President is wise not to call ISIS ‘radical Islamic terrorists’

Editor:

For a long time, one of the many criticisms of President Obama is that he refuses to call various radical, ostensibly Muslim, groups “radical Islamic terrorists”. It is one of many ways that the disingenuous, as well as those who are sincere, have discredited him.

The comments so eloquently delivered by Khizr Khan during the Democratic National Convention were informative in this regard and constituted the beginnings of an education for many of us. When asked in a subsequent interview about the issue of what ISIS, among others, should be called, Mr. Khan (whose son, Humayun, was killed in Iraq while fighting for the United States) stated unequivocally that describing ISIS as “Islamic” unfairly dignifies them, as what they practice has nothing to do with the tenets of Islam.

I do not intend to fully explain why I am convinced it makes practically no sense to call the thugs who are part of ISIS “radical Islamic terrorists”, but I agree with President Obama that it does not.

To put the issue into perspective for those who are certain that Obama is not being straight with us (or worse that he is an ISIS sympathizer) allow me to ask, “Has anyone ever heard the K.K.K referred to as a group of radical Christian terrorists?”

As they have burned churches, lynched and bombed, these ostensibly Christian fanatics have revealed that they have nothing to do with the tenets of Christianity.

Calling the K.K.K. “radical Christian terrorists” is preposterous, because they clearly are not following Christ’s teachings. But I guess, if one’s purpose was to anger Christians, one might call them radical Christian terrorists.

Even if his critics don’t get it, President Obama is keenly aware of the effects his words can have.

Sincerely yours,

Gary Kent
Albion