Terrorists use political correctness to ‘spread their jihadi message’

Recently in an interview on Fox News Dr. James Mitchell, one of the men who interrogated 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, recently said:

[It] was political correctness and their unwillingness to get this person out of their country who had no business being there because he didn’t have the right paperwork to prove who he was.

“Lone-wolf”-style attacks have been discussed for more than a decade between Dr. Mitchell and Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. The conversation start with the  2002 D.C. sniper attacks. Mitchell recently told Sandra Smith from his conversation that:

For him, what surprised him was how much paralysis it caused given how few deaths were involved, few from his perspective. And what he said to me was our civil liberties and our openness and our willingness to be responsive to other peoples’ cultures were weaknesses and flaws that his God, Allah, had put into the American culture so that we could be defeated.

He said that like-minded jihadi brothers would immigrate to Western democracies and to the United States, they would wrap themselves in our civil liberties for protection,” Mitchell said, “they would support themselves in our welfare systems while they spread their jihadi message, and then, when the time was right, they would rise up and attack.”

Mitchell wrapped up the interview by talking about the recent election of Donald Trump as president:

“I hope there’s gonna be change, because here’s the way political correctness works for a guy like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: It allows them to operate in our midst without being challenged.”


Quoting from a related article: “The Origins of Political Correctness” by Bill Lind about Political Correctness:

If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious.


First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the other sainted “victims” groups that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the college, they face formal charges – some star-chamber proceeding – and punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.

Google and Facebook sued for ‘helping’ Pulse nightclub shooter

The core of the article is that Omar Mateen used Google and Facebook to become radicalized and to find out the best way to complete a home grown terrorist attack. Both companies are saying they had nothing to do with the attack. He was a grown man who decided to do evil. Also by law they covered by Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act. This law basically says that unless you are moderating every comment and website for intent you are not responsible for the post or the content of the website.


This lawsuit and fake new filtering has just opened Pandora’s box on two points:

Point 1: Not Guilty

Google, Facebook, and other social media websites are safe in this case for now.  You can’t control what other people say on your service or what you index from other websites.The federal Communications Decency Act gives nearly complete immunity.  This mainly is because people still have abandoned (zombie) websites running that they’re not moderating.

Right now those comment sections are mainly ad bait.  However someone from a violent hate group like ISIS could be posting propaganda or coded messages to trigger events. The website is on something like AngelFire or Google Sites is no longer maintained.  Who is at fault?  It’s not owner because they didn’t do the posts and they’re not doing the hosting.  The evil people did the evil deed.

Point 2: Law of Unintended Consequences

This protection could be going away.  With all these ‘fake news’ laws and guidelines going into effect all these websites as now doing professing strict filtering of their content.  Now that they ARE managing their content they may not longer be under the protection of the Communications Decency Act.  The CDA protects you if you are NOT actively filterer or only doing minimum filtering.

They are now supposedly doing strict filtering. So Google, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace (had toss that in there), ect. are no longer covered by this act.  So by being political correct they’ve cut their own throats for the future lawsuit.


Google, Facebook and Twitter are facing a lawsuit filed by the families of three victims killed by Pulse nightclub gunman Omar Mateen in Orlando. The plaintiffs are accusing the tech titans of providing “material support” to Mateen, who was known to have pledged allegiance to ISIS and its leader. According to their lawsuit, the families are suing the companies for allowing the terrorist group to create accounts to raise funds and to spread propaganda with the intention of attracting new recruits.

The material support these tech giants provide, the lawsuit says, “has been instrumental to the rise of ISIS and has enabled it to carry out or cause to be carried out, numerous terrorist attacks.” In addition, the plaintiffs are accusing the companies of profiting from ISIS-related posts by combining them with advertisements and of violating the Anti-Terrorism Act in the United States.

Source: Engadget