Culture War – Page 1138 – Dr. Rich Swier

Put “Refugees” in FEMA Camps

November 24, 2015/in Culture War, Immigration, Must Read, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Selwyn Duke

Roanoke, Virginia, mayor David Bowers has just created a stir by suggesting that Syrian migrants be placed in internment camps. I found his comments interesting because, if we are going to have the Muslim so-called “refugees,” I also consider placement in camps a must.

Unfortunately, Bowers, a Democrat, undermined the position by drawing the poor analogy with fellow Democrat Franklin Roosevelt’s interning of Americans of Japanese descent during WWII (note: some Americans of German and Italian descent were also interned). George Takei, famous for playing Lieutenant Hikaru Sulu in the original Star Trek series and for, more recently, boldly going where no space traveler had gone before, was quick to chime in. As he wrote on Facebook, “The internment (not a ‘sequester’) was not of Japanese ‘foreign nationals,’ but of Japanese Americans, two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens.” Most of Takei’s other commentary is nonsense, mostly because he equates a low-crime, mostly American-citizen population with unknown-quantity individuals of the demographic responsible for virtually all the world’s terrorism.

It’s also nonsense because we have no legal obligation to accept foreigners of any kind if it’s contrary to our national interests. And I oppose — completely and without reservation — accepting any Muslim migrants whatsoever. I do believe we should help the persecuted Mideast Christians, although, even in their case, the aid should meet certain criteria. If we are going to accept migrants, however, it is imperative they be placed in some of the many FEMA camps our government has been spending good tax money building in recent years. Note that camp placement is precisely what Turkey does with the migrants.

Before elaborating further on this, the migrant issue must be properly defined. Reports tell us that 75 or 80 percent of the migrants are military-age males in generally good health; this relative absence of women and children belies the notion that these are desperate people fleeing for their lives. Moreover, there’s much reason to fear that these migrants are, as Donald Trump has put it, a “Trojan horse” for terrorist infiltration.

First consider that Syria’s ambassador to India, Riad Abbas, has warned that more than 20 percent of Muslim migrants entering Europe may have ties to ISIS-linked groups. As he put it, reports Sputnik, “Among the refugees, who went to Europe, maybe more than 20 percent belong to ISIL groups. Now Europe has received bad element[s] into their ground. They will face further problem[s] in future.”

Then consider Dr. Mudar Zahran, a Muslim asylum seeker and leader of the Jordanian opposition residing in the U.K. On an October segment of “The Glazov Gang” he warned that Europe should not accept the Muslim migrants, as they were ushering in the “Islamic conquest of the West.” Furthermore, he stated that 75 percent of the migrants were not even Syrian and then said that

75 percent of those arriving from Syria come from safe area[s]; actually, the ones in disaster areas cannot … leave. So, actually, as much as there’s a disaster in Syria, most of those people arriving do in fact do not need the protection; they arrive from Turkey, they arrive from Jordan, they arrive from other places which are safe. In addition, those people are … bypassing poor European countries; they’re going to Turkey, Hungary, and other places like Bulgaria and settling in Germany, where there is a rich nation with a generous welfare system.

He also characterizes the migration as the fulfillment of “the Islamic … dreams of fascism of some” and says that what Muslims “couldn’t do in the last 20 years, now the West is doing for us for free — and even paying for it.” In addition, Zahran delivered this shocking news about the “invasion”: “I have to be honest,” he said, “you read Arab magazines and Arab newspapers; they are talking about, ‘Good job! Now we’re going to conquest [sic] Europe.’ So it’s not even a secret.”

There’s still more. According to American Thinker’s Sierra Rayne, a Pew Research Center poll indicates there may be three-hundred million ISIS supporters in the Muslim world. What this means is that if we accept unvetted Muslim migrants, one out of six could be supporters of a group that that crucifies Christians, kills children, drowns people in cages and sets them on fire.

And unvetted they will be. Despite Obama administration assurances that our authorities have cracker-jack screening procedures, the thorough databases necessary for vetting simply do not exist, as this article well illustrates.

Even if they did, though, vetting has a fundamental flaw: It only tells you about people’s past.

Not their future.

(Vetting can’t read minds, and people can change, as I explained here.)

And terrorist acts of concern occur in the future.

Of course, people could disagree with the aforementioned numbers; they may even believe Obama’s claims about vetting. Yet there’s a more basic problem, one almost universally ignored and whose solution is irrefutable within reason’s realm. Let’s assume that the migrants in question truly are refugees.

Well, they belong in refugee camps.

Why on Earth are we giving them the “keys to the city” and dispersing these unknown quantities in towns around the nation? This is at best criminal negligence — at worst treason.

Note that providing camps is what most nations do. Our camps would be humane; the refugees would have quality food and drink and adequate shelter. But remember that granting safe haven is a favor, and there’s a difference between charitable saviors and schlemiels on wheels.

A reason we depart from this sane solution brings us to a second universally ignored problem. As I pointed out recently, if a desperate person came through your area, you might feed him, provide some clothing and even house him for a while.

You don’t generally make him part of your family and let him share in decisions influencing your loved ones’ fortunes and future. The point?

We have conflated refugee status with citizenship, when the two should have nothing whatsoever do to with each other. Providing safe haven is one thing, but when the threat in the stranger’s native land recedes, he should return.

Why have we departed from this sanity? Obviously, people today don’t like the sound of “camps” (so call them “ObamaCare Refugee Exchanges”). But there’s another reason:

Obama and his co-conspirators don’t care about these migrants. Oh, they very much want them to live…in America. Because only then can they become part of a growing demographic that votes 70 to 90 percent for socialistic Democrats. Only then can they be used to further balkanize our nation. Only then can the “fundamental transformation” of our country be accelerated.

As to this, I reported in March on an alleged Obama administration plan to use foreigners as “seedlings” who will “navigate, not assimilate” as they “take over the host,” create a “country within a country” and start “pushing the citizens into the shadows” (more details here). And, of course, you can’t seed communities throughout the nation if you keep your seed in camps.

But if you want to diminish the sense of nationhood and thus the desire to maintain sovereignty, and dilute traditionalist, red-state will and thus negate nullification movements and turn sanity blue, “seeding” via amnesty and “refugee resettlement” is the way to do it. Once the ice is broken and a foreign population is established in an area, family members and others come — and all of them will outbreed the natives.

If certain people truly are refugees, FEMA camps can provide the refuge. After all, if the camps aren’t good enough for them, then what lowly creatures were they built for, anyway?

EDITORS NOTE: Please contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Feminist Teacher’s Lesson Plan: Discriminate against Boys

November 24, 2015/in Culture War, Education, Policy, Politics/by Selwyn Duke

War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. And inequality is equality — at least in the mind of Karen Keller, the Bainbridge Island Review and their enablers.

Reported recently was that Keller, a kindergarten “teacher” at Captain Johnston Blakely Elementary in Bainbridge Island, WA, was refusing to let the boys in her class play with Legos during free play time. As the Bainbridge Island Review (BIR) wrote:

In Karen Keller’s kindergarten classroom, boys can’t play with Legos.

They can have their pick of Tinkertoys and marble tracks, but the colorful bricks are “girls only.”

“I always tell the boys, ‘You’re going to have a turn’ — and I’m like, ‘Yeah, when hell freezes over’ in my head,” she said. “I tell them, ‘You’ll have a turn’ because I don’t want them to feel bad.”

If you’re acquainted with the mental illness masquerading as teaching philosophy today, you can imagine this woman’s problem. As the BIR explained, “Keller…watched with discouragement as self-segregation defined her classroom — her boy students flocked to the building blocks while her girl students played with dolls and crayons and staples, toys that offered them little challenge or opportunity to fail and develop perseverance.” And, of course, innate sex differences evident since time immemorial cannot be allowed, so Keller’s leftist sense of equality compelled her to action. She discriminated so the girls could use the blocks “unencumbered.”

Now, this story quickly went viral, and Keller and the school have since backtracked. It was all a misunderstanding, you see. As the Center for Digital Education reports, “Keller said she instituted a girls-only Lego time during the first month of the 2015-16 school year during free play ‘to get them interested’ in trial-and-error building and math. …Keller said her ‘casual, off-record aside’ [Hell comment] was meant to convey her frustration with marketing to girls in society. She apologized for any problems stemming from the [BIR] article.”

Translation: She’s upset the article caused her problems and frustrated that the “casual, off-record aside” conveyed her true feelings.

This is a reasonable assumption. The BIR piece, written by one Jessica Shelton, is completely sympathetic to Keller’s policy. Among other things, Shelton has a subheading stating “It’s a fair practice” and closes with “While Keller sees more girls in the building area than before, it’s still not the norm, she said. So the boys will just have to wait their turn” (I guess until Hell freezes over). Yet while the BIR wrote a follow-up article last Thursday stating “[W]e have been discouraged by the number of unfair personal attacks made against [Keller]” — including “hate phone calls at her classroom and vicious messages on Facebook” — the editors also wrote, “we stand by what we reported.” Hmm, I wonder if the BIR was discouraged by the hatred directed at Christian businessmen persecuted for not wanting to cater faux weddings or the Christian pizza-shop owner forced into hiding by death threats. Or were those just the broken eggs needed for the omelet?

But perhaps we should believe Keller now. I mean, I’m sure she only lies to people under seven. It’s also interesting that Hell froze over in Keller’s class right about the time her story went viral. Coincidences never end.

There’s another matter. If Keller is really so concerned about girls being discouraged by the boys’ presence (a pity science hasn’t yet weeded those creatures out of the species), there’s a simple solution: create separate boys’ and girls’ Lego areas. But this wasn’t good enough for her; she had to stick it to the boys for being boys.

Moreover, thinking “Yeah, when Hell freezes over” while lying to children to obscure your agenda indicates hostility. Let’s say, for instance, a man teacher was concerned about boys’ lagging reading skills and made reading time “boys only.” What would happen if he admitted he tells the girls they’ll have a turn but thinks to himself, “Yeah, when hell freezes over”? Would he still be employed?

In fairness, some comments pass our lips not as we mean them. On the other hand, philosopher C.S. Lewis once correctly pointed out that it’s when we speak and act spontaneously, without thinking, that our hearts are revealed. And how often do conservatives get a pass on an impolitic, “casual, off-record aside”? They get a career change.

The BIR also wrote that Keller considered her policy “a fair practice ‘because fair is getting what you need to succeed or to get better.’” C’mon, Keller, quote it correctly: “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”

The BIR continued, “Fair doesn’t have to be the same, and she [Keller] says her kindergarteners get that.” Obviously they don’t, because she felt compelled to lie to them about her discrimination. Also, we didn’t hear how “fair doesn’t have to be the same” when the agenda involved opening the Virginia Military Institute and police and fire departments to women. And if it is true, why trouble over, as Keller does, females being less prevalent in STEM fields and Lego areas and having poorer spatial skills?

Reality: hardly anyone, if anyone at all, really believes in equality. Equality is simply a ruse used when convenient to advance leftism and only remains operative until inequality better serves that end. Just witness the college “anti-racism” protesters who recently ejected whites from their “safe areas.”

Keller is a true product of modern miseducation. BIR says she “faults toymakers for reinforcing” sex roles and is frustrated “with marketing to girls in society,” proving she knows as much about economics as she does about sex differences and teaching. Businesses do market masculine toys to boys just as they charge men more for car insurance, may admit women to nightclubs without a cover charge and create women-only health clubs. Is their goal “discrimination” or social engineering? No, they’re responding to the market. Girls and boys aren’t different because manufacturers market to them differently; manufacturers market to them differently because they’re different.

This is illustrated well in the fine Norwegian documentary The Gender Equality Paradox. Among other things, it points out that women are more likely to enter traditionally feminine fields in an uber-feminist, “egalitarian” nation such as Norway than in more patriarchal India. Why? In poorer lands women have no choice but to pursue lucrative professions, such as computer science; in wealthy countries such as Norway, they have the luxury of following their hearts. And their hearts lead to things girly.

As for Keller, she outed herself. It’s logical to assume her abusive, anti-male mentality will manifest itself in other destructive ways in the classroom. She shouldn’t be allowed within a mile of another child — not until Hell freezes over, anyway.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FordhamUniversity Changes Restroom Signs as Part of ‘Gender Inclusive’ Campaign

Notre Dame Professor Forced to Leave Project Aimed at Faithful Catholic Education

EDITORS NOTE: Please contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Canadian Military thrown out of barracks to make room for Muslim refugees

November 24, 2015/in Culture War, Immigration, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Ann Corcoran

The new hard Left Canadian government is hell-bent on bringing in 25,000 Syrians in a little over a month. Apparently unable to find housing for them, they will be housed in military barracks across Canada.

From CTV News:

Soldiers and military personnel at a Kingston, Ont. base are being asked to clear their barracks to make room for an early wave of Syrian refugees arriving in just over a week, CTV News has learned.

Multiple residences at CFB Kingston are being cleared for Nov. 30 to house the refugees, according to an internal memo obtained by CTV News.

The orders will also affect some officer cadets attending the Royal Military College, many of whom are nearing exams.

Where will the military be resettled? CTV News continues….

Trudeau, Canadian Prime Minister.

And while the memo warns of the fast-approaching deadline, it does not indicate where military personnel will be resettled.

However, it does say a place will be found for the personnel.

The notice comes just two days after Minister of Immigration and Refugees John McCallum reaffirmed the government’s plan to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2015.

There is more, read it all! The story mentions “health” concerns, so it appears they are a little worried about containing some potentially contagious diseases. Lucky Canadian citizens!

Note in the story that the UN is picking their refugees, so the vast majority will be Sunni Muslims.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Syrian refugees: Empathy wanes in U.S. and UK as more voters say shut borders

German Jewish group says migration of Muslims into Germany must be “limited”

Maine governor working to stem the flow of welfare to migrants/asylum seekers

Senator Rand Paul cites KY refugee terrorists/Boston bombers on radio talk show, angers Left

Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio): ‘White men are biggest terrorist threat to U.S., not Muslims’

November 24, 2015/in Culture War, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Jihad Watch

Brown’s words recall a widely-heralded study that was published last summer, claiming that “right-wing extremism” was a bigger threat to the U.S. than jihad, based on the number of Americans killed by each since 9/11. Not only does this study skew the results by leaving out 9/11, but it also ignored the many, many foiled jihad plots in the U.S. since 9/11.

Also, right-wing extremists like Dylann Roof, the murderer in Charleston, South Carolina, killed because of their paranoid fantasies, but were not part of any movement with an articulated agenda or goal, while Islamic jihadists are members of or ideologically aligned with groups that have declared their intention to destroy the U.S. and the free world. Islamic jihad groups are determined to kill as many Americans as possible and conquer free societies, and swallowing Brown’s nonsense here will result in the deaths of many Americans.

“White Men Are The Biggest Terrorist Threat To The U.S., Not Muslims — A Reminder From Sen. Sherrod Brown,” by Val Powell, Inquisitr, November 23, 2015:

Muslims and other Middle Eastern people have been falsely branded as terrorists by many, but on Thursday, Sen. Sherrod Brown reminded millions of Americans that most acts of terrorism in the country were carried out by white men and not by Arabs or Muslims.

Brown said that “generally white males” are to blame for many terrorist attacks since September 11, 2001. He cited several incidents of mass shootings in public places in broad daylight and called them “terrorist attacks,” but the only difference is that they were carried out by “different kinds of terrorists.”

“I think most of us recognize, we’re concerned but we also know that we trust the FBI and our security forces to do this right. I mean, since the beginning of the Bush administration when we were attacked, September 11th, we’ve not had any major terrorist attacks in this country,” Brown said, adding that the country has been relatively safe from foreign terrorists.

Many people in Fort Hood and Boston would beg to differ.

Brown also pointed out that the real terror does not come from the outside and that much of the people’s views and stereotypes are distorted. During a radio interview on WAKR, Sen. Brown said that while people are putting all the blame on Muslims, white men who were involved in smaller acts of terrorism committed were neglected.

“We’ve had individual crazy people, normally, they look more like me than they look like Middle Easterners — they are generally white males — who have shot up people in movie theaters and schools. Those are terrorist attacks, they’re just different kinds of terrorists.”

The Ohio Democrat also assured people there is nothing to fear because the government and local communities are putting every effort in keeping the country safe for everyone. The government has done a great job warding off terrorist attacks from foreigners. However, he added the real cause for concern is the terrorism that happens inside the country done by white men, and that is where the government fails to protect its people.

“Not keeping us safe from crazy gunmen coming into schools and movie theaters sometimes, but certainly keeping us safe from foreigners attacking this country,” the senator argued.

In response to the ISIS terror attacks in Paris, Donald Trump suggested shutting down mosques to prevent extremist Muslims from committing atrocities in the country. Conservatives are also against offering asylum to Syrian refugees.

Domestic terrorism is a problem in the country, but it is often neglected and replaced with paranoia that comes with welcoming Muslims in the U.S.

However, white men were responsible for the firebombing of abortion clinics and Planned Parenthood, as well as mass shootings in movie theaters and schools. Who can forget the killing of nine church members in South Carolina? The perpetrator was a white young man named Dylann Roof. In a recent interview, the senator made a good point of reminding people about the stereotypes people subscribe to….

RELATED ARTICLES:

AFDI rolls out Boston #MBTABigots ad campaign

Six Muslim preachers from Britain arrested in Belgium, linked to Paris jihad mass murder mastermind

The Obama Administration Demanded Defense Analysts Downplay ISIS

EDITORS NOTE: Ayn Rand wrote, “The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.”

What Senator Brown said is absurd!

Radical Muslim Properly Defined

November 23, 2015/in Culture War, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Dave Gaubatz

Going back as far as 11 Sep 2001, I have been listening to media heads, politicians, and self proclaimed counter-terrorism experts worldwide explain to the masses what a Radical Muslim is and how they became radicalized. I have listened, analyzed, and self educated myself for over 2 decades on the issue of the terms radical and radicalized.

During my hundreds of visits to mosque in America, listening to Islamic scholars, Muslim worshipers and from studying the material provided to Muslims in a mosque I have for the best part of 2 decades that the terms radical and radicalized have been falsely defined by people who should know and who for decades have been leading innocent people astray of the true definitions.

I will not use several pages to discuss issues that do not relate to the terms radical and radicalized. The simpler written is the best for all to understand. If our media, politicians, and counter-terrorism professionals are providing false information about these two very important terms, do we expect liberals to provide accurate definitions?

Okay, follow me with my basic definitions of radical and radicalized. If at the end you still do not fully understand then please contact me at davegaubatz@gmail.com and I will help clarify.

1. Radical Muslim: This term in describing a Muslim who kills innocent people, rapes and kills young girls, advocates the hatred of Israel and the Jewish people, straps on suicide vests and kill innocent people, carry out shootings and explosive attacks on people at civil and innocent events, advocates killing Christians worldwide, desires in their hearts an Islamic caliphate worldwide and have the law of the land be controlled by Sharia law, and who believes 100% that their Prophet Mohammed was a perfect human and a man to be put upon a pedestal as an example of good to all, are not Radical Muslims.

The people and their actions, beliefs, and followers of Mohammed 100% in their daily lives are not radical, they are just Muslims. These people are not being misguided by the true form of Islam, they know the actions and objectives they follow and advocate is exactly what the Quran teaches and what Prophet Mohammed advocated for them his entire life and beyond. These people are the perfect examples of a Muslim carrying out each and every aspect of Sharia law and never questioning the teachings of the Quran and Mohammed. These people have studied Islam for many years and are closer to Mohammed than any other people on earth. Some become ‘Pure Muslims’ at an early age and for some it takes longer. Few people will reach the utopia of Islam. possibly as low as 1 in a 1000 achieve this goal, but when they do they are the light of Islam and their numbers will be in the millions. They will flourish across all lands to form an Islamic caliphate under Sharia law.

2. A Useful Analogy: When a young boy dreams of becoming a professional major league baseball player, he knows it will take years of study and practice to elevate himself to the highest level of baseball. He will start in little league, make it to the junior high and high school levels and most people who love baseball and desire to make it to the major leagues seldom make it past high school. They have lost their love of the game and no longer want to spend their free time practicing the finer arts of baseball at a higher level.

There are a few who continue after high school and make it to a minor league program of baseball. Many linger here for years and do not have the desire, talent or willingness to make it to the highest level of baseball (Major League Baseball). You must answer a question now. Are the boys who after many years of self sacrifice and study who make it to the Major League Radical baseball players or are they boys and men who fully understand all aspects of baseball and can now play and teach others? These professional players know in their hearts and minds what real baseball is and they understand the rules and regulations by heart and are at a utopia place in their lives.

In order for the world to understand and defeat Islamic based terrorism we must come to terms with the facts that Islam, the Quran, Prophet Mohammed and Sharia law is not an ideology of peace and caring for humanity, but rather an ideology of hate and violence as the rules and regulations laid out by Mohammed were meant to be. Mohammed did not desire for Muslims and Islam to be associated with love, but instead advocated for the worldwide dominance of Islam and violence was to be used to achieve this goal.

Hopefully by now we are beginning to understand just because a person comes to a point in his or her life that they now understand completely and have a desire as Mohammed did to spread Islam through violence does not mean they are being radical. They are the ‘Pure Muslims’ of the world who have accepted the clear and apparent aspects of the evils of Islam and Mohammed and are willing to give their lives in order to spread evil across the world. Essentially Islam is a form of following Satan. Readers must get it out of their minds that Islam has anything to do with peace and that Mohammed was a peaceful man. Islam is aligned with Nazism and the leader of Nazis known as Hitler.

3. A Radicalized Muslim: Day after day we are forced to listen to the media, politicians, and counter-terrorism professionals describe to us how a person goes through various steps to become ‘radicalized’. I consider their misunderstanding of Islam and Muslims to be a far greater national security threat than all Islamic based terrorists combined. These people who should have a better understanding of Islam are misleading the world when they say a person who just bombed innocent people for instance in Paris became radicalized. These Muslims did not become radicalized. They became ‘Pure Muslims’ because they have studied harder than their peers to understand and carry out the objectives of their Prophet Mohammed.

If my analysis of what a radical Muslim is or how the term radicalized is misleading, who are the millions of people who relate to Islam, but never make it to the Utopia level of fully understanding Islam and becoming ‘Pure Muslims’? These people are the apostates of Islam. They do not fully accept Islam, Sharia law, or the total teachings and understand of Prophet Mohammed. These are people that ‘Pure Muslims’ are killing in large numbers around the world.

Mosques are the little league fields, high school fields, minor league fields and for some the path to the major leagues. The objectives of all Imams teaching at mosques is to get their followers to become ‘Pure Muslims’ by accepting the real truths of Islam and what Prophet Mohammed desired. Mosques are the breeding grounds for the practicing of pure evil by pure Muslims.

Interfaith Dialogue — A Bridge Too Far

November 23, 2015/in Culture War, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

In this new monograph, adapted from Annex 1 of his superb recent book, Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, Senior Fellow at the Center for Security Policy Stephen Coughlin explains what’s really behind the so-called ‘interfaith dialogue movement’ and how the Muslim Brotherhood has co-opted the well-meaning but misguided intentions of the Catholic Church in particular. Mr. Coughlin’s expertise in the nexus between Islamic Law (shariah) and Islamic terrorism informs his exposure of the manipulative Brotherhood strategy to use the interfaith dialogue arena as an opportunity to edge Catholics toward a dislocation of faith so as to pave the way for the insinuation of shariah into American faith communities and society in general.

Author Stephen Coughlin introduces the problem in this brief video:

At a time when Vatican policy seems to many to have become unmoored from the traditional doctrinal teachings of the Church in ways advanced by the permissive environment of the interfaith dialogue movement, including tolerance of anti-Constitutional, anti-Western, shariah-based Islamic principles as well as those who promote them, this publication hits home hard. As Mr. Coughlin points out, it is intellectually impossible to adhere faithfully to Church doctrine and yet grant acceptance to principles that are fundamentally opposed to such precepts at the same time. Only a dislocation of Catholic faith could allow such moral equivalence. Ultimately, as he argues, the objective of Islamic supremacists is the prioritization of interfaith relationships over advocacy on behalf of fellow Christians being slaughtered elsewhere by the co-religionists of their Muslim interfaith partners—in other words, the neutralization of the Catholic faith community as a serious obstacle to the encroachment of shariah.

In praise of this new Center publication, Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney said,

While the interfaith dialogue movement presents itself as a laudable effort to ‘bridge’ the distance between faiths, those more familiar with the doctrine of the Muslim Brotherhood know that the actual agenda of too many such efforts is, in fact, modeled after the well-known dictum of Sayyid Qutb, who candidly reminded Muslims that such a ‘bridge’ is ‘only so that the people of Jahiliyyah [society of unbelievers] may come over to Islam.

The Center for Security Policy/Secure Freedom is proud to present this monograph as a superb addition to its Civilization Jihad Reader Series. “Bridge-Building” to Nowhere: The Catholic Church’s Case Study in Interfaith Delusion is available for purchase in kindle and paperback format on Amazon.com.

Click here to purchase this newly released monograph in Kindle format.

Click here to purchase this newly released monograph in paperback format.

Click here for a full PDF of the monograph.

ABOUT THE CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.SecureFreedom.org

Katniss vs. Power: The Hunger Games Finale by Jeffrey A. Tucker

November 23, 2015/in Culture War, Elections, Featured, Policy, Politics/by Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Now that the final movie in the series is out, we know that The Hunger Games is not just a pop movie series for young adults, a fantasy tale about about a young girl’s heroism. It is far more sophisticated than that: It is a political allegory, one of the best known of our time, about power and the complications of its displacement.

In this way, it covers the same intellectual terrain as Aristotle’s Politics, Machiavelli’s The Prince, and de Jouvenel’s On Power, but in a way that is more penetrating for readers and viewers, and particularly relevant for our times.

The final installment is a fitting and dramatic end to the tale. It deals with the greatest conflict in history, that between liberty and power. Those who have followed the story until the last movie might have supposed that the problem was rather stark. One man, President Snow, held all the power. He was a cruel man and he used every means to keep his power. He sat at the center of a capital city that pillaged the districts of resources and held power through fear.

If that is all there is to the problem, the solution would be clear: President Snow has to be killed. The source of the problem out of the way, all will be well.

The Plot Thickens

This was the thinking of heroine Katniss Everdeen for most of the series. And one can see why she would believe this. Snow was a ghastly figure, and he was personally responsible for vast cruelty and crimes. He deserved to be overthrown and for justice to prevail.

Plus, she supposed that everyone she knew shared her vision: a normal life without oppression, without violence, without pillaging, without rigid geographic and caste classifications, and without televised death matches orchestrated to instill fear in the population.

Previous installments had strong hints, however, that there was more going on beneath the surface. The capitol city Panem was an autocracy but also the center of a nation-state, which is to say that the bureaucracy, the administrative apparatus, a standing military, and its methods of rule could survive the death of the leader. This is the difference between a personal state and a nation state. The power apparatus of the nation state seeks immortality, a continuing life regardless who happens to head it.

The problem of creating a world without power, then, is more complicated than the overthrow of the existing autocrat. In every revolutionary situation, those who are most motivated to achieve the aim are those who seek to hold power themselves. So long as the machinery of legal violence exists, there will be those who seek to control it — and, as Hayek said, it is usually the worst who make it to the top. Therefore, it is not just those who rule but also those who seek to rule who constitute a threat to liberty. This is how the existence of powerful nation-states end up creating multiple layers of dangers.

Revolutionaries as Bad as the Regime?

Anyone who seeks to end oppression has to keep his or her eye out for those who would use the chaos and confusion of political upheavals to seize and exercise power in the future. This is what Katniss learns, as she gradually discovers that her one-time allies had become skilled in the conduct of war, appreciative of the status that comes with leadership, and lusty for exercising state power themselves.

She learned that great lesson of history: It is not just despots who need to be kept at bay but also those who most passionately seek to overthrow despots. In order to realize liberty, you need more than just loathing of those in charge; you need the ascendance of the love of true liberty itself.

Once Katniss catches on to what is happening around her, she has to make a decision. Does she comply with the dictate of the increasingly centralized revolutionary forces or take a different turn and go her own way? The urgency of this decision is what turns The Hunger Games from being a simple Manichean struggle between one good and one evil into a real-life version of a Massive Multiplayer Online game.

US Foreign Policy

Let us apply this principle.

In the 1980s, the US sought to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan by supporting Islamic fundamentalists, who were then called “freedom fighters,” and they were given weapons and massive logistical support. After the Soviets left, the rebellion gradually metastasized into the Taliban, who ruled with an iron hand, and were then overthrown after 9/11, leading to 15 years of US occupation, which has stirred resentment among the population.

This saga coincided with a similar situation in Iraq after 2003, following a decade of embargoes, intermittent bombing, and harsh sanctions. The overthrow of the brutal dictator Saddam Hussein brought to power not liberty-loving constitutionalists, but rather a Shiite majority that oppressed in turn on the Sunni minority that Hussein had represented.

The Sunni insurgency against the Iraqi state caused a bloody civil war in Iraq that eventually spilled over into the rebellion against Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and mutated into the Islamic State. Over the course of 25 years, Iraq went from a defeated and relatively quiescent state to a seething hotbed of poverty, violence, and hatred.

Fast forward to the Libyan case where the overthrow of another evil dictator Muammar Gaddafi sparked a grim populist blowback. Combined with all the other interventions, and alongside a surreptitious attempt to boot the Syrian overlord, we’ve seen the spread of ISIS into a region-wide insurgency that truly intends to rule through bloodshed.

Such is politics. You think that getting the bad guy will end the problem. What this doesn’t consider is the possibly that something even worse is waiting in the wings. This is not a case for tolerating tyranny, but it is a case for a good dose of humility to go with revolutionary impulses.

The Problem of Democracy

And it’s not just about foreign regimes. A famous trait of democracy is that the urge to kick out one group of leaders is necessarily tied to bringing another group into power. The latter are often no better and sometimes worse than the former. This is one of the reasons for so much political nostalgia in US politics: a look back almost always provides a better picture than a look at the present.

I can’t count the number of times I heard people tell me how much they long for the good old days of Reagan or Clinton — people who loathed them at the time… until their replacements came along. Or think of the number of people who believed that getting rid of Bush and replacing him with Obama would lead to peace, prosperity, and understanding, only to find that the new regime continued the practices of the old. And heads up: it seems like this history is likely to repeat itself in the case of Obama.

The simple lesson of The Hunger Games is that powerful people can do terrible things. We must resist in order to stop them. The more complicated lesson is that powerful institutions themselves corrupt, and that there will always be those lacking in moral scruples who are willing to assume the mantle of power.

At the end of the movie, we see Katniss out of battle gear, sitting in the grass, at her home, being bathed by sunlight, tending to her own life, cultivating her own personal vision of freedom, out of the limelight. Ruling herself, not others. Perhaps that scene offers the best lesson of all.

Jeffrey A. Tucker

Jeffrey Tucker is Director of Digital Development at FEE, CLO of the startup Liberty.me, and editor at Laissez Faire Books. Author of five books, he speaks at FEE summer seminars and other events. His latest book is Bit by Bit: How P2P Is Freeing the World. Follow on Twitter and Like on Facebook.

Poll: 40 percent of Millennials want Speech Censored

November 23, 2015/in Commentary, Culture War, Policy, Politics/by Jihad Watch

This Daily Caller report is all about how a large percentage of young people favor restrictions on speech deemed offensive to minorities, and while it discusses only racial minorities, there is no doubt that its findings apply to Muslims as well, and that many young people would want speech offensive to Muslims restricted as well. In 2014 I spoke at Cal Poly (video here) and took a question from an angry young woman who told me that there was a difference between “free speech” and “hate speech,” and that the latter should be restricted.

This is an increasingly common idea, taken for granted by large numbers of young people who don’t realize what a sleight-of-hand it is. They think “hate speech” is an easily recognized and universally accepted category of thought, when actually it is a subjective judgment used by those who are in power to discredit and marginalize their opponents. At Cal Poly I asked the questioner who should be entrusted with the momentous responsibility of determining what is hate speech and what isn’t, and pointed out that that person would have tyrannical powers over the rest of society. That didn’t trouble her at all, and that was the problem.

And meanwhile, while college students are indoctrinated into this taste for authoritarian government, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) continues to work to compel Western governments to criminalize all criticism of Islam, which would allow jihad terror to advance unopposed and unimpeded.

“Poll: 40 Percent Of Millennials Want Speech Censored,” by Kerry Picket, Daily Caller, November 21, 2015:

A new Pew Research Center poll shows that 40 percent of American Millennials (ages 18-34) are likely to support government prevention of public statements offensive to minorities.

It should be noted that vastly different numbers resulted for older generations in the Pew poll on the issue of offensive speech and the government’s role.

Around 27 percent of Generation X’ers (ages 35-50) support such an idea, while 24 percent of Baby Boomers (ages 51-69) agree that censoring offensive speech about minorities should be a government issue. Only 12 percent of the Silent Generation (ages 70-87) thinks that government should prevent offensive speech toward minorities.

The poll comes at a time when college activists, such as the group “Black Lives Matter,” are making demands in the name of racial and ethnic equality at over 20 universities across the nation….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Princeton Grad Disappointed Administrators Gave in to Student ‘Bullying Tactics’

FBI top dog: Islamic State “urging people not to travel but to stay and kill where you are. We’re not sure exactly what’s going on.”

Al-Qaeda claims Mali jihad murders: “All praise is due to Allah”

RELATED VIDEO: Robert Spencer speaking at Cal-Poly:

‘Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America’

November 23, 2015/in Culture War, Immigration, Must Read, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Jihad Watch

Republican presidential candidates respond to the ridiculous Democratic National Committee ad you can see here. Huckabee’s comment is most apposite, and is true not just of the DNC, but of the Obama Administration and the mainstream media — as well as much of the Republican establishment.

“EXCLUSIVE: Republicans Slam DNC Ad Attacking Them for Using Term ‘Radical Islam,’” by Patrick Howley, Breitbart, November 21, 2015:

WASHINGTON -Republicans are slamming the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) new attack ad criticizing the GOP for using the term “radical Islam.”

After radical Islamists carried out deadly terrorist attacks in Paris, the DNC released an ad hitting Republicans from George W. Bush to Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for even using the word “Islam” while talking about terrorism.

The GOP is outraged.

“Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America,” Gov. Mike Huckabee told Breitbart News. “No one in the GOP blames all Muslims but no one in the DNC blames any Muslims, even the ones who shout Allah Akbar just before cutting off the head of a person who professes being a Christian.”

“You can’t defeat the enemy if you are unwilling to even call it by name,” Jeb Bush campaign spokesman Tim Miller told Breitbart News.

“The Democrat ad is a poignant reminder of why the world has become less safe under an Obama administration: denial and political correctness have become the default strategies. That’s not how you lead, that’s not how you win and that’s not how we are going to keep America free and safe,” said Ben Carson spokesman Doug Watts….

What’s wrong with this picture?

November 22, 2015/in Commentary, Culture War, National Security, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Reverend Bob Armstrong

Over the past five years of the Saudi-sponsored war in Syria, the United States has admitted a grand total of only 53 Syrian Christian refugees and just one lone Yazidi, despite all the media attention on the Yazidi situation last year.

What’s wrong with this picture?

What shall I tell the Yazidi sheiks when I meet with them in early December?

I will never forget the religious leaders in Lebanon last December saying to me, “We cannot trust the United States government. You are now bombing ISIS, when two or three years ago, you were arming what is now ISIS?!”

What’s wrong with this picture?

Now our president, while at the G20 Summit in Turkey, in reaction to the Paris multiple-terrorist bombings and carnage, tells the world that we will “stay the course” for victory. What???

Obama held a press conference in which he said the terror attacks in Paris that left 130, including one American dead, will not change his policy in regards to ISIS, and that he still will not consider American boots on the ground in Syria or Iraq.

Although the Joint Chiefs of Staff would recommend many boots on the ground, seemingly, they are afraid to contradict the “Commander-in-Chief”.

Reverend Armstrong with Iraqi Christians. Photo by Bob Armstrong.

However, former New York City Mayor Rudy Guliani, weighed in on the outrage where every country is against ISIS even more. Guliani said, “I don’t care about public opinion. I care about the national security of the United States. We should have 30,000 or 40,000 troops in Iraq. If we had had them there consistently, ISIS would never have emerged.”

What’s wrong with this picture?

The French military has bombed more of ISIS strongholds in two days, than the United States has bombed in almost six months! Hello??

What’s wrong with this picture?

According to the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) 19,000 Syrians have been picked straight from “refugee camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan” and given U.N. approval for resettlement in the United States. However, most Christians are NOT in the United Nations refugee camps because of assaults and rapes by Muslims. Most Christians are “urban refugees” living in basements of rundown buildings – and worse – in cities. Virtually all of the 19,000 Syrian “refugees” will be Sunni Muslims who have a hatred for free Western governments.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Former Iraqi General Georges Sada (right) with Reverend Bob Armstrong. Photo courtesy of Bob Armstrong.

According to former Iraqi General Georges Sada, head of Saddam’s Air Force and then a consultant to former President George W. Bush (and even now a consultant to the current Iraqi government on a daily basis) he knew a month ago that President Obama would send a few troops in to fight ISIS, “ONLY because Russia has taken the lead in the region!” I had the privilege of having a private lunch with him.

Although he does not speak to many American audiences, except the United States War College, he reveals that Americans really do not want to hear the truth! He states, “America’s best supposed ‘allies’ in the Middle East are: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey. Yet these three countries provide over three-fourths of the money to fund worldwide terrorism!”

What’s wrong with this picture?

The United States is giving BILLIONS of dollars to bonafide terrorists in Iran as a part of the supposed “Iran Nuclear Deal” even while Iran gathers and chants “DEATH TO AMERICA!”

What is wrong with this picture?

Then there are the arguments for and against immigration. Yes, I am for legal immigration. Yes, I am for protecting our borders with a wall or whatever is required. Our 21,444 U. S. Border Patrol agents need our support and backing, regardless of the inaction by our government in reference to enforcement.

I am against illegal immigrants who disobey our laws to gain access to America, regardless of their color or creed or culture. How can I teach my child to obey laws, if the United States government turns a blind eye to people who are disobeying the laws. (Of course we cannot deport 12 million people. How ludicrous!) But something must be done to STOP the illegal flow!

What about a future attack on the United States? A new Islamic State video is pointing toward New York City as a terrorist target. The New York Post reports: “The images of New York City are spliced between disturbing clips of suicide bombers preparing for attacks. A fighter also holds a grenade, pulling the trigger as the camera cuts to black. French President Francois Hollande then appears on screen, giving an address just after the Paris attacks. At the end of his speech, he says, “It’s horrible!” Then words flash on the screen, saying, “And what’s coming next will be far worse and more bitter.”

Obviously, the United States of America is in the “crosshairs” of a future attack by ISIS.

Breitbart News reports: “Two federal agents operating under the umbrella of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are claiming that eight Syrian illegal aliens attempted to enter Texas from Mexico in the Laredo Sector.

A local president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) confirmed that Laredo Border Patrol agents have been officially contacting the organization with concerns over reports from other federal agents about Syrians illegally enter the country in the Laredo Sector. The sources claimed that eight Syrians were apprehended on Monday, November 16, 2015.

Honduran officials have arrested five Syrians who intended to go to the United States with stolen Greek passports.

On and on, the stories continued to multiply.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Our current administration is like a “Trojan Horse” in assisting Terrorism and radical Islam to make it to the shores of the United States of America. Islam is on the verge of accomplishing in half a dozen years what the Ottoman Empire could not do in 600 years – conquer Europe! Our own U. S. President supports the Muslim Brotherhood!

“But Muslims are peace-loving!” contends many people, even former President George W. Bush. I understand there are those who do love peace and their peaceful way of life in America, but if one were to thoroughly read the Qur’an, and act upon every part, there is really no such thing as a “peace-loving” Muslim.

Most Islamists do not understand that their “cult” is disguised as a religion as they “worship” this false god called “Allah” who directs them to torture and kill anyone who does not submit. They even convince many that Allah and God are one in the same!

President Obama and “wanna-be president” Hillary Clinton both continue to defend radical Muslims. But Islam is for sure tied to every ISIS attack.

Just in the last few hours, in Mali, Islamic Jihadists released a number of the hostages unharmed after they proved that they were Muslims by reciting, for the jihadis, verses of the Qur’an.

In the 2008 Mumbai, India terror attacks, the Islamic terrorists from Pakistan released a number of hostages from the hotel. They did this when the hostages in question proved that they were Muslims by reciting passages from the Qur’an.

A little-known fact is during the Mumbai attacks, a Muslim Labour MP who was in the hotel at the time of the attack was allowed to leave unharmed by the Islamic Pakistani terrorists. He never gave any interviews about his experiences but seems to have withdrawn to the margins of obscurity in British politics. Maybe one day France and Great Britain will have a Muslim majority electorate. Dear Lord, help us! A well-known Muslim told me: “We do not need to fire a shot to win control. France and England allow Muslims to practice their religion of having four wives. Considering all the children, one day we will be in the majority in France and England.” Wow.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Much has been said on social media about the refugees who drowned in the Mediterranean, but no one is forcing these people onto unsafe boats. They all do so willingly. President Obama wants to bring 10,000 Syrian refuges (how many are terrorists?) into the United States. However, the number of refugees welcomed by Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Libya, Egypt, Qatar, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, etc. is ABSOLUTELY ZERO!!

What’s wrong with this picture?

With the backdrop of the Paris terrorist attacks, which left 130 dead including one American, President Obama wants to continue our no-win policy against ISIS. Former GOP House Majority Leader Tom DeLay urges: “The president in his press conference, what I saw was he all but surrendered. He has surrendered to ISIS! We have a president that’s feckless, that’s incompetent, that has no idea what he is doing. His worldview is the wrong worldview for a war president and Congress has to say it. Congress has to stand up.”

The recent anti-Immigration of Syrians bill voted on this past week had nearly 50 Democrats joining the Republicans, but it falls far short of solving the problem. After this past week’s vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed to kill the bill even though it received overwhelming bipartisan support in the House.

In another immigration bill, President Obama is vowing to veto the bill which would increase the screening for Syrian and Iraqi refugees before they enter the United States. The bill would add FBI background checks. Despite the European terror attacks, President Obama simply does not “get it.”

This invasion of America, which is called immigration, is the biggest threat to your personal safety of our generation. In fact, even before the immigration crisis of the last four months, we faced the biggest immigration crisis since World War II. But this could lead to the “Trojan Horse” of terrorism in the USA!

What is wrong with this picture?

Most Americans understand there may be a major terrorist attack in the United States.

The Washington Post – ABC News survey, finds an unbelievable 83 percent of registered voters believe a terrorist attack in the United States resulting in large casualties is likely in the near future. Forty percent say a major attack is “very likely,” matching the level of concern after the 2005 subway bombings in Britain.

Get this, in spite of what our President says, the survey shows that 59 percent think “The United States is at war with radical Islam.” YET, President Obama and presidential candidate Clinton refuse to use that term as the enemy!

In spite of all the worldwide carnage and the terrorism finger pointed directly at the United States of America, our “Commander in Chief” is hell-bent on making “Gun Control” his legacy in his last year in office. I am reminded of Ronald Reagan’s advice: “Self-defense is not only our right; it is our duty.”

Please don’t be sucked into the potent videos children being killed by guns. Bad people will always somehow have access to weapons. Americans must cling to their Second Amendment rights: To defend themselves and their families.

It is against this dismal backdrop that I plan on meeting the enemy head-on in December for three weeks.

If you will recall the daily news last August, 2014 about the Iraqi people who were surrounded by ISIS on a mountaintop, the Yazidis. One-half of the men women and children were slaughtered by ISIS (5,000). The USA dropped from the air food, water and blankets, while the Kurds finally rescued the other half. Genocide, on a smaller scale, still continues in that region. I plan to spend one week in December with them: giving them food, encouraging them, and showing them the love of Christ. Yes, it is still considered a “war zone.”

In fact a Kurd offensive was begun earlier this week, as first reported by CNN to rid Sinjar of the 300 ISIS fighters. U. S. Coalition forces bombed strategic regions near there this past week! But my “insiders” tell me they will be rid of by the time I get there! Pray the Kurds eliminate ALL the IEDs! I will be a couple of miles from ISIS territories and within six miles where Turkey last month – and yesterday – bombed the PKK of the Kurds.

Even though God nudged me to do this, and I will be safe because of Him, for three days I will have five armed bodyguards of the Assyrian Christian “Special Forces”. Confidentially, the Nineveh Plains Protection Unit!

In addition, I will spend the day at a special home for 30 Yazidi women where they have been brutally raped by ISIS (and their husbands killed by ISIS)! I need divine guidance on how to encourage these dear women who have sacrificed ALL. It is like a Rehab Center “on steroids.”

Then the second and third week I will be in Iraq, Jordan, and near the Syrian border in Lebanon, partnering with my good friend, Bill Murray, in the Religious Freedom Coalition’s program “Christmas for Refugees.” Thousands of refugee children will be fed, and their parents will receive food for a week for the entire family, as well as a Bible in their own language.

Last year, I was within 100 yards of ISIS tents; and several Muslims came to know Christ. An ISIS sympathizer infiltrated the church. As a result, according to General Georges Sada, former Iraqi general and present consultant with the Iraqi government on a daily basis, he informed me that I have a $300,000 kidnapping bounty on my head by ISIS, if I came to Baghdad region of Iraq!!

I am not “crying wolf” now. This trip is extremely serious…even one of a kind. NO ONE is reaching the Yazidis except a couple of my new friends! I will be within a few miles where the United States just this weekend sent Special Forces into Syria. Russia’s presence is already enormous in Syria!

What is wrong with this picture?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Bob Armstrong needs to raise $10,000 before December 3rd for his security-conscience Middle East trip to feed Yazidis and refugee children. If you can assist, financially, thank you. All gifts to Lovelink Ministries are tax-deductible.

Readers who wish may give by check. Please email Bob Armstrong at: bobkimandb@gmail.com. To give online, go to www.LovelinkMinistries.com

Victim or Activist? The Choice is Yours!

November 21, 2015/in Commentary, Culture War, Policy, Politics, Regulation/by Karen Schoen

Time is like a river. You cannot touch the water twice, because the flow that has passed will never pass again. Prayers go out to the citizens of Paris, Lebanon and Mali. Again, this ISIS activity is being allowed to continue because DEPOPULATION is a GOAL of Sustainability. Throughout history the Muslims were always the initial gladiators used for the first round of cleansing. I am borrowing a few words from Franklin Graham.

Franklin Graham was speaking at the First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Florida in January, 2015, when he said America will not come back. He wrote:

“The American dream ended on November 6th, 2012 in Ohio. The second term of Barack Obama has been the final nail in the coffin for the legacy of the white Christian males who discovered, explored, pioneered, settled and developed the greatest republic in the history of mankind.”

There is nothing for whites to be ashamed of in America; it is just history. It is the way it was. The sad part is that the blacks who built America along with the European whites – have had the American Black history replaced with victimhood and hatred.

Will we let a small coalition of blacks, Latinos, feminists, gays, government workers, union members, environmental extremists, the media, Hollywood, uninformed young people, the “forever needy,” the chronically-unemployed, illegal aliens, and miscellaneous fellow-travelers…End the Constitutional Republic of America?

I listened to the Democratic debate. All these candidates did was spew MORE HATRED, aimed to make victims of every minority group imaginable…except for whites, of course. I can not imagine why any white person would vote for a candidate who LIES, calls them names, pushing White Guilt Complex; and all the while telling them that all that is needed is MORE MONEY to fix things. I am embarrassed that I once was a Democrat.

To the children of America: You do NOT have a RIGHT to tangible objects or material things. GOD gave you the ability to succeed. No one but you is standing in the way of your success. BUT it is not up to ME to pay for YOUR STUFF. That is YOUR job. How come I don’t hear anyone saying that??

You don’t hear much mentioned on the lame-stream media, either – about the 60%+ people that are sucking off the 40% of the population that IS WORKING.

In America, God grants our Rights. (Our Founders recognized this!)

The Constitution protects those Rights. If you think life will be better somewhere else, please leave!

As we prepare for Thanksgiving, read the Bill of Rights to your children.

Rights are not different for different people under the Constitution.

The opening states: “We The People.” It does not say WE the White people, Black people, Christian people, Jewish people!!!

There are NO divisions in America’s Constitution. The only divisions comes from those who wish to destroy American headed by Obama and a regime of globalists, seeking to force on us – their New World Order.

Just listen to GWH Bush 41. Google his speeches. He is very CLEAR!!

He is calling for a World Government – headed by the UN!!

So did Clinton, and Bush 43…

So did many of their PREDECESSORS!

Click on this link for Roscoe Drummond, Herald Tribune, on an article regarding the U.S., Governors’ visit to the Soviet Union after President Eisenhower signed the initial agreement with Soviet Union (Khrushchev) in 1958:

The Eisenhower-Khrushchev agreement covered planned U.S.-USSR activities in ALL areas. President Reagan followed up in 1985, with the USA-USSR cultural exchange agreement which also contained agreement to merge U.S. and Soviet education systems, currently implemented today under EDUCATION RESTRUCTURING aka NCLB, Common Core, ESEA.

Massive documentation regarding the Reagan-Gorbachev agreement can be found here and at the deliberate dumbing down of america (FREE) download.

And of course, who can forget Obama?

HE TOLD US: “We will fundamentally transform American.” In order to transform, you must first DESTROY. Michelle said: ‘we’ll change History.” And so they have. They have set out to DESTROY America, and that destruction is well on its way:

‘You will never again out-vote these people. It will take individual acts of defiance and massive displays of civil disobedience to get back the Rights we have allowed them to take away. It will take zealots, not moderates and shy, not reach-across-the-aisle RINOs to right this ship and restore our beloved country to its former status.” – written by a USMC Vet.

The TPP will ensure the collapse of America. Just like NAFTA and GATT. These treaties call for the merging of America, Canada and Mexico. Any candidate supporting the TPP agreement is a closet amnesty-seeker, never read the agreement, and is listening to their donor base. Their main goal is MONEY! Not America.

We need a candidate who will redo all trade agreements.

Most of us never ask, where is the hatred coming from? Why is it happening? We see the man in the street asking simple questions that Americans cannot answer, and we do not ask WHY? Perhaps because we are afraid of the answer – which is under our nose.

Before the early 60’s America was always in the top 10 in the world for education. Now we are mediocre. Why did America not keep its sovereignty, and strive for excellence as in the past? The answer to that is CONTROL. People who think freely are hard to control.

Being an American comes with a JOB. The Founders intended it that way! Being an AMERICAN comes with RESPONSIBILITY. If taught properly in school, students would know the way their government works, understand the Rule of Law, and realize the law does not change for different GROUPS of people. All GROUPS have the same rights under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This is the framework that our Founders

put in place. That is why in America, we have EQUAL JUSTICE under the Law.

Social Justice was created by the communists, in order to rally the groups around victimhood while collecting donations. Social Justice creates justice for a specific group, a protected group status. THINK: Would it not follow that if YOU are not part of that SPECIFIC group, you do NOT HAVE PROTECTION under the LAW? Break up into groups is necessary to divide the people.

Think ABOUT it!! So, we are no longer EQUAL in the eyes of the LAW – unless we are part of that SOCIAL JUSTICE GROUP. That is why so much effort is being put into dividing the American people, divided people are easier to CONTROL.

When today’s immigrants come HERE, they are not required to learn our language, or assimilate into our culture! They are used by the left to create a sub culture voting block. They are separated from the existing population and culture. Coming from countries giving minimal free stuff, they can not believe the amount of free stuff they now get from America. They will vote for the group giving the most free stuff. By continuing multi-culturalism, dare I say it? DIVERSITY! – We continue to promote the GROUP or HERD mentality insuring the demise of America.

The concept of being AMERICAN, of being ALL different peoples together in the same land, in the same country, disappears!

Our individualism, our culture…LOST FOREVER.

Our IDENTITY AS AMERICANS…GONE FOREVER!

We MORPH into…THE BORG!!

Comply, Resistance is Futile

Education is the one thing that affects all Americans. We call it the lowest common denominator. When you declare common-ality in education, you must teach to the lowest and slowest. It is now the job of the school to dumb the population by training not educating while they REPLACE:

FAMILIES…WITH SCHOOLS: Cradle-to-grave education, all MEALS (breakfast, lunch dinner) in school, assignments not going home for parental input, and intrusive, constant testing, parents demonized, break morality, children guided to drugs.
GOD…WITH GOVERNMENT: teach NIHILISM (life has no meaning – live for only today), and Secular Humanism (God is Dead) Children are taught in Pre-K that the Government grants rights to have housing, a job, food, medicine. Of course – whatever the government grants, the government can take away, lie, and remove. Freedoms are lost. Children are trained that they can talk, as long as the GOVERNMENT APPROVES what they say.
AMERICAN CITIZENS…with GLOBAL CITIZENS. It now is the job of every able bodied world citizen to work for menial funds unless sanctioned by the government, to never use any resources for fear they will be used up, to forgo dreams of success and to be happy living in an overpriced shipping container to save ??? space, food, the environment? Once you buy into the sustainability program, you will be a slave who has been fooled into giving their POWER to the government. The government will place more controls on you in the name of FAIRNESS to get more Power. Power over you, can only be granted by you. You give your power to the government when you accept the unconstitutional controls.

Eventually, people lose their ability to legally comment on their opposing view and will surrender America’s culture, heritage and traditions – without a shot being fired!

Our children will no longer know FREEDOM, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Instead, they will be told by the government, what makes them happy and to be happy with the crumbs the government provides. The pattern of working all your life to strive for something to pass on to your family, to allow your children to have better opportunities than you did – will die with the NEW WORLD ORDER. Sustainability means you will not better any future as resources can not be used for fear they will be used up. They will be no future innovation, creation, invention unless sanctioned by the government.

The world chaos was created by design. Just watch as riots break out and Martial Law is called for. The American Constitution has been replaced with Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and the writing and money of the bullies in the Chicago mobs, the international socialists cartels, Bush, Soros, Gates, and members of the various commissions, NGO’s, Aspen Institute, Trilateral and CFR to name a few. They have been pulling the strings with Agenda 21/2030, the New World Order for a long time with the final goal ending in WWIII in order to depopulate the planet. Stalin: “No people, no problems.”

Realize, the sad story of America in DECLINE is at its final chapter. But the chapter has an open ending left for us to complete. Realize, the ending will only be THE END…IF YOU ALLOW IT! If you do NOTHING, nothing changes!

The curtain WILL come down. The damage has been done. But a solid leader still has a short time to rewrite the ending. (Remember this too: EVERY American is a leader!) You can either be a VICTIM…OR AN ACTIVIST. You can’t be both. The choice is yours.

If not you, who? If not now when?

Target Corporation backs the ‘Criminalizing Christianity Act’ [HR 3185]

November 21, 2015/in Culture War, Featured, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Americans for Truth

The popular department store giant Target has recently signed on as a corporate endorser of the radical homosexual-transgender “Equality Act” (HR 3185; S. 1858). AFTAH has renamed this LGBT bill the “Homosexual Superiority Act” or the“Criminalizing Christianity Act” because it will accelerate pro-homosexual State tyranny against people of faith or morals who oppose sinful, unnatural homosexual behavior and same-sex “marriage.” See this piece on HR 3185.

Target recently put out a statement on HR 3185–which was ballyhooed by the powerful, anti-Christian homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign (a Target ally):

“Target proudly stands with the LGBT community through all that we do, from our partnerships with organizations like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), to our volunteer efforts, and even the products we sell. We want to be a champion for an inclusive society by using our influence and resources to support equality in the communities where our team members and guests live and work…

“Target is helping to lead the fight against discrimination by putting its support behind the Equality Act. Discrimination has no place in the workplace, and Target is demonstrating to all that inclusion is a pillar of any successful business,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “The time has come for full federal equality, and HRC is proud to include Target as a partner in this fight. Everyone should have a fair chance to earn a living, provide for their families, and live free from fear of discrimination, including Americans who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.”

HRC continues in its statement:

Target has a history of scoring highly on HRC’s Corporate Equality Index, and was named as one of HRC’s 2015 “Best Places to Work”.

Target joins a number of leading American corporations, including Amazon, American Airlines, Apple, the Dow Chemical Company, Facebook, General Electric, General Mills, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Levi Strauss & Co, Microsoft, Nike, Oracle, Orbitz, PayPal and Symantec Corporation in support of federal LGBT non-discrimination protections.

As AFTAH has documented, HRC’s rigged “Corporate Equality Index” is a woefully-biased”scorecard” that gives companies points toward a Perfect 100 rating for making grants to LGBT activist groups–buttakes points away from corporations that give to, say, pro-traditional-marriage groups. The homosexual-transgender lobby group continues to ratchet up the scoring criteria so that pro-“gay” corporations that have attained the “100 percent” ranking are pressured to make ever greater capitulations to LGBT demands to keep their “perfect” rating. In recent years that includes massive grants to pro-LGBT events such as “gay pride parades” [see Walmart’s funding of “New York City pride” HERE] and health insurance coverage for transgender employees seeking body-disfiguring “sex reassignment surgeries” as they “transition” to the opposite sex.

For more information about the “Criminalizing Christianity Act,” go HERE. Target’s pandering and capitulations to LGBT activists go way back: see this 2011 L.A. Times article reporting Target’s pledge to give at least half a million dollars per year to homosexual activist organizations. HRC is relying on large corporations to build support in Congress for the radical “Equality Act”; see thisHRC release.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Target Corporation: [(800)440-0680; or call 612-696-3400 and hit #1; email: guest.relations@target.com. or press@target.com

Urge Speaker Paul Ryan and Congress to oppose the “Criminalizing Christianity Act” (HR 3185). Call 202-225-3121 for the House and 202-224-3121 for the Senate. More information from AFTAH HERE.

Contact information for Target Corporation: [(800)440-0680; or call 612-696-3400 and hit #1; email: guest.relations@target.com, or press@target.com]

Urge them to reverse their support of the anti-Christian “Equality Act”; [HR 3185; S. 1858] a.k.a. the “Criminalizing Christianity Act” or “Homosexual Superiority Act.”

Suggest to Target that they would be smarter to at least stay neutral in the Culture Wars over redefining marriage and “civil rights” rather than siding with intolerant homosexual and transgender activists. The latter now champion anti-Christian bigotry by equating the defense of biblical morality and marriage with “hate”–and make shameful comparisons between cross-dressing men using Female restrooms and racist Jim Crow laws from the past that persecuted Black Americans.

Islamic influx: Why a Religious Test for Immigrants is Moral and Wise

November 20, 2015/in Culture War, Immigration, Must Read, National Security, Policy, Politics, Regulation, Religion/by Selwyn Duke

With the Paris terror attack and flooding of Western nations with Muslim migrants, Senator Ted Cruz and others have proposed limiting Muslim immigration into the U.S. In response, Barack Obama and John McCain have said that having a “religious test” for newcomers would be un-American. It’s a belief betraying dangerous philosophical juvenility.

Before getting to the deeper issues, it doesn’t take an Aristotelian mind to grasp the following: If one million Chinese Christians immigrated to our nation, the probability is decent that not even one of them would turn to terrorism. The same cannot be said of Muslim newcomers. And as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, if 1/10th of 1 percent of 1,000,000 of them are terrorists, that’s still 1,000 dangerous jihadists. Terrorism today is a Muslim phenomenon.

Even more dangerous, though, is the modernistic phenomenon of false moral equivalence. Would you say it was un-American to apply an ideological test to immigrants and deny entry to Nazis or communists? People will say that’s different; on an instinctive level, we view our ideology as superior to others and some ideologies as downright evil. But what is the substantive difference among them? It’s that they espouse different values. And unless we’re moral relativists, we understand that because of this they cannot all be morally equal.

Now consider: Different religions also espouse different values. This is largely why we can call them “different” religions. Conclusion?

They cannot all be morally equal.

You’ll only say otherwise if, again, you’re a moral relativist. But if relativism is “reality,” it then follows that no ideology can be better than another, either. If Christianity and Hinduism were equal despite their different values, so would liberalism and conservatism be; if Judaism and Islam were, so would libertarianism and Nazism be. “Values” are either relative or they’re not — you can’t have it both ways.

What follows from this is that religions, like ideologies, can run the gamut from the good to the bad to the ugly, from the ethereal to the excremental. The Aztecs’ religion, like so many pagan ones, required human sacrifice on a massive scale, and the Christian religion put an end to it. The Romans’ pagan religion allowed for the brutality of the arena, and the Christian religion put an end to it. I’ve heard many conservatives say “Islam is not a religion,” but the truth here is a bit simpler: similar to ideology, religion isn’t bad, but there is bad religion.

In point of fact, the distinction between “secular” and “religious” is, in the most important sense, a false one. Many today, awash in militant “secularism,” talk and behave as if the labels “secular” and “religious” alone are enough to qualify an idea for or disqualify it from the public square and the stuff of laws. This notion has no basis in reason and ignores the only distinction that really matters.

What would this be? Well, if Marxism is a destructive lie (in sum), what is more significant, that it’s labeled “secular” or that it’s untrue? If God’s existence is a reality, what is more significant, that we label the idea “religious” or that it is true? There’s only one distinction of any consequence whatsoever: the true and the untrue. Everything else is water-muddying, pseudo-intellectual verbiage.

In other words, at bottom people don’t believe in “ideologies,” “religions” or “philosophies.”

People believe in things.

Some of those things are good and true, others are bad and false. And if what people believe is bad and false — whatever water-muddying label it wears — there’s every reason not to vote for them. There also may be good reason not to befriend or hire them, depending on the degree and nature of the badness. There may be reason to keep them out of your home.

And there certainly may be reason to keep them out of your national home.

It should be noted that when Charles Martel saved Europe from a Muslim invasion in 732 A.D. and when the responses to Islamic aggression known as the Crusades were launched in 1095, people understood the above well. In fact, the earliest known uses of the terms “religious” and “secular” were, respectively, 1200 and 1300; even so, they didn’t have their current meanings. “Secular” as in “in reference to humanism and the exclusion of belief in God from matters of ethics and morality,” only dates from 1850.

Thus, during Christendom’s formative years, adolescence and rise to dominance, people did in fact view the world more clearly in the most important sense: they understood that there was simply the true and untrue. Maybe now we can understand why Pope Benedict XVI identified the 13^th or 14^th century as the West’s high water mark.

So what changed? Why are we confusing ourselves with terminology? Well, a prerequisite for believing something is “true” or “untrue,” in a real sense, is believing there is a yardstick for thus measuring things, namely Truth. And most contemporary Americans (and other moderns), as this 2002 Barna Group study shows, don’t believe in it. They are relativists.

Since many well-meaning readers occupy this group, I ask you to bear with me and consider the following carefully. Here’s how I always explain this matter: who or what determines what we call right and wrong? There are only two possibilities: either man does or something outside of and above him does — namely God (if the agency outside us weren’t above us, there’d be no reason to defer to its “law”). Consider the implications of each position. If an omnipotent, omniscient, perfect and benevolent being that created the Universe — the physical reality we see — also created moral reality (Truth), then we can say right and wrong is a real thing, unchanging, nonnegotiable and inerrant. It’s not merely a matter of “perspective” or feelings.

But what if, as the ancient Greek Protagoras said, “Man is the measure of all things”? Well, if you learned that the vast majority of the world liked vanilla but hated chocolate, would this make chocolate “bad” or “evil”? Of course not. We know it’s merely a matter of taste.

Alright, but how is murder any different if the only reason we believe it’s “wrong” is that the vast majority of the world dislikes the idea of killing others in a way they consider “unjust”? If it’s merely consensus preference — if there’s nothing more we can cite as evidence of this thing called “wrongness” — then it occupies the same category as flavors: taste.

Some may now say, “C’mon, Duke, we’re talking about finishing off people, not dessert! This is a moral issue.” Again, though, absent Truth, the category of “moral issues” would also be man’s invention, also just a result of the consensus preference that some preferences should be classified differently from other preferences. And, hey, to echo that popular relativist refrain, “Don’t impose your values on me, dude.”

This helps explain why many people subscribe to the ObaMcCain no-religious-test notion. We have become so relativistic that we, at bottom, view religions merely as flavors of the day. Why don’t we apply the same to ideologies, whose “values” would also be relative? Simply because, absent a belief in Truth, people’s tendency to operate based on emotion is exacerbated. And emotion isn’t logical. Most relativists haven’t truly thought their ideas through carefully and applied them consistently. If they had and nonetheless wouldn’t dispense with their relativism, they’d conclude what Friedrich Nietzsche and occultist Aleister Crowley had, expressed by the latter as “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” (And in this case they’d realize they, logically, could treat “religion” and “ideology” differently because relativism dictates that consistency can be no better than inconsistency. Few people would make this logical but foolish decision, though, as opposed to the millions who can be influenced wrongly by emotion.)

And why do people’s emotions today influence them toward the double standard in question? First, people again are creatures who believe “things”; they need something to give their lives meaning, real or illusory. And in this godless age, “ideology” has taken the place of “religion,” which is why we see leftist protesters exhibiting jihadist-like fervor. Second, people often see how “ideology” affects them, the connection between it and how they’re governed. They know that putting liberals or conservatives in office can make a difference.

What they unfortunately don’t realize is that world view, “First Things,” influence whether one will be liberal or conservative — or something else. It’s no coincidence that the Founding Fathers were Christian. It’s no coincidence that the mass-murdering Marxists were atheists. It’s no coincidence that the Nazis were neo-pagans. And it’s no coincidence that the Muslim world never birthed democracy. It makes a big difference whether your credo is “Do what thou wilt,” “Do what Jesus wilt” or “Do what Allah wilt.”

So, yes, a religious test, if not in law but in citizens’ minds, is appropriate for lots of things. And immigration is no exception.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mali: ‘Allahu Akbar’ screaming terrorists take 170 hostage, kill non-Muslims, free those who know Koran

In ‘First Step’ to Address Terrorism Fear, House Easily Passes Bill to Toughen Screenings of Syrian Refugees

EDITORS NOTE: Readers may Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Do You Really Believe there are Moderate Muslims?

November 20, 2015/in Commentary, Culture War, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Ron Edwards

If I have said it once, I have stated it a thousand times even on my syndicated radio commentary The Edwards Notebook that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. For a number of years Muslims have been portrayed by well-meaning or politically motivated progressives as either Muslim moderates or radical Muslim terrorists. Unfortunately, such classifications have helped to dupe so-many into believing that most Muslims are simply the same as everyone else. That they simply want to live a good and decent life without any thoughts of killing non-Muslims per instructions in the quran.’

The world manufactured the silly notion of two Islams. One that is radical and impossible to live with, and the other moderate and not much different from fellow Americans like you and I. The false narrative distinguishing a difference between “radical” and “moderate” is what facilitated the stupid rumor that Islam had been “hijacked” by the radicals. The implication is that the real Islam is moderate and that the radicalized version of today is a fake.

This is one of the reasons why American & European school students are consistently indoctrinated in the traditions of various aspects of Islam, including sharia law. It has been noted that what is taught to one generation dictates the direction that nation takes in the next. Thus the explanation for the insane for the irrational government decisions throughout both the United States and Europe.

The United States is saddled with a president who is more inclined to aid dedicated murdering Muslims than protect American interests. European nations like Great Britain and France are besieged daily with brutish Islamic bullies who are zeroed in on a mission of fundamentally changing their nations into typical uncivilized Muslim societies. The horrific murders of unarmed Parisians by Muslims who are emboldened by the west’s silly penchant for trying to make nice with the Islamists who long ago declared war on non-Muslim nations, particularly, the United States.

Despite the fact that back in January of 2014, ISIS leader Abu Bakr ‘al Baghdidi flatly stated his groups intention to march on Baghdad and into direct confrontation with the Americans. “Our last message to the) Americans, soon we will be in direct confrontation, and the sons of Islam have prepared for such a day.” Baghdadi said. “So watch, for we are with you, watching.”

But instead of acting on behalf of U.S. interests, the White House Occupier continues to govern on behalf of Muslim interests and remains keen on the idea of allowing hundreds of thousands of Syrian Muslim so-called refugees to move into our republic, all expenses paid by United States taxpayers. Obama’s willingness to endanger our nation by flooding her with Muslim enemies is jaw dropping. Also, the cruel similarities between Islam and Nazism are startling. The Nazis believed they were a master race. Islam (also a political movement) is considered by Islamists to be a master religion. When one considers so-called moderate Muslims, just remember, things are not always what they seem.

Most people known as moderate Muslims are those simply waiting until the overall Muslim population is at least around eight percent of the overall population of the country, or city they migrate to. After that they start getting involved politically via the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic organizations and use the judicial system of their chosen nation or city to further the political clout of Muslims at the expense of the native citizens where the immigrated to. Soon after, violent acts begin to occur. Numerous cities in Great Britain, France and even Televiv Israel are peppered with Muslim stabbings of non-Muslims and boisterous calls for the collapse of the nation, or city they have invaded.

The results of foolishly opening up borders to Islamic invaders are playing out all over the world. Hopefully, before it’s much too late, the wisdom of God will be pursued and utilized so that civilization may prevail so that sovereign nations like the United States will awaken from their stupor and properly seal their borders.

To place the interests of enemies who have warned us about their plans to destroy our republic above our own by letting them stream through our porous border is both dishonorable and traitorous. America is divided between those who desire to stay the course of open borders and endless streams of American hating refugees being let in on one side. On the other is a slightly larger majority who are praying for the restoration of an appreciation for and protection of our beloved republic. It can start with the sealing of our borders against illegal immigration. It is also imperative that the government or even Americans in general realize that we do not have the time and it is not our responsibility to sort through legions of illegal immigrants who are streaming across our borders to see who is naughty or nice.

The wise and most prudent approach is to not allow then in American in the first place. The reason is because most of us do not desire to witness a wholesale fundamental change of America. Unless of course it is a dramatic change into living up to the marvelous ideals that the founding fathers so eloquently wrote and then fought to establish. Together, “We the People” of the United States of America can reestablish our beloved republic as One Nation under God. Or settle for being the generation that let her become one nation gone under. The choice is up to us. I pray we make the right one.

Obama Supports (And Suppresses) Free Speech on Campus by David Bernstein

November 19, 2015/in Culture War, Education, Policy, Politics/by Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education reports: “For the second time this year, President Barack Obama publicly defended the importance of free speech on campus.”

The president’s defense is pretty good, though I’d prefer if he had pointed out more directly that left-wing campus activists should embrace free speech not just because it will make them more effective, but also because they should be open to the possibility that they are wrong on issues.

But that’s not why I’m giving the president only two cheers. Rather, it’s because the Obama administration was responsible for undermining freedom of speech on campus, and the president allowed that to happen. Here is the relevant excerpt from my new book Lawless:

In May 2013, OCR [the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights] and the Justice Department jointly sent a letter to the University of Montana memorializing a settlement to a sexual harassment case brought against the university. The letter stated that it was intended to “serve as a blueprint for colleges and universities throughout the country.”

Ignoring Supreme Court precedent, the First Amendment, and OCR’s own previous guidance, the letter declares that “sexual harassment should be more broadly defined as ‘any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” including “verbal conduct,” regardless of whether it is objectively offensive or sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile environment.

As FIRE pointed out in a blistering critique, this meant that the federal government was trying to impose a breathtakingly broad nationwide university speech code “that makes virtually every student in the United States a harasser.” OCR was trying to force universities to ban “any expression related to sexual topics that offends any person.”

So, for example, universities would be required to punish a student for telling a “sexually themed joke overheard by any person who finds that joke offensive for any reason,” or for “any request for dates or any flirtation that is not welcomed by the recipient of such a request or flirtation.”

Fortunately, a few months later, OCR got a new leader, Catherine Lhamon. Lhamon wrote in a letter to FIRE that “the agreement in the Montana case represents the resolution of that particular case and not OCR or DOJ policy.” She also reiterated that OCR’s understanding of hostile environment harassment in educational settings is “consistent” with the Supreme Court’s [much narrower] definition. OCR even allowed the University of Montana to disregard some of the requirements of the agreement.

But despite FIRE’s urging, OCR failed to issue any clarification of the Dear Colleague letter it had sent to the thousands of colleges and universities.

It would be tempting to attribute the original OCR letter to rogue bureaucrats at OCR, but we can’t since the Justice Department signed on as well. So while I appreciate the president’s stated commitment to freedom of speech on campus and am relieved that OCR isn’t trying to enforce the Montana guidance, one is left to wonder how that guidance got through two separate Obama administration bureaucracies to begin with.

David E. Bernstein

David E. Bernstein is the George Mason University Foundation Professor at the George Mason University School of Law.