In the Washington Post, Zbigniew Brzezinski complains about Bush’s choice of words. Other than asserting that we’d be better off not identifying our enemy and comparing an international terrorist organization bent on our destruction with country-specific terrorist groups that don’t threaten our national security, this is perfectly sound advice:

It is particularly troubling that Bush has . . . relied heavily in his recent speeches on what to many Muslims is bound to sound like Islamophobic language. His speeches, though occasionally containing disclaimers that he is not speaking of Islam as a whole, have been replete with references to “the murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals,” “Islamic radicalism,” “militant jihadism,” “Islamofascism” or “Islamic Caliphate.”

Such phraseology can have unintended consequences. Instead of mobilizing moderate Muslims to stand by our side, the repetitive refrain about Islamic terrorism may not only offend moderate Muslims but could eventually contribute to a perception that the campaign against terrorism is also a campaign against Islam as a whole. They may note that the United States, in condemning IRA terrorism in Northern Ireland or Basque terrorism in Spain, does not describe it as “Catholic terrorism,” a phrase that Catholics around the world would likely find offensive.

Jimmy Carter, Ramsey Clark, and Zbigniew Brzezinski. They all deserve one another. Thank God Reagan was elected in 1980.