Muslim Organizations Call On McCain To Drop ‘Islamic’ Terrorist Label
Muslim Organizations Call On McCain To Drop ‘Islamic’ Terrorist Label
One of Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) favorite talking points is railing against “Islamic” extremists and terrorists. A few examples:
– “[M]y Democrat opponents who want to pull out of Iraq refuse to understand what’s being said and what’s happening, and that is, the central battleground is Iraq in this struggle against radical Islamic extremism.” [3/24/08]
– McCain underscored “that his focus as president would be waging war against ‘radical Islamic extremism.’ Speaking to about 500 party faithful…McCain said the war in Iraq was part of the fight against Islamic extremism, ‘the greatest evil, probably, that this nation has ever faced.’” [2/18/08]
– “‘The transcendent issue of this campaign will be this conflict we are in between good and evil, between the forces of radical Islamic extremism that are trying to destroy America and everything we believe in,’ McCain told reporters.” [3/16/07]
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) — the nation’s largest association of Muslim organizations — has now started a campaign to persuade McCain to drop the adjective “Islamic” when describing terrorists and extremists. ISNA head Muneer Fareed told the Washington Times:
We’ve tried to contact his office, contact his spokesperson to have them rethink word usage that is more acceptable to the Muslim community. If it’s not our intent to paint everyone with the same brush, then certainly we should think seriously about just characterizing them as criminals, because that is what they are.
McCain’s campaign, however, refuses to budge. Senior adviser Steve Schmidt said that the senator will continue to use the term: “But the reality is, the hateful ideology which underpins bin Ladenism is properly described as radical Islamic extremism. Senator McCain refers to it that way because that is what it is.”
As The New York Times noted this weekend, McCain frequently oversimplifies the threats abroad, incorrectly using the “shorthand ‘Al Qaeda’ to describe the enemy in Iraq.” The term “Islamic extremism” is similarly sloppy, denigrating Islam as a violent religion while conflating the diverse, multifaceted threats coming from abroad. Former CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid has also said that “even adding the word Islamic” is counterproductive to keeping extremism “from becoming mainstream.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
55 Responses to “Muslim Organizations Call On McCain To Drop ‘Islamic’ Terrorist Label”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Does this mean McCain is OK with Moderate Islamic Extremism?
April 21st, 2008 at 12:24 pmMc100yearwar’s new catchword:
April 21st, 2008 at 12:27 pmIslamo-CommieLibFascistSocialPinkoDem-orrists
Good luck with that request. It’s the fear and smear talkin express, and it ain’t gonna change.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:27 pmIt’s the war of radical Christian extremists vs. radical islamic extremists. It’s hard to tell them apart.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:32 pm“But the reality is, the hateful ideology which underpins bin Ladenism is properly described as radical Islamic extremism. Senator McCain refers to it that way because that is what it is.”
Good
Now , so will I :
McStupid is part of the hypocritical , pandering , exclusive all-white-only , wrinkled old phony religious man’s , majority repressed homosexual club , the GOP………….
April 21st, 2008 at 12:33 pmThey might as well be asking him to stop talking about what a hero he was because he was a POW for 5 years. He’s a 2 trick pony with nothing else to show for himself.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:34 pmThat’s all he’s got, tax cuts for the rich-2%, fear for as many of the losers who will buy it. How about a war on STUPIDITY.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:35 pmbut but but, John-Boy thinks he’s a hero and that we believe his fear-mongering bullshit.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:35 pmIt isn’t Islamic fundamentalists that have brought this country to its knees. It’s Christian fundamentalists that have done that.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:36 pmBut but but how do we motivate people to give up their civil liberties for a protracted War On An Abstract Concept if we can’t stereotype and dehumanize Muslims?
April 21st, 2008 at 12:37 pmChristian extremists need to shut up and go pray quietly someplace where I don’t have to look at them.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:37 pmThey won’t allow you to take this away from him, it’s all that he is running on.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:37 pmI think its time to stereotype and dehumanize Christians just to see how they like it.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pmShayne Says:
——————————————————————————–
It isn’t Islamic fundamentalists that have brought this country to its knees. It’s Christian fundamentalists that have done that.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:36 pm
No
It’s those who pander to them that have ………….
April 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pmjb Says:
——————————————————————————–
I think its time to stereotype and dehumanize Christians just to see how they like it.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
They would probably enjoy it ………..
April 21st, 2008 at 12:40 pmMcNumbNuts likes to conflate and fabricate. He is almost RayGun-esque. RayGun was called “The Great Communicator”; McNumbNuts should be called “The Great Conflabricator”.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:40 pmjb Says:
I think its time to stereotype and dehumanize Christians just to see how they like it.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
_____
And validate their bullshit “teh progressives are anti-Christian” claim? No thanks. We just need to show people that there’s a difference between multimillionaire Evangelical hypocrites who are buying Lear jets with their parishoners’ “first fruits,” and true Christians who work for social justice and the needs of the poor.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:44 pmWhile I think it is not only wrong, but ignorant, to label every follower of a religion as an extremist and/or terrorist, you cannot shake the fact that Islam is, at its core, a religion that can easily promote violence. The Qur’an is filled to the brim with violent imagery and talk of putting infidels “to the sword.” It’s just as disgusting as the Christian Bible. These religions base their beliefs on their respective books, which promote violence, sexism and intolerance. While you can find contradictory verses and studies to offset violent imagery, you cannot deny that this violent imagery / wording exists. The mere fact that it exists is wrong.
It is very easy for a confused young man or woman to find justification in their religious for acts of violence (which is done with Islam and was done for centuries with Christianity). We should not be scared to criticize religion. Maybe we should start trying to fix things at the source.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:44 pmHey, I’m all for it let’s label ‘em for what they are. This, of course, includes Radical Christian fundamentalist Terrorists. Like those that think we should start a war w/Iran to start the end-o-times, or advocate killin’ Dr.s that practice medicine that they don’t approve of.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:47 pmAnyone else notice that he can remember to as the “ic” to Islamic, but not to Democratic?
April 21st, 2008 at 12:48 pmOops @ #20 - add the “ic”
April 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
jb Says:
I think its time to stereotype and dehumanize Christians just to see how they like it.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pm
_____
And validate their bullshit “teh progressives are anti-Christian” claim? No thanks. We just need to show people that there’s a difference between multimillionaire Evangelical hypocrites who are buying Lear jets with their parishoners’ “first fruits,” and true Christians who work for social justice and the needs of the poor.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Ummm , no , “we” don’t.
Keep your religion to yourself ; it’s supposed to be personal , not some type of “Badge of Courage” that needs to be shown off in any way.
All religion needs to be removed from the public (government) forum , as was originally planned ; that it continues to be prevelant is one of the biggest stumbling blocks and irrelevancies that are focused upon that unnecessarily changes outcomes in elections.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pmrmcs Says:
These religions base their beliefs on their respective books, which promote violence, sexism and intolerance. While you can find contradictory verses and studies to offset violent imagery, you cannot deny that this violent imagery / wording exists. The mere fact that it exists is wrong.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Through 21st Century lenses, yes. But these books need to be looked at as part of their historical context. Let’s face it — the 600s and the 0s and the 1000 BCEs were some pretty bloody centuries in human history. War and bloodshed are part of all these holy books because war and bloodshed is an integral part of human existence. While there is violence and blood in the texts, at their most fundamental level they are a prescription for an end to violence.
We shouldn’t try to change these texts because we don’t like to be reminded of this bloody past. It is the job of religious scholars in all faiths, Abrahamic or other, to update the interpretations of these texts and put it into our current context. This is a reform that cannot happen from outside a faith, however. It is up to Jews to push for peace from Jewish leaders, and Christians to push for peace from Christian leaders, and Muslims to push for peace from Muslim leaders.
History has shown that bad things happen when people of one faith try to tell people of another faith how to think.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:53 pmWhat in the hell is McCain doing in that picture???
April 21st, 2008 at 12:56 pmDRxJ Says:
——————————————————————————–
What in the hell is McCain doing in that picture???
April 21st, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Farting
April 21st, 2008 at 1:00 pmMCMetal Says:
All religion needs to be removed from the public (government) forum , as was originally planned ; that it continues to be prevelant is one of the biggest stumbling blocks and irrelevancies that are focused upon that unnecessarily changes outcomes in elections.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm
_____
I think this would be about as futile as removing race or gender from the public forum. While I agree that church and state should be separate, they don’t have to act as if the other doesn’t exist.
There are two definitions of secularism. One is the complete removal of all religion from the public sphere. The second is a recognition of all religions by the government, with favoritism towards none. Personally, I think the latter will be more beneficial to society.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:01 pmHey, McCain is only acting on the wishes of top multinational socialists. What do you expect? His every misstatement, ie the Iran-Iraq-bin Laden confusion is nothing more than the Muslim homogenization strategy of Neo Con conspirators like Podhoretz, Kristol, Rove and their comrades at FOX, the New York Times, and the Likud. So cut ‘em some slack.
Marxist-Straussians have created a boogie man template of a size and shape that fits all Arabs uniformly. So, whats the problem? That’s what any totalitarian movement does. It first creates a uniform, collective term, like Islamofascist, so it can selectively or globally prosecute whenever the need arises. Justification for murder begins through definition.
Got a Palestinian, Syrian, Iraqi, or Iranian problem? No problem! They’re all Islamofascists! Fire away.
Of course, the strategy worked great for Hitler’s cleansing op, the Final Solution. So why not apply the same strategy? Besides, a huge chunk of uninformed Americans see no evil at all in any public condemnation, prosecution, or execution of a turban-wearing person, because much of our own media support it. Hello, 1939 Germany!
http://www.light-to-dark.com/2008_A.D..html
April 21st, 2008 at 1:02 pm“…that is, the central battleground is Iraq in this struggle against radical Islamic extremism.”
The 2008 election is the central battleground in this struggle against radical Republican extremism.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:03 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal Says:
All religion needs to be removed from the public (government) forum , as was originally planned ; that it continues to be prevelant is one of the biggest stumbling blocks and irrelevancies that are focused upon that unnecessarily changes outcomes in elections.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm
_____
I think this would be about as futile as removing race or gender from the public forum. While I agree that church and state should be separate, they don’t have to act as if the other doesn’t exist.
There are two definitions of secularism. One is the complete removal of all religion from the public sphere. The second is a recognition of all religions by the government, with favoritism towards none. Personally, I think the latter will be more beneficial to society.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Ummm , no
Politicians have shown they are not to be trusted ; and to believe that no favoritism will be shown towards any religion is the height of naivete.
Those in power have shown they are predisposed to favoring what they believe , especially this current crew of crappy GOP politicos.
They have foisted Assholito and John Mr Rodgers on us in the Supreme Court , which is a folly that will destroy precedent ; and all because of “Christianity”.
“Public sphere” is the entire outside world ; I’m not suggesting churches be burned down and no more be built.
The US government should simply have no active involvement in anything that deals with religion or anything religious ; especially a prayer before each opening session of the House and Senate.
Do they bring in an Imam and/or a Jewish minister for each opening prayer ?
Stop off at a church prior to the House/Senate opening arguments/business………..
April 21st, 2008 at 1:08 pmLooking at religious texts in their “historic context” is exactly what extremists are doing to justify committing suicide with mechanisms designed to take as many innocent people with them.
I know it is futile and will never change, because there will always be violent and extreme people.
If the majority of the world realized that ancient texts and supersitions weren’t worth dying and killing for, then we would have one less thing to be scared of.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:09 pmIf you take away McCain’s “fear factor”, he has nothing left. I wonder how he feels about the people in the rest of the world painting all of America with the same broad brush. Because if they do that, then we are all “terrorists” to the rest of the world when in actuality it is only our current government that is seen as a “terrorist organization” by the rest of the world, and rightly so.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:10 pmWhenever McCain frequently oversimplifies you have to worry. Everyone of his favorite talking points John does this to. The economy and his economic package, he has experts that say he is right, so he thinks he’s right. (We know his whole economic package was a waste of paper and a perfectly good tree).
His warmongering railing against Extremists and Terrorists.
McCain refers to it that way because “that is what it is.” (We are talking about a man who can’t remember the difference between the Sunnis and Shiites)
He is in a utter state of confusion on any given day. He over simplifies everything because, by the time he gets to end of his point, he has forgotten what point he was trying to make.
OMG and to think there are people who want to vote for this man.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:10 pmReligion is a private matter. Don’t try and force your views on me. In this country one has the freedom to be as stupid as you want as long as you DON’T INTERFERE WITH THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. Modern christianity seems to be little more than a club to join and do business with other “cool” members.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:18 pmDRxJ Says:
What in the hell is McCain doing in that picture???
“Someone shut Condi up. I was supposed to be the one to call that sadist guy a coward”.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:23 pm1. Kruschev used a shoe, John. If you’re going to do the tantrum routine, you’ve got a few more style points to earn.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:41 pm2. John, did you lose your flag pin in Viet Nam?
3. John, would your radical Christian extremist “friends” welcome with chocolates and flowers a large military base of an Islamic country in, say, Arizona or anywhere in the Bible Belt?
4. John, are you still trying to win the Viet Nam War?
5. John, if war is your only tool, then death is your only product. (You can quote me on that one!)
Former President Carter said Monday that Hamas - the Islamic militant group that has called for the destruction of Israel - is prepared to accept the right of the Jewish state to “live as a neighbor next door in peace.”But Carter warned that there would not be peace if Israel and the U.S. continue to shut out Hamas and its main backer, Syria.
Should the U.S. and Israel include Hamas in the peace process?
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=2192
.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:41 pmDRxJ Says:
What in the hell is McCain doing in that picture???
He is wishing everyone a happy and joyful New Year.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:48 pmHmm, folks living in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere want to live without “benefit” of thousands of armed English-speaking foreign occupiers in their midst… Funny, we Americans felt the same way back in 1776 when we started to revolt against thousands of armed English-speaking foreign occupiers. But, times seem to have changed, now, in the 21st century, imperialism and colonialism is OK (with the imperialists and colonists)…
April 21st, 2008 at 2:00 pmWell, last I checked it wasn’t ‘Christian Extremists’ that were involved in these and other attacks. When Christians or Jews or Buddists start strapping bombs to themselves or driving in vehicles that are moving bombs, then I think we can all agree that ‘Religious Extremist’ is a more accurate term. Since that’s not the case, call a duck a duck and a goose a goose.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:00 pmDRxJ Says:
What in the hell is McCain doing in that picture???
How about his Nikita Kruschev impersonation?
April 21st, 2008 at 2:02 pmI remember in the 1960s when the KKK and other anti-civil rights groups burned crosses, bombed churches, and lynched people — citing biblical justifications for their crusades against Jews, blacks, and Catholics. In the 70’s (and ever since), extremist individuals and groups have bombed abortion clinics — again, citing biblical justification for doing so. These people do call themselves Christians.
As a Christian, I have the following comments:
1) I have never heard any presidential candidate, elected official, or mainstream media outlet refer to these criminals as “Christian extremists”.
2) I do not recognize anyone who commits such un-Christianlike behavior to be a Christian.
3) If anyone conflated Christianity with these violent acts by referring to the perpetrators as Christian extremists, I would be very offended (as would most Christians). Most Christians are decent people just trying to live the way God wants them to and don’t deserve to be conflated with bombers and terrorists.
So if the term “Christian extremist” to describe a criminal who claims his criminal act is justified as part of his religion is beyond the pale for everyone, why is “Muslim extremist” or “Islamic extremist” acceptable?
I can understand why ISNA wants these criminals to be treated as criminals without tarring the billion-plus Muslims of the world with the same brush. Unfortunately, McCain sees that the only way Bush got re-elected in 2004 was by trotting out wedge issues about gays and flag-burning, and by ramping up the fear against scary brown people. He thinks that’s going to play again.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:28 pmDo muslims consider the US a terrorist organization?
I guess it’s all about how you think about things, John McSame.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:32 pmmissmolly, as usual, nails it.
April 21st, 2008 at 3:18 pmcrooksNliars Says:
Well, last I checked it wasn’t ‘Christian Extremists’ that were involved in these and other attacks. When Christians or Jews or Buddists start strapping bombs to themselves or driving in vehicles that are moving bombs, then I think we can all agree that ‘Religious Extremist’ is a more accurate term. Since that’s not the case, call a duck a duck and a goose a goose.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Christian and Jewish extremists don’t need to strap bombs to themselves or drive car bombs into buildings in order to terrorize populations. They have some very well-funded armed forces who can do this for them.
April 21st, 2008 at 3:29 pmMcCain and his campaign are attempting to inflate the number of potential enemy forces arrayed against the United States, especially in Iraq. McCain needs to be pinned down in particular through the following type of quetioning:
1. You claim that this is a global War of Terror. Is this against all terrorists in the world regardless of religion? He will look like a fool if he says yes. If he says no, then ask him to define who those terrorists are.
2. Do you believe that this is a war against Islamic terrorists only? Which organizations associated with Islamic terrorism and which countries do you include in the list of enemies against whom we are at war? (Further narrow it so that we exclude Syria, Iran, the Sudan situation. Are we at war with Hamas?)
3. Are we at war with Pakistan? If not, then why have we not attacked AQ there?
4. Is the United States saying that any Shiite or Sunni group opposing the US occupation is a terrorist organization seeking to attack the United States and destroy it as a Nation? (Sadr as an example) By the time that we eliminate those factions fighting for control of Iraq, is it not true that less than 5% of the fighting forces are AQ? Does that not account for about 1000 personnel?
5. Are you stating that we are in a state of war with Iran? Are you stating that Iran is seeking to destroy the United States of America and its way of life?
April 21st, 2008 at 3:45 pmBasil II Says:
hussein toasterhead,
Care to discuss the ISNA’s Wahhabi ties?
April 21st, 2008 at 3:33 pm
_____
No, Trajan. I’d rather stick to the thread topic, not some six degrees of separation bullshit.
April 21st, 2008 at 3:53 pmC’mon you guys. We can hold ourselves to better standards than that. The Republicans are guilty of all sorts of horrible affronts, but calling Middle East based terrorists “Islamic” is not one of them.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:07 pmBasil II Says:
Traitorhead,
I see you’re justifying Terror attacks again!
April 21st, 2008 at 4:02 pm
No you don’t, because I’m not justifying terror attacks. But that’s not stopped you from claiming falsely that I do.
Which is fine by me. When fascists like you hate me, it means I’m doing something right.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:40 pmBasil II Says
April 21st, 2008 at 5:07 pm
hussein toasterhead,
Ypu’re a traitor, what me post here your justifications for 9/11. You also support Hamas! You are the Fascist and you support Islamic Fascists. You are a traitor of the worset kind and you have been exposed!
Coward!
____________________________________________
Geez, toasterhead — whatever you’ve said or done has caused this guy to turn into a raving loony. Who knew that simple logic would pack such a punch?
One more dose and he will probably implode completely.
April 21st, 2008 at 5:22 pmThe people who attacked us on 9/11 ARE Islamic extremists/terrorists. Their terror is in the name of (distorted) Islam. It’s not incorrect to refer to al Qaeda as an Islamic terror group.
But it’s impotant not to conflate Islam itself with Islamic terrorists.
And it’s important not to conflate Islamic terrorists with the people we are fighting in Iraq. Iraq’s problems are caused by numerous groups fighting for control of Iraq, the smallest of which is “al Qaeda in Iraq.” These diverse and disparate groups are all IRAQIS (they are also Muslim, but they are fighting in the name of control of Iraq, not in the name of a distorted view of Islam).
But the existence of Islamic extermists/terrorists is real and it’s silly to pretend otherwise.
April 21st, 2008 at 5:32 pmBasil II Says
April 21st, 2008 at 5:27 pm
misshusseinmolly,
Would you like to discuss ISNA’s wahhabi ties? I thought Progressives were against religious fanatics? Why are allying with some now?
____________________________________________
No thanks — I’m just getting ready to head out the door. I might be tempted to engage in some dialog if I believed it would be an intelligent exchange. However, your ONE bit of “proof” that ISNA is an extremist Wahhabist organization comes from a very biased wingnut site — hardly convincing.
I will throw out a couple of things before I head out. One — progressives don’t have anything against religion. We don’t even really have anything against religious fanaticism. Where we get a bit testy is when religious fanatics attempt to tell everyone else how to run their lives — and this goes for fanatic Muslims, fanatic Jews, and fanatic Christians.
Two — just because we agree with ISNA that conflating “Islam” and “terrorists” merely catapults propaganda at the expense of decent people who don’t deserve it doesn’t mean that we embrace everything every member of ISNA believes in.
Three — ISNA is a group made up of all Muslims, which can be a rather diverse group. Yes, this diversity includes some Wahhabists, but they have hardly “taken over” the group, and your claim that Wahhabists have taken control of 80% of the mosques in this country is pure fiction.
Four — Wahhabism is a very strict orthodox interpretation of Muslim law, which has more to do with the living of daily life than terrorism. Some terrorists are Wahhabists (and some are not) — but not all Wahhabists are terrorists.
And five — since you have taken us on this Kevin Bacon tour through these degrees of separation (Islam = ISNA = Wahhabism = terrorism = Saudi Arabia), why are you not advocating we should be bombing Saudi Arabia? Or haven’t your GOP talking heads issued that talking point yet?
OK — gotta go. Later, everyone.
April 21st, 2008 at 5:48 pmyou just keep digging yourself into a whole…??
No way, he didn’t dig even a half.
Moron.
April 21st, 2008 at 6:14 pmBasil makes a great seasoning. Argument or point? Not so much.
April 21st, 2008 at 6:15 pmThere were no religious extremists in Iraq under Saddam,before we started this war which we call ‘War On Terror’, as a result of this war Iraq became divided to many religious factions, inviting outside fighters to fight Americans in Iraq.
April 21st, 2008 at 8:30 pmThere was no Hizbulla in Lebanon until Israel occupied southern Lebanon for 20 years…resulted in creation of Hizbulla.
There was no Hmmas before Israel occupied West Bank and Gaza and refused to leave based on UN resolutions.
Now we say we cannot leave Iraq until we win against these Islamic radicals.
But what did we accomplish,by toppling Saddam
Basil II Says:
hussein toasterhead,
Ypu’re a traitor, what me post here your justifications for 9/11. You also support Hamas! You are the Fascist and you support Islamic Fascists. You are a traitor of the worset kind and you have been exposed!
Coward!
April 21st, 2008 at 5:07 pm Add Karma Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
Hey, when did McCain start posting in here under a pseudonym?
April 21st, 2008 at 11:36 pm