| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Some good news, in an update on this story. "Michigan rep fights terrorism words ban," from UPI, July 23:
HOLLAND, Mich., July 23 (UPI) -- The intelligence bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives includes a ban on a new policy about which words officials should use to describe terrorists.
The new policy, contained in guidelines issued by the National Counter-Terrorism Center and the departments of State and Homeland Security), warns that that using terms like "Jihadi" or "Islamic terrorist," might alienate moderate Muslims and inadvertently build support for terrorists.
But an amendment to the 2009 Intelligence Authorization Act passed last week bans the use of any government money to promote the guidance in U.S. intelligence agencies.
The amendment, authored by U.S. Rep. Peter Hoekstra, [R]-Mich., was approved by a 249-180 vote. Fellow Republican Michigan Reps. Joe Knollenberg and Thaddeus McCotter supported the amendment, The Detroit News reported Wednesday, and 55 Democrats joined them, despite the opposition of the party leadership.
"I am sympathetic to the argument that if used inappropriately, the words can be counterproductive but I find that the people who are criticizing this are very short on alternatives," Hoekstra said. "So how do they want us to describe al-Qaida and what they are involved with?"
Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations-Michigan said there were alternatives. "CAIR supports using terminology such as 'criminals,' 'murderers' or 'terrorists' that help isolate extremists and remove the false cloak of religiosity they use to justify their barbaric actions," he told the newspaper.
More importantly for CAIR, limiting the terminology in that manner disconnects actions from ideology so no one starts asking questions, particularly about notions like the "false cloak of religiosity."
Posted by Marisol at July 23, 2008 8:57 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
"... remove the false cloak of religiosity they use to justify their barbaric actions," he told the newspaper."
there is no false cloak of religiosity and they do quote their religion when killing and beheading Christians, Hindus, Buddists, and Jews.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 23, 2008 9:41 PM
So report them as random murders with no connecting ties? That helps
I Dont think Rep. Hoekstra knows he is in the heart of darkness he had better watch out he is marked now.
at July 23, 2008 10:06 PM
There is a factual error in the UPI story. Hoekstra is a REPUBLICAN not a Democrat, as is indicated in the original article.
Posted by: s at July 23, 2008 10:12 PM
I have an alternative for CAIR:
Leave and don't come back!
Posted by: Mackie at July 23, 2008 10:18 PM
Bully, Thaddeus! You Rock, Representative McCotter!
Posted by: John C at July 23, 2008 10:27 PM
In addition on Cspan today during a routine press briefing Dana Perino was asked about the Administration’s position on the Muslim countries' "anti-Christian" efforts in the UN, the OIC I assume, regarding the blocking of speech that criticizes Islam. She said it was "the first time they had heard of this initiative" and would get back to the reporter with an answer.
Posted by: PraiaFlamego at July 24, 2008 12:03 AM
Once again folks, congressional Republicans are in the forefront of anti-dhimmitude. Take a hint come November.
Posted by: Cornelius at July 24, 2008 12:09 AM
Its hard to believe that there is a vote on this at all, let alone 180 A-soles who vote against it. Is it that they don't have their heads screwed on or is it because they're already bought and sold by the Musim brotherhood.
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at July 24, 2008 12:25 AM
I'm happy to hear that "jihad" can be used once again by the "bleeping" State Department.
Maybe now we taxpayers will get our "bleeping" money's worth.
at July 24, 2008 12:30 AM
My Congressman voted against the amendment. I emailed him this letter:
I've become aware that the Congressman voted no on an amendment to HR5959 that was proposed by Rep Hoekstra. The amendment read:
"None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be used to prohibit or discourage the use of the words or phrases 'jihadist', 'jihad', 'Islamo-fascism', 'caliphate', 'Islamist', or 'Islamic terrorist' by or within the intelligence community or the Federal Government."
I want to know why the Congressman voted against this amendment.
This amendment is required because the terms that are being banned are exactly the language needed to understand the threat of Islamic Terrorism.
The Federal Govt's primary responsibility is to provide for the National Defense.
Congress is a major disappointment.. especially under Democratic leadership. I really wonder who it is you are representing , because I feel that it isn't me.
Of all the things that I care about, the Congressman seems to be MIA.
I called your office a few times to find out if the Congressman is going to sign the discharge petition to allow the bill banning the Fairness Doctrine to get a vote because Pelosi won't allow it. Everytime I call to find out the position of the Rep, I'm told no one knows.
Additionally, I can only assume the Rep is siding with Nancy Pelosi to ensure that no new oil drilling is allowed. I view this as an attempt by Congress to crush the people in this country. You are trying to impoverish us... you must want all of our wealth to go to the Arabs.
I guess that goes along with the Congressman wanting to make it easier for the Arabs to attack us too.
Taking into account how the Congress-created monsters Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac have been allowed to become black holes of debt, in addition to the refusal to permit the development of Domestic energy supplies how can anyone not blame Congress for steering the country and the people in it into bankruptacy.
You are not protecting us.... you are robbing us blind... you are destroying our wealth.
Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat Party, the inept Republican Party, and Daniel Lipinski disgust me to my core.
Please respond to my request why the Representative voted against the amendment.
That is if you're not busy having hearings on Valerie Plame or steroids or naming post offices or any of the other super critical work you people do.
Posted by: Vince at July 24, 2008 1:25 AM
..."CAIR supports using terminology such as 'criminals,' 'murderers' or 'terrorists' that help insulate extremists and expose the true cloak of religiosity they use to justify their barbaric actions," he told the newspaper.
at July 24, 2008 1:50 AM
As a Michigan resident, I am pleased to see Michigan Congresspersons playing such a prominent role in this successu. McCotter graduated from the same Catholic high school that I did. Knollenberg is my Congressman, and Pete has been on the ball re: intelligence/military matters for some time.
Debbie Slussel is not a big fan of Knollenberg though. If you visit her site, I believe she alleges that Joe has supported US aid to the Hezbos.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/07/who_is_marty_kn.html
Anyway, nice to see the Republicans stand up to the President. Probably a good 5 years too late from a political standpoint, but late beter than never.
Posted by: JSobieski at July 24, 2008 1:51 AM
So it is going to be a law? Great. But we have had some experience with Bush not enforcing laws he does not like, e.g., immigration.
Maybe this sense of the House will wake up the Arabist cabal in foggy bottom that things are not going to keep going their way.
Let's see what the Senate does, and if it gets to GWB's desk. He surely would not veto it, or would he? I keep seeing pictures of GWB and the saudi king holding hands - I am not getting my hopes to far up.
But I'll clap my hands for Hoekstra, Knollenberg and McCotter, and the 249 yes-voters! There is some hope after all that reality is finally seeping into Washington.
Posted by: Jimmy Bones at July 24, 2008 2:31 AM
SAY NO TO "PALESTINIAN" CONFERENCE THAT DENIES ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO EXIST!
The so-called "Popular Conference for Palestinians in the United States," a large Arab conference, is planned to take place in Chicago between August 8-10 of this year, at the Wyndham Hotel near O'Hare Airport. This conference is not a mere social gathering - instead, it is a showcase for the most radical Arab "Palestinian" agenda.
This is particularly important this year when Barack Obama, from Chicago, is running for President, and many concerns have been raised in the Jewish community and among supporters of Israel about his commitment to Israel's security. That this sort of event is taking place in Obama's hometown is a travesty!
We must say no to this conference that denies the right of Israel to exist! This conference has a set of "points of unity" that attempt to delegitimize Israel's right to exist. On their website, they say that the conference is dedicated to: "return of the refugees to their original homes, lands, properties and villages; and End of Zionist occupation and colonization of Palestine, including Jerusalem." They promote the so-called "one-state solution," otherwise known as the destruction of Israel, and they are hosting workshops on infiltrating churches and schools - including "inserting Palestine into high school curricula!"
Many of the organizers of this appalling conference have been involved in similar efforts in the past. They have rejected all of Israel's moves for peace and they have been involved in every effort in the past years to deny Israel's legitimate right to exist and defend itself. These organizers have promoted anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel. They are also glorifying Sami al-Arian, the jailed terrorist!
Apparently the Palestinian community in the United States chose to be "united" on this issue - Denying Israel's Right to Exist! And we must be united on this issue - Affirming Israel's Right to Exist!
That such a conference is taking place nearly unchallenged here in the United States while Hamas and Hezbollah and their fanatic brethren continue to threaten our people in Israel and Arabs here pledge allegiance to their same destructive aims, is horrifying! This is the kind of rhetoric that is being promoted and supported by the murderous Iranian regime, coming to America!
The voices of the Jewish Community and defenders of Israel must be heard! Obama must hear from us that he must take a stand against this abominable conference taking place in his hometown. We cannot ignore such events and stand silently by while those who wish to destroy Israel organize their ranks and plan to infiltrate American institutions. It is essential that our voices are heard wherever the ugly head of anti-Semitism can be found, and this conference will be a haven for the most radical Arab voices as well as the left anti-semites that so frequently populate "anti-war" demonstrations.
Please pass this message to others and call upon Obama to take a stand. Email the Obama campaign at info@barackobama.com and tell them that Obama should speak out against this conference taking place in Chicago! Tell the conference organizers that their conference is unacceptable and unwelcome, email them at conference@palestineconference.org!
We must make it clear that we will stand up for Israel and defend its right to exist - against terrorists and their supporters everywhere!
at July 24, 2008 2:50 AM
Message to CAIR. No one asked or cares what you think is acceptable terminology.
Posted by: Exposing Islam at July 24, 2008 3:39 AM
Here's the actual amendment information from the www.house.gov site:
4. H.AMDT.1114 to H.R.5959 An amendment numbered 4 printed in House Report 110-759 to bar the use of funds to prohibit or discourage the use of the phrases `jihadist,' `jihad,' `Islamo-fascism,' `caliphate,' `Islamist,' or `Islamic terrorist' within the Intelligence Community or the Federal Government.
Sponsor: Rep Hoekstra, Peter [MI-2] (introduced 7/16/2008)
Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 7/16/2008 House amendment agreed to.
Status: On agreeing to the Hoekstra amendment (A004) Agreed to by recorded vote: 249 - 180 (Roll no. 500).
at July 24, 2008 9:16 AM
The good news is that this bill passed, for now only. The bad news is that such a bill should have never been necessary in the first place since free speach is (supposedly - not sure any more) protected in our constitution. The worse news is that the Democrats may reverse it soon. The bill was trying to protect the free speach amendment and the Democrats were mostly against it or against free speach? Someone will have to explain why are the democrats against free speech. Are we going to loose our rights to free speech when the Democrats take over? What else in our constitution is going to be challenged to appease our enemies?
Posted by: American at July 24, 2008 12:15 PM
Vince,
If I could offer some unsolicited advice concerning the letter you wrote to your congressman...
It is important to convey your message with as little rhetorical excess as possible...so that the Congressman (or someone in his office) doesn't just dismiss you as an extremist with an agenda. The more you sound like a typical citizen with legitimate security concerns, the more they are inclined to listen.
Posted by: Cornelius at July 24, 2008 12:45 PM
The only Republican NO votes to the amendment:
Ray Lahood (Ill)...
...and....wait for it....
...Ron Paul!
Posted by: Cornelius at July 24, 2008 1:05 PM
Here's the letter I just wrote to my congresswoman:
I see that you voted “nay” to Amendment 1114 to H.R. 5959. I am curious as to why you voted against this amendment?
The Muslims who are fighting to destroy Israel, America and the West continually use words such as jihad and caliphate to describe their motivation. If we aren’t allowed to use the terms that the jihadists use themselves, we won’t be able to fight them properly because we won’t be able to understand why they do what they do. Muslim organizations like CAIR don’t want us to use those terms because they are a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose goal is the same: to destroy all Western governments and replace them with Sharia law. They would like to continue their stealth jihad without us trying to stop them.
Do you have an understanding of Islam, and of how Global Jihadists are acting within the mainstream traditions of all of the major schools of Islamic law? Have you read the Koran? Have you read any of the Hadith and the Sira? Have you read any of the Orientalist writers such as Joseph Schacht, Snouck Hurgronje or David Margoliouth? Have you read or talked to any modern writers such as Ibn Warraq, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Robert Spencer? If not these, what books about Islam have you read?
Since becoming part of your district, I’ve voted for you in every election. If you don’t show signs of awareness of the Global Jihad, including naming it as the prime motivation for the Muslims at war with us, I am afraid that I will be forced to reconsider my choice for the upcoming election.
at July 24, 2008 1:33 PM
Interesting that CAIR would provide alternative words, and of course these words would disconnect from the religion and the motivation for the 'acts'.
Also, interesting is the fact that CAIR will still not use the 'alternative' words either to describe the mulims killing machine.
Posted by: alaskan1000 at July 24, 2008 1:56 PM
I still don't understand why Islamic Terrorist cannot be considered a word that can be used without offending people.
After all the fatwas by a multitude of Mullah's from around the world that have allowed people to kill other people using suicide bombing techniques, how can people still be offended by this word?
Posted by: AtheistAfghan at July 26, 2008 4:05 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)