By changing the word describing those who kill and maim through bombs or gun attacks, authorities - by intent or bad judgment - is making terrorists less reprehensible.
I think it is a disgrace as a spade is a spade and a terrorist is an evil cowardly killer who does not care who is hurt as long as the aim of creating terror among people is achieved.
The latest new truth word that popped into my vision the other day was migrant.
It was about a "migrant" who was electrocuted while trying to steal aboard a train heading from France to England.
Now why would a migrant do such a thing? I thought. Having just done that trip in reverse, we simply went to the St Pancras train station, showed our passports and tickets, and hopped aboard after a security check.
Aha, the penny dropped.
This person wasn't a migrant, who legally moves from one country to another, this person was an illegal migrant trying to sneak through.
The man, thought to be Syrian, was the 10th person to die while trying to sneak across the English Channel. He is likely to have come from a camp near Calais where about 3000 people are hoping to make a new home away from their original countries in Africa, or Syria or Afghanistan.
So why would authorities call him a migrant?
One has to guess it is because someone feels it is unfair to call illegal migrants such because it may hurt their feelings. If they could speak English, I am guessing.
And whoever read over the original copy either agreed with the writer or, more likely, didn't want to be branded as a racist because most of these "migrants" are not European and therefore it is not right to describe them as they are. Because that would be racist.
Well, that's according to folk who see racists under the bed.
It's like the outrage from bleeding-hearts about how the flood of refugees from Syria and Libya are being stopped at the borders of many European nations. According to these people, the human tide should be allowed to wash through unchecked. Why?
Are nations not able to control their borders? Do they not have a right to say who comes into their countries?
I love the way the focus is on European nations to open the doors for these mainly Muslim refugees.
Yes, they have survived long and dangerous journeys to get there, but is that all that's needed to avoid the legalities of visas and permission to enter?
Surely there are a number of Muslim countries much closer to Syria and Libya who could have taken their religious brothers in?
Or did these "migrants" not want to go there - where life is tough and they don't get pampered by governments - and instead set their sights on Europe where they are known to be soft and easily pressured into ridiculous decisions?
I know where I would want to go if I were a Syrian.
WHAT a great afternoon down at Links Ave on Saturday. The local lads, Tauranga City United, were on a mission to score as many goals as they could in a bid to win an automatic promotion spot from the Northern League First Division. To overtake North Shore, the side above them, they needed to score 10 goals over two matches. Any they concede add to the total they need to score.
Their opponents on Saturday were Ngaruawahia from over the hill and they were the bottom team.
As can be the case in these types of games, the team needing to score lots of goals need to start early and Tauranga did so. In fact, they were two up fairly early in the the first half. They kept their heads after the break and banged in another four - a good total - but they did miss more than they scored, including some my dead granny could have landed.
It leaves them needing to put in a really good effort - a 4-0 win at least - next Saturday (2pm kickoff) against a much tougher Mangere outfit.
So it is all to play for, and I reckon footy fans around our town should head along to Links Ave and roar the boys on to a big win.
-richard@richardmoore.com
Richard Moore is an award-winning Western Bay journalist and photographer.