Quote:
Originally Posted by calgaryblood
Started watching 2 minutes of the video and turned it off because it started off with a blatant lie right off the bat. Obama did mention terrorism and specifically Isil and Alqaeda.
He also said he will destroy those groups so him saying he didn't mention Islamic radicalism or terrorism is a flat out lie and this video doesn't deserve to be listened to after that.
|
You're free to ignore everyone you might disagree with and live in your little regressive bubble (your posts on other topics have demonstrated a propensity for this that is not rare, particularly on twitter) but just so you know, here's the full text of the remarks he's talking about.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...rlando-florida
Islam was mentioned twice, and once in the context of ISIL being a "perversion" of Islam - that is, not really Islamic, which he's said many times before. I don't think Sam's remarks were a particularly good spiel by his own standards, as I said, but this response is frustrating, mostly because I know there are a lot of people who will similarly just put their fingers in their ears and say "I'm not listening".
Incidentally, here is a good article about
why President Obama takes the rhetorical tack he does on this issue. I'm far more sympathetic to it than Harris is, though I still think he should be more direct in his responses.
http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...-islam/487079/
Quote:
|
Obama, in my reading, does not—contra his right-leaning critics—suffer illusions about the pathologies afflicting the broader Muslim world. If anything, his pessimism on matters related to the dysfunctions of Muslim states, and to the inability of the umma—the worldwide community of Muslims—to contain and ultimately neutralize the extremist elements in its midst, has, at times, an almost paralyzing effect on him. The president has come to the conclusion (as I outlined in my recent Atlantic cover story, “The Obama Doctrine”) that the underlying problems afflicting Islam are too deep, and too resistant to American intervention, to warrant implementation of the sort of policies that his critics, including his critics in foreign-policy think tanks, demand.
|