Bush Administration Targets Language In War On Terrorism

.

‘Jihadist’ booted from U.S. government lexicon
MSNBC
WASHINGTON
Don’t call them jihadists any more.
And don’t call al-Qaida a movement.
The Bush administration has launched a new front in the war on terrorism, this time targeting language.

Federal agencies, including the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counter Terrorism Center, are telling their people not to describe Islamic extremists as “jihadists” or “mujahedeen,” according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. Lingo like “Islamo-fascism” is out, too.

The reason: Such words may actually boost support for radicals among Arab and Muslim audiences by giving them a veneer of religious credibility or by causing offense to moderates.
For example, while Americans may understand “jihad” to mean “holy war,” it is in fact a broader Islamic concept of the struggle to do good, says the guidance prepared for diplomats and other officials tasked with explaining the war on terror to the public. Similarly, “mujahedeen,” which means those engaged in jihad, must be seen in its broader context.
U.S. officials may be “unintentionally portraying terrorists, who lack moral and religious legitimacy, as brave fighters, legitimate soldiers or spokesmen for ordinary Muslims,” says a Homeland Security report. It’s entitled “Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims.”

“Regarding ‘jihad,’ even if it is accurate to reference the term, it may not be strategic because it glamorizes terrorism, imbues terrorists with religious authority they do not have and damages relations with Muslims around the world,” the report says.

‘Official use only’
Language is critical in the war on terrorism, says 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, officials said.

“It’s not what you say but what they hear,” the memo says in bold italic lettering, listing 14 points about how to better present the war on terrorism.

“Don’t take the bait,” it says, urging officials not to react when Osama bin Laden or al-Qaida affiliates speak. “We should offer only minimal, if any, response to their messages. When we respond loudly, we raise their prestige in the Muslim world.”

“Don’t compromise our credibility” by using words and phrases that may ascribe benign motives to terrorists.

Some other specifics:
* “Never use the terms ‘jihadist’ or ‘mujahedeen’ in conversation to describe the terrorists. … Calling our enemies ‘jihadis’ and their movement a global ‘jihad’ unintentionally legitimizes their actions.”
* “Use the terms ‘violent extremist’ or ‘terrorist.’ Both are widely understood terms that define our enemies appropriately and simultaneously deny them any level of legitimacy.”
* On the other hand, avoid ill-defined and offensive terminology: “We are communicating with, not confronting, our audiences. Don’t insult or confuse them with pejorative terms such as ‘Islamo-fascism,’ which are considered offensive by many Muslims.”

The memo says the advice is not binding and does not apply to official policy papers but should be used as a guide for conversations with Muslims and media.

Caution against ‘grandiose descriptions’
At least at the top level, it appears to have made an impact. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who once frequently referred to “jihad” in her public remarks, does not appear to have used the word, except when talking about the name of a specific terrorist group, since last September.
The memo mirrors advice distributed to British and European Union diplomats last year to better explain the war on terrorism to Muslim communities there.
It also draws heavily on the Homeland Security report that examined the way American Muslims reacted to different phrases used by U.S. officials to describe terrorists and recommended ways to improve the message.

Because of religious connotations, that report, released in January and obtained by AP this week, counseled “caution in using terms such as, ‘jihadist,’ ‘Islamic terrorist,’ ‘Islamist,’ and ‘holy warrior’ as grandiose descriptions.”

“We should not concede the terrorists’ claim that they are legitimate adherents of Islam,” the report said, adding that bin Laden and his adherents fear “irrelevance” more than anything else.

“We must carefully avoid giving bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders the legitimacy they crave, but do not possess, by characterizing them as religious figures, or in terms that may make them seem to be noble in the eyes of some,” it said.

Wild Thing’s comment……….
You just know I am not liking this.
My comment will be brought to you via the 1st Amendment, thank you ever so.
If not jihadists, how about bitter Muslims who cling to guns/swords and religion.
All of this political correctness is literally an open door to the deaths of more innocent Americans (civilian and military).
So what are we to call the Gaza Strip palis and Hamas, are we to rename them Obamamaniacs? Since they have stated they support B. Hussein Obama 08.
Until we get a President who will deal with that reality, we will not fight them as effectively as we should. And I will include in this our open borders.
Does this trump freedom of speech, ,maybe not among us but certainly among those that got the memo’s sent out.
What a crock.
So the government says I can not call these MUSLIM SCUM BAG Islamic extremists “jihadists” or “mujahedeen,” err…what was that JIHADISTS OR MUJAHEDEEN.
If we can’t call them what they are, then we might as we stop fighting with them. How about calling them “our future rulers”? That shouldn’t offend them. What kind of war is this, where we are afraid of describing our enemy?
These jihadists must be laughing their a$$e$ off as they contemplate the simpering fecklessness of the politically correct infidel clowns whom they are bent on obliterating.
This largest jihad in world history is highly, wildly successful, and, it is in the later stages as published by the Muslim Brotherhoods masterplan discovered in Switzerland in 1991 and published for all that want to read it.
This foolishness, as the EU has also adopted for all its officials, will have no effect on the Muslim plan. While they fight among themselves as well, the plan goes on with steady progress. Sharia financial banking will bring Sharia law to the West thru financial institutions if nothing else. Already 30 percent of the London exchange, 20 per cent of the NASDAQ, and the presence of a Sharia law oriented Muslim advisory board for the Dow Index and the establishment of Islamic banks in Europe are advancing Sharia law rapidly. Of greater import is the decision to downplay the clear and present danger this jihad represents for the United States by refusing to identify it by the correct terminology to our own population.
At a house hearing on Darfur on C Span last night, the directive on the avoidance of jihad, Islamist, islamofascism was clear…all these were replaced by the term ‘bad actor or bad actors’ by Negroponte, Boxer, Mendez, etc.
Such neutering of correct descriptive terms will weaken our own ability to defend ourselves as it will at the same time have no effect on this jihad which is on every continent and growing.
It is preposterous that our State Dept., copycatting the EU which is becoming Sharia oriented more daily, has decided to call jihad ‘bad acting’.
Maybe the EU will now copycat the US state department. Will the US political parties attempt ‘one upsmanship’ and move further to readdress jihad as ‘childish historical behavior’?

I am sure you all remember this movie that was made……..
Obsession is a film about the threat of Radical Islam to Western civilization. Using unique footage from Arab television, it reveals an ‘insiders view’ of the hatred the Radicals are teaching, their incitement of global jihad, and their goal of world domination.
This just part V of a 10 part video series. The film Obsession is also on DVD.
CLICK HERE to see part V of Obsession