I find it interesting that while making the case to not label terrorism as “Islamic” we feel free…
David Curran

I can understand their disdain if they encounter people who are claiming all Islamist are terrorist or that only Islamist can be terrorist. I think what may be the issue is they don’t see ISIS as actual representations of the true Islamist faith. I know Jihad is suppose to be the defense of Islam against invaders who threaten the existence of Islam.

None of the times that western boots hit the ground in the Middle East did they have the intention of killing and taking over all Islamic land to make it Christian. There was never a threat to Islam itself.

Of course the young and completely naive just see western soldiers and their huge tanks rolling through their neighborhoods which scumbags feed off of and convinced them these westerners were infidels that were there to kill all of Islam’s ways and it’s followers.

That is a pretty debatable issue that their Jihad is false and goes against Islamic faith. That on top of the fact many see these terrorist groups like ISIS having secret political agendas and don’t care about Islam more than it’s use as a tool to complete political agendas.

Personally, I don’t see ISIS in anyway as a representation of all Islamic followers. I can’t really say if they are truly Islamic followers or crazed pawns in a major political scheme. These terrorist come from Islamic countries (usually) and claim to be Islamist, so saying Islamic terrorist as to describe a specific group of the Islamist population shouldn’t be seen as offensive or hateful.

It’s not said for intentional prejudice, but as a means for anyone who thinks and commits horrific acts like ISIS, to be easily categorized and Identified.