One Major Southern Problem--Public Schools

One Major Southern Problem--Public Schools

Posted by Charleston Voice

Gone. No longer taught, but not forgotten...

May 17, 2014

by Al Benson Jr.

Although I am writing this, frankly, I don't expect very many people will want to pay much attention to it. You see, it will go against the grain of the propaganda they have been fed and ingested for well over the past century or so, and to do something about the problem would involve personal responsibility, and most folks today flee personal responsibility as they would the plague.
The small North Louisiana town I live in thinks the local public schools there are the greatest thing since sliced bread. The possibility that the local public schools there may be brainwashing their children is the last thing they want to hear, and so if you dare to approach the subject they just tune you out. "Don't confuse me with the facts, please." It's so much better to remain ignorant, then I don't have to DO anything. This is the typical attitude in town and cities across the South, and the rest of the country, too.
The public school is sacrosanct. It is the sacred cow.  The only time anyone ever dares question it is if their kid wears a Confederate flag tee shirt to school and gets sent home for that. The black kid next to him may have a Malcolm X tee shirt on, but that's okay. It gets an automatic pass, just like the tee shirt with the "gay pride" stuff all over it. These are okay, by public school standards today, but your kid's Confederate flag tee shirt has to come off, immediately if not sooner. If the parents decide to protest this, the result is usually far from satisfactory.
I've talked with folks whose kids or grandkids come home from public school spouting anti-Confederate propaganda about how the Confederate flag is "racist." I despise the term "racist" because it is of Trotskyite origin and every time we use it we are playing on our opponents' turf. Same thing when we argue with the local public school bureaucrat about our kid's Confederate flag tee shirt--we are playing on their turf and it's a battle we will seldom win. They already know that. We haven't figured it out yet.
Rather than going through an exercise in exasperation, what we should start doing is just taking the kids out of public school. What we need to do when a problem arises is to just go and state our position politely and then inform the local education commissar "my child will not be returning to your school again." Don't fuss, fume, or get ticked off--the educrat likes that and it gives him or her a reason to put their thumb down on you as a "recalcitrant parent." 

So don't fuss, just take the kid out. End of conversation! That will deprive the local school district of, depending on where you live, anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 per year in federal money.  And if there were a big enough flap over Confederate symbols in one particular area and ten people had the guts to remove their kids from the public system, you can see where that would cost the local public brain laundry some serious money.
Most Southern folks seem to have the opinion that the local public school is second cousin to God, motherhood and apple pie--and it just ain't so. It never was. People love to prattle about the "good old days" when they went to public school and how much better it would be if we could just go back to that. Sorry to disillusion you, but those "good old days" never really existed. 

The public school's foundations were bad from day one.  Public schools, as we now have them, were originally started up in New England, Massachusetts to be specific. The major mover and shaker in starting them was a man named Horace Mann. You may even have seen schools named after him, I have. But do you really know diddley-squat about him?
Horace Mann was a Unitarian. Know what that is? Know what Unitarians believe? They are people, calling themselves Christians, who do not recognize the Deity of Jesus Christ, who think Jesus may have been a great moral example and teacher, but definitely not the Son of God. What really bothered Mann was the influence of church schools in his area. In fact, that bothered him so much that he sought to come up with a way to counteract it.
He didn't think kids should be influenced by Christian education, that they would be better off in "secular" (humanist) schools, run by the state and regulated by the state, where Christian ideas and influence could be muted, and eventually done away with.
To be continued.
Reprinted from The Confederate Sentry, Vol. 19, Number 3, 2013

http://thecopperhead.blogspot.com/2014/05/one-major-southern-problem-public.html

Related Posts

• One Major Southern Problem--Public Schools
• Onward Christian Zionists
• The Future of Libertarianism - Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.
• THE COMMUNIST FIGHT FOR THE NEGRO CAUSE...how it began, Communist publication
• Texas Lawmakers Pronounce That The Establishment of Israel was Fulfillment of Old Testament Prophesy(!)

Russia, China and the West Working Toward Same Goal - Ukraine and Boko Haram and how they connect

Greenwald To Release Info on NSA Spying Targets

Greenwald To Release Info on NSA Spying Targets

• Politics
• US

By: Joshua Cook May 16, 2014

1

2

In an interview with Stephen Colbert, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald said there are still bombshells to be revealed about the National Security Agency’s spying.

“I genuinely believe that the story that is the biggest one and will have the biggest impact and will shape how the last 10 months are viewed by history is the story on which we’re currently working that will hopefully be ready within 4 to 8 weeks,” he said.

“One of the missing pieces is on whom is the NSA spying in America, who are they targeting and for what purpose. Who are these people that they view as sufficient threats that they read their e-mail. What’s the pattern of people. Are they political dissidents? Are they critics of U.S. foreign policy? Are they actual terrorists? And that’s the reporting that remains to be done,” he explained.

The piece like the rest of his articles related to the Edward Snowden leaks will be published in The Guardian newspaper.

Greenwald is also promoting his new book on the topic, entitled “No Place To Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA and the U.S. Surveillance State.”

In an excerpt published by The Guardian, Greenwald writes about the justification of spying: “A prime justification for surveillance – that it’s for the benefit of the population – relies on projecting a view of the world that divides citizens into categories of good people and bad people.”

He contends that the government has led the public to believe that its attention was focused on the “bad people,” but through the Snowden leaks that is simply not true.

“Collect it all, sniff it all, process it all, exploit it all. Not collect the communications of terrorists or just people doing bad things, but collect it all. They collect billions with a b of e-mails and cell phone calls every day,” explained Greenwald on “The Colbert Report.”

And logically, those all can’t be from Al-Queda.

The NSA’s focus on insane data collection should change, and it might. The House Judiciary Committee unanimously approved the USA Freedom Act, which would scale back the U.S. government’s domestic surveillance programs.

According to U.S. News & World Report, “If passed into law, the USA Freedom Act – as amended in committee – would allow the NSA to collect the phone records of individuals and two “hops” through their contacts if officials can convince a judge there’s reasonable suspicion a targeted individual is a terrorist. The bill would ban the government from invoking pen register or National Security Letter statutes to conduct bulk phone-record collection.”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)  said in a statement that the USA Freedom Act is a step in the right direction. But the proposed legislation does has its flaws.

“The USA FREEDOM Act includes a definition of call detail records which excludes cell site location data, a provision that will help safeguard the location privacy of millions of Americans from mass NSA surveillance. However, we remain concerned that the bill allows prospective collection—collection of records that have not yet been created—up to 180 days,” said the EFF.

The Center for Democracy & Technology wrote a letter calling out potential changes as well. (See letter PDF.) “While the bill makes significant progress    in ending bulk collection, we strongly    believe    that several technical corrections and clarifications to the bill are required if Congress is to help ensure the bill language is not misinterpreted and its stated goal of ending bulk collection is met.”

The USA Freedom Act now goes to the House. And we wait and speculate for Greenwald’s next article. Watch Part 1 and Part 2 of Glenn Greenwald’s interview.

Joshua Cook

Joshua Cook is the acting Chairman for the Republican Liberty Caucus of South Carolina. Joshua Cook's articles have also been cited on sites such as InfoWars, Reason.com, WND.com, Breitbart.com, DailyCaller and FreedomOutPost.com. If you have any tips please email me at joshuacook@benswann.com. Like me on FB and follow me on Twitter.

Read Other Stories

• Clemency for Snowden? Greenwald calls out D.C. media in fiery debate – Video
• Plenty More NSA-Leaked Info to Come says Greenwald; Anti-NSA Bill with 117 Sponsors
• Federal Judge Rules NSA Spying IS Legal; Strange Ruling Cites Emotion, Sept 11. and Edward Snowden “Spawning Mischief”
• Obama Fumbles while NSA Insider/Review Board Member says “We Need More NSA Spying”
• The Most Dangerous Domestic Spying Program is Common Core

Read more: http://benswann.com/greenwald-to-release-info-on-nsa-spying-targets/#ixzz31vsQx759
Follow us: @BenSwann_ on Twitter

Truth Wins: The Benghazi Cover Up is Collapsing

Both President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew right away that the attack in Benghazi was a coordinated and planned terrorist attack, and not a protest spiraled out of control.

Yet, Hillary immediately began sending out tweetsblaming a little-seen Youtube video for the attack, which was a lie.  Her “deputy”, former Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice spread the lie on the Sunday news shows, and the White House continued to perpetuate the lie for weeks afterwards, even until this day to an extent.

It has become blatantly obvious to a vast majority of people that the White House engaged in a deliberate coverup of the facts before, during and after the Benghazi attack.  But that coverup may be crumbling now, especially in the face of the impending Benghazi Select Committee investigation.

Follow Conservative Tribune

With all of the evidence already discovered, and the potential for more information to be uncovered later, everybody now knows that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we know that the White House knew on September 11, 2012, too. (H/TBreitbart)

And yet in the post-Benghazi fallout, Obama continued to attack and blame free speech for the Benghazi slaughter. Obama, along with Hillary Clinton, starred in a paid advertisement condemning the video insulting Islam. These paid advertisements (funded with American taxpayer dollars) ran in Pakistan. This presidential attack on our freedom and our Constitution was the Obama administration’s primary response to the deadly Islamist attack on September 11, 2012.

In reviewing the cache of new documents just released as a result of Judicial Watch’s successful FOIA lawsuit, it is clear that there is more incriminating evidence of a cover-up than just the now-infamous “smoking gun” email from Ben Rhodes. Rhodes’ email is slam-dunk evidence of the White House’s lead role in the cover-up. The blaming of the YouTube video and the talking point lies that Susan Rice was to advance on the five Sunday shows were driven by the White House.

Many of the newly released documents contained large sections of redacted text, even thought the documents are unclassified, proving that the White House is still trying to cover up what they knew and when they knew it.

Still, some material extremely damaging to the administration is clear. In a memo from former Deputy Spokesman at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations Payton Knopf to Susan Rice and others, Knopf provides “Guidance on Events in Libya 9/12/12. (Today’s initial guidance from NSS and State).” In it, he gives a timeline (“the tick tock”) of events on that day and quotes the State Department’s Victoria Nuland as saying that “it was clearly a complex attack.”

In the same memo, Knopf discusses Obama’s “tick tock” during Benghazi. The president was made aware of the attack on the afternoon of September 11, 2012 “as he started his weekly meeting with the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.” Ironically, only a day before the Benghazi jihad attacks, Marc Thiessen broke the story in the Washington Post that Obama had scaled back in-person daily intelligence briefings and had actually attended fewer than half of the daily intelligence briefings that had been held since he entered the White House.

But what’s salient here is that according to Benghazi transcripts of defense testimony, just minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi was attacked, senior defense officials, both civilian and military, were told that it was a “terrorist attack.” So why did the Obama White House promote a false narrative, and why didn’t defense officials speak out about this false claim?

Questions still remain about where Obama was during the night of the attack, and when was he notified of Ambassador Stevens’ death?  There are conflicting reports that he was told at some point that night, while others say he was told first thing the next morning.  Senior adviser Eric Pelofsky was informed about Stevens’ death by the Libyans in the evening, while Nuland claims nobody knew for sure until the morning.

I find it impossible to believe that the president of the United States was not notified immediately that night, while Pelofsky was writing about Stevens’s death, that our Ambassador had been taken from our embassy possibly still alive and then murdered. But Nuland clearly says he was notified the next morning.

If he was asleep at that time, they wouldn’t wake him for such momentous news? Why wasn’t he calling the shots? He’s the Commander-in-Chief – or had he by that time already given the stand down order? The American people need answers to such questions, and let the chips fall where they may – or bodies, in this case. Why are they covering up the point at which Obama was informed about Stevens’s death?

We also know that the State Department knew immediately that Ansar Al-Sharia, an Al-Qaeda affiliate, was claiming responsibility for the attack.  Yet Obama and Hillary still didn’t call the attack a “terrorist attack”, and blamed the video for sparking a protest, when they knew otherwise.

And then there are questions about the “security” hired by the State Department to take the place of our real security that was cut by more than half in the weeks and months before the attack.

There is also proof that Rice was lying when she said that security on the ground was strong and significant. In an email at 4:49 PM on September 11th– 49 minutes after the attack began, according to the State Department’s own timeline – State’s Dan Fogarty advised several officials, including Deputy Secretary of State William Burns, Victoria Nuland, and others that the February 17 Brigade were responding to the attack on the mission [consulate] “engaging the attackers, taking fire, and working its way to the compound to get to the villa…”

The February 17 Revolution Brigade is a jihadist militia that is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. It was repeatedly accused of engaging in atrocities during and after the Libyan Civil War. Yes, with the world’s largest, most technologically advanced, and best-armed military, the Obama administration and State Department outsourced their response to a jihadist group.

Back in September 2012, according to the Daily Beast, “the intelligence community had an intercept between a Libyan politician whose sympathies are with al Qaeda and the Libyan militia known as the February 17 Brigade – which had been charged with providing local security to the consulate. In the intercept, the Libyan politician apparently asks an officer in the brigade to have his men stand down for a pending attack – another piece of evidence implying the violence was planned in advance.” In other words, it wasn’t a spontaneous reaction to a video about Muhammad.

So, where was Obama during the night of the attack?  We know that he wasn’t in the “situation room” monitoring the attack.  When was he informed of Ambassador Stevens’ death?  Why did they push the story about a protest and video when  they had been informed otherwise?  Why was no rescue attempt ever sent?  Was a stand down order really given?

These are just some of the questions that Trey Gowdy will be asking as part of the Benghazi select Committee.  Hopefully, he will able to uncover the truth with histeam of experienced prosecutors.  The families deserve the truth, and the American people demand to know the truth.

The Detroit Model: Permanent Rule by the Banks...to Circumvent Public Voting

 

"What is happening in Detroit is a model for cities and states across the country..." Stand still little sheep, for you are to be shorn to the bone by your friendly state bankers. Not for Wall...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Rule by the Banks...to Circumvent Public Voting
noreply@blogger.com (Charleston Voice)
Fri, 16 May 2014 18:26:54 GMT

Did Somebody Intentionally Set California Wildfires?

 

By ABC NEWS via Good Morning America

ABC US News | ABC Entertainment News

Calmer winds and cooler temperatures are aiding firefighters battling blazes in Southern California today, with arson being investigated as a possible cause.

But the fires continue to burn, with at least one person dead and more than 10,000 acres scorched. Conditions remain problematic, as the entire state is experiencing drought conditions, leaving dry brush to fuel the flames.

It’s unclear how many houses have been damaged. Investigators are still trying to figure out what caused the fires.

“We all have suspicions like the public does when we have nine fires that started all over the county,” San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore said. “We are actively investigating the start of those fires.”

A 19-year-old and 17-year-old were arrested Thursday, accused of starting a pair of smaller fires in Escondido. But authorities say those fires were quickly extinguished, and authorities don’t believe there is any connection to the larger fires that remain burning.

Firefighters found a body in a transient camp Thursday. The body was so badly burned that officials have been unable to make a positive identification.

Air and ground crews continue fighting the fires, trying to contain the flames. Jack Whitling’s aunt lost all her possessions in the fire. Her home had been in the family for nearly half a century.

“It’s just devastation. It’s irreplaceable, you know, when somebody grows up in a house,” Whitling said, looking at the destruction.

As the flames inched closer, he tried to save the home, but the smoke was too thick.

“It was too late,” he said. “It just jumped straight in and you couldn’t do nothing.”

AP Photo

PHOTO: Firefighters plan their attack as the brush fire flares up heading toward homes, May 15, 2014, in San Marcos, Calif.

Gregory Bull/AP Photo

PHOTO: A helicopter transporting water flies over trees, May 15, 2014, in Escondido, Calif.

Veronica Navarro and her mother, now evacuated, watched as homes across the street shot up in flames.

“The fire was actually really close, like I could feel the heat actually rub against my skin. It was really hot,” Navarro said.

Displaced residents such as Mari Ruiz are holding out hope that the flames won’t damage their homes.

“We’re sitting here waiting to see what happens, if we’re going to be able to go back and see if the houses are destroyed or not,” Ruiz said.

Gregory Bull/AP Photo

PHOTO: Fire engulfs a structure during a wildfire, May 15, 2014, in Escondido, Calif.

Source

Did Somebody Intentionally Set California Wildfires?
TFAdmin
Fri, 16 May 2014 18:39:14 GMT

Tesla-Led Consortium to Build Massive Battery Factory

 

Via: San Jose Mercury News: Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk said Tuesday that Tesla will partner with several companies besides Panasonic for its planned “gigafactory” for battery production, painting a portrait of a facility resembling a massive industrial park and saying that there eventually will be a need for several more. Musk said that the […]

Tesla-Led Consortium to Build Massive Battery Factory
Kevin
Fri, 16 May 2014 17:12:38 GMT

Petitions to Remove FCC Chair And Restore Net Neutrality Entered

Petitions to Remove FCC Chair And Restore Net Neutrality Entered

Tens of thousands sign petitions concerned about the further corporatization of the Internet

Adan Salazar
Infowars.com
May 15, 2014

Citizens wary of government and corporate encroachment on Internet freedom have launched multiple White House petitions seeking equal treatment of all information and data stored on the web, with several petitions calling for the ouster of Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler.

“Access to the Internet is an invaluable commodity that should transcend socio-economics. Allowing ISPs to auction off preferred access to companies who pay more runs counter to the free market philosophies on which America was founded,” one petition, started by a Baltimore resident, states.

Another petition argues for the removal of FCC boss Tom Wheeler for a supposed conflict of interest. “Before he became Chairman of the FCC, Tom Wheeler was a lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, which the FCC is supposed to regulate. Not only is this a conflict of interest, Wheeler has repeatedly demonstrated that he is not working for the good of the American people,” a petitionstarted by J.D. Of Lufkin, Texas states.

Yesterday, the FCC voted to begin considering plans to allow “internet fast lanes,” which would essentially give cable providers (e.g. Time Warner, AT&T and Verizon) the ability to give preferential treatment to certain web services, such as Skype, Facebook and Netflix, based on premiums paid for high-speed delivery of their content.

Profits derived from the premiums, cable providers argue, are essential to begin upgrading existing Internet cable connections, which they say will ultimately benefit the consumer; however, many perceive it will have the opposite effect and lead to the regulation of the flow of information on the web and ultimately the “televisation” of the Internet.

“This new economy will undoubtedly result in less choice for consumers and lead to what may be termed the ‘televization’ of the internet. In other words large players like NBC and Disney will effectively monopolize the medium as they now do with cable and broadcast television,” Infowars reported yesterday.

The bill’s language is cleverly disguised as calling for an “Open Internet,” when it will actually do the opposite, and Wheeler’s apparently not above playing devil’s advocate, saying recently, “There is one Internet. It must be fast, it must be robust, and it must be open.. The prospect of a gatekeeper choosing winners and losers on the Internet is unacceptable.” His statements against his agency’s own bill are akin to Br’er Rabbit feigning not wanting to be thrown into the briar patch.

By far the most successful petition, and the one that at this point has the best chance of receiving a response from the administration, is one that simply requests the White House “Maintain true net neutrality to protect the freedom of information in the United States.”

“One of the most effective tactics of an invading military is to inhibit the flow of information in a population; this includes which information is shared and by who. Today we see this war being waged on American citizens,” a resident from Ridgecrest, California, whose petition needs just under 29,000 signatures, wrote.

Here are a few of the petitions (and their current signature counts, at time of publication) regarding net neutrality currently active on the White House site, which can all use additional signatures. Petitions must meet or exceed a threshold of 100,000 signatures within 30 days before they require a response.

Reclassify Internet broadband providers as common carriers. (15,554)

Maintain true net neutrality to protect the freedom of information in the United States. (71,083)

Remove Tom Wheeler from his position as FCC Chairman (5,760)

Prevent the FCC from ruining the Internet (2,828)

The video below by Youtube user CGP Grey gives a great, easy to understand presentation of what’s at stake in the battle for net neutrality, and defines why maintaining the web in its current form should be one of the most important causes of our generation.

This article was posted: Friday, May 16, 2014 at 1:44 pm

Tags: internet

Related Articles

• White House ‘secede’ Petitions Reach 675,000 Signatures, 50-state Participation
• Net Neutrality Comment Deadline January 14
• Why the e-petitions system isn’t working
• Internet Citizens: Defend Net Neutrality
• Obama Reelection Spurs Wave of States’ Petitions to Secede

VICTORY: Multiple States Have Now Banned Sharia Law

 

There is a movement within the Islamic religion that is engaged in a global jihad, which seeks to spread a radical Islamic ideology around the world, and subjugate other religions and peoples. Part of that global jihad is the imposition of Islamic civil law, better known as Sharia law, on the courts and governments that

Related posts:

1. North Carolina Just Banned Sharia Law in Their State
2. Rev. Graham on Sharia Law: “Go Back to Where You Came From”
3. Jay Leno Takes Public Stand Against Islamic Sharia Law [PICTURES]

VICTORY: Multiple States Have Now Banned Sharia Law
Ben Marquis
Fri, 16 May 2014 19:05:29 GMT

Feds Failing to Inspect Thousands of Oil and Gas Wells: Report

GAO report finds Bureau of Land management letting countless 'high priority' wells slip through federal regulatory cracks

- Sarah Lazare, staff writer

Process of mixing water with fracking fluids to be injected into the ground. (Photo: Joshua Doubek / Wikimedia Creative Commons)

Amid soaring concerns about the health and environmental impacts of the U.S. fracking boom, federal regulators are failing to inspect thousands of oil and gas wells they have deemed high-risk, according to the government's own report released Monday.

According to the Government Accountability Office, the Bureau of Land Management—an arm of the Interior Department—did not inspect 2,100 of the 3,702 "high-priority" wells drilled between 2009 and 2012, even though such wells are mandated for inspection according to the bureau's own rules.

Frank Rusco, who oversaw the investigation as Director of Natural Resources and Environment for the GAO, told Common Dreams that such wells are deemed high-priority because "there is the need to protect usable water, or high-pressure zones—zones that contain hydrogen sulfate which could pose a safety hazard if it were to be released."

"This report shows a clear lack of accountability about what's happening on public and tribal lands," Jane Kleeb of environmental group Bold Nebraska told Common Dreams. "We have countless families that describe the pollution happening on their land. What pollution is happening that we don't know about?"

Adding to this lack of oversight, according to Rusco, the BLM's own process for identifying high-risk wells is "flawed" because designations are made locally by engineers who make inconsistent judgements across locations.

Of the wells deemed high-risk under this flawed system, the number slipping through the cracks could be far higher than 2,100. "[O]f the more than 14,000 federal and Indian oil and gas wells drilled from fiscal year 2009 through fiscal year 2012 on lands managed by BLM that we reviewed, BLM’s AFMSS database is missing data on whether 1,784 wells were identified as high- or low- priority," states the report.

According to Rusco, GAO investigators were unable to determine how many of these high-priority wells went without an inspection by state or federal regulators. "We know that some wells were inspected by states, but we don't know how many, because we don't have data from states."

For inspections that do occur, the BLM has outdated "rules and guidance governing oil and gas development" and has failed to keep up with "technological advances, such as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling," according to the report.

"The GAO reports findings that high risk oil and gas wells are not being inspected is highly concerning," Emily Wurth, Director of the Water Policy Program for Food and Water Watch, told Common Dreams.

She added, "Our public lands should be protected for future generations, not exploited for the oil and gas industry's gain. That's why we support a ban on fracking on federal lands."

_____________________