Throwback Thursday: Naming Protocol Downplays Seriousness Of Threat

 

 

This is a letter that I wrote, which appeared in the Sunday, June 8, 2008
 edition of the Courier-Post newspaper. At that time, only seven years after
America had suffered through the worst enemy attack on our nation since
   Pearl Harbor, this local South Jersey newspaper was looking for
 "rabble-rousers" or writers who were not afraid to take on the
 establishment and voice their opinions.

Now, some 18 years later, I have to wonder whether this same letter
I wrote would have even made it past the editor's desk of this,
 or any other local or national newspaper.

As far as this "rabble-rouser" is concerned, the "seriousness of threats" 
to the freedom and security of all Americans, twenty-five years after
September 11th, has only grown far worse.

 

Image courtesy/Facebook

There is an old saying. "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck
 it must be a duck." Too bad our government doesn't recognize the
 duck, especially when it comes with a tag of "Islamic suicide bomber"
around it's neck.  The Bush Administration has suddenly decided that
calling the duck, or rather, the enemy, by its correct name is "too risky"
and may be offensive to certain individuals.

In other words, the malignant scourge of political correctness has once
again reared its ugly and ill-timed head to confuse and deliberately misinform
the American people in these uncertain times.  According to a recent report in
The Middle East Times, American government employees both here and abroad
have been ordered to refrain from using words such as "Islamic jihadists"
when describing would-be terrorists.

They've been told to use words like, "violent extremists" or "South Asian youths"
instead, thus downplaying the seriousness of the ominous threat facing the
security of our nation and the world. Ironically, it is moderate Muslims in
many areas of the world who have been the most vocal in their concern
about this new "tolerance policy" on behalf of the U.S. Government.

The Middle East Times reports Muslims who adhere to a policy of
nonviolence are more often the victims of Islamic terror than so-called,
"infidels" because they recognize and denounce the twisted religious
and political doctrine that motivates the murderous agenda of jihadists.

Who is our government really trying to protect? Isn't this new protocol
aimed specifically to appease the demands of controversial political
organizations such as CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations)
and ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), this latter organization
having ties to the violent group known as the Muslim Brotherhood, 
whose Egyptian affiliation was responsible for the 1981 assassination 
 of President Anwar Sadat? 

Both organizations seem to have significant influence in both the
White House and the Department of Defense. Why is our government
kowtowing to the likes of these people who clearly despise the
American way of life? 

The facts as presented are that Islamic jihad, or holy war, was openly
declared on America on 9/11.  The horror of that day should never be
forgotten, nor should the knowledge that the terrorists, and their sponsors
who prance freely inside powerful Washington political circles, are not
going to quit in their dedicated quest to undermine our Constitutional
right to question their true agenda. Thus, this paves the way to the
eventual subjugation of this nation to Islamic Sharia Law.

Unfortunately, it seems our government is determined to help them
along, all in the name of political correctness.