A Politically Correct Foriegn Policy?

How Do You Say "Islamic-Terrorist" in PC-Speak?

According to an AP story titled, “'Jihadist' booted from government lexicon”, written by Matthew Lee on 4/24/08, the Bush Administration and our government has seemingly assumed a politically correct foreign policy posture. Lee’s article discussed a new Homeland Security report entitled, "Terminology to define the terrorists: recommendations from American Muslims." This report is the basis on which the U.S. State Department and the Department of Homeland Security among other Federal Agencies are advising their staff as to what language and phraseology to use and which to not used in discussing Islamo-terrorism officially or in public.

Lee's article also mentions “another document, an internal "official use only" memorandum circulating through Washington entitled "Words that Work and Words that Don't: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication." The memo, originally prepared in March by the Extremist Messaging Branch at the National Counter Terrorism Center, was approved for diplomatic use this week by the State Department, which plans to distribute a version to all U.S. embassies . . .”

NEWLY BANNED FOUR LETTER WORDS

Between the two reports mentioned previously, here are some of the words no longer in vogue or no longer to be used when referring to our enemies, the Islamic terrorists, including the Osama Bin Laden Al Queda gang bangers.

*** “Jihadists”
*** “Mujahedeen"
*** "Islamo-fascism"
*** “Islamist”
*** "Islamo-terrorism"
*** “Holy warrior”

Why would these words be removed from official diplomatic language? Ostensibly, the reports say that these words might give credibility to the actions of the Islamo-terrorists and might increase support among the Arab populace in the Middle East. What? Those folks already hate us. No mere words will make one iota of difference. The only thing that the Jihadists understand is a bullet or a bomb. Yet, Presidential want-to-be Senator Barack Hussein Obama wants to "negotiate" and "play nice" with this rascals.

Another flimsy reason given for not using those words is that they might offend Muslims. Moderate Muslims by their deafening silence of protest against anything the Islamo-terrorists do, do not care about America. Why should we care about “offending” them. What about the offensive behavior of Muslims in the United States? What about their hateful rhetoric their clerics spew in the mosques of American. Most mosques are sanctuaries for rabble rousing. What about their support for Hamas and Hezbollah? They raise support for the foreign terrorists.

It is political correctness and our stupid obsession with not wanting to “offend” anyone except America, Americans, Jesus Christ, God, Christians and the Christian faith. The bureaucrats and political hacks should be stopped and/or expunged their cushy government jobs.

APPROVED TERMINOLOGY

Words such as “violent terrorists” and “terrorists” should be used in lieu of tying the words to Islam in any way. I also heard on a radio show that another approved description for these Islamic-terrorists was "South Asian youth". I think that this was first coined by the French. It sounds like placation or appeasement.

I disagree with any use of this refined terminology. Islam by its very nature is extreme and is a political movement, whose end is subjugation of all peoples under Sharia Law and its religious mandates. Islam is as much an enemy as Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda draws its inspiration and its guidance from the Koran. No, Islam should not be segregated from terrorism. They go together like love and marriage used to, or like a horse and carriage used to. The two fit hand in glove. We have one because of the other. Most terrorism happening in the world today is of the Islamic kind.

“RECOMMENDATIONS OF AMERICAN MUSLIMS”


Part of the title of the Homeland Security report mentioned above uses the phrase “Recommendation of American Muslims.” I heard a radio show where one of the guests who was very familiar with Islam and Islamo-fascism indicated that C.A.I.R. was one of the contributors to the recommendations. This is unbelievable. It is like expecting the fox to offer suggestions to protect the chickens. The Council for American-Islamic Relations (C.A.I.R.) is more pro-Islamic-terrorist than they are pro-American. C.A.I.R. supports terrorists in foreign lands. I believe that C.A.I.R. and groups like it are Trojan Horses, which has only the ultimate destruction of America in mind.