http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021928.php
July 23, 2008 Intel bill passes with Hoekstra amendment to ban funding to promote gov't guidance on "jihad"-free lexicon Some good news, in an update on this story <http://jihadwatch.org/archives/020935.php> . "Michigan rep fights terrorism words ban," from UPI <http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/07/23/Michigan_rep_fights_terrorism_words_ ban/UPI-48481216831073/> , July 23: HOLLAND, Mich., July 23 (UPI) -- The intelligence bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives includes a ban on a new policy about which words officials should use to describe terrorists. The new policy, contained in guidelines issued by the National Counter-Terrorism Center and the departments of State and Homeland Security), warns that that using terms like "Jihadi" or "Islamic terrorist," might alienate moderate Muslims and inadvertently build support for terrorists. But an amendment to the 2009 Intelligence Authorization Act passed last week bans the use of any government money to promote the guidance in U.S. intelligence agencies. The amendment, authored by U.S. Rep. Peter Hoekstra, [R]-Mich., was approved by a 249-180 vote. Fellow Republican Michigan Reps. Joe Knollenberg and Thaddeus McCotter supported the amendment, The Detroit News reported Wednesday, and 55 Democrats joined them, despite the opposition of the party leadership. "I am sympathetic to the argument that if used inappropriately, the words can be counterproductive but I find that the people who are criticizing this are very short on alternatives," Hoekstra said. "So how do they want us to describe al-Qaida and what they are involved with?" Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations-Michigan said there were alternatives. "CAIR supports using terminology such as 'criminals,' 'murderers' or 'terrorists' that help isolate extremists and remove the false cloak of religiosity they use to justify their barbaric actions," he told the newspaper. More importantly for CAIR, limiting the terminology in that manner disconnects actions from ideology so no one starts asking questions, particularly about notions like the "false cloak of religiosity." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
