Mass murder in the pursuit of a religious objective is not terrorism?

Telegraph:

The perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris should be not be described as “terrorists” by the BBC as the term is too “loaded”, a senior executive at the corporation has said.

Tarik Kafala, the head of BBC Arabic, the largest of the BBC’s non-English language news services, said the term “terrorist” was seen as “value-laden” and should not be used to describe the actions of the men who killed 12 people in the attack on the French satirical magazine.

“We try to avoid describing anyone as a terrorist or an act as being terrorist,” Mr Kafala told The Independent.

“What we try to do is to say that ‘two men killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine’. That’s enough, we know what that means and what it is.”

He added: “Terrorism is such a loaded word. The UN has been struggling for more than a decade to define the word and they can’t. It is very difficult to.

“We know what political violence is, we know what murder, bombings and shootings are and we describe them. That’s much more revealing, we believe, than using a word like terrorist which people will see as value-laden.”
...

This is the same news organization that did not want to be judgmental about a huge child abuse operation by Muslims in the UK.  Actually it is pretty easy to label the mass murders in Paris as terrorism because the very purpose was to terrify people into not drawing cartoons about their religious figure.  It is interesting how many in the media were so terrified that they would not publish the cartoons and in the case of the BBC even identify the perps as terrorist.