[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 17 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[House]
[Page H671]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1215
              IT IS ALL IN THE NAME--THE NAME IS TERRORIST

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Speaker recognizes the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Poe) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, ISIS has beheaded yet another person.
  Just this morning we also learned that the Taliban assassins murdered 
nine people in Afghanistan.
  A few months ago, the Taliban did a most vicious act of jihad. They 
attacked a school and murdered 150 children and their teachers in 
Pakistan.
  Last week, we learned that one of the Taliban Five, who was 
unfortunately swapped by the President in exchange for deserter Bowe 
Bergdahl, has recently called his buddies in the jihadist Taliban.
  Now, isn't that lovely?
  But the Taliban are not terrorists, so sayeth the White House.
  According to the White House Press Secretary:

       They do carry out tactics that are akin to terrorism. They 
     do pursue terror attacks in an effort to try to advance their 
     agenda.

  Well then, why not call them ``terrorists''? Why is the White House 
so timid and so intimidated by refusing to call the Taliban 
``terrorists''?
  The National Review reports that the Al Jazeera news service has 
banned the terms ``Islamist,'' ``jihad,'' and ``terrorists'' from their 
reporting. Is the White House Press Secretary getting his politically 
correct language and censored statements from Al Jazeera? Who knows.
  Even Secretary Kerry refuses to define the foreign terrorist group 
ISIS as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Mr. Speaker, at a House 
Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on September 18, entitled, ``The ISIS 
Threat: Weighing the Obama Administration's Response,'' I asked 
Secretary Kerry this question:
  Who are we at war with? I call them ``ISIS.'' Who would you call 
them?

       Secretary Kerry: Well, I would call them the ``enemy of 
     Islam'' because that is what I think they are, and they 
     certainly don't represent a state even though they try to 
     claim to do so.
       So, officially, Mr. Kerry, we should refer to them as the 
     ``enemy of Islam''?
       Secretary Kerry: Well, I do.

  Mr. Speaker, this administration also refuses to say that we are at 
war with radical Islam. There is so much sensitivity in the White House 
over its statements that one is puzzled to wonder: Why are they 
sensitive about calling terrorists ``terrorists''?
  Radical Islam is a cancer that is spreading throughout the world. 
Thousands are joining in the jihad, which preaches hate and murder in 
the name of religion. Even other world leaders have publicly recognized 
this and have called our enemy ``terrorists''--but not the United 
States. The leader of the free world dances around the topic instead of 
telling it like it is.
  Why does the administration refuse to define our enemy? We are at war 
with radical Islam. We are at war with the Taliban. We are at war with 
ISIS, and we are at war with terrorism and terrorists. And, Mr. 
Speaker, they are at war with us.
  Is the White House worried about hurting the feelings of the radical 
terrorists, who make it their mission to kill us, and so refuses to 
call them ``terrorists''? We need to call them what they are--
terrorists who kill in the name of radical Islam.
  Political correctness and political jargon will not win this war. 
Americans and our military must have a clearly defined enemy, not some 
nebulous, undefined named enemy that the White House advocates.
  The threat of Islamic extremism has never been greater. Their mission 
is clear. They are ruthless in pursuing it and will kill anybody who 
doesn't agree with them regardless of their religion. These killers are 
at war with America and humanity. We cannot defeat this enemy without 
first knowing who they are and then defining them. Mr. Speaker, they 
are terrorists.
  And that is just the way it is.

   Report: Al Jazeera's Banned `Islamist,' `Jihad,' `Terrorist' From 
                                Airwaves

       Al Jazeera's New York and Washington, D.C. journalists have 
     reportedly received strict orders from Qatari management: 
     please do not use the words ``terrorist,'' ``militant,'' 
     ``Islamist,'' ``jihad'' and ``extremist'' in your reporting.
       After a January 27 Islamist terrorist attack in Libya, an 
     internal email obtained by National Review showed that Al 
     Jazeera English executive Carlos van Meek sent out an email 
     demanding that his employees refrain from using the banned 
     terms. ``All: We manage our words carefully around here,'' 
     van Meek reportedly wrote. ``So I'd like to bring to your 
     attention some key words that have a tendency of tripping us 
     up.''
       Van Meek explained, ``One person's terrorist is another 
     person's freedom fighter,'' in writing why his employees must 
     stop using the aforementioned words. ``Avoid characterizing 
     people,'' he reportedly added.
       Regarding the term Islamist: ``Do not use,'' van Meek wrote 
     in bold. ``We will continue to describe groups and 
     individuals, by talking about their previous actions and 
     current aims to give viewers the context they require, rather 
     than use a simplistic label.
       ``Strictly speaking, jihad means an inner spiritual 
     struggle, not a holy war,'' van Meek said in explaining why 
     the Arabic term will no longer be allowed in Al Jazeera's 
     reporting. He continued, ``It is not by tradition a negative 
     term. It also means the struggle to defend Islam against 
     things challenging it.''
       He added: ``We do not use words such as militants, 
     radicals, insurgents. We will stick with fighters.''
       National Review reports that van Meek was previously 
     described as the man tasked with ``establishing Al Jazeera in 
     America.''
       Breitbart News has reported on Al Jazeera's radical past, 
     including its current support for Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood 
     terror group.
       After September 11, 2001, the network's headquarters in 
     Doha reportedly put on display multiple pictures in its 
     studio honoring the deceased Al Qaeda terrorist Osama bin 
     Laden.
       In 2013, dozens of staff resigned in protest of Al 
     Jazeera's ``biased coverage'' in favor of the Muslim 
     Brotherhood jihadist organization.
                                 ______
                                 

 [From HFAC Hearing on Sept. 18 entitled, ``The ISIS Threat: Weighing 
                 the Obama Administration's Response'']

       Mr. Poe. You just go ahead and answer the question:
       Who are we at war with? I call them ISIS. Who would you 
     call these?
       Secretary Kerry. Well, I call them the enemy of Islam, 
     because that is what, I think, they are. And they certainly 
     don't represent a state, even though they try to claim to.
       Mr. Poe. So officially we should refer to them as the enemy 
     of Islam.
       Secretary Kerry. Well, I do.
       Mr. Poe. Okay.
       Secretary Kerry. I don't know if there is an official 
     whatever.
       Mr. Poe. Well, why don't we tell the American people----
       Secretary Kerry. I hope you join me in doing that, because 
     that is what I think they are; and I don't think they deserve 
     to have a reference in their name that gives them legitimacy.
       Mr. Poe. Are they the enemy of the United States?
       Secretary Kerry. Beg your pardon?
       Mr. Poe. Are they the enemy of the United States?
       Secretary Kerry. They are an enemy of humanity.
       Mr. Poe. So they are an enemy of the U.S., too?
       Secretary Kerry. Among others.
       Mr. Poe. Okay.
       Secretary Kerry. Among many others----
       Mr. Poe. Well, I am just looking specifically at the 
     national security interest of the United States.
       Secretary Kerry. Definitively, it is in the national 
     security interest of our country, with Americans over there 
     with passports, learning how to fight and taking part in 
     this----
       Mr. Poe. And I agree with you, they shouldn't come back 
     unless they are in handcuffs. I agree with that.
       Secretary Kerry. For all those reasons, yes.

                          ____________________