Do you think it was productive for Janet Napolitano to define down islamic terrorism?
By outlawing within the administration the use of the words “islamic terrorism” and replacing them with “man-caused disasters”?
How does defining down a problem ever help? If a person is handicapped, how on earth does it change his horrible condition to define it down as “handi-capable” or some other mumbo jumbo? The people that I most admire deal in facts and not gooey happy talk.
Best answer:
Answer by dnafairy
I guess being PC is more important than identifying the problem.
Give your answer to this question below!
If Theres Anything I Can Do: How To Help Someone Cope With Grief
Its awful when someone you love goes through the pain of bereavement but theres no need to feel helpless in the face of grief. This book is full of little ways (and big ways) you can help someone you care about cope with grief that little bit better.
If Theres Anything I Can Do: How To Help Someone Cope With Grief
The Sage Learning of Liu Zhi Islamic Thought in Confuci
 | US $54.22 End Date: Saturday Apr-07-2012 11:40:25 PDT Buy It Now for only: US $54.22 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
Modern Islamic Political Thought NEW by Hamid Enayat
 | US $35.39 End Date: Saturday Apr-07-2012 12:51:27 PDT Buy It Now for only: US $35.39 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
Related posts:
- Q&A: What do you think is the best response to Islamic terrorism?
- pt-3/6 – What is Terrorism?
- pt-5/6 – What is Terrorism?
- What is Terrorism? pt-2/6
- 2 – Historical Analysis of Terrorism
I’m sure she was following orders from the Commander in Thief.
Why does this matter? I would say that “Islamic terrorism” is antagonizing to a lot of people because you’re pegging an entire religion as having resulted in the terrorist act. It is a person, acting of their own volition, to cause damage to a country and a people through an act that incites terror. Why should that have to be qualified with “Islamic”? Would you be fine if people called any Christian involved in a terrorist act “Christian terrorism”?
It keeps the US from shooting itself in the foot by constantly misinterpreting the Islamic faith as the cause of terrorism. The problem lies with radicals who pervert Islam’s teachings, much like radicalized Christians who believe murdering abortion doctors is justified.
It is not a big deal what she prefers to call it.
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word “terrorism,” I referred to “man-caused” disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
It would seem to me that a man-caused disaster, would encompass all types of terrorism…not just terrorist acts commited by people of a particular faith.
So let me ask you….. would you like to stop all man caused disasters (all terrorism) ?… or just the Islamic terrorism ?
When talking about security protocol, it’s important not to get hung up on “Islamic Terrorism”, because there is no qualitative difference between that kind of terrorism and any other terrorist act any individual might want to carry out.
The end result in either case would be the death of innocent people…. so why would you want to reduce the effectiveness of our security, by allowing language which encourages our security personal to veiw their job of providing security as a mission to stop radical islamists, rather than focusing on the broader initiative of securing our airports from dangerous persons ??
No it is very fool hearty and she is a fool which she has proven by her own words