Mr. Speaker, ISIS has beheaded yet another person.
Just this morning we also learned that the Taliban assassins murdered nine people in Afghanistan.
A few months ago, the Taliban did a most vicious act of jihad. They attacked a school and murdered 150 children and their teachers in Pakistan.
Last week, we learned that one of the Taliban Five, who was unfortunately swapped by the President in exchange for deserter Bowe Bergdahl, has recently called his buddies in the jihadist Taliban.
Now, isn't that lovely?
But the Taliban are not terrorists, so sayeth the White House.
According to the White House Press Secretary:
They do carry out tactics that are akin to terrorism. They do pursue terror attacks in an effort to try to advance their agenda.
Well then, why not call them ``terrorists''? Why is the White House so timid and so intimidated by refusing to call the Taliban ``terrorists''?
The National Review reports that the Al Jazeera news service has banned the terms ``Islamist,'' ``jihad,'' and ``terrorists'' from their reporting. Is the White House Press Secretary getting his politically correct language and censored statements from Al Jazeera? Who knows.
Even Secretary Kerry refuses to define the foreign terrorist group ISIS as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Mr. Speaker, at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on September 18, entitled, ``The ISIS Threat: Weighing the Obama Administration's Response,'' I asked Secretary Kerry this question:
Who are we at war with? I call them ``ISIS.'' Who would you call them?
Secretary Kerry: Well, I would call them the ``enemy of Islam'' because that is what I think they are, and they certainly don't represent a state even though they try to claim to do so.
So, officially, Mr. Kerry, we should refer to them as the ``enemy of Islam''?
Secretary Kerry: Well, I do.
Mr. Speaker, this administration also refuses to say that we are at war with radical Islam. There is so much sensitivity in the White House over its statements that one ispuzzled to wonder: Why are they sensitive about calling terrorists ``terrorists''?
Radical Islam is a cancer that is spreading throughout the world. Thousands are joining in the jihad, which preaches hate and murder in the name of religion. Even other world leaders have publicly recognized this and have called our enemy ``terrorists''--but not the United States. The leader of the free world dances around the topic instead of telling it like it is .
Why does the administration refuse to define our enemy? We are at war with radical Islam. We are at war with the Taliban. We are at war with ISIS, and we are at war with terrorism and terrorists. And, Mr. Speaker, they are at war with us.
Is the White House worried about hurting the feelings of the radical terrorists, who make it their mission to kill us, and so refuses to call them ``terrorists''? We need to call them what they are--terrorists who kill in the name of radical Islam.
Political correctness and political jargon will not win this war. Americans and our military must have a clearly defined enemy, not some nebulous, undefined named enemy that the White House advocates.
The threat of Islamic extremism has never been greater. Their mission is clear. They are ruthless in pursuing it and will kill anybody who doesn't agree with them regardless of their religion. These killers are at war with America and humanity. We cannot defeat this enemy without first knowing who they are and then defining them. Mr. Speaker, they are terrorists.
And that is just the way it is .