Posted originally on the conservative tree house on July 22, 2021 | Sundance | 197 Comments
The look on the panel’s faces as they get intentionally gentle push-back over their sycophantic worship of Dr. Fauci is a little funny.
The CNN crew seems emotionally hurt at the suggestion that Dr. Fauci may be less than honest. WATCH:
Armstrong Economics Blog/Education Re-Posted Jun 21, 2021 by Martin Armstrong
Yeonmi Park, a North Korean defector, compared her experience at Columbia University to life in the “hermit kingdom.” Education (i.e., indoctrination) in North Korea is designed to teach children from a young age how to think, what to think, and not to question the status quo. “History is forgotten in North Korea,” Park stated, adding she was excited to learn the true facts of history while studying in the land of the free.
To her dismay, she quickly discovered that her American ivy league college participated in the same behavior. After stating that she enjoyed Jane Austen and classical works, her teacher quickly corrected her for adoring books written by authors who were “bigots” with a “colonial mindset.” Students cheered for communism and socialism without regard for past events, such as the millions of lives lost under Mao Zedong’s rule. “They are dying to give their rights and power to government…they take it for granted. They don’t know how hard it is to be free,” Park stated. She failed to understand how students paying tens if not hundreds of thousands for education could cry oppression.
The most confusing part for Park is that Americans, unlike North Koreans, have access to the internet, books, and a plethora of information, yet they “choose to be brainwashed.” She concluded by determining that education is designed to prevent people from critical thinking. “The future of our country is as bleak as North Korea’s if we don’t rise up right now,” Park warned.
Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted Jun 21, 2021 by Martin Armstrong
In July 2015, then CEO Dick Costolo departed Twitter, and Jack Dorsey assumed the role of interim CEO. Twitter was created by Jack Dorsey, Noah Glass, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams in March 2006 and launched in July 2006. By 2012, the platform had more than 100 million users. I am surprised that they have not figured out that Dorsey can be personally sued for securities fraud since he marketed Twitter as being the platform for “freedom of expression,” whereby he has personally taken charge of the company and did exactly the opposite of what was said when they went public.
If I raised money and said we would invest in BioTech, but then after getting the money I invested in real estate, that would be securities fraud. We cannot count on the SEC to defend the people. They get their marching orders and will never cross paths with someone like Dorsey. Worse still, if you take a public corporation and you flip it around for personal use, that too is actionable. Dorsey is obviously incompetent as a CEO.
Armstrong Economics Blog/BigTech Re-Posted Jun 4, 2021 by Martin Armstrong
t is time that the people DEMAND the end to censorship. The immunity given to platforms was to prevent them from being sued for posts of others. Not that they are now the Censors of society. They are endangering people’s lives and they should be dragged out of their offices and put on trial for sedition. This is supposed to be a government by and for the people – not World Economic Forum, Bill Gates, and politicians lining their pockets to create concentration camps to reduce CO2 and the population.
The Democrats are protecting this consortium and not the people!
Armstrong Economics Blog/BigTech Re-Posted May 27, 2021 by Martin Armstrong
As many know, I lived in London years ago. At the upper end of Hyde Park by Marble Arch, there is Speakers’ Corner. That is where anyone could stand up and talk about anything that they wanted. You were free to listen or just walk away. There would often be a crowd, and that was not an indication that they agreed. It simply meant that the topic was curious, worth listening to or just entertaining crazy talk.
Speakers’ Corner even shows up on Google Maps, showing that this is indeed a landmark. What is important about this is that Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, especially those who claim to be public forums, also claim they have the right to censor what you say or even think. Section 230 only gave them immunity from suit because someone posted something another did not like. In that context, it was a reasonable grant of immunity. It would be like suing the city of London because someone at Speakers’ Corner said something that offended you.
You cannot be a public forum by deleting people and canceling anyone you do not like. Speakers’ Corner in London is what these forums were supposed to be. If someone is a Nazi and hates Jews, so be it. They have a right to say that just as the rest of us have the right to shake our heads and walk away as in Hyde Park. It used to be an easy world. If someone was talking to themselves walking down the street, we just looked at them as being strange. We didn’t run to the police screaming we were offended by what the crazy person said. Today, people are walking down the street and talking perhaps to themselves, but then again, maybe they have an earpiece for a phone. Life has become much more complicated. Now it seems the crazy people are in charge of the forums in BigTech and they are saying we no longer have the right to free speech.
Facebook whistleblowers have leaked documents detailing the effort to censor vax concerns on a global scale secretly. None of this is legal for Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube all have connections to the left side of government and that means that they are acting in violation of the Constitution under the pretense of being private when in fact they are acting as agents of the state. This needs to go to trial and the jury will decide if these people are state actors. If so, then they are violating every principle of the Constitution.
The removal of Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier from the U.S. Space Force this month after he publicly stated his opposition to Marxism and Critical Race Theory is part of a very dangerous new wave of censorship that is transforming the United States into East Germany under the Communists. Speakers’ Corner was the very core of a free society which once stood in contrast to Communism and authoritarian forms of government. This is precisely what these people are resurrecting — the worst of human history.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house May 27, 2021 | Sundance | 129 Comments
Comrade citizens, pay no attention to the blatant propaganda inherent in this latest expression from the almighty Big Tech globalist alliance unit at Twitter.
Ignore the stunning hypocrisy of telling a foreign government to respect the “freedom of expression” from a platform that arbitrarily censors and deletes the “expressions” that do not align with their politics.
Be a good comrade and do not pay attention to the scale of hubris for a company to threaten a foreign government and publicly take the position that Big Tech Twitter is more important and powerful than the billion plus citizens and elected government of a sovereign state.
All your governments are belong to us. Yes, quite remarkable but completely in-line with their outlook of self-importance.
(New York Post) – Twitter on Thursday said it is worried about the safety of its staff in India and called for the government to respect freedom of expression, days after Indian police visited its office in New Delhi over its labeling of a tweet by a governing party spokesman as “manipulated media.”
Twitter has been involved in a tense battle with the Indian government, which has often asked it to restrict content alleging Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration is trying to silence criticism, including of its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
Twitter said it has “concerns with regards to the use of intimidation tactics by the police” and “the potential threat to freedom of expression for the people we serve.”
India’s IT ministry called Twitter’s statement “totally baseless, false and an attempt to defame India.” It said Twitter should “comply with the laws of the land” instead of “dictating what India’s legal policy framework should be.” (read more)
Posted originally on the conservative tree house April 19, 2021 | Sundance | 237 Comments
As the closing arguments of the Derek Chauvin trial wrap up today those who want to advance racial hatred attempt to intimidate a prior defense witness. Former police training officer Barry Brodd testified for the defense. His former home in Santa Rosa, California, was attacked Sunday with a pigs head left on the blood-splattered front porch. Fortunately Mr. Brodd had previously moved away from that location, but the current owner was obviously mortified.
The far-left is once again using every resource to trigger violence and hatred around this case. Without a doubt the activists inside Obama’s Chicago network are coordinating the effort. They have been exploiting the death of George Floyd for maximum political value and antagonism from the outset.
CALIFORNIA – A group of as of yet unidentified vandals reportedly threw a bloody severed pigs head on the porch of the former home of a retired California cop who served as a defense witness in the trial of Derek Chauvin, the ex-Minneapolis police officer currently standing trial for the murder of George Floyd.
According to NBC, the current resident of former training officer Barry Brodd’s former home in Santa Rosa found the animal’s head on their blood-splattered front porch around 3 a.m. Saturday morning in what appears to be a case of mistaken identity – or, just stupidity by vandals too dumb to realize that Brodd hadn’t lived at the house for years.
The local police department says it seems the home was targeted because of Brodd’s witness testimony in Chauvin’s trial, in which Brodd likened Floyd’s death to an “accidental death.”
“That isn’t an incident of deadly force,” Brodd said during the trial, according to the Associated Press. “That’s an incident of an accidental death.”
The unfortunate current resident of Brodd’s old house called the police after seeing multiple suspects, dressed in all black, fleeing the scene. The same group is thought to have soaked a local statue in blood and left a sign reading “Oink Oink” about 45 minutes later. (read more)
Rage, hatred and violence is the mantra of the far-left….
The people behind the coordination of this national division are the same communists who indoctrinated Barack Obama into the Alinsky methods. It is all one large soup mix of various racial antagonizers in the same pot. This is what they do…. this is how they drive division.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house April 17, 2021 | Sundance | 101 Comments
Brearley is a private all-girls school on the Upper East Side of Manhattan in New York City. Tuition costs $54,000 a year and prospective families apparently have to take an “anti-racism pledge” to be considered for admission. However, one family has had enough of the indoctrination machine and penned an eloquent letter explaining their reason for removing their daughter.
April 13, 2021
Dear Fellow Brearley Parents,
Our family recently made the decision not to reenroll our daughter at Brearley for the 2021-22 school year. She has been at Brearley for seven years, beginning in kindergarten. In short, we no longer believe that Brearley’s administration and Board of Trustees have any of our children’s best interests at heart. Moreover, we no longer have confidence that our daughter will receive the quality of education necessary to further her development into a critically thinking, responsible, enlightened, and civic minded adult. I write to you, as a fellow parent, to share our reasons for leaving the Brearley community but also to urge you to act before the damage to the school, to its community, and to your own child’s education is irreparable.
It cannot be stated strongly enough that Brearley’s obsession with race must stop. It should be abundantly clear to any thinking parent that Brearley has completely lost its way. The administration and the Board of Trustees have displayed a cowardly and appalling lack of leadership by appeasing an anti-intellectual, illiberal mob, and then allowing the school to be captured by that same mob. What follows are my own personal views on Brearley’s antiracism initiatives, but these are just a handful of the criticisms that I know other parents have expressed.
I object to the view that I should be judged by the color of my skin. I cannot tolerate a school that not only judges my daughter by the color of her skin, but encourages and instructs her to prejudge others by theirs. By viewing every element of education, every aspect of history, and every facet of society through the lens of skin color and race, we are desecrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and utterly violating the movement for which such civil rights leaders believed, fought, and died.
I object to the charge of systemic racism in this country, and at our school. Systemic racism, properly understood, is segregated schools and separate lunch counters. It is the interning of Japanese and the exterminating of Jews. Systemic racism is unequivocally not a small number of isolated incidences over a period of decades. Ask any girl, of any race, if they have ever experienced insults from friends, have ever felt slighted by teachers or have ever suffered the occasional injustice from a school at which they have spent up to 13 years of their life, and you are bound to hear grievances, some petty, some not. We have not had systemic racism against Blacks in this country since the civil rights reforms of the 1960s, a period of more than 50 years. To state otherwise is a flat-out misrepresentation of our country’s history and adds no understanding to any of today’s societal issues. If anything, longstanding and widespread policies such as affirmative action, point in precisely the opposite direction.
I object to a definition of systemic racism, apparently supported by Brearley, that any educational, professional, or societal outcome where Blacks are underrepresented is prima facie evidence of the aforementioned systemic racism, or of white supremacy and oppression. Facile and unsupported beliefs such as these are the polar opposite to the intellectual and scientific truth for which Brearley claims to stand. Furthermore, I call bullshit on Brearley’s oft-stated assertion that the school welcomes and encourages the truly difficult and uncomfortable conversations regarding race and the roots of racial discrepancies.
I object to the idea that Blacks are unable to succeed in this country without aid from government or from whites. Brearley, by adopting critical race theory, is advocating the abhorrent viewpoint that Blacks should forever be regarded as helpless victims, and are incapable of success regardless of their skills, talents, or hard work. What Brearley is teaching our children is precisely the true and correct definition of racism.
I object to mandatory anti-racism training for parents, especially when presented by the rent-seeking charlatans of Pollyanna. These sessions, in both their content and delivery, are so sophomoric and simplistic, so unsophisticated and inane, that I would be embarrassed if they were taught to Brearley kindergarteners. They are an insult to parents and unbecoming of any educational institution, let alone one of Brearley’s caliber.
I object to Brearley’s vacuous, inappropriate, and fanatical use of words such as “equity,” “diversity” and “inclusiveness.” If Brearley’s administration was truly concerned about so-called “equity,” it would be discussing the cessation of admissions preferences for legacies, siblings, and those families with especially deep pockets. If the administration was genuinely serious about “diversity,” it would not insist on the indoctrination of its students, and their families, to a single mindset, most reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Instead, the school would foster an environment of intellectual openness and freedom of thought. And if Brearley really cared about “inclusiveness,” the school would return to the concepts encapsulated in the motto “One Brearley,” instead of teaching the extraordinarily divisive idea that there are only, and always, two groups in this country: victims and oppressors.
l object to Brearley’s advocacy for groups and movements such as Black Lives Matter, a Marxist, anti family, heterophobic, anti-Asian and anti-Semitic organization that neither speaks for the majority of the Black community in this country, nor in any way, shape or form, represents their best interests.
I object to, as we have been told time and time again over the past year, that the school’s first priority is the safety of our children. For goodness sake, Brearley is a school, not a hospital! The number one priority of a school has always been, and always will be, education. Brearley’s misguided priorities exemplify both the safety culture and “cover-your-ass” culture that together have proved so toxic to our society and have so damaged the mental health and resiliency of two generations of children, and counting.
I object to the gutting of the history, civics, and classical literature curriculums. I object to the censorship of books that have been taught for generations because they contain dated language potentially offensive to the thin-skinned and hypersensitive (something that has already happened in my daughter’s 4th grade class). I object to the lowering of standards for the admission of students and for the hiring of teachers. I object to the erosion of rigor in classwork and the escalation of grade inflation. Any parent with eyes open can foresee these inevitabilities should antiracism initiatives be allowed to persist.
We have today in our country, from both political parties, and at all levels of government, the most unwise and unvirtuous leaders in our nation’s history. Schools like Brearley are supposed to be the training grounds for those leaders. Our nation will not survive a generation of leadership even more poorly educated than we have now, nor will we survive a generation of students taught to hate its own country and despise its history.
Lastly, I object, with as strong a sentiment as possible, that Brearley has begun to teach what to think, instead of how to think. I object that the school is now fostering an environment where our daughters, and our daughters’ teachers, are afraid to speak their minds in class for fear of “consequences.” I object that Brearley is trying to usurp the role of parents in teaching morality, and bullying parents to adopt that false morality at home. I object that Brearley is fostering a divisive community where families of different races, which until recently were part of the same community, are now segregated into two. These are the reasons why we can no longer send our daughter to Brearley.
Over the past several months, I have personally spoken to many Brearley parents as well as parents of children at peer institutions. It is abundantly clear that the majority of parents believe that Brearley’s antiracism policies are misguided, divisive, counterproductive and cancerous. Many believe, as I do, that these policies will ultimately destroy what was until recently, a wonderful educational institution. But as I am sure will come as no surprise to you, given the insidious cancel culture that has of late permeated our society, most parents are too fearful to speak up.
But speak up you must. There is strength in numbers and I assure you, the numbers are there. Contact the administration and the Board of Trustees and demand an end to the destructive and anti-intellectual claptrap known as antiracism. And if changes are not forthcoming then demand new leadership. For the sake of our community, our city, our country and most of all, our children, silence is no longer an option.