Thursday, April 18, 2013

Alinsky 101

Anyone else here that's read 'Rules for Radicals?'

One of the key points that sticks with me from Alinsky's amorality is that anything one does to achieve ones goals is moral, as long as the end to be attained is just.

Thus we have known radicals and terrorists, William Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Rashid Kalidi, all palling around with our Dear Leader. These people tried to achieve peace through blowing people up.

We have a Chief Executive who thought it was a good idea to promote gun control by arming Mexican drug cartels. (What's that you say? He didn't know anything about it? Well, I heard he did, and according to Harry Reid (POS, NV), the rules of evidence clearly state that once it's "out there," it's up to the accused to prove it wrong.)

So, a man who pals around with terrorists and subscribes to an amoral philosophy of action and believes you should never let a crisis go to waste becomes President of the United States.

Then Boston gets blown up. I've heard a lot of speculation that the government did  it, but I don't believe it. The government still has too many patriots to pull this off without someone decent finding out. The government is not competent enough to do it well.

But Alinksiite group Organizing for America is.

I've heard they're involved.

Now according to Reid's Rules of Evidence, it's time for them to prove themselves not guilty.

1 comment:

  1. hey, they invented an ar15 out of thin air in newtown, what makes you think they couldnt case-handle someone with FBI agents with enough clearance? FEMA terror training in boston that day, just so happened to be a bombing? just like newtown, fema had terror training there too - except that training was on a mass shooting!

    I know it is repugnant and you dont want to believe that people are capable of such horrific things, but like you said, when the ends justify the means...

    I didnt want to believe wtc7 for the longest time either.