The American Approach Should Be To Keep Fighting For The Accurate Use Of Terrorism As A Word

Submitted by Mike Conlon (United States), Apr 13, 2016 at 20:03

As usual, I mostly agree with Mr. Pipes, who I respect greatly. I differ about the US treatment of the word "terror," and think the American approach should still be fight for the accurate use of Terrorism as a word. He lays out strong cases for various nations and international groups being hopeless. Here it's largely President Obama.

Simple expamples are his delayed response whenever theres an Islamic terror attack here, and his early attempt to change the term "Terrorist event" to "man caused disaster. His many paid and unpaid medial surrogates and mostly supportive medial in general always go along with his lead, except for Fox. We might loose this, as we might loose the overall PC fight.

But Trump has highlighted PC, and he has proven a lightning rod already on some campuses, which can be max'd out with PC'ness. Some of those feeling "other" have defaulted to Trump, probably partly simply satisfying an "in your face, baby" desire to some degree. As our terror discussion here and general PC battle continues, backing down can follow a different track than foreign and international use of the word.

Most of us pay almost no attention to foreign issues except as specific events grab headlines. Here we can still appeal for broad societal agreement in many cases when we can bypass the media mediated support of the Obama obfuscation. So I hope we keep fighting for every inch of truth here in the US. The case of the lone wolf, for instance, should be easily have been won by the "good guys" long before now, while a Milwaukee newspaper plays media mediator waging the PC war of confusion. Since nobody on "our" side is fighting effectively yet in many cases, far from giving up, its time to dig in and try harder.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".