RSSSenator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) States Obama Dropping “Islamic Extremism” term is “Orwellian and Counterproductive”
Obama’s omitting of the term Muslin extremists and jihad blasted by Joe Lieberman.
Earlier this week President Barack Hussein Obama made the not so brilliant decision to eliminate the terms “Islamic extremism” and “jihad” from national security policy statements. Now Joe Lieberman, the Senator from Connecticut has come out and criticized the change as “Orwellian” on Fox News Sunday.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) on Sunday called the administration’s proposal to avoid the term “Islamic extremism” in national security references “absolutely Orwellian and counterproductive.”
Lieberman revealed on “Fox News Sunday” that he had sent a letter to the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, saying in part: “The failure to identify our enemy for what it is, violent Islamist extremism, is offensive and contradicts thousands of years of accepted military and intelligence doctrine to know your enemy.”
The chairman of the Homeland Security Committee said the letter was the product of him growing “so frustrated” with the White House over the terminology issue. He said the Defense Department omitted references to “violent Islamist extremism” in its report on the massacre at Fort Hood.
“Clearly, from the record, [Nidal Malik Hasan] was motivated by Islamist extremism, and they didn’t mention that term there,” Lieberman said.
One has to wonder what is Obama’s agenda in that he does not want to call terrorists for what they really are, Muslin extremists. What is the problem that Obama has with the word, Muslim or extremists? One would think in a common sense world that you would call your enemy for what they really are.
I wonder if Obama and his Administration have any issue is using the term Right wing Conservative militias? Hardly. If it were Christians behind any such act, it would be perfectly ok. Lieberman went on to say the following:
Lieberman said that the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were not carried out by “some amorphous group of violent extremists or environmental extremists or white supremacist extremists.”
The ultimate issue is that Americans call these cowardly dogs who kill innocent men, woman and children in the name of Allah for what they are. The fact That Barack Hussein Obama is caught up in the verbiage rather than the “War on Terror” is troubling, liberal and weak at best. What are we supposed to refer to them as and identify them as if not Muslim extremists? Please do not tell us that by us using such terms that it is a recruiting tool for Al-Qaeda.
The letter was written following reports that the administration was removing religious references from the U.S. National Security Strategy — the document that had described the “ideological conflict” of the early 21st century as “the struggle against militant Islamic radicalism.”
Lieberman told “Fox News Sunday” this isn’t the first time the Obama administration has tried to tiptoe around referring to Islam in its security documents and that it’s time to “blow the whistle” on the trend.
“This is not honest and, frankly, I think it’s hurtful in our relations with the Muslim world,” Lieberman said. “We’re not in a war against Islam. It’s a group of Islamist extremists who have taken the Muslim religion and made it into a political ideology, and I think if we’re not clear about that, we disrespect the overwhelming majority of Muslims who are not extremists.”
Like it or not Barack Hussein Obama, those innocent individuals killed on September 11, 2001 in NYC, Washington, DC and Pennsylvania were murdered by Muslim extremists. America will never forget that as much as you seem to want to re-write history.
The question remains … why would anyone want to not call the enemy of the United States for what they actually really are? Barack Obama needs to answer that question to “We the People” and explain how this is beneficial to National Security.
This is yet one more campaign ad that will be used against Democrats in 2010 and 2012.
Posted April 11, 2010 by Scared Monkeys Barack Obama, Islamofascist, Obamanation, US National Security, War on Terror, We the People, WTF | 13 comments |
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
13 Responses to “Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) States Obama Dropping “Islamic Extremism” term is “Orwellian and Counterproductive””
Leave a Reply
When is Obama going to stop all his PC Bullcrap and call it like it is?
Never? Maybe just another reason why THE CHOSEN ONE will be a ONE TERM PRESIDENT.
What the eff America?!?!? Time to take our Country back, first by starting with the upcoming Mid-Term elections.
the term: Jihad should be dropped, if only to show we christians do know that a jihad is ment peacefully.
but if a terrorist turns out to a muslim extremist, then lets call him a muslim extremist.
_________
SM: Isn’t it the Muslim extremists who have declared a jihad against the infidels? Hmm?
R
Are we still headed for the rocks or has the ship changed course towards the reef ???
Considering there is only one Koran and that one Koran dictates a global agenda quest through passive Islamic indoctrination or jihad … I do not adhere to Senator Lieberman’s thought process but … I do comprehend his point. Islamic Terrorism should be referred to for what it is … Islamic Terrorism.
Janet
++++++
Updated April 11, 2010
Lieberman: Omitting ‘Islamic’ Terrorism From Security Document Dishonest, ‘Offensive’
Sen. Joe Lieberman slammed the Obama administration Sunday for stripping terms like “Islamic extremism” from a key national security document, calling the move dishonest, wrong-headed and disrespectful to the majority of Muslims who are not terrorists.
The Connecticut independent revealed that he wrote a letter Friday to top counterterrorism adviser John Brennan urging the administration to “identify accurately the ideological source” of the threat against the United States. He wrote that failing to identify “violent Islamist extremism” as the enemy is “offensive.”
The letter was written following reports that the administration was removing religious references from the U.S. National Security Strategy — the document that had described the “ideological conflict” of the early 21st century as “the struggle against militant Islamic radicalism.”
Lieberman told “Fox News Sunday” this isn’t the first time the Obama administration has tried to tiptoe around referring to Islam in its security documents and that it’s time to “blow the whistle” on the trend.
“This is not honest and, frankly, I think it’s hurtful in our relations with the Muslim world,” Lieberman said. “We’re not in a war against Islam. It’s a group of Islamist extremists who have taken the Muslim religion and made it into a political ideology, and I think if we’re not clear about that, we disrespect the overwhelming majority of Muslims who are not extremists.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/11/lieberman-omitting-references-islamic-terrorism-dishonest-offensive/
If Muslims are not going to collectively denounce the acts acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam … they can be considered background and passive supporter of the cause.
Last year … an eleven year old Muslim young man on my grandson’s hockey team lost his temper over a situation and referred to the coach of the other team who wore a Christian lapel pin on his jacket as a pig … a terminolgy for a Jew taken right out of the Koran.
The derogatory outburst was so unexpected because this child and his family always gave the impression that they were very tolerant … very humble. It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall of their home or mosque and observe what is being taught in regards to infidels.
@5 or the kid is just an azzhole.
and the jews are not pigs, we christians are (jews also don’t eat pigs).
But I agree somewhat with Red, there is a lack of moderate muslim scholars preaching the peacefull version of the Koran.
___________
SM: Dolf, did i see you say you agree with RED,
R
a terrorist is a terrorist, no matter what name
you give them. we can see where obama’s
loyalities lie.
he’s soft and unfit for leadership.a terrorist
sympathizer and should be sent to live with
them.
#6 Dolf
The incident that provked the Muslim player to refer to the coach who identified himself as a Christian as “PIG” went deeper than a sign of disrespect. If this young man had called out “jerk” or another derogatory name … I would have considered it disrespectful but … “PIG”!
The parents insisted their son apologize for his outburst but … some words cannot be taken back.
Reminder: There is only one Koran (Quram) … one Koran that is embraced by all Muslims.
Janet
+++++++++
Islam – Questions and Answers
Monkeys and Pigs
http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/14085
yes Red, sometimes it happens ;p
isn’t it common practice to some1 a pig, seen it in movies read it in books more then jerk.
however if he was refering to the unclean pig it is an insult and the boy needs an education.
or perhaps a small trip to Iran or Iraq or Pakistan…then he will see how lucky he is to be bron where he was born (US)
Agree with #7. Other bloggers can call Superdave a racist whenever you want—at least he knows the definition of a TERRORIST!
Give me a break. There are no “other” words to cover or define the true meaning of a Terrorist—Islamic Extremist or otherwise….Terrorists come in all forms but their goal is the same.
How dare President Obama, or any other leader in the 21st Century try to portray Terrorisim or Terrorists any other way that for WHAT IT IS and what they are—MURDERERS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE EVERYWHERE.
@10
he doesn’t do that.
he is trying to stop the flow of uneducated kids into terrorist groups.
you can only defeat terror by going after its roots.
Dolf ! Newsflash—Terrorism will never be completely eradicated or defeated. You can pull out the roots, but just like a nasty dandelion weed—they somehow keep growing back in little pockets.
Here is the bottom line for you, Dolf:
OUR PRESIDENT IS TOO SOFT ON TERRORISTS AND OUR KNOWN AND SWORN ENEMIES. OK? Living in a lifelong DEMOCRATIC LIBERAL BLEEDING BLUE HEART STATE AS WELL—-you can ask any Democrat here who voted for him—they will all tell you the same thing. While many still drink the Kool Aide and like the President—you will be hard pressed to find one that doesn’t agree with the above statement—even here !
Please don’t try and tell us what we already know and have seen with our own eyes….did you check the newest thread? Meanwhile, at the Nuclear Arms Summit—Obama continues to BOW TO OTHER WORLD LEADERS. What kind of bullshit is that?
soft on terror?
last time I checked they are opening up new operations in Afghanistan and several Al Q and Taliban leaders were killed
__________
SM: Yes, soft on terror.
Any time you do not call your enemy for what they are … you are soft.
Funny though that Obama is following many of the same programs from the GWB administration that got him MSM anger every night. Interesting how the media is silent. They don’t talk about death tolls every nite like they are announcing a fund raising telethon.
How come Keith Oberman does do a count of the amount of days since Barack Obama said he would close GITMO?
The only positive rating that Obama has right now is war on terror because he keeps bombing them like Bush did. The difference is the media does not condemn him ever nite for killing innocent children in a village that is blown ti bits by a predator drone hellfire missile.
R