Islam's "Grey Zone"

[knapplc]

 

 

So....we can't say Muslim extremists because of stupid people taking it wrong?

The bold is bunk. Nobody has ever told you that, and nobody is enforcing that. You've posted it on HuskerBoard dozens of times, including the last time you railed against Obama about this very phrase.

 

I want to know why it bothers you so much that the president is trying to separate peaceful Muslims from radicals co opting their faith. What's it to you? Obama is being diplomatic in what he says, and he's dropping bombs on ISIS. Seems like the best of both worlds.

 

Why is this a thing for you?

 

I don't care what the President says and I don't care if someone personally chooses to just say "Terrorists" instead of labeling them as Muslim terrorists.

 

I have said, I find it interesting the movement towards "educating" people to not use these terms because they are inflammatory when they themselves call themselves that.

 

What "movement?" Where is this "education" being pushed? I get my news from a diverse source of people and I've never, ever heard this narrative except here by you and when I check in on Fox News et al.

[zoogs]

Beyond being important to not project that the U.S. is at war with the Muslim world, it's not doing extremists a favor by including them as part of that world. *They* call themselves Muslim. They would like to recruit Muslisms and make the case that they share a common cause.

Other Muslisms look at this terrorism and this killing and say, "They are not Muslism."

Which message should the U.S. government legitimize?

Which message is stronger in combating radicalization?

As knapplc noted, I think this is really an Obama thing, and one for which I applaud him.

[zoogs]

Obama being Muslim himself probably has a better understanding of the difference better than most.

 

Maybe I've missed the sarcasm here, but didn't you recently post a status message talking about how our country needs to be better educated?

 

I mean ...

 

(edit) Ha ha, sorry. Maybe I did miss the sarcasm.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

So....we can't say Muslim extremists because of stupid people taking it wrong?

The bold is bunk. Nobody has ever told you that, and nobody is enforcing that. You've posted it on HuskerBoard dozens of times, including the last time you railed against Obama about this very phrase.

 

I want to know why it bothers you so much that the president is trying to separate peaceful Muslims from radicals co opting their faith. What's it to you? Obama is being diplomatic in what he says, and he's dropping bombs on ISIS. Seems like the best of both worlds.

 

Why is this a thing for you?

 

I don't care what the President says and I don't care if someone personally chooses to just say "Terrorists" instead of labeling them as Muslim terrorists.

 

I have said, I find it interesting the movement towards "educating" people to not use these terms because they are inflammatory when they themselves call themselves that.

 

What "movement?" Where is this "education" being pushed? I get my news from a diverse source of people and I've never, ever heard this narrative except here by you and when I check in on Fox News et al.

 

 

Where do the people in this thread come up with the idea that using the term "Radical Islam" inflames ISIS and helps them recruit so we shouldn't use it?

[TAKODA]

 

Obama being Muslim himself probably has a better understanding of the difference better than most.

 

Maybe I've missed the sarcasm here, but didn't you recently post a status message talking about how our country needs to be better educated?

 

I mean ...

 

 

Yes sir, indeed I did! I guess the sarcasm did not transfer very well but then again, this is an election year and no need to leave out documented history.

 

Oh wait, he was said to be the anti-Christ too was he not?

[BigRedBuster]

 

Beyond being important to not project that the U.S. is at war with the Muslim world, it's not doing extremists a favor by including them as part of that world. *They* call themselves Muslim. They would like to recruit Muslisms and make the case that they share a common cause.

Other Muslisms look at this terrorism and this killing and say, "They are not Muslism."

Which message should the U.S. government legitimize?

Which message is stronger in combating radicalization?

As knapplc noted, I think this is really an Obama thing, and one for which I applaud him.

 

If this is just an "Obama thing" then I stand corrected. It sure seems like a bigger group of people pushing for this than just one person.

 

Again, I don't give a rip if someone so chooses to just us "terrorists" and leave out any terms related to Islam. But, I also don't have a problem if someone includes them either.

[knapplc]

 

 

 

 

So....we can't say Muslim extremists because of stupid people taking it wrong?

The bold is bunk. Nobody has ever told you that, and nobody is enforcing that. You've posted it on HuskerBoard dozens of times, including the last time you railed against Obama about this very phrase.

 

I want to know why it bothers you so much that the president is trying to separate peaceful Muslims from radicals co opting their faith. What's it to you? Obama is being diplomatic in what he says, and he's dropping bombs on ISIS. Seems like the best of both worlds.

 

Why is this a thing for you?

 

I don't care what the President says and I don't care if someone personally chooses to just say "Terrorists" instead of labeling them as Muslim terrorists.

 

I have said, I find it interesting the movement towards "educating" people to not use these terms because they are inflammatory when they themselves call themselves that.

 

What "movement?" Where is this "education" being pushed? I get my news from a diverse source of people and I've never, ever heard this narrative except here by you and when I check in on Fox News et al.

 

Where do the people in this thread come up with the idea that using the term "Radical Islam" inflames ISIS and helps them recruit so we shouldn't use it?

 

Obama's explanation, and before him president Bush:

 

Obama has explained his verbal strategy as an effort to isolate the group. Earlier this year, Obama said its members are "desperate for legitimacy."

 

"They try to portray themselves as religious leaders — holy warriors in defense of Islam," Obama said at the close of a summit on violent extremism Feb. 22. "That’s why ISIL presumes to declare itself the ‘Islamic State.’ And they propagate the notion that America — and the West, generally — is at war with Islam."

 

Obama went on to say "we are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam."

 

This wording isn’t all that different from former President George W. Bush’s language following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and at the onset of the war in Afghanistan.

 

"This great nation of many religions understands, our war is not against Islam, or against faith practiced by the Muslim people. Our war is a war against evil," Bush said in January 2002.

LINK

[zoogs]

ISIS doesn't fetishize the fantasy of the West waging war on Islam?

[knapplc]

ISIS doesn't fetishize the fantasy of the West waging war on Islam?

They refer to the West as "Crusaders" in all their propaganda for a reason. Words have power, even words that are wrong.

[knapplc]

If this is just an "Obama thing" then I stand corrected. It sure seems like a bigger group of people pushing for this than just one person.

 

Again, I don't give a rip if someone so chooses to just us "terrorists" and leave out any terms related to Islam. But, I also don't have a problem if someone includes them either.

Until Obama's jack-booted thugs kick in your door and haul you away.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

 

So....we can't say Muslim extremists because of stupid people taking it wrong?

The bold is bunk. Nobody has ever told you that, and nobody is enforcing that. You've posted it on HuskerBoard dozens of times, including the last time you railed against Obama about this very phrase.

 

I want to know why it bothers you so much that the president is trying to separate peaceful Muslims from radicals co opting their faith. What's it to you? Obama is being diplomatic in what he says, and he's dropping bombs on ISIS. Seems like the best of both worlds.

 

Why is this a thing for you?

 

I don't care what the President says and I don't care if someone personally chooses to just say "Terrorists" instead of labeling them as Muslim terrorists.

 

I have said, I find it interesting the movement towards "educating" people to not use these terms because they are inflammatory when they themselves call themselves that.

 

What "movement?" Where is this "education" being pushed? I get my news from a diverse source of people and I've never, ever heard this narrative except here by you and when I check in on Fox News et al.

 

Where do the people in this thread come up with the idea that using the term "Radical Islam" inflames ISIS and helps them recruit so we shouldn't use it?

 

Obama's explanation, and before him president Bush:

 

Obama has explained his verbal strategy as an effort to isolate the group. Earlier this year, Obama said its members are "desperate for legitimacy."

 

"They try to portray themselves as religious leaders — holy warriors in defense of Islam," Obama said at the close of a summit on violent extremism Feb. 22. "That’s why ISIL presumes to declare itself the ‘Islamic State.’ And they propagate the notion that America — and the West, generally — is at war with Islam."

 

Obama went on to say "we are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam."

 

This wording isn’t all that different from former President George W. Bush’s language following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and at the onset of the war in Afghanistan.

 

"This great nation of many religions understands, our war is not against Islam, or against faith practiced by the Muslim people. Our war is a war against evil," Bush said in January 2002.

LINK

 

I have said several times in this thread alone that I really don't care if Obama believes that's the best strategy for what he says himself. Hey....it's him having to deal with what happens with his words. Not me.

 

What I have said is....I find the discussion on the usage of the term Radical Islam interesting especially when someone like the gentleman in the interview freely uses it himself.

[BigRedBuster]

 

If this is just an "Obama thing" then I stand corrected. It sure seems like a bigger group of people pushing for this than just one person.

 

Again, I don't give a rip if someone so chooses to just us "terrorists" and leave out any terms related to Islam. But, I also don't have a problem if someone includes them either.

Until Obama's jack-booted thugs kick in your door and haul you away.

 

I'm confused on this comment.

[TAKODA]

 

 

If this is just an "Obama thing" then I stand corrected. It sure seems like a bigger group of people pushing for this than just one person.

 

Again, I don't give a rip if someone so chooses to just us "terrorists" and leave out any terms related to Islam. But, I also don't have a problem if someone includes them either.

Until Obama's jack-booted thugs kick in your door and haul you away.

 

I'm confused on this comment.

 

 

If you see a black car pull into your driveway, don't answer your door!

[zoogs]

 

ISIS doesn't fetishize the fantasy of the West waging war on Islam?

They refer to the West as "Crusaders" in all their propaganda for a reason. Words have power, even words that are wrong.

 

 

There was a time when President Bush caught a lot of flack for referring to one of his wars as a crusade.

 

Ah, here it is: http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html

 

I think Bush got it, but that was a poor choice of words, too. America has dropped so many bombs on Muslim countries over the years, it's not completely easy to make our case, either. Which makes it all the more important.

 

And I do think we have a serious confusion about who the enemy is even among our own citizenry. The choices of message made by American leadership lead to consequences not just for the President.

[knapplc]

 

 

If this is just an "Obama thing" then I stand corrected. It sure seems like a bigger group of people pushing for this than just one person.

 

Again, I don't give a rip if someone so chooses to just us "terrorists" and leave out any terms related to Islam. But, I also don't have a problem if someone includes them either.

Until Obama's jack-booted thugs kick in your door and haul you away.

 

I'm confused on this comment.

 

You are confused on that comment because I am not as funny as I think I am. I was jokingly insinuating that your fear was right, that you "can't use this term" and if you did, Obama would get you.

 

I'll show myself out.