Wolves in Sheep's Clothing

Muslim politicians in the Western world come in two general varieties: those rare ones who are candid about their desire to transform the West in accordance with the dictates of their faith, and those, far greater in number, who prefer to disguise that ambition. The first category includes people like Abdirizak Waberi, a Swedish MP turned Islamic school principal who has actually admitted he believes in “banning music and dancing, prohibiting boys and girls from socializing, and allowing men to beat their four wives with sticks when they became disobedient,” and Brussels city councilman Redouane Ahrouch, who openly advocates for sharia government and recently called for a separation of the sexes on that city’s public transport.

In the second category are Rotterdam mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb, who while striving to pose as a progressive allows his mask to slip now and then (recently, he told an interviewer that “every Muslim is a bit of a salafist”), and London mayor Sadiq Khan, another faux liberal who has, in fact, ordered police to put less emphasis on monitoring potential terrorists and more emphasis on harassing Islam critics. And let’s not forget Minnesota’s (and the DNC’s) own Keith Ellison, who poses as a standard-issue Democrat but belonged for a decade to the Nation of Islam, speaks at CAIR events, and has ties to several pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic groups.

Also belonging to the latter category is Somali-born Bashe Musse, a Norwegian Labor Party politician who has been a member of the Oslo City Council since 2011. During the last couple of weeks he’s been making headlines because of a Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) report on “dumping.” What’s dumping? Like honor killing and female genital mutilation, it’s a common practice in Europe’s Muslims communities. Instead of sending their kids to regular neighborhood schools, many Muslim parents in Europe send their children off to madrasses – Koran schools – in the countries from which they, the parents, emigrated. The children stay in these schools for years at a time, memorizing the Islamic holy book while their agemates back in Europe learn math, science, and literature.

“Dumping” is eyebrow-raising for more than one reason. Many of these kids’ parents were allowed into Europe in the first place because they professed to be refugees from oppression in their homelands. The fact that they’re shipping their kids off to schools in those same countries gives the lie to those claims. The parents also often maintain that they’re proud to be French, Swedish, or whatever, and that they’re striving to assimilate into their adopted nations. But the whole point of sending these kids to madrasses in the Muslim world is to shield them from what the parents consider the baleful influence of Western civilization.

Last year, NRK produced, as noted, a report on Somali madrasses in which children from Norway have been enrolled. Many viewers considered the revelations eye-popping. In fact it was old news. In a 2004 study, Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Norway’s Human Rights Service (HRS) documented, in extraordinary and devastating detail, the grim reality of daily life in these institutions, where the conditions are almost always primitive and where the atmosphere is less that of a First World school than of a Third World prison. NRK’s report, which contained interviews with children living in Norway who had attended the Somali madrasses, confirmed HRS’s findings: at those “schools,” the children had been tied up, whipped, beaten, and subjected to other sorts of brutal treatment that would ordinarily be considered torture.

Which brings us to Bashe Musse, who in addition to being an Oslo city councilman is also the official chief spokesperson for Norway’s Somali community, the largest non-Western immigrant group in the country. After NRK’s report aired last year, he claimed to be shocked by its contents. But on May 29 of this year, NRK reported that in an interview aired on Somali TV, Musse had dismissed the children’s testimony about the madrasses and regretted that such lies, as he called them, had been “sold to the Norwegian people” by the Norwegian media, which he characterized as “one-sided.”

When confronted by NRK with a transcript of his comments to Somali TV, Musse insisted that the person who had translated his words from Somali into Norwegian had fouled up, entirely misrepresenting his views. NRK thereupon engaged the services of another translator, whose product was essentially identical to that of the first translator. It then presented the transcript to various government officials. Frode Jacobsen, head of the Oslo Labor Party, said he was “surprised and shocked” by Musse’s “double communication,” which he described as “very unfortunate.” Norway’s Minister of Integration, Jan Tore Sanner, also expressed concern, but did not call for any action against Musse. The Progress Party’s immigration spokesman, Jon Helgheim, went quite a bit further, scorning Musse as “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” and urging that the Labour Party discipline him in some way. But as far as I have been able to determine, no one in a position of power has demanded Musse’s resignation or removal from the City Council.

Lying to infidels, of course, has a name in Arabic – taqiyya – and it is one of the chief weapons of Islam in its eternal conflict with non-believers. Among its more celebrated practitioners is “Euro-Islam” proponent, Oxford professor, accused serial rapist, and current jailbird Tariq Ramadan, who is known to routinely say one thing to Western audiences in French or English and another to Muslim audiences n Arabic. Indeed, Caroline Fourest’s book about him is entitled Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan. To employ taqiyya, as Musse appears to have done, is to demonstrate definitively that one is not on the side of the West but that one is a double agent – a partisan, a person whose true loyalty lies, shall we say, elsewhere.

Within a few hours of being caught dead to rights on NRK as a practitioner of doublespeak, Musse made an announcement. Did he resign? Of course not. He declared that NRK had represented him to the Norwegian public as a liar and, what’s more, had painted an unflattering picture of Somalia.  Accordingly, he had contacted a lawyer, Arild Humlen, to ascertain what legal rights he had in the matter. 

What makes this story important, needless to say, is that Musse is not an outlier. Far from it. Increasingly, all over the West, Muslims hold elected positions, some of them at a very high level. It is considered to be racist, or at the very least to be in terribly bad taste, to question whether they can be loyal at once to their totalizing, all-encompassing religion and to their officially secular country and its (still) mostly non-Muslim inhabitants. Once those poiticians are caught engaging in taqiyya, of course, there is no further reason for doubt on this score.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Secret Courts Guarantee Abuse

Michael Ledeen is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

I testified against the Patriot Act because I feared the abuse of secret tribunals.  I’m usually far off in my predictions, but it was obvious from the get-go that the FISA courts would be abused by the Intelligence Community, and indeed those secret courts have almost always done what the FBI and CIA asked, even when—as in the case of General Michael Flynn—the IC had to ask several times, and even when the “evidence” consisted of an unverified “dossier” produced by a political campaign.

The Intelligence Community has long considered itself a state within the American state, dating from its creation just after World War II.  Most of the time, the IC has used its power to support presidential policies—the CIA snooped on the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2014, and on the McGovern campaign, and the FBI spied on the Goldwater campaign– but when a president acted against the IC’s convictions, the spooks advanced their own interests and beliefs.

No sooner had President Truman recognized the state of Israel, than the CIA swung into (illegal) action, secretly creating the American Friends of the Middle East, which brought Middle Easterners to America, published their views, and lobbied Congress, all against Israel.  In the words of Hudson’s Michael Doran, 

AFME was a remarkable instance of a CIA-confected front organization designed to counter official government policy, in this case by seeking to delegitimize Zionism in domestic American politics.

Truman quickly understood what was at stake.  “It’s become a government all of its own and all secret.  They don’t have to account to anybody.”.

It was, Truman recognized, part of a broader problem: bureaucrats who saw themselves, not mere elected officials, as the only legitimate policy makers.  “The civil servant, the general or admiral, the foreign service officer,” Truman insisted, “has no authority to make policy. They act only as servants of the government, and therefore they must remain in line with the government policy that is established by those who have been chosen by the people to set that policy.”

This enraged the president, who was also furious at the State Department’s opposition to his Middle East policies.  Yet bureaucratic action against presidential policies remained common.  As Truman discovered, the IC used “intelligence” to undermine presidential policies and advance its own.  This was demonstrated in the 1970s, when a private-sector group of analysts known as “Team B”—led by the recently-departed Professor Richard Pipes of Harvard–successfully challenged the CIA’s view of Soviet military strength, and the CIA’s conviction that we had very little to fear from the Kremlin.

Back in the Truman years, the president was able to appreciate Soviet intentions better than the IC, ironically thanks in no small part to his own intelligence operation in cahoots with Israel.  Ironically, Truman opened a secret back channel to Tel Aviv at the same time the CIA was sabotaging American cooperation with the Jewish state, via the legendary spook James Jesus Angleton, whose point of contact in Israel was Ben-Gurion’s personal secretary, Teddy Kolleck.  The two worked closely with Israel’s domestic security service, the Shin Bet, debriefing Jewish immigrants from the Soviet Empire.  Angleton, like most CIA officials, suspected the Israelis of collusion with the Soviet Union, but in time he realized this was not true.  Angleton subsequently received the text of Khrushchev’s speech about Stalin’s crimes…from the Israelis.  He was subsequently outed by CIA chief William Colby, with whom he had had many disagreements.

Bureaucratic arrogance is an ongoing problem, nowhere more than the Intelligence Community.  The problem is more grave today, with the advances in electronic snooping, the courts’ willingness to let the intelligence agencies pry into all manner of communications, and the zeal with which the media report improper leaks.  As Lee Smith recently tweeted:

They (the IC) ran a counterintelligence investigation of a former rival spy chief, Mike Flynn, a retired 3-star General. Abuse. Then they leaked intercept of his conversation with Russian ambassador. Crime. Now our 3d world press hires our 3d world spy chiefs.

Secret tribunals guarantee this sort of corruption.  Yes, there are cases where decisions on spying on Americans must be secret, but we pay a terrible price for them.  And as things stand, the snoopers have all the cards.  The game is totally rigged.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Four Takeaways From The Latest Round Of Gaza Clashes

It began with an attempt by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) to plant an improvised explosive device on the security fence separating Israel from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, and ended with a near full-scale conflagration on a scale not seen since the summer of 2014. Tensions for the time being have tapered off but the recent fighting demonstrates why the Israeli Army (IDF) maintains a constant state of readiness along its volatile borders. 

On Sunday, security forces monitoring the Gaza border detected an object attached to the border fence. Upon closer examination, it turned out to be a bolt cutter of the type used by Palestinian rioters to breach the fence in weeks prior. A remote controlled robot was sent in to inspect and remove the object utilizing a long cord. During the course of removal, the bolt cutter exploded. Fortunately, no one was injured but the situation could have just as easily resulted in casualties.

PIJ terrorists who planted the IED were then spotted manning a nearby observation post. An Israeli Merkava IV tank fired at the OP instantly killing two PIJ operatives. A third was mortally wounded and died soon after. Islamic Jihad swore vengeance.

Two days later, southern Israeli border towns and communities came under intense indiscriminate rocket and mortar bombardment. A kindergarten was hit but fortunately, the children had not yet arrived. Over the course of 22 hours, Hamas and PIJ fired over 100 rockets and mortars, 25 of which were shot down by Israel’s anti-rocket defense system, Iron Dome. According to military sources, the system also succeeded in intercepting incoming mortar rounds, a first in the annals of warfare. There were no fatalities but there was some property damage and three IDF soldiers were wounded, two lightly and one moderately. A civilian was also lightly injured.

The unprovoked attacks inevitably drew Israeli retaliatory strikes which came in two waves. Some 65 Hamas and PIJ positions were targeted including a U-shaped, two-kilometer long tunnel that extended into both Egypt and Israel. It was to be used for smuggling contraband as well as for facilitating terrorist attacks. Rocket and weapons storage facilities were also hit and destroyed. A Hamas naval armory which the army said contained “advanced, unmanned submarine vessels, capable of maritime infiltration and carrying out maritime terror attacks,” was hit and destroyed as well.

Israel informed Hamas through intermediaries that if it continued its attacks, the IDF was prepared to conduct a large-scale military operation, similar to those conducted in 2009 and 2014. Hamas, still smarting from the defeats of 2009 and 2014, understood that Israel meant business and ordered its operatives as well as the PIJ to cease fire. The question is how long will the cease fire hold? The answer to that is anyone’s guess.

Nevertheless, the recent round of fighting highlighted several interesting takeaways. First, the discovery of a Hamas tunnel in Egypt is likely to further strain relations between Egypt and Hamas. Egypt has accused Hamas of aiding Islamist terrorists in northern Sinai and the revelation of a Hamas-dug tunnel in Egypt further erodes Hamas’s credibility in the eyes of the Egyptian government.

Second, the Iron Dome system continues to impress. In 2014, Iron Dome succeeded in shooting down rockets but had yet been incapable of downing mortar rounds. In 2014, a mortar round fired from a Gaza school killed a four-year-old Israeli boy named Daniel Tragerman, who lived in a kibbutz near the border. Modifications and software upgrades to Iron Dome have enabled the system to now have the ability to intercept incoming mortar rounds. This is an unprecedented development in warfare.

Third, during the Obama years, Israel received equivocal support at best, when it carried out anti-terror operations against Islamist terrorist groups. Europe, taking cue from Obama, was downright hostile. But in the latest round, Israel received unequivocal political support from both the United States and the European Union, while Hamas was roundly condemned. This positive development signals a seismic shift in favor of Israel and may have been a contributing factor in Hamas’s decision to call it quits. Hamas recognizes that in any confrontation with Israel, it will lose both militarily and politically, whereas in the past, it at least had a chance of scoring political points.

Fourth, the malevolent role of the Iranian regime in stoking the recent round of violence cannot be overlooked. Iran has its fingerprints all over this one. Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders have readily and publicly acknowledged that they receive aid in the form of cash, training and weapons from Iran. For years, the Iranians have been cultivating proxies to do their bidding and these Palestinian groups are willing participants. Iran has recently been on the receiving end of some sharp blows from Israel, and the mullahs were looking for a way to strike back but without engaging Israel in direct confrontation. Gaza appeared to be Iran’s venue of choice. Nevertheless, despite Hamas’s dependence on Iran, the group still exercises some independent thought, and they wisely cried uncle for they recognized that this was a battle they had no hope of winning.         

    

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

No Way José

With at least 11 million false-documented illegals in the United States – the real number is doubtless twice that – it’s clear that Mexican nationals feel entitled to defy U.S. immigration law. At the same time, the Pueblo Sin Fronteras crowd, denounces the United States as exploitive and slams the American founders as a pack of white supremacists. That calls for a look at José Vasconcelos (1882-1959), a major figure in Mexican history and influential to this day. 

Vasconcelos served as rector of the National University of Mexico, and president Alvaro Obregon appointed him as minister of public education from 1921-24. The next year he authored The Cosmic Race, an essay contending that “the mixed race that inhabits the Ibero-American continent,” is destined to become “the first synthetic race of the earth,” surpassing the “four racial trunks: the Black, the Indian, the Mongol, and the White.” 

“The basis of white civilization is fuel,” explains the erudite Vasconcelos, who ran for president of Mexico in 1929. “It served as a protection against the long winters. Then, it was discovered that its power could be used not only for warmth, but also for work; and the motor was born.” On the other hand, “the mestizo, the Indian, and even the Black are superior to the White in a countless number of properly spiritual capacities.”

According to Vasconcellos, who was also an attorney, “no race returns. Each one states its mission, accomplishes it, and passes away.” Therefore, “it will be seen immediately that we belong to tomorrow, while the Anglo-Saxons are gradually becoming more a part of yesterday.” 

The future belongs to “the Hispanic race,” and “only the Iberian part of the continent possesses the spiritual factors, the race, and the territory necessary for the great enterprise of initiating the new universal era of Humanity.” As the other races pass into history, Vasconcelos hails, “the creation of a new race,” and “only the Iberian part of the continent possesses the spiritual factors, the race, and the territory necessary” to create “the final race, the cosmic race.” 

And so on, a rather vile gazpacho of racism and ignorance from Mexico’s minister of public education from 1921-24, who went on to run for president.  So there’s a “final solution” aspect to his thought, which Mexican-American Communists like Bert Corona quickly spotted. 

As Corona told biographer Mario Garcia in Memoirs of Chicano History, Vasconcelos’ racial theory was “close to the kind of German racial superiority theory supported by Hitler. In fact, Vasconcelos himself became a fascist. Many Chicanos considered Vasconcelos and his views of the ‘cosmic race’ as an inspiration. But I recall Vasconcelos as a fascist.” As for the notion that Latinos, Mexicanos or Chicanos are superior to everyone else, Corona explained, “I couldn’t accept all this. We’re not a superior race.”

Corona, who has a charter school named after him, is right about that, but Vasconcelos’ cosmic-race theory remains the inspiration for groups such as the National Council of La Raza and MEChA, the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlán, the lost raza homeland that leftists created in the sixties. California attorney general Xavier Becerra, the sanctuary state enforcer once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, is a proud MEChA alum. 

The cosmic-race theory fuels the sense of entitlement that sends caravans to the border, demanding entry to the United States and benefits from American taxpayers. After all, the incoming dreamers are only fulfilling their destiny by displacing the evil white “Yankees.” As Vasconcelos wrote, after Spain conquered America, “the Napoleonic stupidity gave Louisiana away to the Englishmen from this side of the ocean, to the Yankees.”

Our age, says the Cosmic Race author, isa conflict of Latinism against Anglo-Saxonism,” and the anglos are destined to disappear. Vasconcelos’ spiritual followers are working  hard on the replacement process. When California senate boss Kevin de Leon appointed false-documented Mexican national Lizbeth Mateo to the California Student Opportunity and Access Program Project Grant Advisory Committee, he said the dreamers were “in many ways more American” than those who want illegals deported. 

In other words, they are better people, and more deserving than those actual U.S. citizens who seek to uphold the rule of law and respect U.S. sovereignty. Vasconcelos is also in the house when California politicians protect violent criminals from federal officials. After all, even the worst criminal illegals are superior to those inferior Yankee anglos, who are destined to disappear. 

As Bert Corona said, no way José. Latinos, Mexicans and Chicanos are not a superior race, even if leftist Democrats think so. All parties would do well to ignore the fascist Vasconcelos and take up a more worthy cause.

Since the 1920s, Mexico has been dominated by the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), a reactionary kleptocracy, prone to violence against protesting students, that prefers to export problems to the United States. True dreamers should stay home and work for a more democratic Mexico that upholds human rights, respects international borders, and allows the entrepreneurial energy of the people to flourish.  

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

THE DOOMSDAY SCENARIO: WHAT IF SCHOOL WALKOUTS DON'T WORK?

The New York Times seemed to think it was bitterly ironic that some of the students at Santa Fe High School, site of the recent mass shooting, had staged a walkout last month in support of the Parkland, Florida, students. But now, only a month later, one of the students who participated in the walkout is in the hospital from yet another school shooting. 

I suppose we could revel in the irony, but, as a more results-oriented person, what I take from that vignette is that school walkouts are not effective deterrents to school shootings. I’m not sure the poems did much either. 

These are hideous events that require serious proposals, not the self-indulgent mawkishness our media keep serving up. 

Here are some news items that might help us figure out how to reduce the number of school shooting victims. 

— May 3, 2017, Arlington, Texas: James Jones went to the Zona Caliente sports bar and began yelling incoherently. When the manager, Cesar Perez, went to talk to him and calm him down, Jones pulled out a gun and shot Perez dead, then started shooting wildly at patrons. Luckily, a concealed carry holder happened to be having dinner at Zona Caliente with his wife that night. He shot Jones dead before anyone else was hurt. 

— Aug. 7, 2016, Linndale, Ohio: Two men getting into their car in a Dollar Store parking lot were held up by a masked armed robber. As the gunman, Varshaun Stephen Dukes, was rifling through one of the men’s pockets, the other pulled out his concealed handgun and told him to stop. The robber fired at the man but missed. The concealed carry permit holder shot back, putting a .45 bullet in the robber’s brain. (Naturally, he survived.) All of this was captured on the Dollar Store’s surveillance camera, so no charges were brought against the armed citizen. 

— June 26, 2016, Lyman, South Carolina: Jody Ray Thompson opened fire in the crowded Playoffz nightclub, injuring three. But before he could kill anyone, he was shot in the leg by a club patron with a concealed carry license. Police arrested Thompson without further incident and no one died.

— May 31, 2015, Conyers, Georgia: After arguing with a liquor store clerk, Jeffrey Scott Pitts returned with a gun and began shooting at everyone in the store, killing two. Todd Scott, who was there to buy a six-pack, returned fire. The crazed gunman fled, went home and shot his parents. “He was very surprised that he was not the only one in the store with a gun,” Scott said. Apart from the two people killed in Pitts’ opening barrage, no one died. Scott saved the lives of everyone else in that store. 

— July 24, 2014, Darby, Pennsylvania: Felon and psychiatric patient Richard Plotts pulled out a gun at Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital, murdered his caseworker and wounded his psychiatrist, Dr. Lee Silverman. He would have kept shooting — Plotts had 39 more bullets — but the doctor pulled out his own gun and fired back, in violation of the hospital’s no-guns rule. No one else died. 

— Jan. 11, 2014, Portland, Oregon: After being turned away from a strip club in Portland, repeat felon Thomas Elliott Hjelmeland came back, wearing a clown mask, guns blazing. He hit a waitress, a security guard and a patron before a bouncer, concealed carry permit holder Jonathan Baer, returned fire and ended the attack. No one died. 

— Dec. 16, 2012, San Antonio, Texas: Jesus Manuel Garcia began shooting at the Santikos Mayan Palace movie theater from a nearby restaurant and continued shooting as he walked toward the theater. An armed off-duty cop shot Garcia four times, stopping the attack. No one died. 

— March 25, 2018, Boiling Springs, South Carolina: Jesse Gates kicked in a side door of the Southside Freewill Baptist Church during services, raised his gun to shoot — but was grabbed and held at gunpoint by the reverend’s grandson, a concealed carry permit holder. No one was hurt. Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright said, “I like the fact that a concealed weapons permit holder was prepared to protect the worshipers.” 

It seems like it’s been awhile since we’ve heard of a crazed gunman being quickly disarmed at a school. Maybe because we’ve been trying to stop mass shootings with gun-free school zones. 

Here are some older school shooting cases that had comparatively happy endings. 

— In 2001, 15-year-old Charles Williams tried to shoot up his high school in Santee, California, but luckily, an off-duty cop happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day. He ended Williams’ rampage with his own gun, holding him until more police arrived. Two fatalities. 

— In 1998, a 14-year-old student began shooting up a school dance being held at a restaurant in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. The restaurant owner pulled out a shotgun, keeping the death toll to one. 

— In 1997, a student shot several people at his high school in Pearl, Mississippi, killing two, and was headed to the junior high, until assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieved a .45 pistol from his car and pointed it at the gunman’s head. Another massacre averted. 

— In 1993, student Mark Duong pulled out a gun during his disciplinary hearing at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah, wounding three people, including the police officer, who, luckily, had been asked to attend the hearing. The officer immediately shot the psychotic student dead, saving the lives of everyone in the room. 

We can try the walkouts, rallies, moments of silence, media adulation, poems and fist salutes. But if the full arsenal of liberal disapprobation doesn’t stop schizophrenics from going on shooting sprees, concealed carry laws will at least save a lot of lives. 

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Purges on Campus

Readers of this column know well that much space has been reserved in order to bring to the public’s attention two immense industries that otherwise aren’t typically recognized as such.  They are the Academic-Industrial-Complex (AIC) and the Racism-Industrial-Complex (RIC).

Readers also know that the AIC, for all of its massiveness, is actually but a facet of the vastly larger RIC.  Some recent examples from the world of Higher Education make this abundantly, painfully clear.

[1] Duke University just dropped Professor Evan Charney.  His defenders, particularly his student defenders, suspect that Charney, a white man, was let go because the manner in which he critically engages his students led some to charge him with making his classroom into an “unsafe space” for minority students.

In a letter published by more than 100 of Charney’s students in The Duke Chronicle, some of Charney’s students, including his international students, defended him against the charge that “his class reproduces systems and structures of inequality involving notions of class, privilege and power.”  Charney, the letter reads, has a “teaching style” that is “wonderfully thought-provoking and challenging.  His students’ ideas are vetted and sharpened through rigorous debate and discussion” on a range of issues, and everyone is made to feel uncomfortable through exposure to “viewpoints that conflict with how they think and what they value.”

Charney is known by his students for his “Socratic format,” a style that leaves no “thought…unexamined” or “assertion…unchecked.”

At one point—perhaps this was the final trigger to have broken the leftist juggernaut’s back—Professor Charney used a whole class period to critically interrogate “the motivations and tactics” of students who staged a weeklong sit-in over a racially-oriented event that occurred in 2016.  He “challenged” students to “argue cogently in favor of or against the movement,” an approach that “put the burden on protesters in his class to justify their actions [.]”

Though Charney’s publications include analyzes of “liberal bias,” neither he nor his students are in any obvious way “conservative.”  At least this is the most reasonable conclusion to draw from looking at the views expressed in the student letter to the Chronicle and a listing of some of the classes that Charney typically teaches: While his area of expertise is “genomics and genetics,” specifically “behavioral genetics,” Charney regularly taught a seminar on “Global Inequality research.” 

In fact, that Charney would even take up class time to discuss issues that seem to fall well beyond the jurisdiction of his courses suggests that his instincts as a professor are more at home among the ideology of the colleagues and students who favor his termination than they are the approach to teaching traditionally found among more conservative professoriate.

[2] Yet even faculty who have spent their lives on the left are discovering that they are not safe.  Brett Weinstein is a left-leaning professor at Evergreen State College in Washington.  When he objected to a “Day of Absence,” an event during which whites would avoid campus while non-whites, or “POC” (People of Color), hold workshops, both he and his students were subjected to harassment and intimidation.  When campus police informed Weinstein that they could not protect him, he was forced to hold class off-campus at a park.

Administrators decided this year that in place of a Day of Absence, Evergreen would instead hold an “equity symposium.” Student activists, however, resolved to hold their event despite the school’s change of plans. The theme of this year’s affair is, “Deinstitutionalize/Decolonize.” According to the RSVP page:

“The mission of this event is to bring POC together in order to create a reclamation of space and move forward into the future.  In reaction to [the] institution’s consistent disregard for our safety, we are operating independently of the college. This is a day for us, by us.”

If whites insist upon attending, they will be directed toward “antiracist workshops.”

[3] The University of Michigan is among over 230 colleges and universities nationwide with a “Bias Response Team.” Yet it is among “the most established,” according to The Detroit News.  Whether the “bias” is “intentional or unintentional,” if team members determine that speech contains unacceptable bias, it exacts disciplinary action that ranges from requiring “restorative justice” to “individualized education” to “unconscious bias training.”  

Fortunately, the University of Michigan is now on the receiving end of a lawsuit. 

According to the complaint, such is the restrictive nature of the University’s interpretation of “bullying,” “harassment,” and “bias” that it threatens “staggering amounts of protected speech and expression.”

Nichole Neilly, whose Japanese-American parents met in an internment camp during World War II, is especially sensitive to infringements of liberty.  She is the head of “Speech First.”  The University’s current system, given that it incentivizes members of the school community to anonymously blow the whistle on others, “is not workable,” Neilly says. “Students should be able to express themselves without fear of retribution.”

Speech First found that in just this past year, UM investigated over 150 incidents of alleged “bias.”

Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation says of speech restrictions of the sort found at UM that they are “Draconian” and reminiscent of East Germany and Orwell’s 1984.

[4] At Georgetown University, left-wing student activists are laboring to prevent campus police from being armed.  If police are armed, the students maintain, minority students will be threatened.

On a Facebook post, “Georgetown United Against Police Aggression” self-identifies as “a group of students concerned about GUPD’s impact on Georgetown’s communities of color.” The group shares a letter that it issued to the school’s president urging him “to not arm GUPD [.]”

Among the 30 or so signatories to the letter are such groups as: African Society of Georgetown; Black Student Alliance; Asian Pacific Islander Leadership Forum; Casa Latina; GU Women of Color; Georgetown University College Democrats; Georgetown Young Democratic Socialists; Hoyas for Immigration Rights; Muslim Students Association; Native American Student Council; Queer People of Color; and Students for Justice in Palestine.

The Racism-Industrial-Complex knows no bounds, but academia is a bastion of it. Of course, RIC has facilitated the Academic-Industrial-Complex as well.

Anyone who can still doubt this is either naïve or in denial.   

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Hypocritical Educrat Arne Duncan

Educrat (ED-yoo-krat) noun, usually pejorative. A government school official or administrator whose primary function is to spend tax dollars telling other parents what to do with their children.

Beltway education bureaucrats abhor families who choose to keep their kids out of public schools — unless it’s to grandstand over gun control.

Behold Arne Duncan, longtime pal of Barack Obama and former U.S. Department of Education secretary, who called last weekend for parents nationwide to withdraw students from classes “until gun laws (are) changed to keep them safe.”

Emotions are still raw after a teen shot 10 classmates and teachers to death in Texas last week. But Duncan has no excuse for his cynical, made-for-cable-TV exploitation of the Santa Fe High School massacre. Existing state laws banning minors under 18 from purchasing or possessing guns didn’t stop the shooter. Neither did laws against possessing sawed-off shotguns or pipe bombs.

And contrary to hysterical early reports, the accused 17-year-old gunman did not use “assault rifles.” So a “common sense” ban on “assault weapons” would not have saved lives, either.

But effective solutions to maximize students’ safety and well-being seemingly aren’t Duncan’s goals. His mission is airtime. Publicity. Entertainment. Provocation for provocation’s sake. Show time — for the children, of course.

School boycotts are a “radical idea,” he admitted to MSNBC. “It’s controversial. It’s intentionally provocative.” Praising teacher walkouts and student protests, Duncan told The Atlantic he supported parent-initiated school shutdowns for gun control because “we are not protecting our kids… And the fact that we’re not doing that — we’re not willing to think radically enough to do it — I can’t stomach that.”

Ah, the royal, unstomachable “we.”

Here’s another thing I find hard to swallow: Education overlord Arne Duncan now championing the radical idea of parents exercising their autonomy to do what’s best for their children.

As Obama’s meddling power-hungry education secretary, Duncan attacked “white suburban moms” and their children who turned to homeschooling in protest of the top-down Common Core “standards”/testing/data-mining program. Duncan sneered that he found it “fascinating” that the grass-roots anti-Common Core revolt came from “white suburban moms who — all of a sudden — their child isn’t as brilliant as they thought they were, and their school isn’t quite as good as they thought they were.”

This elitist control freak revealed his fundamental disdain for rabble-rousing parents who’ve taken educational matters in to their own hands. By characterizing the movement against Common Core as “white” and “suburban,” Duncan also exposed his bigotry against countless parents “of color,” like myself, who’ve long opposed Fed Ed’s sabotage of academic excellence, local control and student privacy in school districts across the country.

Note that newly minted parents’ rights advocate Arne Duncan never once advocated boycotting Chicago public schools, which he ran for eight years, for their abject failure to quell rampant school violence.

Nor has Duncan called for parents to demand their districts withdraw from the disastrous “PROMISE” alternative discipline program that he helped create. (After Duncan’s protege, Broward County school superintendent Robert Runcie, initially denied that Parkland, Fla., shooter Nicholas Cruz had benefited from the program, he sheepishly acknowledged last week that Cruz had in fact been referred to the program and avoided criminal prosecution for school vandalism as a result.)

Nor has Duncan said a peep about systemic coddling of abusers in the classroom by teachers’ union presidents in New Jersey and Ohio, as exposed over the past month by undercover investigative journalists at Project Veritas.

Instead, Duncan has won high praise and more media interviews for his phony boycott proposal. “My family is all in if we can do this at scale,” he nobly tweeted.

But what his slavering fans in the liberal media won’t tell you is that Duncan’s wife works at and his own children attend the exclusive, private University of Chicago Laboratory Schools in tony Hyde Park, which a Lab Schools brochure brags is “patrolled by the University of Chicago Police Department and private security.”

Armed, of course, for thine and thee, Arne. But not for we.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Video: Raymond Ibrahim on Muslim Persecution of Christians

The Center’s Shillman Fellow, Raymond Ibrahim, recently appeared on Ratio Christi’s “Truth Matters,” hosted by Tony Gurule. The topic of discussion cented on the episode’s title, “Muslim Persecution of Christians: Past and Present,” and was connected to Ibrahim’s newest book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West. The 30-minute video follows:

 

Read more from Front Page Magazine…