April 8, 2013 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations has succeeded [we imagine they didn't have to push too hard given AP's obviously anti-American, left-wing bias] in rolling the Associated Press [AP] into providing "guidance" for its dronish journos that hereafter, the word Islamist must be stricken from any copy.
For those not intimately familiar with CAIR, a brief bio:
CAIR is a radical Muslim pressure group intent upon incrementally forcing Shari'a compliance on the West. The organization's associations are so noxious that it was named as an unindicted co-conspirator and/or joint venturer [see original document at, U.S. Dist. Court Document U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation For Relief and Development ] in the nation's most extensive prosecution of domestic funding of the terrorist group Hamas, U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation.
In that proceeding, all of the defendants were found guilty on a total of 108 charges.
One of those convicted was Ghassan Elashi:
"Ghassan Elashi was a founder and Chairman of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). He was also a member of the founding Board of Directors of the Texas branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)..." [source, Ghassan Elashi, co-founder of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development]
At the time of his HLF conviction, Elashi was already serving a long prison sentence, convicted in U.S. vs. InfoCom, another Hamas related terror case.
In post prosecution Federal Court proceedings following HLF, CAIR was specifically linked/associated with Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group created by Egypt's terrorist Muslim Brotherhood [which now controls the Egyptian state government under longtime MP kingpin, president Mohamed Morsi] to kill Israelis and destroy the Jewish state.
"The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, NAIT, with NAIT, the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas," U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis said in the July 1, 2009, ruling" [source, The Investigative Project, Federal Dist. Court filing]
The Cliff's Notes version of the above is simple, CAIR is engaged in a furious jihad against Western values hoping eventually to Islamize the U.S., i.e., the group is engaged in the "soft-jihad," the velvet glove inside which is lodged the steel fist of a cruel, take-no-prisoners resurgent Islamic caliphate...a dynastic, global minded, theocratic Muslim governing structure headed by a caliph, Arabic for chief of state, which will presumably rule over the Islamic world...the Ummah.
A key component of CAIR's fifth column activities centers on pressuring the media to refrain from calling Muslim terrorists...well...Muslim terrorists, and in this venture the group has been quite successful. The federal government has already banned the use of nearly all of the descriptors by which this enemy is defined and members of CAIR are routinely seen in the WH of Barack Obama.
"According to the Jewish Press, President Obama's aides have held numerous closed-door meetings with a jihad-linked lobbying group, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR is widely known to support terrorism and terrorists organizations such as Hamas and is also considered the U.S. arm of the radical Muslim Brotherhood..." [source, Obama administration official admits meetings]
It's a classic military principle that you can't defeat an enemy which can neither be named nor described.
Battlefield dialogue, "Who are we fighting Sarge? Well son, I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you..."
Imagine waking up the day after the 1941 sneak attack on Pearl Harbor to find the media of the time failing to even mention that the attackers were Japanese, instead referring to them simply as renegades in airplane with bombs.
In such a scenario, against who or what entity would a counterattack be carried out?
Another classic principle, this one primarily political, is that he who controls the language controls the argument. So it is understandable that AP's announcement was found praiseworthy by CAIR.
In its presser, the group greeted the news with jubilation, "The nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization today said the decision by The Associated Press (AP) to revise its Stylebook reference to the term "Islamist" is a "step in the right direction... "Unfortunately, the term 'Islamist' has become shorthand for 'Muslims we don't like.' It is currently used in an almost exclusively pejorative context and is often coupled with the term 'extremist,' giving it an even more negative slant." [source, CAIR website]
Thus Muslim terrorists become defined as people we don't like, with no identifying characteristics provided...for all we know it could be your in-laws.
Underlying all of the above is the ethical rot called multiculturalism which prevents one from making judgments regarding the comparative - sometimes ethical/moral - worth of various societies. In this theory, well developed by leftist intellectuals, all cultures are of equal value and merit.
In the resultant topsy-turvy world, there is no moral difference between a machete wielding Rwandan butcher, a suicide bomber blowing up a busload of innocents in Haifa, Israel, and the average Joe on the street trying to get to work.
The presumption here is that it is inherently unfair and quite possibly racist to judge other societies according to our system of values.
Under such insane logic - which now largely governs the behavior of the America's political elite, legacy media and the entities most responsible for changing societal mores, education, the law, the arts and entertainment industry and the government - we have sought to blind ourselves.
So yes, CAIR did win one here, but note its language, this thuggish muzzling/censoring of the press which these jihadis forced is merely, "a step in the right direction."
How can this only be a step since it seems a total victory?
The answer is easy if one analyzes Islamism in terms of it being an ideology because it has many similarities with totalitarian leftism. Among members of the left it is almost axiomatic that that "the issue is never the issue, the issue is always the revolution," so compromise is impossible, the bar will always being raised.
Thus there can be no real negotiation, no political give-and-take - and above all no compromise - with the totalitarian Islamist. To paraphrase a popular saying during the American leftist student rebellion most active in the late sixties through the mid 70s, "they want it all...and they want it now."
Until this is understood and internalized, the global Islamic jihad will continue to gain strength.
We are engaged in what is primarily a war of ideas, and .lacking even the capability of adequately describing our common enemy we will continue to remain inadequately defended - having ceded the intellectual battlefield to those whose intense cultural/theological/ideological confidence presumes eventual and total victory.