Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Trump, Pence, Mattis, Sessions fail to name “Islamic terrorism” in 9/11 remarks


From Jihad Watch:
The Trump administration: now digitally McMastered. 
“Instead of naming the enemy, Trump seemingly went out of his way to use other descriptors in his speech, including ‘terrorists who attacked us,’ ‘barbaric forces of evil and destruction,’ ‘horrible, horrible enemies,’ ‘enemies of all civilized people,’ and ‘enemies like we’ve never seen before.'” 
That’s great, Mr. President, but you will find it impossible to defeat these horrible, horrible enemies without identifying and working to devise ways to confront their motivating ideology. That’s what you seemed to be promising to do when you rebuked Obama and Hillary Clinton for not daring to say “radical Islamic terrorism.” Now you have joined them. You were right the first time.

4 comments:

Always On Watch said...

This pisses me off to no end!

christian soldier said...

he is taking
advice
from the wrong people --sad

Anonymous said...

It's complicated. I agree the name should stand. But to actually recognize the problem i.e. the ideology you need more than giving it a name. The subject needs to be out in the open, and this is not happening because those who dare talk about it are labeled and persecuted as racists.

This is a war, an undeclared and unrecognized war. But how to declare war to an ideology shrouded in religion? It would immediately become a religious war, and hell would break loose, all over the world, and within our own borders.

Drudge had an excellent article on the Nazi camps in the US before WW II, which had to be "respected" because of the protection granted by the 1st Amendment. Once war broke up, the leaders were imprisoned and the camps closed since giving allegiance to Hitler was treason. We cannot do that now with Islamists, and who do you declare war to? Nazism was an ideology belonging to a mad man, and could be pointedly fought. But what do you do with a religious ideology?

I read an article that we should not talk about Islam, but Shariah. I don't know if fighting Shariah openly would be a step in the right direction. But as of now, I do not see a solution. Ideas are welcome.

Anonymous said...

But what do you do with a religious ideology?

First, you take on the task of clearly defining the term "religion" and insure it bans any political connection.

Once that is clear, Islam is no longer guaranteed protection for it's political agenda. Shariah can & will be legally blocked from enforcement in the US.

At that point, any 'muslim' that is unhappy with the limitations within our Constitutional boundaries must decide whether they are willing to live within our laws or leave our country.

If that antagonizes their population to war against our freedoms, so be it.