#WhyWontObamaSayDaesh?

IS-2

President Barack Obama has insisted that his refusal to use the expression ‘radical Islamic terrorism’ is motivated by a desire not to malign the religion of Islam nor legitimise the claims of jihadi terrorists to represent the Muslim faith. And yet in spite of repeated requests by Arab and Muslim rulers that Western leaders like himself eschew the use of expressions like ‘ISIS’ in referring to the Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi terror group (and instead replace them with the derogatory term ‘Daesh’), President Obama continues to defy this simple request with his insistence on referring to these killers as ‘ISIL’ (an acronym for ‘Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’) which is an expression these animals embrace, gives them aid and comfort and co-signs their spurious claims to represent Islam.

Donald Trump has hinted darkly that there appears to be “something going on” in this peculiar behaviour by the American president. And nowhere was this more evident than in Mr Obama’s recent press conference with the new British prime minister, Theresa May, and during which she made a point of referring to the Baghdadi gang as ‘Daesh’ while Mr Obama stubbornly clung to his ‘ISIL’ fetish.

So what exactly is going on, Mr Obama? The expression ‘Daesh’ is a term which the Baghdadi group detests. It is an expression which your own Secretary of State, John Kerry, employs. It is increasingly used by other leaders in the international coalition confronting these barbarians. And, above all, it involves none of the prejudicial references to Islam about which you feign concern nor any validation of Baghdadi’s claims to lead the Muslim ummah.

So why won’t you join the rest of the world in landing the ‘Daesh’ epithet on these homicidal bastards? Or, as Mr Trump has put it, what the hell is going on?

Advertisements

One thought on “#WhyWontObamaSayDaesh?

  1. Maybe the old cliché applies: the devil is in the details. The original coinage “ISIS” is weird but symbolic enough to make us wonder who invented that one; the difference with Kerry is interesting, ditto Theresa May–thanks for duly noting. My guess would be 1) the more quantum entanglement, the better the cover. 2) there are some decisions–such as ongoing piling of masses of troops along the Russian border–that insiders say are contrary to Obama’s own best advisors and strictly on his own hook. All I know for sure is that there ain’t no caretakers and whoever’s calling the shots is not “risk averse” despite minutiae distinctions. Hence the infamy escalation?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s