.jpg)
"We have made significant inroads in demonstrating that the U.S. is not at war with Islam..."
-Benjamin J. Rhodes, deputy national security adviser to President Obama. New York Times, today.
True..Well...
"We have made significant inroads"
"in demonstrating"
"that the U.S."
"is not at war"
"with Islam."
That Benjamin has utterly convinced this Benjamin that the U.S. under President Obama is not at war with Islam. I think that Benjamin and his boss have convinced everybody of that.
Well...not Islam, though, right? That's who that Benjamin is talking about, right? So his statement is "The Obamas have made 'significant inroads' in demonstrating to Islam that the U.S. is not at war with Islam."
No. Off the events of 9/11 2012 and their aftermath, that cannot be considered to be true, meaning accurate. But wait...That Benjamin's statement is one-way, it only concerns what the "U.S." has, blah-blah-blah. It doesn't say "we are not at war with Islam," it doesn't say "Islam is not at war with us. " It is a one-way statement. If we reverse the nouns we get "Islam has made significant inroads in demonstrating that Islam is not at war with the U.S." That, that Benjamin did not say and that of course would not be true.
That Benjamin's statement could be literally true: the Obamas have made significant inroads in demonstrating to Islam that the U.S. is not at war with Islam---and Islam doesn't care. That is, Islam is saying "You chumps, sure fooled you! We know you don't think you're at war with us but we are at war with you. Ha-ha, stupid Americans." That Benjamin's statement could be true in that way. That would really be bad because that would mean that that Benjamin and his boss are stupid. It would mean that they are fools who got played and four of their own, Ambassador Stevens and the three others, just got murdered--on 9/11 too--by people who are at war with them and that Benjamin and his boss didn't even know.
Oooh. That would not be good for that Benjamin and his boss.
