• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Josh Earnest: Wouldn’t Be Accurate to Call Paris Attackers ‘Radical Islamists’

Do you agree or disagree with Earnest?


  • Total voters
    21

Whatchu talkin bout, Willis? I'm saying (which you quoted me saying) that Obama refuses to call terrorism, "terrorism". Not sure how you got to that.
 

Sorry! Read your other post that you addressed to me, wrong. Please ignore my previous comment!
 

And dishonestly misrepresenting what happened in this instance isn't going to fix that "problem". It simply creates a different set of problems to go along with that one.
 
This is just painful. It's like that time our genius President called the terrorism at Fort Hood "Work Place Violence".

Indeed.

Why is it that one aspect of the political spectrum insists on calling things which they are not, and not calling things as they are?

“revenue enhancements” instead of “tax increases”
"undocumented worker" instead of "illegal alien" or worse "Undocumented American" instead of "Illegal alien" (this second one is down right wrong!)
"kinetic military action" instead of "combat operations"
"Pro-Choice" instead of "Pro-Abortion"

"War on Women" instead of "Forcing others to pay for your birth control"

"Would-Be Americans" instead of "Illegal alien"

"Single-Payer System" or "Public Option" instead of "Government-Run Healthcare"

"Fetus" instead of "Baby to be aborted"

"Overseas Contingency Operations" instead of "War on Terror"

"Border adjustment mechanisms" instead of "Tariffs"

"Man-Caused Disaster" instead of "Terrorism"

"Raising money" instead of "Taxes"

"Giveaway for the wealthy" instead of "Tax cut"

"Fees" instead of "Taxes"

"Investment" instead of "Government spending"

Why all this malarky? Playing with the language.
 
Except it's inherently about Islam. If there was an international epidemic of Christians bombing civil structures out of some radicalized view of Christianity, it would inherently be about Christianity.
What is the point of identifying terrorist to a religion whether it Islam or Christianity?

I say if we hadn't decimated Iraq (a predominately Islamic country) with Bush's phony war, we would not see the terrorism we see today. These terrorists (criminals) are using the "war with Islam" as a rallying cry to recruit more of them. Wars have unintended consequences and this is one of them.
 

Because it distinguishes them from other terrorists by their individual motives. Terrorists operate with different aims, afterall.

The IRA were wanting separation from Britain and we noted that their terrorism was largely about control of Ireland. It's not like we had a hissy fit calling them Irish terrorists or radicals for fear of offending the Irish.

Radical Islamic terrorism has been an international problem since the 1970s. By laying the blame on Bush, you're wandering off the trail desperate for some sort of political comfort.
 
Do you agree or disagree with him?
Choices in the Poll

Agree with Earnest
Disagree with Earnest
Other



Maybe it's some kind of ultimate test for the Obama faithful and poor Josh has to be the one who sets fire to the bag-o-****.
Given that, I don't blame him at all.
The State Department is doing the same thing.
Hell, Obama himself is pushing this nonsense and looks stupid for it.
 

Your post looks like a good thread starter.
 

Freedom fries. There is nothing else to add.
 
well, believe what you will, but very few are buying it.. the administration is intentionally telling people a falsehood... their heart might be in the right place, but it's still an intentional falsehood.

everything these asshats do is in the name of their radical brand of Islam... that is a truth.. a fact... and there's no need to lie about it.

Where the Christians who burned abortion clinics radical Christians?
definitely.... their actions were guided entirely by their interpretations of Christianity which fall well outside of the mainstream of Christianity. (opposing abortion can be well within the norm, but committing violence in the name of those beliefs is well outside the norm.. IE.. radical)
 
Could you please prove to me they are lying. As I said previously the fact they said something that in your estimation is wrong, that does not mean they are lying.
 
Your post looks like a good thread starter.

Pete, not a bad idea. I'll have to take a few minutes to figure out where it would best belong in the thread topics.
 

Because its all spin, all the time. The left trying to hide from reality behind words.
 
Could you please prove to me they are lying. As I said previously the fact they said something that in your estimation is wrong, that does not mean they are lying.

they are intentionally not calling it radical Islam... he explains why in the video.

unfortunately... it IS radical Islam.... that's just a simple fact.
it is not " in my estimation".. it is a fact.... a known fact.

so it really boils down to the administration lying, or being inconceivably ignorant....
 

It's also religious fundamentalism, and I don't think there's a religion that immune to that sort of interpretation by some. That being said, it appears only the Islamist fundamentalists that are beheading people and killing non-believers, but I might be wrong on that.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…