Why Our Leaders Won't Name The Enemy

Frontpagemag.com ^ | June 28, 2016 | Daniel Greenfield

[Biggirl]

After the Orlando attack, Obama ranted that it did not matter what we called Islamic terrorism. “What exactly would using this label accomplish? What exactly would it change? Would it make ISIS less committed to trying to kill Americans? Would it bring in more allies? Is there a military strategy that is served by this? The answer is none of the above. Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away. This is a political distraction.”

[Pelham]

..because Barack Obama is and was an Islamic sympathizer rather than an American

[null and void]

[detective]

“we see that Obama knows that he’s lying. And Obama makes the awkward semantics argument because he knows that the existence of Islamic terrorism can’t be debated. When you are reduced to arguing that names don’t matter, it’s because you know that the name is right.

Plenty of leftists lie to themselves about Islamic terrorism. Obama is not lying to himself. He’s lying to us. He is willing to say things about Islamic terror to foreign leaders that he refuses to say to Americans.”

Quite simply, Obama is on the side of Islamic terrorists and is against America. To maintain that position he is required to lie. Repeatedly.

[MuttTheHoople]

Muslim terror ping

[A_perfect_lady]

And, worst of all, they might realize that they have no reason to feel guilty about our foreign policy. If Islamic terrorism exists and is caused by Islam, then America isn’t and was never the problem.

Exactly. Pride and patriotism is what he's really afraid of. Just like the White Privilege ethos of original sin is there to stop white people from being proud of their country and their culture and their work ethic.

[Spok]

They do name their enemies-Christians, conservatives, gun owners...The Islamic radicals also hate America. It’s their common ground.

[Netz]

It is the antithesis of Obama’s entire existence.

he cannot, will not and shall not name a fellow Muslim Brotherhood operative.

After receiving the Nobel Peace Prize it has been absolutely impossible for him to be aggressive or assertive in any way, (not that he would have been sans the prize).

The ultimate extension of his power to inflict damage on peoples or terrorists are either sending a Predator aircraft to bomb a house or more frequently, an attack on those that do not agree with HIS MAJESTY.

Russia, Syria, Iran, Hizbollah, HAMAS, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, the Emirates, Iraq, Ukraine and every other country on the planet know that Obama will never respond to indirect or direct attacks on the USA or an ally.

He just can't and does not want to do it so why accuse the murderers of any crime?

[ClearCase_guy]

This is a brilliant article.

[SunkenCiv]

"Death to America!"

[stayathomemom]

Excellent article. Thanks for posting. I tweeted it to my two followers.;-)
Besides what is stated in the article, I find the failure to name the enemy a form of mental abuse. Don't know psychology, but there is something deeply wrong about having those who are charged to protect us, purposefully ignore threats.

[Mark17]

Why our leaders won't name the enemy.

Because our leaders, either can't figure out whose side they are on, or they are on the side of the Muzzies.

[DuncanWaring]

Ping.

[SandRat]

You think imam Barrack Obama would name “Mohammedanism”.

[I want the USA back]

Because he’s bringing in millions of them to replace us, and doesn’t want us to realize it.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Yes, it is.

[AmericanMermaid]

Because their conscience is seemed with a hot iron and their minds are reprobate.

[AmericanMermaid]

Seared, not seemed. Thank you, autocorrect!

[DownInFlames]

Gun show nest weekend. Hello Mosberg!

[Harpotoo]

Obviously! And people here think Comey will recommend an indictment? I don’t think so!!!

http://circanews.com/fbi-didnt-inform-some-americans-they-were-on-isis-kill-list/