If you watched last night’s speech (full text) wondering whether the president would acknowledge the religious nature of the war, or specifically, that the people chopping off heads are followers of Islam, you’re probably disappointed. And angry.
— Ron Christie (@Ron_Christie) September 11, 2014
ISIL is not Islamic? The President refuses to acknowledge the theological motivations of the Islamic extremists. #ObamaSpeech
— Tony Perkins (@tperkins) September 11, 2014
The president failed when he said the group of Allah-worshiping terrorists known as ISIS aren’t true followers of Islam, because no “religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim.”
The left-leaning CNN said the president “was trying to make a broader point.” What is the broader point? That ISIS “is a terrorist organization, pure and simple, and it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way”? Why would this preclude that ISIS is Islamic? Is President Obama an authority on Islam?
“If left unchecked,” he said “these terrorists could pose a growing threat beyond that region, including to the United States.”
Islamic terrorists aren’t presently a growing threat to the U.S.? I’d wager that terrorist cells exist within these borders. More Twitter reactions:
It'd be nice if someone other than the President would tell us #ISIS isn't really islamic. Like maybe lots and lots of Muslims.
— Derek Hunter (@derekahunter) September 11, 2014
"ISIL is not Islamic" – Obama What is it, Jewish? – It might not be all of Islam, but it is all radical Islamists
— Cameron Gray (@Cameron_Gray) September 11, 2014
Sen. Rand Paul reportedly defended the statement:
Rand Paul is defending Obama's "ISIL is not Islamic" comments. "I think he has a point." Come on!
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 11, 2014