It seems obvious to me. Apparently, though, not to our current administration. I don’t fully understand why the current administration refuses to identify Islamic terrorists as such. Ok, maybe I do but just think it’s dumb. Worse, I see a growing percentage of our liberal population wanting to pick up that banner. After a recent Isis beheading, a social media response I read said “THIS IS NOT ISLAM” from someone who I really question how much they know about Islam. I’ve recently seen a series of things on social media from liberals separating these acts from Islam. Honestly, I don’t know that they’re liberals but it seems you’d have to be one to think that. Ok, so outside of someone’s desperate attempt to support the Obama administration, why go for this narrative? I tend to concur with Adam Carolla’s view “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but it seems all terrorists are Muslims.” Sure, you can throw Oklahoma City and the Atlanta Olympics at me, but what else? It seems the exceptions prove the rule. Anyway, this is not an attempt to start an argument, but rather, what I found out after a half-hour of Googling the subject.  I’ve not seen any logical arguments for why it’s not, but here’s some references for why it is. If you don’t click on any other reference, scroll down and read the one from the Atlantic.

We all know what the Taliban has done. Shooting women in the back of the head in soccer stadiums for infidelity, destroying all other forms of religion,

From the BBC on the Taliban

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-11451718

It is commonly believed that they first appeared in religious seminaries – mostly paid for by money from Saudi Arabia – which preached a hard line form of Sunni Islam.

The Taliban’s promise – in Pashtun areas straddling Pakistan and Afghanistan – was to restore peace and security and enforce their own austere version of Sharia, or Islamic law, once in power.

In both countries they introduced or supported Islamic punishments – such as public executions of convicted murderers and adulterers and amputations of those found guilty of theft.

Men were required to grow beards and women had to wear the all-covering burka.

The Taliban banned television, music and cinema and disapproved of girls aged 10 and over from going to school.

It is commonly believed that they first appeared in religious seminaries – mostly paid for by money from Saudi Arabia – which preached a hard line form of Sunni Islam

Al Qaeda

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/alqaeda.html

 In approximately 1989, bin Laden and co-defendant Muhammad Atef founded “Al Qaeda,” ” an international terrorist group … which was dedicated to opposing non-Islamic governments with force and violence.”

“One of the principal goals of Al Qaeda was to drive the United States armed forces out of Saudi Arabia (and elsewhere on the Saudi Arabian peninsula) and Somalia by violence.”

After the attack on Charlie Hebdo, some information on the response of British Muslims. Why? Because it starts to get at the core of the issue.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11434695/Over-a-quarter-of-British-Muslims-have-sympathy-for-the-Charlie-Hebdo-terrorists.-That-is-far-too-many.html

This morning the BBC published detail of a major poll of the attitudes of Britain’s Muslims. The headline on the front of the BBC website linking to the research states: “Muslims ‘oppose cartoon reprisals’”. This of course relates to attitudes within the Muslim community towards the recent Charlie Hebdo attacks.

It’s a reassuring headline. It’s also wrong. Many Muslims – a majority – do indeed utterly oppose the murderous killings in Paris. But a very, very large number of Muslims don’t. Presented with the statement “I have some sympathy for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris”, 27 seven percent agreed with the statement. A further 2 per cent refused to answer the question. And an additional eight percent said they were unsure whether they had some sympathy or not.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law.

Sixty-eight percent support the arrest and prosecution of those British people who “Insult Islam.” When asked if freed speech should be protected, even if it offends religious groups, 62 percent of British Muslims say No, it should not.

Just for more perspective, here’s the story of an Islamic cleric arrested in Norway for comments in support of terrorists.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/norway-arrests-radical-islamic-preacher-who-praised-charlie-hebdo-killers/

A radical Islamic preacher has been arrested in Norway after praising last month’s deadly attack on the Charlie Hebdo satirical weekly in Paris, police said Friday.

The Iraqi Kurd preacher known as Mullah Krekar said in a television interview broadcast on Wednesday that “those who draw caricatures of Mohammed must die”.

Krekar, who was only freed from prison late last month, was arrested Thursday night on accusations of inciting crime, police said.

“I am obviously happy with what happened in Paris,” the 58-year-old said in the interview with Norwegian channel NRK.

 A little on Boko Haram

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13809501

Nigeria’s militant Islamist group Boko Haram – which has caused havoc in Africa’s most populous country through a wave of bombings, assassinations and abductions – is fighting to overthrow the government and create an Islamic state.

Its followers are said to be influenced by the Koranic phrase which says: “Anyone who is not governed by what Allah has revealed is among the transgressors.”

Boko Haram promotes a version of Islam which makes it “haram”, or forbidden, for Muslims to take part in any political or social activity associated with Western society.

This includes voting in elections, wearing shirts and trousers or receiving a secular education.

Boko Haram regards the Nigerian state as being run by non-believers, even when the country had a Muslim president – and it has extended its military campaign by targeting neighbouring states.

A story on ISIS from the Atlantic. Again, if you don’t click on any other reference, check this one out.

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

What is the Islamic State?

Where did it come from, and what are its intentions? The simplicity of these questions can be deceiving, and few Western leaders seem to know the answers. In December, The New York Times published confidential comments by Major General Michael K. Nagata, the Special Operations commander for the United States in the Middle East, admitting that he had hardly begun figuring out the Islamic State’s appeal. “We have not defeated the idea,” he said. “We do not even understand the idea.” In the past year, President Obama has referred to the Islamic State, variously, as “not Islamic” and as al-Qaeda’s “jayvee team,” statements that reflected confusion about the group, and may have contributed to significant strategic errors.

The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.

But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious, millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and back foolish schemes to counter it. We’ll need to get acquainted with the Islamic State’s intellectual genealogy if we are to react in a way that will not strengthen it, but instead help it self-immolate in its own excessive zeal.

Finally, In a speech recently in his own county, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi said this:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/africa/egypt-president-speech/

“I say and repeat, again, that we are in need of a religious revolution. You imams are responsible before Allah. The entire world is waiting on you. The entire world is waiting for your word … because the Islamic world is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost. And it is being lost by our own hands,” el-Sisi said.

“We need a revolution of the self, a revolution of consciousness and ethics to rebuild the Egyptian person — a person that our country will need in the near future,” the President said.

“It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.”

Apparently the President of Egypt thinks Islam has something to do with it

My boss has a sign on her door. It says “Don’t come in here with a problem unless you’ve got a solution.” Well, I don’t have a solution. But my idea is to at least start by recognizing something for what it is.

Ok, so, there you go. Make your own conclusions. But, before you go screaming “this isn’t Islam,” spend a 1/2 hour Googling some shit, eh? Me, I think Islam has something to do with it.