For July - December 2005 Excerpts from writings of interest to all.
 The way back home. Send this page from You Don't Say to a friend.For those using Microsoft Internet Explorer: Select the "Mail" icon at the top of this window, then "Send Page." For those using Netscape: Select "File" at the top of this window, then "Send Page." |
"[My high school's] 'integrated science' curriculum [. . .] was one massive serving of mixed Green salad: global warming, overpopulation, ecological disaster, the evils of DDT, pollution, Alaskan oil drilling, species 'endangerment', and American consumption were all served up as scientific fact. Never was it mentioned that these are subjects of profound debate within the scientific community. Academically dishonest versions of political events, such as the woeful effects of George Bush's 'withdrawal' from the sacred Kyoto treaty, were taught instead."And the bias was not confined to any one class. It seemed all our teachers had taken leave of their obligation to teach us in favor of political indoctrination. English class themes (to borrow Dorothy Parker's classic phrase) 'ran the gamut from A to B' -- A being anti-Semitism, B being [exploitation of blacks]. A doggedly superficial treatment of racism -- 'stereotyping is bad' -- was rammed down our throats from sixth grade on, through a stream of repetitively third-rate literature heavy in cultural relativism and light on any intellectual analysis. [. . .] Even their interpretations of classic texts strained for these one-dimentional perspectives." -- Excerpts from "Politicized Pubescence," by Alec Mouhibian, University of California at Santa Barbara student in the FrontPageMagazine website, as quoted in "Indoctrination," Culture, etc. The Washington Times National Weekly Edition, November 14-20, 2005, page 28. Address: 3600 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002. E-mail. Website.
"'No taxation without representation' echoed in the hearts and spirits of our fathers because it called up the ideas they held most dear. If you may not tax me except as my representative, then for the same reason you may not govern me except by my consent. If you cannot take my property except by law and with difficulty, then my title to my property is real. It is truly mine. I own it. And if James Madison is to be believed, my ownership of my property stands on just the same footing as my entitlement to speak my mind or to say my prayers or to vote my conscience. [. . .]"It is therefore no accident that the idea of one man owning another man was condemned by our Founders, some of them slaveholders themselves who were, and who knew they were, condemning themselves. Our right to our property, by their principles, stems from the same source as our right to all things that naturally belong to us, including our bodies, our conscience, and our relationship with our Maker. One man, said Abraham Lincoln famously, has no right to eat the bread wrung from the sweat of other men's faces. [. . .] "The right to property stands now, after a generation of court rulings and political practices, upon a different footing. This is true at every level of government, from all three branches of the federal government down to the smallest tribunal in the smallest hamlet. Which property owner, wishing to build a house or expand a factory, does not fear exactions, delays and denials that may ensue anywhere and are bound to ensue wherever land is dear? [. . .] "In the notorious Kelo v. New London decision this last summer, the Supreme Court has decided that the property of one can be taken and given to another so that the other may make more money and pay more taxes with it. The old man in his childhood home, and the widow in the dwelling where she raised her children, are no longer secure in their abodes. The Fifth Amendment states: 'Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.' There is no provision in the document for the taking of private land for other private uses. [. . .] "[T]akings of land upon the least pretext, and the heavy regulation of land use at every level of government, form the direct assault upon the principle of ownership. The indirect assault is equally dangerous and much more general. Ultimately, it is an assault upon constitutional government itself." -- Excerpts from "Whatever Happened to the Ownership Society?" by Larry P. Arnn, Imprimis, the National Speech Digest of Hillsdale College, November 2005, pages 1-2. Subscription free upon request. Address: Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan 49242. Phone: 800-437-2268. Imprimis Archive. Hillsdale College Website.
"[T]he Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), sponsored by Senator Joe Biden (D-DE), [. . .] was passed when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and was signed by Bill Clinton in 1994. [. . .]"A woman seeking help from a VAWA-founded center is not offered any options except to leave her husband, divorce him, accuse him of being a criminal, and have her sons targeted as suspects in future crimes. VAWA ideology rejects joint counseling, reconciliation, and saving marriages. "VAWA refuses to recognize that alcohol and illegal drugs are a cause of domestic violence, a peculiar assumption contrary to all human experience. Numerous studies demonstrate a high correlation between domestic violence and alcohol or drug abuse. "VAWA forces Soviet-style psychological re-education on men and teenage boys. The accused men are not given treatment for real problems, but are assigned to classes where feminists teach shame and guilt because of a vast male conspiracy to subjugate women. "VAWA funds the re-education of judges and law enforcement personnel to tech them feminist stereotypes about male abusers and female victims, how to game the system to empower women, and how to ride roughshod over the constitutional rights of men. "VAWA encourages women to make false allegations and then petition for full child custody and a denial of fathers' rights to see their own children. VAWA promotes the unrestrained use of restraining orders, which family courts issue on the woman's say-so. "VAWA-funded centers engage in political advocacy for feminist legislation such as the 'must-arrest' laws even if there is no sign of violence and even if the woman doesn't want the man arrested, and the 'no drop' laws which mean the government must prosecute the man even if the woman doesn't want him prosecuted. "It's time to stop VAWA from spending any more taxpayers' money to promote family dissolution and fatherless children." -- Excerpts from "Time to Defund Feminist Pork -- the Hate-Men Law," by Phyllis Schlafly, The Phyllis Schlafly Report, October 2005, page 1. Address: PO Box 618, Alton, Illinois 62002. E-mail. Website.
"Nearly one third of Germans under 30 say that the U.S. government ordered the 9/11 attacks. In France, a book insisting that Americans carried out the assault themselves to increase defense budgets becomes a huge bestseller. In Britain, major newspapers carry headlines like 'The USA is Now the World's Leading Rogue State'."Asked which countries are the biggest threat to world peace, Europeans name the U.S as often as North Korea and Iran (each are picked by 53 percent). Countries characterized by Euros as less menacing than the U.S. include Syria, Iraq, Russia, China, Afghanistan, Libya. As one American living in Britain, Anglican minister Dwight Longenecker, summarizes: 'Our cultural ancestors have become unrecognizable, even hostile, to us'. "Unlike some forms of bigotry, anti-Americanism is most virulent among Europe's elites. Everyday Germans and Brits and Italians tend to be more appreciative of American culture, economic achievement, and government than their political lords. But ordinary Europeans have relatively little influence on the direction of their societies. The thing about European governance most striking to American eyes today is its comparatively undemocratic nature. In much of the continent, elections mean little, unaccountable bureaucracies and elites commandeer the most important decisions, the same people hang onto power endlessly, and policies that would not survive the test of popular opinion are simply instituted by administrative fiat. To cite just one example, direct election of mayors has been blocked in many localities, with national authorities insisting on appointing local leaders themselves." -- Excerpts from "Europe Learns the Wrong Lessons," by Karl Zinsmeister, The American Enterprise, October-December 2005, page 4. Address: 1150 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036. Phone: 202-862-5886. Fax: 202-862-5867. E-mail. Website.
"According to a report issued last summer by a blue-ribbon, Congressionally-mandated commission, a single specialized nuclear weapon delivered to an altitude of a few hundred miles over the United States by a ballistic missile would be 'capable of causing catastrophe for the nation.' The source of such a cataclysm might be considered the ultimate 'weapon of mass destruction' (WMD) [. . .] It is known as electromagnetic pulse (EMP)."A nuclear weapon produces several different effects. The best known, of course, are the intense heat and overpressures associated with the fireball and accompanying blast. But a nuclear explosion also generates intense outputs of energy in the form of x- and gamma-rays. If the latter are unleashed outside the Earth's atmosphere, some portion of them will interact with the upper atmosphere's air molecules. This in turn will generate an enormous pulsed current of high-energy electrons that will interact with the Earth's magnetic field. The result is the instantaneous creation of an invisible radio-frequency wave of uniquely great intensity [. . .] "The energy of this pulse would reach everything in line-of-sight of the explosion's center point at the speed of light. The higher the altitude of the weapon's detonation, the larger the affected terrestrial area would be. For example, at a height of 300 miles, the entire continental United States, some of its offshore areas and parts of Canada and Mexico would be affected. [. . .] "The EMP Threat Commission estimates that [. . .] 'Depending on the specific characteristics of the attacks, unprecedented cascading failures of our major infrastructures could result. In that event, a regional or national recovery would be long and difficult and would seriously degrade the safety and overall viability of our nation. The primary avenues for catastrophic damage to the nation are through our electric power infrastructure and thence into our telecommunications, energy, and other infrastructures. These, in turn, can seriously impact other important aspects of our nation's life, including the financial system: means of getting food, water, and medical care to the citizenry; trade; and production of goods and services.' [. . .] "We have been warned. The members of the EMP Threat Commission -- who are among the nation's most eminent experts with respect to nuclear weapons designs and effects -- have rendered a real and timely public service. In the aftermath of their report and in the face of the dire warnings they have issued, there is no excuse for our continued inaction." -- Excerpts from "EMP: America's Achilles' Heel," by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Imprimis, the National Speech Digest of Hillsdale College, June 2005, pages 1-4. Subscription free upon request. Address: Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan 49242. Phone: 800-437-2268. Imprimis Archive. Hillsdale College Website.
"To fathom what's been happening to America, you simply must understand that during the 1960s, the moral foundation of America came under a full-blown assault. The radicals of the '60s -- including, by the way, Bill and Hillary Clinton -- have today either taken over or profoundly altered the key institutions they originally wanted to destroy, from government to the news media, from education to religion."A generation later, the various 'liberation' movements -- 'sexual liberation,' 'women's liberation,' 'gay liberation' and so on -- have blossomed into rampant infidelity, divorce and family breakdown, gender confusion, AIDS, abortion and other mammoth problems. Moreover, the multicultural madness that starred in the '60s has infused virtually all of American society with unending confusion. "Today, in the rarified but toxic air of multiculturalism and political correctness, all cultures and all values are of equal value: The most ignorant, oppressive, suffocating, women-hating culture, where young people's hands and feet are amputated as punishment for petty offenses, is now worthy of equal respect to Western culture, which has provided most of the world's knowledge, progress, food, medicine, technology, quality of life, representative government and liberty. [. . .] "This worldview whereby we declare all human cultures and moral codes, from the fairest to the foulest, to be equal in value is made possible only by the total abandonment of any objective standard of right and wrong. "Despite the fact that multiculturalism has rewritten history, demonized Western culture and turned civilization on its head for a generation, Americans for the most part just floated along with this charade, year after confusing year -- until Sept. 11, 2001." -- Excerpts from "Multicultural Madness," by David Kupelian, Whistleblower, February 2005, pages 14-15. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"It's easier to kill someone in a hospice because the prosecutors in every county in the country refuse to investigate deaths in hospices. Or if they do an investigation, they refuse to prosecute killings. They say, 'Oh, she was in a hospice and was going to die anyway, so there's no way we can get a conviction.'"Now if we have all the county prosecutors in the country doing this, we have de facto legalized euthanasia. Anybody can be killed in hospice today. And that's a fact. Anybody. "The state and federal governments know about this but look the other way. Just a Few years ago [in 1998], there were 19 identified homicides in a hospice in Volusia County in Florida, and they were ruled as homicides by the county medical examiner. A committee was convened and the deaths were ruled due to natural causes. It was all covered up. [. . .] The state is already OK with killing off people. [. . .] "Every day a patient is in hospice, the hospice gets more money. So the more patients you have, the more revenue is streaming in. There is a cap on the reimbursement. The cap is not per patient directly, but it's over the average number of patients a hospice has during the year -- that is, there is a cap on the overall reimbursement depending on the number of patients. "So if you have patients who live too long, what do you do? We believe the hospices are wiping out those patients. [. . .] "If you wanted to get rid of anybody, what would you do? Get them into hospice, and the hospice nurses will wipe them out and nobody will go after them. You get a corrupt judge and attorney to work together, rule somebody incompetent -- yes, we've had that also, where they wanted to steal someone's estate and get the money -- and you put them into hospice. They're dead. You inherit all the money. [. . .] "Terri [Schiavo] is a test case for legalizing the killing of the disabled in hospice, to make hospice a killing field in a Nazis-like agenda, where those who are unwanted can be disposed of. [. . .] "There are a lot of hospice nurses who would never kill their patient or hasten death, and there are others who are doing it gung ho. All they have to do is falsify the medical record -- say a patient was in pain, give him morphine, and the patient dies. [. . .] They're doing backdoor euthanasia every day, everywhere, all across the country. "When it becomes so common that everybody knows about it, then it will be legalized. That's what's going on in Terri's case. Terri's death will make killings in hospice acceptable." -- Excerpts from "Hospice Whistleblower Warns Elderly," by Sarah Foster interviewing Ron Panzer (who founded the Michigan-based non-profit Hospice Patients Alliance in 1997), Whistleblower, May 2005, pages 8-11. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"Back in 2001, the United States was voted off the UN's Human Rights Commission for the first time since its inception in 1947. When that happened, a variety of reasons were given as to why such a vote occurred: the U.S. opposed the Kyoto treaty on climate change (a treaty based on highly flawed and disputed 'science' that would have seriously damaged the American economy); the U.S. insisted upon creating a missile defense system (strictly defensive, it did not have offensive capabilities); the U.S. had the death penalty (we executed convicted murderers); the U.S. imposed trade sanctions on Iraq after the Gulf War (these sanctions, ironically, were the outgrowth of a UN-led effort)."The countries voting against the U.S. deemed these actions to be human rights violations. Supposedly, because the countries were morally indignant about our 'violations,' they censured the U.S. In reality, the censure of the U.S. was a petty political maneuver, reflecting the UN's anti-U.S. agenda. "A recent action at the UN again exemplifies the lack of credibility the UN has in making claims of moral authority. Cuba, Zimbabwe, and Saudi Arabia have been named to the five-member group called the Working Group on Situations, which is the screening panel that decides which accusations of human rights abuse will be scrutinized by the UN Human Rights Commission. "None of these countries holds human rights in high regard. In Saudi Arabia, women are treated as inferior to men, and 'in Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe's dictatorship is imitating Stalin by seizing private farms and driving millions toward starvation,' noted the February 10 Investor's Business Daily. The article also commented: 'Fidel Castro's Cuba fails the human-rights test on all counts.' "Those who have long defended the UN, using the justification of the need for the UN's moral guidance, need only to examine the day-to-day happenings at the UN, and the fact that Russia has been on the Human Rights Commission since 1947, to know there is no such guidance." -- Excerpts from "The UN's Claim to Moral Authority," The New American, March 7, 2005, page 6. Published by American Opinion Publishing Incorporated, 770 Westhill Boulevard, Appleton, Wisconsin 54914. Phone: 920-749-3784. Fax: 920-749-3785. E-mail. Website.
"All other races promote their own interests unapologetically, and have prominent, well-funded lobbying organizations. There are no such organizations for whites, mainly because whites themselves oppose their establishment. The few small pro-white organizations that do exist are usually labeled 'hate groups.'"At the same time, whites hand out billions of dollars every year in social services to non-whites, and pass affirmative action legislation to help them compete against whites for jobs and education. Whites promote mass Third-World immigration, and white politicians try to make immigration easier and more attractive. Whites willingly -- even eagerly, it seems -- surrender whole neighborhoods to immigrants. Whites consider it praiseworthy to work in the interests of other races, but disreputable to work in their own." -- Excerpts from "Competitive Altruism and White Self-Destruction (Part I)," by Ian Jobling, American Renaissance, October 2003, page 1. Address: PO Box 527, Oakton, Virginia 22124. E-mail. Website.
"In a comparison of a 1973 algebra textbook and a 1998 'contemporary mathematics' textbook, Williamson Evers and Paul Clopton found a dramatic change in topics. In the 1973 book, for example, the index for the letter 'F' included 'factors, factoring, fallacies, finite decimal, finite set, formulas, fractions, and functions.' In the 1998 book, the index listed 'families (in poverty data), fast food nutrition data, fat in fast food, feasibility study, feeding tours, ferris wheel, fish, fishing, flags, flight, floor plan, flower beds, food, football, Ford Mustang, franchises, and fund-raising carnival.'"Those were the days of innocent dumbing-down. Now mathematics is being nudged into a specifically political direction by educators who call themselves 'critical theorists.' They advocate using mathematics as a tool to advance social justice. Social justice math relies on political and cultural relevance to guide math instruction. One of its precepts is 'ethnomathematics,' that is, the belief that different cultures have evolved different ways of using mathematics, and that students will learn best if taught in the ways that relate to their ancestral culture. From this perspective. traditional mathematics -- the mathematics taught in universities around the world -- is the property of Western Civilization and is inexorably linked with the values of the oppressors and conquerors. The culturally attuned teacher will learn about the counting system of the ancient Mayans, ancient Africans, Papua New Guineans, and other 'non-mainstream' cultures. "Partisans of social justice mathematics advocate an explicitly political agenda in the classroom. A new textbook, Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice by the Numbers, shows how problem solving, ethnomathematics and political action can be merged. Among its topics are: 'Sweatshop Accounting,' with units on poverty, globalization, and the unequal distribution of wealth. Another topic, drawn directly from ethnomathematics, is 'Chicanos Have Math in Their Blood.' Others include 'The Transnational Capital Auction,' 'Multicultural Math,' and 'Home Buying While Brown or Black.' Units of study include racial profiling, the war in Iraq, corporate control of the media, and environmental racism. The theory behind the book is that 'teaching math in a neutral manner is not possible.' Teachers are supposed to vary the teaching of mathematics in relation to their students' race, gender, ethnicity, and community. [. . .] "It seems terribly old-fashioned to point out that the countries that regularly beat our students in international tests of mathematics do not use the subject to steer students into political action." -- Excerpts from "Ethnomathematics," by Diane Ravitch. (Article was forwarded to me by e-mail. Thanks, Bill & Lillian.) Diane Ravitch website. Search for "Ethnomathematics".
"There are four movements that have had a major role in fostering anti-Americanism in the United States. It is worth pointing out that three of these movements were imported from abroad. At least 90% of the members of America's original Communist Party were foreign born, with the initial Communists printing eight daily newspapers in foreign languages but none in English. Relativism, an intellectual rather than an activist movement, immigrated to America with its founder, Franz Boas. Cultural Marxism, which helped spawn the New Left of the 1960s, was a refugee from Nazi Germany. While these movements may have originated across an ocean, their success was contingent on the enthusiasm of the native-born Americans who embraced them. Multiculturalism [. . .] is the lone movement of the four to have indigenous origins. [. . .]"Multiculturalism is a political program masked as a project of cultural appreciation. Those who accept its tenets see the world through a lens that divides us into oppressor and oppressed. Whites, males, the rich, Christians, and heterosexuals are all considered members of privileged groups. Racial minorities, females, homosexuals, immigrants, and the disabled are classified as victim groups. One's status on the hierarchy of victimhood is determined by the number of 'oppressed' categories one falls under. A handicapped black lesbian, therefore, would be exalted by multiculturalism, while a straight white male would be detested. This belief in categories of oppression results in multiculturalists seeking to 'level the playing field' by favoring 'victim' groups while punishing those perceived as privileged. Because one's sexual preference or skin color tells us next to nothing about one's privileged status in Western society, multiculturalism's method of analysis is deeply flawed." -- Excerpts from Why the Left Hates America, by Daniel J. Flynn, 2002, pages 41 and 70. Published by Prima Publishing, Roseville, California, member of the Crown Publishing Group, a division of Random House, Incorporated, New York City, New York. Website.
"The real problem [. . .] is not that the U.N. is corrupt, or ineffective, or run by scoundrels. The real problem is that the U.N. is inherently illegitimate, because supra-national government is an inherently illegitimate concept. The ultimate test for the validity of any government is whether its authority comes from the people it governs, rather than from the use of force or arbitrary edicts."In other words, legitimate governments operate only by the consent of those they govern. This is the fundamental democratic principle. It is ludicrous to suggest that billions of people across the globe have in any way consented to U.N. governance, or have even the slightest influence over their own governments. Yet so many of those on the political left in America, who claim to believe in democracy above all, vigorously champion the inherently undemocratic U.N. [. . .] "American citizens abroad, of course, are subject to the laws of their host nation. At home, however, American citizens are subject only to our domestic laws. Congress, and Congress alone, has the constitutional power to craft our federal laws. While constitutionally ratified treaties can be legitimate, no treaty can legally usurp the basic function of Congress by transferring legislative authority to an international body. "Not even the wildest interpretation of the Constitution would allow allow Congress simply to abandon its lawmaking power to another body. Yet this is what U.N. advocates would have us believe when the the U.N. attempts to dictate or influence our domestic labor, environmental, trade, tax and gun laws - as it already has. [. . .] "Our participation in the U.N. is fundamentally incompatible with our Constitution and American sovereignty." -- Excerpts from "The Real Problem with the United Nations," by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, Whistleblower, January 2005, page 41. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"Eighteen elected judges staff the International Criminal Court. Because the U.S. is not a party to the ICC, no American serves as an ICC Judge. Thus, if a country that is a party to the court extradited an American to the ICC, that American would not receive 'justice' in the American tradition. Furthermore, personnel can be charged with 'crimes against humanity' and sent to the ICC by any party that amasses a strong complaint -- including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), or even agencies such as Human Rights Watch, funded by George Soros, the billionaire financier who backed John Kerry's campaign for the presidency. [. . .]"Judge Robert Bork, author of Coercing Virtue: The Worldwide Rule of Judges, notes the danger for internationalist judges running amok. Bork predicts the rule of law will be interpreted and subverted by the 'socialist impulse' of liberal judges. Judicial imperialism is rampant in current affairs. Thus, Bork notes a growing power grab for international law, to the detriment of national sovereignty, via the International Criminal Court and the Belgian courts that claim universal jurisdiction. [. . .] "The president of Ted Turner's United Nations Foundation, Timothy Worth, suggested that the Bush administration was guilty of 'crimes against humanity' because of its preference for abstinence training as the most effective means of preventing AIDS. [. . .] "[T]he U.S.-based Center for Constitutional Rights filed a criminal complaint in Germany against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. (The German Code of Crimes Against International Law grants German courts universal jurisdiction in cases involving 'war crimes' or 'crimes against humanity.') Because of this filed complaint, Rumsfeld sent a notice to the German government that he may not travel to Germany for the scheduled 2005 meeting of Munich Security Conference. [. . .] "Americans interested in preserving true freedom must reflect as well on this question: The International Criminal Court is in its earliest stage, but at maturity, by what force will it enforce its judgements? When ICC judgments are not enforced, how long will it take for 'the world' to call for an international army?" -- Excerpts from "Senate Challenges Global Court's Reach," by Mary Jo Anderson, Whistleblower, January 2005, pages 38-39. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the 'establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community' with a common 'outer security perimeter.' [. . .]"This CFR document, called 'Building a North American Community,' assets that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin 'committed their governments' to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. [. . .] "The CFR document calls for creating a 'North American preference' so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. [. . .] "The document's 'security cooperation' includes the registration of ballistics and explosives [. . .] "[A] common market requires a court system, so the CFR document calls for 'a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution.' Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway. "The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks 'unlimited access' to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities. The CFR document calls for adopting a 'tested once' principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards. "The CFR document demands that we implement 'the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico.' That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system. [. . .] "U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges. "To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is 'achievable' within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of 'eminent persons from outside government . . . along the lines of the Bilderberg' conferences." -- Excerpts from "The Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada," by Phyllis Schlafly, The Phyllis Schlafly Report, July 2005, pages 1-2. Address: PO Box 618, Alton, Illinois 62002. E-mail. Website.
"'The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing the struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people.'"Who said that? []. . .] Was it some right-wing Jewish extremist? Was it Ariel Sharon? "No. It was Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, in a moment of extreme candor during an interview published in the March 31, 1977 edition of the Dutch newspaper Trouw. [. . .] "You might remember the late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir making the bold political statement: 'There is no such thing as a Palestinian people.' [. . .] "[S]imilar statements [were] made by Yasser Arafat and his inner circle of political leadership years after Meir had told the truth -- that there is no distinct Palestinian cultural or national identity. [. . .] "In the history of the world, Palestine has never existed as a nation. The region known as Palestine was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their ancestral homeland. It was never ruled by Arabs as a separate nation." -- Excerpts from "What Is a Palestinian, Anyway?" by Joseph Farah, Whistleblower, July 2005, page 30. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"America's Founders made plain both their loathing of democracy and their reverence for a true republic's limitations on both majorities and government. Men such as Washington, Madison, Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, Randolph, Ames, and Gerry referred to 'democracy' only to warn against the tyranny they knew it would ultimately bring. They understood that government had to be limited if the people were to be free."In 1939, historians Charles and Mary Beard confirmed what the Founders had done. In their America in Midpassage, they stated: 'At no time, at no place, in solemn convention assembled, through no chosen agents, had the American people officially proclaimed the United States to be a democracy. The Constitution did not contain the word or any word lending countenance to it. . . . When the Constitution was framed, no respectable person called himself or herself a democrat.' [. . .] "In sadness, we note that the preponderant opinion of today's Americans is that the words 'democracy' and 'freedom' are interchangeable. Our elected leaders use them in such a way, as do vast numbers of influential individuals in the mass media, education, clergy, etc. [. . .] "Agreeing with America's Founders, England's Lord Acton wrote, 'The one prevailing evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority.' [. . .] One way to keep our republic is to remind office holders that their goal must never be to please the majority, unless the majority's attitude is consistent with a constitutional rule of law." -- Excerpts from "Founders vs. Democracy," The New American, March 7, 2005, page 24. Published by American Opinion Publishing Incorporated, 770 Westhill Boulevard, Appleton, Wisconsin 54914. Phone: 920-749-3784. Fax: 920-749-3785. E-mail. Website.
"American historians have studied every aspect of enslavement of Africans by whites but have largely ignored enslavement of whites by North Africans. Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters is a carefully researched, clearly written account of what [author Professor Robert C.] Davis calls 'the other slavery,' which flourished during approximately the same period as the trans-Atlantic trade, and which devastated hundreds of European coastal communities. [. . .]"The trans-Atlantic trade in blacks was strictly commercial, but for Arabs, memories of the Crusades and fury over expulsion from Spain in 1492 seem to have fueled an almost jihad-like Christian-stealing campaign. [. . .] During the 16th and 17th centuries more slaves were taken south across the Mediterranean than west across the Atlantic. [. . .] "Italy was the most popular target, partly because Sicily is only 125 miles from Tunis, but also because it did not have strong central rulers who could resist invasion. [. . .] "When [pirates] came ashore, Muslim corsairs made a point of desecrating churches. They often stole church bells, not just because the metal was valuable but also to silence the distinctive voice of Christianity. [. . .] Eventually, Italians gave up much of their coast. [. . .] "If the pirates were short on galley slaves, they might put some of their captives to work immediately, but prisoners usually went below hatches for the journey home. They were packed in, barely able to move in the filth, stench, and vermin, and many died before they reached port. "Once in North Africa, it was tradition to parade newly-captured Christians through the streets, so people could jeer at them, and children could pelt them with refuse. At the slave market, men were made to jump about to prove they were not lame, and buyers often wanted them stripped naked again to see if they were healthy. This was also to evaluate the sexual value of both men and women; white concubines had a high value, and all the slave capitals had a flourishing homosexual underground. [. . .] "Most of these public slaves spent the rest of their lives as galley slaves, and it is hard to imagine a more miserable existence. Men were chained three, four, or five to an oar, with their ankles chained together as well. Rowers never left their oars, and to the extent that they slept at all, they slept at their benches. [. . .] "They had no protection against the burning Mediterranean sun, and their masters flayed their already-raw backs with the slave driver's favorite tool of encouragement, a stretched bull's penis or 'bull's pizzle.' There was practically no hope of escape or rescue; a galley slave's job was to work himself to death -- mainly in raids to capture more wretches like himself -- and his master pitched him overboard at the first sign of serious illness. [. . .] "Slaves were not just property, they were infidels, and deserved whatever suffering a master meted out. [. . .] "[B]etween 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly a million and quite possibly as many as a million and a quarter white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast. This considerably exceeds the figure of 800,000 Africans generally accepted as having been transported to the North American colonies and, later, to the United States." -- Excerpts from "The Untold Story of White Slavery," a review by Thomas Jackson of the book, Christian Slaves by Robert C. Davis, American Renaissance, August 2005, pages 7-11. Address: PO Box 527, Oakton, Virginia 22124. E-mail. Website.
"Liberals, Democrats and others on the left frequently state that they 'support the troops.'"For most of them, whether they realize it or not, this is not true. They feel they must say this because the majority of Americans would find any other position unacceptable. Indeed, for most liberals, the thought that they really do not support the troops is unacceptable even to them. "Lest this argument be dismissed as an attack on leftist Americans' patriotism, let it be clear that leftists' patriotism is not the issue here. Their honesty is. "In order to understand this, we need to first have a working definition of the term 'support the troops'. Presumably it means that one supports what the troops are doing and rooting for them to succeed. What else could 'support the troops' mean? If you say, for example, that you support the Yankees or the Dodgers, we assume it means you want them to win. "But most of the left does not want the troops to win in Iraq. The left's message is this: 'You troops may think you are winning; you may think you are doing good and moral things in Iraq; you may believe you are fighting the worst human beings of our age and protecting us against the scourge of Islamic terror. But we on the left believe none of that. We believe this war is being fought for oil and for Halliburton and other corporations; we believe you are waging a war that is both illegal and immoral; we believe you have invaded a country for no good reason and have killed a hundred thousand Iraqis [the left's generally mentioned number] for no good reason; but, hey, we sure do support you.'" -- Excerpts from An article by Dennis Prager, quoted in "Supporting the Troops," Inside Politics, The Washington Times National Weekly Edition, July 18-24, 2005, page 16. Address: 3600 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002. E-mail. Website.
"More than eight decades ago, the Irish poet William Butler Yeats wrote the now-famous lines, 'Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold.' That the center of the American Empire cannot hold has at no time been more evident than now, with the current wave of secessionist movements rising up across the country: the Alaskan Independence Party, the California Secessionist Party, the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement, the New England Confederation Movement, the North Star Republic, the Cascadian National Party, the Aztlan movement, the Republic of Texas, and the Green Mountain Republic of Vermont. [. . .]"[The] manifesto for a new nation is here, in The Grey Book: Blueprint for Southern Independence. [Michael Hill, Editor.] "Why secession? As The Grey Book explains: "Since the War for Southern Independence, the South has been redefined by an alien and revolutionary vision radiating from Washington, DC: the American Empire. It has imposed on its once-free citizens a vast and oppressive bureaucracy in the form of welfare and affirmative action programs that squander our wealth and incite racial strife. . . . It has assumed control over the education of our children, who are taught little except to hate their ancestors and to despise their own people. It has, while pursuing empire abroad, refused to defend its own people against an epidemic of crime, the invasion of our borders by illegal aliens, and the international agencies that are bit by bit chipping away at the sovereignty of these United States. [. . .]"A new Confederation of Southern States (CSS) composed of the 11 states of the original Confederate States (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia) would be home to 80 million people and trail only the remaining United States and Japan in gross domestic product. This new CSS would be based on the foundation of family, faith, and community under a limited and decentralized government. Beyond protecting its borders and its people, the CSS would leave governance to its sovereign states. [. . .] "Since the publication of The Grey Book, a call has gone out to make South Carolina the first state of the new unreconstructed South. [. . .] ChristianExodus.org plans to relocate 12,000 Christians annually to South Carolina with a secession date set for 2016." -- Excerpts from "Hurrah, Hurrah, for Southern Rights, Hurrah!" by Pauline Tate, American Renaissance, May 2005, pages 8-10. Address: PO Box 527, Oakton, Virginia 22124. E-mail. Website.
"'All' legislative powers are vested in the Congress, according to the U.S. Constitution. That means no legislative power is granted to the courts. Yet, over the past 50 years, judges have become increasingly activist, writing their own ideas and attitudes into the law."Some of our most far-reaching social, economic and political decisions have been made by judges rather than by our elected representatives. These include decisions about criminal procedures, prayer and the Ten Commandments in public schools, internal security, pornography, forced busing, racial preferences and quotas, term limits, abortion, and election procedures. "The federal courts have invented new 'rights' such as the right to abortion and welfare payments. The federal courts have arbitrarily overturned the votes of the people in California, Colorado, Arizona and Washington State who had the old-fashioned belief that they could exercise self-government. The federal courts have set themselves up as a super-legislature and grabbed authority to micromanage schools, prisons, hiring standards, and legislative reapportionment. [. . .] "A striking current example of how activist judges engage in the 'evolution' of the so-called 'living' Constitution was provided by the U.S. Supreme Court in June this year [2002]. In Atkins v Virginia, Justice John Paul Stevens rewrote the Eighth Amendment to outlaw capital punishment for those with low I.Q. scores. There isn't any basis in the Constitution for his decision. Justice Stevens based it on what he called 'a natural consensus,' for which he cited 'polling data.' Stevens was appointed by the so-called moderate Republican, President Gerald Ford. [. . .] "Out went the Ten Commandments, in came condoms. Out went the Cross and pictures of Christ, in came drawings of apes pretending to walk like humans. Out went adam and Eve, in came Heather Has Two Mommies. Out went Easter, in came Earth Day. Out went teachings against homosexuality, in came teachings in favor of homosexuality. "A single Jimmy Carter-appointed federal judge (Mariana Pfaelzer) in 1994 nullified California Proposition 187, which would have prohibited giving taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens. Proposition 187 received five million votes, but it was nullified by only one federal judge and kept permanently inoperative. [. . .] "The federal judges appointed by Clinton, Carter and Johnson are the biggest threat to constitutional self government today. These activist judges have been writing liberal opinions into the law, usurping legislative functions, and depriving Americans of our rights of self-government." -- Excerpts from "Judicial Activism: the Biggest 2002 Election Issue," by Phyllis Schlafly, The Phyllis Schlafly Report, October 2002, pages 2-3. Address: PO Box 618, Alton, Illinois 62002. E-mail. Website.
"The Endangered Species Act [ESA] of 1973 is the quintessence of all anti-human, anti-property rights laws. It derives its authority and power from five principle international treaties administered by the UN, the most prominent being the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere. [. . .]"In a very real way, U.S. citizens are going to prison, paying thousands of dollars in fines and, in some cases, losing their life savings because of international treaties that are not in the best interests of the American people. [. . .] "The goal of [the] Western Convention is to: 'protect and preserve in their natural habitat representatives of all species and genera of their native flora and fauna . . . in sufficient numbers and over areas extensive enough to assure them from becoming extinct through any agency within man's control. . . (Italics added) [. . .] "The ESA is the perfect tool for environmental groups to stop the use of any private land that they want by simply finding a species that is declining or is relatively rare, and petition the Secretary of the Interior. The petition costs the environmentalist or environmental group almost nothing. The private landowner and USFWS [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service], on the other hand, have to spends hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars proving the species is not endangered. [I.e.: guilty until proven innocent.] [. . .] "Under the ESA as it currently stands, the government is entitled to take control of all or part of a landowner's property without regard to the financial burden placed on the landowner if the government believes the property is needed to protect an endangered species. Consequently, regulators can set aside large amounts of land at no cost to their agency or to the urban taxpayer. This formula inevitably will lead them to take control of private property even when its contribution to efforts to save an endangered species is low and the cost to the landowner is high. Hence, the government's power is absolute, destroying the Locke model of protecting property rights and enforcing the Rousseau model of socialism where the state has absolute authority to enforce the 'general will' upon hapless property owners. "The top-down bludgeon approach of the ESA sends exactly the wrong message to land-owners. If they want to protect their land and their family investment, they dare not allow an endangered species on their land -- or their neighbor's land. To do so invites the federal government to condemn their land for the benefit of the endangered species. If their life savings is invested in the land they stand to lose everything. This has led to what is called the three S's: 'shoot, shovel and shut-up -- destroying and disposing of an endangered species before it can be found by federal bureaucrats or environmentalists. Consequently, the ESA has every incentive to fail. And [. . .] it has failed miserably. Not a single species that has been taken off the endangered or threatened species list is the result of government efforts of the ESA. Not one." -- Excerpts from "The Problems with the Endangered Species Act," a booklet by Michael S. Coffman, Ph.D., 2003, pages 19-21, 37-38. Address: The American Land Foundation, PO Box 1033 Taylor, Texas 76574.
"With stunning rapidity, divorce has been transformed from something relatively rare, stigmatizing and traumatic to something commonplace, accepted -- and traumatic."Indeed, divorce today is almost expected, with one in every two marriages ending this way. It is only the numbing frequency and ubiquity of divorce that makes us forget the full-blown tragedy it really is -- the devastation of a family. "'All it takes is one confused spouse who thinks that divorce will solve their unhappiness,' said Michelle Gauthier, founder of Defending Holy Matrimony, a Catholic organization. 'When that one spouse visits a lawyer, they place the entire family in the hands of a hostile court system. Children become wards of the state, and all marital assets are controlled by the courts. It is truly a tragedy.' [. . .] "'National studies show that children from divorced and remarried families experience more depression, have more learning difficulties, and suffer from more problems with peers than children from intact families,' writes Judith Wallerstein, widely considered the world's foremost authority on the effects of divorce on children. [. . .] "It gets worse. Besides the more obvious results of rampant divorce -- such as the massive growth in single-parent homes -- 'virtually every major personal and social pathology can be traced to fatherlessness more than to any other single factor,' says author Stephen Baskerville, a professor of political science at Howard University. Citing violent crime, substance abuse, unwed pregnancy, suicide and other problems, he says, 'fatherlessness far surpasses both poverty and race as a predictor of social deviance.' [. . .] "For an out-of-control, ever-expanding government such as America's, divorce represents a hard-to-resist growth opportunity. 'Once the father is eliminated,' Baskerville explains, 'the state functionally replaces him as protector and provider. By removing the father, the state also creates a host of problems for itself to solve: child poverty, child abuse, juvenile crime, and other problems associated with single-parent homes. In this way, the divorce machinery is self-perpetuating and self-expanding. Involuntary divorce is a marvelous tool that allows for the infinite expansion of government power. [. . .] "Breaking a marriage 'contract' today is easier than firing an employee hired last week or getting out of a cell-phone contract. "In truth, there is no genuine civil marriage in America anymore. The 'contract' part of the marriage contract is non-existent. After all, two parties enter into what they call a contract -- and yet either party has the power to end that 'contract' at any time, for any reason, whether or not the other party agrees. Thus, there never was a real contract, a binding agreement, in the first place. "Yet, the 'binding,' extremely-hard-to-break nature of the marriage contract is essential to marriage itself. Marriage is difficult, and there comes a time in many, if not most, marriages when conflicts and suffering cause one of the other spouse to contemplate ending the marriage. The marriage contract is meant to protect both spouses -- and their children -- against exactly such a period of weakness. No-fault divorce destroys that protection." -- Excerpts from "Ending the Divorce Epidemic," by David Kupelian, Whistleblower, March 2005, pages 8-11. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.  Must-Read items for March-May 1999. June-August 1999. September-December 1999. Must-Read items for January-April 2000. May-August 2000. September-December 2000. Must-Read items for January-June 2001. July-December 2001. Must-Read items for January-June 2002. July-December 2002. Must-Read items for January-June 2003. July-December 2003. Must-Read items for January-June 2004. July-December 2004. Must-Read items for January-June 2005.
The way back home. |
Government Run Amok
e-Mailbox1
It's Been Said
Must Read 
Poems
Picture This
Quickies
Say What? 
This & That
Thoughts
Xtra