Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

by silvermani Thu Sep 29, 2016 11:44 am

"My son gave his life for acts of terrorism," audience member Tina Houchins told Obama at the town hall moderated by CNN's Jake Tapper. "Do you still believe that the acts of terrorism are done for the self-proclaimed Islamic religious motive? And if you do, why do you still refuse to use the term ... Islamic terrorist?" Obama called it a "sort of manufactured" issue.

Yeah, all that meddling in the middle east has certainly manufactured lot of issues. For once Obummer says something close to the truth.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Sep 29, 2016 12:23 pm

for all his many faults, dubya pretty much had the same stance as obama. his instincts on this one thing were right on, and were based on not demonizing billions of people. in fact he'd take great pains to point out that the actions the US was taking against jihadis and terrorism had nothing to do with islam. i don't remember you guys whining so much then. is it because he was a republican and automatically gets the benefit of doubt?

by Guest Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:50 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:for all his many faults, dubya pretty much had the same stance as obama. his instincts on this one thing were right on, and were based on not demonizing billions of people. in fact he'd take great pains to point out that the actions the US was taking against jihadis and terrorism had nothing to do with islam. i don't remember you guys whining so much then. is it because he was a republican and automatically gets the benefit of doubt?

Ok, let him not say Islamic terrorism. What is the problem in saying 'Radical islamic terrorism?' or 'Wahabi brand of Islamic terrorism?' If he feels that it demonizes billions of people, then he believes that that is what Islam is all about.

You lefties have no problem using the words like chuddies or Hindutva a million times, but are so guarded in saying 'jehadists' or 'radical islam'. Double standards and hypocrisy!

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:17 pm

Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:for all his many faults, dubya pretty much had the same stance as obama. his instincts on this one thing were right on, and were based on not demonizing billions of people. in fact he'd take great pains to point out that the actions the US was taking against jihadis and terrorism had nothing to do with islam. i don't remember you guys whining so much then. is it because he was a republican and automatically gets the benefit of doubt?
Ok, let him not say Islamic terrorism. What is the problem in saying 'Radical islamic terrorism?' or 'Wahabi brand of Islamic terrorism?' If he feels that it demonizes billions of people, then he believes that that is what Islam is all about.

You lefties have no problem using the words like chuddies or Hindutva a million times, but are so guarded in saying 'jehadists' or 'radical islam'. Double standards and hypocrisy!

Because it would be inaccurate. San Bernadino, Orlando, and now Seattle are all homegrown terrorism. None of these guys had actual contact with Wahabis or ISIS. Perhaps he could say ISIS inspired terrorists. That would be the most accurate description. You can't look at a dog and insist that people call it a wolf. A dog is a dog not a wolf.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:18 pm

I'm happy to call the guys creating havoc in Aleppo radical Islamists.

by Sponsored content

Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

Re: Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

Re: Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

Re: Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

Re: Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism

Re: Obummer continues to refuse to call out Islamic terrorism