Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Oakland Schools Plan Teach-ins On Iraq Crisis
Oakland Schools to Launch Teach-ins on the Iraq Crisis on January 14, 2003
Oakland Schools to Launch Teach-ins on the Iraq Crisis on January 14, 2003
Media Contact: Jonah Zern, Coordinator, Peace and Justice Caucus, Oakland Education Association 510.654.8613
Speaker and Resource Suggestions: Mary Prophet at 510.527.1222 or mlprophet [at] earthlink.net, (people of color especially encouraged)
Schedule a Teach-in at Your School: Judi Hirsch at 510.653.0776 or judih [at] ousd.k12.ca.us (Oakland Schools will be given priority, but any school may ask to receive assistance and speakers)
The Oakland Unified School District will launch teach-ins on the Iraq Crisis on Tuesday, January 14. The teach-ins, being organized by the Peace and Justice Caucus of the Oakland Education Association will be in honor Martin Luther King’s birthday and will come just a few days before the next major anti-war march in San Francisco on Saturday, January 18.
The Caucus is hoping to hold kickoff events at most high school and middle school sites and many elementary schools. We are working to provide age appropriate material. Here are some of the issues we plan on addressing through the teach-in; Martin Luther King Jr.'s Dream for Global Civil Rights and Global Unity; War Spending vs. Social Spending; Military in Our Schools through the “No Child Left Behind Act”; Understanding Propaganda/ Media Literacy; Understanding Islam and Arab People, Stopping Attacks on these Communities; Know Your Rights and Defending Civil Liberties; Ways to Truly Make Our Community Safer; Understanding the "Crisis" in the Context of US History and Foreign Policy.
The San Francisco School Board also unanimously passed a resolution to hold teach-ins on Iraq and will also be kicking theirs off sometime in January.
Enclosed: Text of Oakland School Board Resolution
Asian Week Article from December 12, 2002
Oakland Tribune Article from November 16, 2002
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A DAY OF PUBLIC EDUCATION
ON WAR AGAINST IRAQ
Cosponsored by Dan Siegel, Board Member and Sheila Quintana, President of the Oakland Education Association, Passed Unanimously on November 14, 2002
WHEREAS, the United States government states that it is preparing to initiate a war against the nation of Iraq; and
WHEREAS, an attack on Iraq by the United States would have enormous human, financial and political consequences in the United States and the world community; and
WHEREAS, it is essential that the people of the United States be well-informed on the causes and consequences of military action by their government,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Education of the
Oakland Unified School District decrees that there shall be citywide public education at the school level concerning the background of the current crisis concerning Iraq, the options available to the United States government for attempting to resolve that crisis, and the likely consequences of a United States military attack on Iraq;
FURTHER, that the District's Division of Student Achievement shall work with the Oakland Education Association to develop a list of available resources and lessons that are appropriate for the classroom;
FURTHER, that schools may invite parents and other members of the public to participate in the educational programs; and
FURTHER, that no student or teacher who objects to participation in such educational programs shall be required to do so.
Bay Area Schools Plan Teach-ins about War
By Ji Hyun Lim | AsianWeek Staff Writer, Asian Week, Thursday, December 12, 2002
In an attempt to educate K-12 students in the Bay Area about the possibility of a war with Iraq, both the Oakland and San Francisco Unified School Districts unanimously passed resolutions to conduct teach-ins regarding the crisis in the Middle East.
Modeled after the 1960s Vietnam anti-war demonstrations, the intention of these teach-ins is to educate students about the causes and consequences of war, while making sure the information presented is grade-appropriate. Although the school districts will recommend a curriculum for instructors, the resolutions call for each school district to either integrate the subject matter in a discussion or provide speakers for older students.
Dan Siegel, an Oakland School Board member and former anti-Vietnam War activist, authored the Oakland resolution in late October and it passed in November. Oakland districts tentatively plan to conduct these teach-ins in mid-January, to coincide with Martin Luther King’s birthday.
Oakland plans to provide a program for some 50,000 students that will not be mandatory. Siegel points out that educating students from K-12 is important because the war has and will have significant impact on their lives. Because billions of dollars spent on the military budget are siphoning resources from less affluent communities like Oakland, Siegel points out that government policies will directly affect funding for health care, education and social services.
“If our government starts bombing Iraq, there can easily be tens of thousands of casualties as American citizens,” Siegel comments. “U.S. troops who will disproportionately represent poor communities like Oakland and working class, poor people and people of color will end up in the military.”
School board members and teachers agree that educating students should be a priority. Some argue that many students may not understand the scope of the crisis in the Middle East and a dialogue would provide clarity on the subject.
Teachers like Jonah Zern point out that such dialogue is often muffled by political rhetoric and media sensationalism about “terrorist nations.”
“[Students] hear about war and it’s essential that we help them understand it and stop them from developing feelings of hatred,” Zern said. “The main message is to stop prejudice and hatred.”
During a preliminary meeting to discuss the curriculum for Oakland schools, four committee members discussed the need to highlight the ramifications of war, terrorism, community safety, global unity, racial profiling and the threat to civil liberties.
Educators emphasized that students should be educated about U.S. relations with foreign countries and the history of the warring states. Board members hope to encourage students to discuss deeper issues of economics and freedom, security and safety and the conflicts that may occur as a result of a counter attack.
“We hope that our children can build a better future — one that is based on a common understanding and a common humanity rather than a winner take all mentality,” Zern explained.
Siegel points out that discussion with youth about war will be similar to discussion after the Sept. 11 attacks. However, the partially guided lesson plan will allow each school the flexibility to bring in both anti-war and pro-government policy speakers at the school’s discretion. Teachers are advised to present the materials in a way that won’t shock or upset younger children and provide a balanced and informative symposium of learning.
Siegel said: “We have to present a program that educates and allows the students and others to participate and make up their own minds. We’re not trying to indoctrinate or politicize people. We’re trying to educate them.”
The intent of the resolution is to foster discussion and allow students to understand democracy and the importance of their political voice, Zern said. Board members will encourage teachers to lead students in a more lengthy conversation about poverty, systems of violence and the funding of the military/industrial complex.
San Francisco School District is also planning a teach-in for students.
Board members Eric Mar and Mark Sanchez drafted a similar measure for SFUSD shortly after the Oakland School Board passed its resolution. Inspired by community and grassroots groups such as International ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), Not in Our Name, Asian Pacific Islander Coalition Against the War and United for Peace/Global Exchange, San Francisco Board members proposed a more detailed agenda.
The San Francisco resolution tackles privacy issues and draft counseling. The proposal states that parents and students should understand their rights to privacy. In the resolution, the board argues that schools should not be required to provide names and addresses to military recruiters.
The resolution states that in accordance with the ‘opt out’ clause of the No Child Left Behind Act, SFUSD will comply with each parental request for non-release of student information and provide information about draft counseling resources.
San Francisco’s teach-ins are slated to begin in January. In the meantime, School Board members are continuing to meet regularly to discuss the curriculum. Both districts hope other districts will embark on similar measures to educate students.
Said Zern: “The major problem about U.S. schools is that they’re too removed from engaging student in the world around them. This is just one instance in how teachers should be engaging their students to see how history is not just something of the past but it’s something they create.”
Reach Ji Hyun Lim at jlim [at] asianweek.com
Anti-war school board plans teach-ins
By Alex Katz, STAFF WRITER, Printed Front Page, Oakland Tribune,
OAKLAND -- Students in kindergarten through 12th grade will learn about the proposed war in Iraq at 1960s-style "teach-ins," a vocally anti-war school board decided Wednesday.
School board member Dan Siegel proposed the resolution encouraging schools to set aside time to teach about the planned conflict to rid Iraq of what President Bush calls "weapons of mass destruction."
"I think the pending war with Iraq is a matter that has the most serious consequences for people in this country," Siegel said, citing the inevitable deaths of Iraqi civilians and U.S. military personnel, as well as the allocation of resources away from schools and toward war.
The teach-ins will be voluntary and open to parents. Each school site will determine when, or if, the events will happen.
Despite vocal opposition to an Iraq war expressed at school board meetings by board members, schools Superintendent Dennis Chaconas, teachers and students, Siegel said information will be presented in an impartial manner by teachers of all political stripes.
"We ask teachers to do that all the time," said Siegel, who led anti-Vietnam War protests as student body president at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1969. "We have enough integrity and respect for the students to provide them the information and let them make up their own minds."
Fifth-graders from Sequoia Elementary School spoke in favor of the teach-in at Wednesday's board meeting and read letters they had written to Bush opposing an Iraq war.
"When you go to war, you are setting a bad example for all the kids in the U.S.A.," one letter stated. "Wars and fights are not right, and bombing beautiful things is not right either."
Teacher Betty Olson-Jones said the students came up with the idea on their own.
The students invited Bush to come to a weekly class at Sequoia that teaches youngsters how to resolve problems without fighting.
"It's not fair for other people (if) they get killed, because they haven't done anything to George Bush," said student Jennifer, whose parents did not want her last name published.
Bush "is only mad at one person (Iraqi President Saddam Hussein)," Jennifer said. "We think (Bush) should come to our class on Wednesday to learn some (conflict resolution) skills."
The fifth-graders showed they understood that the United States once supported Iraq militarily.
"We think it's strange to go to war with a country you taught war to," student Emma Styles-Swaim said. "We think it's strange because, well, it's weird."
A White House spokesperson was not available to comment Thursday. One official said the students could probably expect some kind of response from the White House.
School board member Bruce Kariya voiced concern about exposing children below fourth grade to "the ravages of war."
Other board members disagreed. As school board member Greg Hodge put it, Iraqi children below the fourth grade will lose their lives in any U.S. attack, so why shouldn't children here at least know about it?
"At the end of the day, it's not going to be Bush and it's not going to be (Vice President Dick) Cheney going off to war," board member Jason Hodge said. "They make the decision and then send our young people to war."
Media Contact: Jonah Zern, Coordinator, Peace and Justice Caucus, Oakland Education Association 510.654.8613
Speaker and Resource Suggestions: Mary Prophet at 510.527.1222 or mlprophet [at] earthlink.net, (people of color especially encouraged)
Schedule a Teach-in at Your School: Judi Hirsch at 510.653.0776 or judih [at] ousd.k12.ca.us (Oakland Schools will be given priority, but any school may ask to receive assistance and speakers)
The Oakland Unified School District will launch teach-ins on the Iraq Crisis on Tuesday, January 14. The teach-ins, being organized by the Peace and Justice Caucus of the Oakland Education Association will be in honor Martin Luther King’s birthday and will come just a few days before the next major anti-war march in San Francisco on Saturday, January 18.
The Caucus is hoping to hold kickoff events at most high school and middle school sites and many elementary schools. We are working to provide age appropriate material. Here are some of the issues we plan on addressing through the teach-in; Martin Luther King Jr.'s Dream for Global Civil Rights and Global Unity; War Spending vs. Social Spending; Military in Our Schools through the “No Child Left Behind Act”; Understanding Propaganda/ Media Literacy; Understanding Islam and Arab People, Stopping Attacks on these Communities; Know Your Rights and Defending Civil Liberties; Ways to Truly Make Our Community Safer; Understanding the "Crisis" in the Context of US History and Foreign Policy.
The San Francisco School Board also unanimously passed a resolution to hold teach-ins on Iraq and will also be kicking theirs off sometime in January.
Enclosed: Text of Oakland School Board Resolution
Asian Week Article from December 12, 2002
Oakland Tribune Article from November 16, 2002
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A DAY OF PUBLIC EDUCATION
ON WAR AGAINST IRAQ
Cosponsored by Dan Siegel, Board Member and Sheila Quintana, President of the Oakland Education Association, Passed Unanimously on November 14, 2002
WHEREAS, the United States government states that it is preparing to initiate a war against the nation of Iraq; and
WHEREAS, an attack on Iraq by the United States would have enormous human, financial and political consequences in the United States and the world community; and
WHEREAS, it is essential that the people of the United States be well-informed on the causes and consequences of military action by their government,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Education of the
Oakland Unified School District decrees that there shall be citywide public education at the school level concerning the background of the current crisis concerning Iraq, the options available to the United States government for attempting to resolve that crisis, and the likely consequences of a United States military attack on Iraq;
FURTHER, that the District's Division of Student Achievement shall work with the Oakland Education Association to develop a list of available resources and lessons that are appropriate for the classroom;
FURTHER, that schools may invite parents and other members of the public to participate in the educational programs; and
FURTHER, that no student or teacher who objects to participation in such educational programs shall be required to do so.
Bay Area Schools Plan Teach-ins about War
By Ji Hyun Lim | AsianWeek Staff Writer, Asian Week, Thursday, December 12, 2002
In an attempt to educate K-12 students in the Bay Area about the possibility of a war with Iraq, both the Oakland and San Francisco Unified School Districts unanimously passed resolutions to conduct teach-ins regarding the crisis in the Middle East.
Modeled after the 1960s Vietnam anti-war demonstrations, the intention of these teach-ins is to educate students about the causes and consequences of war, while making sure the information presented is grade-appropriate. Although the school districts will recommend a curriculum for instructors, the resolutions call for each school district to either integrate the subject matter in a discussion or provide speakers for older students.
Dan Siegel, an Oakland School Board member and former anti-Vietnam War activist, authored the Oakland resolution in late October and it passed in November. Oakland districts tentatively plan to conduct these teach-ins in mid-January, to coincide with Martin Luther King’s birthday.
Oakland plans to provide a program for some 50,000 students that will not be mandatory. Siegel points out that educating students from K-12 is important because the war has and will have significant impact on their lives. Because billions of dollars spent on the military budget are siphoning resources from less affluent communities like Oakland, Siegel points out that government policies will directly affect funding for health care, education and social services.
“If our government starts bombing Iraq, there can easily be tens of thousands of casualties as American citizens,” Siegel comments. “U.S. troops who will disproportionately represent poor communities like Oakland and working class, poor people and people of color will end up in the military.”
School board members and teachers agree that educating students should be a priority. Some argue that many students may not understand the scope of the crisis in the Middle East and a dialogue would provide clarity on the subject.
Teachers like Jonah Zern point out that such dialogue is often muffled by political rhetoric and media sensationalism about “terrorist nations.”
“[Students] hear about war and it’s essential that we help them understand it and stop them from developing feelings of hatred,” Zern said. “The main message is to stop prejudice and hatred.”
During a preliminary meeting to discuss the curriculum for Oakland schools, four committee members discussed the need to highlight the ramifications of war, terrorism, community safety, global unity, racial profiling and the threat to civil liberties.
Educators emphasized that students should be educated about U.S. relations with foreign countries and the history of the warring states. Board members hope to encourage students to discuss deeper issues of economics and freedom, security and safety and the conflicts that may occur as a result of a counter attack.
“We hope that our children can build a better future — one that is based on a common understanding and a common humanity rather than a winner take all mentality,” Zern explained.
Siegel points out that discussion with youth about war will be similar to discussion after the Sept. 11 attacks. However, the partially guided lesson plan will allow each school the flexibility to bring in both anti-war and pro-government policy speakers at the school’s discretion. Teachers are advised to present the materials in a way that won’t shock or upset younger children and provide a balanced and informative symposium of learning.
Siegel said: “We have to present a program that educates and allows the students and others to participate and make up their own minds. We’re not trying to indoctrinate or politicize people. We’re trying to educate them.”
The intent of the resolution is to foster discussion and allow students to understand democracy and the importance of their political voice, Zern said. Board members will encourage teachers to lead students in a more lengthy conversation about poverty, systems of violence and the funding of the military/industrial complex.
San Francisco School District is also planning a teach-in for students.
Board members Eric Mar and Mark Sanchez drafted a similar measure for SFUSD shortly after the Oakland School Board passed its resolution. Inspired by community and grassroots groups such as International ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), Not in Our Name, Asian Pacific Islander Coalition Against the War and United for Peace/Global Exchange, San Francisco Board members proposed a more detailed agenda.
The San Francisco resolution tackles privacy issues and draft counseling. The proposal states that parents and students should understand their rights to privacy. In the resolution, the board argues that schools should not be required to provide names and addresses to military recruiters.
The resolution states that in accordance with the ‘opt out’ clause of the No Child Left Behind Act, SFUSD will comply with each parental request for non-release of student information and provide information about draft counseling resources.
San Francisco’s teach-ins are slated to begin in January. In the meantime, School Board members are continuing to meet regularly to discuss the curriculum. Both districts hope other districts will embark on similar measures to educate students.
Said Zern: “The major problem about U.S. schools is that they’re too removed from engaging student in the world around them. This is just one instance in how teachers should be engaging their students to see how history is not just something of the past but it’s something they create.”
Reach Ji Hyun Lim at jlim [at] asianweek.com
Anti-war school board plans teach-ins
By Alex Katz, STAFF WRITER, Printed Front Page, Oakland Tribune,
OAKLAND -- Students in kindergarten through 12th grade will learn about the proposed war in Iraq at 1960s-style "teach-ins," a vocally anti-war school board decided Wednesday.
School board member Dan Siegel proposed the resolution encouraging schools to set aside time to teach about the planned conflict to rid Iraq of what President Bush calls "weapons of mass destruction."
"I think the pending war with Iraq is a matter that has the most serious consequences for people in this country," Siegel said, citing the inevitable deaths of Iraqi civilians and U.S. military personnel, as well as the allocation of resources away from schools and toward war.
The teach-ins will be voluntary and open to parents. Each school site will determine when, or if, the events will happen.
Despite vocal opposition to an Iraq war expressed at school board meetings by board members, schools Superintendent Dennis Chaconas, teachers and students, Siegel said information will be presented in an impartial manner by teachers of all political stripes.
"We ask teachers to do that all the time," said Siegel, who led anti-Vietnam War protests as student body president at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1969. "We have enough integrity and respect for the students to provide them the information and let them make up their own minds."
Fifth-graders from Sequoia Elementary School spoke in favor of the teach-in at Wednesday's board meeting and read letters they had written to Bush opposing an Iraq war.
"When you go to war, you are setting a bad example for all the kids in the U.S.A.," one letter stated. "Wars and fights are not right, and bombing beautiful things is not right either."
Teacher Betty Olson-Jones said the students came up with the idea on their own.
The students invited Bush to come to a weekly class at Sequoia that teaches youngsters how to resolve problems without fighting.
"It's not fair for other people (if) they get killed, because they haven't done anything to George Bush," said student Jennifer, whose parents did not want her last name published.
Bush "is only mad at one person (Iraqi President Saddam Hussein)," Jennifer said. "We think (Bush) should come to our class on Wednesday to learn some (conflict resolution) skills."
The fifth-graders showed they understood that the United States once supported Iraq militarily.
"We think it's strange to go to war with a country you taught war to," student Emma Styles-Swaim said. "We think it's strange because, well, it's weird."
A White House spokesperson was not available to comment Thursday. One official said the students could probably expect some kind of response from the White House.
School board member Bruce Kariya voiced concern about exposing children below fourth grade to "the ravages of war."
Other board members disagreed. As school board member Greg Hodge put it, Iraqi children below the fourth grade will lose their lives in any U.S. attack, so why shouldn't children here at least know about it?
"At the end of the day, it's not going to be Bush and it's not going to be (Vice President Dick) Cheney going off to war," board member Jason Hodge said. "They make the decision and then send our young people to war."
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
They have unique and important experience - kids take them seriously because they've BEEN there, unlike many regular peace activists.
Kids learn best from people they are personally inspired by (which is often people of the same race or gender and/or something they respect). People who have been soldiers would be an important addition besides GX and peace groups.
Kids learn best from people they are personally inspired by (which is often people of the same race or gender and/or something they respect). People who have been soldiers would be an important addition besides GX and peace groups.
What nonsense, Oakland kids need reading, writing and arithmetic. Leave the politics’ out of the curriculum along with Ebonics.
Oakland kids DO need to learn about history and current events. I gather the above poster is suggesting we should never teach them why Nazism is wrong, if they are only to learn to read, write and multiply like robots .....
They need to learn these things too, but let's not limit them to the very least we can manage.
They need to learn these things too, but let's not limit them to the very least we can manage.
Students need to learn about these things. If they don't, they only start believing what mommy and daddy teach them at home, why do you think mid. easterns hate America, because mommy and daddy said so. If we have these types of teachings, it gets students the oportunity to have different views. The middle east is full of brainwashed people from the young ages of 5 learning how to shoot guns and kill at the age of 12, all because mommy and daddy told them what was what. So students should continue to learn about what is going on in this world.
It looks like no one even *asked* vets for peace . . . possibly the national and the local person aren't in sync, but so far that's the answer I got about why they aren't involved.
Thanks answer, gx, united for peace, etc. - vets for peace has been in the classroom many years doing this, so I hope this is a mix-up.
Thanks answer, gx, united for peace, etc. - vets for peace has been in the classroom many years doing this, so I hope this is a mix-up.
Whether or not I agree with the war, I think it's a horrific use of schools to push one political agenda. Kids are extremely vulnerable to being steered in whatever direction their teachers herd them. They are not going to learn anything about the other side of the issue, anything about the debate, they will just be pressured to parrot slogans with no knowledge of the underlying issues, which whether you like it or not, are more complex than the "Bush is evil and war is never necessary" line they will be fed. There will be no real communication of the other side. You'll probably just say that the media is doing that...well, most kids don't watch Bill O Reilly or read the Washington Post.
Public schools should not be used as incubators for political activism. If you can do this, then why shouldn't right wing nuts use schools to have "teach-ins" about how Muslims are evil and violent and we should go to war tomorrow. Don't think that idea isn't already on some right-wing Christian message boards .
This is not even about the specific issue, it's about the technique of using teachers to push political propaganda. Are you sure all the teachers want to do this, or are you forcing some (who may fear for their jobs if they don't mouth the message) to take part? Or do they even matter to you if they have a different viewpoint?
And the person who made the Nazi reference, read your history. This type of thing is PRECISELY what the Nazis did, they had 'teach-ins' in public schools about the Party, about the Jews, about the future Reich. And it was always approved by the school boards, so it must have been all right.
Do I equate your anti-war message with the Nazi message? Of course not, but your tactic is identical, and wrong for the same reason...administration-suported political activism has no place in public schools. It is essentialy using the power of the schools to establish a 'correct' political view for students. Do you not see this as problematic? Will you support a redneck, Christian-dominated school board in Idaho when they do the same thing to sow hatred or support a war you feel is unjust? I think not.
Whatever happened to common sense? Protest all you want, but keep it out of the classroom.
Public schools should not be used as incubators for political activism. If you can do this, then why shouldn't right wing nuts use schools to have "teach-ins" about how Muslims are evil and violent and we should go to war tomorrow. Don't think that idea isn't already on some right-wing Christian message boards .
This is not even about the specific issue, it's about the technique of using teachers to push political propaganda. Are you sure all the teachers want to do this, or are you forcing some (who may fear for their jobs if they don't mouth the message) to take part? Or do they even matter to you if they have a different viewpoint?
And the person who made the Nazi reference, read your history. This type of thing is PRECISELY what the Nazis did, they had 'teach-ins' in public schools about the Party, about the Jews, about the future Reich. And it was always approved by the school boards, so it must have been all right.
Do I equate your anti-war message with the Nazi message? Of course not, but your tactic is identical, and wrong for the same reason...administration-suported political activism has no place in public schools. It is essentialy using the power of the schools to establish a 'correct' political view for students. Do you not see this as problematic? Will you support a redneck, Christian-dominated school board in Idaho when they do the same thing to sow hatred or support a war you feel is unjust? I think not.
Whatever happened to common sense? Protest all you want, but keep it out of the classroom.
One question....how is it legal to "teach , discuss, and better educate children on Islam when we don't allow our schools to do the same with Christianity?
Why is it that most of this "curriculum" is anti-American. Most anti-war protest are organized by groups that are communist or other countries that are Anti-American.
Why do they only teach one side of the issue. I even noticed some of the "classes" are Anti-military. The military gave them the Right for Free Speech. It is the blood of this nations soldiers that has given this country the freedoms it has. AND it is the current military force that keeps our freedoms entact.
Teach that in your class rooms, have teach-ins about that.
If these people spent half the time bringing a little support to this country instead of taking away from it....we would be much better off.
I have served 14 yrs in the United States military to protect and to serve this country. Ten of those years I was active duty as an Intelligece Analyst. These anti-war people don't have a clue of what is out there and what is against us. I thought 9/11would've have opened their eyes, but I guess they have their own agenda.
Why do they only teach one side of the issue. I even noticed some of the "classes" are Anti-military. The military gave them the Right for Free Speech. It is the blood of this nations soldiers that has given this country the freedoms it has. AND it is the current military force that keeps our freedoms entact.
Teach that in your class rooms, have teach-ins about that.
If these people spent half the time bringing a little support to this country instead of taking away from it....we would be much better off.
I have served 14 yrs in the United States military to protect and to serve this country. Ten of those years I was active duty as an Intelligece Analyst. These anti-war people don't have a clue of what is out there and what is against us. I thought 9/11would've have opened their eyes, but I guess they have their own agenda.
This is so wrong in so many ways.
First, public school teachers can't even teach children to read, do basic math, or speak proper English. (Why do you think anyone who can afford it sends their kids to private schools?) Now we are supposed to believe they can effectively teach controversial subjects?
Secondly, even if they could teach kids about foreign policy and world affairs effectively, this topic is still not appropriate for school. These political issues should be discussed at home, not in schools, where you are almost guaranteed to offend someone.
Third, this being Oakland, the members of the local education association are far-left wing extremists who shouldn't be trusted to teach kids about anything, much less foreign policy, about which they are completely clueless. Intellectually, most of these teachers are stuck in the 1960s, when the idea of using brutality and oppression to keep your "inferiors" in line (a la Saddam Hussein) was very popular. I'll bet the vast majority of these baby-boomer teachers spent the 60s arguing that the American system of freedom and democracy was wrong, and what we needed was a little good old-fashioned head knocking (a la the Viet Cong, Khmer Rouge, Soviets, etc.) to keep everyone in line.
Fourth, this is going to lead to an extremely ignorant, intellectually backward group of schoolkids. Notice the quotes from the fifth graders stating erroneously that this is just something between Bush and Saddam, that attacking Iraq is only going to hurt people, etc. I'll bet the teachers don't tell them anything about Saddam's systematic rape of the wives of Iraqis who disagree with him, or about his torture and/or rape of small children (forcing their parents to watch) as a means of intimidating people and suppressing dissent, or about his starting two major wars, or about his mass murder of his own citizens with poison gas. I bet they don't teach them about the trade-offs involved. (How many people will be killed in this war? How many people will be killed by a Saddam with nukes if we do nothing? Etc.)
Last but not least, notice the racism of the OEA in their statement that "people of color" are "especially encouraged" to apply for the teaching slots. In other words, whites need not apply. This is much like the racist country clubs and men's clubs in the south of the past. Of course, they didn't discriminate against minorities; they just "especially encouraged" whites to join. Shameful.
Luckily, polls show that about two-thirds of Americans support war against Iraq, so these people only represent the most extreme one-third of our country.
First, public school teachers can't even teach children to read, do basic math, or speak proper English. (Why do you think anyone who can afford it sends their kids to private schools?) Now we are supposed to believe they can effectively teach controversial subjects?
Secondly, even if they could teach kids about foreign policy and world affairs effectively, this topic is still not appropriate for school. These political issues should be discussed at home, not in schools, where you are almost guaranteed to offend someone.
Third, this being Oakland, the members of the local education association are far-left wing extremists who shouldn't be trusted to teach kids about anything, much less foreign policy, about which they are completely clueless. Intellectually, most of these teachers are stuck in the 1960s, when the idea of using brutality and oppression to keep your "inferiors" in line (a la Saddam Hussein) was very popular. I'll bet the vast majority of these baby-boomer teachers spent the 60s arguing that the American system of freedom and democracy was wrong, and what we needed was a little good old-fashioned head knocking (a la the Viet Cong, Khmer Rouge, Soviets, etc.) to keep everyone in line.
Fourth, this is going to lead to an extremely ignorant, intellectually backward group of schoolkids. Notice the quotes from the fifth graders stating erroneously that this is just something between Bush and Saddam, that attacking Iraq is only going to hurt people, etc. I'll bet the teachers don't tell them anything about Saddam's systematic rape of the wives of Iraqis who disagree with him, or about his torture and/or rape of small children (forcing their parents to watch) as a means of intimidating people and suppressing dissent, or about his starting two major wars, or about his mass murder of his own citizens with poison gas. I bet they don't teach them about the trade-offs involved. (How many people will be killed in this war? How many people will be killed by a Saddam with nukes if we do nothing? Etc.)
Last but not least, notice the racism of the OEA in their statement that "people of color" are "especially encouraged" to apply for the teaching slots. In other words, whites need not apply. This is much like the racist country clubs and men's clubs in the south of the past. Of course, they didn't discriminate against minorities; they just "especially encouraged" whites to join. Shameful.
Luckily, polls show that about two-thirds of Americans support war against Iraq, so these people only represent the most extreme one-third of our country.
Sorry Jack, but you're wrong about the stats on support for war. Please start reading other news sources than you are - CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC are all financially invested in a war and they would love to have you buying into their lies. You're smarter than that.
Published on Tuesday, December 17, 2002 by the Los Angeles Times
Most Unconvinced on Iraq War
Two-thirds believe Bush has failed to make the case an attack would be justified
by Maura Reynolds
WASHINGTON -- Despite a concerted effort by the Bush administration, more than two-thirds of Americans believe the president has failed to make the case that a war with Iraq is justified, according to a Los Angeles Times poll.
The overwhelming majority of respondents -- 90% -- said they do not doubt that Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction. But in the absence of new evidence from U.N. inspectors, 72% of respondents, including 60% of Republicans, said the president has not provided enough evidence to justify starting a war with Iraq.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1217-03.htm
Published on Tuesday, December 17, 2002 by the Los Angeles Times
Most Unconvinced on Iraq War
Two-thirds believe Bush has failed to make the case an attack would be justified
by Maura Reynolds
WASHINGTON -- Despite a concerted effort by the Bush administration, more than two-thirds of Americans believe the president has failed to make the case that a war with Iraq is justified, according to a Los Angeles Times poll.
The overwhelming majority of respondents -- 90% -- said they do not doubt that Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction. But in the absence of new evidence from U.N. inspectors, 72% of respondents, including 60% of Republicans, said the president has not provided enough evidence to justify starting a war with Iraq.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1217-03.htm
Only a third of the colonists supported the American revolution.
Jack, David, and Fred
First, please tell me what you know about the Oakland City School's budget situation. If you feel we aren't covering the basics, what are you doing about it? Trying to say we can't teach peace because we haven't covered the math just doesn't carry.
Children don't need to be lied to also. Their textbooks are already FILLED WITH LIES!! Have you even read the textbooks?? Why would you support that your children learn one type of lie, but not about PEACE? It's time that kids get to see what's on the other side, for once, instead of having to WAKE UP to the facts of what our country is engaged in when it may already be too late.
And at the rate we're going now, they'll be lucky to see adulthood without a nuclear war.
First, please tell me what you know about the Oakland City School's budget situation. If you feel we aren't covering the basics, what are you doing about it? Trying to say we can't teach peace because we haven't covered the math just doesn't carry.
Children don't need to be lied to also. Their textbooks are already FILLED WITH LIES!! Have you even read the textbooks?? Why would you support that your children learn one type of lie, but not about PEACE? It's time that kids get to see what's on the other side, for once, instead of having to WAKE UP to the facts of what our country is engaged in when it may already be too late.
And at the rate we're going now, they'll be lucky to see adulthood without a nuclear war.
"Two-thirds believe Bush has failed to make the case an attack would be justified"
Yeah right, when was this poll taken? 14 months ago? Not buying it. Go sell it somewhere else.
Yeah right, when was this poll taken? 14 months ago? Not buying it. Go sell it somewhere else.
"If you feel we aren't covering the basics, what are you doing about it?"
Best thing you can do for your kids is to home school if you are able or send them to private school. It's the only way I've found to completely avoid the leftist garbage and lies as their attempt to re-write history to fit their own political agenda. Not only will they learn more, they'll learn the truth, something that will never happen as long as people like "history buff" and "bov" have anything to do with the public school curriculum.
Best thing you can do for your kids is to home school if you are able or send them to private school. It's the only way I've found to completely avoid the leftist garbage and lies as their attempt to re-write history to fit their own political agenda. Not only will they learn more, they'll learn the truth, something that will never happen as long as people like "history buff" and "bov" have anything to do with the public school curriculum.
Surely you are not implying that what I said about the American revolution was untrue, are you? because, if you are, I'd like to see some proof.
This pretty much says it all about the political agenda of those in charge of our public education system. It's particularly ironic in light of the poor scores that Oakland is famous for.
If the education establishment keeps fighting against the vouchers that the disadvantaged want, look for more people to flee to home schooling.
If the education establishment keeps fighting against the vouchers that the disadvantaged want, look for more people to flee to home schooling.
"Surely you are not implying that what I said about the American revolution was untrue, are you?"
How about asking "What do you mean by that?" rather than guessing.
How about asking "What do you mean by that?" rather than guessing.
"They teach crap like the so-called "virtues" of nationalism, and a grotesquely distorted version of history."
Another reason I DON'T want my kids around anyone who believes the way history buff (nessie) does. Anyone who is foolish enough to believe that love of country is not virtuous is not someone I don't want to be near children at all. ANY children. I've seen nessie's version of history and events, and I prefer my kids to know the truth. Truth and anarchy/leftism are diametrically opposed. They cannot exist in harmony in the same universe. Anyone who does not recognize that public schools and the NEA are leftist/socialist/communists should not be premitted to teach anyone at all. I haven't any reason to believe that the teacher of the advanced science class knew which way was east either, except to point out it was the direction of the home of the greatest country to have ever existed, the mecca of humanity, the pinacle of mans existance here on Earth: the Soviet Union.
Home school or private school, preferably with a Christian based curriculum. It'll be the best investment you ever made towards helping your own kids obtain a formal education.
Another reason I DON'T want my kids around anyone who believes the way history buff (nessie) does. Anyone who is foolish enough to believe that love of country is not virtuous is not someone I don't want to be near children at all. ANY children. I've seen nessie's version of history and events, and I prefer my kids to know the truth. Truth and anarchy/leftism are diametrically opposed. They cannot exist in harmony in the same universe. Anyone who does not recognize that public schools and the NEA are leftist/socialist/communists should not be premitted to teach anyone at all. I haven't any reason to believe that the teacher of the advanced science class knew which way was east either, except to point out it was the direction of the home of the greatest country to have ever existed, the mecca of humanity, the pinacle of mans existance here on Earth: the Soviet Union.
Home school or private school, preferably with a Christian based curriculum. It'll be the best investment you ever made towards helping your own kids obtain a formal education.
My first political debate was against a teacher who was trying to push political opinions on our class. I argued AGAINST the side I actually believed in (i.e., I agreed with the teacher's opinion). I was just offended that the teacher was abusing her position.
I'd add, most of the same arguments used against school prayer could apply in the case. As the antiwar opinion is probably in the majority here, those with differing opinions will feel they are unable to speak. Those without opinions will probably follow the group. In that light, I think this whole situation is despicable and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves (but, of course, they are shameless and completely self righteous..).
Maybe next time there is a meeting they could work on improving test scores. People will learn to think for themselves once they have attained the level of education required to read..........
I'd add, most of the same arguments used against school prayer could apply in the case. As the antiwar opinion is probably in the majority here, those with differing opinions will feel they are unable to speak. Those without opinions will probably follow the group. In that light, I think this whole situation is despicable and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves (but, of course, they are shameless and completely self righteous..).
Maybe next time there is a meeting they could work on improving test scores. People will learn to think for themselves once they have attained the level of education required to read..........
<This pretty much says it all about the political agenda of those in charge of our public education system. It's particularly ironic in light of the poor scores that Oakland is famous for.>
Poor the scores may be, but citing a report by a lunatic right wing think tank says even more about your own political agenda. Do you really want us to believe that the peace movement is "biased" but that the authors of this study are not?
The best way to empower students to read, write, and learn is to engage them. Imagine the scenario:
A young high school student hates his hidebound curriculum. But then he attends a teach-in and learns to question the War Party's propaganda. He runs to the library, reads everything he can by Fanon, Chomsky, and Dr. King, and applies himself to his schooling. He wins a scholarship to Berkeley or Wesleyan, becomes a leading international lawyer, and helps negotiate the human rights treaties that finally reign in U.S. imperialism and enshrine a just world order.
Flush with success, he heads back to Oakland in time to fend off a right wing assault on public education masquerading as a "school reform" movement. He helps students and teachers learn that unions are not the enemy of public education, and that people who throw the word "entrepreneur" around are often just parasites living off the labor power of poor people. Inspired by his example, the parents and students start a mass based democratic movement to wrest power away from the oligarchies that control the State. Our hero is elected President and helps institute socialized medicine and child care, more progressive income and inheritance taxes, vastly expanded civil liberties, and all sorts of other cool stuff. Milk and honey flow, and the world becomes a better place.
But unfortunately, our story has a bittersweet ending. Tom Brosz and other embittered fanatics affiliated with an ultra-right wing hate group called the Pacific Research Institute assassinate our great leader. For a bunch of people who talk about the importance of learning, it appears they have never read the U.S. Constitution. They are of course captured and strung up from a lamppost as befits such counter-revolutionary scum. Despite the loss of their leader, the people realize they are now an empowered democratic majority and can take care of themselves. The revolution is saved, and everyone lives happily ever after.
Poor the scores may be, but citing a report by a lunatic right wing think tank says even more about your own political agenda. Do you really want us to believe that the peace movement is "biased" but that the authors of this study are not?
The best way to empower students to read, write, and learn is to engage them. Imagine the scenario:
A young high school student hates his hidebound curriculum. But then he attends a teach-in and learns to question the War Party's propaganda. He runs to the library, reads everything he can by Fanon, Chomsky, and Dr. King, and applies himself to his schooling. He wins a scholarship to Berkeley or Wesleyan, becomes a leading international lawyer, and helps negotiate the human rights treaties that finally reign in U.S. imperialism and enshrine a just world order.
Flush with success, he heads back to Oakland in time to fend off a right wing assault on public education masquerading as a "school reform" movement. He helps students and teachers learn that unions are not the enemy of public education, and that people who throw the word "entrepreneur" around are often just parasites living off the labor power of poor people. Inspired by his example, the parents and students start a mass based democratic movement to wrest power away from the oligarchies that control the State. Our hero is elected President and helps institute socialized medicine and child care, more progressive income and inheritance taxes, vastly expanded civil liberties, and all sorts of other cool stuff. Milk and honey flow, and the world becomes a better place.
But unfortunately, our story has a bittersweet ending. Tom Brosz and other embittered fanatics affiliated with an ultra-right wing hate group called the Pacific Research Institute assassinate our great leader. For a bunch of people who talk about the importance of learning, it appears they have never read the U.S. Constitution. They are of course captured and strung up from a lamppost as befits such counter-revolutionary scum. Despite the loss of their leader, the people realize they are now an empowered democratic majority and can take care of themselves. The revolution is saved, and everyone lives happily ever after.
Nice fairy-tale, mike. An international lawyer who fights against parasites living off the labor power of poor people? A LAWYER!?! Maybe good for kiddy preschool. But a well rounded first grader's going to see right through the foolishness of any supposed "hero" who would read Chomsky. Chomsky! Mother Goose has a better mind for political matters.
Homeschooling is great, but make sure that your kids do come into contact with members of the community of various ages. I was once occasionally the caretaker of some home schooled kids who basically were kept in their own basement- they didn't play with neighborhood children. At age 11-12 the older boy still definitely required a babysitter and would have tantrums more normal for an 8 year old. I can't imagine what they'll be like once they get out on their own. Plus, watching cable TV in their basement, they were probably much more well versed in popular culture dregs than a typical child who had a reasonable TV limit.
I observed some scary signs of level of education some other students were at upon graduating from high school - crappy teachers who would bore students to death by making them slowly read aloud would actually embarrass some students who would stumble over 3 syllable words etc. and at the college level, there have occasionally been some similar frightening insights of the big gaps in some students' knowledge.
However, I tend to discount those popular media surveys where they announce that the majority of seniors can't place the civil war in the right half-century, or that only 1/7 18-24 year olds can find Iraq on the map (Nat'l Geographic just announced this). I have to think that these groups had some motive for trying to say that everyone is stupid. For instance, I remember a big glut of these 'isn't education awful' stories in the very early 90s during the first Bush recession. What they did was serve to blame the condition of the economy on workers, implying that if everyone wasn't so lazy at school and everyone went to college, then everyone would have a top earning engineering job. However, this isn't true. Even if everyone went and got a master's degree (and not a fake one bought off of the internet!), there would still be the same % of jobs requiring college level vocational training, and the rest of the people would be cooking and building things and taking out trash. A better solution than to have everyone believe that they have to go to college to get a white collar job is to have more equitable pay for all the necessary tasks of society- and shipping everyone to college won't do that.
Plus, these surveys showing the vast majority to be a bunch of drooling idiots doesn't mesh with the state of adults in society, does it? I see most adults holding a job requiring some level of skill above McJobs - most blue collar jobs like construction worker or auto mechanic require nearly as much skill as someone who cruised their way through Cal State. Most people collect their receipts and can do the accounting to pay their taxes, finance houses and cars. Lots of people can operate businesses and complete complex tasks.
I observed some scary signs of level of education some other students were at upon graduating from high school - crappy teachers who would bore students to death by making them slowly read aloud would actually embarrass some students who would stumble over 3 syllable words etc. and at the college level, there have occasionally been some similar frightening insights of the big gaps in some students' knowledge.
However, I tend to discount those popular media surveys where they announce that the majority of seniors can't place the civil war in the right half-century, or that only 1/7 18-24 year olds can find Iraq on the map (Nat'l Geographic just announced this). I have to think that these groups had some motive for trying to say that everyone is stupid. For instance, I remember a big glut of these 'isn't education awful' stories in the very early 90s during the first Bush recession. What they did was serve to blame the condition of the economy on workers, implying that if everyone wasn't so lazy at school and everyone went to college, then everyone would have a top earning engineering job. However, this isn't true. Even if everyone went and got a master's degree (and not a fake one bought off of the internet!), there would still be the same % of jobs requiring college level vocational training, and the rest of the people would be cooking and building things and taking out trash. A better solution than to have everyone believe that they have to go to college to get a white collar job is to have more equitable pay for all the necessary tasks of society- and shipping everyone to college won't do that.
Plus, these surveys showing the vast majority to be a bunch of drooling idiots doesn't mesh with the state of adults in society, does it? I see most adults holding a job requiring some level of skill above McJobs - most blue collar jobs like construction worker or auto mechanic require nearly as much skill as someone who cruised their way through Cal State. Most people collect their receipts and can do the accounting to pay their taxes, finance houses and cars. Lots of people can operate businesses and complete complex tasks.
"Anyone who is foolish enough to believe that love of country is not virtuous is not someone I don't want to be near children at all"
scar-ry!!!
And can you keep the little virtuous militant patriots away from us too please?
I don't love my country and my country doesn't own me. And there's nothing virtuous about love of murder in the name of country, which is what we are currently witnessing all over the world.
I went to PUBLIC school.
scar-ry!!!
And can you keep the little virtuous militant patriots away from us too please?
I don't love my country and my country doesn't own me. And there's nothing virtuous about love of murder in the name of country, which is what we are currently witnessing all over the world.
I went to PUBLIC school.
That's right, a lawyer. A people's lawyer who does all his work pro bono, lives in the slums like Gandhi, and gives free legal tutorials to homeless people at night. Kind of like the lawyer Jesus would have been if he didn't become a Republican, drive an SUV, and bless the B-52's as they drop cluster bombs on innocent civilians.
As for Mother Goose, did you ever hear of Mother Jones? That's right, Mother Goose was her great great great great grandmother and a renowned labor leader in her own right, until she was captured and killed by Frank Perdue, a parasitic Republican business leader living off the sweat of poor immigrants and plucked chickens. It takes a tough man to slaughter a defenseless chicken, which I hear is the new GOP campaign slogan.
As for Mother Goose, did you ever hear of Mother Jones? That's right, Mother Goose was her great great great great grandmother and a renowned labor leader in her own right, until she was captured and killed by Frank Perdue, a parasitic Republican business leader living off the sweat of poor immigrants and plucked chickens. It takes a tough man to slaughter a defenseless chicken, which I hear is the new GOP campaign slogan.
"YOU CAN'T TRUST A "PATRIOT"
By Kurt Saxon
What is a patriot anyway? The word comes from the Greek, "patros", fathers or ancestors. Its general meaning is one who upholds and defends the culture, traditions and wisdom of his ancestors. In that sense, nearly everyone on Earth could claim to be a patriot.
Okay, so most of us are patriots just by our upbringing. We take it for granted. What qualifies someone to stand out as a patriot?
The plain and sad truth is that some people who are anxious and alarmed by world conditions are flattered as "patriots" by frauds marking them as suckers for a line of foolish propaganda and worthless goods. The "patriot" movement isn't a movement at all but a sucker market, a flock of sheep to shear.
It starts with "The Conspiracy". I know; I was a "patriot" and bought the whole phony line. In 1964 I joined the John Birch Society. For nearly four years my only companions were Birchers, Minutemen, Nazis, Klan and Identities.
They were convinced that the Jews, Trilateralists, Bildebergers, Council On Foreign Relations, Rockefellers and Rothchilds were all conspiring to take over the country and enslave us through Communism.
At that time the "Communist Menace" was in full play. The Soviets were indeed a threat and made no bones about it. Their missiles were ready. Over here, leftists took over colleges and paraded and rioted. During the Vietnam war the flags of the Viet Cong flew in every big city, carried by those who wanted a communist victory.
Our politicians were so tolerant of these vermin that it was easy to believe they were willing to let the Soviets bully and blackmail the U.S. into surrender. The marketers of the "Conspiracy" used this tolerance to convince us "patriots" that something had to be done, and by us.
All we really did was buy their newsletters and books and send donations so they could expose the plotters. It was a business, that's all. Nothing was accomplished. The Communists made no gains, the Left didn't take over and our politicians were still just as blind to the threat as they had always seemed.
After nearly four years of wasting time and money fighting the "Conspiracy" and rotten politicians, I sat down and thought it out. Sure, a lot of our politicians are corrupt, a lot are greedy and a lot are just stupid. And they get worse as our system deteriorates. I finally realized such politicians are just a bunch of pigs at the public trough.
But it's their trough, you see? They're not going to share it, much less give it away to some foreign interests. Politicians can be voted out after a term or so. In what time they have, they must rip off as much as possible to feather their own nests.
And what is a conspiracy? A conspiracy is when two or more people plan, in secret, to do something wrong. But what if the conspiracy is broadcast, documented, spread nationwide? Pitiful!
Say you and a couple of friends conspired to rob a bank. Before you can do it the news is on the street. Would you go through with it? And if you were so clumsy and stupid as to let your plans be known to outsiders, you'd best go straight.
And the big "Conspiracy"? It's been detailed, documented, exposed for all to see, for years! The conspirators are described as brilliant, sinister, powerful and yet so clumsy that even you know what they're up to.
So you have only two ways of looking at it. Either the "Conspirators" are and have been totally incompetent and so there's nothing to worry about, or there is and was no conspiracy in the first place. The whole thing with the "Conspiracy" is that it's a lie. Every bit of it. It has to be believed by those who really want to believe it. Any fool can believe and every fool does. But the wise person wants to know, rather than believe. You can't prove a lie so the "Conspiracy" promoters are kept busy inventing more lies as even those they've fooled show signs of waking up.
But the "Conspiracy" sells. It comforts those who see their system coming apart but feel helpless to provide for themselves after it collapses. Being taken over is preferable to the challenge of self-reliance. In many cases, the "Conspiracy" gives them an excuse for their own lack of success.
In 1975, the Cold War was heating up and the conspiracy mongers were doing well. The morons were marching and swamping every economy.
Yet, the Jews, Trilateralists, etc. and their Communist accomplices were increasingly blamed for the mounting inefficiency and chaos worldwide. Then, in 1990, with a world population of five billion and over- crowding, crime, pollution and diminishing resources alarming the intelligent, the dull-normals were still being conned into blaming it all on the Jews. In that same year, a catastrophe hit the conspiracy mongers, the Soviet Empire collapsed!
This threatened economic disaster should have put the conspiracy mongers out of business. The Jews, Trilateralists, Council On Foreign Relations, Bildebergers, Rockefellers and Rothchilds, had failed, had never been a conspiracy, or had been beaten. "Not at all" chorused the conspiracy mongers. "The collapse of Communism was a hoax. It was engineered by the Jews to lull Americans to sleep and put us off guard".
This lie was a desperate attempt to stay in business. Only the most stupid "patriots" bought it and they weren't enough to support the conspiracy mongers. Some new threat would have to be made up. Reagan had been talking about a New World Order. This was completely economic, like the European Common Market or NAFTA. It promised relaxation of trade barriers and prosperity for everyone in the field of international commerce. It wasn't accepted by the international financiers. But it had nothing to do with private individuals anywhere.
It was the poorest excuse for a threat anyone could come up with. But it was all the conspiracy mongers had, so they turned it into a sinister plot against your liberties. Again, it was backed by the Jews, Trilateralists, Bildebergers, Council On Foreign Relations, Rockefellers, Rothchilds and now the Clintons.
The whole idea is stupid. First the name is wrong. There never has been a world order and so there could not be a "New" world order. Of course, there is a vast body of international laws concerning trade, borders, maritime laws, etc. But these laws don't affect private individuals in the various countries.
A world order as threatened by the conspiracy mongers would dictate a uniformity of social conduct in the respective nations. Individual liberties would be outlawed and only the Jews and their favorites would be free and prosperous. Everyone else would be enslaved.
This is a fantasy for many reasons. But in order for the fantasy to become reality, the major nations would have to go along with the program. The Chinese, one billion, two hundred million strong, dislike non-Chinese and especially whites and more especially Americans. They would never go along with a world system dominated by whites. Their break with Russian communism guaranteed they would never get that close to whites again.
The Japanese, with their two hundred million, being anti-non-Japanese, would likewise reject such dictation. India, with over nine hundred million, Africa with about a billion and likewise most of South America, the Phillipines and much of the rest of Asia, each depressed with Third World backwardness, would prove too great a liability to dominate or enslave.
The Middle East, with about a billion Moslems, many of whom hate Jews, would also be out of the running for membership in any world order. The above regions and countries make up a majority of the world's nations and populations and would either refuse to join or would be more trouble to subdue than they would be worth. So there can be no world order as promised by the conspiracy mongers. Their "New World Order" is neither being implemented or even planned. It's a fraud.
Another difficulty faced by the conspiracy mongers was their sad choice of the U.N. as the enforcers of the will of International Jewery. If I hadn't been 4-F in 1950, I would have been a U.N. soldier, as was every soldier sent to Korea to fight the North Koreans and later the Chinese in the Korean "Police Action". The North Koreans and the Chinese rejected the will of the U.N. then and would again.
The U.N. didn't win that war. In fact, the U.N. has never won a war. Somalia was a disgrace, as was Bosnia. Only the force of NATO kept the U.N. from leaving Bosnia with its tail between its legs.
The U.N. was set up as an international peace-keeping organization. Each nation has only one vote so no nation has more power or authority than another. It doesn't work for peace or international understanding and I don't think it ever will.
So for the conspiracy mongers to have chosen the U.N. as their Jew-backed villain is an act of desperation showing they have run out of villains. During the '60's, '70's and '80's, they said thousands of North Vietnamese, Viet Cong and Chinese were hidden in the U.S. and Canada and thousands of Russians were massed on the Mexican border. When that idiocy proved unbelievable to all but the most "patriotic" they were reduced to their present nonsense about the U.N.
In late 1993 I had my own shortwave radio show on WWCR. On my second night a "patriot' called in to tell me there were hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of U.N. troops hidden in the U.S. waiting to jump out, kick in doors and take our guns.
I tried to paint for him a picture of all those young men, away from home and families, hidden, no social life, lonely except for porno tapes. Month after month being supplied in secret, and for how long? They're still here - in his fantasies.
A while back I taped an interview with John Troutman, head of the Montana Militia. The reporter asked him about the U.N. troops hidden in the U.S. He told her that there were U.N. troops only twenty miles away. Why didn't she have him take her to see them? Why didn't he volunteer to take her? There were no U.N. troops. She just didn't want to show him up as a phony and ruin the interview.
About that time a "patriot" from Louisiana came to visit me and told me there were 5000 U.N. troops in his county. I asked what they gave as an excuse for being there and he said he never saw them as he couldn't get through the FBI lines. I asked him what the FBI told him and he admitted he had only heard about them on the radio. There were no U.N. troops in his county.
This wussy is a perfect example of a "patriot". A Prozac Poster Boy, he's so driven by anxiety and fear he wouldn't dare to confront an enemy. Even if he had the guts, he wouldn't have the common sense to check out such a rumor, even in his own county.
The next case was of a news lady who phoned and said she had her own radio station back east and wanted me on it. As we talked, she brought up U.N. troops and I said they didn't exist here. She said they did and she had seen them in her downtown shopping mall, blue helmets, uniforms and all. When I asked her what reason they gave for being there, she said she hadn't talked to them because she was shopping.
Such lies about U.N. troops, hidden or walking around in malls, finally wore too thin for all but the terminally stupid to believe. But as a conspiracy mongers lie wears out it's improved. Now the U.N. troops are in U.S. military bases. Instead of waiting to kick in doors and take guns, they're preparing to simply take over.
But what about our own troops? Wouldn't they resist foreign nationals taking over their country? Of course; but they'll all be sent as American U.N. troops to take over the countries of the foreign troops posted here to take over ours. Only a "patriot" would swallow that.
And then there's Fletcher. He turns up on all the talk shows with his photographs. His main photo is of a train of flat cars with about a dozen tanks and an armored personnel carrier (APC). He says they're Russian tanks brought over here to subdue us Americans. I don't know if they are Russian tanks but if they are, they were brought over for scrap. America has plenty of tanks; thanks, but no thanks.
The APC is painted white with U.N. markings. There's something phony about it. I'll bet the photo was blown up, the APC painted white and marked with "UN" and then reduced so it would look authentic. But it doesn't look authentic and if it were it would prove nothing more than those crewless tanks.
Another photo shows an APC with Sheriff's Department markings. This is supposed to prove that the Sheriff of that town means to subjugate his neighbors. It proves nothing. The Sheriff's Department was fortunate in buying a surplus APC in case some idiot opened up on the townsfolk. Every Sheriff and Police Department should have one.
Then there's the photo of men wearing ski masks. Fletcher says they're ATF although there are no ATF markings. Another shows ski-masked men with ATF markings. The ski masks are to keep you from identifying them when they come to take your guns. But why would they care if you could identify them if they were involved in "the takeover"? Actually, the ski masks show they're undercover officers. In case the judge lets the criminals go, they can't identify the officers back on the street.
Then, of course, there are Linda Thompson's tapes. I have three of them. She will take a camcorder, record common scenes and narrate wild stories about them. One scene is of a factory courtyard surrounded by a chain link fence. The narration says this is a concentration camp. No inmates. It can't be a concentration camp without inmates. It's just a factory courtyard.
Another scene is through the fence of an Army base. There are a lot of helicopters painted in various shades of Army green. The narration says some of them are black but none are. It was also supposed to have many U.N. troops there but none were in evidence. A few frames further on showed blue-helmeted U.N. troops but there was no proof that they were on that base or where they really were stationed, if even in the U.S.
Thompson also showed a one-story federal building housing some department or other. Thompson said terrible plots were being hatched there. There was no indication of anything going on except for the narration.
One of her Waco tapes showed a tank she said was a flamethrower. She even said, "If you look closely you can see the flames" There were no flame-throwing tanks at Waco. A flame-throwing tank shoots flames 150 yards and six feet wide. You don' t need to look closely to see the flames. Besides, the tanks weren't even armed. They were just to protect the drivers while poking holes in the structure so as to shoot in tear gas.
I could photograph an empty closet and say in the caption that eighteen women had been butchered there. "Patriots" would need no more than the caption for proof that the closet was a place of murder. Anyone can take pictures of ordinary places and objects and say they're Russian weapons, concentration camps, torture chambers, enemy bases, etc. Only the easily fooled are convinced by false narrations and captions.
People who spread such idiocy should find a more dignified way of making a living. But they've been at it so long and have so much of their reputations and resources invested in the sucker market, that they can't change. I think a lot of them also enjoy the idea that so many even believe them to be heroic saviors.
If they were telling the truth they would indeed be heroic. If people like Linda Thompson, Bo Gritz, Jack McLamb, G. Gordon Liddy, Chuck Harder, Tom Valentine, William Cooper, Don MacAlvany and Norman Olson were really opposing a despotism, they would be prime targets when that despotism took over. They would be
executed as the anti-Jewish-U.N.-New World Order foes they claim to be. It's a certainty that if they were telling the truth, they'd all be doomed. And if our government were indeed a tyrany, they'd be in prison now
And, of course, their "patriotic" followers would be just as certain to be put into U.N. concentration camps. Everyone who subscribed to "Conspiracy" newsletters, bought such tapes and joined anti-government militias would be in the Federal master computers as being opposed to a Jewish-backed U.N. takeover. They'd be disarmed, lose their freedom, their gold, everything they have.
The sad thing about it is that if the "Conspiracy" were real, the people who would be rounded up are mostly wussies who would be no threat in the first place.The 'conservatives' and 'right wingers' have been the biggest disappointment. They are the world's worst conspiracy-mongers - and also the greatest cowards. In fact, their cowardice is exceeded only by their stupidity.
An example of such stupidity is the "patriots" who buy gold. Wealthy people may have a reason to buy gold but working class people don't. I don't have any gold and I don't know anyone who does and the great majority of ordinary people who buy gold are known by the government as "patriots". All gold purchases from firms such as
Viking International are recorded. The Feds have access to such records. So if you believe the Feds are going to come around and collect your guns, you might as well realize they'd collect your gold at the same time.
Besides, gold is no longer legal tender with a fixed value. The price goes up and down. It's a commodity. After the collapse of our system, its value will be determined by the seller of what you want to buy.
When I was on shortwave radio a listener called in to say that he'd been on the road without his checkbook. But he had his lucky gold Krugerrand so he thought he would be alright. He took it to a bank and they didn't want it. He took it to another bank with the same result. He then took it to a seller of gold and rare coins and was told that they'd take it but it would be a couple of weeks before they checked it out and he wouldn't get anywhere near what he had paid for it.
If you have gold, make a simple test. Take an ounce and try to buy something with it worth what you paid for the ounce. Probably the only purchase you could make would be from a store clerk who thought he could resell it. Even so, he'd only give you something he could pay for out of his own pocket to put in the cash register. There's just no practicality in a working class person buying gold.
By Kurt Saxon
What is a patriot anyway? The word comes from the Greek, "patros", fathers or ancestors. Its general meaning is one who upholds and defends the culture, traditions and wisdom of his ancestors. In that sense, nearly everyone on Earth could claim to be a patriot.
Okay, so most of us are patriots just by our upbringing. We take it for granted. What qualifies someone to stand out as a patriot?
The plain and sad truth is that some people who are anxious and alarmed by world conditions are flattered as "patriots" by frauds marking them as suckers for a line of foolish propaganda and worthless goods. The "patriot" movement isn't a movement at all but a sucker market, a flock of sheep to shear.
It starts with "The Conspiracy". I know; I was a "patriot" and bought the whole phony line. In 1964 I joined the John Birch Society. For nearly four years my only companions were Birchers, Minutemen, Nazis, Klan and Identities.
They were convinced that the Jews, Trilateralists, Bildebergers, Council On Foreign Relations, Rockefellers and Rothchilds were all conspiring to take over the country and enslave us through Communism.
At that time the "Communist Menace" was in full play. The Soviets were indeed a threat and made no bones about it. Their missiles were ready. Over here, leftists took over colleges and paraded and rioted. During the Vietnam war the flags of the Viet Cong flew in every big city, carried by those who wanted a communist victory.
Our politicians were so tolerant of these vermin that it was easy to believe they were willing to let the Soviets bully and blackmail the U.S. into surrender. The marketers of the "Conspiracy" used this tolerance to convince us "patriots" that something had to be done, and by us.
All we really did was buy their newsletters and books and send donations so they could expose the plotters. It was a business, that's all. Nothing was accomplished. The Communists made no gains, the Left didn't take over and our politicians were still just as blind to the threat as they had always seemed.
After nearly four years of wasting time and money fighting the "Conspiracy" and rotten politicians, I sat down and thought it out. Sure, a lot of our politicians are corrupt, a lot are greedy and a lot are just stupid. And they get worse as our system deteriorates. I finally realized such politicians are just a bunch of pigs at the public trough.
But it's their trough, you see? They're not going to share it, much less give it away to some foreign interests. Politicians can be voted out after a term or so. In what time they have, they must rip off as much as possible to feather their own nests.
And what is a conspiracy? A conspiracy is when two or more people plan, in secret, to do something wrong. But what if the conspiracy is broadcast, documented, spread nationwide? Pitiful!
Say you and a couple of friends conspired to rob a bank. Before you can do it the news is on the street. Would you go through with it? And if you were so clumsy and stupid as to let your plans be known to outsiders, you'd best go straight.
And the big "Conspiracy"? It's been detailed, documented, exposed for all to see, for years! The conspirators are described as brilliant, sinister, powerful and yet so clumsy that even you know what they're up to.
So you have only two ways of looking at it. Either the "Conspirators" are and have been totally incompetent and so there's nothing to worry about, or there is and was no conspiracy in the first place. The whole thing with the "Conspiracy" is that it's a lie. Every bit of it. It has to be believed by those who really want to believe it. Any fool can believe and every fool does. But the wise person wants to know, rather than believe. You can't prove a lie so the "Conspiracy" promoters are kept busy inventing more lies as even those they've fooled show signs of waking up.
But the "Conspiracy" sells. It comforts those who see their system coming apart but feel helpless to provide for themselves after it collapses. Being taken over is preferable to the challenge of self-reliance. In many cases, the "Conspiracy" gives them an excuse for their own lack of success.
In 1975, the Cold War was heating up and the conspiracy mongers were doing well. The morons were marching and swamping every economy.
Yet, the Jews, Trilateralists, etc. and their Communist accomplices were increasingly blamed for the mounting inefficiency and chaos worldwide. Then, in 1990, with a world population of five billion and over- crowding, crime, pollution and diminishing resources alarming the intelligent, the dull-normals were still being conned into blaming it all on the Jews. In that same year, a catastrophe hit the conspiracy mongers, the Soviet Empire collapsed!
This threatened economic disaster should have put the conspiracy mongers out of business. The Jews, Trilateralists, Council On Foreign Relations, Bildebergers, Rockefellers and Rothchilds, had failed, had never been a conspiracy, or had been beaten. "Not at all" chorused the conspiracy mongers. "The collapse of Communism was a hoax. It was engineered by the Jews to lull Americans to sleep and put us off guard".
This lie was a desperate attempt to stay in business. Only the most stupid "patriots" bought it and they weren't enough to support the conspiracy mongers. Some new threat would have to be made up. Reagan had been talking about a New World Order. This was completely economic, like the European Common Market or NAFTA. It promised relaxation of trade barriers and prosperity for everyone in the field of international commerce. It wasn't accepted by the international financiers. But it had nothing to do with private individuals anywhere.
It was the poorest excuse for a threat anyone could come up with. But it was all the conspiracy mongers had, so they turned it into a sinister plot against your liberties. Again, it was backed by the Jews, Trilateralists, Bildebergers, Council On Foreign Relations, Rockefellers, Rothchilds and now the Clintons.
The whole idea is stupid. First the name is wrong. There never has been a world order and so there could not be a "New" world order. Of course, there is a vast body of international laws concerning trade, borders, maritime laws, etc. But these laws don't affect private individuals in the various countries.
A world order as threatened by the conspiracy mongers would dictate a uniformity of social conduct in the respective nations. Individual liberties would be outlawed and only the Jews and their favorites would be free and prosperous. Everyone else would be enslaved.
This is a fantasy for many reasons. But in order for the fantasy to become reality, the major nations would have to go along with the program. The Chinese, one billion, two hundred million strong, dislike non-Chinese and especially whites and more especially Americans. They would never go along with a world system dominated by whites. Their break with Russian communism guaranteed they would never get that close to whites again.
The Japanese, with their two hundred million, being anti-non-Japanese, would likewise reject such dictation. India, with over nine hundred million, Africa with about a billion and likewise most of South America, the Phillipines and much of the rest of Asia, each depressed with Third World backwardness, would prove too great a liability to dominate or enslave.
The Middle East, with about a billion Moslems, many of whom hate Jews, would also be out of the running for membership in any world order. The above regions and countries make up a majority of the world's nations and populations and would either refuse to join or would be more trouble to subdue than they would be worth. So there can be no world order as promised by the conspiracy mongers. Their "New World Order" is neither being implemented or even planned. It's a fraud.
Another difficulty faced by the conspiracy mongers was their sad choice of the U.N. as the enforcers of the will of International Jewery. If I hadn't been 4-F in 1950, I would have been a U.N. soldier, as was every soldier sent to Korea to fight the North Koreans and later the Chinese in the Korean "Police Action". The North Koreans and the Chinese rejected the will of the U.N. then and would again.
The U.N. didn't win that war. In fact, the U.N. has never won a war. Somalia was a disgrace, as was Bosnia. Only the force of NATO kept the U.N. from leaving Bosnia with its tail between its legs.
The U.N. was set up as an international peace-keeping organization. Each nation has only one vote so no nation has more power or authority than another. It doesn't work for peace or international understanding and I don't think it ever will.
So for the conspiracy mongers to have chosen the U.N. as their Jew-backed villain is an act of desperation showing they have run out of villains. During the '60's, '70's and '80's, they said thousands of North Vietnamese, Viet Cong and Chinese were hidden in the U.S. and Canada and thousands of Russians were massed on the Mexican border. When that idiocy proved unbelievable to all but the most "patriotic" they were reduced to their present nonsense about the U.N.
In late 1993 I had my own shortwave radio show on WWCR. On my second night a "patriot' called in to tell me there were hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of U.N. troops hidden in the U.S. waiting to jump out, kick in doors and take our guns.
I tried to paint for him a picture of all those young men, away from home and families, hidden, no social life, lonely except for porno tapes. Month after month being supplied in secret, and for how long? They're still here - in his fantasies.
A while back I taped an interview with John Troutman, head of the Montana Militia. The reporter asked him about the U.N. troops hidden in the U.S. He told her that there were U.N. troops only twenty miles away. Why didn't she have him take her to see them? Why didn't he volunteer to take her? There were no U.N. troops. She just didn't want to show him up as a phony and ruin the interview.
About that time a "patriot" from Louisiana came to visit me and told me there were 5000 U.N. troops in his county. I asked what they gave as an excuse for being there and he said he never saw them as he couldn't get through the FBI lines. I asked him what the FBI told him and he admitted he had only heard about them on the radio. There were no U.N. troops in his county.
This wussy is a perfect example of a "patriot". A Prozac Poster Boy, he's so driven by anxiety and fear he wouldn't dare to confront an enemy. Even if he had the guts, he wouldn't have the common sense to check out such a rumor, even in his own county.
The next case was of a news lady who phoned and said she had her own radio station back east and wanted me on it. As we talked, she brought up U.N. troops and I said they didn't exist here. She said they did and she had seen them in her downtown shopping mall, blue helmets, uniforms and all. When I asked her what reason they gave for being there, she said she hadn't talked to them because she was shopping.
Such lies about U.N. troops, hidden or walking around in malls, finally wore too thin for all but the terminally stupid to believe. But as a conspiracy mongers lie wears out it's improved. Now the U.N. troops are in U.S. military bases. Instead of waiting to kick in doors and take guns, they're preparing to simply take over.
But what about our own troops? Wouldn't they resist foreign nationals taking over their country? Of course; but they'll all be sent as American U.N. troops to take over the countries of the foreign troops posted here to take over ours. Only a "patriot" would swallow that.
And then there's Fletcher. He turns up on all the talk shows with his photographs. His main photo is of a train of flat cars with about a dozen tanks and an armored personnel carrier (APC). He says they're Russian tanks brought over here to subdue us Americans. I don't know if they are Russian tanks but if they are, they were brought over for scrap. America has plenty of tanks; thanks, but no thanks.
The APC is painted white with U.N. markings. There's something phony about it. I'll bet the photo was blown up, the APC painted white and marked with "UN" and then reduced so it would look authentic. But it doesn't look authentic and if it were it would prove nothing more than those crewless tanks.
Another photo shows an APC with Sheriff's Department markings. This is supposed to prove that the Sheriff of that town means to subjugate his neighbors. It proves nothing. The Sheriff's Department was fortunate in buying a surplus APC in case some idiot opened up on the townsfolk. Every Sheriff and Police Department should have one.
Then there's the photo of men wearing ski masks. Fletcher says they're ATF although there are no ATF markings. Another shows ski-masked men with ATF markings. The ski masks are to keep you from identifying them when they come to take your guns. But why would they care if you could identify them if they were involved in "the takeover"? Actually, the ski masks show they're undercover officers. In case the judge lets the criminals go, they can't identify the officers back on the street.
Then, of course, there are Linda Thompson's tapes. I have three of them. She will take a camcorder, record common scenes and narrate wild stories about them. One scene is of a factory courtyard surrounded by a chain link fence. The narration says this is a concentration camp. No inmates. It can't be a concentration camp without inmates. It's just a factory courtyard.
Another scene is through the fence of an Army base. There are a lot of helicopters painted in various shades of Army green. The narration says some of them are black but none are. It was also supposed to have many U.N. troops there but none were in evidence. A few frames further on showed blue-helmeted U.N. troops but there was no proof that they were on that base or where they really were stationed, if even in the U.S.
Thompson also showed a one-story federal building housing some department or other. Thompson said terrible plots were being hatched there. There was no indication of anything going on except for the narration.
One of her Waco tapes showed a tank she said was a flamethrower. She even said, "If you look closely you can see the flames" There were no flame-throwing tanks at Waco. A flame-throwing tank shoots flames 150 yards and six feet wide. You don' t need to look closely to see the flames. Besides, the tanks weren't even armed. They were just to protect the drivers while poking holes in the structure so as to shoot in tear gas.
I could photograph an empty closet and say in the caption that eighteen women had been butchered there. "Patriots" would need no more than the caption for proof that the closet was a place of murder. Anyone can take pictures of ordinary places and objects and say they're Russian weapons, concentration camps, torture chambers, enemy bases, etc. Only the easily fooled are convinced by false narrations and captions.
People who spread such idiocy should find a more dignified way of making a living. But they've been at it so long and have so much of their reputations and resources invested in the sucker market, that they can't change. I think a lot of them also enjoy the idea that so many even believe them to be heroic saviors.
If they were telling the truth they would indeed be heroic. If people like Linda Thompson, Bo Gritz, Jack McLamb, G. Gordon Liddy, Chuck Harder, Tom Valentine, William Cooper, Don MacAlvany and Norman Olson were really opposing a despotism, they would be prime targets when that despotism took over. They would be
executed as the anti-Jewish-U.N.-New World Order foes they claim to be. It's a certainty that if they were telling the truth, they'd all be doomed. And if our government were indeed a tyrany, they'd be in prison now
And, of course, their "patriotic" followers would be just as certain to be put into U.N. concentration camps. Everyone who subscribed to "Conspiracy" newsletters, bought such tapes and joined anti-government militias would be in the Federal master computers as being opposed to a Jewish-backed U.N. takeover. They'd be disarmed, lose their freedom, their gold, everything they have.
The sad thing about it is that if the "Conspiracy" were real, the people who would be rounded up are mostly wussies who would be no threat in the first place.The 'conservatives' and 'right wingers' have been the biggest disappointment. They are the world's worst conspiracy-mongers - and also the greatest cowards. In fact, their cowardice is exceeded only by their stupidity.
An example of such stupidity is the "patriots" who buy gold. Wealthy people may have a reason to buy gold but working class people don't. I don't have any gold and I don't know anyone who does and the great majority of ordinary people who buy gold are known by the government as "patriots". All gold purchases from firms such as
Viking International are recorded. The Feds have access to such records. So if you believe the Feds are going to come around and collect your guns, you might as well realize they'd collect your gold at the same time.
Besides, gold is no longer legal tender with a fixed value. The price goes up and down. It's a commodity. After the collapse of our system, its value will be determined by the seller of what you want to buy.
When I was on shortwave radio a listener called in to say that he'd been on the road without his checkbook. But he had his lucky gold Krugerrand so he thought he would be alright. He took it to a bank and they didn't want it. He took it to another bank with the same result. He then took it to a seller of gold and rare coins and was told that they'd take it but it would be a couple of weeks before they checked it out and he wouldn't get anywhere near what he had paid for it.
If you have gold, make a simple test. Take an ounce and try to buy something with it worth what you paid for the ounce. Probably the only purchase you could make would be from a store clerk who thought he could resell it. Even so, he'd only give you something he could pay for out of his own pocket to put in the cash register. There's just no practicality in a working class person buying gold.
It says a lot about the rhetoric of the Left that one cannot easily tell their real stuff from someone writing a biting satirical treatment of leftist rhetoric. Mike's post could be from someone making fun of the way leftists often talk, or it could actually be from someone who really thinks this way.
The "lunatic" PRI simply pointed out test scores that are available to the public. Not sure why this qualifies them as "lunatic right wing"--others can browse their site and decide for themselves--or why the source of the information is a factor.
As for the "milk and honey" generated by the socialist policies Mike advocates, if this represents what he has learned from the bloody history of centrally-controlled economies during the 20th century, I would submit that his own education could use some work.
The "lunatic" PRI simply pointed out test scores that are available to the public. Not sure why this qualifies them as "lunatic right wing"--others can browse their site and decide for themselves--or why the source of the information is a factor.
As for the "milk and honey" generated by the socialist policies Mike advocates, if this represents what he has learned from the bloody history of centrally-controlled economies during the 20th century, I would submit that his own education could use some work.
This will be an exercise in leftwing political indoctrination and strident anti-Americanism. I should say hatefilled, intentionally deceitful, grossly inaccurate, and purposefully misleading leftwing political indoctrinations and strident anti-Americanism. You people are why the Democrats lost. Your hatred for your country is clear for all to see.
It says a lot about political rhetoric these days that so many arguments start with the phrase, "It says a lot about....."
<Mike's post could be from someone making fun of the way leftists often talk, or it could actually be from someone who really thinks this way.>
Maybe it's from both, Mr. "I Bought That Free Market Line." A characteristic of conservative "thinkers" is their tendency to criticize leftists for stale rhetoric while flaunting same. Thus, Mr. B refers everyone to this PRI website, thinking, no doubt, that it embodies innovative thinking. Obviously the joke escapes him.
After Enron, the 401(k) debacles, the catastrophic repeal of Glass-Steagall, the accounting "irregularities" wrought by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the failures of free market health care, the ongoing meltdown of Edison and other public school privatizers, the breeding of a crimminal class of MBAs by the elite business schools--after all this and so much more, we are directed to a web site that promotes the virtues of the "free market."
I know I speak for all of us here in the belly of the beast, Tom, when I say that's fucking hilarious. For God's sake, man, Karl Rove was so spooked about capitalism's credibility problem that he invented a phony crisis in Iraq to get the electorate's mind off it. Worked, too. Smart guy, that Karl. You'll never catch him spouting all this free market stuff--unless, of course, he's shaking people like you down for campaign cash.
<The "lunatic" PRI simply pointed out test scores that are available to the public....[why is] the source of the information..a factor[?]>.
The source of the information is always a factor, Tom, as I tell the conspiracy people. When anti-Semitic web sites cobble together various factoids to spin a fanciful 9/11theory, you have to wonder why they do it. And so when --here comes that phrase again-a "free market think tank" (I'm sorry, that's just funny) slices and dices test results a certain way, you have to wonder what's motivating them.
Don't get me wrong. The Oakland schools are by all accounts deeply troubled and in need of help. But vouchers and privatizing and union busting will do about as much for them as managed care did for health care, or "litigation reform" did for corporate accountability, or--well, you get the picture. That dog was never going to hunt, but now he won't even walk.
What does this have to do with anti-war "teach-ins"? Geez, I don't know, I've really gone off the runway here, haven't I? Oh, yes, I remember--REVOLUTION!! You get kids interested in changing the world around them, you're onto something. I mean, how many rich kids can even spell "entrepreneur"?
<Mike's post could be from someone making fun of the way leftists often talk, or it could actually be from someone who really thinks this way.>
Maybe it's from both, Mr. "I Bought That Free Market Line." A characteristic of conservative "thinkers" is their tendency to criticize leftists for stale rhetoric while flaunting same. Thus, Mr. B refers everyone to this PRI website, thinking, no doubt, that it embodies innovative thinking. Obviously the joke escapes him.
After Enron, the 401(k) debacles, the catastrophic repeal of Glass-Steagall, the accounting "irregularities" wrought by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the failures of free market health care, the ongoing meltdown of Edison and other public school privatizers, the breeding of a crimminal class of MBAs by the elite business schools--after all this and so much more, we are directed to a web site that promotes the virtues of the "free market."
I know I speak for all of us here in the belly of the beast, Tom, when I say that's fucking hilarious. For God's sake, man, Karl Rove was so spooked about capitalism's credibility problem that he invented a phony crisis in Iraq to get the electorate's mind off it. Worked, too. Smart guy, that Karl. You'll never catch him spouting all this free market stuff--unless, of course, he's shaking people like you down for campaign cash.
<The "lunatic" PRI simply pointed out test scores that are available to the public....[why is] the source of the information..a factor[?]>.
The source of the information is always a factor, Tom, as I tell the conspiracy people. When anti-Semitic web sites cobble together various factoids to spin a fanciful 9/11theory, you have to wonder why they do it. And so when --here comes that phrase again-a "free market think tank" (I'm sorry, that's just funny) slices and dices test results a certain way, you have to wonder what's motivating them.
Don't get me wrong. The Oakland schools are by all accounts deeply troubled and in need of help. But vouchers and privatizing and union busting will do about as much for them as managed care did for health care, or "litigation reform" did for corporate accountability, or--well, you get the picture. That dog was never going to hunt, but now he won't even walk.
What does this have to do with anti-war "teach-ins"? Geez, I don't know, I've really gone off the runway here, haven't I? Oh, yes, I remember--REVOLUTION!! You get kids interested in changing the world around them, you're onto something. I mean, how many rich kids can even spell "entrepreneur"?
"leftwing political indoctrination and strident anti-Americanism"
mmmm . . . . good!
btw - what's with the 'mr'? Is that like er?
mmmm . . . . good!
btw - what's with the 'mr'? Is that like er?
>>>Best thing you can do for your kids is to home school if you are able or send them to private school. It's the only way I've found to completely avoid the leftist garbage and lies as their attempt to re-write history to fit their own political agenda. Not only will they learn more, they'll learn the truth, something that will never happen as long as people like "history buff" and "bov" have anything to do with the public school curriculum. <<<
bov said:
>>And can you keep the little virtuous militant patriots away from us too please?
I don't love my country and my country doesn't own me. And there's nothing virtuous about love of murder in the name of country, which is what we are currently witnessing all over the world.<<
Again, with people like bov having anything to do with school curriculum, forget it. It'll never get better.
>>I went to PUBLIC school.<<
Like that wasn't obvious.
>>"love of country"
by nessie
Patriotism: What makes the enemy feel good about killing you.<<
And again, with nessie in any way participating in what the public school's curriculum will be, you can see it will go nowhere.
These people would have the schools teaching children things contrary to the truth. I pulled my kids out of the public schools a few years ago because I got tired of having to "deprogram" them from the lies they were being told. I won't permit my kids to grow up and become like nes or bov or ....... or aaron or mike or this thing here or cp who simply parrot what their teachers told them to think and then convinced them that the reason they believe the way they do is because they studied independently and reached these conclusions on their own. And they actually believe they have reached these conclusion by their own study, when we know all along they are simply repeating what they were told to repeat. And if you try and tell them they did not reach these conclusions of their own volition, that they are a product of what their teachers told them they should believe, they'll deny it or they'll lie and claim their teachers taught them the opposite of what they believe now and that they independently came to the conclusions they hold today, so complete is the brainwashing the teachers have done to these individuals.
And I agree with the writer who says if you do choose to homeschool your kids, to make sure they get with other children for social activities. And there are many groups of parents of homeschoolers who do get together (usually at least twice a week) who they will welcome any new children with open arms.
bov said:
>>And can you keep the little virtuous militant patriots away from us too please?
I don't love my country and my country doesn't own me. And there's nothing virtuous about love of murder in the name of country, which is what we are currently witnessing all over the world.<<
Again, with people like bov having anything to do with school curriculum, forget it. It'll never get better.
>>I went to PUBLIC school.<<
Like that wasn't obvious.
>>"love of country"
by nessie
Patriotism: What makes the enemy feel good about killing you.<<
And again, with nessie in any way participating in what the public school's curriculum will be, you can see it will go nowhere.
These people would have the schools teaching children things contrary to the truth. I pulled my kids out of the public schools a few years ago because I got tired of having to "deprogram" them from the lies they were being told. I won't permit my kids to grow up and become like nes or bov or ....... or aaron or mike or this thing here or cp who simply parrot what their teachers told them to think and then convinced them that the reason they believe the way they do is because they studied independently and reached these conclusions on their own. And they actually believe they have reached these conclusion by their own study, when we know all along they are simply repeating what they were told to repeat. And if you try and tell them they did not reach these conclusions of their own volition, that they are a product of what their teachers told them they should believe, they'll deny it or they'll lie and claim their teachers taught them the opposite of what they believe now and that they independently came to the conclusions they hold today, so complete is the brainwashing the teachers have done to these individuals.
And I agree with the writer who says if you do choose to homeschool your kids, to make sure they get with other children for social activities. And there are many groups of parents of homeschoolers who do get together (usually at least twice a week) who they will welcome any new children with open arms.
"Again, with people like bov having anything to do with school curriculum"
nice try but too late . . . the damage from my presence was already inflicted on the little darlings years ago.
Saw these at the Franti concert - it was great. Kids love peace - they really don't *like* to fight.
nice try but too late . . . the damage from my presence was already inflicted on the little darlings years ago.
Saw these at the Franti concert - it was great. Kids love peace - they really don't *like* to fight.
If the parents who oppose the Teach-In had thought of boycotting Oakland Schools and not send their children on the day of the Teach-In.
About 80 percent of the anti-capitalists I have met are either rich kids who have never worked a day in their life, usually students, or losers who bitch constantly about how unfair life is while they secretly spit in the secret sauce of the burgers they're flipping. All of them complain endlessly about capitalism while rocking in the hammock of luxury and freedom that capitalism provides. Wonder which category you're in. If you're still a student, you'll learn.
Be that as it may, my original point is that massive indoctrination for political reasons has no place in public schools, and the fact that the indoctrination is leftist bullshit is almost beside the point. If you want to pump kids full of this stuff, do it in summer camps like your parents and grandparents did.
Defending this overt brainwashing is funny coming from people who have a cow about students saying the Pledge of Allegiance.
Be that as it may, my original point is that massive indoctrination for political reasons has no place in public schools, and the fact that the indoctrination is leftist bullshit is almost beside the point. If you want to pump kids full of this stuff, do it in summer camps like your parents and grandparents did.
Defending this overt brainwashing is funny coming from people who have a cow about students saying the Pledge of Allegiance.
Hey, how would someone simultaneously be a rich kid who never worked a day in their life, and work at a fast food hamburger flipping job where they bitterly harmed the secret sauce, as described two comments previously.
I actually know someone who was a taco Bell manager who did indeed adulterate the food, particularly if he perceived that someone was a vegetarian, but he was a libertarian. He kept pushing Ayn Rand's book on capitalism, and then he cashed in when a dump truck nearly killed him while he was riding a motorcycle and he's been sitting pretty ever since on insurance settlement.
I actually know someone who was a taco Bell manager who did indeed adulterate the food, particularly if he perceived that someone was a vegetarian, but he was a libertarian. He kept pushing Ayn Rand's book on capitalism, and then he cashed in when a dump truck nearly killed him while he was riding a motorcycle and he's been sitting pretty ever since on insurance settlement.
because it contained a sexist slur.
No, you can't say that here. Say it somewhere else. I recommend you try saying it 18th and Castro on a Saturday nite. Say it there. Say loud. Tell me in advance which Saturday nite it's going to be, because I want to be there to see you get what you deserve.
No, you can't say that here. Say it somewhere else. I recommend you try saying it 18th and Castro on a Saturday nite. Say it there. Say loud. Tell me in advance which Saturday nite it's going to be, because I want to be there to see you get what you deserve.
There was nothing sexist about that post, all it said was that teachers teach their political views, instead of what they are supposed to teach. if they teach animal rights, vegitariism, sexual orientation, or any of their political views, they should be banned from teaching, You, by deleting the post, must find that offensive, are you a teacher poisoning our children?
Bull plop. You used the F-word. You can't do that here. We won't let you.
..... don't make it true.
doesn't mean fools will believe it.
..... and that's why we don't believe it.
Gotta go X-mas shopping. You answer now, you answer to someone fighting the crowds. Wish me luck.
Luck!
Thanx! Mean it!
Luck!
Thanx! Mean it!
"No, you can't say that here. Say it somewhere else. I recommend you try saying it 18th and Castro on a Saturday nite. Say it there. Say loud. Tell me in advance which Saturday nite it's going to be, because I want to be there to see you get what you deserve."
Is that the local gay hang out? I will say what ever I want there, and there isn't much that can be done about it. Obviously, I'm not gay, but it seems you are. Get help!! its a mental disorder.
Is that the local gay hang out? I will say what ever I want there, and there isn't much that can be done about it. Obviously, I'm not gay, but it seems you are. Get help!! its a mental disorder.
. . . and there isn't much that can be done about it. "
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
You just try it. You'll wind up in traction. Promise.
San Francisco's Gay community once led a mob that beat the crap out of the SFPD, and cornered most of the force, the mayor and the city council in their block house. They were battering down the door when I got there. The only reason they didn't lynch anybody is because a bunch of Gay pacifists interceded by placing their own bodies in front of the door. Nobody had the stomach to knock them out of the way. Twenty years later, people still debate whether that was a mistake.
Mess with Gays in San francisco and you're going to get hurt and they're going to get help.
>Obviously, I'm not gay, but it seems you are.
Actually, no, I'm not. But some of my friends are. Don't mess with my frinds or I'll hurt you myself.
>Get help!! its a mental disorder.
Homophobia is a mental disorder. You're a sick, sick person. Don't bother getting help. You're beyond help. Put yourself out of your misery. Take a long walk off a short pier.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
You just try it. You'll wind up in traction. Promise.
San Francisco's Gay community once led a mob that beat the crap out of the SFPD, and cornered most of the force, the mayor and the city council in their block house. They were battering down the door when I got there. The only reason they didn't lynch anybody is because a bunch of Gay pacifists interceded by placing their own bodies in front of the door. Nobody had the stomach to knock them out of the way. Twenty years later, people still debate whether that was a mistake.
Mess with Gays in San francisco and you're going to get hurt and they're going to get help.
>Obviously, I'm not gay, but it seems you are.
Actually, no, I'm not. But some of my friends are. Don't mess with my frinds or I'll hurt you myself.
>Get help!! its a mental disorder.
Homophobia is a mental disorder. You're a sick, sick person. Don't bother getting help. You're beyond help. Put yourself out of your misery. Take a long walk off a short pier.
Or female sheep?
"Why, female, of course. What do you think I am, anyway, Queer?" - Oscar Wilde
A gang of gay thugs, LOL they must look pretty in their tu tu's LMAO
Us "homophobes" can also organize gangs, but we don't bother, Some gay's like beatings, and we wouldn't want to inavertantly give them pleasure.
Us "homophobes" can also organize gangs, but we don't bother, Some gay's like beatings, and we wouldn't want to inavertantly give them pleasure.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$170.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network