Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Monday, January 28, 2008

Slouching Towards Balkanization

We are witnessing the final throes of a failed attempt at social integration in America's schools. We need to face the fact that federally enforced integration through social design hasn't worked, will never work. Human nature will always trump man's attempt to effect social, political and economic equality among diverse groups.

It is past time for Americans to cast off the slough of utopian ideas behind the take-over of our governance as a nation. The choice to segregate is a matter of survival, and the need to be associated with one's own includes both immigrants and the former slave-class, known currently as "African-Americans". The name itself, which seems to be the preferred nom de plume, further indicates a special status, setting them apart from Americans, and guaranteeing the cherished mantle of victimhood.

The natural choice of preferring one's on kind is determined by many factors, but let's not intellectualize this phenomenon beyond the obvious: we prefer our own kind because we are more comfortable with our own, build better communities, and thrive better among our own. Diversity at every level of interaction is not man's best means of survival, socially or economically. As long as we continue to allow the socialist designers to influence how we interact with one another, we as a nation, will continue to drift toward balkanization.

Our school system, largely controlled by stale Gramscian/Friereian methodology, out of which comes the doxology of "outcome-based education" (OBE), and the deceit of NCLB, is experiencing the final breakdown of common sense.

The need for a core curricula free of political ideology and dogma has never been greater than today. Schools need to adopt a content-based pedagogy of science, mathematics, English, and the arts; need to become much more flexible and responsive to developing minds. Our youth must be taught, shown how to think and reason for themselves.

OBE must go, along with the misguided concept of No Child Left Behind. There will always be children, as well as adults, who are "left behind"- where they will perhaps be in a better place to meet their destiny as human beings. Yeah, I know: life sucks.

Here is yet another report of the break-down of the Utopian social design...

Resegregation of U.S. schools deepening

Districts in big cities of the Midwest and Northeast undergo the most change.

By Amanda Paulson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Jan 25, 2008

At one time, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District in North Carolina was a model of court-ordered integration.

Today, nearly a decade after a court struck down its racial-balancing busing program, the school district is moving in the opposite direction. More than half of its elementary schools are either more than 90 percent black or 90 percent white.

"Charlotte is rapidly resegregating," says Carol Sawyer, a parent and member of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Equity Committee.

It's a trend that is occurring around the country and is even more pronounced than expected in the wake of court cases dismantling both mandated and voluntary integration programs, a new report says. The most segregated schools, according to the report, which documents desegregation trends, are in big cities of the Northeast and Midwest. The South and West – and rural areas and small towns generally – offer minority students a bit more diversity.

Suburbs of large cities, meanwhile, are becoming the new frontier: areas to which many minorities are moving.

These places still have a chance to remain diverse communities but are showing signs of replicating the segregation patterns of the cities themselves.

"It's getting to the point of almost absolute segregation in the worst of the segregated cities – within one or two percentage points of what the Old South used to be like," says Gary Orfield, codirector of the Civil Rights Project and one of the study's authors. "The biggest metro areas are the epicenters of segregation. It's getting worse for both blacks and Latinos, and nothing is being done about it."

About one-sixth of black students and one-ninth of Latino students attend what Mr. Orfield calls "apartheid schools," at least 99 percent minority. In big cities, black and Latino students are nearly twice as likely to attend such schools. Some two-thirds of black and Latino students in big cities attend schools with less than 10 percent white students; in rural areas, about one-seventh of black and Latino students do. Although the South was the region that originally integrated thenmost successfully, it's beginning to resegregate, as in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg district.

While resegregation has been taking place for some time, Orfield says the latest numbers are worrisome both for the degree to which they show the trend is occurring and in light of the US Supreme Court's most recent decision on the issue last June, which struck down several voluntary integration programs and made it more difficult for districts that want to work at desegregating schools to do so.

"If you [as a district] are going to ask your lawyer what's the easiest thing to do, it's to just stop trying to do anything," Orfield explains. "That's a recipe for real segregation."

Not everyone feels that way. Some groups applauded the Supreme Court's decision last summer as another step toward taking race out of school admission policies and allowing parents to send their kids to the schools most convenient for them. If schools start reflecting neighborhood makeup – which often means nearly all-white or all-minority – that doesn't have to matter, they say.

"Segregation means people are being deliberately assigned to schools based on skin color," says Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity in Falls Church, Va. "If it simply reflects neighborhoods, then it's not segregation."

Mr. Clegg questions some of the resegregation research, noting that the percentage of white students in schools is often going down simply because they're a decreasing portion of the population. He also quibbles with the notion that an all-black, all-Hispanic, or all-white school is necessarily a bad thing.

"I don't think that the education that you get hinges on the color of the person sitting next to you in the classroom," Clegg says. "What educators should focus on is improving schools."

That sounds great in theory, say some experts, but the fact is that segregated schools tend to be highly correlated with such things as school performance and the ability to attract teachers.

"Once you separate kids spacially from more privileged kids, they tend to not get the same things," says Amy Stuart Wells, an education professor at Columbia University's Teachers College in New York. "And we need to start thinking about how a school that's racially isolated can be preparing students for this global society we live in."

Still, many of the programs that worked to achieve integration – such as busing – have been highly unpopular over the years. And in big cities, real integration is often virtually impossible: Many cities have largely minority populations, and the districts don't extend to the suburbs.

Suburbs, though, offer potential. The Civil Rights Project report noted that big-city suburbs educate 7.9 million white students along with 2.1 million blacks and 2.9 million Latinos. "This is the new frontier for thinking about how to make diverse schools work," says Professor Wells.

But so far, the data for suburbs are not encouraging, showing emerging segregation. Some integration advocates say this shows a need for more diversity training for teachers and students and for policies that encourage integrated housing, not just schools.

"Each affects the other," says Erica Frankenberg, the co-author on the Civil Rights Project study. "Unless we think about this jointly, we're probably not going to be able to create stable racial integrated neighborhoods and schools."

Vanishing American gives voice to Reason:

Liberals would, in their tiresome way, blame the outsider-ness of many immigrants on 'racism'. If only white Americans were better indoctrinated into being 'inclusive' and 'tolerant', then no immigrant need ever feel an outsider. I don't buy this rationale. Most of the immigrants of today self-segregate, and prefer to be among their own kind. I also see a new arrogance and sense of entitlement that I don't remember in past eras among immigrants.

And can they be blamed for self-segregating? At one time, a more liberal time, in my life, I would have said: they should assimilate. Shame on them for preferring to stay among their own. But now I see their choice as natural and primal. Each to his own. The problem arises only when we mingle various peoples within a geographic space and order them to associate and adapt to each other. And how can this be reconciled with our supposed dedication to liberty and freedom in America?

The right to freedom of association is an important one, and it's one that has been taken away from us for 40+ years, because of the enforced liberal ideas of 'equality'. As we've seen, equality and liberty cannot coexist, in many cases.

Equality is not a normal state of things, and must be brought about by coercive means.

I see no reason to suppose that this tendency toward immigrant 'outsider' status will reverse itself. The liberals of both parties prattle about 'assimilation' and English only, but those things can often be superficial. It is possible to be outwardly assimilated and to speak good colloquial English and yet be an outsider victim with a chip on one's shoulder toward the host country.

And as long as the regnant liberal philosophy exalts and rewards and coddles those with 'victim' status, many will exploit this for all it's worth. The rewards and the reinforcements for playing the victim are too numerous. We will have to shed liberal ideas and return to traditional American habits, in which people are judged on their merit, before we can break the cycle of this unhealthy dynamic.
The choice is ours to make.

Related story: Supreme Court Rejects School Racial Diversity Diversity Plans

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Vanishing American on "Outsiders and Victims"

Vanishing American, with the help of Ron Guhname explains the patch-work quilt of 'identities" in American society...

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Outsiders and victims

Ron Guhname at Inductivist
writes an entry that has to do with the fact that, statistically, most immigrants, even upwardly-mobile immigrants, tend to vote Democrat. He ties this voting pattern to the immigrants' frequent self-perception as outsiders in American society. Most immigrants these days are non-white by a huge margin, so they tend to see themselves as outsiders. And the Democrats are the party of, by, and for outsiders. Racial and ethnic minorities, gays, the poor in general, immigrants, and extreme leftists, who view themselves as victims -- even when they are middle-class or better in economic terms -- these are the base of the Democrat Party. There are also the unions, although they have been a waning force, and they are now looking to the tidal wave of illegal (and legal) immigration to swell their ranks. They, too, see themselves as outsider/victims in an economic sense, even if they are white.Guhname mentions that it is hard for immigrants to psychologically move from their outsider status to the inside, and identify with the American old-stock majority. Guhname mentions the allure of the role of outsider and victim, a fact which is seldom addressed or analyzed, even though it plays a huge part in relations between the majority (whites) and minorities in America.

Someone who sees himself as an outsider also perceives himself as weak--the inside is where the power is. He naturally joins up with other self-perceived outsiders to play the role of David against Goliath. He is both insecure and morally superior at the same time. His stance is oppositional: he wants to tear down whatever it is that the giant wants to hold up. That role is a an alluring one, and the psychological payoff is large enough to keep its hold on a person, even after achieving economic success. The role is so appealing, the children of non-white immigrants are likely to adopt it, even though they were born here and may have enjoyed an easy life.

In this context, the Virginia Tech killer, Cho Seung Hui, comes to mind. He was Korean-born, and he very definitely exemplified the outsider/victim mentality. The video he mailed to the media before his rampage expressed his hatred of American society. Guhname continues:
People on the Right, by contrast, have no such insecurities: they belong here and they know it. The guys in suits are not your enemies: you're on the same team. But it is much easier to get to that place psychologically if you are white and Christian.''The crucial part in that passage above is the part about the moral superiority which accrues to victims in our society. He says that there is a large psychological payoff for the outsider/victim, and this is undeniable. There is a psychological payoff in that victims and outsiders are seen as morally righteous and noble, and they are seen as somehow heroic by their mere existence, serving as walking testimony to the injustice and 'unfairness' of the present system, which these groups usually define as evil and immoral.

The crucial part in that passage above is the part about the moral superiority which accrues to victims in our society. He says that there is a large psychological payoff for the outsider/victim, and this is undeniable. There is a psychological payoff in that victims and outsiders are seen as morally righteous and noble, and they are seen as somehow heroic by their mere existence, serving as walking testimony to the injustice and 'unfairness' of the present system, which these groups usually define as evil and immoral.

Read the rest at Vanishing American.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

The Caliphate vs Multiculturalism

From Sultan Knish

The cult of multiculturalism has been the biggest failure of liberal Western governments in the previous century. It might have survived its many failures however to slowly strangle its host societies had it not been for the emergence of a competing vision against which it is helpless, that of the Caliphate.

In any showdown between a multicultural society against the caliphate, the caliphate will always win among Muslims, simply because a multicultural society is incapable of defending its own existence and must tolerate the proponents of the caliphate.

The problem with multiculturalism and the reason why in the end Muslims and even many non-Muslims will choose a romanticized caliphate over the bleak reality of a multicultural system, is that in the end it stands for nothing. Tolerance of everything really means standing for nothing and embracing all cultures means lacking any culture of your own.
Read the rest...

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Lou Dobbs Nails the "Bush legacy"

Beware the Lame Duck

By Lou Dobbs

Lou Dobbs' commentary appears weekly on CNN.com.

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Diehard GOP faithful, the dwindling number of Bush loyalists and political pundits of every stripe and medium seem obsessed these days with defining or discerning the "legacy of George W. Bush."

Lou Dobbs says President Bush has diminished a great nation and may diminish it further.

Frankly, I spend more time worrying about whether or not the United States can survive the remaining 15 months of his ebbing presidency.

There is little mystery about what future historians will consider to be the legacy of the 43rd president of the United States. Those historians are certain to describe the first presidential administration of the 21st century with terms such as dissipation and perversion.

Bush campaigned for the Republican Party's nomination eight years ago, styling himself as a compassionate conservative. He's amply demonstrated that he is neither.

Although many conservatives refuse to accept the reality, George W. Bush is a one-world neo-liberal who drove budget and trade deficits to record heights while embracing faith-based economic policies that perversely require only blind allegiance to free markets and free trade, without regard for consequence.

This president pursues a war without demanding of his generals either success or victory and accepts the sacrifice of our brave young men and women in uniform while asking nothing of our people or the nation at a time of war.

Sadly, this president has diminished a great nation and may diminish it further.

President Bush has pressed hard for the Security and Prosperity Partnership, the first step toward a North American Union that will threaten our sovereignty. This administration has permitted American businesses to hire illegal aliens, encouraged the invasion of 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens and has given Mexico and corporate America dominion over our borders and our immigration policy.

Were it not for an outraged public, the Bush administration would have been happy to cede control of our ports to a Dubai government-owned company.

The assault on our national sovereignty continues: At a time when public approval of the White House and Congress is near historic lows, the president is urging the Senate to act favorably on our accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

One hundred fifty-five nations have ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty, which essentially codifies into law detailed rules about freedom of the seas and the extent of territorial waters. The treaty also establishes an international bureaucracy to regulate deep-sea mining.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee recently heard arguments on the 1982 Law of the Sea Treaty, which President Ronald Reagan rejected but President Bill Clinton submitted to the Senate in 1994. A vote is likely in the weeks ahead, and this Democratic-controlled Senate is the same institution whose leadership sought passage of the disastrous comprehensive immigration overhaul legislation.

And just as this administration trotted out an Army general to support the Dubai Ports World fiasco and a Marine Corps general to support the administration's immigration proposal, it's now pressured the U.S. Navy to support this treaty.

Bush says the treaty "will secure U.S. sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural resources they contain." The president could not be more wrong.

This treaty will submit the United States to international tribunals largely adverse to our interests, and the dispute resolution mechanisms are stacked against the United States. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, astutely argues that nearly all the signatories "have voted against the United States over half the time [at the United Nations]."

This administration can do nothing straightforwardly and perverts language at every turn. Take, for example, the words of Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte arguing in support of the treaty. "As a non-party," he argues, "We are not currently in a position to maximize U.S. sovereign rights over the shelf in the Arctic or elsewhere."

Negroponte's tortured reasoning is entirely consistent with this administration's intellectual performance over almost two terms in office, but it serves neither the truth nor the national interest.

The Law of the Sea Treaty would undermine our national sovereignty and act as a back door for global environmental activists to direct U.S. policy.

It would hold the United States to yet another unaccountable international bureaucracy and constrain our national prerogatives. Aside from that, the treaty is wholly unnecessary. The U.S. Navy already enjoys international navigation rights by customary practice.

Our elected officials in both political parties and the national media should worry less about the legacy of this lame-duck president and far more about the future of a great nation and people debilitated by his ruinous leadership.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Intolerant Tolerance

I just started a new job this week, and haven't had time to post anything. Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna posted a piece today by H. Numan which is definitely worth a read. On his site Scroll down about a third of the page.


by Baron Bodissey
- Continuing the discussion about political correctness, our expatriate Dutch correspondent H. Numan contributes the following essay.

Intolerant Tolerance
by H. Numan

Monday, January 07, 2008

Islamic Insiders Corrupt the Corruptible

Stephen Coughlin gets the boot from the Department of Defense...not good news, because it's symptomatic of the rot within the power structure posing as our government.

Jan 5, 2008
Posted by John

Defense Department Critic of Islam Sacked

Scott noted here Bill Gertz's report on the conflict inside the Defense Department between Stephen Coughlin, a leading student of Islamic extremism, and Hasham Islam, an aide to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R. England who conducts Muslim outreach on behalf of DoD. Coughlin had pointed out, based in part on information that came to light in the Holy Land Foundation trial in Texas, that several of the groups participating in Mr. Islam's outreach program are front organizations for the pro-jihad Muslim Brotherhood.

Gertz now reports that Islam won the bureaucratic battle: Coughlin has been fired from the U.S. military's Joint Staff:

Mr. Coughlin was notified this week that his contract with the Joint Staff will end in March, effectively halting the career of one of the U.S. government's most important figures in analyzing the nature of extremism and ultimately preparing to wage ideological war against it.

The officials said Mr. Coughlin was let go because he had become "too hot" or controversial within the Pentagon.

It was bad enough when this kind of thinking dominated the State Department. Now, it's spread to DOD and the military.
and from the Washington Times

Inside the Ring
January 4, 2008
By Bill Gertz - Coughlin sacked
Stephen Coughlin, the Pentagon specialist on Islamic law and Islamist extremism, has been fired from his position on the military's Joint Staff. The action followed a report in this space last week revealing opposition to his work for the military by pro-Muslim officials within the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England.

Mr. Coughlin was notified this week that his contract with the Joint Staff will end in March, effectively halting the career of one of the U.S. government's most important figures in analyzing the nature of extremism and ultimately preparing to wage ideological war against it.

He had run afoul of a key aide to Mr. England, Hasham Islam, who confronted Mr. Coughlin during a meeting several weeks ago when Mr. Islam sought to have Mr. Coughlin soften his views on Islamist extremism.

Mr. Coughlin was accused directly by Mr. Islam of being a Christian zealot or extremist "with a pen," according to defense officials. Mr. Coughlin appears to have become one of the first casualties in the war of ideas with Islamism.

The officials said Mr. Coughlin was let go because he had become "too hot" or controversial within the Pentagon.

Misguided Pentagon officials, including Mr. Islam and Mr. England, have initiated an aggressive "outreach" program to U.S. Muslim groups that critics say is lending credibility to what has been identified as a budding support network for Islamist extremists, including front groups for the radical Muslim Brotherhood.

Mr. Coughlin wrote a memorandum several months ago based on documents made public in a federal trial in Dallas that revealed a covert plan by the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian-origin Islamist extremist group, to subvert the United States using front groups. Members of one of the identified front groups, the Islamic Society of North America, has been hosted by Mr. England at the Pentagon.

After word of the confrontation between Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Islam was made public, support for Mr. Coughlin skyrocketed among those in and out of government who feared the worst, namely that pro-Muslim officials in the Pentagon were after Mr. Coughlin's scalp, and that his departure would be a major setback for the Pentagon's struggling efforts to develop a war of ideas against extremism. Blogs lit up with hundreds of postings, some suggesting that Mr. England's office is "penetrated" by the enemy in the war on terrorism.

Kevin Wensing, a spokesman for Mr. England, said "no one in the deputy's office had any input into this decision" by the Joint Staff to end Mr. Coughlin's contract. A Joint Staff spokesman had no immediate comment.

And Andrew Bostom provides the background of our government's wishy-washy attempts at counter-jihad, going all the way back to the Barbary Piracy Wars and Thomas Jefferson. He draws parallels with another couragous American, William Eaton, whose efforts to pull the scales from the eyes of US diplomats regarding the true intent of Islamic jihad met with tragic defeat.

Eaton Agonistes, Redux?

January 5th, 2008
by Andrew Bostom
This past September, 2007, I lectured with Mr. Coughlin, a US Army Reserves Major, at The Naval War College, and witnessed his brilliant, tour de force presentation which elucidated the reliance of contemporary jihadism on Islamic Law. Coughlin demonstrated meticulously that “Jihad fi Sabil Allah”—“Jihad in the cause of Allah,” is the animating principle which underlies the threat of global jihad terrorism, and how this understanding should form the basis for rational, effective threat development assessment, and war planning.

That Coughlin’s analyses would even be considered “controversial,” or worse still lead eventually to his firing—perhaps, as Gertz strongly suggests, at the behest of a Muslim aide, Hesham Islam, within the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England—is pathognomonic of the intellectual and moral rot plaguing our efforts to combat global jihadism.

There is no evidence that Mr. Islam—distinctly unlike Mr. Coughlin—has any specific expertise on the theory or historical practice of jihad; indeed Gordon England’s Egyptian Muslim aide is touted for his public relations skills—a sort of English-speaking Muslim Dragoman to the global Islamic umma. According to Deputy Secretary England, Hesham [Islam] helps me understand people’s different perspectives and how they see things. He has a cultural background that’s very helpful, but he also works at it very hard to get a better understanding of people and how they think.

...Coughlin’s reasoned conclusions simply update and complement, exquisitely, what serious scholars of jihad have long argued about revivalist movements throughout Islamic history. For example, forty years ago (in 1967), John Ralph Willis observed regarding the 19th century jihadist movements in West Africa, specifically, and such historical movements in general,

The jihad…is essentially an instrument of revival, employed for the purpose of extending the frontiers of Islam and leading the faithful back to roots. And it is not insignificant that the faithful, being in essence conservative, have been as susceptible to the summons of revivalists as they have been insensitive to the activity of reformists...

...Stephen Coughlin understands and enunciates what was stated openly to then Ambassadors John Adams and Thomas Jefferson—and what they apparently understood—by the Tripolitan Ambassador Adja. During his September. 2007 presentation which I witnessed at US Naval War College, Coughlin updated this timeless Islamic formulation into its modern context:

If the Enemy in the War on Terror (WOT) states that he fights jihad in furtherance of Islamic causes that includes the imposition of Shari’a law and the re-establishment of the Caliphate; And Islamic law on jihad exists and is available in English; Then Professionals with WOT responsibilities have an affirmative, personal, professional duty to know the enemy that includes ALL the knowable facts associated with the law of jihad.

And Coughlin, a well-trained lawyer, further argued that such understanding by our military leaders is obligatory if they are to uphold their essential commission:

This is the Professional Standard.

Stephen Coughlin has been fired for reminding his peers of this basic obligation.

Two hundred years after William Eaton’s bitter, tragic experiences, and ultimate posthumous vindication, let us fervently hope that our contemporary military and political elites muster the intellectual courage to heed Major Stephen Coughlin’s advice in a much more timely, and responsible manner.
To read Andrew Bostom's article, go here.

Trackbacked to Right Truth, Woman Honor Thyself

Sunday, January 06, 2008

How To Destroy America

How to Destroy America

Article by Frosty Wooldridge
October 31, 2003

Published in MichNews.com.

In Washington, DC, several weeks ago, an immigration-overpopulation conference was filled to capacity by many of America’s finest minds and leaders. Writers, speakers, CEO's, representatives from Congress such as Tom Tancredo as well as former governors graced the podium. Bonnie Eggle, mother of the national parks ranger Kris Eggle, slain by Mexican drug runners last year on our unguarded southern border--gave a compelling speech that left not one dry eye in the place.

Peter Gadiel, father of Jamie Gadiel, spoke powerfully on how the World Trade Center took his son and how nothing has been done since--to stop the flow of illegal immigration into the United States. Even with the facade of Tom Ridge's Homeland Security, 800,000 illegal aliens continue walking, crawling or tunneling across the Mexican border annually. Their accelerating numbers undermine America's ability to function.

During the conference, speaker after speaker astounded the audience with facts on how fast the present administration and congress continue dismantling the American Dream for average citizens. Mr. Rob Sanchez of Arizona, showed how H-1b and L-1 visas have ripped one million high tech jobs out of American worker's hands. Another speaker told a packed audience how 'offshoring' and 'outsourcing', fully supported by the president and congress have cost over three million American jobs in the past six years. His prediction was even more depressing: "In excess of three million more jobs will be 'outsourced' within four years. Those American jobs are headed to Mexico, India, China, Pakistan and Brazil."

Later, a brilliant college professor, Victor Davis Hansen, talked about his latest book, 'MEXIFORNIA', explaining how immigration, both legal and illegal, was destroying the entire State of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of the American Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm, stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound by the eight methods for destruction of the United States.

Lamm said, "If you believe that America is too smug, to self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall, and that, "An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide."

"Here is how they destroyed their countries," Lamm said. "First, turn America into a bilingual or multi lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.

The historical scholar Seymour Lipset put it this way, "The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon-all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons and Corsicans."

Lamm continued on how to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds."

"We could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the ATLANTIC MONTHLY recently: " The apparent success of our own multi-ethnic and multi-cultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together."

Lamm added, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school."

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology'. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other-that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks: "The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet, all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors…local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus' instead of the 'unum, we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits-make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity'. I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century-that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate."

"Having made America a bilingual--bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology', I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra:

"That because immigration has been good for America, it must ALWAYS be good. I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. A profound silence swept over the room. Finally, he said, "Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hansen's book 'MEXIFORNIA'. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Every discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity'. American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as greedy corporations create a Third World in America-take note of California and other states-to date, 10 million illegal aliens and growing, fast.

It reminded me of George Orwell's book, '1984'. In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building:

"War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength." I sat there as one of this country's most patriotic Americans, Governor Lamm, walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy, are deeply in trouble and worsening fast. An invasion of diseases, clashing cultures, languages, balkinization, mounting environmental dilemmas accelerate by the day.

If this immigration monster isn't stopped within three years, it will rage across the United States like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially the American Dream.


Indeed, the Socialists, which are endemic in our universities, federal courts, and in every other level of federal government, are following just such a recipe.

Wiki says:

  • endemic (epidemiology), an infection is said to be "endemic" in a population when that infection is maintained in the population without the need for external inputs.

Wednesday, January 02, 2008

Just The Facts On SB 777

Might as well let Michael Savage loose on this, too...

North County Times

Just the facts on SB 777

By: ROBERT TYLER - Commentary

Forget everything you learned in kindergarten about the difference between boys and girls. According to Gov. Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature, schoolchildren can now choose their own sex. I'm not talking about choosing "sexual behavior or sexual preferences." Kids are going to be taught that they have the right to completely ignore their physical anatomy and choose the status of being "male" or "female."

Ignore your common sense, ignore your chromosomes and ignore your anatomy. This is what your politicians want to teach your kids in school. After all, California's kids have mastered reading, writing and arithmetic, haven't they? In October, California Senate Bill 777 was signed into law. Senate Bill 777 eliminates Education Code 212, which currently defines "sex" as "the biological condition or quality of being a male or female human being." And worse yet, SB 777 redefines the term "gender" for all schoolchildren by adding Education Code 210.7, which will read: "'Gender' means sex, and includes a person's gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth." In short, this redefinition of gender states that you are what you choose to be regardless of your anatomical make-up.

SB 777 also uses this redefinition of gender to forbid educators from discriminating against any individual employee, student or other person based upon that individual's unspoken claim of being male or female, regardless of his or her actual sex.

Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a nonprofit law firm dedicated to pro-family issues, filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court, San Diego, on behalf of the California Education Committee LLC, a project of California Family Council. Members of the California Education Committee include school board trustees, educators, parents and students.

The lawsuit argues that the redefinition of gender should be declared unconstitutionally vague as no school administrator or teacher would ever know whether they are unlawfully discriminating against a person based on their chosen sex. For example, how is it possible for an educator to segregate the boys from the girls if each individual has the ability to randomly self-define their sex regardless of their anatomy? Should educators really have to face the possibility of being sued for discrimination every time they segregate boys and girls or should they just be responsible for asking every child what sex they choose to be that day?

The lawsuit also argues that SB 777 is vague because Education Code section 51500 prohibits any teacher or school district from giving instruction or sponsoring any activity that promotes a discriminatory bias against persons based upon their gender or sexual orientation. Is a "discriminatory bias" being promoted when a high school chooses a homecoming king and queen or when a teacher discusses the role of a mother and father after reading a classic English novel?

Education Code section 220 prohibits discrimination based upon a person's self-defined gender in "any program or activity conducted by an educational institution." And Education Code section 200 requires "equal rights and opportunities in the educational institutions of the state."

If the school must treat a biological male as a self-defined "female" in "any program or activity" and in the "educational institutions of the state," does this require schools to allow the self-defined "female" to access female facilities? If persons can legally self-define their sex, shouldn't they be entitled to be treated that way regarding access to all public facilities?

Sound outlandish? Not really.

The Los Angeles Unified School District has already adopted policies allowing boys to use girls' restrooms and locker rooms ---- and vice versa! You can read LAUSD's Reference Guide 1557 on the district's Web site.

It even tells teachers they need to refer to students using the student's preferred pronoun. And of course, it prohibits the teachers from disclosing a student's chosen gender to the student's parents. Since LAUSD has such a strong academic record, don't you think all school districts should duplicate this program?

Our schools should not be used as incubators for social experiments and our kids should not have to be subjected to the radical agenda of Sacramento politicians. It's time for our schools to get back to the basics and fend off these ridiculousefforts to brainwash our kids.

Robert Tyler is general counsel for Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a national nonprofit religious liberty and pro-family law firm located in Murrieta.

Its Web site is www.faith-freedom.com.

Comments On This Story...

Read the Washington Times' take on this insanity...