Islamists" is probaly the most accurate term, but...

Submitted by Junius2006 (Canada), Aug 14, 2006 at 15:21

"Islamists" is probaly the most accurate term, but it fails to connect appropriately with the large majority of english speakers. Numbed as we have been by decades of MSM PC speak, the connotation it carries is hardly descriptive of the evil perpetrated in its name, nor indicative of the future danger it entails. It registers somewhere between 'presbytarian-ism' and 'animists', resembling a vague and neutrally flavoured term from a long forgotten anthropology course.

To put the onus back on the population that spawned this dread, we could try for terms as 'failed islam', 'un-evolved islam' or 'un-human islam'. Perhaps followers themselves could adopt terms as 'flawed', 'tribal', 'regressive' or best something that speaks to 'backwards', 'opposite' or 'untrue'. If we were voting, my ballot would go with 'retarded' to emphasize the un-evolved nature of this violent and imperialistic cult form.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".