Obama administration refuses to acknowledge nature of terrorism

Finally, the President acknowledges that "we are at war" (previously we were warred against but were only dealing with criminals ). With whom are we at war? We are at war with Al Qaeda. No mention of the Islamist nature of Al Qaeda or the fact that we are also at war with other Islamic jihadists who may not be members of Al Qaeda and might even be at war with IT (e.g. Shia jihadis ). For all a martian would know from the President's mention, Al Qaeda might be an organization like Rotary International.
When the venerable, crotchety White House correspondent Helen Thomas twice asked John Brennan, the chief advisor on Homeland Security "What is the motivation of these terrorists who want to kill us?" he couldn't bring himself to say that it was Muslims who wished to establish a world Caliphate and whose religion gave them the right in their eyes to kill or convert us. He fumbled around saying only that these people (presumably limited to some featureless organization called Al Qaeda ) want to kill innocent people. ( The same John Brennan insisted "there was no smoking gun" in the Christmas bomber incident --No, there were many smoking guns and many identifiable miscreants-- and who suggested that his staff not interrupt their Christmas vacations in light of the incident.)
A question for the President is whether the Muslim fanatic who is the killer at Ft Hood, Major Hasan, is at war with the U.S. and if he is part of what the President called Al Qaeda, in the view of Obama. There are efforts to treat Hasan as merely a criminal, and a mentally-deranged one, at that. (One might therefore argue that all of the jihadi terrorists are deranged since they have little regard for their own earthly lives.)
There is no rationale as to how Holder's Justice Department and Obama decide who gets tried in civilian courts and who in military tribunals. The Christmas Day bomber ( who actually SUCCEEDED in his act of terrorism since he has cost the U.S. millions and millions of dollars in wasteful activity and inconvenience as a result of his failed attempt to kill people and crash a plane ) picked Christmas Day deliberately and was clearly, from the getgo, identifiable as a member of international terrorism ( in this case, specifically Al Qaeda, AS WELL.)Why was he Mirandized, given a lawyer and silenced as a result instead of being heavily interrogated as a captured enemy. We are told, by way of extenuation, that he WILL talk as a result of plea bargaining. First, information is highly perishable. Second, someone who was embarked on a suicide mission is unlikely to be highly susceptible to the blandishments of plea bargains ( and what are we willing to reduce the charge to? )
This is all a clear example of what Mark Steyn has termed Obama's ISLAMO-SCHMOOZING; there is a pervasive refusal to admit, acknowledge and take advantage of the Islamist nature of the terrorists' war against us. (They have LONG been in a war against us; only recently has Obama admitted that WE are in a war with Al Qaeda --after assuring the Muslim world that the U.S. is NOT at war with Islam. )