Cameron tells BBC to stop calling barbaric terror group 'Islamic State'

[LilAnn]

I agree that the name wouldn't bother me but with the murdering, I guess that crime of killing would come first in my mind over that name. In other words, even if the group of murderers are called Christian Nation, I would still look at them as criminals. But concerning the insult, the name is an insult to the Christians.

I think we should call them words I'm not going to post online. Its feeding into the fear that all Muslims are murderers. At least I believe it is.

Isn't Islamic Statebwhat the group themselves says their name is? Yes it is offensive, but perhaps it will get other Muslim people to think about what their religion is really teaching. Islam is not a peaceful religion unless the people omit certain parts of their holy book.

Oh, no no no. You shouldn't say that. Their religion isn't teaching them to murder. Some crazy extremists are just teaching people that it it does. Just like Christianity isn't teaching people to blow up buildings in OK city. Or to send bombs to people through the mail.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

I am sympathetic to people who do not want the name of their honorable and ancient religion used in the name of terrorist group. But there is also an old and sensible journalistic tradition that groups should be referred to in neutral reporting by whatever they call themselves, even if we do not agree with the meaning or implication of the term they choose.

I have noticed BBC reporters inserting "the so-called" Islamic State to imply their disapproval.

Keep calling "Islamic state" will eventually relate their acts to Islam and Muslims in people heads even unconsciously.

 

[LilAnn]

The only thing worse than the ignorance regarding the Islam religion is the attitude that all Muslims are practicing this evil dogma, and everybody else has a right to insult and threaten ALL Muslims.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Why Isis will hate it if we start calling them Daesh
Posted 5 hours ago by Louis Doré in news

Kurdish Peshmerga forces fire towards Isis in Kirkuk, northern Iraq (Picture: Getty)

In the wake of the Tunisia beach attack, there is increasing pressure to stop calling Isis by the self-chosen name "Islamic State", on the grounds that it grants the terrorist group legitimacy.

In today’s i newspaper, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, SNP MP for Ochil and South Perthshire, wrote:

I’ve been encouraged over the past week to hear an increasing number of MPs from across the House of Commons refer to 'Daesh' when referring to the group previously called by nearly everyone 'Islamic State'.

I was particularly pleased by the more thoughtful response I received from Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, to my question in Parliament on the Government’s own terminology, who went further than David Cameron did.

Mr Fallon said:

I have a lot of sympathy with that view. Of course, our interlocutors in the Gulf and our coalition allies refer to it as Daesh, and as the Prime Minister reported on Monday, we have now got the BBC to move away from calling it any kind of state.

I have referred to it in shorthand as Isil, and it may be too late to replace 'Isil' with 'Daesh', but the hon. Lady is right to say that we need to reflect on it and not to confer any further legitimacy on Isil.

Daesh, an adapted acronym of their Arabic name - Dawlat al-Islamiyah f'al-Iraq w Belaad al-Sham - is similar to another Arabic word - das - which means 'to trample down' or 'crush', which could therefore be the source of their dislike.

The group hates it so much, in fact, that they have reportedly threatened to cut out the tongues of anyone who uses it in public.

Last week the head of the BBC rejected calls to drop the use of the term ‘Islamic State’ in reports, saying that the BBC must be fair to Isis in its coverage of the terrorist group.

Lord hall dismissed a letter signed by 120 MPs demanding that the BBC stop using the term on the grounds it gives undue credibility to the Islamic extremists, saying the BBC would “redouble our efforts” to use caveats such as “so called Islamic State group”.

In January, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said:

Daesh hates being referred to by this term and what they don't like has an instinctive appeal to me.

I absolutely refuse to refer to it by the title that it claims for itself [Islamic State], because I think this is a perversion of religion and a travesty of governance.

I would strongly counsel people against ever using the presumptuous title that they have given themselves.'

It's not often that we say, but maybe Tony Abbott has a point...

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/why-isis-will-hate-it-if-we-start-calling-them-daesh--bkC822p_zl

 

[DancingLady]

I do agree that referring to ISIS as "Islamic" is an injustice to the millions of peaceful Muslims around the world. However, what are we meant to refer to them as? The term "ISIL" still includes the word after all.

Maybe Daesh is a better term, I believe that they find this insulting and I, for one, am more than happy to insult them. Just as long as reporters don't take to calling it "The organisation formerly known as ISIS"!

The reality is that all those peaceful Muslims are actually the liberal Muslims, the ones who ignore portions of the Koran that they don't like or don't want to follow because they want to live peaceful lives. It is actually groups like ISIS that take the Koran literally and follow all the commands.