Posted on 05/23/2013 3:49:51 PM PDT by lowbridge
In stark contrast, the Obama Administration’s response has been to avoid calling the attack terrorism, let alone terrorism motivated by a radical Islamic ideology. Instead the Administration, via the State Department, said it stood with the U.K. in the face of “such senseless violence.”
Senseless violence? One can hardly term a targeted attack on a U.K. soldier in broad daylight — where the assailants gleefully admit the radical motivation behind their attack — “senseless violence.”
Yet, use of this terminology is nothing new for the Obama Administration. “Senseless violence” is the Administration’s catch-all phrase loyally called upon whenever motivations for a despicable act should not be ascribed, lest someone take offense.
Particularly troubling is that “senseless violence” is the same terminology the Administration used when describing the terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed the American Ambassador and three other U.S. citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.heritage.org ...
It was NOT “terrorism”. Call it what it is — an Islamic Menace on society.
“It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you – something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you, almost, to deny the evidence of your senses. In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable…what then?”
Winston 1984
It happened in London; who cares what Washington thinks?
Yeah, and all that Allah Akbar and threats of attacking the West was nothing. This man is a total ass.
The guy stands over soldier’s headless body with bloody machete in his hand shouting “Allah Akbar”. Nope, doesn’t sound like a terrorist to me.
It was workplace violence.
I’m surprised the Bamster didn’t warn the British not to discriminate against the Muslim.
Obama is standing with the muslims, as he promised.
Which by an odd coincidence is exactly the position of the Iranian Government. And the Egyptian government, and government of Libya.
I read that book in 1983 and it seemed so far fetched back then. Not anymore.
The Islamic murderers where obviously outraged over a disgusting, offensive video.
I’m sure Obama will say he called it terror one day one about 6 months from now.
Anyway, here we go again, same old sh*t...
“Better to line on our headless knees than to offend a Muslim I say.
Of course now. His fellow Muslims committed the atrocity.
Anyone who tells you the libs did not adopt it as a set of directions is a liar.
Wow what a surprise....Not! Even the terrorists themselves called it what it is in their video: Islamic Terrorism. Pathetic Obamanuts.
If only there were some clues, some hint, just anything at all that could connect them to that Muslim religion thingee.
What...could it be...?
Yeah, and all that Allah Akbar and threats of attacking the West was nothing. This man is a total ass.
No no no. You heard wrong. They were saying "Piss ...uh I mean Peace Be to the West". ;-p
>>where the assailants gleefully admit the radical motivation behind their attack — “senseless violence.”<<
This is NOT “senseless violence.” It is PURPOSEFUL violence with a specific reason — to further islam’s reach into normal people’s lives. That is the OPPOSITE of “senseless.”
God, obozo and his handlers are so incredibly stupid they don’t even know the meaning of simple words.
It can’t be workplace violence because they weren’t at work. They were on a public street. It must be road rage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.