Could the world get any crazier? We have a president who denies that ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, is Islamic, and such an insane act of denial is commonplace. Hillary Clinton has condemned Trump’s attacks on ISIS as helping to “create this clash of civilizations that is actually a recruiting tool for ISIS and other radical jihadists.”” We’re apparently supposed to believe we can’t criticize Islam or else it’ll turn Muslims into terrorists, but that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam.Barack Obama bends over backwards to avoid using the phrase “radical Islamic terror,” even though the “radical” part is purposely put in there to acknowledge that it’s a fringe group of Muslims, not all Muslims, responsible for the atrocities that terrorists carry out. Now, following the NYC bombing, not only is “radical Islamic terror” not P.C., the word “terror” itself is triggering to some.
Richard Fowler: Here’s what de Blasio tried to do yesterday, right? Yes, it was an intentional act. Yes, it was an act of terror. The problem is when you say the word ‘terror’ because of word association it automatically assumes you are talking about people of the Muslim faith. And that is why he said an intentional act and not terrorism because we don’t know if it was Muslim. None of these organizations have taken credit for it. So before we go out and start to blame and shame a whole religion we ought to be very careful and get all the facts first.The only person assuming that we all associate “terror” with Muslims is Fowler in this situation.
There have been 29,236 DEADLY Islamic terrorist attacks since 9-11 but please don’t use the word “terror” it might offend Muslims.
Are any Muslims offended by the fact that other Muslims are CHEERING the New York bombing? Twitter is awash with congratulations and praise.What kind of newspeak will we be subject to next, and what are we supposed to call terrorists, if not terrorists?
[Note: This post was written by The Analytical Economist]