CAIR and Associated ‘with terrorists’ Press attempt to redefine ‘Islamist’


via CAIR Claims Victory Over AP Stylebook’s Restrictions on Word ‘Islamist’ | CNS News.

( – The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) praised the Associated Press (AP) for revising its stylebook to forbid the use of the word “Islamist,” if it is used to describe Islamic militants or extremists.

In a press release on Friday, CAIR said revising the term is a “step in the right direction,” and that they helped influence the AP’s decision.

“Late last year, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) approached AP about modifying the reference, which had been added to its influential Stylebook,” the release said.

“That entry read: ‘Islamist — Supporter of government in accord with the laws of Islam. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.’”

“CAIR suggested that AP change its Stylebook to incorporate language similar to that used in the reference to ‘fundamentalist,’ which states that the label should not be used unless a group applies the term to itself,” they said.

CAIR also encouraged the media to drop the term.  “Unfortunately, the term ‘Islamist’ has become shorthand for ‘Muslims we don’t like,’” said CAIR.  “It is currently used in an almost exclusively pejorative context and is often coupled with the term ‘extremist,’ giving it an even more negative slant.”

The group’s national communications director, Ibrahim Hooper, also wrote a commentary earlier this year, calling on AP to drop the term.

“No journalist would think of referring to the ‘Judaist government of Israel,’ the ‘Christianist leader Rick Santorum’ or ‘Hinduist Indian politician Narendra Modi,’ while use of ‘Islamist’ has become ubiquitous,” Hooper wrote.  “It might be an interesting exercise to hold a contest, the winner of which would be the first to find a positive mainstream media reference to ‘Islamist.’”

A more interesting exercise would be to hold a challenge to any so-called journalist to investigate CAIR, its history, its leaders, its finances and to challenge attorney generals in all states to prosecute them for their terrorist links since Holder refuses to do so.

Back to the article, we know so-called journalists would and they do refer to non-Muslims in other snide and insidious ways but those leaders would never be ashamed to be described as Christianist or Hinduist. They have nothing to hide or be ashamed of. Unlike CAIR and Muslims who dedicate their lives to one thing and one thing only (after money that is) – forcing Islamic sharia law on everyone by whatever means necessary.

That said, there is no such thing as an Islamist although we all fall into the trap of using such a term. There are Muslims. Period. Muslims like those who join and support al Qaeda wage physical jihad. Muslims like CAIR leverage the threats of the jihad-waging Muslims and wage legal and cultural jihad shaking down corporations, law enforcement and the media. They work in conjunction with each other, feeding off each other. They have the same goal. All Muslims do. It is proscribed for them. Even if they dislike it – so says the Koran.

They have a choice to leave Islam – but Islam sharia law regulates that too. The penalty for leaving Islam is up to and including death.

Nuff. Said.

@Twitchy has more: AP adds ‘more nuance’ to definition of ‘Islamist’; CAIR celebrates

11 thoughts on “CAIR and Associated ‘with terrorists’ Press attempt to redefine ‘Islamist’

  1. And just what are we to call them if not Islamists? They believe in the ways of Islam. Islam, in itself carries the stigma it should. The oppression of anyone who does not believe in Islam. You don’t see them dropping the term “infidel” because it points to anyone of non-Islamic beliefs, whether it is Christian, Jewish, Buddist, Hindu or any other religion. That term still clumps everyone into one group.

    If you want to look at the term Jihadist, that is a term to describe a person who is waging war on anyone who does not believe in Islam. The notion that no one is called a “Christianist” or ” Hinduist”, Those that believe in Budda, are referred to as “Buddists” It means they are followers of Budda. So it would follow that a follower of Islam is referred to as a ” Islamist” And Jihad is simply waging war , be it physical or stealth, is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other, it is still waging war. So anyone engaging in the activity is called a “Jihadist” Bottom line, AP has knuckled under. And the rest of the mainstream liberal media will follow suit instead of standing up for what is right. But they have to learn to report the news as it is, not as CAIR wants them to report it, with flowery excuses why the scumbags we refer to as “ISLAMIST EXTREMISTS” are determined to destroy everything but Islam and Sharia Law.

      • They are Muslims, And I do believe that there are Muslims that are not Islamists. They are simply afraid to speak out for fear of physical harm to befall themselves or their families. I do not believe that they are great in numbers and they sure are not anywhere near the majority. Otherwise they could all stand up as one and put an end to this Islamist Extremist movement coursing through the world. But all Islamists are Muslims. So you see, there has to be some differentiating between the Islamists and the Muslims who only want peace and co-existence, but because of the very nature of Islam, it instills fear in those who want to exercise the free speech America affords them to express it, but men fear being beaten to death, women risk having acid thrown into their face and children are in danger of who knows what from the Islamists.

        CAIR continues to push their influence and change America into something more suited for Islam and Sharia Law. The Constitution is our basis for law, not the word of some Pedophile warmonger who bendt a ideology to the extent he was entitled to a percentage of the spoils of each incursion his horde engaged in so that he could satisfy a psychopatic need to rape women and very young girls. Sometimes he would rape women before their dead husband’s body was cold. I have not confirmed it, but there are a few stories of him raping women and daughters right in front of the husbands before he killed them. Now how does that fit into the Qua’ran? According to this pervert Mohammed, Allah decreed that he is entitled to the women of the slain as booty for the deed. If he had not killed the husband, then he had not , to his thinking, earned the right to ownership of the woman. Therefore would that not have constituted the breaking of Allah’s law? Or is that another one of those symantics that Islamists use as a way to get around the laws and traditions they say they adhere to so closely? The Ft. Hood killer, he made a big stink about how it was required by his religion to wear a beard and had to be forcibly shaved because Army regulations say no beards. If you look at any of his pictures pre-attack, you will see he is clean-shaven. Another time when they bend the tradition when they want to. Islam is not a religion, it is a set of ideological ideas that they observe when it gets them out of trouble or allows them to get their way, or disregarded when following it would be inconvenient.

        • Why do I keep hearing those words: “There are muslims who are not islamists”, even on SUN news here in Canada we keep hearing that the majority of muslims are peace loving, etc., etc..

          As long as people keep repeating that nonsense we are going to keep losing the battle. So most muslims are not beheading people or setting off bombs; but they are keeping quiet, which should strike you as ominous.

          Let’s be clear here; after muslim atrocities such as the trade towers, Beslam etc., how many of those ‘decent’ muslims did we see demonstrating against the atrocities–none. They were dancing in the streets in several Islamic countries.

          Most Germans were not Nazis, they kept quiet and let it happen; the same could be said of the Chinese when Mao came to power, or the Tutsis and moderate Hutus in Rwanda–they too kept quiet and let the catastrophe happen.

          muslims are not like other people–ANY other people, which should be a given; and I live in a quiet rage that so many people are still getting it wrong about islam. BTW Newhon, I don’t include you in that; I enjoy reading your thoughtful comments

          One thing, the Oxford English Dictionary and Wikipedia both have “infidel” as of French derivation, and meaning: “Disbelief of Religion; particularly of Christianity”. So really, infidel applies more to MUSLIMS. They are the infidels–not you. (I’m an atheist)

          • If you mean what I said. That is not entirely what I said.

            I said that not all Muslims are Islamists, I said that there are peaceful Muslims, but they are definitely not a majority, they are a very small number of people, in my opinion. I will say with certainty that all Islamists are Muslims. That is for sure. Another thing is for sure. We are taking alot of things from CAIR and other Islamic backing groups. But once things get nasty, Americans fight back. These groups that walk the streets harrassing gays, they will eventually run into Muslim hunting groups of gays, will they be ready to face such a group that also has clubs in their hands. Will they run like little girls with fear? It is one thing for a group of 5 or 10 Muslims to confront a single person, but when they do it and find 15 to 20 people were in hiding waiting for when the Muslims start harrassing someone, then it is different. And it will not matter to them if the news reports it as Muslim hating. At some point, it will be too much, then it will be the attitude of the majority of people to say ” okay, you want a piece of me? COME ON!!!!!!” And no CAIR, No ISNA. No Muslim Brotherhood will save them. They want extremists. I don’t like any kind of extremists , but I do not think anyone will see anything uglier or more bloody than a group of Muslim Extremist who meets up with a group of Skinheads Extremists.


  3. Wiki Pedia…Islamist = Murderer, Rapist, Pedophile, Homosexual, Wife-Beater, etc., etc., etc., …

    Do you think we can make this an entry in “Wiki???”

    After all…it IS the TRUTH!!!

  4. AP capitulates to CAIR-, surrenders to their demands – WHY?? they are unelected and do NOT represent American Muslims- not by a long shot- what right do they have to represent themselves as the voice of USA Muslims, many who came here to ESCAPE people like them who want Islamic govt and sharia law-

    2. Muslims hate each other – just today the Shiites are blowing up the Sunnis- they each hate the ones they consider apostates- so WHY are we importing groups that WILL wage war, not just on US, but on each other?

    3. if you do read AP you can see the mangling of language to appease Muslims who might be offended (everything offends them apparently- religion of perpetual outrage)
    So terrorists, suicide bombers, are called “militants” or “insurgents” and other equally Orwellian terms in the world according to the dhimmi AP (Reuters is not better)

If sharia law continues spreading, you'll have less and less freedom of speech - so speak while you can!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s