Daniel Pipes has written an excellent analysis of Obama’s mosque speech.
Assessing Obama’s Mosque Speech on Islam
by Daniel Pipes
Special to IPT News
February 8, 2016
Wishing to address growing anti-Islamic sentiments among the American public, Barack Obama ventured on Feb. 3 to the Islamic Society of Baltimore (sadly, a mosque with unsavory Islamist associations) to talk about Islam and Muslims. The 5,000-word speech contains much of interest. Here’s an in-depth assessment of its key points:
Obama:… “the very word itself, Islam, comes from salam — peace.”
How can a person in a position of responsibility say something so patently wrong? Islam means submission, and does not derive from peace. As I explained in 2005, “There is no connection in meaning between salām and islām, peace and submission. These are two distinct words with unrelated meetings.” Shame on Obama.
Obama: “the notion that America is at war with Islam ignores the fact that the world’s religions are a part of who we are. We can’t be at war with any other religion because the world’s religions are a part of the very fabric of the United States, our national character.”
By this infantile logic, Hitler could not have been at war with Judaism because Jews were part of the very fabric of Germany.
Obama also said in his [errant and arrogant] mosque speech that:
“Groups like ISIL are desperate for legitimacy. They try to portray themselves as religious leaders and holy warriors who speak for Islam. I refuse to give them legitimacy.”
Pretty desperate for legitimacy: I think a caliphate gives them legitimacy more than his words, which he refuses to use, would give them. They are religious leaders and holy warriors — not just playing them on TV. Are they acting when they’re running a caliphate, towns, a state and an oil network? Or when they behead rebels and infidels, when they recruit around the world to join their holy war? They’re just begging for legitimacy.