A Defending Crusader…

The best defense is to be good and offensive…or something like that.

Archive for the ‘PC-BS’ Category

More Stupidity

Posted by Godefroi on December 16, 2008

Perhaps this is better described as another chapter in the “Say Good-bye to England” story.

The amazing Cassy Fiano has the story.

A MOTHER was told to remove her Christmas lights – in case they offended non-Christian neighbours.

Dorothy Glenn decorates her home with illuminations every year, including a giant tree and a 4ft Santa.

But this year she was stunned when a housing association worker called at her house and told her that the decorations she was displaying might be offending her neighbours.

The linked article doesn’t specify (or hint) whether the council member’s objections were based on some atheistic perspective, or perhaps on that of a competing religion.  It’s not particularly important anyway.

England no longer has any use for God – the God of the Bible – and it’s showing in the crazy laws, the overreaching multi-cultural sensitivities, and the devolution of the populace.

We are being warned…are we listening?

Posted in PC-BS | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

With friends like these…

Posted by Godefroi on August 15, 2008

And I use the term “friend” VERY loosely.

At Brussels Journal, the brillian Fjordman alerts us to a new effort by the European elite to accommodate advance the aims of Islam, to the obvious detriment- and in glaring omission – of all other faiths.

Resolution 1605 of the Council of Europe

Council of Europe member states should continue to be vigilant in their work to prevent and combat the phenomenon of Islamophobia.

9. In light of the above, the Assembly calls on the member states of the Council of Europe to:

9.1. act strongly against discrimination in all areas;

9.2. condemn and combat Islamophobia;

9.7.6. encouraging the participation of people with an immigrant background in political parties, trade unions and non-governmental organisations;

9.7.7. taking all the necessary measures to eliminate the inequality of opportunity faced by immigrants, including unemployment and inadequate education;

9.7.8. removing unnecessary legal or administrative obstacles to the construction of a sufficient number of appropriate places of worship for the practice of Islam;

9.7.9. ensuring that school textbooks do not portray Islam as a hostile or threatening religion;

11.6. encourage young European Muslims to become imams;

11.8. encourage the promotion of fair coverage of Muslim reality and views in the media and ensure that the voice of moderate Muslims is also reported;

11.9. develop ethical guidelines to combat Islamophobia in the media and in favour of cultural tolerance and understanding, in co-operation with appropriate media organisations;

Just a few thoughts here. 

§9.2:  Why are they only explicitly calling out Islamophobia?  What about “Jewophobia” or “Christiophobia” or “Hinduphobia” – or more plainly, the hostility that is inherent in Islam to all other beliefs?  Why are Muslims the only group to receive this special attention?

§9.7.6:  Are these intellectual giants encouraging the indigenous populace to be active in politics?  It seems to me that if a person wants to have a voice in politics, it should be up to that person to get involved based on his or her own convictions. 

§9.7.9:  By not portraying Islam as a hostile or threatening religion, the “educators” thus tasked will have to completely ignore the bulk of the history of Islam, whitewashing or ignoring the deaths of millions of people killed in the expansionist conquest of what is now Dar-al-Islam, and the humiliations heaped upon those left alive who did not convert…which continue to this day.

§11.6:  This is by far the most egregious contradiction of the principle of church-state separation I’ve ever seen in the modern West.  If these morons were to propose that “member states…encourage young European Christians to become priests“, the people of Europe would hang their carcasses for the birds.  More pointedly, if someone from outside their cocoon of idiocy were to make such a proposition, the howls of outrage and derision coming from their own mouths would be deafening.  This is hypocrisy of the highest order.

I’d write more, but I’m getting too worked up already.  Read more at the link above, and at Galliawatch.

Posted in Deception, Dhimmitude, Insanity, Islam, PC-BS, Politics | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Whitewash continues

Posted by Godefroi on June 4, 2008

I wrote several months ago about the inclnation – growing in popularity – to change the description of Islam-inspired Terrorism Anti-Islamic Behavior to something other than jihad, and correspondingly, those acting in this “Un-Islamic” way as something other than jihadi’s, mujahideen, etc. Not that anyone saw it, but if one did, one might recall the term hirabah.

I’ve now seen several posts at JW on this subject – that is, what to call these extremists militants uh, bad guys, beginning with this one from only 4 days ago (“Words matter”: Homeland Security rolls out newspeak campaign, cautions against use of terms like “jihadists,” “Islamic terrorists,” “Islamists” and “holy warriors”), culminating in this one today “Spencer: War On Terror Ends?”. In a nutshell, our enlightened leaders in Washington have decided, definitively now, that our use of these terms is actually giving legitimacy to the miscreants-we-can-not-name perpetrating acts-we-can-not-name.

What is this all about? First, Muslims are offended by “War on Terror” because they see it as a “War on ISLAM“. We’re only spending our precious security resources in surveilling Muslims (allegedly). The prisoners in Guantanamo…they’re all Muslims. It’s obvious, right? Second, as I mentioned above, we’re giving the world the impression – by our use of the same religion-couched terms that the terrorists use – that we agree that they’re justified, that they really ARE fighting for Allah and will be rewarded according to their heroic deeds. You see, Jihad is a GOOD thing in Islam…it just doesn’t mean what they (and we) are saying it means.

Let’s think about this (a novel concept, I know). If, in the last 7 years, more than 11,000 attacks on innocents had been committed by the International Fundy Church of Bob (with the bulk of those attacks being justified, in their minds, by their religious beliefs), isn’t it merely PRUDENCE that would suggest that the Bobbians be scrutinized more closely than the rest of the general public? And, what sense would it make (for US) to decide that TRUE Bobbians don’t act this way (the holy texts notwithstanding), and then to call the dastardly ones “Anti-Bobbians”, or perhaps Stevians? Their acts of defending and expanding the faith aren’t Bobardic, they’re just criminal – again, irrespective of a LONG history of similar behavior that at one time was just fine with all the Bobbian scholars, theologians, theorists, and practitioners…and still is in many parts of the world. If the American government, or British, or French, or Canadian, uses their terminology (these Bobarians), does that REALLY make these criminals more legitimate than they were before we started taking notice? Knowing, of course, that Bobbians have no use for the opinions of Cawfers (that’s non-believers to you uninitiated). If we start calling them Stevians, does that de-legitimize them to those who currently esteem these Bobardic martyrs? Good Grief, are we REALLY so self-important?

Look…they’re criminals, indisputably (at least by most Western laws). But not acknowledging the ideology that drives them is not helping in the fight against them. No one complains when we refer to Marxist or Maoist “rebels”. And if we refer to them that way, are we then saying that ALL Marxists or Maoists (or whatever) are violent thugs? Obviously not.

Someone who is overly sensitive of oblique criticism is usually insecure and/or trying to hide some vulnerability or shortcoming. Caving in to their demands for coddling their feelings does them no favors (it assists in keeping them away from facing, and dealing with, criticisms and consequently from improving and growing), and it minimizes LEGITIMATE security concerns among the rest of the populace.

As I said last time: Call a spade a spade, call a pirate a pirate, call a jihadist (one struggling for Allah, violently or otherwise) a jihadist. If you can’t name your enemy, you can’t know your enemy…and if you don’t know your enemy, you’re lost.

UPDATE:  Raymond Ibrahim over at American Thinker weighs in on this very topic.

Would a Jihadi by Any Other Name Smell as Foul?

[A] NYT article suggests that,

“If we want to say what we mean, what terms better describe [al] Qaeda members and other violent extremists? ‘Muharib’ or the more colloquial ‘hirabi’ or ‘hirabist’ would be good places to start. ‘Hirabah,’ the base word, is a term for barbarism or piracy. Unlike ‘jihad,’ which grants honor, ‘hirabah’ brings condemnation; it involves unlawful violence and disorder.”

Now, as a native Arabic speaker, I regret to say that usage of these terms — that is, Americans trying to be at once politically-correct and descriptive, in, of all languages, Arabic — is, alas, somewhat comedic.  I further suspect that Arabs, especially al-Qaeda types, would find it hilarious and consistent with their interpretations of wishy-washy Americans, who go to great lengths to learn a language only to censor themselves and compromise their precision in that same language, all so they can appear the “nice guy.” 

Which leads to a final point: Arabs and Muslims are not waiting around for Americans or their government — that is, infidels — to define Islam for them, much less to confer Islamic legitimacy or condemnation on al-Qaeda through the use of subtle word-games.  Calling this or that a “hirabi” or “jihadi” is not about to make any great impression on them, since only an authoritative Islamic entity (e.g., Cairo’s al-Azhar university) is qualified to determine such matters. Thus the US government would do well to worry less about which words will better humor the Arab/Muslim world, and worry more about providing its citizenry with accurate and meaningful terminology. 

Precisely!

Posted in Deception, Dhimmitude, Islam, PC-BS, Truespeak | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Another Victim

Posted by Godefroi on June 3, 2008

A victim of the ligitation jihad, or whatever the appropriate term might be, and of the onslaught of the Politically Correct machine of EU-rabia.

PARISBrigitte Bardot was convicted Tuesday of provoking discrimination and racial hatred for writing that Muslims are destroying France.

Which is true, of course.  Witness the recent riots of “youths” outside of Paris, and the Muslim-dominated slums which the gendarme are afraid to enter, and where firefighters are often attacked.  Truth, however, is irrelevant in politics.

A Paris court also handed down a $23,325 fine against the former screen siren and animal rights campaigner. The court also ordered Bardot to pay $1,555 in damages to MRAP.

A leading French anti-racism [uh, what race are Muslims again?] group known as MRAP filed a lawsuit last year over a letter she sent to then-Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy. The remarks were published in her foundation’s quarterly journal.

In the December 2006 letter to Sarkozy, now the president, Bardot said France is “tired of being led by the nose by this population that is destroying us, destroying our country by imposing its acts.”

Bardot, 73, was referring to the Muslim feast of Aid el-Kebir, celebrated by slaughtering sheep.

French anti-racism laws prevent inciting hatred and discrimination on racial or religious or racial grounds. Bardot had been convicted four times previously for inciting racial hatred.

While the basis of Ms. Bardot’s complaint was ANIMAL rights (the slaughtered sheep), so she didn’t mention any of the things I noted above, her assessment – which direction she’s pointing the finger – is still accurate.

Freedom of speech loses more ground, and the band plays on.

Posted in Big Government, Insanity, News, PC-BS | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Scary Trend

Posted by Godefroi on April 9, 2008

It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible. —  George Washington

At Townhall I read an article exposing the growing antipathy toward Christianity (or at least Evangelical Christians) in our Universities.  The story goes:

Two Jewish researchers went on campus (this is not a joke) last year to see just how anti-Semitic the faculty were. Their findings? In a survey of over 6,600 college professors across the country, they found virtually no anti-Semitism. Instead, they found a distinct bias against evangelical students: More than half (53%) of college faculty view evangelical students unfavorably. Mormons are next at 33%, followed by Muslims at 22%.

Let me put this in proper perspective: In the United States of America, professors are two and a half times more likely to view evangelical Christian students unfavorably than Muslim students.

The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. —  Abraham Lincoln.

The study also found that: Professors are five times more likely to be atheists than the general public: 19% vs. 4%; There are far fewer Evangelicals among the faculty than the general public: 11% vs. 33%…


If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.  — Ronald Reagan

Nod:  Cao

Posted in Academia, Christianity, PC-BS | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Holy Sh|te!

Posted by Godefroi on April 3, 2008

I knew that our military establishment had come up with some doozies, but this is something…ELSE.

I’d heard that we had a non-lethal weapon that had been dubbed the Ray Gun, and that it wouldn’t be deployed in Iraq.  Apparently there’s much more to this story.  Excerpted from Front Page Magazine interview with Dave Gaubatz.

The Pentagon officials have intentionally lied…

The Pentagon has had an operational “Ray Gun” since early in 2003. The Ray Gun was designed to be a lethal weapon. It can kill, injury the person very badly, or just slightly depending on the setting of the mechanisms…

The Ray Gun can send a signal at least a football field in width from a long distance from the target and take out (kill) hundreds of enemies within a few seconds. Few if any American troops would need to die…

A weapon that can instantly kill entire battalions is not a weapon our politicians believe the American people could accept [Couldn’t the Daisy Cutter bomb do the same thing?]…This simply means PC comes first, and then the lives of our brave troops suffer…

So our politicians believe that Americans will be happier with and additional 4,000 American deaths than they will be with a weapon that basically only endangers those trying to accomplish said deaths.  Hmmm.  I’m not a fan of killing, but war is war.  If we have a weapon that can protect our own, and speed up the end of this conflict, it needs to be used.

No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.  – George S. Patton

Posted in Deception, PC-BS | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Persecution of the Day

Posted by Godefroi on March 27, 2008

One might not think of this as persecution, and I suppose it isn’t in the traditional sense.  However, the fact that the premise is entirely fabricated – presumably in order to demonstrate that Christianity and Islam as “equally prone to inspire violence”™ – puts this anti-Christian propaganda on the same BS level as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (though obviously not as stunningly hateful).

The story and details are at AT.

 [NBC’S] Dick Wolf stooped to using an imaginary storyline to run interference for Islamic murderers, particularly the “honor killers” recently in all but the mainstream news.  

You might recall the name Aqsa Parvez.  She was the Canadian teenager murdered by her father last December after refusing to wear a hijab (head scarf).  Or, perhaps, Yasser Abdul Said, who shot his own young daughters, Amina and Sarah, to death in Texas last New Years Day for dating non-Muslims.   

These were but two of a growing number of cases sounding the alarm that honor killings are no longer the exclusive dominion of the Middle East and South Asia. Yet they do remain a barbarism isolated to Muslim (and, less often, Hindu) cultures – which makes Multi-cultists somewhat nervous that future religious murders might just put lie to their cries of Islamophobia whenever jihadists appear suspect.     

And so, despite the absence of even a single case of such behavior by Christians on record, the TV program whose plots are often advertised as being “ripped from the headlines” simply created one.  

True to its 18 season formula, last Wednesday’s Law And Order opened with the discovery of a homicide victim in New York City – this time a Caucasian woman found stoned to death.  Watching with family members, I had an immediate uneasy feeling of where the storyline might be headed.  Hunch turned quickly to angry certainty when, no sooner did one of the detectives mention that he had witnessed a drug-addict so killed in Islamic Pakistan, than his Captain chimed in:  “I seem to remember some stonings in the bible, too.”  

[…]

But wait — the plot thickened.  We quickly learned that the bloody stoning was not at the hands of Islamic fanatics, but — are you ready for this — Christian ones.    

The detectives’ diligence uncovered evidence that the Muslim artist had been showing the deceased art dealer more than just his etchings. And that this tawdry interfaith affair incurred the wrath not of the Mullahs, but rather a lone fanatical Christian preacher.  Our investigative heroes soon showed the District Attorney a videotape capturing the preacher inciting a spiritual army of youths indoctrinated through dogmatic speeches and “willing to die for Jesus” while “waging war against Muslim infidels.”   

[…]  

And so, at the behest of his fanatical Christofascist superior and in the name of God, he and his acolytes stoned his adulterous mother who, by having sex with a Muslim was “defiled by his blasphemous seed.” Of course, “Allah Akbar” would not have suited these particular holy warriors, so they stoned to the cries of “This Means War.”  

Oh, and just in case the moral of this completely fabricated fable somehow eluded its tolerance-seeking audience, the episode ended with a line crafted to not only minimize jihad as a fringe menace, but also to suggest that an identical fringe lurks here:  “Then our fanatics can fight their fanatics.”  

Disgraceful barely covers it.  

Posted in PC-BS, Persecution | Leave a Comment »

Stop the Memorial Blogburst

Posted by Godefroi on January 31, 2008

The crescent-topped tower

Not all of the Islamic symbolism in the Flight 93 memorial is hidden. One of the things that Tom Burnett Sr. protested from the beginning was the overtly minaret-like Tower of Voices . The Tower is formed in the shape of an extruded crescent, and even has its top cut at an angle so that its crescent arms reach up into the sky, similar to the upturned crescent motif seen atop minarets all over the world:

TowerShapeComposite50%

Up tower view (left) shows the Tower of Voices to be formed in the shape of an Islamic crescent, covering about 2/3rds of a circle of arc, with a circular inner arc. The top of the tower is cut at an angle (right) so that the crescent arms reach up into the sky.

This sky-reaching crescent is a standard mosque motif, seen from the Abdul Gaffoor mosque in Singapore :

AbdulGaffoor50%

… to Your Black Muslim Bakery in Oakland :

YourBlackMuslimBakery

… to the Uppsala mosque in Sweden :

Swedish mosque with crescents 55%

There is no way that the Islamic shaped crescent atop architect Paul Murdoch’s minaret-like tower is an accident, any more than THIS could possibly be an accident:

MockUpandWikiCrescent30%

That’s before you even get to the hidden stuff, like the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent; the 9/11 date placed in the exact position of the star on an Islamic crescent and star flag; or the fact that the Tower of Voices turns out to be a year round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial:

SundialAndTowerOfVoices

Every particle of the original Crescent of Embrace design remains completely intact in the Bowl of Embrace redesign, which only disguised the original crescent with a few irrelevant trees.

That Islamic crescent reaching up into the sky is completely undisguised. How can anyone abide this?

Nod: Cao

Posted in Deception, Dhimmitude, Insanity, PC-BS, Politics | Leave a Comment »

The Death of the University

Posted by Godefroi on January 24, 2008

An update on this story.

Last week, in an article published here on FrontPageMag, I told this story of how the high priests of diversity rejected truth and God at what is billed as the “Largest Catholic University in America.” My article was published as the Task Force released its Guiding Principles of Free Speech and Expression, now scrubbed clean of anything “offensive.” In a university-wide email, the Task Force told students, faculty, and staff that it was “actively gathering input on the draft Guiding Principles from the broadest possible spectrum of voices within the university community.” I chose to publish my input on FrontPageMag.com.

As soon as my article appeared, the Diversity Council held a meeting with the president of the University and the Task Force. They demanded that something be done about the troublemaker, namely me. I pointed out that there had been no confidentiality agreement and the Guiding Principles had already been released. But they argued that members would no longer feel comfortable participating out of fear that whatever they say may be published. It was apparently inappropriate for me to hold these individuals accountable for their ideas. I could have been given a warning not to publish anything in the future without consent of the Task Force, which would have protected their sensibilities. But just as the race card helped to derail the Guiding Principles themselves, so now it sealed my fate. I ought to be ashamed, they told me, because the members of the Task Force named in my article were people of color. In other words, people of color are above criticism and my concern for free speech and the betrayal of its principles was essentially racist.

For President Holtschneider this was all he needed to hear. Each and every time an incident like this occurs, the administration buckles to the pressure of the diversity agenda; this time was no exception. Under apparent duress from the Diversity Council, I was informed that I would no longer be welcome on the Free Speech and Expression Task Force. So much for free speech.

Posted in Academia, Insanity, PC-BS | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

We ARE — and Shall Remain — UNDER GOD!

Posted by Godefroi on January 21, 2008

I regularly receive email messages from the American Center for Law and Justice.  Once again, they are being called on to protect the “under God” inclusion in our Pledge of Allegiance. 

Michael Newdow is once again challenging the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance, including the words “one nation under God,” representing the Freedom From Religion Foundation in Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Congress.  But more than that, the Freedom From Religion Foundation and other groups are striking at the very heart of America’s foundational beliefs and time-honored traditions.  They will not stop until every public mention of God is stripped from our country.

The Pledge of Allegiance is a core piece of America’s heritage.  It acknowledges that our freedoms as a nation come from God … and it must be preserved.  For the sake of our nation’s future, for the sake of our children and grandchildren, stand with the ACLJ in fighting to protect the Pledge of Allegiance from encroachment by those who would erase the name of God from the public sphere. 

In our brief, we argue that the Pledge and the phrase “one Nation, under God” do not violate the Constitution, saying that the words “simply echo the sentiments found in the Declaration of Independence and recognize the undeniable truth that our freedoms come from God.”  The brief contends:  “These words were placed in the Pledge of Allegiance for the express purpose of reaffirming America’s unique understanding of this truth. The United States is different from nations who recognize no higher authority than the State.” 

“While the First Amendment affords atheists complete freedom to disbelieve,” the brief argues, “it does not compel the federal judiciary to redact religious references in every area of public life in order to suit atheistic sensibilities.”

The brief also cites the fact that the Supreme Court has made numerous proclamations regarding the constitutionality of the Pledge; and in every instance in which the high court or individual Justices have addressed patriotic exercises with religious references – including the Pledge – they have concluded “unequivocally” that those references pose no constitutional problems. 

We contend that, if the lawsuit succeeds, a flood of new litigation will ensue.  The brief says if the Pledge is declared unconstitutional   “. . . it will undoubtedly embolden further challenges to other religious expressions in government venues, including the several religious works of art and various religious inscriptions in the Capitol Complex, as well as the prayer rooms in House and Senate Office buildings.”

I support them.  You should too.

“America needs God more than God needs America. If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under.” – Ronald Reagan

Posted in Big Government, PC-BS, Politics | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Education?

Posted by Godefroi on January 16, 2008

My wife and I have four children, all of them being brought up in a (GASP) Fundamental Christian manner. Oh, and did I mention that we home-school them all (for a partial look at why, check out this post over at Doc Bulldog & Ronin’s, and this site as well.)? Well, excepting the youngest since he’s only 2.5 months old. 🙂

My 12-year-old daughter has decided that she doesn’t want to go to college. While I suspect that she’ll change her mind by the time she’s 17-18, I’m starting to think maybe it’s actually a good idea. Why? While it’s true that college graduates tend to make significantly more money over their lifetimes than non-graduates, I have to wonder if they’re really any more successful – looking at that term as a measure of happiness and positive societal impact on a daily basis. And along with that, the corruption in academia (especially in Universities) has me very concerned. I’m not worried that she’ll abandon her faith. I am worried that she’ll be ridiculed because of it, especially as this tendency keeps moving forward.

Today at Front Page I got yet another reminder of why the University setting has me apprehensive about throwing my daughter to those wolves.

DePaul University, which bills itself as “the Largest Catholic University in America” was described as a “basket case” on a Hannity and Colmes segment because of its questionable “commitment” to free speech. In the past couple of years DePaul has suspended, without due process, a professor who defended Israel. It has created de facto policies to prevent students from posting flyers opposing an on-campus event featuring the plagiarist professor Ward Churchill. It has also shut down a student-run Affirmative Action Bake Sale in which cookies were sold at different prices depending on the customer’s skin color because the campus left was offended. It later condemned the student group sponsoring the bake sale in a university-wide email.

The Task Force has finally produced a document: Guiding Principles of Free Speech and Expression.[1] The Task Force chose a wise path in deciding against adopting speech codes against “hate speech,” a term which does not appear in the Principles. In fact, the language of the document seems to open the doors of the University to all ideas––as it should. It respects “open discourse and robust debate” and at the same time remains “open to a broad range of ideas and opinions” as a way to “create the best conditions for discovering the truth.” Most importantly, it’s not patronizing and it respects the “right of listeners to respond with their own expression, or choose to turn away.”

It’s also eloquent in its commitment to “ennoble the God-given dignity of each person”––wait just a minute, I’m sorry. Scratch that whole part about dignity being “God-given.” Such a reference would alienate members of our community who do not believe in God.

“What?” a concerned friend asked me when I informed him of what had happened.

“Yes,” I said, “the Task Force voted to remove ‘God-given’ from the Guiding Principles before making it an official statement of the largest Catholic University in America. That’s not all. The Task Force also voted to remove the phrase ‘create the best conditions for discovering the truth.’ ‘Truth’ was too ‘strong’ and too ‘offensive’ a word for a free speech document.”

Is that ridiculous to anyone other than me? What could drive such stupidity?

[Task Force members] Manley and Cho told us our Principles were fundamentally invalid because we lacked a diverse racial make-up in membership. Isn’t it important to note the ideological diversity on this Task Force? “No,” Manley said, and pointing to the back of his hand added, “it is about this: skin color.” Cho then highlighted words and phrases in the Principles she considered to be “hegemonic.” Hegemonic phrases allegedly exclude the marginalized and oppressed. Among the highlighted phrases were: “free speech and expression,” “exercise of reason,” “competing arguments,” and “immeasurably enriched by exposure to differing points of view.” According to Cho, free speech should provide “an environment that encourages enfranchising the disenfranchised” and discontinues “the practice of exclusion and marginalization.” According to Cho, “hegemonic free speech” (her term) does the opposite.

Bowing to the Manley and Cho, the Task Force added some new members who met their diversity standard. Our newly assembled Task Force took up the concerns they raised. Not surprisingly, the new members were not only diverse by skin color, they were ideologically in tune with Manley and Cho. The Task Force now agreed that some speech does “threaten the community.” Some speech does silence, because it “wounds” and is “so hurtful.” Some people simply don’t have a voice. And so, students who are offended should be given a special “safe space” where they feel “comfortable” speaking publicly with potential offenders silenced.

Now the Task Force removed the phrase “discovery of the truth,” because the idea that there is “truth” can be harmful and excluding to the oppressed. So can “God-given dignity.” These are “right-wing buzzwords” in any case – at least according to the leftists on the Task Force. Sonia Soltero, a President’s Diversity Council appointee, was baffled by the concept that a university was founded on the pursuit of truth. She had never heard that before. She would rather understand the university as a place for “exploration” and “seeking knowledge.” And one of our new members, Theatre School professor Phyllis Griffin, even went so far as to say that whenever she reads “God-given dignity” she feels the “heavy, historical foot of the Catholic Church on her neck.” Really? At the largest Catholic University in America?

There are more details in the original (go read it), but this is more than enough to make my point. Academia is rife, even rank, with activist “professors” who are more interested in furthering the damnably dangerous and suicidal PC-Leftist agenda than in actually educating.

Do not disagree. Do not debate. Above all, do not offend.

This is not what America was supposed to be about, and it’s absolutely not what I want the wonderful curious mind of my daughter poisoned with.

Posted in Academia, Deception, PC-BS, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »