"A WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING" Sunday May 17 at 1:30 PM EDT on EWTN (Television): Where did political correctness, gender conflict, gender confusion, Cu

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1cthlctrth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1

1cthlctrth

Guest

The answer to these, and many other questions, can be found in the EWTN Documentary “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing,” a chilling look at the impact of Community Activist Saul Alinsky, whose “Rules for Radicals” still wields a huge influence on American culture – and the world.

You’ll have to tune in to find out what happened in that Chicago parish, but suffice it to say that Father Mitch Pacwa personally witnessed the execution of a former gang member – as a result of this demonization and stirring up of “enmities” with the goal of trying to help people – which had a profound effect on him.

Are Alinsky tactics being used by a few state Governors and their media during these unusual times, in order to establish power and control over the citizens?

EWTN television will re-broadcast “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” on Sunday from 1:30 PM to 3PM.
 
Last edited:
This is an excellent, powerful, very disturbing report that ought to be required viewing of every Catholic today, from the laity to every bishop, including the pope. We need to see this, and learn from it, to understand the so-called “progressive” movement that is in politics around the world, and is in the Church, at all levels.

I don’t know how else to say it - but I know that some will not see it, and will not be dissuaded from their love for “progressivism”, from the Democrat progressives, from the liberal progressive churchmen… and etc. I know how “cool” it is for many young people, who are seduced into a “progressive” viewpoint by their teachers, professors, entertainers, all “cool” and “in” and “woke” and whatever the latest word is for “we who know best” and etc. Yes, it’s “cool” as the serpent in the Garden was, and as he continues to be in his work opposing all that is right and true. He is a liar. “Progressivism” - “socialism” - all temporary aliases for dictatorial communism - are all lies straight out of hell.

Watch it, brothers and sister! Please!
 
Last edited:
Part of what I found really interesting was that Fr. Mitch, as a young novice, had no idea what Alinsky-style community organizing was all about until he, and several other eager novices intending to do good things, were assigned to a Chicago parish that just happened to have two priests trained in the technique. These priests wanted to stop the violence between the Hispanic, Black and Italian gangs and touted Alinskyian style organizing as a way to do this.

The stated goal is worthy. Father Mitch says Catholics are particularly vulnerable to these techniques because our faith teaches us to help others. Unfortunately, Alinsky’s community organizers use Marxist techniques that call for someone or some group to be cast as an “enemy” who must be isolated and demonized. They are taught to treat people not as individuals but as symbols.

Alinsky further teaches: “The end justifies almost any means."

This is truly frightening the way leftists use well-meaning people to accomplish catastrophic ends.

We don’t want to end up like Venezuela, which used to be the richest country in South America. But then socialism took over.

Article from 2017:

 
Last edited:
This film is brought out around every election season, it is intended to make the other guys into monstrous enemies.
 
1cthlctrth said:
… techniques that call for someone or some group to be cast as an “enemy” who must be isolated and demonized. They are taught to treat people not as individuals but as symbols.
Click to expand...
The irony is lost on most.
 
Hey Fred. Pot calling the kettle black, eh? You think that’s so clever indicting @1cthlctrth for division, yet your response . . . actually does that quite a bit. . . . @1cthlctrth is speaking of how Saul’s tactics were precisely what he said Saul did, and you are clearly guilty of it.

And I’ll ask you, have you WATCHED it? . . . Father Mitch Pacwa, a wonderful priest on EWTN, . . . speaks about how he was so deceived by Saul. The devil sows a little bit of lies with some truth so it’s easier to swallow. . . .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JoeFreedom said:
Hey Fred.
Click to expand...
Hey, Joe. As I said…lost on most.

Off the top of your head, can you think of anyone who calls for some group to be cast as an ‘enemy’ who must be demonized? Anyone? Anyone who uses ridicule as a weapon? Who personalises threats and polarises the argument? Who picks tactics that his supporters enjoy? Who prefers to push negatives? Who casts about for a ‘common enemy’ to rally the troops? Who treats people as symbols and not personalities?

Anyone come to mind?
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
Agreed…
Who exactly are the “other” guys?
Click to expand...
What she is refering to is the “Us vs. Them” mentality in politics and how this video is used as propaganda.
 
Last edited:
I’m sorry, but you’re completely wrong. Alinsky was a divider. I’m stating the truth, and what in fact Alinsky claimed he was and wrote in his book and is on film saying. If you want to call me a hypocrite because I’m stating the facts, then we have nothing else to say to each other.
 
JoeFreedom said:
I’m sorry, but you’re completely wrong. Alinsky was a divider. I’m stating the truth, and what in fact Alinsky claimed he was and wrote in his book and is on film saying. If you want to call me a hypocrite because I’m stating the facts, then we have nothing else to say to each other.
Click to expand...
You can state facts without being divisive.
 
JoeFreedom said:
40.png
Freddy:
Off the top of your head,
Click to expand...
The Democrats come to mind, but I’m smart enough…
Click to expand...
Then you’d be smart enough to know that these are pretty standard political tactics used by many people on both sides of the politcal spectrum. The Tea Party was a bottom up organisation that was a classical example of Salinsky’s methods. Yet you and fide only seem to want to apply them to those on the left side of the political divide. Which, along with other comments, would indicate that you feel the tactics themselves are something to be demonised.

By all means criticise the ends to which these means are used by any one person or party or group. But if you simply criticise the means themselves and not appreciate that the guy in that big white house on Pennsylvania Avenue uses the very same tactics himself, then we have…irony.
 
Freddy said:
The Tea Party was a bottom up organisation that was a classical example of Salinsky’s methods.
Click to expand...
You lump together bottom-up approaches of Saul Alinsky with the Tea Party, but the difference is that the Tea Party was not seeking to divide, but to bring together. Just because you don’t agree with the Tea Party’s goal to allow all people personal freedom and equality, doesn’t mean they were out to divide. They weren’t.
 
JoeFreedom said:
40.png
Freddy:
The Tea Party was a bottom up organisation that was a classical example of Salinsky’s methods.
Click to expand...
You lump together bottom-up approaches of Saul Alinsky with the Tea Party, but the difference is that the Tea Party was not seeking to divide, but to bring together. Just because you don’t agree with the Tea Party’s goal to allow all people personal freedom and equality, doesn’t mean they were out to divide. They weren’t.
Click to expand...
I’m all for freedom and equality. So what better way to obtain that then to get like minded people together, organise them into a political group and push for change. Don’t you agree with that tactic?

And did someone say the tea party was out to divide?
 
That’s the problem with typed arguments. Context can get easily lost. If I inferred something based on what was written that was not the intent, then my apologies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top