Economist Stephen Moore: Climate Change is World's Greatest Propaganda Campaign In History

Economist and author Stephen Moore. 
(Heritage Foundation)

There is a difference of opinion. Some believe that psychiatry is the greatest propaganda campaign in history. 

[From article]
Commenting on the Obama administration’s high-pressure offensive to address global warming, leading economist and author Stephen Moore said it is “amazing” because this “dingbat idea of global climate change” is “one of the greatest propaganda campaigns in world history” executed by the political left.
During a June 3 radio interview on the nationally syndicated Janet Mefferd Today show, Moore, the founder of the Club for Growth and a former Wall Street Journal editorial board member, said, “It’s really amazing, I have to say. I have to tip my hat to the left: This has been one of the greatest propaganda campaigns in world history that the left has pulled off.”
“I mean, they’ve taken this dingbat idea of global climate change and they’ve put it in the schools, they’ve put it in the movies, they’ve put it in the media and the churches — you know, I’m Catholic, even the Pope talks about climate change,” said Moore, co-author of Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy.
“So, it’s very alarming how this propaganda campaign, that they made this stuff out of, almost completely out of thin air and they’ve convinced millions and millions of thought leaders that this stuff is real,” said Moore, who is the Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Project for Economic Growth.
[. . .]
Moore said, “Yes, it’s interesting, it’s very Stalinistic. Right? … It’s like, ‘You’re going to toe the line or were going to put you in jail.’ You mentioned the fact that now, if you question them, they’d put me in jail, if they could. Steve Moore is an environmental skeptic, let’s put him in jail.”
“It’s like the Spanish Inquisition,” he said. “Truly, it’s frightening actually. These people don’t want dissent. They don’t believe in freedom of speech. They don’t think you have the right to question their religion of global warming.”
“They’re becoming more militaristic,” he said. “They are young Stalinists. I can’t go on college campuses today to even question their religion of global warming – and it is a religion, by the way. “

http://cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/stephen-moore-climate-change-one-greatest-propaganda-campaigns-world-history

Stephen Moore: Climate Change 'One of Greatest Propaganda Campaigns in World History’--'Very Stalinistic'
By Michael W. Chapman

June 9, 2016 | 1:39 PM EDT

All White People Are Racists; Black People, Hispanics, Homosexuals Are Never Biased, Only Objective and Morally Correct, Always

This essay is hilarious. Coulter describes the same pattern employed by black students at Harvard Law School demanding an end to white racism. Students, university and law school administrators appear to agree that all white people are wealthy and powerful; but all black people are poor and weak. Except for the privileged upper class students at Harvard Law School? Is this all psychoses celebrated by liberal politicians and journalists?

[From article]
Annoyed at federal judge Gonzalo P. Curiel’s persistent rulings against him in the Trump University case (brought by a law firm that has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for speeches by Bill and Hillary), Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said that maybe it’s because the judge is a second-generation Mexican immigrant.



The entire media — and most of the GOP — have spent 10 months telling us that Mexicans in the United States are going to HATE Trump for saying he’ll build a wall. Now they’re outraged that Trump thinks one Mexican hates him for saying he’ll build a wall.
Curiel has distributed scholarships to illegal aliens. He belongs to an organization that sends lawyers to the border to ensure that no illegal aliens’ “human rights” are violated. The name of the organization? The San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association — “La Raza” meaning THE RACE.
Let’s pause to imagine the nomination hearings for a white male who belonged to any organization for white people — much less one with the words “THE RACE” in its title.
The media were going to call Trump a racist whatever he did, and his attack on a Hispanic judge is way better than when they said it was racist for Republicans to talk about Obama’s golfing.
Has anyone ever complained about the ethnicity of white judges or white juries? I’ve done some research and it turns out … THAT’S ALL WE’VE HEARD FOR THE PAST 40 YEARS.
The New York Times alone has published hundreds of articles, editorials, op-eds, movie reviews, sports articles and crossword puzzles darkly invoking “white judges” and “all-white” juries, as if that is ipso facto proof of racist justice.
Two weeks ago–that’s not an error; I didn’t mean to type “decades” and it came out “weeks” — the Times published an op-ed by a federal appeals judge stating: “All-white juries risk undermining the perception of justice in minority communities, even if a mixed-race jury would have reached the same verdict or imposed the same sentence.”
In other words, even when provably not unfair, white jurors create the “perception” of unfairness solely by virtue of the color of their skin.
Innocence Project co-founder Barry Scheck’s entire career of springing criminals would be gone if it were generally accepted that we can’t question judges or juries based on race or ethnicity. Writing about the release of Glenn Ford, a black man convicted of robbing a jewelry store and murdering the owner, Scheck claimed that one of the most important factors in Ford’s death sentence was the “all-white jury.”



On the other hand, the evidence against Ford included: His two black friends telling police he’d shown them jewelry the day of the murder, another Ford acquaintance swearing he’d had a .38 in his waistband — the murder weapon was a .38 — and the gunshot residue on Ford’s hand. His conviction was overturned many years later, on the theory that his black friends had committed the murder, then framed him.
So we know 1) the “real killers” were also black; and 2) any jury would have convicted Ford on that evidence.
Here’s how the Times described Ford’s trial: “A black man convicted of murder by an all-white jury in Louisiana in 1984 and sentenced to die, tapped into an equally old and painful vein of race.”
I have approximately 1 million more examples of the media going mental about a “white judge” or “all-white jury,” and guess what? In none of them were any of the white people involved members of organizations dedicated to promoting white people, called “THE RACE.”
Say, does anyone remember if it ever came up that the Ferguson police force was all white? Someone check that.
I don’t want to upset you New York Times editorial board, but perhaps we should revisit the results of the Nuremberg trials. Those were presided over by – TRIGGER WARNING! – “all white” juries. (How do we really know if Hermann Göring was guilty without hearing women’s and Latino voices?)
The model of a fair jury was the O.J. trial. Nine blacks, one Hispanic and two whites, who had made up their minds before the lawyers’ opening statements.
[. . .]



In defiance of everyday experience, known facts and common sense, we are all required to publicly endorse the left’s religious belief that whites are always racist, but women and minorities are incapable of any form of bias. If you say otherwise, well, that’s “textbook racism,” according to Paul Ryan.
At least when we’re talking about American blacks, there’s a history of white racism, so the double standard is not so enraging. What did we ever do to Mexicans? Note to Hispanics, Muslims, women, immigrants and gays: You’re not black.
Six months ago, a Times editorial demanded that the Republican Senate confirm Obama judicial nominee Luis Felipe Restrepo, on the grounds that “[a]s a Hispanic,” Restrepo would bring “ethnic … diversity to the court.”
You see how confusing this is. On one hand, it’s vital that we have more women and Latinos on the courts because white men can’t be trusted to be fair. But to suggest that women and Latinos could ever be unfair in the way that white men can, well, that’s “racist.”
The effrontery of this double standard is so blinding, that the only way liberals can bluff their way through it is with indignation.
[. . .]
They’re betting they can intimidate Republicans — and boy, are they right!
The entire Republican Brain Trust has joined the media in their denunciations of Trump for his crazy idea that anyone other than white men can be biased.
[. . .]
What do Republicans they think they’re getting out of this appeasement? Proving to voters that elected Republicans are pathetic, impotent media suck-ups is, surprisingly, not hurting Trump.

http://humanevents.com/2016/06/08/stunning-new-development-media-calls-trump-racist/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Stunning New Development!!! Media Calls Trump Racist

Ann Coulter

Wednesday Jun 8, 2016 2:57 PM

Cambridge, MA High School Students Recognize Difference Between Perception and Reality

“In Cambridge, there’s a difference between perception and reality,” [student Gregorio Leon] said. “There’s this perception of being an ultra-liberal utopia, which can often lead to a lack of questioning about who we really are. That complacency is very dangerous, and good to challenge.” is an accurate observation not limited to CRLS. 



Tell that to $37 billion endowed Harvard University, local, state and US governments which abuse taxpayers and voters. 



One Cambridge gentleman was described as a retired drug dealer for 35 years by the FBI as part of covering up serious criminal government abuses, while others described the same gentleman as homeless and crazy. Police and politicians joined in bullying a vulnerable person. This works in many areas.

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20160602/NEWS/160609476/?Start=1

'Our Truths' student production highlights issues facing Cambridge teens
By Natalie Handy
nhandy (at) wickedlocal.com
Posted Jun. 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM
CAMBRIDGE Chronicle

Anti Israel Indoctrination At Newton, MA High School

Published on Apr 6, 2016
New Video Exposes Bias and Bigotry in Newton High Schools

https://youtu.be/JpSPOInxZYo

Google Rewriting American History

[From article]
Google (now under the Alphabet umbrella) leverages its ubiquitous platform to doodle about holidays, anniversaries and famous people. Since about 26% of us are unsure from whom we got our independence; many believe that Karl Marx helped author the Constitution, and untold others cannot name our 3 major branches of government, they could provide a useful civic service.
Instead, the insular techies are enmeshed in Silicon Valley’s progressive orthodoxy, choosing to superimpose today’s mores on yesteryear while ignoring many heroic figures and religious holidays
that weave together the grand tapestry of American history. Contrary to their claims, Google Doodles more often celebrate obscure anniversaries and niche figures, retroactively applying modern leftist sensibilities tainted by sexism, multiculturalism, secularism, environmentalism and racialism.
[. . .]
On March 16, 2016, Google celebrated the 266th birthday of astronomer Caroline Herschel. By all accounts she was diligent, but her brother, Sir William Herschel, was more consequential in the field. [. . .] Even though William worked tirelessly to develop a natural history of the heavens, you won’t find a Google Doodle of him.
Amelia Earhart (who failed spectacularly) was celebrated by Google on July 24, 2012, but in the Google Doodle archives it’s Charles Lindberg who has gone missing.
[. . .]



If Google were intent on providing a public service faithful to our history, they’d spotlight Anthony with a doodle since a majority of Americans can’t identify her as a founder of the Women’s Rights movement.
[. . .]
Even though Christmas has been a federal holiday since 1870, we’re always greeted with a generic “Happy Holidays.” Their doodling started in 1998 – that’s 19 years of avoiding “Merry Christmas.”
In a nod to multiculturalism, I’m sure the clever artists at Google/Alphabet could contrive to combine Christian and Jewish traditions. Even many of the Jewish faith appreciate the glorious Nativity scene, and are content to see it beside the menorah in public. Yet you’ll find neither in the Google Doodle archives.
[. . .]



We all agree that while promoting economic development and creating good paying jobs that we must also protect our pale blue dot that hovers majestically in the vast void of space. But 16 Earth Day Doogles? That hardly reflects their mandate of being “fun, surprising and sometimes spontaneous”; rather, it bespeaks their political agenda, reinforced by their contributions.
Not many would begrudge MLK his Google Doodle. Actually, he has 12, which is far more than for all the U.S. Presidents combined. I couldn’t actually find many Google Doodles celebrating President’s Day, but I don’t want to definitively accuse them of gross negligence in case their search engine algorithms are absentminded.
[. . .]
Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman: let’s be magnanimous and concede they both deserve a Google Doodle. But Abraham Lincoln, who signed the Emancipation Proclamation and is generally considered one of our greatest presidents, is omitted.
[. . .]



On April 15, 2016, Google’s Doodle highlighted Samuan Samadikun’s 85th birthday. Apparently he’s a bright scientific mind from Indonesia who specialized in electrical engineering. But brighter or more influential than the plethora of great American electrical engineers, including Charles F. Kettering who holds 186 patents? Sorry, Charles, even though you gave so much back through your eponymous Kettering Foundation, you just sound too American to be recognized by Google.
[. . .]



I’m not sure whether Google should be intermixing business with iconography, but they like Earth Day so much they could at least remind us about the people and events that made America the “last best hope of earth.” We need it, since about 1/3rd of us would fail a naturalization test.
Google’s Doodles aren’t absentminded; they aren’t even spontaneous fun. They don’t celebrate our religious holidays with relish nor emphasize our American luminaries. They are deliberate, agenda-driven, social action propaganda that apologizes for American greatness. As Google parent Alphabet has surpassed Apple as the world’s most valuable company, the old question “does Google hate America?” deserves a huge doodle

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/google_doodles_redrawing_american_history.html

May 12, 2016
Google Doodles: Redrawing American History
By Noel S. Williams

NPR Michigan Refuses Donor's On Air Message "Happy Birthday Israel."

[From article]
Lisa Lis of Oakland County was pleased when she got a message in April from Michigan Radio, a statewide public radio group operated by the University of Michigan. It said because she had donated at least $365, she could sponsor a day's broadcast and have a message read on air six times
Lis, a self-proclaimed progressive and strong supporter of Israel, whose husband is Israeli and whose son is in the Israeli Defense Forces, wanted her message to celebrate Israel. Eventually she settled on "Happy 68th Birthday Israel." Israel celebrates Independence Day this year on May 12.
Initially, "blessing" was in her message, but the station said that implied something religious, so she dropped that word. Then the station said it couldn't accommodate the wish because it needed two months' notice.
Then the station rejected the message outright. Alison Warren, associate director of development, wrote in an April 26 email:
Dear Lisa,
We will not be able to air your day sponsorship message as written.
We have determined that this message would compromise the station's commitment to impartiality and that it crosses over into advocacy, or could imply advocacy.
If there is another message, perhaps celebrating a birthday or anniversary of an individual, please let me know and I'd be happy to assist you.
"I'm very upset," said Lis, a daughter of Florine Marks of Weight Watchers' fame. "It’s sad. There's plenty anti-Israel messages out there, and they won't allow something for Israel." Lis said she and her husband, Hannan Lis, donate $40 per month.
[. . .]



Last Friday, Lis took it to the next level, writing about the conflict in a weekly newsletter emailed to about 1,000 people.
I am in a battle with Michigan Radio to use my Day Sponsorship to wish Israel Happy 68th birthday. They denied my request because they said it would "compromise the station's commitment to impartiality and that it crosses over into advocacy".
Why would Public Radio need to be impartial about a legally recognized country other than the fact, many want her wiped from the face of the earth. Would it be a problem if it were the birthday of England, Norway or South Sudan?
Israel is a hot button country that the world has accepted as questionable and debatable and the major infraction Israel has committed is purely her existence. By the way, I truly look forward to expressing my same salutation when Palestine can celebrate her birthday.
[. . .]
Steve Schram, executive director and general manager, responded Monday:
The current request was denied because it doesn’t meet our day sponsorship policies, which state “typical messages honor an individual’s birthday, anniversary, retirement, graduation, or other personal event.”
In accordance with our rules governing donor acknowledgments, announcements containing political or religious messages are not acceptable This was shared with the donor.
This policy is not unique to this station and is similar to other public radio stations across the country.

http://www.deadlinedetroit.com/articles/14898/was_public_radio_right_to_reject_sponsor_s_request_to_wish_israel_happy_birthday#.Vz5gn_krKUl

Is Public Radio Right to Reject Donor's Request to Wish Israel Happy Birthday?

By Allan Lengel
allan (at) deadlinedetroit.com
May 10th, 2016, 10:36 AM

Propaganda Promoted By Major Media and Prominent Journalists

[From article]
First they came for the baker, and I said nothing, because I was not a baker.
Then they came for the photographer, and I did nothing, because I was not a photographer.
Then they came for the institution of marriage, but I was not married.
Then they came for the girls' bathrooms, but I was not a girl.
Then they came for the tolerant in the name of tolerance, but I didn't understand.
Calling themselves progressives, they seek to destroy progress.
They rewrite history to control the future.
They have deformed the Constitution into a suicidal playbook.
Their appointed justices say the Constitution is a living document.
But if the Constitution is living, then it is dead.
They have replaced Jeffersonian individualism and free enterprise with the Leviathan State.
[. . .]



They steal from the worker through taxing his wages and give it to those who vote for a living.
Voter fraud is justified as a means to end. Nothing is beneath them.
They disarm the law-abiding to make victims defenseless against the emboldened criminal.
Before, they came for the Jew, but now they also come for the Christian and Western civilization itself.



Yet they protect the illegal alien and Muslim immigrant hordes.
They shame our cultures and our borders, but theirs are sacrosanct.
They tell us it is our fault that we are blown up and beheaded.
They prey on the humane and decent and use their humanity and decency against them.
They brandish pseudo-phobias as both spear and shield.
Shouting for racial justice, they incite racial hatred.
Failing incitement, they fabricate hoax incidents of hate against themselves for attention and sympathy.
[. . .]



They crusade on campus to enslave free minds and enforce conformity to an ideological assimilation of attitude.
They attack Judeo-Christianity with religious fervor yet worship at the altar of secular atheism while embracing sharia.
They strive to enslave the people of the planet in the name of saving the planet.
They foment panic of plant food while ignoring data of epochs past.
They use the siren song of entertainment media to demoralize, desensitize, and dumb down.
Now I see the truth as the scales of my public education and trust in media fall from my eyes.
Yet now the twin tides of the nihilist and the zealot ooze forth to pillage and rape.
Pillage of my culture and rape of women because they are daughters of the infidel, or maybe just because their skin is white.
They feel entitled through self-esteem, though they are retarded from generations of ideological inbreeding.
They demand charity for merely existing and reparations for something that never happened to them.
Left, thy name is hate. Yet with gnashed teeth, they call us the haters, because we hate what they are doing to all that we love.
They wage guilt and gall.
They worship mayhem and madness.
They bond in a cult of duplicity and death.
Oppose not this sacrilege at your own peril.
Pacifism in the face of evil is the greater evil.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/05/march_of_the_orwellians.html

May 11, 2016
March of the Orwellians
By W.R. Wansley

White House Diverts Attention From Criminal Scandals With Non Gender Bathrooms

Agree that this is one of many issues used by PR flacks to divert attention, not just from important issues, but also from many criminal scandals of this lawless administration. What is extremely troubling is how alleged conservative pundits, including the erudite Mark Levin, no less the obedient mindless lame stream journalists, spend far too much time discussing these diversions.



[From article]
Let's add the battle over transgenders and bathrooms to Obama's favorite pastime of distractions.
To be honest, I think bathrooms are for boys and girls. This is why we identify them as such on the door. Furthermore, women are entitled to a sense of privacy about going to a public bathroom.
Most important of all, this is an issue that should be settled by state legislatures. We don't need a Roe v. Wade about bathrooms.



Let North Carolina decide. Let them figure this out, and they will.
In the meantime, the Obama administration should use its time to deal with real issues, such as:
1) Obamacare premiums: The rates are going up from coast to coast. They are about to explode in 2017.
[. . .]
2) The last GDP number started with a zero. In fact, the U.S. economy is weaker than anticipated:
[. . .]
3) The battles vs. ISIS is not going well. In fact, the public does not think we are winning, and with good reason.



So what do you do when Obamacare premiums are crushing family budgets, or the economy is losing steam and the wars on drugs and terror are lacking a strategy?
The answer is that you find topics to distract your base with, such as getting into a war with North Carolina over bathrooms.
Our Founding Fathers got this right many years ago. They gave the federal government certain responsibilities and left the rest to the states. This bathroom issue is for the states, and the Justice Department should get back to doing something important, such as enforcing immigration laws.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/05/talking_bathrooms_beats_talking_about_everything_else_that_isnt_flushing_.html

May 11, 2016
Talking bathrooms beats talking about everything else that isn't flushing
By Silvio Canto, Jr.

Harvard University Muslim Supremacist "Experts" See Anti Muslim Hatred Everywhere

Author attributes misleading statements by Muslim apologists, as sloppy research. Perhaps it is intentional propaganda?

[From article]
a recent panel titled "Anti-Muslim Sentiment in the US: Challenges and Perspectives." [. . .] was sponsored by Harvard University's Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Islamic Studies Program (AISP), whose eponymous founder is an influential member of the Wahhabi Saudi regime. As every panelist was either a current or future Harvard alumnus, the event provided evidence of some disturbing trends in elite higher education today.
The discussion was held on a cold, rainy Monday evening in the Tsai Auditorium, which serves Harvard's Center for Government and International Studies, before an audience of about eighty, including a representative from the university's Office of the President.
[. . .]
anti-Muslim sentiment is attributed to social polarization and religious illiteracy, which is then exploited by unscrupulous politicians and terrorist organizations. He described panelist Omar Khoshafa, a Harvard senior who, in 2015, invited Holocaust-denying extremist preacher and Rhodes College religious studies professor Yasir Qadhi to speak at the university as a "superhero."
[. . .]
Christopher Bail, a Duke University assistant professor of sociology and Harvard Ph.D., characterized his lengthy broadside against critics of radical Islam as social science, but his talk did not rate well in a simple fact-check.
[. . .]
According to Bail, Rubio called to close down "places where Muslims gather to be inspired." This was presumably a reference to Rubio's extemporaneous remarks on November 19, 2015, in which he spoke of "closing down any places where radicals are being inspired" (emphasis added), while expressly rejecting the equation of these places with mosques. Bail then lambasted Ben Carson for supposedly saying "that he would hesitate to appoint Muslims to his cabinet," when it was Herman Cain who stated in 2011 that he would not "be comfortable appointing a Muslim ... in [his] cabinet."
Repeatedly plugging his book, Terrified: How Anti-Muslim Fringe Organizations Became Mainstream, Bail argued that the "mainstreaming of anti-Muslim sentiment" in America is due not to terrorism, ISIS, or the attacks of September 11, 2001, but to:
... [a] very well-coordinated effort by a small network of anti-Muslim organizations who have succeeded not only in captivating the mass media but also, increasingly, in influencing our counter-terrorism policy and ... American public opinion about Islam.
[. . .]
MEMRI, for example, had allegedly engaged in "media manipulation" for translating a line in a Palestinian children's program as "I will shoot the Jews," when, according to Bail, it meant "the Jews are shooting at us." Does Bail not know that MEMRI addressed and rebutted the alternative translation, that the context of the statement undisputedly included directing children to shoot "for the sake of al-Aqsa," or that incitement to kill Jews in Palestinian Authority media is routine? If such sloppiness reflects the quality of his research, it's little wonder he draws such bizarre, conspiratorial conclusions.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/harvard_experts_islamophobia_everywhere.html

April 30, 2016
Harvard 'Experts': Islamophobia Everywhere!
By Caleb Jephson

Anti-BDS Growing In Countering Anti Israel Propaganda

[From article]
At the recent Stand With Us conference, it became obvious that the anti-BDS movement is becoming empowered.
[. . .]
California has a closeness with Israel: over two billion dollars in trade, over 1500 companies do business in Israel, and Governor Brown signed a memorandum of understanding in 2014 to increase collaboration and trade with Israel.”
More and more opponents of BDS are putting the movement on the defensive. People are recognizing that one of the important battlefields is the terrain of college campuses.
[. . .]
There is no strong leadership on campus that says anti-Semitism is not okay, so we need to stand up for ourselves. I warn my fellow students who are not Jewish, anti-Semitism, which is also anti-Zionism, is a canary in a coalmine. The first piece of discrimination starts with the Jewish people and goes forward to others.”
[. . .]



a former Israeli intelligence officer, told of how she was disrespected when trying to speak at the University of Florida. “Their goal is to erase the state of Israel. They called me a baby killer. I hope the opponents of BDS become active and are not afraid to fight for what is right. I truly believe that many of those Americans who protest don’t know the facts, while believing random lies.”
[. . .]
But the supporters of BDS are going beyond free speech with intimidation and political/legal harassment. People should reflect and applaud those who speak out and take action to secure the victory of truth. Those mentioned in the above article need to be supported and admired for standing up to injustice with strength and fortitude.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/fighting_bds.html

April 28, 2016
Fighting BDS
By Elise Cooper

Anti Israel Indoctrination @ Newton High School April 7, 2016

New Video Exposes Bias and Bigotry in Newton High Schools

Anti-Israel Indoctrination Masquerading as “Critical Thinking”

Indoctrination @ Newton High, a new video released today by Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT), exposes a pattern of anti-Israel teachings found in Newton, Massachusetts high schools, including:
Newton’s high schools have used Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) maps that falsify the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Newton students were not told that the maps were created by the PLO’s propaganda unit.



Newton’s schools presented students with a falsified version of the Hamas Charter. In Newton’s doctored version the word ”Jews” – as a target of hatred — is replaced with the word “Zionists.”
In one lesson, Newton students are asked to consider the Jewish state’s right to exist. (The legitimacy of no other nation-state’s existence is questioned.) The lesson included “expert” opinions, which are drawn overwhelmingly from anti-Israel academics and anti-Semitic activists.
A book used in Newton high schools has a recommended reading list that includes the extremist writings by Muslim Brotherhood leaders including Sayyid Qutb, and Yusuf Qaradawi, whose sermons call for the murder of Jews and homosexuals.

https://youtu.be/l_6w1nujk2Q

Journalists Publish Propaganda For White House

[From article]
Some of the most disturbing aspects of the times in which we are living include the utter corruption of the mass print and broadcast media and the lack of awareness of this fact by a large portion of the public.
It seems that most Americans operate on the assumption that the media is making a good-faith, if imperfect, effort at objectively informing its audience. That so few are genuinely aware of the outrageous manipulation of public opinion now taking place is the single greatest threat to the republic, to the extent that we can even say that our republic still exists. A glaring example of this would be the treatment of Nixon 42 years ago over Watergate compared with the treatment of Obama today over any one of several far worse scandals.
It was recently reported in the WSJ that Obama used the NSA to spy on Congress during the deliberations related to the Iran nuclear deal. It was reported on at one time, but this story has now disappeared completely from media coverage. Consider the implications.
In the former case, Nixon apparently directed or sat by and knowingly let his immediate subordinates direct a third-rate burglary of the campaign headquarters of an election opponent. In the latter case, Obama authorized one of the most sophisticated intelligence-gathering organizations in the world to spy on American legislators, en masse, in pursuit of the most important – and egregiously flawed – international agreement impacting American national security and world stability – namely, with the chief sponsor of international terrorism: the Islamic Republic of Iran.
This is a thousand times worse than Watergate! Where is the media? Where are today's equivalents of Woodward and Bernstein? The media doesn't focus on this outrage at all, so to the overwhelming majority of the public, it is as though this never even happened. And this is only one of several comparable scandals we could name.
Another case of the selective focus of our mass media took place in 2009. Barack Hussein Obama said publicly that the U.S. is "not a Christian nation" and that America is "one of the world's foremost Muslim countries."
These statements amount to utter lunacy in a country in which at least 70% self-identify as Christians, where Christian holidays are official national holidays, and where Muslims number, at most, three to four million out of a population of over 330 million. This provoked not even a whimper of incredulity by the mass media. Then, in 2012, during an unintentional "open mic" moment, we overheard Obama making assurances to Russian president Medvedev that once he was able to get past the election, he would have "more flexibility."



Here we have a sitting U.S. president apparently ready to make some huge concession to America's most important major power rival on the world stage, a concession so drastic that it apparently couldn't even be revealed until after the election. And the media did not hound him over this.
Could one imagine a President Nixon, or a President Reagan, making such a statement during arms control negotiations with the USSR and the media simply giving it a pass? But that Donald Trump, he says such "crazy" things...and that Ted Cruz, he's a "religious fanatic." Why! just look at all the terrible things Trump and Cruz say about one another.
The media focus is entirely on setting the major GOP candidates against each other, in order to tarnish their images – letting the candidates themselves do the actual tarnishing, while not giving even a fraction of their coverage to the Democratic contest between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders or their actual qualifications to be president.
How many journalists in the mass media have focused on the fact that despite having held positions such as senator from New York and secretary of state, Hillary Clinton has not even one major positive accomplishment she can name?
And what about Hillary and Bill Clinton's foundation, which has amounted to little more than a money-laundering, influence-peddling racket aimed at amassing a vast campaign war chest funded by numerous foreign interests? Or that Hillary's amply documented mishandling of highly classified information likely represents the greatest breach of trust by a cabinet-level government official in U.S. history?
Does the disgrace of Benghazi, the brutal loss of a U.S. ambassador, mean anything to anyone in the media? Does it even count for a fraction of the consternation eighteen years ago over a stain on a dress?
How about the qualifications of Bernie Sanders, who did not so much as earn a regular paycheck until he was 40, who ran for Congress while collecting unemployment, who supported himself for a time writing about masturbation and rape fantasies for leftist publications, who has served in Congress for 25 years without having written even one piece of legislation that ever passed?
Who, in the national-level print and broadcast mass media, is giving more than scant attention, if any, to these issues? Instead, we are hearing endlessly about Trump's latest gaffe, or the latest smear against Trump by the Cruz campaign, or sleazy allegations about Cruz's personal life, etc.
As an illustration of the power of today's mass media to shape public opinion, one might consider the first time Obama experienced a major drop in his approval ratings. This was early in his second term, during the rollout of Obamacare, and proved to be such an unmitigated and obvious disaster that the mass media had no choice but to report on it honestly and across the board.
Obama's poll numbers suffered dramatically, and in short order, all over this one debacle. One might imagine how his presidency might be viewed if so many other debacles, often of an even more serious nature, received comparable treatment. But this has not happened.
Thus, in such an environment, is it any wonder that despite presiding over the most anemic economic growth experienced under a two-term president since WW2, the lowest labor force participation rate in over 35 years, a more than doubling of the national debt, and the most catastrophic decline in America's stature and prestige on the world stage under one president in the whole of our history, Obama's approval ratings incredibly still hover around 50%?
Add to that not one, but several major scandals that by themselves would likely have sparked impeachment hearings under any previous president. This is clearly the result of a mass media that is as controlled, literally, as what we saw in the Cold War-era Soviet Union – except that in the old USSR, people knew the media was peddling nonsense, so they took it with a big grain of salt.
Here, people aren't fully aware of the extent of the corruption. In terms of degree, this is a relatively recent phenomenon, so their guard is down. The individual exercise of independent critical thinking, the commonsense skepticism that would be needed to counter this, is largely absent, since there is no perceived need to make this effort, even on the part of people who consider themselves "informed."
For these reasons, the fear and expectation have to be that the American public are now being herded by the media into electing Hillary...or even Bernie.
May God help us all.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/obamas_willing_executioners_in_the_media.html

April 9, 2016
Obama's Willing Executioners in the Media
By Victor Sharpe and Robert Vincent

History of West Bank Reveals Palestinians Have No Legitimate Claim, Only Propaganda

[From article]
March saw a return of economic warfare against Israel, masked in discontent with Israel’s “occupation” of “Palestine.”
[. . .]
What these economic and political warriors don’t seem to realize is that Israel is not occupying anything. There was never an Arab state known as Palestine. In fact, the Arabs have rejected multiple offers to establish such a state.
Before Jewish sovereignty was reestablished with the modern state of Israel in 1948, the (Turkish) Ottoman Empire ruled the Holy Land for approximately 400 years up until 1917. Following the defeat of the Ottoman Turks in World War I, the British and French administered it in a period of joint military administration (1917-1920). The San Remo Conference (1920) formally established the British Mandate of Palestine’s borders to encompass modern day Israel, Jordan, the Gaza Strip, and what is today often referred to as the West Bank.
[. . .]
Britain Created “Palestine” for the Jews…
The legal document that created the Mandate recognized the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home” and called for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People.” The document also obligated the British to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and “encourage…settlement by Jews on the land…” The British, with the approval of the League of Nations (the predecessor to the United Nations) took on the obligation to help Jewish immigration and settlement of the Mandate, which included the West Bank. Indeed, Jews lived in this area in historic (Hebron, today’s “East” Jerusalem, Nablus/Shechem) and new (Gush Etzion) communities during the Mandate period.
…And Then Gave 75% of it to the Arabs.
In 1922, Britain partitioned the British Mandate of Palestine into two separate mandates, Palestine (west of the Jordan River) and the Transjordan (east of the Jordan River). Transjordan eventually became sovereign Arab territory. Despite the partition, the land that is now known as the West Bank still remained within Palestine and was still slated to be included in a new home for the Jewish people.



The Arabs Rejected the West Bank Twice.
Arab leaders did not accept any further partitions. The Arabs rejected two offers (in 1937 from Britain and in 1947 from the United Nations) that would have established Arab independence from Jewish sovereignty west of the Jordan River, including the West Bank. The Jewish community in Palestine, on the other hand, accepted both of these offers. So, before Israel’s War of Independence (1947-1949), there was no Arab ownership of the West Bank, and no sovereign from which to occupy it.
[. . .]
Israel Had the Best Claim to the West Bank Before 1967.
An Arab state west of the Jordan River could not claim the West Bank; the Arabs made sure, in their rejections of 1937 and 1947, that no such state came into existence. The Arab state east of the Jordan River (Jordan) did not have a legitimate claim to the West Bank, and regardless relinquished all claims to it in 1988. So Israel, based on the original Mandate, confirmed by the League of Nations, had the most legitimate claim.
Israel Took the West Bank (Back) in Self-Defense.
While many see Israel’s taking of the West Bank in the Six-Day War (1967) as one of “occupation,” Israel was in fact re-claiming, in an act of self-defense, what was previously granted to the Jewish State under international law. So how could Israel “occupy” territory that was rightfully hers?
The Arabs Refused the West Bank Another Five Times.
Despite the Arabs losing military control over the West Bank in a war that they had initiated, Israel and the world continued to offer the Arabs sovereignty in at least some of it. True to form, the Arabs continued to reject these offers. Opportunities for Arab sovereignty in the West Bank were rebuffed in 1967 (the Khartoum Resolution), 1967-1968 (the Allon Plan), 2000 (Camp David), 2001 (Taba) and 2008 (Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s offer to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas). The latter two offers would have granted Arab sovereignty to roughly 95% of the West Bank.
[. . .]
So what does this mean? Israel is not occupying “Palestine” but is the legitimate heir to the British Mandate of Palestine. The West Bank is, at best, a disputed territory.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/israel_and_the_occupation_that_isnt.html

April 10, 2016
Israel and the Occupation that Isn't
By Steve Postal

Lack of Free Speech On Campuses Is Alarming

[From article]
The disturbing campaign to suppress speech that is purportedly hurtful, unpleasant, or morally distasteful is a troubling and recurrent pattern of behavior by "progressive" leftists and "social justice" advocates from Muslim-led pro-Palestinian groups. Coalescing around the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, this unholy alliance has been formed in a libelous and vituperative campaign to demonize Israel, attack pro-Israel individuals, and promote a relentless campaign against Israel in the form of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement. As the ideological assault against Israel and Jews intensifies on university campuses, and pro-Israel individuals begin answering their ideological opponents, the student groups leading the pro-Palestinian charge (including such groups as the radical Students for Justice in Palestine [SJP]) have decided that their tactic of unrelenting demonization of Israel is insufficient, and the best way to optimize the propaganda effect of their anti-Israel message is also to suppress or obscure opposing views.
[. . .]



For instance, a leaked memorandum from the Binghamton University Students for Justice in Palestine chapter revealed that members would be required never even to engage in dialogue with pro-Israel groups on their campus. They would be prohibited from "engaging in any form of official collaboration, cooperation, or event co-sponsorship with [pro-Israel] student organizations and groups." And SJP members "shall in no manner engage in any form of official collaboration with any student group which actively opposes the cause of Palestinian liberation nor with groups which have aided and abetted Zionist student organizations" – meaning, of course, that the so-called intellectual debate that universities purport to promote in exactly this type of discussion will never take place when SJP is involved.
Because they cannot win an honest, open ideological debate about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict – because they deal almost exclusively in misrepresentations and untruths (the allegation of Israeli apartheid being the central example) – SJP has characteristically has tried to insure that no pro-Israel voices are heard, by either disrupting and shutting down pro-Israel events and speakers or urging administrators to disinvite speakers they deem Islamophobic, too pro-Israel, or critical of their own tactics and activism.
The thuggish substitution of event disruption and the shutting down of other people's speech for what is supposed to be two-sided academic dialogue and debate occur with increased regularity. These methods mark another, more pernicious, aspect of the campus campaign against Israel, Zionism, and Jews.



At the University of California, Davis this month, for example, George Deek, a Jaffa-born Arab Christian, planned to give a speech entitled "The Art of Middle East Diplomacy" when some 30 pro-Palestinian activists stood up and blocked Deek with banners and took over the event by screaming, "From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free" – meaning an Arab state in place of present-day Israel – and chanting such toxic ditties as "long live the Intifada," "Allahu Akbar," and "When Palestine is occupied, resistance is justified." These activists further employed ghoulish calls for the murder of Jews and "Israel is anti-Black" and "Palestine will be free, fight white supremacy" – an intellectually clumsy way of trying to frame Israel as a racist state.
In February, Bassam Eid, a Palestinian himself and the founder of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, witnessed how nothing positive said about Israel is allowed to be heard, even from such a credible, though unusual, source as a Palestinian. During his speech, in which he was critical of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority for their failure to seek peace, Eid was verbally attacked by a student attendee, who said in Arabic, "Dr. Bassam, do not dare talk about us [Palestinians] anymore. You have shamed our God … you've shamed us, disgraced us, you are a traitor, you are a traitor, in the name of God you are a traitor. … You are worse than the Jews and we will hunt you down and find you in every place. Be prepared." When it became obvious that his speech would not be able to continue uninterrupted, Eid cancelled the event and had to be escorted off site by the police.
[. . .]
A pro-Israel student group at Columbia University, Artists 4 Israel, was also denied the opportunity to express views during Israeli Apartheid Week, during which the SJP chapter had erected its version of a mock "apartheid wall," emblazoned with anti-Israel slogans and symbols. To counter the display with a pro-Israel one, Artists 4 Israel had set up a 15-foot inflatable figure, a "pro-Israel Pinocchio," replete with a long nose and a sign that read "'Apartheid' Week Compassion Abuse" as an effective, sardonic swipe at SJP's toxic campaign. The chair and vice chair of Columbia's student government, who not coincidentally are members of Columbia's SJP chapter and pro-BDS activists, ordered the removal of the Pinocchio figure, offering the disingenuous justification that Pinocchio's long nose might be construed as anti-Semitic and that the pump used to inflate the figure was too loud for use on the Columbia grounds.
The university officials and student groups who now try to suppress all thought of which they disapprove have sacrificed one of the core values for which the university exists. In their zeal to be inclusive, and to recognize the needs and aspirations of victim groups, they have pretended to foster inquiry, but they have actually stifled and retarded it. As this otherwise noble purpose for the university has devolved, the first victim in the corruption of academic free speech, unfortunately, has been the truth.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/03/the_lie_of_academic_free_speech.html

March 23, 2016
The Lie of Academic Free Speech
By Richard L. Cravatts

Florida Catholic School Hears Muslim Propaganda Promoting Discrimination As Higher Priority Than Terrorism and Public Safety

Creepingsharia.com published a report on March 16, 2016 titled Florida: Terror-linked, ex-CAIR Thug Addresses Catholic School Kids. The article reports in part:

Source: Family Security Matters
by PAMELA GELLER

The infamous founder and past executive director of the Tampa chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Ahmed Bedier, was given unfettered access to St Petersburg Catholic High School children to spew and spread his vile hate. If a religious school not only sanctions this deceptive propaganda, but gifts these terror-tied CAIR operatives their own school assembly, what shot do our kids have?

ISLAMIZATION OF AMERICA

Despite the continuing Muslim genocide of Christians in the Middle East and Africa, American Catholic leaders continue not only to turn a blind eye to jihad terror and the persecution of their fellow Christians, but are actively aiding and abetting the forces that are persecuting them. Last month, the entire student body of St. Petersburg Catholic High School in St. Petersburg, Florida, was called together to hear a deceptive presentation on “Islamophobia” from the notorious Ahmed Bedier, who openly supports the jihad terror group Hezbollah and has worked for the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Bedier’s address was ostensibly about fighting the supposedly rising level of “Islamophobia”; he also offered what he presented as a primer on Islamic culture. In it, he blamed the U.S. for ISIS, claiming that the bloodthirsty caliphate arose because we bombed innocent civilians in Iraq. He also called out Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, white people, Jews, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and Ben Carson – all as examples of Muslim-haters – while proselytizing for Islam. Click here to read full report at CreepingSharia.com

Ahmed Bedier:
• Is the leader of the national Islamist organization called United Voices for America. One of United Voices of America’s top issues is to oppose federal legislation that would prohibit American courts from recognizing Sharia law.
• Was the founder and director of the Tampa office of the Council on Islamic-American Relations.
• As CAIR Tampa director, Ahmed Bedier defended Sami Al Arian, who was indicted and plead to federal charges of raising support for a Palestinian terrorist organization. The Tampa Tribune reported in part on April 15, 2006: “Ahmed Bedier, Tampa spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations, said Moffitt was wrong about the Al-Arian plea. Al-Arian did not agree to admit to any charges associated with terrorism, Bedier said. He stayed true to his convictions - he stayed true he wasn't going to plead to those issues," Bedier said. "There is no conspiracy to support terrorism. Bedier said he could not reveal what charge Al-Arian agreed to, and he refused to reveal the source of his information. Bedier convened a 7 p.m. news conference, saying he hoped to have Al-Arian's family there. They did not appear.
• As CAIR Tampa director, Ahmed Bedier spoke on behalf of Youssef Megahed one of two University of South Florida students who were arrested for allegedly carrying pipe bombs near the Goose Creek, S.C a naval base and Megahed was arrested later for deportation. The Tampa Tribune reported in part on September 1, 2007 "We have faith in the American judicial system," said Ahmed Bedier, executive director of the Tampa chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations. "So far we've only heard and read about vague language describing an explosive device, but no actual evidence. Until that's displayed it's going to be unclear what's going on."
• As CAIR Tampa director, Ahmed Bedier’s lobbying efforts resulted in the Hillsborough County School Board removing Yom Kippur and Good Friday from the school calendar even after nearly sixty percent of the students (supported by parents) protested by staying home from school on subsequent Good Fridays. The school district reversed their policy after more than half of the student body showed up for school on Good Friday.
Ahmed Bedier made reckless and erroneous statements and disparaged numerous people and institutions who have legitimate concerns about the Islamist political and cultural agenda in America. It was irresponsible to allow his pro-Islamist propaganda to be presented to students.
It is truly disappointing that the St. Petersburg Catholic High School allowed Ahmed Bedier with his Islamist background and agenda to proclaim the bogus evils of Islamophobia to impressionable students.

Therapeutic State Promotes Double Standards. Muslim Feelings More Important Than Others

[From article]
If alleged Islamophobia causes Muslims to pillage, rape, and slaughter, then how come centuries of anti-Semitism have not produced a raging Jewish population hell-bent on murder? Or if cartoons about Muhammad can cause homicidal riots, how come the daily anti-Semitic cartoons emanating out of the Middle East and other parts of the globe do not result in Jews going on a rampage?
Because civilized people don't behave this way.
For that matter, how come when people step on the American flag and rip it to shreds, Americans don't go on assassination raids?
I am absolutely sick and tired of talking heads using a double standard for those Muslims who act like barbarians against their own women and against other people who refuse to accede to their demands.
If you don't want to eat bacon, then don't eat bacon.
If you don't want to drink alcohol, then don't drink alcohol.
If you don't want to wear pig costumes, then don't.
But we will not surrender to your demands.
When people begin to self-censor their ideas, their activities, their food, and their entertainment, we might as well put "RIP" over our heads, because we are triggering our own suicide.
I, for one, opt out of that thinking. If you cannot abide by the American Constitution, and despise what the Stars and Stripes symbolizes, you are certainly free to leave this country. If you cannot use the same toilet as a non-Muslim child, then please do not use the facilities. We are not going backward to a segregation of Muslims vs. non-Muslims.
If you want to pray, you will not take over public space of a taxpayer-funded university and demand a key to lock out anyone else who wants to use the room.
Engaging in female genital mutilation has no place in this country; it is heinous and a form of child abuse.
If you don't approve of gay people's lifestyles, it is unacceptable to harm them. You can think what you want, but when you act out and are violent, then you have crossed the line. It will not be tolerated.
And no, we don't want American girls to wear the hijab in school, since it actually represents one part of the infiltration and indoctrination that ultimately results in building mosques, advancing the teaching of Arabic, demanding Halal food, and creating Islamic financial institutions that fund jihad. These are not disconnected events, but part of a well coordinated movement toward an Islamic caliphate.
You will not demand that sharia law be used instead of the Constitution. Sharia is the complete opposite of the rights enumerated in the Constitution, and to say otherwise will be met with "if there is no difference, then why are you demanding a change in the first place?"
You will not receive the largesse of this country and consider it to be jizya paid by the dhimmis. If you cannot take care of your families, then you will be considered a drag on this society. The entitlements will end.
When you stop murdering Christians across the globe, then you will begin to be a part of a community of people who respect others. This last year was the "worst year in modern history for Christian persecution." And "who claims the lion's share of this unprecedented persecution?" – the descendants of Mohammad. It is Christianophobia and Judeophobia that are running rampant because of the actions of jihadists.
This obdurate desire to derail American rights has no place in this country. Why are we so afraid to stand up for the freedom that has made this country unique and so special relative to other countries? Why are we willing to give up our birthright so others can trample all over it?
It is time to refuse to surrender to unyielding demands by jihadists.
And to those who find my words harsh, I pose this question: why are so many Muslims coming to our shores if they refuse to become Americanized?
For those who are knowledgeable about hijra, it is patently clear why.
As explained in Ann Corcoran's Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America, "Hijra remains the model to this day for jihadists who seek to populate and dominate new lands. Their migrations are not for the purpose of assimilating peacefully in a new host nation, adopting as their own its traditions and legal systems." Instead, it is to "colonize and then to transform non-Muslim target societies – whether through violent means or via stealthy, pre-violent ones[.]" The ultimate goal is "global submission to shariah and the reestablishment of a caliphate to rule according to it."
For your friends and family who are still not convinced, have them check out the Refugee Resettlement Watch website. Since its launch in 2007, one can see that the U.S. government's refugee resettlement program is "exacerbating the jihadist threat to our nation."
One need only look at what is going on in Europe as un-vetted Muslim immigrants terrorize the women of Germany, England, France, Sweden, and Norway. When did common sense and protection become unimportant?
In a poll commissioned by the Center for Security Policy, more than half (51%) of Muslims in America believe that they should have "the choice of being governed according to Sharia" law. Nearly a quarter believe that "it is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam," and nearly one fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the U.S. is justified in order to make sharia the law of the land in this country. Consequently, these findings confirm that, indeed, mass Muslim migration eviscerates Western culture. So has it been in the past, and so will it be going forward, if it is allowed to go unchecked.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/03/enough_with_the_double_standards_for_muslims.html

March 11, 2016
Enough with the Double Standards for Muslims
By Eileen F. Toplansky

Academy Awards Adopts Black Propaganda. Will Operate As Government Does

In the academic world scholars are taught to focus on one area, to specialize and to learn all one can about one's specialty. It is inspiring to listen to lectures given by these men and women who know most of what there is to know about an area of research. The problems arise when they believe that their expertise carries over into other areas where they know little. This appears to be the reasoning flaw of Hollywood executives. They are great at making movies and spotting talent. But now they have accepted the propaganda of the black racist leaders, and are going to make movies as the government governs. Hiring people based on their skin color will not guarantee that the product is good or even acceptable. Just as there are bozos in government there will be as many in Hollywood making movies.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/oscarssowhite-spurs-diversity-casting-boom-872005

Hollywood's Casting Blitz: It's All About Diversity in the Wake of #OscarsSoWhite
6:55 AM PST 3/2/2016

by Rebecca Ford and Borys Kit

Anti Israel Propaganda At Vassar College

[From article]
Jasbir Puar, an associate professor in the Women and Gender Studies Department at Rutgers University [is] widely known as a tenured professor of anti-Israeli rhetoric, a key figure in the academic and cultural boycott of Israel, and a proponent of the resolution of the American Studies Association to boycott Israeli academic institutions. Indeed, Puar introduced her lecture by congratulating the Vassar Students for Justice in Palestine, who had proposed a BDS resolution to be voted on in March.
[. . .]
The current tuition for Vassar students is $63,000 a year. Two questions can be asked. Did those students who attended the lecture get their money's worth, and are they instructed at Vassar in a peculiar kind of language that can grasp the "prehensive forms," which no one else outside Poughkeepsie can penetrate?
No official transcript was made, because of a ridiculous excuse for the need for "congeniality and respect." Thus, the world will never know the full extent of the wit and wisdom of Puar.
[. . .]
The bizarre presentation, if one can possibly understand Puar's convoluted language, appears to be that Israel's occupation has resulted in the maiming and stunting of the Palestinian population, and that BDS is both necessary and a step toward armed resistance against Israel.
[. . .]
her main purpose was to continue her condemnations of Israel and her calling for boycotts of Israel.

[. . .]
since the movement's real purpose is the elimination of the State of Israel.
[. . .]
It is an unfortunate truth that many in American faculties have disgraced themselves in two ways. One is by sponsoring anti-Israeli rhetoric, whether out of anti-Semitic beliefs or not, or at least not responding to vicious attacks. The other is to make clear the lack of intellectual substance, as well as the dishonesty, in some of the presentations at sponsored events.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_need_for_honest_discussion_at_american_colleges.html

February 26, 2016
The Need for Honest Discussion at American Colleges
By Michael Curtis

Applying Engineering Protocols To Human Activity, and Government

Hehe. Logical argument. But liberals, progressives, do not think logically. They speak propaganda, appealing to emotions. Logical arguments and critical thought can never counter emotional beliefs. It is easier to open a rock than a mind.

[From article]
Why are most engineers politically conservative? The answer is that engineers fail most of the time. In engineering there is a cycle of design, test, test failure, diagnosis, and redesign, until a product is perfected. Failure is the natural state of engineering new devices. Through their repeated failures, competent engineers are forced to become rigorously honest and functionally conservative.
This honesty is notably lacking in the ungrounded wishful thinking of the political left. The great failure of liberals is that they never fail (according to them).
[. . .]
There are three classes of top-down social engineering. Government programs to restructure society is one class. Government laws, regulatory mandates, and court orders to change behavior is a second. The third is liberal social pressure, often with government complicity, to control thought. We call this third method “political correctness.”
[. . .]



America has hundreds of millions of people. Each individual is infinitely complex and unique. Each has desires, intentions and needs that normally are incompatible with any master scheme. And yet, the left has the arrogance to assume that a master planner can engineer a social system that best for all the people -- a “one size fits all” program. There is no way, other than forcing everybody to be identical robots,
[. . .]
Unfortunately, most political Democrats, and many establishment Republicans as well, have been seduced by a lifetime of pro-government experience into believing that top-down, big-government programs are the answer to all ills. It is vanity to think that they are specially chosen to steer everyone’s life.
[. . .]
Of the seven deadly sins, theologians say the most deadly of all was Vanity. The Greeks called it Hubris. We call it Arrogance. All the other deadly sins derived from Vanity. This sin is really at the heart of progressive, or liberal, social engineering programs. One can do no wrong if one’s heart is in the right place -- so liberals believe.
Our Founding Fathers thought otherwise. They realized that no person, or selected group, could anticipate all circumstances. They therefore created a Constitution that allowed for local adaptation within a protective framework -- a framework that inhibits vanity by enlisting contending interests in making the most important decisions.
The American Constitution was designed for a society whereby people manage their own affairs and solve their own problems. Beyond promoting trade among the states, protecting against foreign invasion, and ensuring the rights of property, the Federal Government really has no legitimate role in structuring society. Society was intended to evolve social arrangements on its own within the protective framework of the Constitution. Thus, this progressive idea that government has the right to impose social change is contrary both to the spirit and to the words of the Constitution.
[. . .]



successful complex structures grow organically: Start small, and simple. Find out what works. Try adding features. Edit out those elements that don’t work and build on those that do work. [. . .] Consider computers. Computers today are far different, and vastly more complex, than they were at their beginning. All successful innovations start simple and evolve complexity as discoveries are made about what works and what doesn’t.
[. . .]
many people, including many conservatives, believe that Social Security has been a success. In fact, Social Security is a great, compulsory, Ponzi scheme. But even it, too, started small: merely as insurance against personal catastrophe. It has grown to be a monster that is devouring the national budget and jeopardizing national security. There is no money in its so-called “Trust fund” and it is generally conceded that the program is on the verge of financial failure, the only dispute being when insolvency will occur.
[. . .]
ObamaCare is the contemporary classic. But, what we have not yet seen is all the damage that ObamaCare has in store. Examples of programs where we do see the wreckage are those “Great Society” antipoverty programs initiated by President Johnson. Enough time has passed to validate the early warnings. Senator Daniel Moynihan warned, all the way back in 1965, that liberal poverty policy was leading to disaster: the breakup of families, crime, drug use, wasted lives and all the other horrid consequences that have followed. The liberal community did not listen and, today, we are stuck with the predicted social disaster.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_lessons_of_engineering_for_social_engineers.html

February 10, 2016
The Lessons of Engineering for Social Engineers
By Chet Richards

Cashless Society Will End Most Freedoms

[From article]
But no one is going to put their money in banks! Not if it means negative interest rates.
Don't worry. Governments will rise to the occasion and soon will be making cash illegal. People will be forced to put their money in banks or the market, thus rescuing the central governments and the central banks that are incestuously intertwined with them.
Beyond that, cash is probably the last arena of personal autonomy left. It can be spent anyway one pleases, with no one watching. It can be hidden from the government to avoid taxes. It can be used to engage in transactions of a semi-legal nature. It has power that the government cannot control; and that is why it has to go.
Of course, governments will not tell us the real reasons. Might provoke a reaction. We will be told it is for our own "good," however one defines that. It will be sold to us as a benefit. Millions of smartphone users are being seduced to take advantage of the convenience of Apple Pay; and indeed it is convenient, until you lose your smartphone.
[. . .]
Side stories will inform us that mugging is down. Crime is finally being defeated. What won't be reported will be that hacking will shoot up. Bank fraud will skyrocket.
[. . .]
Conservatives will be told that no cash puts a damper on drug transactions, and social crimes, such as prostitution. Illegal aliens will not be able to get work. The media will be replete with tales of such wonder working miracles during the transition.
Be assured, however, that criminals, ever innovative, will find a way around problem. Escort Agencies now take credit cards. Muggers will soon concentrate on jewelry and smartphones, especially those with Apple Pay accounts.
[. . .]
The real purpose of a cashless society will be total control: Absolute Total Control.
The real victims will be the public who will be forced to put all their wealth in a centralized system backed up by the good faith and credit of their respective governments.
[. . .]
The end result will be the loss of all autonomy. This will be the darkest of all tyrannies. From cradle to grave one will not only be tracked in location, but on purchases. Liberty will be non-existent
However, it will be sold to us as expedient simplicity itself, freeing us from crime: Fascism with a friendly face.
Perhaps the scariest consequence of all is that an individual can be "terminated" by a bureaucrat erasing his identity.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/here_comes_the_cashless_society_.html

February 8, 2016
Here Comes the ‘Cashless Society’
By Mike Konrad