re: #881 Obdicut

I agree that ‘violent religious extremism’ is unnecessarily vague. I think his point about how ‘violent’ is more important and much better than ‘radical’, though, is a very strong one.

That could be.
I object to the super-sensitivity to identifying these acts with Islamists and those who subscribe to a violent (or radical) interpretation of Islam. The term used can be radical, or violent, or whatever. It’s those who want to shy away from identifying the association with Islam that I have a problem with.

Iossarian’s suggestion left out the “Islam”, replacing it with generic “religious”. Muddies the waters, IMO.