This image was lost some time after publication.

If the New York Post had to name three things that it can't stand, those things would be: cultural sensitivity, wisdom, and peace (fourth: stepping on gum). That's why the paper is outraged that "the Bush administration has gone all PC in the War on Terror." They've stopped using words like "jihad" and "Islamo-fascism" because they may be provocative or offensive. The Post's jaw literally dropped onto the floor at that news! Right onto the floor! So the neocon, Murdoch-owned scandal sheet had to evoke the memory of prominent socialist revolutionary George Orwell to help it call for harsher language about the Arabian menace:

What's really going on here, according to Andrew McCarthy of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, is an attempt to soft-pedal the reality of jihad by downplaying its connection to holy war and instead stressing its "broader" meaning of a struggle to do good.

"Government is heavily influenced by the media and the commentariat," McCarthy rightly notes, and those interests "are trying to redefine the troubling concept of jihad as a positive."

It would have made George Orwell laugh - or cry.

The Post feels that using the term "violent extremists" instead of "Jihadists" is too soft on terrorism. Tomorrow, they can suggest we should just go straight back to "Ragheads."