You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
War By Any Other Name
2009-04-14
The Obama administration has come under intense criticism for replacing the term "war on terror" with the emaciated euphemism "overseas contingency operations," and for referring to individual acts of terror as "man-caused disasters."

This semi-official attempt to disassociate the administration from the fierce rhetoric favored by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney has enraged Americans on both the right and left. Many feel that such vaporous bureaucratese is a self-emasculating action that plunges us into an Orwellian world where words have no emotional connection with the horrors they purport to describe.

Yet, if the intention of the Obama administration is to tone down the confrontational rhetoric being used by our enemies, the effort is already reaping results. This week, in a pronounced shift from its usual theatrical style, the Taliban announced that it will no longer refer to its favorite method of murder as "beheadings," but will henceforth employ the expression "cephalic attrition." "Flayings" -- a barbarously exotic style of execution that has been popular in this part of the world since before the time of Alexander -- will now be described as "unsolicited epidermal reconfigurations." In a similar vein, lopping off captives' arms will now be referred to as "appendage furloughing," while public floggings of teenaged girls will from here on out be spoken of as "metajudicial interfacing."

A Taliban spokesman reached in Pakistan said that the new phrasing was being implemented as a way of eliminating the negative associations triggered by more graphic terminology. "The term 'beheading' has a quasi-medieval undertone that we're trying to get away from," he explained. "The term 'cephalic attrition' brings the Taliban into the 21st century. It's not that we disapprove of beheadings; it's just that the word no longer meshes with the zeitgeist of the era. This is the same reason we have replaced the term 'jihad' with 'booka-bonga-bippo,' which has a more zesty, urban, youthful, 'now' feel. When you're recruiting teenagers to your movement, you don't want them to feel that going on jihad won't leave any time for youthful hijinks."
Rest at link
Posted by:ed

#7  So what's this about "Man caused disasters"? I think this is sexist and it should be "human caused disasters". Where are the feminists on this?
Posted by: Aussie Mike   2009-04-14 22:29  

#6  Queenan is a funny guy. Wrote a book of essays called "Red Lobster, White Trash." It has significance for those of us old enough to remember "Blue Water, White Death."
Posted by: Sgt. D.T.   2009-04-14 17:40  

#5  Newspeak. Double plus ungood.
Posted by: mojo   2009-04-14 10:44  

#4  Besoeker:

That's State. Where are the directions to Capitol Hill. That is truly man-made disaster by all of us.
Posted by: Jack is Back!   2009-04-14 10:26  

#3  "man-caused disasters."

Route 50, cross the TR Mem bridge, take a left on 23rd St. proceed North approx 5 blocks to G Street at Foggy Bottom and make a right. Proceed approx 7 blocks and look for parking. You have arrived at home of the ultimate "man-caused disaster."
Posted by: Besoeker   2009-04-14 08:06  

#2  This leaves me so cerebrally marginalized, that I yearn to achieve a balistic overmatch on the nearest target-rich environment.
Posted by: Bunyip   2009-04-14 05:23  

#1  How about "Man made disasters"?
Posted by: newc   2009-04-14 01:15  

00:00