Quote:
Originally Posted by graciegirl
I wasn't discussing Alinsky. I had to look him up to know who he was.
Rubicon has taught me so much about debate such as the use of a "red herring" and changing the subject rather than addressing the subject. And since I am from Ohio, I know about comparing apples to oranges.
What I don't understand are those unwilling to really face the terrible danger we are in from terrorists. Maybe not here today...but the black clouds are trying to cover the sun. If we do not know WHO our enemy is, we cannot survive his attacks.
I too am continuing to wonder why the moderate and "peaceful" Muslims don't more often speak out more and disavow themselves and separate themselves from these individual acts. It would make ME feel better. They do every once in awhile...but I don't see it as wide spread.
|
This was not a surprise. In France they have what they call NO GO zones where everything in that zone is ruled by muslims. Those not of the muslim persuasion may not enter and Muslim law prevails There are also a few of these in England and look around our country....we are creating the same kind of "zones".
The only comment I will make about Alinsky is this...one of his weapons was creating GUILT. I mentioned this in the discussion on police and the riots and it was sort of ignored. THIS IS A ALINSKY tactic as we are made to feel guilty if these kind of zones or neighborhoods are not allowed.
This is beginning in this country. Each generation has had communities, not zones where ethnicity was prevelant but never to the point of turning the back on american LAW. If you wanted to survive you HAD TO assimilate, It is not that way any longer in this country or around the world. If you do not want to assimilate you will be defended and told that is your right, and those who oppose this are made to feel guilty. That is an Alinsky tool.