http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/01/13/white-house-still-refuses-to-even-say-the-phrase-radical-islam-n1942527
listen to the current White House Baghdad Bob Press Secretary...the contortions this administration goes thru to remain PC boggles the mind
This is absurd
Just because religious leaders have condemned their actions as "entirely inconsistent with Islam" the fact remains that their actions appear to be entirely consistent with radical islam which we all know exists. Shit, the radical islamists themselves will tell you that.
Why the fuck do we all need to collectively pretend that they don't exists just to appease the feelings of so called moderates who are clearly afraid of their own radical factions of their nutbag belief system
But is that exactly what occurred? Did the two men that assassinated the journalists at Charlie Hedbo choose the magazine at random and then, after the fact as Earnest suggests, try and justify their actions by invoking Islam?
Did the man who took hostages at a Paris grocery store just happen to pick a Jewish store by random, and then later as the White House position posits, justify his acts by invoking Islam?
Or did a radical version of Islam, one embraced by tens of millions muslims world wide, influence these men before they acted? Is this same version of Islam inspiring muslims all over the world to travel to Iraq and Syria to fight for the Islamic State? Did this same version of Islam inspire the 9/11 attacks?
The White House is right about two things. First, labels matter. That's why Earnest is bending over backwards not to use the "radical Islam" label.
Second, accuracy matters. Are young men seeking to terrorize and kill and only then, as the White House suggests, later looking for an ideology to justify what they already did? Or is there an ideology that is inspiring and motivating these attacks in the first place? And if so what is its name?
