fascist." Many don't like it.
If that one's off limits, then what term should we use?
One of my friends got angry with an article I wrote because I used the
term "jihadist," insisting I must not know that jihad is the spiritual
struggle within Islam, etc.
I see stickers on cars throughout Seattle that say "War IS Terrorism," so terrorism must be a no-no.
"Islamist" could be deemed offensive to Muslim that don't follow the ideology of those we are labelling "Islamists."
"Islamonazi," Michael Medved's phrase, is good because it taps into the
legacy of the Muslim Brotherhood, who devoured the Protocols of the
Elders of Zion, a document touted by those claiming knowledge of a
Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. But I'd be crazy to think
that wouldn't be offensive to someone.
So what should I call the Muslims that fly planes into buildings, hack
off heads, blow up embassies over a cartoon and force journalists to
convert to their religion? Let's see if Michael Moore can describe them
for us:
“The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not
‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION,
the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win.” -
Michael Moore, 4/14/2004
Ahhhhh.....that's it.