Saturday, May 31, 2014

Jay Carney Leaves White House Press Secretary Post After Years of Lies

I have to think that even the most determined of supporters for The Cause can break down under the sheer weight of years of lying.

"White House Press Secretary Jay Carney is stepping down, ending a lengthy term in what is considered one of Washington's toughest jobs.

Carney has served as President Obama's lead spokesman since 2011. The president interrupted Carney's daily press briefing on Friday to announce his departure, calling him one of his "closest friends" and a trusted adviser..........

Carney, as the de facto voice of the White House, has dealt with a barrage of scandals since the start of Obama's second term. He has defended Obama from the briefing room podium on everything from the botched launch of to the VA scandal to lingering questions about the Benghazi terror attack.

Obama said Carney plans to take the summer off before getting a new job, indicating the press secretary role has been a "strain" on his family..............."

"In April of 2002 White House press secretary Jay Carney offered some important insight into his job. Speaking at a scholarship lunch hosted by the White House Correspondents’ Association, he said he never lies in response to reporters' questions, even when he knows more than he can say: "When I go stand up at the podium in front of the White House press corps, I never lie. I never say something that I know is untrue. Credibility is enormously important to a press secretary."

Of course when Carney made that statement, he was lying about never lying. In fact this press secretary offered up many a falsehood during his tenure of protecting President Obama from his errors, omissions, and scandals. To honor Mr. Carney on the day his resignation was announced, we offer his top 9 lies as press secretary:

1) Last month when it emerged that deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes had written an email directing Susan Rice to emphasize the YouTube video story during her Sunday news show appearances, Carney told the press corps the Rhodes email “was explicitly not about Benghazi.”

2) In mid-May 2014, Carney announced that the American Legion had praised the Department of Veterans Affairs for the "resignation" of top VA health official Dr. Robert Petzel. Carney was only off by 100%. The actual American Legion statement was, "the move by VA is not a corrective action, but a continuation of business as usual. Dr. Petzel was already scheduled to retire this year, so his resignation now really won’t make that much of a difference.”

3) Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012: “Those [Benghazi] talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened. The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.” But six months later, in May 2013, ABC News reported the edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted, as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

4) In April 2012, Carney said the President had never argued the so-called Buffett Rule would solve the country’s deficit problems. Perhaps he didn't remember when the Buffett Rule was first introduced in September 2011: President Obama claimed the tax would “stabilize our debt and deficits for the next decade.”

5) During the 2012 election, Hilary Rosen, Democratic Party consultant, said Ann Romney had “never actually worked a day in her life.” It turns out that Rosen had visited the Obama White House 35 times. Carney told reporters it might be a different Hilary Rosen, and that he personally knew three people named “Hilary Rosen.” Rosen herself said she was the only Hilary Rosen she had met before.

6) In April 2011, Carney told reporters that Obama was never against signing statements, except when George W. Bush abused them. That's not what Obama said when he came out against signing statements in 2008 while running for president.

7) October 2013 saw millions losing their healthcare plans thanks to Obamacare. On October 31st, after weeks of the news reporting horror stories of people losing their insurance, Jay Carney was still hanging on: “The fact of the matter is, if you had insurance on the individual market prior to the passage of the Affordable Care Act, and you have that plan today, you can keep it, you’re grandfathered in forever. No matter how crummy the plan is.”

8) Jay Carney repeated over and over that the IRS scandal was limited to a few rogue employees in Cincinnati. He even fought with Joe Scarborough about it. That was false.

9) In January 2014, Carney told Major Garrett that the 7 million Obamacare enrollment goal was never a White House figure, it was a Congressional Budget Office estimate, and that other estimates varied. Even after Garrett interrupted him with, “Kathleen Sebelius said on Sept. 30 — this is a direct quote: ‘I think success looks like at least 7 million people having signed up by the end of March 2014,'” Carney continued to try and spin his way out of it.

"During an event at Georgetown University, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was asked how he felt about President Obama getting the “Lie of the Year” award from Politifact in 2013.

Obama repeatedly assured Americans during his push for health care reform that if they liked their health care plan, they could keep it under Obamacare—a statement that was clearly false.

Carney defended Obama’s statement, admitting that he came at it from a “different perspective” but reminding the audience that Obama thought it was true at the time.

“On that particular issue, I think that a lie is one of intent, and the president believed that that’s what the policy would deliver, and when it didn’t and it became clear that it wasn’t and that there were things that needed to be fixed to help those individuals… that it ought to be done,” Carney explained..........."

Friday, May 30, 2014

New Illegal Immigrants Given "Catch and Release" Treatment

Added -5/31/14 - I should have noted that the term "Catch and Release" is a reference to returning fish to the water after catching them on a hook and line.
My internet is still giving me problems, so I still cannot cut and paste links. This article appeared on LatinoFoxNews and is dated  May 30, 2014.

While we are subjected to false admonitions of a "humanitarian crisis" that are clearly designed to allow our feelings to overrule our sense of security, national sovereignty, Rule of Law, and concerns about the transformation of our electorate, the US government is quietly adding more illegal newcomers who will be eligible for taxpayer-funded benefits and who will in time be included among those who will be granted amnesty. 

We must also keep in mind that every single "immigration reform" plan that has been hatched in the last few years is, despite the assurances that these are not cases of amnesty, nothing other than amnesty. 

It's the polar opposite of "A rose by any other name....."

"Officials Under Fire For Dumping Illegal Immigrants In U.S."
"Scores of illegal immigrants, caught by authorities in Texas trying to sneak into the country via the Rio Grande Valley, are being flown, bused and then abandoned out of state in places like Arizona, New York and Maryland.If the immigrants had been from Mexico, authorities would release them back across the border. But these would-be immigrants come from Central American countries, such as El Salvador and Guatemala, and trying to get them back to their country of origin has been a costly and largely unsuccessful endeavor.

Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, told Reuters, “essentially, they have gotten successfully into the country and it’s unlikely that they’re going to leave.”

[The reader is supposed to accept that nothing can be done and that we have no choice]

............Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley sector apprehended 154,453 immigrants last year – up from 97,762 the previous year.

More shockingly, some say, is the unprecedented surge of children making the more than 1,000-mile journey from Central America to the U.S.-Mexico border to escape violence in their home countries.

Multiple media outlets have reported horrific stories from border districts on youngsters, ranging from toddlers to teens, being raped and murdered on their way to the U.S. border.

[Looks like reason enough to refrain from bringing children with you doesn't it?]

Floridalma Bineda Portillo and her two young boys were part of a group of about 400 Central Americans who were flown from Texas to Tucson last weekend. Bineda Portillo and others were then shuttled to Phoenix after the Tucson Greyhound station ran out of space.

[I always thought that committing an illegal act while having children with you is at the very least a case of child abuse if not the criminal offense of employing a minor in the commission of an illegal act]

When they arrived at the station in Phoenix, a volunteer nurse found Bineda Portillo's five-year-old son, Hugo David, wheezing and struggling to breathe. His asthma inhaler had been lost when the family was processed by immigration. The boy's three-year-old brother developed a cold after sitting on the floor for hours in the detention center, his mother said.

"We all started crying because we didn't know what was going to happen to us. It was brutal," the Guatemala native said in Spanish.

[and, when she left Guatemala, she supposedly thought that she knew what was going to happen?]

"This is a humanitarian crisis and it requires a humanitarian response," Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., told Reuters.

Most of the families apprehended so far in Texas have been flown to Arizona and dropped off by the busload at the station in Phoenix by federal immigration authorities overwhelmed by a surge of families caught crossing the Mexican border into the Rio Grande Valley...................

They are expected to return to Texas on their own once their deportation process nears completion in an honor system of sorts.

“After screening by DHS authorities, the family units will be released under supervision and required to report in to a local ICE office near their destination address within 15 days, where their cases will be managed in accordance with current ICE enforcement priorities,” according to an ICE statement........................

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Bob Beckel Pretends That Obama Critique is "Treasonous"

My internet is giving me problems again, so I cannot paste any links to posts.

This excerpt came from The Blaze today - May, 28. 2014.

It's no secret the Leftists have no regard for the truth, which is understandable given that the system that they advocate is a mountain of lies based on the foundation of more lies. 

The problem for non-Leftists, though, is that they assume that Leftist commentators such as Bob Beckel and "Toure" are crazy or just foolish. In reality, they are nothing of the sort; they know that the accusations that they level against others are not true. Their false claims affirm the false assumptions of their followers and the very fact that their opponents naively accept that they believe what they say is a victory for them. Opponents also often become fearful of being the subject of the next accusation.  

I am reminded of the line in the movie Natural Born Killers when a psychiatrist is asked if the mass-murdering couple understands that what they do is wrong. His answer was clear and to the point:

Mickey and Mallory know the difference between right and wrong; they just don't give a damn

".....Bob Beckel, the liberal co-host of “The Five,” lashed out at his co-host Kimberly Guilfoyle on Wednesday after she made what he called a “treasonous” comment about President Barack Obama’s foreign policy.
“This is the problem. I just don’t think he understands — honestly — I really don’t think he has a grasp on what it means to have a cohesive, coherent foreign policy or how to combat the war on terror,” Guilfoyle said. “We cannot go around to our enemies, ‘Let me hug you and then let me drone you.”

“That’s treasonous, what you just said!” Beckel shot back.

When Guilfoyle stood by her remark, calling it “accurate,” Beckel argued that his co-host’s treatment of the president of the United States is “abysmal and disgusting.”......"

From the Washington Times on May 27, 214,  was another report on the vicious anti-white charge made by the lying rat "Toure", who used the fact that Jews who escaped being murdered by the Nazis to 'prove" that they succeeded in their new homes because they were white. His lie has two purposes - to deny the existence of a  general work ethic, determination and culture of any white group that contributed towards their success and to tell others that they don't have a chance to succeed because of a white-dominated society:

"....MSNBC host Touré is accused of anti-Semitism after suggesting Friday that Holocaust survivors were able to succeed in America because they’re white.

A Twitter user by the name @hope_and_chains tweeted at Touré on Friday, saying, “My family survived a concentration camp, came to the US w/ nothing, LEGALLY, and made it work.”

The power of whiteness,” Touré retorted, gaining more than 240 retweets

Read more:
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Catholic Mag Broaches Critical Research/Treatment of Koran

There are two reasons why the Koran, despite its overwhelming amount of key verses that call for violence and the subjugation of non-Muslims, is not treated in a critical manner as is the Bible:

-Many academicians, particularly those of the Left or influenced by Islamophile, anti-Christian writers of the 19th century, have no desire to do anything that will undermine the beliefs of those who seek to end Christian culture. My guess is that the Left plans to ride the back of the lion* until they get what they need from Islam then do what they can to confine its further growth.

"...The Left strongly prefers Muslims simply due to the fact that Islam is pan-national in nature; nation-states are not germane to Islam nor do they fit with the outlook of those who follow that religion..."

-Atheistic-type academicians, while reveling in their feeble attempts to disprove the Bible, only target the book because they know that they can do so in relative safety. This is not possible when the topic is the Koran,  Having little appreciation for the plight of future generations, atheists will generally choose their own safety over that of people who will come after us.

There also appears to be a tremendous amount of evidence that much of the text in the Koran is cut and pasted directly from ancient Christian Syro-Aramaic works. Many of the words clearly were untranslatable into the Arabic of the Koran, and the reader will note that he is repeatedly stymied by words and verses that not only seem to be out of context, but make little sense at all.

The Koran contains accounts from the Old Testament, such as that pf the patriarch Joesph in Egypt, but they appear to have been written by someone who was had only a passing familiarity with the actual accounts and changed the story around to suit his tastes. There are many new works that treat the research into the Syro-Aramaic origins of the Koran - this is one of them:

Tending to follow the outlook of the Church, Catholics have focused on "dialogue" with Muslims rather than engaging in any activity that may be perceived as confrontational. This is precisely why the following article in Crisis Magazine  is a breath of fresh air.

"........So how can we disabuse terrorists and potential terrorists of the notion that Allah wants them to kill infidels? The obvious place to start is with the Koran. We can’t say, however, that there is absolutely no warrant in the Koran for killing unbelievers, because there patently is. “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them” (9:5) is typical of many similar verses. According to a content analysis conducted by the Center for the Study of Political Islam, 24 percent of the Medinan verses of the Koran are devoted to jihad. Or, as Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud once declared, “Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad.”

The you-should-read-the-Koran tactic won’t work with those who actually have read the Koran. What else might work? Another tactic is to try and convince would-be jihadists that they are misinterpreting the Koran—that it should be interpreted in a more spiritual and peaceful way. But here again we run into a problem. Since the eleventh century, a consensus has existed among Islamic scholars that the “Gates of Ijtihad” (or interpretation) are closed. Calling for new interpretations is tantamount to rejecting centuries of Islamic tradition.

Some small sects, such as the Ahmadiyya community, do interpret the Koran in a symbolic rather than literal way, but they are considered as heretics by mainstream Muslims and they are often the target of persecution. More importantly, Muhammad, whose example is considered definitive by Muslim authorities, did not interpret the command to wage jihad in a figurative way and his victims did not die figurative deaths. The Center for the Study of Political Islam’s content analysis of the Sira (Muhammad’s biography) shows that approximately two-thirds of it has to do with fighting. Part Three, which covers the Medinan period of Muhammad’s life, is particularly instructive in this respect. Its five hundred pages are taken up almost entirely with descriptions of battles and raids.

In short, the jihadist interpretation of the Koran is strongly supported both by the text and by the example of Muhammad. Why should they give it up when they have so much evidence on their side? Jihadists have been highly successful in recruiting Muslims to the cause precisely because they can demonstrate that warfare against unbelievers is a scriptural duty.

......... Is there another way of addressing the issue? Well, yes, there is. Moreover, to paraphrase the ubiquitous ad copy, this one weird trick can save you hundreds of fruitless arguments. The other—largely untried—alternative for disabusing jihadists of jihadist notions is to discredit the Koran entirely. If the whole thing is a man-made fabrication, what does it matter what verse such-and-such says? If Muhammad made it all up, why waste your time in weighing the peaceful suras against the violent ones?

This argument is not often made because if you make it you will be attacked not only by Muslims but by non-Muslims as well. The latter will go after you with charges of divisiveness, insensitivity, bigotry, hatred, and whatnot.
That, however, doesn’t diminish the strength of the argument. The Islamic edifice rests on the belief that God wrote the Koran and transmitted it via the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad, who merely recited it to his followers. If that’s not true, then only a fool would rush into battle for the sake of Allah and the promised paradise. Take away the divine mandate to subjugate unbelievers, and you take away the rationale for Islam’s war against the world.

Although it’s difficult to get a hearing for it, the argument itself is surprisingly easy to make. That’s because Muslim apologists have set themselves up for a takedown by establishing an impossibly high standard of evidence. What proof is there that God wrote the Koran? Well, there’s the circular argument, i.e., we know that God wrote the Koran because that’s what the Koran says and we know the Koran is truthful because God wrote it. For many Muslims, that settles the matter. However, Islamic scholars long ago realized that something more was needed. And the main argument they developed is that the Koran is such a piece of perfect, nonpareil prose that no one except God could have written it. As I say, it’s a hard case to make because although there are some arresting passages in the Koran, there are also plenty like this:

Prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave-girls whom God has given you as booty; the daughters of your paternal and maternal uncles and of your paternal and maternal aunts who fled with you; and any believing woman who gives herself to the Prophet and whom the Prophet wishes to take in marriage. (33:50)

Maybe it sounds better in Arabic, but one suspects that, however translated, this piece of legalese is still going to read like a passage from a textbook on contract law. Christians and Jews should be able to sympathize with the plight of the Muslim apologist. How would you like to be stuck with the task of defending those so-and-so-begat-so-and-so passages in the Bible as examples of incomparable style?

Furthermore, the literary shortcomings of the Koran are not limited to pedestrian prose. The author, whoever he was, also had little sense of composition, continuity, character, dialogue, or drama. Don’t take my word for it. Here are some scholarly observations:

His characters are all alike, and they utter the same platitudes. He is fond of dramatic dialogue, but has very little sense of dramatic scene or action. The logical connections between successive episodes is often loose, sometimes wanting; and points of importance, necessary for the clear understanding of the story, are likely to be left out. (C.C. Torrey, The Jewish Foundation of Islam, New York, 1933, p. 108)

The book aesthetically considered is by no means a first-rate performance…indispensable links, both in expression and in the sequence of events, are often omitted…and nowhere do we find a steady advance in the narration…and even the syntax betrays great awkwardness…. (Theodor Noldeke inEncyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., Vol. 15, pp. 898-906)

The Koran is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content…. (P. Crone and M. Cook,Hagarism: The Making of the Muslim World, Cambridge, 1977, p. 9)

As I wrote two years ago:

If you believe that the Koran is dictated by God, you are faced with the difficulty of explaining why the Author of Creation seems to lack the literary touch—that is, the knack for storytelling, sequence, composition, and drama that we expect in accomplished human authors. Yes, there are beautiful passages in the Koran, but as an exercise in composition, it would not pass muster in most freshmen writing courses.

The purely human origin of the Koran is further suggested by the very human defensiveness displayed by its author. He never tires of reminding his audience that the Koran is a genuine revelation, not a fake one. This obsessive concern with the Koran’s authenticity is exhibited on almost every page. Here is a small sampling:

This Koran could not have been devised by any but God. (10:37)

This is no invented tale, but a confirmation of previous scriptures…. (12:112)

This Book is beyond all doubt revealed by the Lord of the Universe… Do they say: “He has invented it himself”? (32:1-2)

When our clear revelations are recited to them they say… “this is nothing but an invented falsehood.” (34:43)

As I say, these assertions about the authenticity of the revelation appear over and over. Far more space is allotted to vouching for the genuine nature of the revelation than to telling what the revelation is. But what sort of author feels compelled to tell us ad nauseum that his word is not a human invention? It’s not likely that the Author of all Creation would be so insecure about what he had written. On the other hand, a man who had invented it all himself would have good reason to be defensive. Muhammad, however, also realized that the best defense is a good offense. Thus, as the Koran repeatedly reminds its readers, the surest path to hell is to doubt “Our revelations.”

In insisting that the Koran is the verbatim word of God, Muslims are stuck with the task of defending a second-rate literary production as though it were Shakespeare, Homer, and Dante all rolled into one. If they have been largely successful in so defending it, it is because not many want to challenge them on the point. Of course, some of this reluctance is due to the fear factor. For instance, scripture scholar Bart Ehrmans, who has been outspoken in his criticism of Christianity, has admitted that he wouldn’t apply his skills to the Koran because he values his life too highly..........................

............... why not subject it to the same rigorous standards? Dialoguers and scholars currently spend a lot of time ferreting out little nuggets of compatibility between the Koran and the Bible. But what’s the point of establishing the common ground between a real revelation and a fake one? There are many commonalities between the Book of Mormon and the Bible as well, but Catholic scholars don’t show much interest in trying to reconcile the two books—and wisely so.

If Islam weren’t such a militant faith, it would probably be best to take an attitude of live and let live. Unfortunately, live and let live is not what the Koran is all about. Although a great many Muslims manage to ignore its harsher mandates, the violent injunctions are still there and they beckon to those who seek to devote themselves fully to Allah’s commands.

Consequently, it’s not just Islamic terrorists that need to be feared, but also Islamic theorists and theologians. They provide the ideological fuel which powers the terror machine. It’s important to take out the terrorist, but in the long run, it’s more important to take down the terrorist’s ideology. And that, by necessity, involves a deconstruction of the Koran. If that measure seems much too drastic, consider the alternatives—a slow-motion capitulation such as is now happening in Europe or a bloody war, once it finally dawns on the civilized world that it must resist.

Up to now, Islam’s status as a religion has provided it with a sort of diplomatic immunity under which it has literally gotten away with murder. Thomas Jefferson said “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” But when your neighbor’s religion tells him it’s okay to break your neck and enslave your children, it might be prudent to expose that religion and its holy book to the light of serious examination.
All of this leaves aside the tricky question of who should bell the cat. Whose job is it to say that the Koran has “100 percent man-made material” written all over it? That question requires an essay all to itself, but one observation seems in order here: it should most probably not be the pope or any other prominent churchman for the obvious reason that authoritative Church statements are the most likely to invite retaliation against Christians living in Muslim lands. This is a job for lay men and women provided they have the requisite skills, and for secular critics and scholars as well as Christian ones. The more, the better.

Bart Ehrmans has excused himself from the task of applying his scholarship to the Koran on the grounds that he values his life. That seems like the soul of pragmatism, but it’s a very short-sighted kind of pragmatism. The larger question is not whether he values his own life, but whether he values the lives of his children and the future of his society. If the Koran remains unchallenged, the jihad will continue to spread, and there will come a day when we will wish we had contested the Koran while we still had the freedom to do so."

Monday, May 26, 2014

Memorial Day

I grew up in a small town in northern New Jersey that was far closer to multiple dairy farms and active iron mines than the urban regions that come to the minds of most when they think about the Garden State. The town was on the old Morris Canal route, so unlike most towns in the region, ours had a small business district that had banks, drugstores, dry-cleaners, a hardware and candy stores, barbers and the last of the tiny "department stores" that were a big deal prior to the days of K-Mart and Sears-type stores. And yes, everyone knew everybody. I was fortunate to live in a house that sat on the parade route, so viewing the parade did not require any effort - just a trip to the front porch.

Our parades included the standard features; the volunteer fire department marching in dress uniforms followed by gleaming fire trucks, local school bands and flag corps, boy and girl scout troops, the mayor and council, and - most intriguing to me, the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars Honor Guards, and the old veterans in their old uniforms, some of which rode in a few antique cars. I don't recall seeing any Vietnam veterans in these parades, but the the US was still involved when I was small so it is possible that some of them preferred to avoid hearing insults hurled at them from the crowd - not that I think that this would have been likely in our sleepy municipality.

I was always drawn to the individuals in military uniforms and wondered what they had experienced. Knowing that they had probably spent several years far away from home, I sensed that they in tun became far more a part of the fabric of the community than most of us.

The parade had its camp-followers - mostly boys either on their bicycles or on foot, We would trail behind to the cemetery by the lake and remain for the ceremony honoring those who never made it home.

When I became a father, we lived in a town vary close to that of my childhood. I was happy that my daughter joined the Brownies (Junior Girl Scouts).  She loved marching in the parade, and being among the younger kids, the Brownies would be given a place near the stone memorial with a bronze plaque holding the names of the fallen. As the speeches were being made, I would notice that the girls were getting a little uncomfortable in the now-new heat of late Spring, but at the same time I realized that it was precisely this bit of discomfort that would help her remember these annual events. Even then I had no doubt that years later, the memory of those days of childhood would be good ones despite the heat and humidity.

My youngest also loved to watch the parades, and as his high school baseball team had practice this morning, he was not able to see the parade. I chose, then, to give him a task to help him remember. The task fulfilled two purposes - getting me a photo and giving him a chance to search among the honored without having me around to point things out.

I sent him a text message (he drives) to stop by the old cemetery in town on the way home directing him to find a gravestone of a veteran of the American War of Independence. This is what I got in his reply text:

Noting his birth year made me think. When he was thirteen, we had won the Seven Years (French and Indian) War at had reached a point in which the colonists considered themselves as British/English citizens to a greater degree than they ever had previously - and would ever be again . From that point, moves by Parliament and The Crown steadily pushed colonists away. This individual, in a mere 10-12 years, went from being a young adult who was probably an enthusiastic citizen of Britain to one who fought them in support of the American republic. He later witnessed the the debates about ratification and the formation of the new system when the Constitution went into effect. He saw a lot of changes in a short period of time.

I grew up with the impression that things would be the same long after I reached adulthood, but that "illusion of permanency" (Credit - Samuel Huntington) was soon eclipsed by the reality of the influence of Western Socialism in the post-Soviet era*. I am beginning to believe that, as the American republic (that for which the man above fought) slowly succumbs to the threats faced by most republics that have made it as far as has ours, many of our youth may well see changes that occur in a succession almost as rapid as-they did in his lifetime. I just hope that these changes don't have the consequence of requiring more memorial stones to display additional names of those who fell victim to yet another (as labeled by Marxists) "experiment" with humanity. 

Sunday, May 25, 2014

Pedophiles Want Rights - Find Support From Psychologists/Psychiatrists

This post is almost three years old, but the amount of direct quotes that it contains leads me to think that it is not a fabrication.

I have noted on previous posts that many of the Left have every intention of achieving the pseudonym-ical  "decriminalization" of sexual acts on young children and underage minors. The increasing sexualization of our youth seems to have a purpose beyond that of strongly encouraging them to have sex at as early an age as possible and to have had multiple sexual partners by the time they reach adulthood.

When we were warned that the change from "consenting adults" to civil unions to gay marriage would lead to an opening of the floodgates, those who made the predictions were subjected to incessant ridicule.

"Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.

Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists with B4U-Act recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.

B4U-Act calls pedophiles “minor-attracted people.” The organization’s website states its purpose is to, “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma and fear.”

[The following paragraph is the only portion of the post that leaves me wondering if the quotes are accurate. I attempted to find another source for the quote but had no success. From what I have read previously, the evidence that being sexually victimized is a leading factor for all sorts of psychological and sexual problems is overwhelming] 

In 1998 The APA issued a report claiming “that the ‘negative potential’ of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that ‘the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from childhood sexual abuse experiences.”

Pedophilia has already been granted protected status by the Federal Government. The Matthew Shephard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act lists “sexual orientation” as a protected class; however, it does not define the term.

Republicans attempted to add an amendment specifying that “pedophilia is not covered as an orientation;” however, the amendment was defeated by Democrats. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) stated that all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law. “This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these ‘philias’ and fetishes and ‘isms’ that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule.”

The White House praised the bill saying, “At root, this isn’t just about our laws; this is about who we are as a people. This is about whether we value one another – whether we embrace our differences rather than allowing them to become a source of animus.”

Earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia is a sexual orientation just like homosexuality or heterosexuality.

Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, told members of Parliament, “Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.”..................

Linda Harvey, of Mission America, said the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT groups continue to assert themselves. “It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages; to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction.”

Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, “Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.

Diamond is a distinguished lecturer for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality
 [IASHS] in San Francisco.......

The IASHS lists, on its website, a list of “basic sexual rights” that includes “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.” Another right is to, “be free of persecution, condemnation, discrimination, or societal intervention in private sexual behavior” and “the freedom of any sexual thought, fantasy or desire.” The organization also says that no one should be “disadvantaged because of age.”............."
-Previous posts:

Obama Again Complains About US Governmental Structure

Most of us will remember when BHO complained that the government that is provided for in our Constitution does not allow someone of his ability to set all things right:

"President Obama has revealed something about his imperial mentality that critics have been saying his entire time in office. He said that, “the problem is… I’m not the emperor of the United States.”

The line came during the 2013 Fireside Chat hosted by Google+, which was attended by conservative commentators Kira Davis and Lee Doren. It came in response to a question about the deportation of persons who are in the country illegally.

This is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency,” said Obama. “The problem is that I’m the president of the United States, I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed."


Taking a break from beating up Republicans (what other US president ever spoke poorly about the opposition party?), Obama has again expressed his disapproval with the structure (He actually refers to that word) of our national government.

"President Obama is taking a swipe at the Founding Fathers, blaming his inability to move his agenda on the “disadvantage” of having each state represented equally in the Senate.

At a Democratic fundraiser in Chicago Thursday night, Mr. Obama told a small group of wealthy supporters that there are several hurdles to keeping Democrats in control of the Senate and recapturing the House. One of those problems, he said, is the apportionment of two Senate seats to each state regardless of population.
“Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of Senate seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage,” Mr. Obama said...................................

The president also blamed “demographics” for the inability of the Democratic Party to gain more power in Congress, saying Democrats “tend to congregate a little more densely” in cities such as New York and Chicago. He said it gives Republicans disproportional clout in Congress.

“So there are some structural reasons why, despite the fact that Republican ideas are largely rejected by the public, it’s still hard for us to break through,” Mr. Obama said............"

Over half of all Americans who voted in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections wanted this guy to be president - a man who has clearly voiced his position on the amount of power allotted to the chief executive and also has a problem with states having equal representation  in the Senate (and by extension a degree of equality in the electoral college). 

He also had stated that the US Constitution is deeply flawed. He clarified that it did not provide for economic redistribution, so he does not like our system because it does not allow the government to do something that no government has the right to do in any case regardless of what the laws that it make actually say. 

"Seven years before Barack Obama’s “spread the wealth” comment to Joe the Plumber became a GOP campaign theme, the Democratic presidential candidate said in a radio interview the U.S. has suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth.

In a newly unearthed tape, Obama is heard telling Chicago’s public station WBEZ-FM in 2001 that “redistributive change” is needed, pointing to what he regarded as a failure of the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in its rulings on civil rights issues in the 1960s.The Warren court, he said, failed to “break free from the essential constraints” in the U.S. Constitution and launch a major redistribution of wealth. But Obama, then an Illinois state lawmaker, said the legislative branch of government, rather than the courts, probably was the ideal avenue for accomplishing that goal

The US is a republic, but he has a strong disliking for any type of governmental structure that could be considered indicative of a republic, so that begs the questions:

Why did he want to be president in the first place? Was it to work to undermine the entire edifice? 

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Dr. Ben Carson Recommends Reading Saul Alinsky, Warns us on US Debt

-Another video but again it is well worth the time.

I will admit that I have yet to read Saul Alinky's Rules for Radicals - the manual for paving the way for Marxism in the United States, but this is one for which I have no excuse for skipping. George C. Scott's character, General George S. Patton in the classic WWII movie Patton, after reading Field Marshall Rommel's book on tank warfare and later engaging the Afrika Korps' commander's army, famously uttered the following:

"I read your book, you son of a bitch!"    

I often read material from the opposition, and I have to acquire a copy (hopefully used so no royalties go to anyone).

In the video, Dr. Carson encourages the viewers to read Alinky's book so that they can see what the Left does and why they do it. Learning the tactics and overall strategies of the Left also enables one to "connect the dots" on gay marriage, abortion, sexualizing the youth, massive amounts and degrees of welfare, and particularly the standard method of nonstop ridiculing and demonizing of non-Leftists.

Dr. Carson also cites several examples from history to provide a dire warning about our crushing national debt. Out of all of these, I hold that the cases of the ancien regime in France and 17th century Spain are the most telling, so I will provide a few details to bolster his arguments.

-France by that time had long been a nation in which mind-boggling amounts of money were being taken and used by the government for services and projects that did nothing to create wealth. Versailles was a case in point of sterilized wealth. Add to that the costs from the crucial military and financial assistance that was given to the fledgling American republic, and you have a recipe for bankruptcy. We too have wasted - and continue to do so, immeasurable sums on welfare and governmental subsidies, borrowing ever-more amounts of money from the Chinese; this while we look to get our military involved in one new conflict after another.

-Spain at her height of power suffered from the commonly-held notion that money automatically means long-term wealth. With gold and silver pouring in from her colonies, but very little native industry, that money left Spain as quickly as it came in. Worse still was the inflation that ensued. With so many Spanish coins floating around, it came to the point that an English silver coin that had the same weight in silver as its Spanish counterpart was deemed by virtually all to be of greater value. What was easy the most wealthy and militarily powerful nation in Europe went bankrupt near the end of the Thirty Years War - even Spanish soldiers fighting in the Netherlands went on strike for lack of pay. We are fast approaching the fate of Spain.

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Revised- Former Army Colonel-Turned Lawyer Crushes White Privilege

Added 5/22/14 - This classic one came out today. A teacher who was involved in creating the Common Core curriculum says that he did so because " a white male in society I am given a lot of privilege that I didn’t earn,”.  This begs the question - Given that the Left has made it very difficult for Blacks to help themselves, was it his intention, then, to prevent any other white males from succeeding in the future? He affects to have a desire to help all students learn to read, but the Common Core does not in any way create accomplished readers.

I am reminded of what our Secretary ofEducation said about white people and the Common Core:

"U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan reportedly said on Friday that some of the opposition to the controversial Common Core State Standards is derived from wealthy white mothers upset to learn their children are not as bright as they thought.

According to the Washington Post, Duncan told a group of state schools superintendentshe found it “fascinating” opposition comes from “white suburban moms who — all of a sudden — their child isn’t as brilliant as they thought they were and their school isn’t as good as they though they were.”.........."

Main post:
This is another follow-up to recent posts (at bottom) regarding the White Privilege (or "Check your Privilege) tactic that both denigrates the achievements of non-whites and discourages other from making any attempt to succeed. -Video is in link and is a must-see.

"In an interview with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, former Army Colonel Kurt Schlichter discussed his recent Townhall article that refutes the liberal argument that so-called “white privilege” generates success for white people.

In a bold discussion, Schlichter, a Colonel-turned-lawyer, vehemently refuted the left’s notion of “white privilege.” Carlson noted that Schlichter, in his Townhall piece, wrote, “What you call ‘privilege’ is just me being better than you.” Carlson asked what Schlichter had meant by that.

Schlichter enthusiastically clarified:
“Have you ever seen or heard anybody babbling about privilege that has any kind of track record of success? I didn’t become a partner in a law firm because my great-great-great grandfather came over from Bavaria, okay? I started out mopping-out stalls at McDonalds. On the military side, I didn’t become a full-Colonel because somebody liked my skin tone. I started out as a Private 27 years ago this Tuesday.

All of us have worked; all of us have achieved something and that’s how we measure character; that’s how we measure what the value of a person is. Not some arbitrary category imposed by some ponytailed grad students who’ve taken too many gender studies seminars.”........................"


Princeton Student Blasts White Privilege Brainwashing

-Previous posts on White Privilege at bottom.

In a world of hate, lies, and truly Orwellian guilt-laying, one courageous student speaks out and is met with nothing more than recycled lies. 

[5/1/14 - I should add that the Left has set this argument up to mean whatever they want.You either admit to being the beneficiary of White Privilege or you, by dint of being white, don't know that you benefit from White privilege. This of course begs the questions - How can anyone that is white even know if there is in fact such a thing as White Privilege? If being white makes it impossible to know of it , then couldn't those whites who supposedly do knowalso possibly be-wrong?]

"Tal Fortgang, a freshman at Princeton University, says he has been ordered to “check your privilege” by his “moral superiors” several times this year because he happens to be a white male. In a column in the Princeton Tory, Fortgang takes on the ideology he says ”assumes that simply because I belong to a certain ethnic group I should be judged collectively with it.”

“There is a phrase that floats around college campuses, Princeton being no exception, that threatens to strike down opinions without regard for their merits, but rather solely on the basis of the person that voiced them. ‘Check your privilege,’ the saying goes, and I have been reprimanded by it several times this year,” the student writes. “The phrase, handed down by my moral superiors, descends recklessly, like an Obama-sanctioned drone, and aims laser-like at my pinkish-peach complexion, my maleness, and the nerve I displayed in offering an opinion rooted in a personal Weltanschauung.” 

“‘Check your privilege,’ they tell me in a command that teeters between an imposition to actually explore how I got where I am, and a reminder that I ought to feel personally apologetic because white males seem to pull most of the strings in the world,” he continues.
Fortgang then explores his family’s history to figure out where his “privilege” comes from:

'Perhaps it’s the privilege my grandfather and his brother had to flee their home as teenagers when the Nazis invaded Poland, leaving their mother and five younger siblings behind, running and running until they reached a Displaced Persons camp in Siberia, where they would do years of hard labor in the bitter cold until World War II ended. Maybe it was the privilege my grandfather had of taking on the local Rabbi’s work in that DP camp, telling him that the spiritual leader shouldn’t do hard work, but should save his energy to pass Jewish tradition along to those who might survive. Perhaps it was the privilege my great-grandmother and those five great-aunts and uncles I never knew had of being shot into an open grave outside their hometown. Maybe that’s my privilege.

Or maybe it’s the privilege my grandmother had of spending weeks upon weeks on a death march through Polish forests in subzero temperatures, one of just a handful to survive, only to be put in Bergen-Belsen concentration camp where she would have died but for the Allied forces who liberated her and helped her regain her health when her weight dwindled to barely 80 pounds.

Perhaps my privilege is that those two resilient individuals came to America with no money and no English, obtained citizenship, learned the language and met each other; that my grandfather started a humble wicker basket business with nothing but long hours, an idea, and an iron will—to paraphrase the man I never met: “I escaped Hitler. Some business troubles are going to ruin me?” Maybe my privilege is that they worked hard enough to raise four children, and to send them to Jewish day school and eventually City College.

Perhaps it was my privilege that my own father worked hard enough in City College to earn a spot at a top graduate school, got a good job, and for 25 years got up well before the crack of dawn, sacrificing precious time he wanted to spend with those he valued most—his wife and kids—to earn that living.........Now would you say that we’ve been really privileged? That our success has been gift-wrapped?'

The real problem with the notion of automatic “privilege,” he explains, is you have no idea what their struggles have really been or “what they may have gone through to be where they are.”..........

“I have checked my privilege. And I apologize for nothing,” he concludes........

His column has received both praise and criticism. One commenter told Fortgang that as a “white male, you are most likely ignorant of the ingrained racism or sexism that lives in society today.”

“You want to play oppression olympics? What about the millions of blacks enslaved in America for 300 years, who then had to deal with segregation and Jim Crow while new immigrants were allowed to assimilate into white culture within one or 2 generations,” another wrote......."

"White Privilege" Video Aired by U. of Minnesota-Duluth

Hat tip to The Blaze.

White privilege is a concept similar to that of Obama's old favorite "Critical Race Theory". Along with college courses in "Whiteness Studies", these ideas are advanced with the intention of keeping the fires of racism alive in our minds. The ultimate goal is to keep whites both in a state of perpetual "White guilt" and to keep them on the defensive at all times. Colleges around the nation have been pushing this agenda for quite some time. The University of Delaware recently made Whiteness Studies mandatory for all students. There, whites have to endure all sorts of abuse and accusations from fellow students while the professors smugly demonize all cultures and societies created by whites.

What one is supposed to believe is that, no matter how far we have come, whites are born into a privileged state even today. This can only be remedied by subjecting them to a state of bondage in which they would be required to keep their mouths shut and acquiesce to whatever demands are made, be it more affirmative action, dumbed-down curriculums and standardized testing (For schools and for jobs), higher taxes to pay for more programs, rabid historical revisionism that paints the worst possible picture of any notable whites, what have you.

On a playing field in which White Privilege has been put forth as an assumed truth, whites are not to be allowed to complain about anything let alone make any complaints about how they believe that they are being treated. To paraphrase the advocates of White Privilege - "You have nothing to complain about. You're white, therefore, you can only be the beneficiary of the racist system that was created by the nation's founders. You need to accept any and all changes that we want. Only when we decide that your position is no longer one of privilege will you have the right to speak your mind. Until then, you need to be brushed aside and do what we tell you to do."

-From the above link:

"The University of Minnesota – Duluth (UMD) is now sponsoring an ad-campaign designed to achieve “racial justice” by raising awareness of “white privilege.”

The project disseminates its message, that “society was setup for us [whites]“ and as such is ”unfair,” through an aggressive campaign of online videos, billboards, and lectures. The ads feature a number of Caucasians confessing their guilt for the supposed “privilege” that comes along with their fair features.[...]

“You give me better jobs, better pay, better treatment, and a better chance – all because of the color of my skin,” reads one poster that features a close shot of a Caucasian male.

The Un-Fair campaign also held a series of lectures and events on campus last semester. One included a presentation by Tim Wise, author of Dear White America. In his book, Wise confesses a “longstanding fantasy” where he turns to a man with a “God Bless the USA” button and asks him, “why can’t you just get over it?”

"For all y’all rich folks, enjoy that champagne, or whatever fancy ass Scotch you drink.

And for y’all a bit lower on the economic scale, enjoy your Pabst Blue Ribbon, …

Whatever the case, and whatever your economic station, know this . . .

You need to drink up.

And quickly.

And heavily.

Because your time is limited.[...]

And in the pantheon of American history, old white people have pretty much always been the bad guys, the keepers of the hegemonic and reactionary flame, the folks unwilling to share the category of American with others on equal terms.

Fine, keep it up. It doesn’t matter.

Because you’re on the endangered list.

And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving."

The video can also be accessed on the linked article.

The ad is the brainchild of Tim Wise, a longtime "anti-White" white person. Along with other (this time) volunteer modern-day Sonderkommandos wearing inscribed anti-white messages on their faces while speaking about how wrongfully privileged whites are, Wise intends both to frighten whites into perpetual subservience and silence and to whip non-whites into an anti-white frenzy of jealousy and hatred. The white volunteers who shamelessly attack other whites make this ad all the more appalling.

This ad comes amid a slew of claims from others essentially stating that anything that is challenged by whites or conservatives is racism. Here are three examples from the past two days:

We have been faced with this agenda for a long time, but the campaign has been strongly stepped up of late. I personally believe that the new offensive is occurring now due to the difficulties that the Obama campaign is experiencing. 

In a typical "Year Zero" mentality, nothing honorable or good for humanity that was accomplished by whites is mentioned or allowed into the conversation. The ban on the global slave trade (Although blacks are still enslaved in more than one region in Africa), an horrific civil war fought almost entirely about slavery (Sorry, but the historical evidence is too strong to deny that one), the fact that mainly white Church bodies were almost the only groups condemning slavery, the desegregation of the American South, the acceptance of vast amounts of refugees from third-world nations, or any other virtuous action can not be entered into the debate. 

One's work ethic, the willingness to postpone life decisions such as marriage and children, frugality in spending in order to at some point accumulate any property, or moral compass can not be cited in defense of what you have or are working to have. You have (or will obtain) what you have exclusively by virtue of your aristocratic white birth, and nothing else.

We must fight back with the truth, and in a determined fashion. I for one worked too hard, at too many backbreaking jobs, and put off too many purchases to be fooled into feeling guilty.

Colorado U. Hosts White Privilege Conference

White students are being trained to hate everything about themselves, other whites, the society that bred them, and the history and civilization that gave birth to this country.

I have noted on previous posts (Two are below) that colleges in the US have been more than largely taken over by radical Leftists, particularly of the brand that specifically detests Western Civilization. Students are either forced to take, or are given handouts of college credits for attending, classes in "Whiteness' or "White Privilege  studies. These are geared primarily towards turning American whites into Sonderkomanndos who are tasked with dismantling everything that concerns our cultural and historical legacy.

A white never earns his or her credibility, education, job, or anything else; all of these are the fruits of an unfair system that bestows privileges solely on account of one's birth.

The United States is not a Western nation, except when it is, at which point it is evil because precisely due to the fact that it is a Western nation.

-From the top-linked article:

"The University of Colorado-Colorado Springs (UCCS) is offering students up to four college credits if they attend the public university’s 14th annual “White Privilege Conference,” Campus Reform reports..........

“I am privileged,” reads black text on an all white background. “I can if I wish arrange to be around people of my race most of the time.”

The video continues:

“I can go shopping fairly assured I won’t be followed or harassed.”

“When I’m told about our national heritage or about ‘civilization’ I am shows that people of my color made it what it is.”


“I can, whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, count on my skin color not to work against my appearing financially reliable.”

“I don’t have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily protection.”


“I can choose blemish cover or bandages in ‘flesh’ color and have them more or less match my skin.”

“I cannot be blind to the invisible system of privilege I am a part of,” the video concludes........"

Continuing to ignore what is going on will have one result- The electorate of the US will tilt irrevocably towards the anti-US and Leftist camp. National elections will no longer even be a contest, for too many voters will have been brainwashed to hate themselves and be overwhelmed by "white guilt". This guilt will be manifested in the election of more candidates who will assuage the self-hatred by having them accept increasing degrees of marginalization, more control, and crushing taxation to pay for more reeducation.

A culture that has protected the rights of free speech/press, self-defense, religion, property, trial by jury, the individual, true representative government, and changed to protect women and the oppressed (And even prior to this women enjoyed far better conditions than elsewhere) is the bad culture. World cultures such as those of Islamic societies and China that still deny or severely restrict these rights are the good ones.

As I noted a few days ago, Texas is experiencing a flood of similar reeducation at the primary school level:

....and the Lone Star State is in danger of having its crucial electoral votes go the wrong way:


More Marxist Professors, Students Call for Suppressing Whites

In November of 2013, I treated the now-rampant phenomena of Marxists in US colleges who re-educate their victims to hold that all Westerners (read -whites) must be either suppressed or encouraged to kill themselves (at bottom). This normally is restricted  to white men as their women also continue to suffer under the white, male, yoke.

When reading about or listening to these individuals, one must keep two points about their methods and choices of definition mind:

-The US is not a Western nation, except when the situation calls for labeling it as such, at which time the US is wrong precisely because it is a Western nation.

- There is such thing as race (Race is a social construct) unless the situation calls for denigrating or demonizing whites, at which time whites are wrong precisely due to the fact that they belong to the white race.

"As a college senior, I see the real “institutional racism” in this country: the blatant anti-white prejudice at public universities. Here are some observations about race on campus.......

I have taken plenty of history, anthropology, and other liberal arts courses. If I did not have an independent view of race, I would leave those classes believing one thing: Whites are responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened in history.

Whatever the subject, the professors almost always try to throw in anti-European, anti-white ideas. They will use any excuse to blacken the reputation of Europeans, whom some call “the world’s oppressors.” I have often had to defend historical figures such as Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, and even George Washington. When it comes to the slave trade, professors usually ignore the active participation of Africans and blame it all on Europeans.

In one anthropology class, the professor could not go a single day without slandering the white men as evil, racist, or just boring. Needless to say, he was white. He often praised Mexicans as having a culture that was better than ours, and would downplay the violence in Mexico. He would urge students to visit Juarez, even though it was at one time the kidnapping capital of the world, and is one of the most dangerous cities anywhere.

This professor had lived in Mexico and been married twice to Mexican women. He said that our city—El Paso, Texas—should be turned into the premier Mexican city in America by replacing American people and culture with Mexican people and culture..........

In one course, when a professor asked the class what could be done to destroy the monopoly of whites on American culture, I objected that the European influence on American culture was not innately bad. Black and Hispanic students immediately complained that whites were oppressors. The Hispanics delighted in telling me they would become a majority and rule the country. I replied that whites are being displaced just as the Indians were displaced. Hispanics say they have a right to be in North America because they have partial Indian ancestry.

It is always baffling to me how a professor can characterize all whites as oppressors while claiming race does not exist. One professor assured the class that race of course race does not exist, and that even if it did, it wouldn’t matter. One anthropology professor explained that there was no biological basis for race, but in the very next sentence began explaining that sickle cell anemia affects blacks more than anyone else. I must have been the only person in class to notice the irony; everyone else was dutifully taking notes.........

Most whites sit silently when a black student claims that the United States is an expression of white supremacy or that the opinions of white students don’t matter because whites are inherently racist. Some are afraid to speak up; others no doubt believe this rubbish........

white sentiments I hear come from whites. A few even call for the destruction of the white race, though they are a radical minority that call themselves anarchists or communists......"


Marxist Professor - Whites Should Commit Suicide

Added 11/28/13 - One should take note of the tremendous amount of recent anti-white propaganda that is gift-wrapped as merely anti-Anglo-Celt. It was this broad group that was most responsible for spreading Liberty throughout the world and is the main target of the Left for precisely that very reason.  In one recent work on the Alamo (can't recall the name) in which the author jumps though flaming hoops to paint a false/weak picture of a bunch of cowardly and purely rapacious Texians, Mexican are really nice, German settlers are given a pass, while the Anglo-Celts are definitely portrayed as the yellow-bellied bad guys.

Also, Paul Weston's newest video should also be viewed. I just got it today:
Main post-

Unfortunately, the search bar on this blog page has been inoperable for over a week, so previous posts are difficult to access for now.

As I had not heard of this particular professor until I read the article below, I had to put my first impression aside for a moment and admit that his rantings could have been satire. A quickWikipedia check put that shred of doubt to rest.  (as I first thought - he is a Communist)

-From the first link:

"If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live. You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world! They only murder, exploit and oppress non-whites! At least a white woman can have sex with a black man and make a brown baby but what can a white male do? He’s good for nothing. Slavery, genocides against aboriginal peoples and massive land confiscation, the inquisition, the holocaust, white males are all to blame! You maintain your white male privilege only by oppressing, discriminating against and enslaving others!”......................."

One must keep in mind that all references to marginalizing and destroying whites (especially males) have their origins in Cultural Marxism. The system envisioned and began by Georg Lukaks, Antonio, Gramsci and those of the Frankfurt School had a specific purpose - to prepare the West for creeping Socialism. That system later made its way to the US via the conduit of Columbia University.

Confounded by the fact that the proletariat did not rise up against their masters in WWI, European Marxists soon realized that the foundations of Western Culture had to be dismantled in order to pave the way for worldwide Marxism. When a radical author, professor, or other nasty individual  writes or speaks against Christianity, Judaism (including trying to argue that Hebrews were never in Egypt), or any aspect of Western history, the material that he uses ( as well as his motivation)  is likely taken out of the same playbook that all Progressives/Marxists employ.

The claims that these people take, that white Europeans have no culture, that they are the primary dispensers of wholesale violence and robbery of land and wealth, etc, cannot be defended when compared to the light of history, but that is not the point as they who make these claims don't worry about being proven wrong; Their claims are designed to convince, or at least bully into silence, students who have been taught almost nothing about Western history; which itself is a purposeful omission by the Left. It is a system that does work to some extent - keep them woefully ignorant as kids, then subject them to a barrage of fictitious (or grossly exaggerated) and hateful claims so that they are ashamed to have any appreciation of their cultural origins.

Another point to keep in mind is that, like the wild claims made by Fundamentalist Christians about events in the history of Christianity (specifically that of Catholicism), every false claim would take entire paragraphs or pages (including citations) to refute, Marxists rely on the fact that, even when someone does invest the time and effort to refute the accusation, that work will never be seen by the original targets. So, when Noel Ignatiev claims that the Pilgrims gave blankets taken from smallpox victims to kill off the neighboring Native Americans,  his students will likely never hear the truth; just as the Fundamentalist sitting in his Church will think that the Catholic Church was created by the Emporer Constantine.

It is not hard to see that the whites who make these claims have no intention of subjecting themselves to the same penalties that they demand for other whites. As with population control proponents (also of Marxist origin) who revel in asserting that people should do the world a favor and end their lives to reduce the amount of the living - but won't do the deed themselves, filth-minded individuals such as Noel Ignatiev act as if, due to their work against whites (and "overpopulation"), they deserve a permanent voluntary Sonderkommando-type "pass".

Now, for the report on how his claims were received by his compliant students:

"....The Professor however, reported receiving “a standing ovation” from his “largely white and middle class students....."

We are fast approaching the point when a political break with the Leftist elements that operate in this republic will be very difficult do accomplish without widespread violence. I hold that the People need to accept that such a break is our only viable option. We could have to ability to teach an accurate version of history rather than Marxist sophistry, to name one tangible benefit. If we continue to allow things to go as they have, we will lose another generation of Americans to Marxist-induced ignorance. Training the young people to despise the work of their ancestors is the most effective means of getting this job done. 

The key target of the Left is the Anglo-American sphere. It is that entity that has been far and away the greatest contributor to the concept of Liberty and free Peoples. If that world can be dismantled - and the progress in that endeavor is substantial, there will be nothing to stop the implementation of worldwide Marxism.

I recently purchased this book by British politician and author Daniel Hannan. In it he successfully argues that it was in England that seed of freedom was own and successfully cultivated like in no other nation. 

Here's one that will put to rest the myth that the Native Americans were just a bunch of innocent guys who lived solely in communion with nature as mild hunter-gatherers prior to the arrival of Europeans: