The Humanitarian Hoax of Common Core: Killing America With Kindness – hoax 19


by Linda Goudsmit
January 14, 2018

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

Obama, the humanitarian huckster-in-chief, weakened the United States for eight years presenting his crippling Common Core advocacy as altruistic when in fact it was designed for destruction. His legacy, the Leftist Democrat Party with its “Resistance” movement, is the party of the Humanitarian Hoax attempting to destroy the capitalist infrastructure of American democracy and replace it with socialism.

Common Core is a deliberate information war targeting American children. It is a deceitful campaign to undermine established American Judeo-Christian cultural norms celebrating patriotism, the meritocracy, and American sovereignty. The Leftist/Islamist axis is promoting collectivism in preparation for one-world government. This is how it works.

Serious educational reform enacted by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 was designed to provide high standards and measurable goals to improve individual outcomes in education. Federal funding was correlated to test performance. Rather than improving education the net effect of NCLB was education reformatted to teach to the tests. Education critic Alfie Kohn argued that the “NCLB law is ‘unredeemable’ and should be scrapped – its main effect has been to sentence poor children to an endless regimen of test-preparation drills.” There were loud calls for reform.

Enter Common Core State Standards (CCSS) launched under Obama in 2009 deceptively marketed by a propaganda campaign emphasizing the positive benefits of national standards and uniformity in curriculum guidelines with measurable effectiveness for American public education K-12. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are mistakenly understood to be a derivative of the No Child Left Behind Act – they aren’t.

Obama’s 2009 Race To The Top program was introduced as a competitive grant program that awarded points to states for satisfying performance-based evaluations of teachers and principals based on measures of educator effectiveness. Sound familiar? It should because measurable effectiveness = student test scores. Even though Race to the Top did not mandate adoption of Common Core, to receive federal stimulus money states had to “commit” to adopting Common Core standards. Forty-two states now operate public and private education under the Common Core program.

So, what makes Common Core a humanitarian hoax? Let’s review.

Common Core Standards Mission Statement:

“The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy. . . These Standards do not dictate curriculum or teach methods.”

Sounds great. The problem is the deceptive language referring to the “real world” the “global economy” and the misleading statement that the Standards do not dictate curriculum or teaching methods. This is how it works.

Common Core State Standards are not a derivative of America’s No Child Left Behind. Common Core State Standards are a derivative of the United Nation’s Global Education First initiative (GEFI). The 3 Priorities of GEFI are:

Priority 1: Put Every Child in School

Priority 2: Improve the Quality of Learning

Priority 3: Foster Global Citizenship

It is Priority #3 that is most problematic and the basis for the humanitarian hoax of Common Core.

Obama’s Common Core is not teaching American children about the world and how to be effective and competitive in a global marketplace. Obama’s deceitful Common Core initiative is propagandizing American children toward collectivism, globalism, and one-world government with its anti-American, anti-Judeo-Christian, pro-Islamic bias. American public/private education no longer advocates American patriotism, the meritocracy, American exceptionalism, or American sovereignty. America is no longer in control of American education. This is how it happened.

Obama’s infamous Cairo speech launched an eight-year initiative to Connect All Schools that was fraudulently presented as a program to help different people who believe different things be able to communicate and understand one another.

Bethany Blankley’s stunning 4/2015 article exposes Obama’s Common Core as “originating from the One World Education concept, a global goal orchestrated by the Connect All Schools program to globalize instruction. Its origin is funded by the Qatar Foundation International (QFI). The director of QFI’s Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics is Tariq Ramadan, grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder, Hassan al-Banna.”

World Net Daily WND reported that in 2011 Qatar Foundation International “partnered with the Department of State and the U.S. Department of Education to facilitate matchmaking between classrooms in the U.S. and international schools through. . . the ‘Connect All Schools’ project.” QFI proudly states on its website that the initiative was founded in response to Mr. Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech with the Muslim Brotherhood prominently seated in the front row.

The conspiracy of the Leftist/Islamist axis to re-educate American children away from America-first patriotism toward global governance and Islam is well underway and well funded.

Qatari Foundation International unapologetically states its mission of advancing global citizenship through educational curricula on its Q&A page:

Why is your global presence limited to a select few countries?

While QFI’s mission is dedicated to connecting cultures and advancing global citizenship through education, our current focus is K-12 public and charter schools in the United States, Canada, and Brazil. To find out if a school near you is a QFI partner, see our map to find other resources that may help your child learn Arabic, visit Al Masdar.

Most parents have no idea what their children are learning in school unless their child asks for help with homework or relates an experience at school. Parents in any of the 42 states that have adopted Common Core State Standards need to start reading their children’s textbooks immediately. It is up to parents to decide if they support American sovereignty and fair trade in the global marketplace or if they support global citizenship and a globalized curriculum promoting one-world government. It is a matter of informed consent.

This brings us to the United Nations Agenda 21 initiated in 1992 and described in a lengthy report titled United Nations Sustainable Development. The entire document can be summarized in one sentence:

The United Nations Agenda 21 is a plan for a New World Order that internationalizes the entire world into a global society under its own UN global governance for our own good of course. Its lofty Preamble reads like the lyrics of John Lennon’s song “Imagine.” In the old days power grabbers for world domination were not so soft spoken. Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini did not sing lullabies of peace – but this is the 21st century and requires a different approach. We have “Imagine” and the updated 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The Culture War is an insidious information war being waged on America through the political correctness, moral relativism, and historical revisionism embodied in the informational materials supplied by the pro-globalism enemies of national sovereignty at the UN. Stealth jihad is quietly being fought in classrooms with the educational propaganda of the World Core Curriculum – not with bullets or airplanes.

In 1989 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) awarded its prize for peace education to the father of global education and creator of the World Core Curriculum (WCC) Robert Muller. He accepted his award saying, “I dream that UNESCO will study and recommend by the year 2000 a world core curriculum for adoption by all nations.”

Why is a world core curriculum desirable? Most people understand the mission of the United Nations to be promotion of mutual respect and understanding between sovereign nations with differing cultures. Were we mistaken or mislead? Was the goal of the UN always universal citizenship? Muller says, “In the final analysis… the main function of education is to make children happy, fulfilled, and universal human beings.” Universal human beings?? Really?

In November, 2010 Obama’s Secretary of Education Arne Duncan addressed UNESCO praising universal education without ever mentioning educational content. Educating the world’s children is a laudable goal. Putting every child in school and improving the quality of learning is an altruistic undertaking. The problem is that most people naively assume universal education advances literacy and do not realize it is a propaganda tool designed to advance global governance. It is a humanitarian hoax.

In a world of technology where hard copy books are increasingly being replaced with software and lessons taught on computers it is incredibly simple to alter, censor, and manipulate original texts. Having the world’s children literate and able to read about the world to better understand other cultures and live together in peace is not the same thing as having the children of the world literate to be propagandized by manipulated curriculum content.

There are 193 member states in the United Nations and only 86 are full-fledged democracies. The G77 has 134 members (69% of member states) and functions to advance the economic well-being of the Third World. It should surprise no one that UN educational objectives are in conflict with traditional American educational objectives.

Curriculum content for American educational materials must be developed by Americans for Americans with an unapologetic America-first foundation. Parents endorsing the Common Core State Standards are unwittingly endorsing the pro-Muslim anti-American globalized educational products designed by British publishing giant Pearson Education. Pearson Education supplies educational materials to Connect All Schools.

When the UK froze Muammar Gaddafi’s assets in 2011 The Sovereign Fund of Libya had a 3.27% stake in Pearson. Libya was the second largest shareholder in Pearson Education. CAIR, designated a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates, was also an investor. The anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-Muslim Pearson educational products must not be allowed to propagandize American students.

Words matter. It is essential that Americans understand what one-world government global citizenship means in the Arab world. To Qatar and the Islamic world it means the re-establishment of the Islamic caliphate that rules the world under religious Islamic sharia law. It is equally important for Americans to understand what one-world government means to the secular globalist elite.

Secular one-world government was described in chilling detail 65 years ago by English aristocrat Lord Bertrand Russell in his alarming book, The Impact of Science on Society. Neither the secular nor the religious version of one-world government is the fulfillment of John Lennon’s iconic song “Imagine.” Both are regressive returns to feudal infrastructures consisting of the few ruling masters, the mass of ruled slaves, and an army of soldiers to enforce the pyramid. Both see the United Nations as the instrument for imposition and management of their own version of global governance.

If American parents do not become actively involved in discovering what their children are learning in school they will be unable to oppose the radical education initiative currently transforming the children of the world into “green” or “global citizens” prepared for the New World Order. The humanitarian hoax of Common Core will successfully propagandize American children to reject American citizenship and become citizens of a world dictated and governed by the United Nations. Ignorance is not bliss and willful blindness is not a position of strength – it is submission.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos: Common Core is Dead at U.S. Department of Education…


U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos gave a far-ranging speech Tuesday in Washington at an American Enterprise Institute conference, “Bush-Obama School Reform: Lessons Learned.”  Most media reporting outlines Mrs. DeVos presentation to state ‘the era of common core education is now dead“…

The full transcript of Secretary DeVos remarks is below:

[Transcript] “Thank you, Rick, for that kind introduction. Who would’ve thought that after we were last together on a panel in Grand Rapids a couple of years ago, I’d be here in this capacity today?

It’s an honor to be with all of you at an organization I have long appreciated.

AEI is now in its 80th year and in that near century, the Institute’s scholars have influenced and shaped the way Americans think about so many issues in the public square. AEI has been – and will continue to be – a treasured constant in this town of transition. And it should be noted that’s due in no small part to the leadership of Arthur Brooks, who brings a unique and compelling perspective. I’m grateful to call him a friend.

I’d like to especially thank Rick and Michael for putting this volume together and for hosting today’s important discussions. Both of you have contributed significantly to the policy debates in American education, and, importantly, you’ve put your distinct perspectives and experience to work with the goal of improving education for all. You both left the classroom out of frustration, and there are still far too many teachers who share that experience today.

My work over thirty years has revolved around time spent on the outside, looking in. Outside Washington. Outside the LBJ building. Outside “the system.” Some have questioned the presence of an outsider in the Department of Education, but, as it’s been said before, maybe what students need is someone who doesn’t yet know all the things you “can’t do.”

To a casual observer, a classroom today looks scarcely different than what one looked like when I entered the public policy debate thirty years ago. Worse, most classrooms today look remarkably similar to those of 1938 when AEI was founded. Take a look at this! These two operating rooms look starkly different, as does this general store and this website. But these two classrooms look almost identical.

The vast majority of learning environments have remained the same since the industrial revolution, because they were made in its image. Think of your own experience: sit down; don’t talk; eyes front. Wait for the bell. Walk to the next class. Repeat. Students were trained for the assembly line then, and they still are today.

Our societies and economies have moved beyond the industrial era. But the data tell us education hasn’t.

The most recent Program for International Student Assessment, or PISA, report, with which you are all familiar, has the U.S. ranked 23rd in reading, 25th in science and 40th in math. And, you know this too: it’s not for a lack of funding. The fact is the United States spends more per pupil than most other developed countries, many of which perform better than us in the same surveys.

I know that hard truth touches a nerve for everyone in this room. It does so for educators who try to help their students realize their potential. For employers who seek prepared employees. And, most importantly, for parents who only want the best for their children.

Of course there have been many attempts to change the status quo. We’ve seen valiant efforts to improve education from Republicans and Democrats, liberals, conservatives and everyone in between.

That’s because everyone is aiming for the same result.

Everyone wants students to be prepared and to lead successful lives.

We can’t say that sort of public harmony exists in other policy arenas. Not everyone agrees about the outcome or goal of tax policy or energy policy or immigration policy.

Our unity of purpose here presents an opportunity.

But while we’ve changed some aspects of education, the results we all work for and desire haven’t been achieved.

The bottom line is simple: federal education reform efforts have not worked as hoped.

That’s not a point I make lightly or joyfully. Yes, there have been some minor improvements in a few areas. But we’re far from where we need to be. We need to be honest with ourselves. The purpose of today’s conversation is to look at the past with 20/20 hindsight, examine what we have done and where it has – or hasn’t – led us.

First, let me be clear that I’m not here to impugn anyone’s motives. Every one of us wants better for students. We want better for our own children. We want better for our communities and our country. We won’t solve any problems through finger-pointing.

I also don’t intend to criticize the goals of previous administrations’ education initiatives. In the end, every administration has tried to improve education for students and grow the number who are learning valuable skills.

We should hope – no, we should commit – that we as a country will not rest until every single child has equal access to the quality education they deserve. Secretary Spellings was right to ask “whose child do you want to leave behind?”

But the question remains: why, after all the good intentions, the worthwhile goals, the wealth of expertise mustered, and the billions and billions of dollars spent, are students still unprepared?

With No Child Left Behind, the general consensus among federal policymakers was that greater accountability would lead to better schools. Highlighting America’s education woes had become an American pastime, and, they thought, surely if schools were forced to answer for their failures, students would ultimately be better off.

President Bush, the “compassionate conservative,” and Senator Kennedy, the “liberal lion,” both worked together on the law. It said that schools had to meet ambitious goals… or else. Lawmakers mandated that 100 percent of students attain proficiency by 2014. This approach would keep schools accountable and ultimately graduate more and better-educated students, they believed.

Turns out, it didn’t. Indeed, as has been detailed today, NCLB did little to spark higher scores. Universal proficiency, touted at the law’s passage, was not achieved. As states and districts scrambled to avoid the law’s sanctions and maintain their federal funding, some resorted to focusing specifically on math and reading at the expense of other subjects. Others simply inflated scores or lowered standards.

The trend line remains troubling today. According to the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress data, two-thirds of American fourth graders still can’t read at the level they should. And since 2013, our 8th grade reading scores have declined.

Where the Bush administration emphasized NCLB’s stick, the Obama administration focused on carrots. They recognized that states would not be able to legitimately meet the NCLB’s strict standards. Secretary Duncan testified that 82 percent of the nation’s schools would likely fail to meet the law’s requirements — thus subjecting them to crippling sanctions.

The Obama administration dangled billions of dollars through the “Race to the Top” competition, and the grant-making process not so subtly encouraged states to adopt the Common Core State Standards. With a price tag of nearly four and a half billion dollars, it was billed as the “largest-ever federal investment in school reform.” Later, the Department would give states a waiver from NCLB’s requirements so long as they adopted the Obama administration’s preferred policies — essentially making law while Congress negotiated the reauthorization of ESEA.

Unsurprisingly, nearly every state accepted Common Core standards and applied for hundreds of millions of dollars in “Race to the Top” funds. But despite this change, the United States’ PISA performance did not improve in reading and science, and it dropped in math from 2012 to 2015.

Then, rightly, came the public backlash to federally imposed tests and the Common Core. I agree – and have always agreed – with President Trump on this: “Common Core is a disaster.” And at the U.S. Department of Education, Common Core is dead.

On a parallel track, the Obama administration’s School Improvement Grants sought to fix targeted schools by injecting them with cash. The total cost of that effort was seven billion dollars.

One year ago this week, the Department’s Institute of Education Sciences released a report on what came of all that spending. It said: “Overall, across all grades, we found that implementing any SIG-funded model had no significant impacts on math or reading test scores, high school graduation, or college enrollment.”

There we have it: billions of dollars directed at low-performing schools had no significant impact on student achievement.

These investments were meant to spark meaningful reforms. Schools were encouraged to significantly alter their teaching staffs, fire the principal or change the structure and model of the school. But most glossed over those recommendations. They simply took the federal money and ran the school the same old way.

So where does that leave us? We saw two presidents from different political parties and philosophies take two different approaches.

Federally mandated assessments. Federal money. Federal standards. All originated in Washington, and none solved the problem. Too many of America’s students are still unprepared.

Perhaps the lesson lies not in what made the approaches different, but in what made them the same: the federal government. Both approaches had the same Washington “experts” telling educators how to behave.

The lesson is in the false premise: that Washington knows what’s best for educators, parents and students.

Rick, you’ve rightly pointed out that the federal government is good at making states, districts, and schools do something, but it’s not good at making them do it well. Getting real results for students hinges on how that “something” is done.

That’s because when it comes to education – and any other issue in public life – those closest to the problem are always better able to solve it. Washington bureaucrats and self-styled education “experts” are about as far removed from students as you can get.

Yet under both Republican and Democratic administrations, Washington overextended itself time and time again.

Educators don’t need engineering from Washington. Parents don’t need prescriptions from Washington. Students don’t need standards from Washington.

Throughout both initiatives, the result was a further damaged classroom dynamic between teacher and student, as the focus shifted from comprehension to test-passing. This sadly has taken root, with the American Federation of Teachers recently finding that 60 percent of its teachers reported having moderate to no influence over the content and skills taught in their own classrooms.

Let that sink in. Most teachers feel they have little – if any — say in their own classrooms.

That statistic should shock even the most ardent sycophant of “the system.” It’s yet another reason why we should shift power over classrooms from Washington back to teachers who know their students well.

Federal mandates distort what education ought to be: a trusting relationship between teacher, parent and student.

Ideally, parent and teacher work together to help a child discover his or her potential and pursue his or her passions. When we seek to empower teachers, we must empower parents as well. Parents are too often powerless in deciding what’s best for their child. The state mandates where to send their child. It mandates what their child learns and how he or she learns it. In the same way, educators are constrained by state mandates. District mandates. Building mandates… all kinds of other mandates! Educators don’t need Washington mandating their teaching on top of everything else.

But during the years covered in your volume, the focus was the opposite: more federal government intrusion into relationships between teachers, parents and children.

The lessons of history should force us to admit that federal action has its limits.

The federal-first approach did not start with No Child Left Behind. The push for higher national standards was present in the Clinton administration’s “Goals 2000” initiative. Before that, we had President George H.W. Bush’s “America 2000,” also calling for higher national standards. These followed the Reagan administration’s “Nation at Risk” report, released in 1983.

That report gave dire warnings about the country’s track if education was not reformed. “If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today,” the report warned, “we might well have viewed it as an act of war.” That came after President Carter’s giant nod to union bosses: the establishment of the Department of Education, with the ironic charge to “prohibit federal control of education.”

The trend is evident. Politicians from both parties just can’t help themselves. They have talked about painting education in new colors and even broader strokes. But each time, reform has not fundamentally changed “the system.” Each attempt has really just been a new coat of paint on the same old wall.

When we try the same thing over and over again, yet expect different results, that’s not reform – that’s insanity.

We will not reach our goal of helping every child achieve his or her fullest potential until we truly change. Let me offer three ways we can move forward in that pursuit.

First, we need to recognize that the federal government’s appropriate role is not to be the nation’s school board. My role is not to be the national superintendent nor the country’s “choice chief” – regardless of what the union’s “Chicken Littles” may say! Federal investments in education, after all, are less than 10 percent of total K-12 expenditures, but the burdens created by federal regulations in education amount to a much, much larger percentage.

The Every Student Succeeds Act charted a path in a new direction. ESSA takes important steps to return power where it belongs by recognizing states – not Washington — should shape education policy around their own people. But state lawmakers should also resist the urge to centrally plan education. “Leave it to the states” may be a compelling campaign-season slogan, but state capitols aren’t exactly close to every family either. That’s why states should empower teachers and parents and provide the same flexibility ESSA allows states.

But let’s recognize that many states are now struggling with what comes next. State ESSA plans aren’t the finish line. Those words on paper mean very little if state and local leaders don’t seize the opportunity to truly transform education. They must move past a mindset of compliance and embrace individual empowerment.

Under ESSA, school leaders, educators and parents have the latitude and freedom to try new approaches to serve individual students.

My message to them is simple: do it!

Embrace the imperative to do something truly bold… to challenge the status quo… to break the mold.

One important way to start this process is to make sure that parents get the information they want and need about the performance of their children’s schools and teachers. ESSA encourages states to be transparent about how money is spent, down to the school-building level.

Some states have developed information that is truly useful for parents and teachers. Others have worked just as hard to obfuscate what is really going on at their schools. To empower parents, policymakers and teachers, we can’t let “the system” hide behind complexity to escape accountability.

We must always push for better.

ESSA is a good step in the right direction. But it’s just that – a step. We still find ourselves boxed in a “system,” one where we are in a constant battle to move the ball between the 40-yard lines of a football field. Nobody scores, and nobody wins. Students are left bored in the bleachers, and many leave, never to return.

So why don’t we consider whether we need a new playbook?

That brings me to point number two. And, to finish the analogy… let’s call a new play: empowering parents.

Parents have the greatest stake in the outcome of their child’s education. Accordingly, they should also have the power to make sure their child is getting the right education.

As Deven Carlson points out, there is little constituency in America for the top-down reforms that have been tried time and again. In order for any reform to truly work, it must attract and maintain the support of the people.

I have seen such support for parental empowerment. The more parents exercise it, the more they like it. This growing support is why states are responding to that demand one by one. It’s also why sycophants entrenched in and defending the status quo are terrified. They recoil from relinquishing power and control to teachers, parents and students.

Well, I’m not one bit afraid of losing power. Because I trust parents and teachers, and I believe in students.

Equal access to a quality education should be a right for every American and every parent should have the right to choose how their child is educated. Government exists to protect those rights, not usurp them.

So let’s face it: the opponents of parents could repeal every voucher law, close every charter school, and defund every choice program across the country.

But school choice still wouldn’t go away. There would still be school choices… for the affluent and the powerful.

Let’s empower the forgotten parents to decide where their children go to school. Let’s show some humility and trust all parents to know their kids’ needs better than we do.

Let’s trust teachers, too. Let’s encourage them to innovate, to create new options for students. Not just with public charter schools or magnet schools or private schools, but within the traditional “system” and with new approaches yet to be explored.

What we’ve been doing isn’t serving all kids well. Let’s unleash teachers to help solve the problem.

You know, I’ve never heard it claimed that giving parents more options is bad for mom and dad. Or for the child. What you hear is that it’s bad for “the system” – for the school building, the school system, the funding stream.

That argument speaks volumes about where Chicken Little’s priorities lie.

Our children deserve better than the 19th century assembly-line approach. They deserve learning environments that are agile, relevant, exciting. Every student deserves a customized, self-paced, and challenging life-long learning journey. Schools should be open to all students – no matter where they’re growing up or how much their parents make.

That means no more discrimination based upon zip code or socio-economic status. All means all.

It’s about educational freedom! Freedom from Washington mandates. Freedom from centralized control. Freedom from a one-size-fits-all mentality. Freedom from “the system.”

Choice in education is not when a student picks a different classroom in this building or that building, uses this voucher or that tax-credit scholarship. Choice in education is bigger than that. Those are just mechanisms.

It’s about freedom to learn. Freedom to learn differently. Freedom to explore. Freedom to fail, to learn from falling and to get back up and try again. It’s freedom to find the best way to learn and grow… to find the exciting and engaging combination that unlocks individual potential.

Which leads to my final point: if America’s students are to be prepared, we must rethink school.

What I propose is not another top-down, federal government policy that promises to be a silver bullet. No. We need a paradigm shift, a fundamental reorientation… a rethink.

“Rethink” means we question everything to ensure nothing limits a student from pursuing his or her passion, and achieving his or her potential. So each student is prepared at every turn for what comes next.

It’s past time to ask some of the questions that often get labeled as “non-negotiable” or just don’t get asked at all:

Why do we group students by age?
Why do schools close for the summer?
Why must the school day start with the rise of the sun?
Why are schools assigned by your address?
Why do students have to go to a school building in the first place?
Why is choice only available to those who can buy their way out? Or buy their way in?
Why can’t a student learn at his or her own pace?
Why isn’t technology more widely embraced in schools?
Why do we limit what a student can learn based upon the faculty and facilities available?

Why?

We must answer these questions. We must acknowledge what is and what is not working for students.

Now, I don’t have all the answers or policy prescriptions. No one person does. But people do know how to help their neighbors. People do know how they can help a dozen students here or 100 there. Because they know the students. They know their home lives. They know their communities. They know their parents. They know each other.

That means learning can, should, and will look different for each unique child. And we should celebrate that, not fear it!

I’m well aware that change — the unknown – can be scary. That talk of fundamentally rethinking our approach to education seems impossible, insurmountable.

But not changing is scarier. Stagnation creates risks of its own. The reality is…

we should be horrified of not changing.

Our children don’t fear their futures. Think of a newborn, born into hope — not fear. They begin life with a clean slate. With a fresh set of eyes to see things we don’t currently see. That’s how students begin their lifelong learning journeys… with unlimited potential… yet with limited time.

Their dreams, their hopes, their aspirations, their futures can’t wait, while another wave of lawmakers puts yet another coat of paint on the broken “system.” One year may not seem like much to an adult, but it’s much too long for the child who still can’t read “Goodnight Moon.”

We, the public, can’t wait either. Education is good for the public.

Everything else – our health, our economy, our continued security as a nation — depends on what we do today for the leaders of tomorrow. It follows, then, that any educator in any learning environment serves the public good. If the purpose of public education is to educate the public, then it should… not… matter what word comes before school.

What matters are the students the school serves. What matters are their futures. We’ve been entrusted with their futures not because we asked to be, but because it’s a duty to destiny – theirs… and ours. It all depends on what we do now.

When our grandchildren tell their children about this moment in history, let them say we were the ones who finally put students first.

Thank you, and I look forward to this conversation.

[Transcript Link]

More Winning !!

Meanwhile… the fake news media are cats chasing Trump’s dancing laser pointer…

60% of Japanese Girls Are Not Dating & Are Younger Girls Looking for Older Men a Return of the Cycle?


Culture is changing and much seems to be reverting back to the way it was before Socialism. Before the 1930s, there was typically a large age differe4nce between couples. The boy had to become a man and then approach the father to ask for her hand. He would have to demonstrate that he was capable of taking care of her. After Socialism when the government replaced old family traditions, the age differential collapsed. The common complaint girls have today is that boys in their 20s are immature. In Japan, this has manifested into what is called the “celibacy syndrome” where girls are not interested even in dating no less marriage. Now about 60% of eligible girls are not interested in dating. The high unemployment among the youth, in Europe especially, also has driven younger women to now seek older men for husbands who are (1) mature and not addicted to video games, and (2) have the means to support a family.

Other studies are uncovering interesting facts about age differences. Men ‘live longer’ if they marry a younger woman. Perhaps the natural balance was the way things were before Socialism. The boy had to first become a man before he was ready for a wife. What many girls complain about boys lacking maturity is often expressed that they are raised being told they can be independent whereas boys are raised these days telling them to have fun for there is plenty of time to settle down. It may be possible that girls are being prepared for life faster than boys in addition to the biological clock.

Just maybe, Socialism has disrupted a lot more than people think. Couples used to have several children for their retirement was the family unit. When Socialism came into play, family size reduced dropping from an average of nearly 5 to 2.5. In 1790, having more than 5 children accounted for 35.8% which is now only 1% of households. Children, who once saved to take care of their parents in old age, are no longer responsible. Government social programs take care of that. In the USA, it is Social Security which replaced the family structure. Socialism may have changed a lot more than saving to take care of the parents in old age. Altering the age differential of couples may also have also profoundly changed to our social structure and girls are naturally now either not interested in marriage or are looking for older men. The future of society may be starkly different than people suspect.

Are Police Acting Like Thugs Because Judges Refuse to Defend the Constitution?


Teacher Deyshia Hargrave was questioning the school board how they can vote to give the superintendent a raise when school employees have not gotten a raise in years. A policeman from the parish Marshal’s Office told her to leave the room. He shut down her freedom of speech to even ask a question in a respectful manner.  He ordered her to step outside, pushed her to the ground, and then arrested her dragging her out in handcuffs.

The question this presents is why are police officer lacking any training about human and constitutional rights. Far too many seem they believe they are supreme in their authority and need not answer to anyone. This evolves because judges are not defending the constitution as a whole. There are no checks and balances anymore. What happened to “We the People” in this modern day?

British Prosecutors Charging Hate Crimes for just saying “All right Geezer.”


The British government is also going completely nuts with criminal charges for nonsense. British prosecutors charged a woman for calling a man a “pussy”. Then there is the case of a businessman who was charged with a hate crime for saying to a transgender man presenting himself as a woman  – “all right geezer.” He alleged he simply said that to him/her when they passed in the street. Vernon Mussington was found guilty but appealed and finally had his conviction overturned.

When the governments collapse, we simply MUST take away the power to prosecute from government completely. Part of the cycle that signals the decline and fall is in motion, is none other than the abuse of the power to prosecute. Edward Gibbon wrote in the Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire:

“[A] distinction of every kind soon became criminal. The possession of wealth stimulated the diligence of the informers; rigid virtue implied a tacit censure of the irregularities of Commodus; important services implied a dangerous superiority of merit; and the friendship of the father always insured the aversion of the son. Suspicion was equivalent to proof; trial to condemnation. The execution of a considerable senator was attended with the death of all who might lament or revenge his fate; and when Commodus had once tasted human blood, he became incapable of pity or remorse

(Book 1, Chapter 4).

Why Governments are Like an Ameba


 

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; You may be called the legend because of your forecasts on so many levels, but it might also be because you have met with more governments than probably any economist or analyst. My question is simple. From your experience, do you believe you can prevent the economic carnage that is becoming so obvious to everyone except those in government?

SK

ANSWER: The idealistic belief in intelligence and goodness embedded within human beings is increasingly confronted with the harsh experiences of reality. We all indeed act in our own self-interest or we would take no action (Smith’s Invisible Hand). Even an ameba, which lacks consciousness as we define it being self-aware, still responds to its surrounding and engulfs its prey to survive. It responds due to its hardwired nature. Unfortunately, humans also possess at that inner level this same survival instinct that is hardwired. This makes it increasingly unlikely that willingness to change gains sufficient strength in time for the abyss to be reached. Hence, we must crash and burn.

Because the government will respond in the same manner as an ameba, there is no hope that they will spontaneously look in the mirror and reach an OMG moment of realizing that they are causing the demise of our society. Consequently, they will consume our liberty until they push it to the point that society will then act only in its self-interest to survive. Historically, all governments collapse once they have consumed rights, liberty, and privileges in their desire to maintain control and in the end, die by their own greed for power. They lack any consciousness of what they are doing precisely as an ameba. There is no reasoning for there is no one single mind to reason with.

Therefore, neither I nor anyone else, possess the power to prevent the cycle from unfolding. The very best I can hope for is perhaps to influence the reconstruction

Ukraine & the Next Revolution


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I want to thank you for defending the Ukrainian people in their quest to overthrow the government corruption. You are a great inspiration here in Kiev. What does your model show for the success of our revolution looking ahead?

PN

ANSWER:  There are many in the West who know nothing of Ukraine and simply attribute the revolution to the CIA. I understand the disillusionment in Ukraine about these pretend analysts. They pontificate CIA and ignore that there was a real uprising of the people. Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine endured years of corruption, mismanagement, lack of economic growth, currency devaluation, and problems in securing funding from public markets. The corruption became widespread and Yanukovich’s sons were engaged in a protection racket preventing people from going into small business. There is no other evidence of how the Ukrainian people have suffered under political corruption that has not really changed. Yanukovich was removed, but those under him are still in power and just changed their stripes. The corrupt politicians did not realize that when the government tried to arrest Mikheil Saakashvili, the ex-Georgian leader-turned Ukrainian opposition politician, the people would rally and rescue him from the police wagon freeing him. The accusations that he plotted to overthrow the government is on par with the corruption. I have a friend who lives close to him. He stood on the roof preaching to the people as the police tried to grab him. It was a real spectacle of corruption.

They have also accused Saakashvili of accepting funding from an exiled Ukrainian businessman in a bid to seize power, which he denies. Thousands of people even gathered outside the courthouse after an almost-eight-hour hearing where the government tried to use the criminal process to eliminate an opposition leader. This is standard in politics and we see the Democrats in the USA trying the same tactics to Impeach Trump. The people are against demanding the impeachment of President Petro Poroshenko trying to stamp out corruption once again in Ukraine.

Ukrainian Revolutions Have Been:

Khmelnytsky Uprising (1648–57)
Ukraine after the Russian Revolution
Ukrainian War of Independence (1917–21)
Declaration of Ukrainian State Act (1941)
Declaration of Independence of Ukraine (1991)
Orange Revolution (2004–05)
Euromaidan (2013–Present)/2014 Ukrainian revolution

This has demonstrated a close correlation with a 52-year cycle aligning with the Economic Confidence Model of 51.6-years. This appears to be on schedule for a rise in tensions again here in 2018, but the peak is most likely coming into play in 2022

Intellectual Froglegs – New Year Addition


The long awaited 2018 New Year awards show by Joe Dan Gorman and the Intellectual Froglegs media empire is finally out:

Visit Website HERE

The Feast Of Epiphany


 

On January 6 Christians celebrate the Feast of the Epipany of our Lord. The word epiphany comes from the Greek word epiphainen and means “to manifest” or “to reveal.”

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The Epiphany is the manifestation of Jesus as Messiah of Israel, Son of God and Saviour of the world. the great feast of Epiphany celebrates the adoration of Jesus by the wise men (magi) from the East, together with his baptism in the Jordan and the wedding feast at Cana in Galilee.

In the magi, representatives of the neighbouring pagan religions, the Gospel sees the first-fruits of the nations, who welcome the good news of salvation through the Incarnation.

The magi’s coming to Jerusalem in order to pay homage to the king of the Jews shows that they seek in Israel, in the messianic light of the star of David, the one who will be king of the nations.

Their coming means that pagans can discover Jesus and worship him as Son of God and Saviour of the world only by turning towards the Jews and receiving from them the messianic promise as contained in the Old Testament.

The Epiphany shows that “the full number of the nations” now takes its “place in the family of the patriarchs”, and acquires Israelitica dignitas (is made “worthy of the heritage of Israel”) [CCC 528]. Taken from a post on NCR here.

Epiphany is celebrated on January 6. In the United States it is observed on the first Sunday after January 1, this year on January 7.

The magi, also known as the Wise Men and the Three Kings, although the number was never specified in the Bible, came seeking the King because of a widespread belief that a universal king would come from the nation of Israel.

Gospel MT 2:1-12
When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea,
in the days of King Herod,
behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying,
“Where is the newborn king of the Jews?
We saw his star at its rising
and have come to do him homage.”
When King Herod heard this,
he was greatly troubled,
and all Jerusalem with him.
Assembling all the chief priests and the scribes of the people,
He inquired of them where the Christ was to be born.
They said to him, “In Bethlehem of Judea,
for thus it has been written through the prophet:
And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
since from you shall come a ruler,
who is to shepherd my people Israel.”
Then Herod called the magi secretly
and ascertained from them the time of the star’s appearance.
He sent them to Bethlehem and said,
“Go and search diligently for the child.
When you have found him, bring me word,
that I too may go and do him homage.”
After their audience with the king they set out.
And behold, the star that they had seen at its rising preceded them,
until it came and stopped over the place where the child was.
They were overjoyed at seeing the star,
and on entering the house
they saw the child with Mary his mother.
They prostrated themselves and did him homage.
Then they opened their treasures
and offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.
And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod,
they departed for their country by another way.

War in the Classroom


By Tabitha Korol       

The year was 2011, and a freshman in Newton South High School, in Newton, Massachusetts, asked her father if it was true that the “Israeli occupation forces” had “imprisoned, tortured and killed” hundreds of Arabic women who had been “active in the Palestinian resistant movement.”  Her father, Tony Pagliuso, asked for the source of this misinformation.  It was her 540-page Arab World Studies Notebook, a highly explosive textbook filled with fabrications, shown to contribute, at least in part, to the marked decrease, from 84 to 57 percent, in student sympathy for Israel. In another textbook, The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography, a question reads, “If a Palestinian suicide bomber kills several dozen Israeli teenagers in a Jerusalem restaurant, is that an act of terrorism or wartime retaliation against Israeli government policies and army actions?”  These are not unique.

The editor, Audrey Park Shabbas, employed by Arab World and Islamic Resources and School Services, authored the volume to improve the Arab image because the truth is unpalatable in Western society, and the Israeli image is scapegoated in the process, consistent with the 1400-year Islamic war against Jews and Western civilization.  Schools also distribute Scholastic’s maps that omit Israel from the modern Middle East.

Other education sources used across America are the Internet’s Flashpoints: Guide to World Conflicts, which identifies Jerusalem as the capital of (the non-existent) Palestine; handouts that omit the numerous and deadly Arab terrorist attacks on Israel; and A Muslim Primer that presents a deceptive, sugar-coated version of the subjugated Muslim woman’s life.  Biased textbooks in use throughout America are World History: The Human Odyssey; World History: Human Legacy; World Civilizations: The Global Experience; A Muslim Primer: Beginner’s Guide to Islam, and more.  I have personally reviewed four textbooks and written exposés accordingly, and many concerned professionals and members of the public are working hard to combat the manipulation of our youth, but the disinformation continues to proliferate.

More than 10,000 teachers attended Shabbas’s hundreds of three-day teacher-training sessions from 2000 to 2006, and were thus persuaded and made skillful at reaching and indoctrinating more than 25 million students over ten years.   Additional corroboration comes from visiting biased speakers, such as the notorious anti-Israel Noam Chomsky, an aficionado of the Iran-supported, world’s most powerful terrorist group/army, Hezbollah, responsible for large-scale bombings and suicide attacks on Americans and Israelis; Linda Sarsour, anti-Semite, jihadi and proponent of FGM (Female Genital Mutiliation); and academia’s Paul Beran, then-director of Harvard University’s Outreach Center, now leader of SHARIAsource, recognized for promoting BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) against Israel to the Presbyterian Church.

It took alert parents and involved citizens and intense investigation and reports by The Massachusetts Board of Education, Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT), the American Jewish Committee and Verité Educate to expose Newton High’s ethical violations and unacceptable practices and to finally have the school admit the Outreach Center’s strong influence.  Key criticism was leveled at Harvard International Review’s Hatem Bazian’s fallacious portrayal of Palestinians as the indigenous victims and Jews as the colonialists; at the textbooks for their academic dishonesty through inaccuracies, false information, plagiarism, deceptive editing, and hate-filled, religious-proselytizing websites; assignments designed to prejudice students toward a suicidal one-state solution for Israel/the West Bank/Gaza, revealed in Miriam F. Elman’s “Palestinian Propaganda is  Infiltrating US Public Schools”; and biases against Israel and the US while sanitizing Islamic ideology and terrorism, explained by Rafael Medoff in Breaking Christian News.

Examples of other schools across the country that inculcate Islamism and unfairness in the classroom include Bellaire High, in Houston, Texas, cited for extreme claims about Israel’s history; Carlmont High in Belmont, California, which invited Linda Sarsour and other anti-Semites to advocate BDS and tutor radical positions against Israel; and La Plata High, a Maryland public school that forces the children to learn about Islam, memorize the Five Pillars of Islam, and recite the Shahada, the Islamic oath of conversion.  By contrast, there is a considerable lack of parallel information being taught about Christianity and Judaism because Islamists precedently announced their aversion and umbrage.  This generation of children is being fed an egregiously biased version of an ideology that is incompatible with democracy and corrosive to our beliefs, morals, and ideals.  Let us be clear: their ultimate purpose is the conversion of our children.

The Intense focus on Islamic subjects is carefully selected.  For example, the status of women is profoundly misrepresented, the origin and purpose of their sharia-compliant clothing falsified and unsupported by scholarship.  One author asserts that “Islam and the Quran created major improvements in the status of women,” when the truth is otherwise.  The worst conditions for women are concealed, including the practices of genital mutilation and honor killings; accusations of adultery and stoning; their treatment as property and legal inferiority; endorsed beatings by their husbands; the fact that a woman may have no rights to show her face, walk alone, drive a vehicle or attend schools. International speakers and experts who offer genuine facts, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Anni Cyrus, Brigitte Gabriel, and Noni Darwish, are not among the invitees.

The textbooks elevate Islam over Judaism and Christianity, one being John Esposito’s Islam, the Straight Path, in which he declares that revelations given to the Jews and Christians were false. By contrast, he cites as truth, rather than belief, that God sent Muhammad as his final messenger and that God’s sacred language is Arabic.  Students write about Moslem pilgrimages, including to Jerusalem as “your homeland,” when Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran.  Many textbooks explain the rise and spread of Islam as being a successful acceptance of ideas, rather than the result of persecution and wantonly destructive conquerors who beheaded the non-believers, kidnapped the women for forced conversion and sexual slavery, and enriched themselves with appropriated bounty.

The textbooks’ definition of jihad varies from the benign, the spiritual struggle within oneself against sin, to the traditional, the struggle against the enemies of Islam, but the goal is always the same – that of bringing the whole world under Islamic law, as explained by Bernard Lewis. Omitted is the account of hundreds of members of the Jewish Meccan tribe, the Quarayza, beheaded in 627 AD for rejecting Muhammad as Prophet, and the more than 109 verses in the Quran that decree violence and death to Jews and Christians, and the destruction of Israel.

Not found in textbooks is Israel’s history – not 1948, when five surrounding Arab states declared war on the new state of Israel and lost, or 1967, when the Arabs again attacked Israel and lost, leaving behind Arabs who stayed and accepted Israel citizenship and Arabs who fled and remained as stateless pawns, neglected by their brethren.  Mislaid is the number of Jews – between 800,000 and one million – who fled for their lives from Islamic countries, and were absorbed by Israel.  Missing are a timeline that would verify Israel’s attacks as retaliatory to the Arab leaders’ calls to annihilate Israel, and a correct definition of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as “religious,” as declared in the Quran, confirming that anti-Semitism is integral to the Moslem culture. The textbooks do not explain Islamic terrorism and radicalism as religious precepts of jihad, or the incitement to hate that permeates Palestinian and Islamic society. Palestinians extol terrorism, praise terrorists as heroes and deceased murderers as martyrs after whom streets, cultural events, and public squares are named, and for which parents are handsomely rewarded – with “humanitarian aid” funded by UN countries. Anti-Semitism is endemic to the Koran, and none of this is mentioned.

The correct definition of Islam, with its religious, legal, political, economic, social and military components is a 100% system of life, and the greatest threat to the world.  There are organizations that work to free our schools of Islamic propaganda, but the programs of study have been bought and paid for by the Saudis, and theirs is the agenda.  Hence, the lessons are plagued with poor scholarship, revisionism, and blatant anti-Israel bias, and supported by a corrupt media that fuels the skewed perspective.

It is now evident that we are at war, a war that is being waged in the classroom, with its weaponry aimed at our children’s minds.  The diligent work, “Indoctrinating our Youth,” by CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, has resulted in the removal of some curriculum materials, but not all.  Despite parental rights to know what their children are learning, teaching staff does not provide full disclosure.  And, for every school that removes falsehoods, there are a hundred more that are continuing its use, now beginning at 3rd grade level.  It is up to us to pursue what must be stopped for the sake of our survival as a republic.  Go to www.schoolbias.org or call CAMERA, at 617-377-6911.  To quote a popular phrase, “If you see something, say something.”