A common justification for the argument that Islamic terrorists are not Islamic is that Islamic terrorists also murder other Muslims. In reality, does that not further call Islamic fundamentalism into question? The latest example comes in the video below, from Pentagon press secretary, Rear Admiral John Kirby, who makes it a point to say that the Jordanian pilot who was recently burned alive by ISIS was a Muslim, implying that ISIS is not Islamic because if they were, they wouldn’t murder Muslims.

The leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has a PhD in Islamic studies, as Shoebat.com has reported. Does this make him more or less of an expert on Islam than the Jordanian pilot? Assuming the pilot did not have such credentials, he would actually have been less of a Muslim than the leader of the group that burned him alive.

So who has/had Islamophobia, ISIS or the Jordanian pilot? If ISIS has Islamophobia, the implication is that they’re no better than non-Muslims who are afflicted with it but who don’t savagely murder people because they’re not Muslim – or in this case, not Muslim enough. If the Jordanian pilot had Islamophobia, was he not justified in having it?

To say that Obama administration spokesmen have a muddled message when it comes to ISIS is an insult to muddled messages. In the video, Kirby who obviously has trouble processing the sheer barbarity of ISIS, said, “these aren’t the acts of a winner” (h/t WFB):