Featured Obama Says That All Faiths Share Same ‘Bedrock Values’ Taught by Jesus Christ

I'm glad you quoted that last quote. So why would we let ISIS speak for Islam then? Why in the world would you give them what they seek most. They seek to hijack the voice of Muslims and go so far as to call themselves a "state" indicating a desire to legitimize themselves governmentally as well. I'm not going to do that. Are you? Why would we validate them? The bulk of those that have actually been on the ground fighting ISIS have been predominately Muslim. The Bush administration and the Obama adminsitration understand this latest administration has simply carried that stance forward. You don't insult those with which you rely on in combat and imply that their religion is spoken for by ISIS. This seems simple and it is utterly baffling why this isn't understood in this country.

Frankly, I don't care what he calls it as long as he keeps spearheading the fight against them.

 

I would say you lack an understanding of information operations. Bush himself disagreed with your interpretation of what "real Islam" is. That and the billions of muslims who in numbers alone, greatly outnumber ISIS, would say that Islam is being contorted by ISIS. Islam has existed in the world for centuries but it did not look like ISIS. To say that most of them won't deny it is a falsehood. Both President's have "named" the enemy. Just in different terms. If you think ISIS is purely a religious sect then that is a gross misunderstanding of what is happening in that particular region.

So I say again. Why would we validate the minority to set up potential conflict with the mass majority. It is illogical in every way. That is why Bush made his disclaimers to alleviate being seen as an antagonist to Islam and it is why Obama won't say it as well, especially in a time when we are trying to enlist the help of fighting forces int he Middle East. Surely you can see this.

 

No it isn't. It is simply your preference of one term vs. another and I've already explained why things are the way they are. Address and point out the flaws of why these administrations make clear they are fighting terrorists and not Islam? You cannot argue that both Presidents made it clear they are fighting terrorist and not Islam. There is a reason for this. If you disagree with it then point out the part where you disagree.

 

Information Operations Carpro. You don't get what little we have to gain and how much we have too lose. That is the problem with so many that keep beating this drum. You continually refuse to acknowledge these points. What happens if tomorrow Obama says "Islamic Terrorist." What then? What does that get us? What could it cost us? Risk vs. Reward.

"For one, the Islamic State is just one of numerous jihadist groups that the United States is fighting in the Middle East and North Africa, including al-Qaida and its affiliates. And the Islamic State has several qualities that set it apart from other jihadi groups, such as their desire to immediately create a caliphate. In that sense, it would be misleading to lump these groups into one singular enemy code-worded Islamic extremism, said James Gelvin, a history professor at the University of California Los Angeles."

"Additionally, several countries helping the United States fight the Islamic State and other terrorist groups are Muslim nations, including Jordan and Saudi Arabia. In those cases, it is in the United States’ interest not to be at war with a religion. And, as Bloomberg’s Eli Lake points out, there are some Muslims around the world who support some radical ideology practiced legally in some Muslim countries, such as honor killings, but they disavow terrorism."

"Declassified files from Osama bin Laden’s compound show that the Obama administration’s decision to try and separate terrorist groups from Islam had negatively impacted al-Qaida’s brand. Bin Laden wrote that Muslims were less likely to feel as if they belonged to al-Qaida because the Obama administration had "largely stopped using the phrase ‘the war on terror’ in the context of not wanting to provoke Muslims," according to the Washington Post."

"Just as Muslims worldwide refused to take up bin Laden’s brutal brand of Islam, the vast majority of Muslims are also not heeding the call of the self-proclaimed caliph of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Tufts University religion professor Kenneth Garden said accepting the terror group’s self-description would amount to "an own-goal" by the United States."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...fact-why-obama-wont-label-isis-islamic-extre/

 

WHAT DO WE HAVE TO GAIN? Is it so hard of a question? I'm not surprised this is your embarkation point. As soon as that question is posed the conversation usually finds a way to terminate. I can never seem to get an answer on that one. I have not been the least bit disrespectful to you here so playing the victim is your out I guess.

What changes if all of a sudden Obama says the words "Islamic Terrorism" tomorrow night during his speech?

 

You know it is really sad when you try to have adult conversations and what I thought was a pretty good one with this topic until you got cornered, decided to tuck tail and throw off an insult. This is the mindset of a toddler. If you can't engage in a serious conversation without acting like a baby then don't start threads you don't have the resolve to actually debate.

 

The muslim faith was founded upon peace and love and compassion? Hmmm. It was founded upon a false lying pedophile murderous prophets words. Ever read how these nut jobs crawl in others excrement and filth to Mecca?

As Obama said about Scriptures when mocking them 'Folks haven't been reading their Bibles' (very close to that) then these hypocrites also need own up themselves - they haven't been reading their Qu'ran and following it wholly. Even the alleged 'peaceful' ones spend much time talking of how others offend them.

They haven't been studying the murderous pedophile Mohammad's example either. The only faith that has true peace, true love and true compassion is the faith once delivered to the saints - Jude 1:4. Many professing believers will defend Muslims and their satanic faith. Inclusivism isn't far off for these types.

Exposing the evils of any group is not the opposite of being Christian by the way; 2 John, 1 John, Jude, 2 Peter, Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy...

 

At the end of the day, do we REALLY think that if Obeyme utters the words "radical islamic terrorism", will that change a thing he's doing or NOT doing?

The man is weak. We have a Chamberlain in charge. Current circumstances necessitate a Churchill.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

 

Have the religious right yet to declare Dylann Roof a far ,right, white radical or a Christian terrorist or radical Christian?
How about Wade Michael Page?
How about Scott Roeder?
How about Jim David Adkinson?
How about Paul Jennings Hill?
How about John Salvi?
And more recently, Robert Lewis Dear?

Why on earth don't we ever hear from the right who these folks are? The majority of Americans are not fooled. They know the type of animus that has been incited by Fox News and some of those wicked folks who pimp their audiences on conservative talk radio.

Are yall in denial about who the American domestic terrorists are?