Danish Secret Service: getting rid of terms like 'jihad' will save us from Islamic terror

*  There is no end to this. Stupidity & cupidity goes hand in hand. When the halfwitted socialists cooked this indigestible nonsense up on the advice of their Muslim peers infil-traitors in olde England, the completely PC-infested US was eager to gobble it up, and now this DRECK seems to have come around and ended up in Denmark, where it belongs like  Pali-sewage.

From Islam in Europe

Denmark: Security service recommends avoiding ‘Jihad’

 

The Danish Security Service, PET, is proposing that the Danish government refrain from using the words “war against terror” and “Jihad”.      

In an eight page report the language use PET recommends that the authorities choose their words with care in order to deescalate the conflict between the West and the Muslim world.

Besides refraining from using the phrase “war against terror” PET recommends to refrain from speaking of Muslims as a population group related to terror and extremism.  Other expression to refrain from using are “jihad”, “holy war”, “Islamism”, “fundamentalism” or “mujahedines”.

      

The suggestions from PET’s Center for Terror Analysis (CTA) are intended to ensure that the world’s Muslims don’t feel suspected of being terrorists and that PET doesn’t encourage Muslims by adopting their own terms, like Jihad.

PET suggests that authorities don’t use the term “Islamist terrorist” and instead use just ‘terrorist’.  Other terms suggested by the report are “extremist”, “militant” and “violent”

The head of PET’s department for preventing security, Anja Dalgaard-Nielsen, says that this isn’t an issue of political correctness but of ensuring a use of language that is as precise and objective as possible.  Terrorists don’t just engage in a violent war but also in a war of words, of a specific outlook on the world.

The report, titled “Language Use and Fighting Terrorism (Sprogbrug og Terrorbekæmpelse) advises in general against tying Islam and terrorism together, since the typical person doesn’t differentiate between Islam the religion and Islamism the political ideology.

The report says that in order to prevent stigmatizing the Muslim population CTA recommends to always consider how much it contributes to coherence to use religious terms in describing terrorism (for example, “Islamic”).

PET will endeavor to follow the recommendations.

An earlier report by a former PET analyst also suggested not using the combination “Muslim terrorists”.

Mehdi Mozzafari, head of the Center for Research in Islamism and Radicalization processes at Aarhus University, says that the intention is good, but that they risk ignoring reality if they don’t call Osama Bin Laden and Islamist terrorist.  It’s not tenable and Islamism certainly comes out of Islam.

Justice minister Lene Espersen, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Integration Minister Birthe Rønn Hornbech refused to say whether they will follow the recommendations.

What Western Security Services should be learning about:

Jihadi spokesman makes clear the purpose of “cease-fires” with infidels

Deja vu? “Jihad: Gaza ceasefire fragile and it will end at any time,” from China View, August 14:

GAZA, Aug. 14 (Xinhua) — Islamic Jihad movement’s armed wing on Thursday said the ceasefire with Israel in Gaza Strip was “fragile and was expected to end at any time.” 

“We are using the lull to prepare fighters for the coming phase of confrontation,” a spokesman for al-Quds Brigades, the Islamic Jihad’s armed wing, said.

 

In one short, honest sentence, a simple jihadi declares what all cease-fires and truces are in essence: time for the weakened jihadis to regroup and prepare “for the coming phase of confrontation” (which, of course, short of world domination, is perpetual, e.g., ‘Umdat al-Salik, 9.16).

 

 

6 thoughts on “Danish Secret Service: getting rid of terms like 'jihad' will save us from Islamic terror”

  1. We should avoid terms that suggest or imply competence on behalf of state agencies
    that once appeared to protect us – such as: Security Service; Investigation; Intelligence;
    State Department; Security; Federal Police (etc).

  4. Does it never occur to these inadequate bedwetters that the “typical person” is dead right when he fails to “…differentiate between islam the religion and islamism the political ideology?” There IS no #%^*+=> difference! If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s probably a duck.
    I sometimes feel like slashing my wrists when I unwisely allow myself to reflect upon the incompetence and stupidity of those who are entrusted with the task of protecting us and our democratic way of life.

  5. * The head of PET’s department for preventing security, Anja Dalgaard-Nielsen […]

    Is it a typo, or do they have a department for preventing security? It seems they do,
    & do a good job of it.

  6. SuprKufrB said:
    “There IS no f…… difference between the religion Islam and the ideology Islam” –
    You are so right –

    There is only ONE Quran – not one book for religion and one book for politics –
    Islam is an Ideology, pretending to be “just” a religion.
    Just because some of them don’t act out in person, in terroristattacks, they help in other ways, with money and moral support, and ALL OF THEM believe in spreading Islam all over the world.
    Don’t fool yourself.!
    “Not using the word Jihad should stop terrorist attacks” – What a stupid idea.!
    Where have PET parked their brains –
    If the Muhammedans want to attack anywhere in Denmark/the World, they will do so – not using the true word for this will not stop them –

    Why are all big Moskees built the way they are.?
    “The roof is our shield, the Minarets our swords and the believers our soldiers.!”
    “There will not be peace in this world, untill everybody bows to Islam.”

    That is their agenda, and as long as they, themselves, use the words “Jihad” and “Terror”, why won’t PET –
    What ignorance.!

Comments are closed.