Posted on 09/02/2006 8:43:02 AM PDT by conservativecorner
President Bush has toned down his war rhetoric after Muslim-rights groups complained his description of the enemy as "Islamic fascists" unfairly equates Islam with terrorism.
In his speech to the American Legion Thursday, Bush backed away from the term, defining the enemy simply as "fascists" and "totalitarians."
He said the war on terror was an "ideological struggle" with terrorists who "kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian ideology," but he did not identify the source of the ideology. His only reference to Islam during the speech was in noting that the Muslim terrorists are distorting the tenets of the religion. "Free societies are a threat to their twisted view of Islam," he said.
In a press conference last week, Bush also avoided repeating the phrase "Islamic fascists," reverting instead to more general language such as "extremists" to describe the threat.
"This is a global war on terror. We're facing, you know, extremists that believe something," he said. "And they want to achieve objectives."
While the White House declined to comment officially about the dropping of the term 'Islamic fascists,' a White House insider explained that the president is sensitive to concerns raised by Muslim leaders.
"The president never meant to imply we're at war with Islam, but some took it that way," the official said. "It's not a climb-down as much as a recognition of the concerns of the Muslim community."
In a major rhetorical shift, Bush last month began describing the enemy as "Islamic fascists," sparking a firestorm of criticism from Muslim groups.
The pressure groups, led by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, lobbied the president to stop using the term. Washington-based CAIR fired off a letter to Bush arguing that continued use of the "hot-button" term would only harm the image of America "in the Islamic world."
"We believe this is an ill-advised term and we believe that it is counterproductive to associate Islam or Muslims with fascism," added CAIR executive director Nihad Awad.
Awad warned Bush to choose his words carefully so as not to "start a religious war against Islam and Muslims."
"We urge him and we urge other public officials to restrain themselves," he asserted.
CAIR is a spin-off of the Islamic Association for Palestine, identified by two former FBI counterterrorism chiefs as a "front group" for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Several CAIR leaders have been convicted on terror-related charges.
Washington officials have been careful during the war on terror to distinguish between Islam and the terrorists so as not to offend Muslims.
The distinction has rankled many conservatives who see little difference.
After 9-11, Bush frequently referred to Islam as a "religion of peace" and asserted the terrorists were "perverting" or "hijacking" the faith. A search of transcripts shows that, to date, the president has not publicly used the terms "Islamic terrorists" or "Islamic terrorism."
The White House insider says it's unlikely Bush will repeat the term "Islamic fascists" out of deference to Muslim groups.
I'm not familiar enough with you to know whether I'd call you an "unappeasable" or not, but the term, at least as I use it, has nothing to do with President Bush.
I use it to describe those who never find any action by the government strong enough or decisive enough. At least as it concerns their pet concerns.
The "nuke Mecca" crowd is part of the unappeasables. Those who seriously suggest mining our southern border or killing anything that moves along there are "unappeasables."
Of course, they also oppose what the government did at Waco or in the Elian Gonzalez case. Rightly so, IMO, but it's the whole mindset that the government is never right, whether it is too lax or too heavy-handed.
If you're a professional political bitch, you're an "unappeasable." It's shorter than typing "professional political bitch."
Literally. The polls show we are weary of the government's airport security "band-aid" approach; looking for things.
We and the idiots in the government takke notice of the kinds of weapons the terrorists use..sharp objects, liquids that can be combined to make explosives. In reaction, we ban nail clippers and toothpaste and shampoo.
When in hell is the Homeland Security going to take note that all the terrorists are men of Middle Eastern looking descent?!
I heard it on Foxnews. Posted to this point three times now. A Foxnews segment had a clip of Bush leaving an event and Bush was asked a question and used the phrase. Another Freeper witnessed the clip and posted here about it.
Why are there so many here ready to believe the worst about a great President? DU and dim plants are actively doing this sort of thing all over the web. I have a copy of their "blast fax" requesting Anti-American, islmofacist-loving lefties to do such things. Don't fall into their trap!
LLS
You keep trying to redefine the term so that it only applies to one's feelings about President Bush. I've already rejected that, and I reject it again.
I'll just use Islam.
He might talk in "folksy" manner is a better way to put it.
George W. might be the greatest leader since Ghandi and Churchill. He also could be the biggest idiot since John Rocker.
We live in a world of instant results: Instant coffee, instant messaging, e-mail, internet, 24 Hour News Channels, faxes...
We want answers now!
The truth is, we won't have the answer for 25 years. We can't wait that long. When's the next post?
Nope just using Bush as an example. Your initial definition that ""unappeasables" accurately describes those who will never be satisfied, most of whom are not fellow Republicans "and your claim that "this thread is filled with "unappeasables"" lead me to question what you meant because that statement is on its face patently wrong. This thread focused on a single issue so a broad sweeping indictment by stereotype is not appropriate since there is little indication anyone here fits your description of always taking the position that the "government is wrong". (In fact I can't recall ever finding a FReeper with that perspective no matter how much I disagreed with them on a single issue.) The perjorative use of a stereotype is an ineffective argument on the point of this (any) thread and a tactic usually used to derail logical debate. Just wondered why you chose that tactic instead of debating the issue.
Who said "Wonder how the bots will handle this potato..." before I ever made my post?
You should be the last one taking me to task.
Touche' at least I don't have to wonder now..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.