The criminal "safe zone" at the Obama Commissariat of Injustice, Revenge & Coverup continues to crazily and nauseatingly expand. And you won't believe where it's headed next: the Commissariat of Re-Education.
Nah, you probably will. First, "convict" was "fundamentally transformed" into "person who committed a crime," followed by "felon" being etymologically (and windily) transmogrified into "individual who was incarcerated".
And now criminals get their special day:
It’s only May, but I think I’ve found the euphemism of the year: According to Team Obama, criminals should now be declared “justice-involved individuals.”
The neo-Orwellianism comes to us from the bizarre flurry of last-minute diktats, regulations and bone-chilling threats collectively known to fanboys as Obama’s Gorgeous Goodbye.
In another of those smiley-faced, but deeply sinister, “Dear Colleague” letters sent to universities and college this week, Obama’s [Re-E]ducation [Commissar] John King "discouraged" colleges from asking applicants whether they were convicted criminals.
Because why would anybody want or need THAT little piece of information?
An accompanying pamphlet was called “Beyond the Box: Increasing Access to Higher Education for Justice-Involved Individuals.”
Spot question: Before this post, if you had seen the phrase "justice-involved individuals," you would have assumed it was a reference to police officers or district attorneys, wouldn't you? Individuals involved with carrying out justice, not being the target of it. Which makes this Orwellian verbiage at least an order of magnitude more sinister than the dopey DOJ euphemisms. In fact, don't they have to be updated? Shouldn't "person who committed a crime" now be revised to "person who committed a justice involvement"? How about "racist murderer of unarmed black men metaphysical status alterer" in place of "cop-killer"? I'd almost guarantee that one is next in the SJW hopper.
By the way, why should JIIs get increased access to higher education? To make them smarter devils? Oh, my apologies, "horned, hooved, red-skinned, forked-tailed, Ron Pearlman-portrayed non-positive cultural archetypes".
So rapists, burglars, armed robbers and drug dealers aren’t criminals anymore. These folks are simply “involved” with “justice,” according to Obamanoids.
Hell, that probably describes Obama's Cabinet by this time. Look at who'll be serving his third term, for heaven's sake.
But this is just one aspect of Cloward-Pivenization. Hijacking the language is no different than the Left's hijacking every last societal institution (and, via Trumpmania, now both major political parties). It is an all-out war, ideological, political, physical, and ultimately military, of evil waged upon the good. And the Obama Regime is rapidly escalating it, as Mr. Smith goes on to elaborate:
Obama is fighting the war for criminals to get closer to you on several fronts. Last month, through the [Commissaria]t of Housing & Urban Development, he went after landlords, threatening them with penalties if they barred criminals from living in their buildings.
In November, Obama unilaterally ordered federal agencies to strike the box asking applicants whether they had committed crimes and referred to criminals as “folks.” This would be the same president who on October 25th, 2010, referred to Republicans as “enemies” and suggested voters should “punish” them. Convicted rapists? They’re just “folks.”...
[T]his is just a step in a long-term strategy pursued by [communists], who love criminals the way little girls love Disney princesses. The goal is to sneak criminals into your apartment building or workplace or campus.
.....or bathroom or lockerroom.
It's as I've been saying since November 6th, 2012, ladies and gentlemen: We have been taken over from within. America has fallen. And there's no getting it back.
Boy, I can't wait for the SCOTUS's repeal of the Second Amendment next year, can you?
Exit quite from Mr. Smith: "When you think about it, Jack the Ripper was merely a “cutlery-involved individual” while Jeffrey Dahmer was simply a “unconventional dietary-options-involved individual.”
No comments:
Post a Comment