...[W]e have two types of dhimmi—the subjugated dhimmi who is under the political power of Islam and the apologist dhimmi who seeks Islamic favor....[T]he word dhimmi has two separate meanings—a subjugated dhimmi is persecuted and the apologist dhimmi helps the persecutor. The context determines which dhimmi we are talking about. One dhimmi is to be pitied and helped; the other dhimmi needs to be educated. But the apologist dhimmi is the key to defeating Islam.This April 22, 2008 posting by Robert Spencer indicates that one of our most important leaders, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, falls into that second classification of dhimmi:
A reliable source has informed me that Condoleeza Rice has approved a new lexicon for State Department usage, absolutely forbidding the use of the terms "jihad" and "jihadist" by any State Department official.Via this posting today at Jihad Watch, the new lexicon at the State Department and other federal agencies has been confirmed. Excerpt from this item at Associated Press:
Federal agencies, including the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counter Terrorism Center, are telling their people not to describe Islamic extremists as "jihadists" or "mujahedeen," according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. Lingo like "Islamo-fascism" is out, too.Why would Ms. Rice take such a position? The AP item gives some "reasons," but this comment at Jihad Watch also provides a possible clue:
At least at the top level, [the memo] appears to have made an impact. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who once frequently referred to "jihad" in her public remarks, does not appear to have used the word, except when talking about the name of a specific terrorist group, since last September.
The memo mirrors advice distributed to British and European Union diplomats last year to better explain the war on terrorism to Muslim communities there.
About a year ago a story briefly surfaced about Rice's executive assistant, an attractive young Pakistani woman, I believe it was, who was very influential in shaping Rice's views....The above commenter Eastview did not have further information, i.e., the executive assistant's name. But if Eastview is correct, the highest-ranking member of our State Department could well have a subverter at her side.
Posted by: Eastview at April 24, 2008 6:43 AM
What we have at the highest level of our government is a failure to name the enemy in this so-called "War On Terror." How are we going to win if we can't even identify and name the enemy?