Avoiding The Term “Islamist Extremism”

Love him or hate him, Lieberman has the guts to tell the truth:

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.

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.”

“It’s absolutely Orwellian and counterproductive to the fight that we’re fighting at risk of great life every day to stop violent extremism of an Islamist base,” he said.

I’m afraid this change of language is going to work as well as their changing “terrorism” to “manmade disaster.” Anyone who saw the video of Islamic extremists cutting off Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg’s head knows that “violent Islamic extremist” is exactly what they are. Different terminology doesn’t change that. If the President thinks that changing the wording will somehow tone down the end result of what Islamic extremisim is, he is sadly mistaken.

via HotAir

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!