New Anti-Terrorism Strategy ‘Narrowly Tailored’ to Target the Right The NSC ignores Islamic terrorism and joins the Obama-Biden jihad against ordinary Americans. Lloyd Billingsley

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/07/new-anti-terrorism-strategy-narrowly-tailored-lloyd-billingsley/

“This National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism lays out a comprehensive approach to addressing the threat while safeguarding bedrock American civil rights and civil liberties – values that make us who we are as a nation,” explains an introduction attributed to Joe Biden in the document, released last month by the National Security Council. This strategy, readers learn “is narrowly tailored to focus specifically on addressing violence and the factors that lead to violence.” As it happens, this “narrowly tailored” approach is nothing new.

The strategy reflects the fundamental transformation by the composite character president David Garrow described in Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama. He changed the focus from radical Islamic terrorism to “right-wing” domestic terrorism, and imposed that strategy in the FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

In April of 2009, DHS released Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. These rightwing extremists, the document claims, are “mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority.” The “possible passage of new restrictions on firearms” also disturbs them.

“We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity,” proclaimed DHS boss Janet Napolitano, “ but we do not – nor will we ever – monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people, including subjecting our activities to rigorous oversight from numerous internal and external sources.” According to critics, Napolitano’s DHS was targeting most conservatives and libertarians in the country.

Some six months later, on November 5, 2009, American-born Muslim Nidal Hasan, a self-described “soldier of Allah,” murdered 13 American soldiers and wounded more than 30 at Fort Hood, Texas. The composite character president called it “workplace violence,” not domestic terrorism or even gun violence. Hasan’s victims included blacks and Hispanics, but the administration did not call it a hate crime motivated by racism.

The FBI was monitoring Hasan’s communications with al Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki but dropped the case and did nothing to stop the mass murder. Major Hasan didn’t fit the “right-wing” profile, which kept appearing in DHS documents such as “Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1979-2008.” This 2012 study classified as “extreme right-wing terrorists” persons judged to be “suspicious of centralized federal authority” and “reverent of individual liberty.”

Consider also Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right, from the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. This 2013 study warns about the “anti-federalist movement,” whose members “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights.” They also support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self-government, so these potential terrorists sound a lot like millions of mainstream Americans. The National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism takes this genre to new depths.

Air Force Chief of Staff Brown’s Racism Witch Hunt Another disloyal military leader undermines our national security. Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/07/air-force-chief-staff-browns-racism-witch-hunt-daniel-greenfield-0/

“Unconscious bias,” an Air Force video warns, “can’t be seen or felt.” As the camera focuses on white personnel, an unseen minority voice claims that, “it hides itself in our unseen behaviors”.

“As Airmen in the U.S. Air Force, it’s our duty to acknowledge our biases whether we realize they exist or not,” the official video pushing critical race theory struggle sessions demands.

This is Chief of Staff Charles Q. Brown Jr’s new Air Force.

Brown, the first black Chief of Staff of the Air Force, ought to be a living symbol of opportunity. Instead, like other disloyal military leaders, including his predecessor, Chief of Staff David Goldfein, he’s smearing America, and conducting a witch hunt for imaginary racism.

The racial attack on the U.S. Force from within began with the Black Lives Matter riots.

“I am a Black man who happens to be the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force,” Chief Master Sergeant Kaleth Wright tweeted using his official Air Force account. “I am George Floyd…I am Philando Castile, I am Michael Brown.”

Even Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison admitted there was no racial element in the Floyd case and had not even tried to add to the wrongful prosecution with hate crime charges.

But Wright, the top advisor to former Air Force Chief of Staff Goldfein at the time of the Black Lives Matter race riots, suggested that he could be killed by white police officers at any moment.

“My heart starts racing like most other Black men in America when I see those blue lights behind me,” he claimed. “You don’t know the anxiety, the despair, the heartache, the fear, the rage and the disappointment that comes with living in this country… every single day.”

It made you wonder why Wright hadn’t left America for somewhere safer like Cuba.

The Air Force’s top enlisted leader smeared America, identified with criminals, and urged everyone to be angry. He ranted that he had been inspired by socialist rapper Killer Mike to pursue “plotting, planning, strategizing, organizing and mobilizing”. And together with his boss, Goldfein, they would be working on a “full and thorough independent review of our military justice system”. The review, predictably, accused the military justice system of being racist.

Joe Biden’s pants-on-fire lie of a white nationalist insurrection By Ed Brodow

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/07/joe_bidens_pantsonfire_lie_of_a_white_nationalist_insurrection.html

The Democrats have a talent for avoiding responsibility for their contemptible actions by blaming them on the other side.  A recent manifestation of this talent is President Biden’s attempt to deflect attention away from abhorrent behavior by scores of Democrat politicians.  Throughout 2020, they shirked their duty to uphold the law in the face of civil disturbances.  Biden wants you to pretend that never happened in order to rail against what he calls a “white nationalist insurrection.”  Pants on fire!  Biden should be ashamed to embrace this nonsense.

In his first joint address to the U.S. Congress on April 28, Biden identified white supremacy as the number-one domestic terror threat.  He insisted that white supremacists pose a bigger threat than foreign actors.  “We won’t ignore what our intelligence agencies have determined to be the most lethal terrorist threat to our homeland today,” Biden said.  “White supremacy is terrorism.”

For seven months, Democrat mayors and governors refused to take action against leftist violence that destroyed our cities.  In many cases, they supported the rioters.  “You have to look pretty hard to find Democrats condemning fires, riots, violence, looting, stealing, burning police cars,” said author and political commentator Dennis Prager.  If you condemn only what Republicans do and applaud what was done daily by leftists, says Prager, then you don’t care about truth.  “Violent protests had been championed and normalized by Democrats and their media over the last four years,” Daniel Greenfield wrote in the Jewish Press.  Greenfield is referring to the attempt by the media to characterize the ongoing violence as “peaceful protests,” an obvious fabrication.

On January 6, 2021, a nonviolent assault on the U.S. Capitol, spurred on by leftist agitators who were bussed in, was staged by Democrats with the collaboration of mainstream and social media, along with — if you believe Tucker Carlson’s well-substantiated accusation — the FBI.  “The purpose of the entire circus was to provide a propaganda opportunity for the Left,” wrote Daniel Greenfield.  By blaming the assault on white nationalists, Biden and the Democrats hope to achieve three objectives: (1) create a diversion from the 2020 riots, (2) divert attention from massive circumstantial evidence that the 2020 election was rigged, and (3) crush conservatives and Trump-supporters.

How Barack Obama Begot Gwen Berry By Jack Cashill

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/07/how_barack_obama_begot_gwen_berry.html

“I never said that I hated the country,” said Gwen Berry, the world’s most famous hammer thrower — male, female or non-binary. “All I said was I respect my people enough to not stand or acknowledge something that disrespects them. I love my people point blank, period.”

Berry, who finished third in the female hammer throw at the U.S. track and field Olympic Trials, was attempting to explain why she turned her back on the National Anthem. If her subversive pout appalled half of America, it surprised no one. In the year 2021, sports fans have come to expect athletes, black and white, to disrespect symbols of national pride.

It didn’t use to be this way. When Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, race relations were better than they had ever been. As to athletic protests, it had been forty years since any Olympian grabbed the kind of attention Berry got.

At the 1968 Olympics, 200-meter medalists Tommy Smith and John Carlos famously gave a black power salute while the Anthem played. Unlike Berry, however, they at least had something to bitch about, Smith having grown up in the Jim Crow South and Carlos having been schooled there.

Berry had no idea what she was protesting. Born in a St. Louis suburb in 1989, she likely cast her first presidential vote for a black man. She may have even believed Obama’s insistence that there “is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America — there’s the United States of America.”

The more salient question is whether Obama believed it. If he did, he did not believe it deeply enough to resist the pressure he faced from the left’s old school race hustlers and new school critical race theorists. Clearly intimidated, he made a decision in March 2012 that committed the Democratic Party to the corrosive madness of identity politics for the foreseeable future.

How Alumni Established A Beachhead For Open Discourse On Bucknell’s Campus The new headquarters of the Open Discourse Coalition was established this spring by Bucknell University alumni to support innovative programs for the nearby campus. By Paul Siewers and Charles Mitchell

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/06/how-alumni-established-a-beachhead-for-open-discourse-on-bucknells-campus/

The small, classically pillared bank building at the center of the little town of Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, could be the Bailey Brothers Building and Loan in Bedford Falls from the film “It’s a Wonderful Life.” But it’s at the center of revolutionary new trends emerging in American higher education.

The new headquarters of the Open Discourse Coalition (ODC) was established this spring by Bucknell University alumni to support innovative programming for the nearby campus, and will feature seminar rooms, space for receptions and talks, and offices for student and faculty research. The goal: Encourage viewpoint diversity and civil discussion on campus about the “great books” of the liberal arts tradition, at a university where faculty and staff increasingly seem to many students to only advocate for one set of extreme ideological views.

“We want to open up higher education to new ideas and not let it stagnate in static ideology, to prepare students adequately for a dynamic twenty-first century ahead,” explains Allison Kasic, an alumna involved in the project, which has seen initial financial support from alumni in the seven figures since its launch in November 2020. The alumni involved include a former chair of Bucknell’s Board of Trustees, Judge Susan Crawford, and Home Depot co-founder Ken Langone.

Among innovative projects underway sponsored by ODC:

A non-credit leadership seminar in the fall by a Bucknell professor emeritus and former Goldman Sachs general partner and naval officer, whose courses earned rave reviews from generations of alumni, with grants for students who successfully complete it.
Support for paradigm-shifting student research, faculty curricular development, and faculty work that comes under attack by colleagues for ideas at odds with conventional campus political wisdom.
Speaker programming featuring dialogues and thoughtful viewpoints on issues often excluded from campus.

The Left’s Critical Race Theory Is Ruining U.S. Public Education

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/07/07/the-lefts-critical-race-theory-is-ruining-public-education-in-the-u-s/

A radical teachers’ union has a message for parents: We control your children, not you. And it means to prove it by shoving Marxist Critical Race Theory (CRT) down your kids’ throats, part of the union’s ongoing effort to “fundamentally change” America. If you want the best for your children’s education, you’ll say “hell, no!” to this pernicious, anti-American ideology.

Unfortunately, many centrist and conservative parents have looked the other way as our nation’s once-superior public schools have been taken over by leftist unions and their “educator” allies, using race-based Marxist CRT as their tool. It’s a pity.

Just last weekend, the 3-million-strong National Education Association, the largest labor union in America, stated its outright opposition to parents’ groups and state legislatures seeking to end CRT’s baleful influence on a whole generation of school kids.

Doubling down, the NEA announced not just its support for CRT, but also said it would encourage teachers to hold a “national day of action” each year on martyr George Floyd’s birthday to “teach lessons about structural racism and oppression.”

No parents needed. In fact, teachers are actively opposing parents who don’t like what they’re doing. The NEA last week, for instance, also voted to “research” (that is, spy on and politically attack) groups that oppose CRT in our nation’s schools.

“NEA will research the organizations attacking educators doing anti-racist work and/or use the research already done and put together a list of resources and recommendations for state affiliates, locals, and individual educators,” the union threatened.

Meanwhile, “More than 5,000 educators have signed a petition vowing to break anti-critical race theory laws being considered in multiple state legislatures – as the controversial curriculum faces a reckoning in districts across the country,” the New York Post reports.

And why is this so important to the left? It thinks it owns your children. Don’t you remember? “It takes a village.” So it has a right to push hateful CRT and the wholly specious 1619 Project on gullible students.

THE PUSHBACK AGAINST INDOCTRINATION IN SCHOOLS….CHECK OUT THIS SITE

http://getinsight.pro/schools/intro_video.htm

My way of coping with this situation was to create an online curriculum to teach my children to question the propaganda that they learn in school and to expose them to information that is being left out by schools.  This online curriculum is free for everyone.  The lessons have condensed video clips by some of the best experts on the different topics and added explanatory texts.  I unexpectedly have learned a lot by doing this.  The lessons are full of history that I didn’t know.  Although the original intent was to counter propaganda a side benefit is that my children are learning a lot of science and history and most importantly they are learning to think critically about what they are being taught in school.

I asked my son what he thought would motivate children to learn the online lessons.   He suggested that I make a quiz for them to take on each page.  Once they take the quiz the computer will display a certificate that shows that they took the quiz and how they scored which they can show their parents.  Then their parents can reward them for it.  Of course he wants rewards every time he takes a lesson and I give one to him.  Usually it’s a dollar or a treat.  It’s cheaper than private school and a lot of private schools indoctrinate as much as the public schools do anyway. 

Regarding quizzes. There are two kinds of questions those with circles in front of the answers and those with squares in front of the answers.  The ones with circles have only one answer.  The ones with squares can have more than one answer but might only have one answer.  Lets say a question has 2 right answers and your child checks the correct boxes but also checks two boxes that are the wrong answer.  In that case your child will get a score of zero on the question even though 2 of the answers were correct.

The Lesson List of the web site lists all the pages on the site so children can make sure they didn’t miss a lesson.  If children learned a lesson the color of the link to that lesson in the Lesson List changes.  This only works if the child took the lesson on the same computer with the same browser.  Children can print the Lesson List and check off what quizzes they took to help them keep track.  If a child wants to look up a topic they learned in school, they can do a search on the Lesson List page for a keyword by typing CTRL F and entering the keyword.

The site is arranged by topic.  These topics were chosen to counter what my children are being taught in school.  For example my daughter was taught that voter ID wasn’t fair.  That falls under the topic of discrimination.  So there will be the topic Discrimination on the home page of the web site.  Clicking on it will take your child to a web page on some aspect of discrimination.  That page will in turn have a link on the bottom to another page about another aspect of discrimination which in turn leads to another until your child gets to the voter ID.  The fastest way to get to it is from the Lesson List page.  There is a link to that at the bottom of most pages.

Some of the words on the lesson pages are highlighted in yellow.  If your child places the cursor over those words the page will show the definition of the word.

This website is continually being improved and extended.

One of the challenges of a site like this is that children come in all ages.  Some of the material may be too difficult or advanced for some children.  I’ve tried to make it as easy as possible but some of the videos were made by adults for adults.  Sometimes I have put definitions of difficult words before the video to help the child understand what is being said.  My children often surprise me with how well they understand what they are reading but they are 9 and 12. 

Stopping K–12 Indoctrination Is Right By Stanley Kurtz

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/stopping-k-12-indoctrination-is-right/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=third

A July 5 New York Times Op-Ed by Kmele Foster, David French, Jason Stanley, and Thomas Chatterton Williams argues that it is “un-American” for state laws to keep indoctrination in the tenets of critical race theory (CRT) out of the K–12 curriculum. While conceding that such laws may be permissible in the “narrow context of public primary and secondary education,” they argue that said laws are “antithetical to educating students in the culture of American free expression.” While the authors raise some legitimate concerns about specific provisions in bills that have passed to date, their conclusions do not follow. Many of the specific problems they point to can and should be fixed. The overall effort to prevent CRT indoctrination, however, is both necessary and justified. It is CRT that is un-American, not efforts to prevent the imposition of this pernicious orthodoxy on schoolchildren.

Let us begin with specific legislative language, then move to broader principles. I focus here on Texas House Bill 3979, inspired in significant part — but by no means entirely — by my model legislation published with the National Association of Scholars. That Texas bill has some technical flaws, which were well on their way to being fixed as the legislative session wound down. The flaws of which the op-ed complains can and should be addressed when House Bill 3979 is taken up soon in a special legislative session.

Texas House Bill 3979 initially passed the House. After it reached the Senate, a key fix was made. The original House version held that the various illiberal concepts listed (e.g., collective guilt by race or sex) should not be made “part of a course.” This phrasing could potentially prevent even discussion of the various concepts, which would indeed run afoul of our culture of free expression, despite being legally permissible. In contrast, my model legislation merely says that teachers should not teach the various illiberal concepts in such a way as to inculcate them. Anything can be discussed. The core concepts of critical race theory, however, should not be presented as worthy of assent and belief. In other words, students should not be indoctrinated with CRT.

Good News, Criminals: Manhattan’s Next D.A. Has Your Back By Kyle Smith

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/07/good-news-criminals-manhattans-next-d-a-has-your-back/

Promoting social decay in the name of social justice, Alvin Bragg threatens to be a disaster for New York City.

R eeling psychologically and economically from the pandemic, New York City could use a boost. Unfortunately its central borough’s choice for district attorney is a guy whose big selling point is telling us about all of the criminals he won’t be prosecuting.

Alvin Bragg has won the Democratic primary for D.A. of New York County (Manhattan) by promising not to prosecute minor crimes such as trespassing, resisting arrest, turnstile jumping, and traffic offenses. In a debate, Bragg (who previously prosecuted state crimes in the attorney general’s office and federal ones in the Southern District of New York) boasted that he had only ever prosecuted one misdemeanor, when he charged some men for blocking access to a Planned Parenthood office.

“Non-incarcerations are the outcome,” read his campaign materials, “for every case except those with charges of homicide or the death of a victim, a class B violent felony in which a deadly weapon causes serious physical injury, or felony sex offenses.” In an overwhelmingly Democratic city, Bragg is almost certain to win the general election against a Republican opponent in the fall. His proposals threaten to be yet another catastrophe for Manhattan — the economic heart of the region — by bringing San Francisco’s laissez-faire prosecution philosophy to New York City and promoting social decay in the name of social justice.

The DNC’s Dishonest Voting Case Against Arizona The justices upheld our common-sense election laws against baseless charges of racism. By Mark Brnovich

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-dncs-dishonest-voting-case-against-arizona-11625608666?mod=opinion_lead_pos6

Protecting the right to vote while maintaining public confidence in the integrity of the results is every public servant’s sacred duty. With that in mind, I defended Arizona’s election safeguards before the Supreme Court in March. Last week, in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, the justices ruled 6-3 in our favor, reaffirming the ability of states to administer secure elections with outcomes every voter can trust.

The Democratic National Committee asked the court in 2016 to strike down Arizona’s statutes on in-precinct voting and ballot harvesting as violations of the Voting Rights Act. The DNC didn’t have a sound or compelling argument, so it lapsed into calling Arizona “racist” for passing the law. I am thankful the justices saw through this partisan attack and upheld our common-sense measures. The court’s ruling is a win for election integrity at a time when the far left conducts propaganda campaigns to trick people into believing any election law that protects against voter fraud is “Jim Crow 2.0.”

The irony is that the DNC chose to attack Arizona, a state that offers some of the most convenient ways to vote. You can vote early in-person, vote on Election Day, or request a no-excuse absentee ballot. Don’t want to get out of the car? We also have drive-through ballot drop-off sites. Contrast that with other jurisdictions such as Delaware, Connecticut and New York, which require bureaucrats to approve your reason for absentee voting. Why are those requirements not being challenged? It’s clear that the DNC prefers to pursue its partisan power plays in what it deems to be battleground states.