President Barack Obama is not refusing to use the term “radical Islamic terrorist” out of ignorance, as inferred from the letter by Gary Ellis in June 22 (“Radical Islamic terrorism apt term”).
He is trying to keep down the Islamiphobia and not offend the 1.7 billion Muslims worldwide. After all, what is gained by using that terminology other than increasing the fear and hatred of the Muslim religion? Keep in mind that the slaughter of the citizens of Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and throughout the Middle East by ISIS, the Taliban and the other extremist groups are acts against Muslims, which make the vile acts against Christians almost insignificant.
Consider the tragic and ongoing violence in Chicago. Should that be labeled radical Christian terrorism or maybe radical atheist terrorism? No, of course not, these are criminal acts which make the need for some sensible legislation and a strengthened crime prevention activity even more urgent. Labeling these with religious ties serves no useful purpose. Remember the crusades were an early example of religious terrorism, which we should keep in mind before we follow a “ban the Muslim” leader.