Pages: 1 2
Editor’s note: More information on the unholy alliance’s campaign to silence critics of the jihadi threat can be found in David Horowitz and Robert Spencer’s pamphlet, “Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future,” available in our bookstore.
For a person like me who learned English as a second language, the current trend of inventing new meanings for words is a disturbing phenomenon. Our vocabulary is transforming, particularly in politics, where the new interpretation of news and events is distorted to adversely affect reality.
It started with our government demanding that we stop using certain words and specifying alternates. “Overseas contingency operation.” “Man-caused disaster.” “Anti-Islamic activity.” These are the terms currently required by our administration for the “global war on terror,” “terrorism,” and “Islamic terrorism.” At times, “freedom fighters” has been used for “terrorists.” The new expressions are vague to the point of meaninglessness and don’t convey the facts.
These phrases appear in internal government memos, as well as media articles, preventing the public from being properly informed. A new edition of the lexicon might also include euphemisms for serial killers and serial rapists as “man-caused afflictions” or “uninvited shoppers” for shoplifters.
An official memo from the National Counterterrorism Communication Center directs the replacement of “terrorists” with vague words like “extremists” or “totalitarians.” Officials are to “refrain from using so-called harsh words or Arabic words with Islamic consequence.” Instead they are to use generic terms without specific emphasis. Why? Terrorists attack us and we should not use harsh words? The word “jihad” is used by the radicals themselves, why can’t we use it? Going one step further, the government has drafted official guidelines in the publication “Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims, a guide for U.S. Government Officials.”
In addition, the government has required corporations, state, federal and various other agencies to hold “sensitivity training” for dealing with the Muslim community. We have never had such requirements. We seemed to get along with people of other faiths. Any opposition expressed to the Muslim community is considered an attack. What happened to free speech?
Is there a problem with truth and facts and, most importantly, with the appropriate use of the English language? The government instructed us to use “undocumented immigrant” instead of “illegal alien.” They are not synonymous. The word “illegal” means against the law and punishable by law. Our obligation is to follow the law and promote lawful behavior. Using the new expressions confuses the facts. Why are we afraid to tell the truth? How can we correct something if we cannot describe it properly? Does “uninvited shopper” mean the same as “shoplifter”? Hardly.
Now we learn that the Defense Department has reclassified the Fort Hood massacre as “workplace violence.” The incident had nothing to do with Major Hasan’s work or the workplace. This mass murderer was shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he fired and killed thirteen innocent people. On his private business cards under his name was printed, “Soldier of Allah.”
Radical Islamists use our constitutional freedoms to sabotage our system of government from the inside. Sen. Susan Collins suggested on December 7, 2011 that the Defense Department classifying the Fort Hood massacre as workplace violence seems to place political correctness above the security of the nation’s armed forces at home.
On 9/11 we were attacked, yet people who are critical about Islam are called “Islamophobes.” The truth must be known — there is no such thing as Islamophobia. The definition of “phobia” is an irrational fear. However, our fear of Islam is very real as a result of 9/11, coupled with the constant barrage of anti-Western sentiments expressed by Muslim leaders. It is imperative that we listen to them and not ignore them.
Ever wonder where the term “Islamophobia” came from?
According to a FrontPage Magazine column posted by Robert Spencer on Dec. 30, 2011, it was deliberately invented by a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), based in Northern Virginia.
Abhdur-Rahman Muhammad, a former member of the IIIT describes the strategy behind the word’s invention:
In an effort to silence critics of political Islam, advocates needed to come up with terminology that would enable them to portray themselves as victims. Muhammad said he was present years ago when his then allies, meeting at the offices of the IIIT… coined the term “Islamophobia.”
Consider the power of this word, how the media exploits it and how politicians fear it.
Pages: 1 2