Obama Excoriates Republican Obsession With The Term ‘Radical Islam’

[Darryl1958]

That was a low blow.
He mentioned nothing of the Bishop.

Of course I never. I have no idea who the guy is even.
This is what I have had to deal with from CB for months now.

Oh well, trolls will be trolls. It is who they are and what they do.

 

[I_trust]

Bishop Cantu is American.

Your statement just became more absurd.
Straw man arguments.

 

[I_trust]

Of course I never. I have no idea who the guy is even.
This is what I have had to deal with from CB for months now.

Oh well, trolls will be trolls. It is who they are and what they do.

When trying to defend an indefensible argument set up straw men, put words in other’s mouths, use language and terms that obscure truth…

At least others with open minds can see the tactics.

 

[Crossbones]

Your statement just became more absurd.
Straw man arguments.

Darryl said that Americans who are worked up by waterboarding are hypocrites, yet here is an American bishop who seems very concerned about torture. So, while he us attempting to insult those who hold a view contrary to your position, it is important to remind lurkers and newcomers that the position is contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[Crossbones]

Of course I never. I have no idea who the guy is even.
This is what I have had to deal with from CB for months now.

Oh well, trolls will be trolls. It is who they are and what they do.

If you are going to call Americans who worry about torture hypocrites, it is important to remind you that includes Bishop Cantu.

 

[I_trust]

Darryl said that Americans who are worked up by waterboarding are hypocrites, yet here is an American bishop who seems very concerned about torture. So, while he us attempting to insult those who hold a view contrary to your position, it is important to remind lurkers and newcomers that the position is contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

No…You conveniently left out that he said they were hypocrites (and I quote) “to the extent that they dismiss radicalism in Islam as a little piffling nothing, and a Republican obsession.”
He never mentioned the Bishop. He never said the Bishop dismissed radicalism in Islam.

Frankly, your insinuation was uncharitable and abusive.

Anyway it was a straw man argument. So troll on.

 

[Crossbones]

No…You conveniently left out that he said (and I quote) “to the extent that they dismiss radicalism in Islam as a little piffling nothing, and a Republican obsession.”
He never mentioned the Bishop. He never said the Bishop dismissed radicalism in Islam

Frankly, your insinuation was uncharitable and abusive.

Anyway it was a straw man argument. So troll on.

Any attempt to marginalize torture as a minor issue by suggesting that those who care about the issue are hypocrites and that only three people were tortured have to understand that within the Church, there is serious concern about torture. As Bishop Cantu recently pointed out

"Mention the word “torture” and Abu Ghraib comes to mind. The images of naked detainees cowering as dogs lunge at them make us squirm with shame. But then we think, those were extreme circumstances; the United States doesn’t do this anymore. Yet we still hear some advocate for waterboarding and “enhanced interrogation techniques” (a euphemism for torture) as a way of extracting information.

In the current environment of fear, we do well to remember Catholic teaching. It tells us that torture is always wrong. In his 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor, Saint John Paul II included physical and mental torture in his list of social evils that are “intrinsically evil” (No. 80). The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church says the prohibition against torture “cannot be contravened under any circumstances” (No. 404)."

He wrote this on June 8th. Just a week later, we are faced with the fear and yet torture is dismissed as some sort of minor concern only held by liberals. It is important for Catholics to keep in mind what the Church teaches about torture as outlined by BIshop Cantu above.

 

[I_trust]

Any attempt to marginalize torture as a minor issue by suggesting that those who care about the issue are hypocrites and that only three people were tortured have to understand that within the Church, there is serious concern about torture. As Bishop Cantu recently pointed out

"Mention the word “torture” and Abu Ghraib comes to mind. The images of naked detainees cowering as dogs lunge at them make us squirm with shame. But then we think, those were extreme circumstances; the United States doesn’t do this anymore. Yet we still hear some advocate for waterboarding and “enhanced interrogation techniques” (a euphemism for torture) as a way of extracting information.

In the current environment of fear, we do well to remember Catholic teaching. It tells us that torture is always wrong. In his 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor, Saint John Paul II included physical and mental torture in his list of social evils that are “intrinsically evil” (No. 80). The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church says the prohibition against torture “cannot be contravened under any circumstances” (No. 404)."

He wrote this on June 8th. Just a week later, we are faced with the fear and yet torture is dismissed as some sort of minor concern only held by liberals. It is important for Catholics to keep in mind what the Church teaches about torture as outlined by BIshop Cantu above.

I will humor your attempt at a straw man argument…
Since you quoted me, are you insinuating (with no evidence) that I am trying to “marginalize torture as a minor issue”?

By the way Pope Francis has no problem using the words “Islamic terrorism”

 

[Peter_Plato]

Some tips for how to discuss the topic of this thread with a "progressive friend:”

stream.org/guns-dont-kill-people-islamists-discuss-orlando-jihad-massacre-terrified-liberal-friends/

 

[GaryTaylor]

Don’t you love how on the heals of mass murder and chaos Obama comes out and plays politics. He’s mad at the republicans? Donald Trump upset him more than the Orlando massacre apparently. Its despicable on the heals of disaster a President uses the event for polemics of politics. Same with Newtown. Should be no secret why so many think so little of him let alone his tragic handling of isis and radical Islam.

Gun control/Islamophobia!!!

 

[GaryTaylor]

No…You conveniently left out that he said they were hypocrites (and I quote) “to the extent that they dismiss radicalism in Islam as a little piffling nothing, and a Republican obsession.”
He never mentioned the Bishop. He never said the Bishop dismissed radicalism in Islam.

Frankly, your insinuation was uncharitable and abusive.

Anyway it was a straw man argument. So troll on.

Most people see through all that thank God.

 

[Used2beSherryG]

Muslims are human beings, not orcs. Most want peace. But let me ask you this; how do you feel when you hear that a Muslim kills someone, either in your country or abroad? Do you feel anger? Do you feel that they are a threat to your way of life that must be stopped?

Now ask yourself, how would you feel if you were in their shoes. How would you feel if someone you loved died in a drone attack and their killers seemed to think that so long as the terrorist died, the ends justified the means? How would you feel, when your news shows images of crying mothers and ruined villages?

Muslim’s aren’t become radicalized because they are inherently evil. They are becoming radicalized because they are angry. They are becoming radicalized because they feel we are a threat to their way of life and must be stopped.

If America is really interested in stopping terrorism, we need to stop looking the other way when Saudi Arabia does something wrong, all while wagging our fingers (and sometimes, imposing sanctions) on other countries that do the same thing. And we have to admit, even if we never intended, we created the atmosphere were terrorism breeds.

Apparently, you have never studied world history or you would not be making such claims about just how Muslims are becoming radicalized. Please study up on just how long Muslims have been terrorizing other countries/cultures. This is their entire way of life, their ideology. Don’t kid yourself that this is due to something the good ole USA has done wrong.

 

[Darryl1958]

Doesn’t it? - I’m never quite sure these days.

Raheel Raza who is actually a practitioner of Islam but clings to Liberal values seems to think so.

**By The Numbers - The Untold Story of Muslim Opinions & Demographics **
youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFDDQHk

I did get some of the numbers I have been using previously from this link.

People who come up with numbers in the thousands to describe what we are up against in terms of Islamist influence would do well to listen to what she is saying.

Like virtually any liberal in the ME, she is under death threats, not from Republicans, not from conservatives, but from Islamists and members of her own religion who cannot abide by her liberal values.
Instead of focusing on the illiberal people who would kill liberals in the ME for the crime of being liberal, Obama focuses on Republicans as the culprits. His is not an untypical response from the left.

It is the rare leftist that gives even a passing glance to this kind of testimony.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

But you were quoting my statement about jihadists (I clearly used the word jihadist) and trying to maintain that a religious motivation was not established.

But you were quoting my statement where I clearly used the word “terrorism”. By returning to “terrorism” I was just putting the discussion back on track.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

They may be angry to being with, but they still adopt the religion. I don’t see any justification for assuming their religious motivations are just a pretense.

If they were angry to begin with, then they obviously did adopt the religious narrative to legitimize their anger. The burden is on those whose claim Islam itself it driving ordinary reasonable people to become terrorists to prove that point.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Don’t you love how on the heals of mass murder and chaos Obama comes out and plays politics.

It was in response to Trump who instantly politicized the Orlando shooting by using it to call for Obama’s resignation. When the presumptive nominee of a major party comes out with an accusation like that, don’t you think it is appropriate to respond?

Its despicable on the heals of disaster a President uses the event for polemics of politics.

Only after Trump did it worse.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Apparently, you have never studied world history or you would not be making such claims about just how Muslims are becoming radicalized. Please study up on just how long Muslims have been terrorizing other countries/cultures. This is their entire way of life, their ideology.

You are making the mistake of putting all 1.6 billion Muslims in the same basket. Sure, the news coverage is all about those that cause trouble. All religions have their trouble makers. But it is military suicide to ignore the vast majority of Muslims that support our efforts against terrorism and tell those allies they are just as bad as the terrorists themselves.

 

[Ridgerunner]

You are making the mistake of putting all 1.6 billion Muslims in the same basket. Sure, the news coverage is all about those that cause trouble. All religions have their trouble makers. But it is military suicide to ignore the vast majority of Muslims that support our efforts against terrorism and tell those allies they are just as bad as the terrorists themselves.

If, indeed, the “vast majority of Muslims” support our efforts against terrorism, use of the term “radical Islam” or equivalents aren’t going to change that. If a Middle EAstern Muslim, for example, is worried about being beheaded, his wife raped to death and his children butchered, and looks to America to save him from it, American terminology is the very least of his concerns. And that’s particularly true if he uses the same or similar terminology himself. He might actually find it comforting that America finally understands what he’s facing.

 

[Crossbones]

I will humor your attempt at a straw man argument…
Since you quoted me, are you insinuating (with no evidence) that I am trying to “marginalize torture as a minor issue”?

No, I am saying that comments where those who question torture are called hypocrites because it affect three terrorists marginalize torture as a minor issue.

By the way Pope Francis has no problem using the words “Islamic terrorism”

Semantics and something I don’t worry about unless semantics are used to justify an intrinsic evil, such as ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ in place of torture or ‘choice’ in place of abortion.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

If, indeed, the “vast majority of Muslims” support our efforts against terrorism, use of the term “radical Islam” or equivalents aren’t going to change that. If a Middle EAstern Muslim, for example, is worried about being beheaded, his wife raped to death and his children butchered, and looks to America to save him from it, American terminology is the very least of his concerns. And that’s particularly true if he uses the same or similar terminology himself. He might actually find it comforting that America finally understands what he’s facing.

It is not the Muslims worried about being beheaded that are in danger of being radicalized by American rhetoric. But the much larger group of Muslims that are not immediately threatened by terrorism and are unsure about the US and are in danger of being radicalized. There is no reason to concede this group to ISIS. Better to isolate ISIS as much as possible. I see no positive military benefit of emphasizing the claimed religion of the terrorists.