Senator 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.