THE MORAL MAZE: A new lexicon? ..Tonight on BBC R4

[Tintin]

Michael Buerk chairs a live debate examining the moral issues behind one of the week's news stories: combative, provocative and engaging.

6 February 2008
Wednesday 8.00-8.45pm
rpt Saturday 10.15-11.00pm

This week: A new lexicon?

What do you call someone who believes their religion has inspired them to set off a bomb on a crowded train? Criminal? Certainly. Terrorist? Perhaps. But what connection should you make with their faith which motivated them? The Home Office has just issued a new set of guidelines for civil servants and police advising them not to use phrases such as "Islamist extremism" or "jihadi-fundamentalist" but instead to refer to "violent extremism" and "criminal murderers" or "thugs."

Their argument is that the "aggressive rhetoric" of the so-called war on terror is counter productive and that people stop listening if they think you are attacking them.

Is this new lexicon a more sophisticated tactic in the battle of ideas and values, or does it seriously undermine our ability to confront head on unpleasant and dangerous beliefs. Is it right to censor our language just in order to win over the hearts and minds?

This week's team:
Clifford Longley, Melanie Phillips, Claire Fox, Ian Hargreaves cross examine the experts.

[Tintin]

Watchin footba#,..eh?

[Seperatist]

I'm listening to the programme....interesting.

[Seperatist]

Melanie Phillips

[Tintin]

I'm listening to the programme....interesting.

yes, its interesting indeed

[europa]

If anyone missed it and can't wait for the repeat on Saturday - you can listen at Listen again http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/mainf...dio4/moralmaze

[Seperatist]

Had to laugh at her response when the guy accused her of being anti-Islamic....as if it might make her a target

[big al]

Remember this is the "b"bc - an organisation that actively gives platform to ANYONE who hates Semites / Muslims. They are utterly desperate to get non White / Western audience back.