Extremism Summit Or Apologist Platform? *Open Thread*

I happened to catch some of President Obama’s speech at the “Extremist Summit” on Tuesday. As I forced myself to listen to him, I could not believe the words coming out of his mouth. He wasn’t talking about radical terrorism, but how Muslims are treated here in the United States. He went on and on about their history here, laying railroad tracks, the first mosque (which he noted was in North Dakota), and on and on.

Huh? Why in the world were we getting a lecture on “Muslims in America” when the issue was Terrorism? Hey, don’t take my word for it. Here is Obama lecturing us on the many and various contributions by Muslims in America:

Again I ask, why the hell were we getting this lecture at a Terrorism summit, implying that we are bigoted and intolerant of Muslims in our country? As I have noted before, the FBI statistics have demonstrated that MUSLIMS are not the top religious group targeted for hate crimes in this country, JEWS are. I don’t see Obama throwing some “summit” going on about the lengthy history of Jews in America, and all of their contributions to this country. And living near Charleston, SC, I can tell you, Jews have been an INTEGRAL part of our history from the very beginning (Reformed Judaism actually began in Charleston).

I am not so sure Obama is accurate in his claim about Muslims, however. Neither is Roger Kimball of PJ Media emphasized. That is not wholly accurate – Kimball called it a “lie.” But that doesn’t stop Obama from making the claim. (Note: This PJ Media article highlights just how many of our Founding Fathers viewed Islam.) Much as he continued to make the claim that ISIS is not Islamic, and that Islam does not condone this kind of violence. Well, Kimball takes MAJOR exception to that. From PJ Media:

[…] But let’s return to the President’s speech. “No religion,” he says, “condones the killing of innocents . . .” Can Obama really be that ignorant of the glorious history of Islam and the glittering deeds of Mohammed? We have it on the highest (for Muslims, the only) authority that he regularly slaughtered innocents. Consider, to take just one example, the 627 siege of Medina, then home to a Jewish tribe. After a couple of weeks, the inhabitants surrendered unconditionally. Mohammad then had the 600-800 men butchered and sold the women and children into slavery.

“We are not at war with Islam,” Obama said yesterday. “We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.” Let’s see, that would the Iranians? No, no: we like them now, remember? After all, the President of the United States has reversed himself and is doing everything he can to assure that the radical Shia state can acquire nuclear weapons. He doesn’t say that, of course, but actions—including non-actions—speak louder than words. Where are those unperverted Muslims of whom the Presidents is so fond? In the common rooms of American universities? Maybe. In our cities and suburbs? Perhaps. But may we agree that it is not (to make an arbitrary and woefully incomplete list) the people behind such actions as

•The 9/11 terrorist attacks (mostly Saudis involved in that little escapade)
•The Bali nightclub bombing
•The Ft. Hood “workplace violence” event
•The London tube and bus bombings
•The Madrid train bombing
•The Boston Marathon carnage
•The Charlie Hebdo and Jewish supermarket slaughter last month (“folks shot in a deli” was how Obama described the latter)
•The Danish shootings just a few days ago by another “Allahu Akbar” shouting chap. […] (Click here to read the rest.)/blockquote>
What is clear to me, all the examples above aside, is that Obama is absolutely ignorant of Islamic history.

And again, he needs to read the excellent Grame Wood article in The Atlantic about ISIS. It most definitely IS Islamic, whether Obama is willing to admit it or not. Does that mean all Muslims are terrorists? Of course not.

But to continue to act as if these terrorists are NOT Muslims is just sheer denial. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, (D-HI) makes this point as The Hill notes:

[…] Gabbard, a combat veteran who served in Iraq, has repeatedly criticized the White House for not defining militants from ISIS as Islamic extremists. She said that the summit’s “broad focus” is further proof that the administration doesn’t understand America’s true enemy.

“The administration is misidentifying the enemy and their motivation by saying they are motivated by material aspirations, they are motivated out of poverty or lack of jobs or education or opportunity,” she said.

“As a result, the courses of action that the administration are proposing are also materialistic in nature.”

She pointed to Libya and Egypt as past examples where America helped remove a dictator and allowed a “greater threat” to emerge. […] (Click here to read the rest.)

Precisely. And Rep. Baggard oughta know – she has been in that fight and knows firsthand. And so she knows firsthand how fallacious is Obama’s assertions about who these terrorists are.

Not only is Obama’s absolute refusal to name Islamic terrorism problematic, as is his claim that we need to address the “grievances” terrorists exploit as another justification for claiming victim status for these poor put upon future terrorists, but the people Obama chose to invite to this Summit are problematic as Breitbart illuminates (h/t Facebook friend). The Administration had tried to keep this list under wraps – with good reason as it turns out – but once the Summit started, the cat was out of the bag. You can check out the attendees in question HERE.

And you can see the disgust from Greta van Susteren regarding one of the attendees below:

Van Susteren is right – that IS “so messed up,” as is so much about the way Obama is approaching this major issue, and the people he invited to his Summit. What a waste of taxpayer time and money, and what a waste of an opportunity. That is pretty messed up, too.

At least that’s what I think. How about you?

This is an Open Thread.

Tags: Barack Obama, ISIS, Islamic terrorism, Israel, Jews, Muslims, Paris terror attack