Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Politically correct terrorism: David Kupelian identifies the enemy, since no one else will
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, September 28, 2001 | David Kupelian

Posted on 09/28/2001 1:54:36 AM PDT by JohnHuang2

WND Exclusive Commentary


Politically correct terrorism


© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com

America is in danger of losing this war.

But not because of any lack of military might or intelligence capability, nor even because of any unwillingness to sustain grievous human and financial losses.

No, America is in danger of losing this war because of political correctness.

Answer me this: If we can't identify who the enemy is – and, in fact, refuse to do so – haven't we lost already?

The news media, the filter through which Americans receive their information, is reluctant to define the enemy. Indeed, within the last week, it has become politically incorrect to describe the Islamic terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center and Pentagon, murdering thousands of innocent Americans, as "Islamic terrorists."

As the Washington Times reported, "an organization of religion news reporters yesterday suggested that reporters avoid the term 'Islamic terrorist' or similar labels as Muslims and their beliefs receive greater scrutiny. The Religion Newswriters Association said it was 'troubled' by the frequent use of the term in the days after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington." At its annual meeting last week, the group adopted a resolution also rejecting "similar phrases that associate an entire religion with the action of a few."

OK, but at least we can still call them terrorists, right?

Wrong.

Stephen Jukes, Reuters' global head of news, decreed that the giant wire service's 2,500 journalists should not use the T-word unless in a direct quote.

"We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist," he wrote in an internal memo. "To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack."

Attempting to explain his values-neutral approach, Jukes added: "We're trying to treat everyone on a level playing field, however tragic it's been and however awful and cataclysmic for the American people and people around the world."

So former Reagan staffer and columnist Paul Craig Roberts was right when he observed recently that "Americans might be so politically correct and racially sensitive as to be unable to deal with the problem at all."

And yet, as America's experience in Vietnam proved, widespread public support is critical for a successful campaign, especially a long, difficult and costly campaign, as the forthcoming war promises to be. Hard to garner support if the press doesn't tell us who the enemy is.

But the news media don't prosecute the war – the government does. So, how are our leaders doing in defining the enemy?

"Islam is a religion of peace," we are told, and these terrorists – oops, I guess I should say, these folks – are just some bad apples that belong to a widely dispersed "terror network" of a few hundred or even a few thousand members – who have "hijacked" Islam in order to philosophically justify their murderous hatred of the West.

But as Mideast expert Daniel Pipes wrote this week, "The president dismissed al-Qaida's version of Islam as a repudiated 'fringe form of Islamic extremism.' Hardly. Muslims on the streets of many places – Pakistan and Gaza in particular – are fervently rallying to the defense of al-Qaida's vision of Islam. Likewise, the president's calling the terrorists 'traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam' implies that other Muslims see them as apostates, which is simply wrong. Al-Qaida enjoys wide popularity – the very best the U.S. government can hope for is a measure of Muslim neutrality and apathy."

Although without question there are millions of peaceful, tolerant and decent Muslims, what we're talking about here is a particular brand of Islam -- a rapidly expanding one at that -- often called "Islamism." Like communism and Nazism, it is a brutal, coercive utopian movement bent on nothing less than total world domination. It's what President Bush described, in his excellent Sept. 20 speech to the nation, as heir "of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century ... they follow in the path of fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism." Yes, the president, to his credit, characterized the enemy correctly, albeit briefly and incompletely. But he gave no sense of the size of the enemy.

Take a deep breath. Of the world's approximately 1.2 billion Muslims, an estimated 10 to 15 percent are of the militant "Islamist" strain. Do the math – that's well over 100 million human beings who, to a greater or lesser degree, are caught up with what amounts to the world's most dangerous cult.

Paul Marshall, senior fellow at the Center for Religious Freedom at Freedom House, told this writer that right now perhaps eight to 10 governments are "scared of being toppled" if they stand up to the Islamic "jihad" against the West. Citing Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Jordan, Indonesia and other potential "coalition" members, Marshall said such states "are afraid their country could be destabilized if they support the West too much, which shows that opposition to American action is not simply from a few hundred people."

By the way, if you want to truly understand what America is up against, who the enemy really is – in-depth – you should read the upcoming issue of WND's "Whistleblower" magazine. This extra-large issue, titled "JIHAD: The radical Islamic threat to America," will be devoted from cover to cover to a groundbreaking exploration of America's most mysterious, and deadly, enemy.

Now that we've talked a bit about what we're up against, let's think about political correctness, that bizarre self-censorship that currently makes us afraid even to name the enemy, let alone fight it.

Political correctness, at its core, is intimidation. Terrorism, of course, is the ultimate in intimidation.

The militant Islamic movement – as opposed to peaceful Muslims – wants to intimidate the United States, to intimidate us out of the Middle East so it can destroy Israel, take over the so-called "moderate" states, especially Saudi Arabia, ushering in a unified and radicalized Islamic state throughout the Mideast, and control the world's oil. Oil is a powerful weapon.

Then, they can destroy America in their own good time – remember, it is central to their politicized, utopian, religious beliefs that they convert the entire world to Islam – by force, if necessary.

But how can America withstand such intimidation when we have already given in to seemingly far less threatening intimidators in recent times?

We have given in to the militant homosexual movement – not the live-and-let-live homosexual who wants to be left alone to live his or her life – but the radical strain of homosexual activism that wants to force a repugnant agenda down our throats – to teach kindergartners about perverted sex, make AIDS exempt from normal infectious-disease protocols and outlaw traditional Christian teaching on homosexuality as a "hate crime."

The militant women's movement – not your normal women's activists seeking equal pay for equal work, but the extremist wing – intimidated America into allowing women in combat, unlimited abortion-on-demand, no-fault divorce, and driving millions of mothers into the workforce who really would rather have stayed home and raised their children.

The militant civil-rights movement – not Martin Luther King who championed a color-blind society, with which most Americans heartily agree – but the radical, virulent strain, the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world, brought us forced bussing, reverse discrimination, endless hypocrisy and increased, not decreased, racial hatreds.

And Americans have been so intimidated by their own government that, just a few months ago, President George W. Bush had to stump across the nation, begging outrageously overtaxed Americans to accept a tax cut, so fearful and brainwashed are so many of us of losing some perceived government benefit.

If America is to have any chance of prevailing in this war – which is not only a military conflict, but a cultural and spiritual one as well – we in the Free World have to come to grips with Islam. But to do so, we first have to come to grips with ourselves. We must become virtuous. We must become courageous. We must become self-disciplined, mature and uncompromisingly honest. And we must throw political correctness onto "the unmarked grave" of history. If we do, we can address with a clear head and a pure heart the spiritual warfare in which, ready or not, we are now engaged.

For the truth is, there is no clean distinction between "good Islam" on one side and "bad Islam" on the other. There is, rather, a continuum. Take the estimated four to seven million Muslims in the U.S.A. At one end, and clearly this constitutes the majority, you have the peaceful Muslim family living down the street that obeys our laws, pays their taxes and are proud to be Americans. But since Sept. 11, we have learned that, while we were asleep in this country -- with our borders wide open, giving high-technology to our enemies -- an unknown number of terrorists also have set up shop in America, along with their supporters, sympathizers, apologists and funders.

In between these two types of Muslims – the loyal American and the enemy – you have many degrees of dissatisfaction and outright anger at the United States of America, of sympathy for Palestinian suicide bombers, of secret and sometimes open agreement with the Sept. 11 attacks and, in some cases, of actual cooperation with America's enemies. There is a great deal more to this adversary than meets the eye.

America's job is to utterly destroy – that means kill – the terrorist network, root and branch, and likewise to destroy the governments of the terrorists' patron states. If we do this just right, with the right spirit and timing, we may just succeed in shocking those millions of future Osama bin Ladens who today are following the siren song of militant Islam, and forcing them toward the more moderate end of the spectrum.

To accomplish such a Herculean task will take nothing less than God's intervention. And to receive such help from above, we must look to Him with all our heart, soul, mind and strength.


Subscribe to Whistleblower and receive the upcoming issue, "JIHAD: The radical Islamic threat to America."


TOPICS: Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

1 posted on 09/28/2001 1:54:36 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Dynamite assessment of "modern America"....
Will the "wimpified" U. S. be able to prevail in this situation?
...very iffy....
2 posted on 09/28/2001 2:02:43 AM PDT by unamused
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
This should be the fate of terrorists who plan atrocities from within their host nation.

In war time, we need't wait for their execution before their execution. And, perhaps we ought to invite the politically correct crowd to participate in the first test drop.

3 posted on 09/28/2001 2:04:38 AM PDT by Vigilanteman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I agree with the author. We WILL lose if we keep going down the path of PC. It seems the top priority in this country is to make sure that these Mohammedans are not offended in any way.

Islam and Western Civilization DOES NOT and CANNOT mix. The Mohammedans know this, that's why they want the USA to become an Islamic state. They CANNOT seperate religious law from secular law, it's AGAINST their religion. It's a lost cause until we come to this realization.

4 posted on 09/28/2001 2:14:17 AM PDT by GuillermoX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
[i]America's job is to utterly destroy – that means kill – the terrorist network, root and branch, and likewise to destroy the governments of the terrorists' patron states. [b]If we do this just right, with the right spirit and timing, we may just succeed in shocking those millions of future Osama bin Ladens who today are following the siren song of militant Islam, and forcing them toward the more moderate end of the spectrum. [/b][/i] Sorry folks, but if you believe in facing the cold unvarnished truth, the author here is engaging in an unsupported conclusion. He lays out the danger of PC think very well, but his idea that we may be able to "to shock future osama Bin Ladens" doesn't seem to come from any exicting logical model. Like so many so called experts on the middle east he seems to have a far firmer grasp of the problem than the solution.
5 posted on 09/28/2001 2:19:50 AM PDT by Mission2mars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Welcome to the Brave New World...of Paradise-Engineering.
6 posted on 09/28/2001 2:37:44 AM PDT by Aerial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Fantasic assessment!

Then, they can destroy America in their own good time – remember, it is central to their politicized, utopian, religious beliefs that they convert the entire world to Islam – by force, if necessary.

AMEN to that! I don't think we REALLY believe this is the ultimate goal.

7 posted on 09/28/2001 3:38:42 AM PDT by Zeph211
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2,loopy,phikapmom,common tator,uncle bill
The news media, the filter through which Americans receive their information, is reluctant to define the enemy. Indeed, within the last week, it has become politically incorrect to describe the Islamic terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center and Pentagon, murdering thousands of innocent Americans, as "Islamic terrorists."

Stephen Jukes, Reuters' global head of news, decreed that the giant wire service's 2,500 journalists should not use the T-word unless in a direct quote.

"We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist," he wrote in an internal memo. "To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack."

In 1990 Rush Limbaugh warned that Political Correctness, especially on the college campuses, was becoming the Fascism of America. In this case, I think Rush has been proven "More than Right." Who could have predicted such sheer, stark-raving mad lunacy would develop from the PC movement?

Even here on FR, the PC crowd sometimes jumps in with such whimpy fury, that I fear at the rate we are going, in a few more years, an excellent article posting such as this one would be pulled by the PC Police.

Thanks for the head's up, JohnHuang2, this represents an absolutely awful & nefarious social development.

8 posted on 09/28/2001 3:58:53 AM PDT by Hit & Run Poster (lurker since quidam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
This is a MUST read!!! E-mail this to everyone you know. This is a commentary that will wake people up, and shatter the PC evil that has had America in its ugly grip for 40 years.
9 posted on 09/28/2001 4:00:32 AM PDT by Russell Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
this is a reposted reply from 9/18 re: two American high school students who tore down a Palestinian flag in their school:

Bump for these guys. Our only real hope in "winning" whatever we're in now is for this PC crap to be beaten out of people. We need a population who have the backbone to demand any questionably allied foreign nationals be deported ASAP. Even if some innocent, charming foreign nationals get shipped out. We need a population who have the backbone to make this country uninviting for anyone who's of a mind to move here, live here for few years, then strap on a bomb for Allah.

The terms of this war cannot possibly have sunk into the national psyche yet, but all here know that we are LIVING IN the frontlines. This BS about being nice-nice to the innocent (whomevers) is great in an academic kind of way, but when you're dealing with an enemy who willing to exchange his one life, in a surprise and catestrophic fashion, for the lives of thousands of people; untold vital communication, transportation, and commerce infrastructure, and the guy could be living next door to you and me, then we haven't really got much choice to be a bunch of pricks about weeding him out. IOW, we need to err on the side of being too harsh, rather than erring on the side of appeasing the PC sensibilities that have been strangling rational discourse and thought in this country for years.

Unfortunately, the sentiment of tolerance at any cost is getting increased play on the public airwaves. We will likely have the opportunity to see the stamina of said sentiment in the face of another horrendous attack. At that point, we will know whether we've won or lost, IMO.

10 posted on 09/28/2001 4:16:51 AM PDT by Semaphore Heathcliffe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
And we must throw political correctness onto "the unmarked grave" of history.

Just so. We just may have to throw the Libs into the "dustbin of History" first in order to do it.

11 posted on 09/28/2001 4:24:18 AM PDT by Dan De Quille
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
"We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist," he wrote in an internal memo. "To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack."

These men, these terrorist (I will use the term), do not fight for freedom. They fight for conquest. They fight for domination. They fight Christianity. They by their own words fight to make the whole world an Islamic Republic. They can hardly be called Freedom Fighters

When one sets out to report on an event one must define the event in terms that can be understood by the target audience. The attack on the World Trade Center attack was an attack on building predominately occupied by civilians. This is a target with out any military or strategic value. This attackers only conceivable purpose is to strike fear in to the populace of the target country and destroy the will of the people to resist the attacker and accede to attackers political demands. This in the understanding of the general population of this country would in popular parlance be termed as a Terrorist Attack

12 posted on 09/28/2001 4:30:04 AM PDT by Pontiac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I've been reading a lot on Islamism since the World Trade Center attack. All these groups trace their origin to the revolutionary views of Komeini. If anyone would know of an excellent biography of this Iranian leader, please let me know. However, I have found out so far that he was influenced by the writings of Ali Shariati and Franz Fanon. Reading the beliefs of Fanon is more chilling than any suspense novel. Try this site: http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Fanon.html
13 posted on 09/28/2001 4:32:34 AM PDT by wjeanw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
A largely overlooked piece yesterday by Paul Johnson, Relentlessly and Thoroughly, made many of these same points. People should read that very important article.
14 posted on 09/28/2001 4:37:25 AM PDT by Cincinatus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
BUMP
15 posted on 09/28/2001 4:41:31 AM PDT by truthkeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Now that we're more than two weeks and a half weeks past the attacks (a virtual lifetime in the eyes of American media), it's become increasingly evident in TV interviews and radio call-ins that a significant portion of our population have literally stifled any self-survival instinct in favor of not offending anyone. It's absolutely mindboggling. There are now entire generations of Americans, young though they may be, who know nothing other than a fuzzy relativist worldview where nothing's really better than anything else. They and their adult counterparts (whom tragically have infested the very media that shape public opinion) can only be a liability in what is shaping up to be a cut-throat future.

And as the reality of an obliterated national icon and financial hub fades into "America United" or "America's New War" or whatever braindead network of your choice has named this week in time, we lose sight of the bottom line. This situation will very possibly become, whether the majority wants it or not, a war between Islam and the West. Correction: the guys of 9/11 have made this a war between Islam and the West. And the West, being so hamstrung by PC, can't find the stones to call it what it is. Please, West...find the stones, and join the battle that is on your front lawn.

16 posted on 09/28/2001 4:55:47 AM PDT by Semaphore Heathcliffe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Excellent job, as usual!

One thing I've noticed lately, and one must listen to NPR to hear this (for now at least), but many of the pc police are trying to use this attack as a venue for moving their agendas forward.

For example, Andrew Sullivan thinks now is a good time to lift restrictions on gays in the military, feminists want us to rethink our martial macho culture and/or make women's opinions on war equally relevant to talk of retaliation. Afterall we can't give into the forces of "hate". Militant blacks wonder if America is even worthy of defense.

Our leaders, and each of us, must insist that this fight, this war, is about our survival as a free people. Nothing less. All appeals to politics & politeness & fairness be damned. These are distractions we can't afford.

I believe these discordant voices will grow as the shock of the attack wears off. No freedom loving citizen should give them any leeway or venue for their stupidity.

17 posted on 09/28/2001 5:17:25 AM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Source: Associated Press

AP? Making sure we're on our toes, John, even before the first cup of coffee?

Good post. Hopefully, this war will mean the death of PC. If not, I fear it will mark a significant inflection point in the decline of America.

18 posted on 09/28/2001 5:38:59 AM PDT by FreedomPoster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GuillermoX
>They CANNOT seperate religious law from secular law, it's AGAINST their religion. It's a lost cause until we come to this realization.

It shouldn't be hard to come to that realization, there are many here in the US that don't want church and state seperated.

19 posted on 09/28/2001 5:55:14 AM PDT by texlok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Another problem with PC is the fact that if we go into Afghanistan or Iraq or wherever, the American public is going to have to deal with the fact that innocents will probably be killed. It's sad, but true. It happened in Iraq, but wasn't widely publicized, and it'll happen here I'm sure (some reporter aching to get a news story and that doesn't like the administration would love to flash pictures on the screen of collateral damage).

I'm actually somewhat worried that some news organization will flash a few pics of people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time and all of the sudden the sheeple of the world will try and make us out to be bad guys. "Those awful Americans, look how they killed civilians" and then some here in the US will lose the will to do what has to be done. Things happen, there's nothing we can do about it. Sometimes the means justify the end (and before anybody brings up Hamburg and Hiroshima and Nagasaki, hey, we could have totally demolished those countries had we not done what we did).

20 posted on 09/28/2001 6:00:56 AM PDT by texlok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Kudos to David Kupelian and even AP. . .Great article to share ***** "So former Reagan staffer and columnist Paul Craig Roberts was right when he observed recently that "Americans might be so politically correct and racially sensitive as to be unable to deal with the problem at all." ***

That IS the intent in the design and the 'delivery' of PC. . .and it's introduction into our language is no accident. With PC, you cannot identify the idealogical enemy. Can we say 'L I B E R AL'? (Any out there reading this article; what do you think?)

Do feel sad however and concerned for the good Muslims in this country and political correctness aside, would not be rude to anyone. OTOH, feel offended as well, by just how much is being demanded by so many Muslims in light of September 11.

Not that they should NOT try to explain to America who they are in an effort to dis-engage ignorance; but some are more demanding. . .more vocal in their complaints about OUR 'insensitivity'; by our prayers, the presence of our Flag, our expression of fear or distrust, even if only in the eyes of those they behold.

A ratcheting up of PC, seems to be the required response. . .

Political Correctness embraces the irrational. . .(as expressed in the insanity of ". . .the terrorist and victims should be placed on an equal playing field). We must fight our way back to reasonable ground.

The Media might be cowed into a quiet rhetoric; or being Liberal themselves, demand it of others; but we do not have to be.

Maybe in time, they will follow the 'mainstream'; and not the other way around.

It is time to recognize that words mean things; time to reassert that 'sensitivity' does not have to mean 'SURRENDER', which is what political correctness is really about.

David Kupelian is right about "PC Terrorism". Political correctness is a 'soft' terrorism,(my words). . .by creating fear for anyone expressing the the truth.

21 posted on 09/28/2001 6:04:03 AM PDT by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Take the estimated four to seven million Muslims in the U.S.A.

I would have thought there were more than this. I wonder if this includes not only Muslims of Middle Eastern descent, but also the American black Muslim movement. Weren't most of the the Black Panthers of the 60's and 70's Muslim? I know the New Black Panthers are. The leader of the New Black Panthers has appeared on O'Reilly. He doesn't want any whites, including Bill Clinton, to operate businesses or live in Harlem.

22 posted on 09/28/2001 6:07:34 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
If I had the time, I would love to research how Reuters dealt with the OK City atrocity. Did they refrain from using the word "terrorist" or "white" or "Christian" or "male" when referring to McVeigh? Out of deference, did they call him a "freedom fighter"?
23 posted on 09/28/2001 6:18:15 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

FINALLY SOMEONE IS TELLING IT LIKE IT IS!

24 posted on 09/28/2001 6:27:41 AM PDT by Colt .45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: randita
The Black Muslims are not regarded by true Muslims as believers in Islam. They're regarded as apostates from the true faith whose crime is punishable by death. And that's just for starters. We have to keep in mind that Islamist Nazism which is the enemy is hugely popular in the Arab/Islamic world. While the President would like to comfort himself with the notion its a marginal phenomenon, all the empirical evidence has shown otherwise. The truth is there are terrorists who are Muslims and the reason for the identification is that we haven't seen people of other faiths engage in it explicitly at least not with so wide a breadth and in so horrific a fashion. David Kupelian's right about one thing: if we flinch at identifying the enemy as he clearly represents himself to be and by the aims that he is pledged to fulfill, then this war will be over before it is launched. Make no mistake: the future of America and the Free World rests on uprooting and defeating rapidly and throughly Islamist Nazism every where that it exists. This is the task facing this generation that is now its calling.
25 posted on 09/28/2001 6:30:15 AM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: texlok
What the Founders were opposed to was an official church, like the Church of England. They were also opposed to codifying all Christian, or other religious tenets into the law. They view of what the 'mosque'/state relationship should be to the Mohammedan is much different. They want them to essentially be the same thing. In Islamic countries, Islamic law is THE law.
26 posted on 09/28/2001 6:33:19 AM PDT by GuillermoX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Mega-bump!

Political correctness was first coined as a phrase by Mao Tse Tund.

It was introduced to the United States most effectively by Donna Shalala when she was President of the Univ. of Wisconsin circa 1982.

27 posted on 09/28/2001 6:36:24 AM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus
bttt.
28 posted on 09/28/2001 6:37:11 AM PDT by WillaJohns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I agree with the writer, the Liberal Media is just as bad an enemy as the terrorist. Untill a large majority of American people tell this media to cram it and make them pay for their treason by stopping any purchase of their propaganda, we will not be able to get rid of terrorist. I think this is highly unlikely, so we are in deep dodo. We have allowed the media to lie for so long and get away with it.
29 posted on 09/28/2001 6:39:32 AM PDT by Texbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2, Miss Marple, Irma, Howlin
Good post, JH2. (You NEVER post anything that is a waste of time and for that I thank you!) Political correctness HAS to be jettisoned now, and we have to do whatever it takes to lead the jettisoning. I'm flagging some experts on taking action...
30 posted on 09/28/2001 6:40:51 AM PDT by looscannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
These men, these terrorist (I will use the term), do not fight for freedom. They fight for conquest. They fight for domination. They fight Christianity. They by their own words fight to make the whole world an Islamic Republic. They can hardly be called Freedom Fighters.

Excellent point! I don't think that ANYONE, even someone highly imaginative, could describe the people of Afghanistan as "free". From my perspective, there aren't many differences between those who practice Islamism and the Nazis of WWII.

31 posted on 09/28/2001 6:41:16 AM PDT by ChocChipCookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hit & Run Poster
Stephen Jukes, Reuters' global head of news, decreed that the giant wire service's 2,500 journalists should not use the T-word unless in a direct quote.

Hubby and I were watching Imus this morning, and he mentioned this and the fact that CNN was following suit. He was railing about what idiots they were! And he mentioned that hardly anyone ever watches CNN anyway!

32 posted on 09/28/2001 6:44:22 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Personally, I'm STILL outraged that they caved and changed the name of the coming military operation. While I realize the need to not have any more people take the field against us than already are, I think we need to telegraph to Moslems that they have no business trying to tell us what to do after these events.

Also, do they give a rat's ass about what Hindus, Jews and Christians think in their countries, or even other countries? I think not.

33 posted on 09/28/2001 6:47:09 AM PDT by TKEman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Excellent analysis, for you are calling these people by their true name-NAZIS. This is something the media needs to make clear as the president did in his speech. We need to send all these fascists to "the unmarked grave of discarded lies."
34 posted on 09/28/2001 6:49:20 AM PDT by ohioman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Didn't notice this in the article but the dark side of PC is virulently anti-American.

After nearly forty years of constantly denouncing just about every element of our own culture as being racist, sexist, far right wing, christian (also right wing), and using those descriptions to press forward their agenda, the PC crowd has defined the USA in particular and the West in general as "the enemy".
Despite the obvious facts on the ground in the middle east it is still virtually impossible to state in public that the "Palestinians" are an intentionally created cult of terrorists and bigots. "We" find it far easier to put the blame on those European Jews who resettled (according to previous promises and immediate history) between Jordan and Egypt - largely because they are more "like us".

Theology aside, they learned from many of the same dead white guys who gave us our core beliefs - the same ones being attacked under the PC mantle.

Sadly, and encouraged by the very icons of political correctness (except in their personal lives), some of our recent actions have highlighted that definition with bombs and with propaganda such as Americans have rarely experienced.

I fear than a large number of otherwise middle of the road (wherever that may be) Americans have accepted enough of this self-damnation so as to be passive toward our enemies as well as to encroaching government controls.

What can we expect from a generation or two generations raised on self doubt, hatred of those who "oppress" others because of gender, ethnicity (no, "race" has become accepted again), or their "orientation"?

Americans seem to enjoy feelings of guilt - guilt for not being invaded in WW2, tormenting innocent agrarian reformers in Vietnam, eating well, or owning two cars...
Do we believe so strongly in that guilt that we might not have the will to defend such a place?
Have enough Americans been convinced that we no longer deserve our special role?
Do great nations or empires fall from within or from without?

35 posted on 09/28/2001 6:52:00 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The only good thing about the eventual result of Political Correctness War Policy is watching Hillary get fitted out for her chador...
36 posted on 09/28/2001 6:52:10 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norton
Sorry about that.

Maybe after more coffee........

37 posted on 09/28/2001 6:52:43 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Good post!
38 posted on 09/28/2001 6:53:02 AM PDT by neutrino (Neutrino)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChocChipCookie
Excellent point! I don't think that ANYONE, even someone highly imaginative, could describe the people of Afghanistan as "free". From my perspective, there aren't many differences between those who practice Islamism and the Nazis of WWII.

There are parallels. The Nazis wanted racial purity for the world. The Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorist wants religious purity. And both were/are willing to use the threat and surety of death to enforce their dream of purification of the world.

39 posted on 09/28/2001 6:53:15 AM PDT by Pontiac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Source: "Associated Press"

That's gotta be a mistake.

Excellent article though.

40 posted on 09/28/2001 7:02:49 AM PDT by Harrison Bergeron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
IF we had been concerned about Good Germans and Good Japanese in World War II the few of us still alive would be slaves to a society that considered us to be inferior animals.

All Middle Eastern Muslims believe that we are the great SATAN. How many times have you heard them call us that?

Why are we surprised that they want to kill SATAN?


41 posted on 09/28/2001 7:16:22 AM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I have come up with a term for the events of Sept. 11 - "the Great Provocation." PC is a lesser provocation, but all the same, it's a tool of the enemies of freedom.

"We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist," he wrote in an internal memo. "To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack."

Mr. Journalist, you ignorant slut: WE ALL KNOW you are not with us. You are with the terrorists. To be frank, you may even be lower than the murderous moles who were/are willing to die for their cause. You are cowardly and seditious.

Political correctness is intimidation, and that is the facially challenged (ugly) truth.

I think I will email this article to everyone I know. Your service is appreciated, JH2.

42 posted on 09/28/2001 7:53:31 AM PDT by irgbar-man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

Comment #44 Removed by Moderator

To: Manny Festo
Good bump and great piece.
45 posted on 09/28/2001 9:53:34 AM PDT by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

Comment #46 Removed by Moderator

To: JohnHuang2
If America is to have any chance of prevailing in this war – which is not only a military conflict, but a cultural and spiritual one as well – we in the Free World have to come to grips with Islam. But to do so, we first have to come to grips with ourselves. We must become virtuous. We must become courageous. We must become self-disciplined, mature and uncompromisingly honest. And we must throw political correctness onto "the unmarked grave" of history.

It's been nice knowin' y'all.

47 posted on 09/28/2001 10:14:58 AM PDT by CubicleGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
"...Take a deep breath. Of the world's approximately 1.2 billion Muslims, an estimated 10 to 15 percent are of the militant "Islamist" strain. Do the math – that's well over 100 million human beings who, to a greater or lesser degree, are caught up with what amounts to the world's most dangerous cult."

Well, this is as far as I had to read.

I am sick to my stomach. I want to see Baghdad, Tehran, and a half-dozen cities in Afghanistan to be nuked. TODAY!!

What in the hell will it take? A bio-chemical attach, that kills hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans?

Just what in the SAM BLAZES is going on??

Kill them all, and let Allah sort it out. At the very least it will ensure about 50 years of peace.

48 posted on 09/28/2001 10:24:19 AM PDT by DCPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: looscannon
Political correctness HAS to be jettisoned now, and we have to do whatever it takes to lead the jettisoning. I'm flagging some experts on taking action...

I thought you were going to say "I'm flagging some experts who are not very politically correct". Hahahahaha!

Seriously, you (and the author of this article) are so correct, Mr. Cannon. We MUST put a halt to this "PC" nonsense which ultimately threatens, if left unchecked, to expose us as sitting ducks (although politically correct ducks) for the cowardly acts of the TERRORISTS!

Thanks for the flag. Terrific article.

49 posted on 09/28/2001 10:25:36 AM PDT by Irma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Russell Scott, JohnHuang2, looscannon, Miss Marple
Well now, we can add CNN to the PC list.....

CNN Will not call Terrorists, "Terrorists"

As Miss Marple so correctly pointed out on that thread.......

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. "

50 posted on 09/28/2001 10:37:13 AM PDT by Irma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson