Terrorism Deaths Quadruple Under Obama

[Revmitchell]

Post #3, the OP states:

"But with a president that is an islamic sympathizer and willing to turn a blind eye to terrorism committed in the name of allah, it is certainly possible that terrorist organizations like isis have been emboldened. They knew he would do little to stop them. And they were right."

First of all post # three is not the op it is Carpro's view of how Obama handles terrorists. Second, What I said is not related to post # 3 at all. There is a distinct difference between the cause of terrorism and addressing the problem.

My original post in this thread was a response to someone else who tried to mistakenly say that terrorism is caused by economics. I disagree with that causation of terrorism.

The op, however, addresses the failure to deal with terrorism properly. It does not address the cause of terrorism.

Not sure why I need to explain this.

 

[InTheLight]

Please show me in the op where it says terrorism is Obama's fault.

It doesn't explicitly. But this is an excellent example of innuendo. Terrorism has increased under Obama. Obama is compared to Bush and found to have a worse record. Therefore, the implication is that it is Obama's fault.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

[Revmitchell]

It doesn't explicitly. But this is an excellent example of innuendo. Terrorism has increased under Obama. Obama is compared to Bush and found to have a worse record. Therefore, the implication is that it is Obama's fault.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

You believe the implication is what is Obama's fault?

 

[matt wade]

I wonder if some of these pastors on this forum play these word games from the pulpit? Or do they actually learn how to speak the truth once they step behind the pulpit?

 

[Revmitchell]

I wonder if some of these pastors on this forum play these word games from the pulpit? Or do they actually learn how to speak the truth once they step behind the pulpit?

What are these word games of which you speak?

 

[carpro]

-- Boxed - -

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

Not hardly. The OP does not say it's Obama's fault.

 

[carpro]

Post #3, the OP states:

"But with a president that is an islamic sympathizer and willing to turn a blind eye to terrorism committed in the name of allah, it is certainly possible that terrorist organizations like isis have been emboldened. They knew he would do little to stop them. And they were right."

That's my opinion. Not part of the OP.

 

[carpro]

I wonder if some of these pastors on this forum play these word games from the pulpit? Or do they actually learn how to speak the truth once they step behind the pulpit?

OTOH maybe you should sharpen up on your critical reading skills.

 

[carpro]

So, you disagree with the OP that this is Obama's fault then?

He can't. The OP doesn't say that.

 

[matt wade]

Maybe you guys should understand the terminology utilized on the Internet? It's a common misconception that OP means "original post" or "opening post", when in fact it refers to the "original poster", i.e., the person that started the thread.

http://www.internetslang.com/OP-meaning-definition.asp

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/O/op_original_poster.html

 

[carpro]

Maybe you guys should understand the terminology utilized on the Internet? It's a common misconception that OP means "original post" or "opening post", when in fact it refers to the "original poster", i.e., the person that started the thread.

http://www.internetslang.com/OP-meaning-definition.asp

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/O/op_original_poster.html

I disagree. It's my thread and I say the OP is the opening post. I don't use "internet slang" all that much.

The point you are trying to make is dead. Try again.

 

[matt wade]

I disagree. It's my thread and I say the OP is the opening post. I don't use "internet slang" all that much.

The point you are trying to make is dead. Try again.

Sure, just redefine acronyms to fit your narrative. Once again, you illustrate that talking to you is fruitless, since you don't care for logic, reason, or facts. If something doesn't fit your opinion, you just redefine the terms or stick your fingers in your ears and act like a child.

 

[Zaac]

I disagree. It's my thread and I say the OP is the opening post. I don't use "internet slang" all that much.

Wink

Yet you find all my posts to be dumb?

 

[Use of Time]

Rev Mitch and Carpro. The ultimate masters of goal post moving and backpedaling double talk.

 

[carpro]

Wink

Yet you find all my posts to be dumb?

Not all. Just the ones that go off into racial and left wing rants when you start calling other members here names that shouldn't be allowed on any board, let alone a christian one , but are.

 

[carpro]

Let's see, Isis has been responsible for God knows how many terrorist killings in the past few years. But there were only 700 of them in 2008. Now there are over 20,0000. Wonder how many terrorist acts they would have committed if there were only 700? Fewer, one would think.

But with Obama's idiotic and precipitous withdrawal from Iraq coupled with his arming of Isis in the hopes some of them would fight against Assad and his phony bombing campaign against Isis, one would have to conclude this moron is responsible for thousands of crimes against humanity committed by isis.

In particular they are murdering every Christian they can find and Obama is mute on the subject. As are the leftists here on BB.

Yes, Obama bears a huge portion of the responsibility for the radical increase in terrorist killings since he has been in office...even if one just considers those committed by Isis.

 

[matt wade]

In particular they are murdering every Christian they can find and Obama is mute on the subject. As are the leftists here on BB.

"Let’s be clear about ISIL. They have rampaged across cities and villages -- killing innocent, unarmed civilians in cowardly acts of violence. They abduct women and children, and subject them to torture and rape and slavery. They have murdered Muslims -- both Sunni and Shia -- by the thousands. They target Christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them when they can for no other reason than they practice a different religion. They declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people." -Obama

 

[Revmitchell]

I disagree. It's my thread and I say the OP is the opening post. I don't use "internet slang" all that much.

The point you are trying to make is dead. Try again.

Rather than just admitting he was wrong that the "op" (original post) "implied" through innuendo that Obama causes terrorism he turned to accuses pastors of misusing words, went on a crusade marking posts dumb, and argued about the meaning of op. A lot of energy put into things when it would have been easier to just admit he misread things.

 

[carpro]

C

Rather than just admitting he was wrong that the "op" (original post) "implied" through innuendo that Obama causes terrorism he turned to accuses pastors of misusing words, went on a crusade marking posts dumb, and argued about the meaning of op. A lot of energy put into things when it would have been easier to just admit he misread things.

I guess he thinks it matters to the adults. Rolleyes

 

[carpro]

"Let’s be clear about ISIL. They have rampaged across cities and villages -- killing innocent, unarmed civilians in cowardly acts of violence. They abduct women and children, and subject them to torture and rape and slavery. They have murdered Muslims -- both Sunni and Shia -- by the thousands. They target Christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them when they can for no other reason than they practice a different religion. They declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people." -Obama

Talk is cheap.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...sm-summit-islam-muslim-faith-column/23632171/

Obama's religious blindness aids Islamic State


At this week's White House summit on combating violent extremism on social media, all topics are fair game except Islamist extremism. From the administration's point of view, it may as well not even exist, despite the fact that the first I in ISIS and ISIL stands for "Islamic", as in Islamic State.

The White House has consistently downplayed, if not outright ignored, the religious dimension of the war on terrorism. This has much to do with President Obama's apparent belief that any mention of Islam in the context of terrorism will reinforce negative views of the United States abroad, and supposed American prejudices against Muslims.


Attempts to avoid touching on religious dimension of the struggle has led to several recent high-profile administration gaffes. President Obama strangely tried to deflect the issue at the National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 5 by mentioning the Crusades as an example of Christian excess. Unfortunately, that example is also a key jihadist talking point.

snip
In an interview published days later, Obama downplayed the religious aspect of a terrorist attack on a kosher deli in Paris that specifically targeted French Jews, saying the perpetrator "randomly (shot) a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris."

snip
The White House made a similar blunder in a statement condemning last week's ISIL beaheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya, referring to them only as "Egyptian citizens" and stressing that ISIL attacks are "unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity."

snip
Yet the Obama administration consistently sends the message that it either does not comprehend or refuses to accept the nature of the struggle. Any strategy not based on the facts is a recipe for failure.