:I am leaving for Athens, Thursday and probably should drape my car in black crepe because UGA'ers are going to still be seeing red.
Both teams played inspired football and someone had to lose. The UGA team played beautifully and have nothing to be ashamed of and I hope the teams play again next year.
Saban is losing two of his top coaches. He seems to keep training his competition.
And
Comment from a very dear friend and fellow memo reader: " Your comments are always good, regardless of the topics, but your comments today on Pocahontas and Oprah were priceless! The" imposition of Hollywood values" would bring about a speedy collapse of the USA--- which I think is what many of the liberals would love to see...at least for a few weeks, until reality finally dawned...!
B.."
Gee note: your children are being fed nonsense and propaganda in our schools and you haven't a clue where their anti-Israel opinions were developed. At the end of this article is a link to a Commentary Article dealing with a similar subject
Our kids are being subjected to an education that will wash their minds. I was told to watch for this in 1999, by Dr Ellen Cannon who was lecturing on the Rollins College Campus while we were attending a Parent's Day Weekend.
Ellen was a college professor in Illinois and an expert on the Muslim attempt to wheedle their way into America with the ultimate goal of disrupting our culture and weakening/distorting our intellect
She talked about the subtle way they would accomplish this by using our freedoms and election processes. They would run candidates for School Boards, seek media employment and eventually go up the ladder running candidates for Congress etc. Her words are more prophetic today as this is happening at an accelerated pace. .
Rot begins from within and it has already begun infecting our college campuses and will penetrate all education in time.
Look at the Georgia History books which are teaching our children about Ga. History and I am told the same about History Books in Pennsylvania by our son.
When you whitewash/scrub a society's history that is not healthy. Trump said it well in Tennessee yesterday when he talked about America's history and noted it was not all we should be proud of but , because we are a free society, we have the ability to rectify our mistakes and are and no other nation can touch us in this regard.
The Islamist effort is largely being funded by the Wahabi elements of the Saudis through various charitable organizations. Enormous sums have been given to major colleges to establish and finance Arab Study departments, build Mosques and support Madrasas in order to spread the word of Islam and Sharia Law.
There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about this until radical Islamists begin to fund domestic terrorism as it is also doing in certain instances etc.
I am not an alarmist. I am simply reflecting what is happening . We are more interested in football than education. We are more interested in consuming than reasoning. We are more interested in denying than comprehending. We are more interested in seeking pleasure than being responsible. We are more interested in mocking those of faith and who cherish our nation's symbols than upholding them. We are willing to allow a small segment of our nation to volunteer to defend our freedoms while we purchase new cars and enjoy the benefits their spilled blood and personal sacrifices allow/provide..
I submit this is not healthy. I am concerned for my progeny.(See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++
President dictator Tweety Bird, Deal Maker Trump threw the Dacca and illegal immigration ball to a joint group of Congresspersons today and said he had confidence in their ability to present him with a bill he would sign and then tied their efforts to something he wanted, building a wall.
I do not, for the life of me, understand why someone in The White House does not explain that the wall is self-funding and will be there for decades unless Oprah runs and wins and decides her Hollywood friends need cheap labor to manicure their lawns and pick their vegetables etc.
Unless I am incapable of adding and subtracting, we spend tons of money annually on subsidizing illegal immigrants and that does no include the cost of associated crime, when it occurs, much less the tragic suffering on both sides. The wall will be there for eons so the money saved, ie. what we expend on welfare, will go towards funding any type of structure. This is so logical I guess it escapes the genius of politicians who are used to turning simplicity into compelxity..
Trump allowed the mass media to see and report the meeting from the inside. I am sure he cleverly did so because it would help dispel the unfounded claims he is insane,nuts, incompetent etc.. He is clever like a fox and knows not to eat the chickens but neither to shrink from doing so if they attack him.
Trump has just fed Chicken feed to Republicans and Democrats and said don't choke, do what is best for the nation and the Dacca people. Go Trump!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Move it! (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++
Tobin on OPRAH! You are going to have to navigate and leave the likes of Streep. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++
1)
War in the Classroom
The year was 2011, and a freshman in Newton South High School, in Newton, Massachusetts, asked her father if it was true that the “Israeli occupation forces” had “imprisoned, tortured and killed” hundreds of Arabic women who had been “active in the Palestinian resistant movement.” Her father, Tony Pagliuso, asked for the source of this misinformation. It was her 540-page Arab World Studies Notebook, a highly explosive textbook filled with fabrications, shown to contribute, at least in part, to the marked decrease, from 84 to 57 percent, in student sympathy for Israel. In another textbook, The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography, a question reads, “If a Palestinian suicide bomber kills several dozen Israeli teenagers in a Jerusalem restaurant, is that an act of terrorism or wartime retaliation against Israeli government policies and army actions?” These are not unique.
The editor, Audrey Park Shabbas, employed by Arab World and Islamic Resources and School Services, authored the volume to improve the Arab image because the truth is unpalatable in Western society, and the Israeli image is scapegoated in the process, consistent with the 1400-year Islamic war against Jews and Western civilization. Schools also distribute Scholastic’s maps that omit Israel from the modern Middle East.
Other education sources used across America are the Internet’s Flashpoints: Guide to World Conflicts, which identifies Jerusalem as the capital of (the non-existent) Palestine; handouts that omit the numerous and deadly Arab terrorist attacks on Israel; and A Muslim Primer that presents a deceptive, sugar-coated version of the subjugated Muslim woman’s life. Biased textbooks in use throughout America are World History: The Human Odyssey; World History: Human Legacy; World Civilizations: The Global Experience; A Muslim Primer: Beginner’s Guide to Islam, and more. I have personally reviewed four textbooks and written exposés accordingly, and many concerned professionals and members of the public are working hard to combat the manipulation of our youth, but the disinformation continues to proliferate.
The selective outrage of BDS.">The selective outrage of BDS.
More than 10,000 teachers attended Shabbas’s hundreds of three-day teacher-training sessions from 2000 to 2006, and were thus persuaded and made skillful at reaching and indoctrinating more than 25 million students over ten years. Additional corroboration comes from visiting biased speakers, such as the notorious anti-Israel Noam Chomsky, an aficionado of the Iran-supported, world’s most powerful terrorist group/army, Hezbollah, responsible for large-scale bombings and suicide attacks on Americans and Israelis; Linda Sarsour, anti-Semite, jihadi and proponent of FGM (Female Genital Mutilation); and academia’s Paul Beran, then-director of Harvard University’s Outreach Center, now leader of SHARIAsource, recognized for promoting BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) against Israel to the Presbyterian Church.
It took alert parents and involved citizens and intense investigation and reports by The Massachusetts Board of Education, Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT), the American Jewish Committee and Verité Educate to expose Newton High’s ethical violations and unacceptable
practices and to finally have the school admit the Outreach Center’s strong influence. Key criticism was leveled at Harvard International Review’s Hatem Bazian’s fallacious portrayal of Palestinians as the indigenous victims and Jews as the colonialists; at the textbooks for their academic dishonesty through inaccuracies, false information, plagiarism, deceptive editing, and hate-filled, religious-proselytizing websites; assignments designed to prejudice students toward a suicidal one-state solution for Israel/the West Bank/Gaza, revealed in Miriam F. Elman’s “Palestinian Propaganda is Infiltrating US Public Schools”; and biases against Israel and the US while sanitizing Islamic ideology and terrorism, explained by Rafael Medoff in Breaking Christian News.
Examples of other schools across the country that inculcate Islamism and unfairness in the classroom include Bellaire High, in Houston, Texas, cited for extreme claims about Israel’s history; Carlmont High in Belmont, California, which invited Linda Sarsour and other anti-Semites to advocate BDS and tutor radical positions against Israel; and La Plata High, a Maryland public school that forces the children to learn about Islam, memorize the Five Pillars of Islam, and recite the Shahada, the Islamic oath of conversion. By contrast, there is a considerable lack of parallel information being taught about Christianity and Judaism because Islamists precedently announced their aversion and umbrage. This generation of children is being fed an egregiously biased version of an ideology that is incompatible with democracy and corrosive to our beliefs, morals, and ideals. Let us be clear: their ultimate purpose is the conversion of our children.
The Intense focus on Islamic subjects is carefully selected. For example, the status of women is profoundly misrepresented, the origin and purpose of their sharia-compliant clothing falsified and unsupported by scholarship. One author asserts that “Islam and the Quran created major improvements in the status of women,” when the truth is otherwise. The worst conditions for women are concealed, including the practices of genital mutilation and honor killings; accusations of adultery and stoning; their treatment as property and legal inferiority; endorsed beatings by their husbands; the fact that a woman may have no rights to show her face, walk alone, drive a vehicle or attend schools. International speakers and experts who offer genuine facts, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Anni Cyrus, Brigitte Gabriel, and Noni Darwish, are not among the invitees.
The textbooks elevate Islam over Judaism and Christianity, one being John Esposito’s Islam, the Straight Path, in which he declares that revelations given to the Jews and Christians were false. By contrast, he cites as truth, rather than belief, that God sent Muhammad as his final messenger and that God’s sacred language is Arabic. Students write about Moslem pilgrimages, including to Jerusalem as “your homeland,” when Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran. Many textbooks explain the rise and spread of Islam as being a successful acceptance of ideas, rather than the result of persecution and wantonly destructive conquerors who beheaded the non-believers, kidnapped the women for forced conversion and sexual slavery, and enriched themselves with appropriated bounty.The textbooks’ definition of jihad varies from the benign, the spiritual struggle within oneself against sin, to the traditional, the struggle against the enemies of Islam, but the goal is always the same – that of bringing the whole world under Islamic law, as explained by Bernard Lewis. Omitted is the account of hundreds of members of the Jewish Meccan tribe, the Quarayza, beheaded in 627 AD for rejecting Muhammad as Prophet, and the more than 109 verses in the Quran that decree violence and death to Jews and Christians, and the destruction of Israel.
Not found in textbooks is Israel’s history – not 1948, when five surrounding Arab states declared war on the new state of Israel and lost, or 1967, when the Arabs again attacked Israel and lost, leaving behind Arabs who stayed and accepted Israel citizenship and Arabs who fled and remained as stateless pawns, neglected by their brethren. Mislaid is the number of Jews – between 800,000 and one million – who fled for their lives from Islamic countries, and were absorbed by Israel. Missing are a timeline that would verify Israel’s attacks as retaliatory to the Arab leaders’ calls to annihilate Israel, and a correct definition of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as “religious,” as declared in the Quran, confirming that anti-Semitism is integral to the Moslem culture. The textbooks do not explain Islamic terrorism and radicalism as religious precepts of jihad, or the incitement to hate that permeates Palestinian and Islamic society. Palestinians extol terrorism, praise terrorists as heroes and deceased murderers as martyrs after whom streets, cultural events, and public squares are named, and for which parents are handsomely rewarded – with “humanitarian aid” funded by UN countries. Anti-Semitism is endemic to the Koran, and none of this is mentioned.
The correct definition of Islam, with its religious, legal, political, economic, social and military components is a 100% system of life, and the greatest threat to the world. There are organizations that work to free our schools of Islamic propaganda, but the programs of study have been bought and paid for by the Saudis, and theirs is the agenda. Hence, the lessons are plagued with poor scholarship, revisionism, and blatant anti-Israel bias, and supported by a corrupt media that fuels the skewed perspective.
It is now evident that we are at war, a war that is being waged in the classroom, with its weaponry aimed at our children’s minds. The diligent work, “Indoctrinating our Youth,” by CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, has resulted in the removal of some curriculum materials, but not all. Despite parental rights to know what their children are learning, teaching staff does not provide full disclosure. And, for every school that removes falsehoods, there are a hundred more that are continuing its use, now beginning at 3rd grade level. It is up to us to pursue what must be stopped for the sake of our survival as a republic. Go to www.schoolbias.org or call CAMERA, at 617-377-6911. To quote a popular phrase, “If you see something, say something.”
2)University of Chicago faculty tell Obama to move his ‘socially regressive’ Presidential library Washington Times
More than 100 members of the University of Chicago faculty are asking the Obama Foundation to move the proposed library honoring the 44th president to a new location because the plan as currently constituted is “socially regressive.”
The Obama Presidential Center will not provide the “promised development or economic benefits” to surrounding neighborhoods, the professors write and could cost more than $100 million in state funds.
“We are concerned that these are not the best ways to use public funds to invest in the future of Chicago,” the letter reads.
The library will also take over large sections of two historic public parks, Jackson Park and Midway Plaisance, and force the closure of a major South Side thoroughfare, Cornell Avenue. The professors argue it’s a “traffic-jam in the making.”
The Obama Center did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The letter has been circulating internally at the University of Chicago and was first made public by Blair Kamin, the architecture critic at the Chicago Tribune.
President Barack Obama lectured at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004.
The proposed Obama Center will sit on the shore of Lake Michigan, next to the Museum of Science and Industry and across the street from the University of Chicago campus.
The project is being financed with private donations but is expected to require as much as $100 million in infrastructure improvements to the surrounding area.
Economic development spurred by the library is limited, the professors write, because “there is no available adjacent land in which to start a new business, set up a new café or restaurant, [or] bring another cultural center to the neighborhood.” The only new jobs created by the library “will be staff to the Obama Center.”
It will also annex 21 acres from Jackson Park, which the professors point out is on the National Register of Historic Places and is “one of the most important urban parks in the nation.”
“At a time of increasing complexity and pressure in urban life, Chicago should be dedicated to preserving our public parks as open areas for relaxation and play for all its citizens,” the letter reads.
Library planners also intended to turn a portion of another public park, Midway Plaisance, into an above-ground parking garage. But following the release of the public letter, the Chicago Sun-Times reported the Obama Foundation had reached an agreement to move the garage below ground.
The University of Chicago faculty write that they would be “pleased to support the Obama Center if the plan genuinely promoted economic development in our neighborhoods and respected our precious public urban parks.”
But they urged the Obama Foundation “to explore alternative sites on the South Side that could be developed with more economic benefits, better public transportation, and less cost to taxpayers.”
© Copyright (c) 2018 News World Communications, Inc.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)The Ideal Candidate and Her Toxic Platform
Oprah would have to flee the very people — the Hollywood hypocrites — who are now her most enthusiastic supporters.
Oprah Winfrey may be the perfect Democratic presidential contender, but her Hollywood cheerleaders compromise her chances.
Will Sunday evening’s Golden Globes Awards show turn out to have been a pivotal moment that shaped the 2020 presidential race? The wagonload of conventional Democratic politicians already making plans to challenge President Donald Trump better hope not.
If Oprah Winfrey decides to let Hollywood liberals’ ecstatic reaction to her awards-show speech become the starting point for a presidential run, she would immediately vault to the top of a field that is currently composed of a mix of grizzled political veterans (Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren) and a bunch of untested but hopeful newcomers to the national stage (Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker). While all of those politicians can come up with a scenario by which a combination of luck, skill, and circumstances could lead to their winning the Democratic nomination, none have the universal name recognition, wealth, and likeability that the daytime TV star turned media mogul possesses.
It’s easy to imagine that, to match Trump, a Democratic party burdened by a deep bench of mediocrities will embrace their own media celebrity with no political experience. But there is one potentially serious problem to her candidacy that the unexpected launch of the Oprah movement revealed.
As much as Oprah benefited from the rapture she excited in an auditorium packed with Hollywood stars, the blatant hypocrisy and vapid virtue-signaling on display at the Golden Globes was a reminder of the Democratic party’s fatal weakness: It is adored by coastal elites but is clueless about the feelings and needs of the rest of the country. Oprah has proven she has the acting chops to feel the pain of ordinary Americans. Nonetheless, the spectacle of an entertainment industry condemning Trump while having enabled sexual predators for decades is an albatross that Winfrey will have to shed if she is to make the leap from theoretical front-runner to a candidate who can actually win the presidency.
While the overwhelming instinct of the chattering classes is to mock celebrities who aspire to government, that didn’t happen to Winfrey in the 24 hours following the Golden Globes.
After Donald Trump humiliated all the smart people who write about politics and dismissed his chances of becoming president, no one is going to make such a mistake with Winfrey. Nor should they. Like him, she lacks any normal qualifications for high office, let alone the presidency. But in our transformed political culture, the notion that this would prevent her from winning the Democratic nomination — even in a party that has spent the last two years mocking Trump for the same attribute — is absurd. If Oprah wants to run — and sources supposedly close to her claim she is interested — she must be acknowledged as the potential front-runner in a race where the only seemingly sure things are recycled and tired candidates of the past, such as Biden or Sanders.
It’s not merely Tinseltown hype to anoint her as the leader of a contest that hasn’t even really begun. Winfrey possesses many of the qualities that Democrats are likely to prioritize in 2020 as they seek to replicate Barack Obama’s successes while avoiding another disaster like Hillary Clinton.
Winfrey is a female and a minority candidate in a party where appealing to female and minority voters is key to mobilizing the liberal base that elected Obama twice but that failed to turn out in sufficient numbers for Clinton. While other 2020 Democratic wannabes might punch some of those same tickets, Winfrey appears to come as close as anyone to the elusive Obama formula.
She also possesses some of Trump’s strengths in that she is an outsider untainted by the public’s disgust with Washington and the political class. On top of that, and unlike Trump, she has built her media empire on being an unthreatening personality who is liked by virtually every demographic group. She also has nearly as much money as Trump. And though any Democrat can count on the support of the mainstream media that is already at war with the president, Oprah’s open flattery of the press in her speech is a reminder that she will be operating with another built-in advantage that will make it even more difficult for primary rivals to attack her.
It’s true that if she enters the political arena, Winfrey’s status as a universally beloved figure will be revoked. After decades as a purveyor of feel-good, personal-growth solutions to problems, she will become a target who will, like everyone else in politics, be held accountable for every foolish thing she has said and done. And despite her obvious intelligence and keen instincts for manipulating an audience, she will inevitably be exposed as a policy neophyte. It’s also possible that despite her seemingly unerring grip on America’s affections, her trademark touchy-feely persona would wear thin on the nation’s patience. On the other hand, the contrast to the angry and vindictive Trump might work in her favor; she has a vault full of TV appearances where we’ve seen her cry and reveal America’s inner torments. But we don’t know how she’ll react under the very different pressures that come with running for president.
But her real problem might be rooted in the origin of her still-theoretical candidacy: Hollywood.
The notion that the film and television world still has the moral standing to preach to the nation — let alone impose its presidential choice on us — is risible. That one of those prominent actors who were most vocal about Winfrey’s running was Meryl Streep —someone who was closely associated with serial sexual predator Harvey Weinstein while still claiming to know nothing about his deeds despite their being so well known that his reputation was openly mocked in public for years — speaks loudly to this problem.
It’s not just that the coastal elites Hollywood exemplifies are unpopular with flyover America. It’s that the entertainment industry is uniquely culpable for the sexual predation, leading to the #metoo movement, about which Winfrey was eloquently lecturing the nation Sunday night. The more closely Winfrey is associated with her fellow celebrity cheerleaders, the less likely that she will transcend the Democratic party’s inherent limitations.
Trump has already shown that voters aren’t looking for the perfect political résumé in a president, so Winfrey won’t need to prove that a successful entertainer and media executive can run the country. Rather, her challenge will be that she will have to flee the embrace of the very people who are now doing so much to hype the Oprah-for-president bandwagon. Like every other Democrat, she has to understand that for all of the glitz and glamour of their donors, a group wearing designer black gowns and tuxedos has no clue about the public’s concerns. Hollywood isn’t just a problem for Democrats; it’s a toxic waste dump that reminds voters of everything they hate about their party. How Winfrey or any Democrat navigates that conundrum will go a long way toward answering the question about whether their party can take advantage of Trump’s historically low favorability ratings in the next presidential contest.
— Jonathan S. Tobin is the editor in chief of JNS.org and a contributor to National Review Online.
No comments:
Post a Comment