o'mam - NewSpeak: Aurora Batman v Fort Hood "Allah ak Bar"

Obama uses word "terrorize" for Aurora murders but not for Fort Hood jihad "Allahu Akbar"

NewSpeak v OldSpeak

article source: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/07/obama-uses-word-terrorize-for-aurora-murders-but-not-for-fort-hood-jihad.html

Pamela Geller makes this extraordinary observation:

     When Obama spoke about the shooting in Aurora, he used the word "terrorize," a word he never used when Nidal Hasan killed 13 of our serviceman in a jihad attack at Fort Hood.  That was "workplace violence."

     Obama knows what he is doing.  He wants to drive home the point that "terror" is not Islamic.  The Colorado shooting is terror, but Fort Hood is not.

     Obama said this about the movie theater murders in Colorado:

     "We may never understand what leads anybody to terrorize their fellow human beings like this.  Such violence, such evil is senseless.  It's beyond reason.  But while we will never know fully what causes somebody to take the life of another, we do know what makes life worth living."

     He used the same phrase in his address in his exploitative event in Aurora: "Even as we come to learn how this happened and who's responsible, we may never understand what leads anyone to terrorize their fellow human beings.  Such evil is senseless – beyond reason.  But while we will never know fully what causes someone to take the life of another, we do know what makes that life worth living." (minute mark at 2:41)

     This is his talking point on the Batman madman.

     Yet when it came to the Fort Hood jihad massacre back in 2009, Obama showed no similar curiosity about what "causes someone" -- jihadist Nidal Hasan -- "to take the life of another."   And he did not use the word "terrorize."

Read it all at: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/07/obamas-comments-on-aurora-killer-and-the-islamic-attack-at-ft-hood.html

Posted on Jihad Watch by Robert on July 30, 2012

---

A comment by vladtepes2

| July 30, 2012

     "Obama has a chip on his shoulder.

     Maybe because he is an "other", a non-white in a majority white society and he suffered some slight or offense that he blames on the traditional white society in which he was raised.

     Or maybe it's something he picked up by osmosis from the black-communist-socialist-radical milieu of his childhood or college years.

     It's a chip on his shoulder that has engendered an unquenchable thirst for vengence upon the traditional white society in which he does not belong, a chip on his shoulder that can only be removed by wreaking vengence on the society in which he thinks he does not and can never fit.

     It's a thirst for vengence that is his highest priority, it's something that can never be altered by something as weak and feeble as logic or truth or the facts.

     So now we're living in '1984', Obama practices "newspeak", he's in the process of redefining the language.

     He's in the process of turning the "war on terror" on the true victims of terror, he's in the process of accusing the true victims of terror of being the perpetrators of that terror.

     He's in the process of making the real terrorist out to be the victim.

     He's in the process of redefining "terror" not to mean that tactic that Muslims use to make "God's religion ... victorious over all other religions."

     Now "terror" is being redefined and turned on the victims of terror.

     The victims of terror are being accused of being the perpetrators of terror and the newspeak victims of terror are the those who in truth are the real source of that terror.

     And if he can redefine terror to be something that's only committed by "white guys" and never by Islam so much the better."

---

Newspeak - Ambiguous euphemistic language used chiefly in political propaganda.

Newspeak Dictionary

Modern Newspeak

dictionaries source: http://www.newspeakdictionary.com

---