*ABC, Hate Speech
& Whoopi Goldberg
SHARON SEBASTIAN, NEWNEDIAJOURNAL.US
Like so many trapped in their own illogical thinking without knowing the facts, ABC Talk Show Host Whoopi Goldberg contorts both truth and history. Ironically, Goldberg's comments have historical bearing as they pose a threat to Christians worldwide. It is a threat that must not easily be dismissed. In his article, "Whoopi Goldberg: Hitler Was A Christian," William Bigelow of Breitbart News wrote with rich sarcasm that, "...The View's imminent historian Whoopi Goldberg, reaching into her vast bag of historical erudition, pulled out a tidbit of data that would astonish even Jesus: Adolf Hitler was a Christian." In regard to the talk show's on-air debate over Syrian refugees and who should be allowed in, Muslims or Christians, Goldberg let it rip: "There have been a lot of horrifying -- there have been a lot of monster Christians. Hitler was a Christian." In a deepened display of her ignorance of what it means to be Christian, Ms. Goldberg declared: "Well, he didn't like the Catholics, remember? So, he thought of himself as a Christian person." Break down her statements and you get: Monster equals Christians equals Hitler. The question is: What is her intent? Is Ms. Goldberg practicing "hate speech" while she sits comfortably in the lap of an ABC Entertainment talk show as she both denigrates and targets Christians? By doing so, Ms. Goldberg displays similar traits to Hitler. Does this escape her? Ms. Goldberg's right to free speech is tantamount. Even so, her "Hitlerizing" of the followers of Christ recalls the same insidious propaganda verbalized by Hitler that first vilified then led to the persecution and slaughter of the Jews. Is that Ms. Goldberg's intention? Are we to conclude that Ms. Goldberg represents the same mind-set as Hitler with her deception and targeting. What are Ms. Goldberg's motives to subject God-loving Christians to such a negative and damning association?
*Chimera of the
ALEXANDER MAISTROVOY, NEWMEDIAJOURNAL.US
"France is at war," President Francois Hollande says after ISIS attack (as if it had not happen before - 9/11, Madrid in 2004, London in 2005, Boston in 2003, Marathon bombing, countless acts of terrorism in Israel, Russia, Kenya, Nigeria, and finally "Charlie Hebdo"). Hollande is awaken from a dream, like the West is awaken in general. Similar to carefree and capricious Olympic Gods, the West has found itself in the epicenter of the storm and now repeats the same question feverishly and desperately: "How one can fight with the ISIS?". But the question is much more complicated and deeper: "For the sake of what one should fight?". Such is the existential question of the Western civilization (with the exception, perhaps, of the Eastern Europe and Israel). People fight for certain ideas: the Motherland, national dignity, religion (as Muslims do today), ideology – in our case, Liberal values and Democracy. The Motherland and national dignity are no longer values for the young generation of the West. They are completely cosmopolitan; patriotism for them is synonymous with nationalism, xenophobia and prejudice. They know practically nothing and don't even want to know anything about their country, history and roots. Cromwell and Nelson, William of Orange and Charlemagne, Sherman and Bismarck, Louis the Great and Prince Eugene of Savoy, Lorenzo de' Medici and Alfonso the Brave don't mean anything for them, or worse – represent something dangerous and unpleasant, associated with war and violence, alien to tolerance and pluralism ("Dead White European Males" , isn't it so?).
BRET STEPHENS, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
For almost 50 years universities have adopted racialist policies in the name of equality, repressive speech codes in the name of tolerance, ideological orthodoxy in the name of intellectual freedom. Sooner or later, Orwellian methods will lead to Orwellian outcomes. Those coddled, bullying undergrads shouting their demands for safer spaces, easier classes, and additional racial set-asides are exactly what the campus faculty and administrators deserve. In other words, the radical children who grew up to run the universities have duplicated the achievement of their parents, and taken it a step further. In three generations, the campuses have moved from indulgent liberalism to destructive radicalism to the raised-fist racialism of the present—with each generation left to its increasingly meager devices. Why should anyone want to see this farce repeated as tragedy 10 or 20 years down the road? Education entrepreneurs have long been trying to find a new way forward, without much success. For-profit schools could help—if they weren’t the constant target of liberal invective and government investigations. It might help, too, if concerned alumni could apply greater pressure on their alma maters in the face of these campus uprisings. But as the Bass family discovered when they tried to establish a Western Civilization program at Yale some 25 years ago, rich schools can afford to blow off rich alumni.
THOMAS SOWELL, CREATORS.COM
It is amazing how many different ways the same thing can be said, creating totally different impressions. For example, when President Barack Obama says that defeating ISIS is going to take a long time, how is that different from saying that he is going to do very little, very slowly? It is saying the same thing in different words. Politics produces lots of words that can mean very different things, if you stop and think about them. But politicians depend on the fact that many people don't bother to stop and think about them. We often hear that various problems within the black community are "a legacy of slavery." That phrase is in widespread use among people who believe in the kinds of welfare state programs that began to dominate government policies in the 1960s. Blaming social problems today on "a legacy of slavery" is another way of saying, "Don't blame our welfare state policies for things that got worse after those policies took over. Blame what happened in earlier centuries." Nobody would accept that kind of cop-out, if it were expressed that way. But that is why it is expressed differently, as a "legacy of slavery." If we were being serious, instead of being political, we could look at the facts. Were the kinds of problems we are concerned about in black communities today as bad during the first century after slavery or in the first generation after the vastly expanded welfare state? What about children being raised with no father in the home? As of 1960, nearly a century after slavery ended, 22 percent of black children were being raised in single-parent families. Thirty years later, 67 percent of all black children were being raised in single-parent families.
10,000 Syrian Refugees
Mean 1,300 ISIS Supporters
DANIEL GREENFIELD, FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE
Syria is a terror state. It didn't become that way overnight because of the Arab Spring or the Iraq War. Its people are not the victims of American foreign policy, Islamic militancy or any of the other fashionable excuses. They supported Islamic terrorism. Millions of them still do. They are not the Jews fleeing a Nazi Holocaust. They are the Nazis trying to relocate from a bombed out Berlin. These are the cold hard facts. ISIS took over parts of Syria because its government willingly allied with it to help its terrorists kill Americans in Iraq. That support for Al Qaeda helped lead to the civil war tearing the country apart. The Syrians were not helpless, apathetic pawns in this fight. They supported Islamic terrorism. A 2007 poll showed that 77% of Syrians supported financing Islamic terrorists including Hamas and the Iraqi fighters who evolved into ISIS. Less than 10% of Syrians opposed their terrorism. Why did Syrians support Islamic terrorism? Because they hated America. Sixty-three percent wanted to refuse medical and humanitarian assistance from the United States. An equal number didn't want any American help caring for Iraqi refugees in Syria. The vast majority of Syrians turned down any form of assistance from the United States because they hated us. They still do. Just because they're willing to accept it now, doesn't mean they like us. If we bring Syrian Muslims to America, we will be importing a population that hates us.
Fed-up Princeton Students Create Petition to Support Free Speech
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
A petition demanding that Princeton University remains committed to free speech is gaining steam in the wake of nationwide protests by college students seeking protection from offensive language on campuses. The petition, titled "Protect Plurality, Historical Perspective, and Academic Speech at Princeton," has garnered more than 1,500 signatures by many in the Princeton community. It was created in response to demands outlined by the Black Justice League, which included a dorm for students to celebrate black affinity; mandatory diversity training; and a requirement that students take a course on so-called marginalized peoples, MarketWatch reported.
This is an encouraging sign. It will be interesting to understand the disparity in numbers between those who are sick and tired of the narcissistic crap foisted by a micro-minority of agitators, i.e. #BlackLivesMatter, #ConcernedStudent1950, etc., and the malcontents themselves. In the end, if the numbers of students who are outraged by the faux-outraged are significantly greater, this could be the opening that we all have been looking for to expunge the politically correct Progressives from the institutions of higher education and, maybe, education as a whole.
NEW! These Dead Shall
Not Have Died In Vain
Last evening, we shared a table with a young group of marines en route to SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape) training in Maine. I woke up this morning feeling especially thankful to those who put themselves in harm's way to protect our nation and yet I kept thinking about the Gettysburg Address. This is because I worry whether our soldiers (and their families) deployed after 9/11, many injured or in coffins, sacrificed in vain. Did the soldiers who liberated our country from England, as well die in vain? Did the 620,000 casualties of the Civil War die in vain? At 10 years of age, I became aware of terrorism. I watched it play out during the television broadcast of the 1972 Olympics when a terrorist group, identifying itself as "Black September", killed 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team. Why were these athletes arbitrarily murdered on a world stage? I truly didn't understand the catalyst until I was much older. Black September was a movement to avenge Palestinians' losses in Jordan. This was one battle in a continuum of battles and part of a larger war...Like it or not, we are being called upon to fight a non-conventional war against a group of people who do not believe we have a right to exist. There is no co-existence in their world view. It is our freedom and our lives that are at stake. Civilians are targets and the population needs to prepare for this reality. Our leaders need to admit this truth and take all precautions to maximize freedom and limit casualties.
NMJ Managing Editor Frank
Salvato on the Brutality of ISIS
QUOTE OF THE DAY
"Nearly every parent on earth operates on the assumption that character matters a lot to the life outcomes of their children. Nearly every government antipoverty program operates on the assumption that it doesn't."
~ David Brooks