Posted on 02/19/2015 6:35:46 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
WASHINGTON – President Obama defended his administration’s approach to the terror threat at a White House summit Wednesday, standing by claims that groups like the Islamic State do not represent Islam -- as well as assertions that job creation could help combat extremism.
Obama, addressing the Washington audience on the second day of the summit, said the international community needs to address “grievances” that terrorists exploit, including economic and political issues.
He stressed that poverty alone doesn’t cause terrorism, but “resentments fester” and extremism grows when millions of people are impoverished.
“We do have to address the grievances that terrorists exploit including economic grievances,” he said.
He also said no single religion was responsible for violence and terrorism, adding he wants to lift up the voice of tolerance in the United States and beyond.
Obama’s address came as Republican lawmakers and others criticized the administration for declining to describe the threat as Islamic terrorism.
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf has also come under fire for suggesting several times this past week that more jobs could help address the terrorism crisis.
On Tuesday, Rob O'Neill, former Navy SEAL Team 6 member who claims to have fired the shot that killed Usama bin Laden, told Fox News: "They get paid to cut off heads -- to crucify children, to sell slaves and to cut off heads and I don't think that a change in career path is what's going to stop them."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
You're a multi-millionaire. Why don't you go out and start some businesses and hire some folks?
the red queen has been in play from day one. just cut to the chase.
Midnight basketball for AL Baghdadi!
That the pundits are even discussing this with any degree of seriousness tells me that obama will succeed in redirecting the narrative.
Nobody is willing to say it (Rudy comes close). Obama’s actions clearly expose that he is an enemy. For the love of Pete, he is going to give Iran a nuclear bomb.
So Muslims should celebrate Festivus where their grievances can be aired.
This is very simple. The main grievance right now is the existence of Israel. Several (I counted them online last night) "moderate" Muslims say that terrorism will stop if we get rid of Israel. (Note that they didn't say "get rid of" but wanted a military solution that neutered Israel's defense forces).
If Obama or someone worse hands them Israel's lands then the next grievance on the list will be the Jews on those lands, then Christians, then others in surrounding lands. The Arabian Peninsula is completely free of Jews due to motivations that are alive and active in the "moderate" Muslim community today.
“....For the love of Pete, he is going to give Iran a nuclear bomb.”
“.......Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has the final say on all matters of state.
“It’s beyond comprehension they would hold someone for seven months without making any direct claims about what they had done or showing any evidence to give a reasonable person a belief that he should even be held, let alone convicted,” the brother added.”.........
It is the Leftists like Obama who’s way of governance that create poverty.
” He stressed that poverty alone doesn’t cause terrorism, but “resentments fester” and extremism grows when millions of people are impoverished.”
As a community agitator he knows about festering first hand
He’s a muzzie.
they are perpetually aggrieved.
This guy and “State Department Barbie” are singing from the same playbook.
What is laughable is that they are using the same excuses they use for disproportionate black crime rates
for Islamic terrorism.
Who actually believes this crap?
I don’t think Patton would have put up with Obama....if you know what I mean.
Community Organizer 101 on display at the White Hut.
“agitate to the point of conflict” - Alinsky.
Good one.
The main grievances the islamists have are the existence of...
- Jews
- Christians
- Buddhists
- atheists
He claims, also, to be a member of another perpetually aggrieved group as well.
Leftists are on board with eliminating the first two groups.
indeed...
If one does not wish to provide “legitimacy” to a group, then where is the logic in “address(ing) their grievances”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.