• 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
Wait....

The "individuals" are "mostly Muslim" but because they do not hold to the traditional views of Islam, they are therefor NOT "Radical Islam". Further they are killing other Muslims, and that means for sure they are neither "radical" nor "Islam".

Got it.


And now back to our regularly scheduled reality. Upcoming: A new report shows Libya is terrorist free due to US foreign policy.

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.
 
I do not agree that this is not a lie, as in a deliberate attempt to deceive. As a Christian I too know what its like to be blamed for the asinine views of others who claim the faith, especially those Americans who believe Jesus has given them the right to war on whoever they disagree with. and true faith is NOT at the heart of their actions, but a distorted, perverted truth of invention counter to the teachings of either of our faiths.

However, here we see a member of the administration of the president of the United States playing word games for purely partisan political purposes, a deliberate attempt to mislead that is far, far more dangerous than "you can keep your plan. period"

The point the White House should be making is that traditional Islam is NOT a threat, and make it clear with traditional Islam leaders standing at the President's side, promising full co-operation and a cleansing of the radicals in their midst in the US.

When Obama can bring his "buddies" in and have them face retribution, America will lose a lot of it's fear of Islam and maybe not confuse Sikh and Hindu as Islam. Frankly, with there never having been a "green" on Homeland Security's scale, the usually brave American people aren't sure who their friends are....FFS you have sunk to strip searching Asian women entering from Canada....


I do not understand....

When I was in Jr High in the US I learned when you stand up to a bully, risk a beating maybe, you win. If this America had been around in 1944, you would all be speaking Japanese/German

Sorry! Read your other post that you addressed to me, wrong. Please ignore my previous comment!
 
I think it's great that you don't mind if some people use the term radical Mormons, but you are just one person and you don't speak for all Mormons. Look at post #3 and tell that person doesn't think all Muslims are bad. And that's the problem today, too many people are blaming Islam for all the things these terrorist do.

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.
 
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.
 
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.

Your post looks like a good thread starter.
 
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.

Freedom fries. There is nothing else to add.
 
It's not a lie (by them) if they believe its true, lies are meant to deceive. I don't believe that's what they are doing. They are trying to correct the notion it's all about Islam. I think by conflating these radicals with Islam is the reason we'll more domestic terrorists, like the shooter at Ft. Hood.
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)
 
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.

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.
 
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.

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....
 
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.
 
Back
Top Bottom