This post is somewhat convoluted and I apologize. The current actions of ISIS, the radical Islamist group creating turmoil in the mideast ,makes me bring up many expressions of thought. I welcome any comments or additional thoughts on this issue, thank you………
Radical Islamist Thoughts 2015-30
I was reading the newspaper and read that President Obama or his administrative people are refraining from using the words Islamist, radical, and terrorists in their language to the press. They want to use a more generic “violent extremism” instead. Obama is trying to be mindful of the impact that his words can have abroad, it stated.
Hmmmmmm! The French Prime Minister suggested that the world is “waging a war against Islamist extremists, and the British Minister stated that Europe and the U.S. face a “very serious Islamist extremist terrorist threat”.
My question is “Who are we trying to appease” by not calling the terrorists— Islamists, if that is what they are? It must be mentioned by any that do so, to explain also, that it is the terrorists that try to justify their actions by invoking the religion of Islam and their own deviant view of it, and it is NOT the typical Muslim adherent to the religion that are doing the vile things the terrorists do.
The word “Islamist” is caricaturized by describing a supporter or advocate of Islamic fundamentalism and is said to make a moral conservatism, and attempt to implement Islamic values in all spheres of life. If that person or group uses terrorism as means of doing so, then it is indeed appropriate to use the words together.
A general in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) told a conference in January that “You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists.” The same words were used by a Democratic congressman, Tulsi Gabbard, who stated the same context, on Fox news. Is is in response to President Obama’s article in the press.
The battles with ISIS in the Mideast are ones that are taking a toll on many people of many countries. There are many people that have been displaced, killed, mutilated, beheaded, etc. by these Islamist killers. They are supported by unknowns and this compounds the problems. They, the Islamists, are sons and daughters of people that live in the areas that do their deeds and I question this. In this, I wonder if family members see their sons or daughters as being righteous in their actions. Some religious leaders do not just support them, but promote their causes of killing, for various reasons. Many times the actions are against the everyday people that live there, the majorities, of which, are Muslim.
I bring up the battle cry that the terrorists sometimes use, as was done in France, in January 2015, of Allah Akbar, or God is the Greatest, in English. (This phrase is used by Muslims for nonviolent reasons also, as a note.) This signifies or tries to show that what they do is for their god, Allah, and that their god approves of the action they are doing. Nothing can be further from the truth. Just as the word God was used during the Crusades, using the word god today for their actions is incorrect. The Crusades are mentioned, because it is an example of how those that committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ, used religion as a basis of doing wrong. And it was wrong! It was wrong to kill innocent people to justify the religious reasons at the time. I believe that leaders and fighters of conflicts might well be careful in using God as a reason for their actions. Nobody can speak for God in what they do!!!
President Obama at a breakfast recently (Feb 2015) made a statement using the word Crusades, and the former VA Governor Gilmore stated that his (President Obama’s) remarks were the “most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make.” I do not agree. The whole text of the speech reads differently and it was taken out of context in my opinion. This happens many times unfortunately and this type of action is wrong also. The President also stated “Part of what I want to touch on today is the degree to which we’ve seen the professions of faith used both as an instrument of great good, but also twisted and misused in the name of evil,”.
Right-side radio host Rush Limbaugh made the Christianity reference the subject of one of his segments on his show. “Why would you attempt to downplay Islamist extremism?” Mr. Limbaugh said. “Why would you attempt to put in perspective the actions taken today by Al Qaeda and ISIS and Boko Haram and the Khorasan Group and all of the rest of them by claiming that just as many atrocities have taken place in the name of Christ?” Why? Becasus it may be true in the past and it is hard sometimes to admit it…….
These are examples also, of using sound bites to promote the opinion of the day. It becomes political and if ALL the facts or total speech is available then the truth comes out. It is the way it is though and I have to be careful I do not allow these sayings to sway my opinion.
That being said, I think President Obama and those of his administration are incorrect in many things they do, and many of the other foreign policies they promote can also be criticized. I feel fortunate that he is in the last tenure of his leadership and although there are many areas of his Presidency that can be applauded,( or not) this type of policy thinking and trying to be politically correct in his speeches, are not correct either.