In Barack Obama’s “fundamentally transformed” Amerika, it’s become incredibly too common to feel like we’re living in fantasy land when our “leaders” speak. Why? If you just heard what White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Said, you would definitely feel like you’re living in fantasy land.
Earnest was asked about the string of attacks over the weekend, and you have to hear his answers to believe he actually said the things he said.
Here’s a partial transcript of his interview on CNN, via TheBlaze:
“When it comes to ISIL, we are in a fight, a narrative fight with them, a narrative battle”:
What ISIL wants to do is they want to project that they are an organization that is representing Islam in a fight and a war against the West, and a war against the United States. That is a bankrupt, false narrative. It’s a mythology, and we have made progress in debunking that mythology.
Earnest added, “We can’t play into this narrative that somehow the United States or the West is fighting against the Muslim religion.”
“The fact is there are millions of patriotic Muslims in this country right now that make our country proud,” he said. “They serve in our armed services. They serve in our law enforcement. … These are individuals who make a substantial and positive contribution to our country, and that is an inconvenient fact for the ISIL narrative.”
He also cautioned that “we can’t paint with a broad brush” and suspect individuals of terrorism “just because of the way they worship God.”
Okay. We’re going to just ignore how ridiculous Earnest sounds for a minute and discuss his boss. Let’s say that what Earnest said is true, and we are in a “battle of narratives” with ISIS, hypothetically speaking, of course.
If that’s the case, and Obama and Earnest both believe that to be true, then the first question that needs to be asked is, what’s going to empower ISIS and give them ground in the battle?
Let’s think about this one for a second…
ISIS wants to be called ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) because it legitimizes them to the Muslim world by showing they’ve been successful in creating their caliphate. The Levant represents large areas they control outside of Iraq’s borders that were seized by Islam during the Muslim Conquests, and having world leaders recognize they’ve successfully retaken those areas by referring to it when referencing their name does far more to empower them than saying “radical Islam.”
Radical Islam, as an ideology, relies heavily on symbolism to create propaganda for recruitment and other purposes. That’s why their targets are carefully chosen, such as the Twin Towers – the worldwide symbol of freedom – and other soft targets of significance, where numerous casualties are possible and the scenes that are shown from them are horrific. That’s also why the Islamic State calls itself ISIL rather than ISIS – the Levant is symbolic of a time when Islam was on its way to world domination, and the group is now pledging to spread Islam across the globe.
Obama, Earnest, Kerry, and everyone in this administration calls ISIS “ISIL,” giving ISIS a historical hat tip and acknowledging that the entire region was once controlled by Muslims until the Crusades, when Western nations finally decided to stop the Islamic invasion from the East. In doing so, they’re giving the terror organization a powerful propaganda tool that can be used to convince their sympathizers to become supporters by showing them that even the leaders of the nation they’re at war with acknowledge they’ve been able to reclaim the Levant, and giving them reason to pick up arms and fight to either save it or enlarge the territory under their control.
Ironically (or not ironic at all), and slightly off-topic but worthy of noting in trying to understand Obama’s position on the issue of Islamic extremism, Obama has also been highly critical of Christianity and used the Crusades as a point of attack against Judeo-Christian beliefs numerous times. Only Obama knows why he’s so critical of both the Crusades and Christianity, but when paired with him constantly defending Islam against its critics, one has to wonder where his loyalties really lie.
But I digress.
Now that you have the historical meaning behind the term ISIL, think about this; If Obama and Earnest are really concerned about narratives, why are they helping give ISIS legitimacy in the Muslim world? It seems if they really believe what they are saying, they’d use ISIS or Daesh (a derogatory term that’s highly insulting among Muslims) when describing them, and they would have no problem labeling their ideology as “radical Islam,” since if we don’t differentiate then we can’t tell who’s who. In fact, there’s a strong argument that by not separating the two, more damage is being done to Muslims, who are peaceful and don’t support anything extremists do or believe, since the lack of proper identification results in both sects being lumped together and judged as one.
That’s not to mention, when it comes to intelligence gathering, investigations, and national security issues, the refusal to first identify, then properly label extremist beliefs within Islam makes it nearly impossible for law enforcement to properly do their jobs since extremists can hide among peaceful communities without fear of being spotted. So really, Obama is doing more harm than good in his refusal to call radical Islam radical Islam.
In closing, if Obama and Earnest really were trying to win the war of ideologies they wouldn’t be legitimizing ISIS on the world stage, and more importantly to Muslims across the globe, who may see such an acknowledgement as a sign that ISIS remains strong and decide to join their cause. They would instead do everything they can to alienate the terror group from the non-violent Muslim world, create a degree of separation between the extremists and the moderates, and empower law enforcement along with our military while ensuring they don’t give the barbaric group anything that can be used for propaganda.
His own actions have done more to help the group than calling them radical Islamists or labeling them extremists could have ever done, so perhaps it’s time for him to take a look in the mirror and realize that he’s the one putting us all in danger. Whether or not you believe he’s doing so intentionally is up to you, but the fact of the matter is that his policies have undoubtedly made us all less safe, and the idiotic remarks from Earnest earlier were just more evidence of it.