Benghazi, Alinsky & Sacrificing Souls For The Unachievable Utopia

Watching the events of the past weeks Benghazi hearings has been a little disturbing, to say the least. By all rights this scandal should lead to impeachment hearings for President Obama and his entire administration as far as I am concerned. It won't though because there isn't enough outrage among a population that has been indoctrinated into a worldview that espouses big government. Also, half the country is still blind to the reality that there is something much larger at work here, if they are even aware of it all. As sad as it is we are truly living in an age where the freedoms of the majority has been surrendered by the fears of the minority, and the masses just blindly follow the path laid before them by their socialist masters.

For those of us that are paying attention we face an uphill battle against a radical minority who not only controls the opinions of the masses through media but education as well. These radicals have a vested interest in maintaining their power and they are the masters of running campaigns that literally destroy any opposition that stands in the way of their ultimate objective, a world communist paradise otherwise known as a Utopia. It is imperative that this is understood because after all, we have an Alinsky style community organizer in the White House and according to Alinsky-

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counter attack ridicule. Also, it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

This is the fifth rule of tactics in Alinsky's Rules for Radicals and can be seen on page 128. It essentially explains why the republicans have developed a yellow stripe down their backs and can be regularly seen waving a white flag. They are scared to death because there is nothing the left will not say or do to discredit them. This tactic is employed specifically to put the opposition on the defensive and then make them react to the most ridiculous accusations. Another rule that Alinsky has is that any good tactic is one that your people enjoy. In other words folks these people sink to incredible lows and have a ball destroying peoples reputations while putting them in a reactionary mode trying to prove what was said about them is not true. We have seen that this can become very nasty, yet effective in advancing their agenda. The strategy has bordered on the ridiculous with ads such as the one depicting Paul Ryan throwing granny off the cliff to creating mental associations connecting gun right supporters to mass murderers.

It is difficult for people to understand this mentality because we tend to project ourselves onto others I believe. Most of us try to be decent, honest citizens and would never do to others what the left does to us. We try to do the right thing. The left doesn't believe in a "right thing" in the same sense that we do folks. They believe in moral relativism which allows them to get away with anything when it comes to reaching their goals of establishing a totalitarian government.

The best way to explain this is to say that the ultimate expression of morality for the left is the sacrifice of their morality for the greater good of mankind. From their warped perspective the greater good of mankind means restructuring society into a one world communist government that can make it fair for everyone. In other words to call republicans racist and homophobes and call gun right supporters terrorists are understood by the left to be deplorable tactics, but if they succeed in destroying the opposition than they have lived to the highest standard of morality by sacrificing their own "salvation" for the salvation of mankind. If they are not willing to corrupt themselves for the greater good than they do not really care. This is the way the left thinks America and we have to understand this if we expect to stand a chance at getting our country back. Let's ponder this quote a moment-

"To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play mom against dad in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life."

He goes on to say that a "man of action" does not have the luxury of making decisions consistent with his own conscience and the good of mankind, therefore he must always chose the latter. In other words the radical leftist believes that by sacrificing their own "personal salvation" they are in fact, as stated earlier expressing the highest form of morality because it is being done for their ultimate objective which they believe will create a perfect paradise, world communist government. It must be realized that this objective cannot be reached. What they are really doing is destroying the soul of mankind because they are acting without God. No matter how hard people try to change the truth to suit their agendas truth will always remain the truth. In this case truth tells us that mankind cannot and will never be able to create a perfect paradise without God; that is not our purpose. So the natural consequence is that instead of creating a perfect paradise where everyone is equal and everything is fair, they are creating another hell on Earth because they have failed to look at what happened the last time they tried this. Of course, if you understand the left and the depth of their depravity than you understand to them it may take the slaughter of another 20 million to reach their objective. After all according to Darwin and Hegel a perfect society would evolve out of conflict.

What does all of this have to do with Benghazi? Maybe nothing; however, if it turns out to be true that there was a massive gun running operation at the heart of the scandal it could be argued that it was done for the purpose of removing the Syrian president , Bashar Al-Assad in order to give control of the region to U.N. troops. Knowing that the left is infatuated with Alinksy like tactics, statements like "What difference does it make" from Hillary Clinton and "Death is a part of life" from Eliah Cummings make more sense. They are selling their souls in an attempt to protect their agenda; which they believe will eventually serve the greater good of mankind. I think in reality they are only concerned with serving the greater good for themselves and protecting their lies.



Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

153 thoughts on “Benghazi, Alinsky & Sacrificing Souls For The Unachievable Utopia

  1. I agree that there is something bigger that was being covered up in Benghazi. The British pulled their people out because it was too dangerous, The Red Cross closed their office and left, but the USA not only kept their people there, but had an Ambassador there, and reduced the amount of Security, hired local Libyans to "protect" the "Diplomatic Facility, Consulate, or whatever the buzzword of the day was to describe it. The Ambassador's last meeting in the afternoon of the attack was with the Turkish Ambassador.There were all kinds of weapons left behind after the fall of the Libyan Dictator. I think the US Gov. was trying to send weapons from Libya to Turkey and then to the Syrian Rebels. I think Obama was waiting for the Muslim Brotherhood to infiltrate and control the Syrian Rebels, and keep them in line by providing weapons, before he did anything in Syria to stop the slaughter. Ambassador Stevens may have been brokering that deal, and the Libyan Terrorists wanted the weapons to stay in Libya under their control, and attacked to stop it. The State Dept and the Whitehouse did nothing because they didn't want that "mission" exposed. All speculation but it makes more sense than the stupid Youtube video scenario.

  2. Thelma Samuelson says:

    Dear Mr. Risselada,

    You are right. I have been very hard on you over "a few typos" which actually were not typos but grammatical errors. I have to tell you that there really is a difference between a typo (or typos) and a repeated grammatical error, three times in one very good--even important--article. And it is precisely that repetition of a simple word misused within the context of important ideas that got me so very upset. WHY? Well, you've said it best yourself, John: because it is something that conceivably could discredit the cause of Conservatism. HOW? Again, you've said it best yourself: through their ridicule (right out of Alinsky's playbook).

    Just think of what those polished, over-indoctrinated New York Times readers (and writers) can do with your message by ridiculing your grammar--for starters. If you continue on this path, as I hope you will, the legions of the Left will do far worse to you, but this is a good place to start--if you give them the opening. This is what got me so upset. You're not just preaching to the choir here. Your ideas are an attack on those who will hate you. A message this powerful ("Benghazi, Alinsky & Sacrificing Souls for the Unachievable Utopia," WOW!!) deserves to be delivered in pristine, unblemished condition.

    What you have to say is dynamite, John. And you have said it VERY well. From the title to the ending, you've hit their goddamned nail right on the head, you've pulled their pants down and exposed them in all their godless corruption. And, yes, Bernadine Dorn herself admitted to an undercover FBI agent that their objective will not be achieved nor will their revolution be complete until at least another 25 million of US are liquidated. So, even if our Godly Conservatism is a lost cause, by all means, continue this fight. But for God's sake, really proof read what you've written, carefully, before you post it.

  3. what I will never understand is the fact that Alinsky was a jew - and his rules for radicals smacks of communism from page 1 to the bitter end. Now we have a muslim in the white house and yet he lives and breathes Alinsky's vile and terrible ideas!!?!!l What is wrong with this picture? Why the double standards by the latte one? and of course all the other traitors in government who also hold the Alinsky bible lose to their bosoms... Enough

  4. Thelma Samuelson says:

    Yes, I think you're on to something Tex, and I also think you're right. I really should cut him some slack. He is not the enemy. He's a friend, but we are drowning in enemies now.