Obama: Calling ISIL 'Islamic extremists' would accomplish nothing

[GMDino]

(06-14-2016, 08:36 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What exactly would the label accomplish?  How you read my post and missed that part confuses me, but I'll explain again.  Jeffrey Dahmer wasn't a cannibalistic serial killer, he was "a human flesh oriented depriver of homosapien life".  A child molester should instead be called, "a person with sexual proclivities towards those younger than legally allowed."  The fact that you don't get this distinction simply shows how significant, and pervasive, this problem has become.

That fact that you said...

(06-14-2016, 08:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I get why Obama shies away from the term, he's trying not to alienate islamic allies in the region who are aiding in the fight against Daesh.  Even for those that aren't actively assisting it makes sense not to give them the impression that the US considers all of islam to be the enemy.  However, in so doing he minimizes the cause behind these attacks in the US.

...but still think somehow people would be more "focused" or there would be a greater "consensus" if just said one word different.

It accomplishes nothing.

The President in now way minimized the shooting.

Quote:First of all, our hearts go out to the families of those who have been killed.  Our prayers go to those who have been wounded.  This is a devastating attack on all Americans.  It is one that is particularly painful for the people of Orlando, but I think we all recognize that this could have happened anywhere in this country.  And we feel enormous solidarity and grief on behalf of the families that have been affected.

The fact that it took place at a club frequented by the LGBT community I think is also relevant.  We’re still looking at all the motivations of the killer.  But it’s a reminder that regardless of race, religion, faith or sexual orientation, we’re all Americans, and we need to be looking after each other and protecting each other at all times in the face of this kind of terrible act.


With respect to the killer, there’s been a lot of reporting that’s been done.  It’s important to emphasize that we’re still at the preliminary stages of the investigation, and there’s a lot more that we have to learn.  The one thing that we can say is that this is being treated as a terrorist investigation.  It appears that the shooter was inspired by various extremist information that was disseminated over the Internet.  All those materials are currently being searched, exploited so we will have a better sense of the pathway that the killer took in making the decision to launch this attack. 


As Director Comey I think will indicate, at this stage we see no clear evidence that he was directed externally.  It does appear that, at the last minute, he announced allegiance to ISIL, but there is no evidence so far that he was in fact directed by ISIL.  And there also at this stage is no direct evidence that he was part of a larger plot.  In that sense, it appears to be similar to what we saw in San Bernardino, but we don’t yet know.  And this is part of what is going to be important in terms of the investigation.

As far as we can tell right now, this is certainly an example of the kind of homegrown extremism that all of us have been so concerned about for a very long time. 

What you are saying is exactly why the President said what he did in the OP.  It serves no purpose but would make a small group feel better for some reason.

He is preaching unity.  

If someone thinks that means terrorism isn't bad enough because he won't say Islamic then they have deeper problems.  And they will never join the "consensus".