Today's must-read is former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani's Wall Street Journal oped on why it is dangerous not to call Islamic terrorism what it is. Giuliani began with his tenure as a U.S attorney who prosecuted Mafia bosses and used the term Mafia (even though, at the behest of Mario Biaggi, a former congressman, the term had been prohibited by the Justice Department).
Giuliani believed that it was important to use the term since, " The Mafia existed, and denying what people oppressed by those criminals knew to be true only gave the Mafia more power. " Similarly:
The terrorists refer to themselves as members of Islamic State. Just as it would have been foolish to fail to use the word Mafia or admit its Italian identity, it is foolish to refuse to call these Islamic terrorists by the name they give themselves or to refuse to acknowledge their overriding religious rationale.
Yes, it is essential to emphasize to the public the distinction between Islam and Islamic terrorists. That education has been in progress in the U.S. at least since 9/11. I recall that during my last press briefing on that horrific day, I urged New Yorkers not use the barbaric attacks to attach group blame—for doing so would mirror the sort of thinking that inspired the terrorists. President George W. Bush and New York Gov. George Pataki made similar appeals, and the American people overwhelmingly took that idea to heart, and still do. They knew that the attacks were the actions of people with a warped, evil interpretation of the Islamic religion.
Yet it is also essential to acknowledge that there are portions of the Islamic texts that are used by these terrorists to justify mass murder in the name and for the propagation of their faith. Unfortunately, this confusion between the religion and those who pervert its meaning is exacerbated by the Obama administration and others in prominent leadership positions who engage in euphemisms or misdirection regarding Islamic terrorism. They make it seem that they see no connection between the acts of terror and the terrorists’ interpretation of Islamic teaching and Shariah law.
. . .
The failure to speak bluntly about Islamic terrorism opens the door to the vast generalizations that can steer the debate in a totally counterproductive direction. The idea of excluding all Muslims is unworkable and legally dubious. It will soon disappear. But it is clear that the Obama administration’s refusal to face up to the nature of Islamic terrorism is never going to change. That is more than foolish. It is also dangerous.
It is also making the American public, which has been commendably tolerant and able to distinguish between law-abiding citizens who happen to be Muslim and terrorists, angry.
The federal government's extreme delicacy with regard to the use of the term "Islamic terrorists" is possibly dangerous in another way. A former Homeland Security official told Fox's Megyn Kelly that he was tracking global networks infiltrating U.S. but was told to stop because he was profiling Muslims. One of the subjects of his investigation: the mosque attended by San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook.