Skip to comments.Trump national security adviser wants to avoid term 'radical Islamic terrorism', sources say
Posted on 02/25/2017 9:58:21 AM PST by GonzoII
Donald Trumps new national security adviser has told staff at the White House he does not wish to use the term radical Islamic terrorism to describe the terrorist threat the US faces, according to multiple sources.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
IF A DIPLOMAT ISN'T LYING, THEN HE ISN'T DOING HIS JOB.
“sources say” = “rumors” = “fake news”
Jihad works for me.
“According to sources...”.
Their lunch buddies? Their mistress? Until they name their so called sources I will believe it to be Very Fake News
“”””according to multiple sources””””
When the media starts naming their multiple sources, I may start believing what the media is saying.
Until then these stories are just works of fiction.
I recommended him to Team Trump.
I don’t call it radical Islamic terrorism, it’s just plain regular normal traditional Islamic terrorism.
The Guardian so so suspect that in order to even give this a second thought, we need some real sources. I know that McMasters said a few years ago that ISIS was “twisted perversion” of Islam but I’d cut him slack since it was during the reign of 0bola and people in the mil were fired for saying the unvarnished truth.
And Flynn had praised Erdogan to the skies, which made me feel very, very dubious about him.
>>I recommended him to Team Trump.<<
So, do you believe the story?
PLEASE say this is FAKE!!
Both the Islam position and the rewarmed neocon attitude to Russia are VERY BAD.
Will you now recommend to fire him?
Nope. Bannon & Trump know what they are doing.
Someone was not vetted quite as throrough as we were led to believe.
Or the insider "leaks" seem to be still with us...
If they can't seem to eliminate the killer 15% among themselves, it must mean they approve of their actions.
Our president has long been a performance oriented boss who also values loyalty and fealty to group goals. If McMaster fails in any of those areas, I'm sure the President knows what to do.
An Amercan muslim is a muzzie first and foremost and, when it is advantageous, he can be an American.
Can’t beat the enemy if you won’t call them by name. Why won’t he say radical Islamic terrorism if he’s on our side?
Since he’s killed 10 times more than you or I, I’d say he’s doing a damn good job of “beating the enemy.” Otherwise, you’d have to ask him and Trump.
BTW, even Trump has not identified “all” Moslems as the problem.
My guess is that McMaster had daily working alliances with all sorts of Iraqis and Saudis, and needed them as allies, as interpreters, as scouts, and so on.
Not talking about all Muslims. Article says he doesn’t want to say radical Islamic terrorism. Sorry but no matter who he’s killed, I see that as a red flag. Trump pushed that repeatedly in his rallies, you can’t beat the enemy if you won’t say their name. He criticized Obama over and over for not saying radical Islamic terrorism.
Anyway, Hillary’s probably killed her share of enemies, not necessarily a character reference. :-)
Just call it Mohammedanism.
Trump approves. Bannon approves. He’s fine with me.
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.