Why won’t Obama say the phrase ‘radical Islamic terrorist?’

Obama refuses to use the phrase “radical Islamic terrorist” when speaking about the Islamic State and other Islamic terror organizations. He explained this refusal during a town hall discussion on CNN.

President Obama refuses to use the term “radical Islamic terrorist when talking about radical Islamic terrorists. During a town hall with CNN’s Jake Trapper, a Gold Star Mother asked Obama why he refused to use the term to describe the Islamic State.

Obama claimed the term has been “sort of manufactured.”

Obama explained he did not want to lump murderers with a billion peaceful Muslims around the world.

It’s a cute explanation, but it’s also Orwellian doublespeak.

Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda are Islamic. That is their entire being. They believe in a literal interpretation of the Quran, and they want a global Islamic State under the rule of a caliph.

These people believe they are the true Muslims. All others are apostates. And this is very true if you follow a literal reading of the Quran. The world does not contain a billion Muslims. It contains tens of thousands of Muslims and nearly a billion apostates.

The moderate Muslim is not a Muslim. The real Muslim is a soldier, a fighter who is willing to spread Islam by all means necessary. So perhaps Obama is right to avoid the term. The terrorists aren’t the radicals. They’re the orthodox. They’re the ones who correctly read and understand their holy text.

There is another theory about Obama’s reluctance to confront the Islamic State and other terrorists directly. He is a Muslim.

There is at least anecdotal evidence for this, which we have covered before. As a Muslim, he has infiltrated our government and continues to disrupt our war on terror, allowing the Islamic State to form and grow exponentially under his watch.

Certainly, he got Osama bin Laden, but the Al Qaeda ringleader was ineffective by the time he was killed. What better cover for a secret Muslim terrorist in the White House?

At least, that’s how the theory goes. Most people dismiss this idea, but it would explain some of his actions, or lack of action. And it would explain his reluctance to use the phrase, “radical Islamic terrorists.”

Regardless if this is all right wing hysteria or not, one sad fact remains. Our president clearly likes to play word games with the truth. What are the consequences of his inability to see things as they really are? What danger has this brought?

There is no scenario where this ends well for the truth or the American people. We can only be grateful the end of his regime is near.

By David Drudge


1 comment

  1. Patrick Gannon Reply

    Wow such hatred for our President. I’m ashamed to share citizenship with Drudge. To even infer that Obama is a Muslim terrorist is despicable and un-American in my view. I assume Drudge is a Trump “birther” who lets his hatred get in the way of logic and reason, not to mention evidence. Check the Politifact site for “who-killed-more-terrorists-obama-or-bush” For someone that Drudge wants us to think is a Muslim, he’s sure killed a lot of them – mostly going after leaders, and doing so very successfully. In this very forum, I read another article today about the ISIS “apocalypse” in which the author claimed ISIS was just about finished. Who gets credit for that, David Drudge? Donald Trump?
    Obama avoids the term because he doesn’t want to offend what Drudge refers to as a billion apostates. Drudge, it seems, would prefer to make all of them radical Islamists, by offending all Muslims. That’s certainly one approach – the one that Trump embraces.
    Drudge does hit on the key problem though. When you call your ancient books “holy,” “sacred,” “inspired,” or worst of all “literal,” then those who do what the books say are not terrorists, they are righteous. And as we look back in history, we can see that this very much applies to Christianity as well. Indeed people still use the bible as authority to blow up abortion clinics, beat up or kill LGBTs, burn witches, etc. and they are not terrorists in their mind – they are righteous because an ancient book of myths told them they should commit these evil acts.
    The problem is in the ancient, sexist, homophobic, racist, genocidal books that all the Abrahamic religions have embraced. It’s time to recognize that religion and peace cannot coexist as long as these books continue to be called holy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *