interesting development in the U.S. House of Representatives

United States
July 23, 2008 3:02pm CST
Last week, there was an interesting development in the U.S. House of Representatives that will give Americans a clear view as to exactly where their individual representatives stand on the war of ideas in fighting Jihad. Per my previous article on this subject, on May 8, 2008, Congressman Peter Hoekstra attempted to add an amendment on the "terror lexicon" to a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence bill on 2009 intelligence funding (House Resolution 5959). Hoekstra's amendment condemned efforts by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC), and the State Department to recommend a "terror lexicon" that prohibits use of words such as "Jihad," "jihadist," "Islamist," "mujahadeen," "caliphate," etc. In this amendment, Congressman Hoekstra called for the House of Representatives to prohibit the use of intelligence funding in support of such "terror lexicon" efforts. The House Intelligence Committee voted against this amendment, and over 900 people signed a petition condemning the actions of the House Intelligence Committee that was sent to members who voted against the amendment. But on July 16, 2008, H.R. 5959 was presented to the full House of Representatives for debate and adoption, including Congressman Hoekstra's amendment to bar the use of intelligence funding for such "terror lexicon" measures. This time the amendment passed by the margin of 249-180 (with 10 abstentions). The amendment was incorporated in H.R. 5959 as follows: "None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be used to prohibit or discourage the use of the words or phrases 'jihadist', 'jihad', 'Islamo-fascism', 'caliphate', 'Islamist', or 'Islamic terrorist' by or within the intelligence community or the Federal Government." Per my congressional sources, the House of Representatives passed (via voice vote) House Resolution 5959 "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009," including the amendment on the issue of the "terror lexicon" from Congressman Peter Hoekstra. Efforts to send H.R. 5959 back to the House Intelligence Committee (by a motion to recommit with instructions) failed, so now H.R. 5959 represents the House's resolution on 2009 intelligence funding. Most importantly, Americans can see how their individual representatives in the House voted (Roll Call 500) on this issue, demonstrating where their individual congressional representatives stand on the war of ideas in fighting Jihad. During the discussion on this House Amendment 4 to H.R. 5959 (aka "Hoekstra of Michigan Amendment No. 2"), on the "terror lexicon" efforts by DHS, NCTC, and the State Department, Congressman Hoekstra stated, per the Congressional Record: "Al Qaeda itself uses these terms to describe its fight against America, our allies, and moderate Muslims around the world. Why then would we prohibit our intelligence professionals from using the same words to accurately describe al Qaeda's stated goals?" "Yet that is exactly what some in Washington are attempting to do. I was dismayed to learn that over the past few months, intelligence bureaucrats at the State Department, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Department of Homeland Security have issued memos imposing speech codes on how their employees can describe al Qaeda and other radical jihadist groups. They won't even be able to use the words these groups use themselves to describe themselves. These agencies within the intelligence community won't be able to use those words." "Mr. Chairman, free speech should not be controversial, nor should candid, accurate, and
1 person likes this
2 responses
@Vladilyich1 (1454)
• Canada
23 Jul 08
My meshuggana tax dollars at work! Politically correct politics!
2 people like this
• United States
24 Jul 08
you got that right~!!
1 person likes this
@suspenseful (40192)
• Canada
23 Jul 08
Do you mean that they cannot describe what these people really are? I mean if the terrorists are actually calling for a jihad, they are not just making speeches on how bad the West is, and how Islam is so much better than Christianity, they are advocating the violent overthrow of the American way of life. So what is going happen next? These groups who sent the planes off to destroy the World Trade Center, we are just say that they are nice guys and if they did set bombs off, we have to blame it on some discontents in the group? Who is the Congressman Peter Hoekstra catering to, the people of America or the terrorists themselves? Where does his loyalty lie?
• United States
24 Jul 08
one wonders???
1 person likes this