Conservatives Lash Out At Administration Guidelines On Terrorism Language: It’s ‘McCarthyism In Reverse’
Conservatives Lash Out At Administration Guidelines On Terrorism Language: It’s ‘McCarthyism In Reverse’
UPI’s Shaun Waterman reports today that congressional conservatives are riled up over new government guidelines shunning the use of terms like “jihadist” and “Islamo-fascism” to describe terrorists. On Friday, every Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence voted for a failed amendment to ban “the use of federal cash to produce documents like the terminology guidelines.”
Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI), who authored the amendment, attacked the guidelines as “McCarthyism in reverse“:
Mr. Hoekstra called it “sad that as we approach the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, we are still debating how to define our enemy.”
His amendment aimed to end what he called “McCarthyism in reverse” and “speech codes that encumber accurately describing the radical jihadist terrorists that attacked America.”
Hoekstra is missing the point when he lashes out at the guidelines as part of a debate over “how to define our enemy.” Even if terms like “jihad” are used accurately, the report concludes that “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.”
“A senior administration official” who spoke to UPI disagreed with the House GOP’s position, claiming “that President Bush had been ‘absolutely at the forefront’ of promoting and using the kind of language the guidelines recommend.” In order to support this claim, Waterman cited research by Duke University’s David Schanzer:
A search of the president’s speeches and other public comments on the White House Web site conducted by David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security at Duke University in North Carolina, found that Mr. Bush — who has repeatedly spoken about America’s enemies — has used the term “Islamic terrorist” only once since the beginning of 2007.
Though President Bush appears to have made some effort, “Islamic terrorist” is not the only term whose use the guidelines caution against. As ThinkProgress has noted, President Bush referred to terrorists as “jihadists,” which is also seen as problematic by his administration, as recently as April 29.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Nothing important to do Hoekstra?
May 12th, 2008 at 8:56 pmFriggin nuts, I tell you. Bet Hoekstra has an extra supply of Depends in his office.
take care tony and guidedogLido
What part of Michigan is responsible for this piece of shite? Please bow your head in shame and elect someone else, or give up your US citizenship because you are not patriotic Americans.
May 12th, 2008 at 8:57 pmAnd thus, the snake continues to eat its own tail.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:01 pmWhat difference does it make as to what it is called! A rose is a rose is a rose and by any other name would smell like a Ho house if the bushco is involved. Just call the ass holes “dead!”
May 12th, 2008 at 9:09 pmMr. Hoekstra called it “sad that as we approach the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, we are still debating how to define our enemy.”
— As Pogo famously said, “we have met the enemy and he is us.”
May 12th, 2008 at 9:09 pmLet’s just remember the source. UPI is not the same as when Helen Thomas was the star. They long ago sold out to the Moonies along with the Washington Times. Real journalists no longer put this outlet on their resumes.
As far as the people who go to them with their news stories, well they share the same total lack of credibility and should be branded as such.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:24 pmFor the Neo-Conservatives there are only two distinct poles – Good and Evil. You are either with us or against us. These morons know not of logic nor legal process. Arguing with them is the same as arguing with your cat. They will scratch, they will hiss, and even on their best days they still, for reasons unbeknown to the rest of us, pee on your carpet. Hoekstra et al are racist thugs. They will not understand a document as important at the one reported by the A.P. What this document has said is that for years, words like Jihadists, Islamic Terrorism, Islamic Extremism etc have done nothing but castigate Muslim men and women. Now, the Bushy’s are aware that their gameplan is being foiled and they do not like it one bit.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:29 pmMr. Hoekstra called it “sad that as we approach the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, we are still debating how to define our enemy.”
We noticed that, too, Hoekstra. Maybe it’s because the enemy changes all the time. Now, we are even helping support some of the very people who were trying to kill us a few short years ago. If you have an idea who the enemy is, could you tell the president, please?
May 12th, 2008 at 9:34 pmOn an episode of M.A.S.H. tonight Hawkeye said, “There needs to be a law against war with a country where you don’t speak the language”.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:40 pmThe funny thing is that the extremists are not followers of Islam.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:42 pmDon’t blame Islam of 9/11.
Osama is not a follower of Islam.
He has become a radical.
Just like Hagee and Paisly.
UPI is now owned by Sun Myung Moon (see Washington Times). Not my idea of a reputable news service. Now, I don’t know, but did Hoekstra have any connection to Moon’s coronation in a federal building in 2007? Seems like these idiots are a we bit confused about who we are fighting. They are so paranoid and so uninformed thanks to UPI and the Washington Times, that they just think everybody in the world is the enemy.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:43 pmReally Dumb Question: Whether I agree with the terms or not, what do I have to gain by throwing around terms that I know nothing about and knowing that the terms are going to fuel the flames of hatred ?
Kind of like the ?Die Hard? movie where the character was forced to walk in Harlem, naked except for a sandwich sign, with the words, “I hate N—s.”
May 12th, 2008 at 10:02 pmIs that all there is to a Republican??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRWcPoxmZos
May 12th, 2008 at 11:09 pmCompletely OT but couldn’t resist.
What will Rev Hagee blame the Chinese earthquake on:
a. They are soulless, godless commies
b. They eat their gay babies
c. They aren’t going to imprison and execute the gay athletes at the upcoming Olymics.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:40 pmBelieve me when I say I hear that argument A LOT in Michigan.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:40 pmHey Hokey! Read Pogo.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pmInteresting how these conservatives do not have any problem with McCarthyism; only with “reverse McCarthysim”, ie when they are (or think they are) on the receiving end.
And I am still trying to understand how the use of accurate & descriptive terms amounts to political prosecution in Mr. Hoekstra’s paranoid little brain.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:44 pmRUCerious Says:
Completely OT but couldn’t resist.
What will Rev Hagee blame the Chinese earthquake on:
—–
May 12th, 2008 at 11:52 pmI assume there is significant scrutiny of this radical cleric at this point?
Hoekstra provides more proof, if any were needed, that Republicans don’t care about lessenng the threat of terrorism.
In fact, it’s pretty clear that their aim is to provoke more terrorism, because they found that, for a while, terrorism works for them. They can keep America scared and unwilling to stand up against their authoritarian bullsh**.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:01 amnumfar Says:
Believe me when I say I hear that argument A LOT in Michigan.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Doesn’t Michigan have a huge Arab population? How did this meathead get elected?
May 13th, 2008 at 12:20 amThe Republican Party is the party of hate. It has become the Nazi Party, as everyone can see.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:43 amGlamorization of war makes it enticing, keeping these jacka$$es in office. If these GOP nut-jobs are scatter-brained over terminology useage in prior-approved guidelines, they’re pulling at threads and hoping something starts unraveling. Nothing stirs these a-holes’ juices like labeling a group out of fear and pure hate. And you can never educate a dug-in conservative that not all Muslims/Arabs want to kill us. They either all own AK-47’s and rocket launchers and beat their wives for showing too much cheekbone or they’re techno wizards who can turn a coffee can into a functioning WMD. They’ll storm the borders if Glenn Beck & Co. can’t lay down more of the same fence that’s helped 12 million-plus immigrants, illegal or otherwise, cross into our nation. We’re dealing with the same types of minds who called for charges in World War I after the first four advances got mowed down and the commanders said that the fifth either jumps out of the bunker, goes over the top and advances or gets shot if they don’t…whatever, it was just a waste of mind and men. And the same commanders would just be able to do this all again, just like the GOP.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:46 amOnly a Republican could be stupid enough to think “anti-McCarthyism” is something to be avoided.
Wikipedia has this to say: “Since the time of McCarthy, the word “McCarthyism” has entered American speech as a general term for a variety of distasteful practices.”
Against something distasteful? That would be anti-Republican!
May 13th, 2008 at 2:32 amI remember when Bush described our elusive “enemy” as “Islamofascists” or the verbally twisted “rejectionists” which is just too hard to say, especially for him. At one point our enemy was “ordinary Iraqis”. I remember that one very clearly because my jaw actually dropped.
There have been a hundred words so far for whoever it is that our enemy is this week. We would like a real definition one of these days, not these vague all-encompassing phrases. We need less terminology guides and more honesty from these losers.
Who is our enemy?
May 13th, 2008 at 7:00 amWait, so if McCarthyism in reverse is bad, is he saying that McCarthyism is good? That is the logical conclusion, but of course I’m forgetting that logic is far from the grasp of someone who is proud to be Republican.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:02 amWhat Hoekstra isn’t saying, of course, is that it fits their agenda if these terrorist criminals ARE glamorized and glorified. As long as there is a “war” on, the neocons believe they have a free pass to erode our freedoms, invade our privacy, and build dictatorial power for themselves. And the only way we can stay “at war” is if we keep the enemy viable.
The other element of the plan is to keep the American populace in a state of fear, and therefore easily controlled. This means conflating this relatively piddling number of violent crackpots with all 1.5 billion Muslims of the world. They HAVE to fan the flames of anti-Muslim bigotry; it’s the keystone of their agenda.
Hoekstra’s protests merely indicate that the neocons have no intention of reducing the terrorist threat — in fact, it serves their purpose to keep it alive as much as possible.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:20 amDoesn’t this charade bore you?
May 13th, 2008 at 9:08 amWhere the hell are the Democrats?
Why aren’t any Democrats “lashing out?”
Pelosi & Reid are the Silent Partners of the Cons. Both are cowards and have let SO MANY opportunities go by. Both MUST be replaced it we are to make ANY progress at all.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:12 amIt’s ironic that the very first time the administration does something regarding fighting terrorism that seems to make sense, the Republicans are rabidly against it. I think this just points out that the right wing message machine needs to have short and exotic sounding labels to create the boogie-man branding they need for their fear mongering. I mean, without a label that their followers don’t undertand, how can they define the ‘other’ that we have to fear and hate and blow up?
May 13th, 2008 at 12:31 pmMr. Hoekstra: get a haircut!
May 13th, 2008 at 1:07 pmNo one has religious authority.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:02 pmArguing with them is the same as arguing with your cat. They will scratch, they will hiss, and even on their best days they still, for reasonssohbet unbeknown to the rest of us, pee on your carpet. Hoekstra et al are racist thugs. They will not understand a document as important at the one reported Bedava mp3 indirby the A.P. What this document has said is that for years, words like Jihadists, Islamic Terrorism, Islamic Extremism etccet have done nothing but castigate Muslim men and women.
April 13th, 2009 at 1:05 am