New British PM Gordon Brown has banned the word 'Muslim' from being used with 'terrorism'. Your thoughts?

Question

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/12172/Brown:-Don

Will that keep the MUSLIM TERRORISTS from continuing to try to blow up parts of the United Kingdom? Is this political-correctness gone wild?

The ban was put in place as to not offend muslims and 'improve community relations' with Muslims.

Is this the correct thing to do and will it work to alleviate further terrorist attack attempts????

Answer 1

The political correctness has not peaked yet. Wait until the gov't says "We are looking for a suspect. Report anyone in your area who might be a suspect." That will be the only description you will receive.

Answer 2

Lets call it a valiant effort.

Unfortunately such a measure will probably only increase the problem though, if people feel repressed from expressing their feelings, discriminatory or not.

It certainly wont alleviate the chance for terrorist attacks. If a terrorist is planning a bomb in britain they have been training for a long time and wont quit because of an unenforceable ban that is probably more of a gesture.

Although I couldn't suggest an apropriate alternative, and who knows, maybe the gesture IS indeed what the British need. Thats why I would call it a Valiant Attempt.

Answer 3

It's precisely because of this mad attitude, and the government's desire to appease the Muslim community, that we're in this mess to start with.

As far back as the 90s, our politicians sat back and allowed extremist Islamic groups to use London as a recruiting ground and meeting place. Even when they were warned by the intelligence services of other nations, our politicians refused to act.

Now look where we are: doctors that are terrorists, policemen who are linked with radical Islamic groups, and the dangerous group Hizbut Tahrir free to recruit on every British university campus - even though they are banned in most Arab countries.

And what does our brand new Prime Minister do to improve the predicament? Does he do more to protect potential victims of terrorism? NO!!! He's far too busy pandering to the feelings of the Muslim community.

The same Muslim community who were quick enough to organise a march over a few lousy cartoons - but who haven't, at least not in London, organised any protest against terrorism.

And now we can't even use the correct adjectives to describe the terrorists. It's pathetic.

Answer 4

I think it is PC going over the TOP!
I laugh when watch the Fox New 1/2 hour hour news skit when they were talking about all the names of the terrorists and couldn't figure out what they all had in common.
I thought it was a joke but according to Brown he wouldn't see it as a joke.

Someone should pull out a history book for Brown and make him do a report on Chamberlin and see the rewards for appeasing the bad guys.

NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS!

The terrorists that have been doing the lion share of killing are Muslim nuts.

PC is the worst idea anyone came up with well maybe Pet Rocks but that guy made some major bucks.

Answer 5

I would have to say that it proves he is deluded,and unwilling to face reality head on. And it would seem to be political correctness gone completely awry,except for the fact that the entire point of being politically correct is to avoid offending others regardless of the reality of the situation. So under that criteria his actions fall exactly in line with the goals of political correctness.

And no it will not,will not stop one action that any terrorist decides to do just because he's "nice enough" to not call something what it is. The reality is that if you are paying attention,unless of course European news is not covering, the hateful ideology of Radical Islam is being spread in mosques the world over including in Britain,and may actually be growing at a rate faster than the religion itself. And burying ones head in the sand and ignoring the problem,as Gordon Brown wants to do,and as the US Congress wants to do,is not going to lead us one step closer to a solution. What it will do is ignore the problem until it becomes so severe that the bloodbath that follows in order to try and stop it will make the current conflicts seem pale and paltry in comparison.

AD

Answer 6

My thoughts:

He's a liberal wimp bar none. I read an article yesterday the explained how he's taking the terrorist attacks and playing them down to the point that they seem like a bank robbery. With this kind of thinking, they will be attacked many more times and no one will think twice about it until hundreds are killed due to those attacks. He has been saying this sense they found two cars loaded with explosives and stopped then before they could go off. It was only by shear luck they found them.

He's a sick puppy.

Answer 7

It might make more sense to ban the use of the word "liberal" from being used with the phrase "strong defense."

Although no ban is necessary. It seems to follow naturally.

I'm feeling a bit provocative today. I'm not usually this blunt, but I think not even being willing to discuss the problem is not a good sign that the new government is willing to work to combat it.

I am careful to state that it is an extremist fringe of Muslims. Using the word Muslim in this context is NOT the same as saying that all Muslims are terrorists. People know this, but again the "victim" card is played.

I'm tired of it. I will not allow MY good intentions and desire not to discriminate to be used as a weapon against me, or against the civilization that these terrorists want to destroy.

We're in a serious fight here. And task one is NOT to make sure we don't offend the people trying to kill us. Careful use of language is one thing; closing one's eyes to the problem is another.

And I think it IS a problem that many on the left don't seem to think this is much more than a "nuisance," as John Kerry called it.

Answer 8

the international economic gadget relies on opposition, i.e diverse economies competing with one yet another on an identical time as concurrently working with one yet another. on account that economies sink or swim by ability of overcoming one yet another, the comprehensive theory of a international new deal could fail miserably. each and every physique can no longer win, this is purely impossible. besides, Browns plan could count on each and every of the international's economic gamers agreeing to paintings jointly in sturdy faith. what share human beings have faith that OPEC could voluntarily save the value of oil low just to assist us out? every physique? you spot, the project with a international economic gadget is that it turns into like a chain, and purely one hyperlink desires to make a mistake for each individual else to fall. this is why worldwide government is a undesirable theory. this is lots safer for every physique to be in our very own boats.

Answer 9

It will not stop the global jihad.
The only thing to "improve community relations" with muslims is for the reportedly 90% of muslims to publicly denounce those that are committing the terrorist acts. We see their silence as support for jihad. Although you have organizations in the U.S. that say this publicly like C.A.I.R. their actions and affiliations do not support that they denounce terrorism. Just like arafat these organizations say one thing in the news and another in private. The British channel 4 showed us this first hand when they would infiltrate mosques and made a documentary outing the hatred taught.

Answer 10

This is completely caving in, a cop out. It will do nothing to stop them. I don't really care about hurting the feelings of people who blow up our troops on a regular basis and have started all the major conflicts of the past decade +.
Political correctness is crap, I prefer people to tell it like it is.