Well, for anyone NOT demandng we redefine words in the English language to serve their personal agenda (ironic, since that's EXACTLY what Orwell's 1984 was all about: the gov't redefining words to serve their agenda), here's something that all literate adults should understand: the difference between the word SHOULD and a more imperative form (eg MUST):
From website: MY HAPPY ENGLISH
English Lesson: Should Vs Must
I like coffee, maybe a little too much. I think I should cut down on coffee. My dad used to say that for a healthy life, you should eat and drink in moderation. In other words, you shouldn’t have too much of any one thing. I should have listened to his advice. What do you think I should do? Do you think I must follow my doctor’s advice?
Today we will look at how to use should and must. Do you know how to use these words? Take a look at the paragraph above and then check out today’s lesson:
Should is an auxiliary verb and usually comes before the main verb in the sentence. Should is used to show obligation.Must is also an auxiliary verb, but it is much stronger than should and is often used for orders.
Compare the following sentences:
- My doctor said that I should cut down on coffee. My doctor gave me a strong suggestion.
- My doctor said that I must cut down on coffee. My doctor gave me an order.
- You shouldn’t use a cell phone on the train. This shows your obligation not to use the phone.
- You mustn’t use a cell phone on the train. Maybe there is a regulation prohibiting cell phone use.
- You shouldn’t smoke in public places in New York. Not smoking in public is a social obligation
- You mustn’t smoke in public places in New York. Smoking in public is prohibited by law.
Should is used to show probability, but must is not used this way:
- The meeting should be finished by 2:00. Not, the meeting must be finished…
- The flight should arrive on time. Not, the flight must arrive…
Must is used to show something is sure or certain.
- The train must be running late. I’m sure the train is running late
- You worked until 10 last night! You must be tired. I’m sure you are tired.
Should is used with the past participle (pp) to show what was supposed to happen, but it didn’t:
- The meeting should have finished by 2:00. But, the meeting didn’t finish by 2:00.
- I should have called before I left the house. But I didn’t call before I left the house.
Must is also used with the past participle (pp) when we want to show certainty about the past
- The meeting must have finished by 2:00. I’m sure it finished by 2:00.
- I must have left my wallet at home. I’m sure I left my wallet at home.
Well, I should stop for today. You must be tired from studying so hard. I hope you enjoyed today’s lesson…see you next time!
And for extra credit, it's good to understand what a "weasel word" is, which is EXACTLY what the WTBTS IS guilty of using repeatedly (as above Awake shows), but would improperly labelled as 'contradictory' or 'hypocritical' (or if you DO label it as much, it means you've clearly missed their duplicitous use of "weasel words"):
A weasel word (also, anonymous authority) may be an informal term  for equivocating words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim, or even a refutation has been communicated.
For example, an advertisement may use a weasel phrase such as "up to 50% off on all products". This is misleading because the audience is invited to imagine many items reduced by the proclaimed 50%, but the words taken literally mean only that no discount will exceed 50%, and in extreme misrepresentation, the advertiser need not reduce any prices, which would still be consistent with the wording of the advertisement, since "up to 50" most literally means "any number from 0 to 50 inclusive". 
Another example is a letter of recommendation where the letter writer states "I cannot recommend this person highly enough", which would ordinarily be taken to mean that an amount of recommendation is sufficient to communicate the high stature of recommendation, while at the same time it could literally mean that there is no recommendation at all.
In other cases, words with a particular subjective effect are chosen. For example, one person may speak of "resistance fighters" or "freedom fighters", while another may call the same subjects "terrorists". The underlying facts are the same, but a quite different impression is given.
The use of weasel words to avoid making an outright assertion is a synonym to tergiversate.  Weasel words can imply meaning far beyond the claim actually being made.  Some weasel words may also have the effect of softening the force of a potentially loaded or otherwise controversial statement through some form of understatement, for example using detensifiers such as "somewhat" or "in most respects". 
The WT's use of "should" is a PERFECT example of such a use.