"From the River to the Sea" Hate From Coast to Coast

The above video was produced by the Investigative Project on Terrorism. Org and shows pro-Hamas protests conducted in numerous North American cities during the fighting in Gaza.

I have written extensively on these rallies and the words spoken about Jews, so there is no need to write about it again here. It's all on the YouTube video tape. I encourage everyone, regardless of their position on the Israel-Palestinian issue, to watch and listen to the words.....













and make your own comparisons.

British News Report-The Terror Threat in the UK

The above video is from PressTV and provides a news update on the terror threat in the UK.

Newspaper Bailout? No Way!

(For you University of California at Santa Cruz graduates, Truman defeated Dewey.)


Even crazier than the bailouts of the auto industry, banks and Wall Street is this latest idea being floated around of Government stepping in to bail out the newspaper industry. Representative Frank Nicastro (D-CT) has spoken out in favor of government action. Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) has just introduced the so-called "Newspaper Revitalization Act", which would allow newspapers to file as non-profits. All this has implications that go far beyond the question of whether failing newspapers ought to be saved or allowed to die.

First of all, let's examine the reason newspapers are dying out (The San Francisco Chronicle and Seattle Post Intelligencer are the latest big papers to fold). One reason is the revolution in news reporting and coverage. It is difficult for newspapers to compete with 24-hour news coverage offered first by cable channels such as CNN and Fox. In addition, news can be obtained instantly via the Internet from a myriad of sources. By the time you receive your daily paper, you already know the news that's in there. While I still subscribe to the Orange County Register, my main focus is the editorial page and the sports page in that order. I basically skim the front pages.

In short, newspapers are becoming more and more obsolete.

Another reason the newspapers are failing is that the public realizes that much of what they are getting is opinion rather than fact. The editorial page is 80-90% slanted to the liberal point of view while even front page writing is often written in such a manner as to slant the news in the liberal direction without the reader seeing between the lines.

The problem is (not a problem, really) the readers are increasingly reading between the lines, and they don't like the bias they are seeing.

Rightfully or wrongfully, many followers of the news are increasingly going to news sources they are comfortable with, whether it be Public Radio, CNN, Fox News or MSNBC. It is the same with the Internet and blogs. People go to the sites they tend to agree with and occasionally check opposing views on other sites.

It doesn't leave a lot of room for newspapers.

Now come various figures who say that government should step in and save the newspapers, either by bailout, takeover or giving them tax breaks on things like advertising revenue. If government can step in and save failing enterprises that are so important to the country, why not newspapers? Are they not crucial to the American Way of Life?

Well, not really for the reasons I listed above. When something becomes obsolete, it naturally dies out in the free market. (Should the government have stepped in and saved elevator operators a few decades ago?)

But even more serious a consideration is the idea of government being involved in newspapers in any form. We are already seeing the effects of government bailouts of GM and Chrysler. Now, President Obama is deciding who should or should not be the CEO of GM. Now, President Obama is telling Chrysler they should merge with Fiat.

Fiat??? When I was living in Italy, I owned a used Fiat. Fiat stands for:

Fix
It
Again,
Tony.

I know, I am digressing. Back on track.

The point is that once government steps in and bails out newspapers or gives them any financial breaks that allow them to keep operating, they have a voice in the editorial content of that paper-whether they ask for it or not. What newspaper is going to bite the hand that feeds it? If we are sceptical of the political agenda of our newspapers now, how trusting can we be if they owe their continued financial well-being and very existence to the government?

I say no. I know what it is like to live in a country at a time they didn't have a free press (Thailand in the 1970s). As much as we complain about the biased coverage of most of our newspapers, we haven't seen anything yet if government steps in to save those that are failing. In fact, I suspect that most of the folks in Washington who are clamoring for government assistance are Democrats who recognize that they may lose a valuable ally.

I say let the newspapers go the way of the elevator operator if they have become obsolete or the customers are rejecting them. The government should have no role whatsoever in the operation of a newspaper-even in a financing role. This would set too dangerous a precedent in a nation like America.

Tolerating Intolerance- the Trailer

The above video is a trailer for the documentary produced by Stand With Us-an organization that is a fighting against anti-Semitism on college campuses. It is even more poignant for me personally because much of the film shot was at UC-Irvine, where I teach part-time. The speakers you will see and hear were brought to UCI by the Muslim Student Union.

I urge everyone to see the entire film.

Bill Maher : "(American Troops) Are Going to Have to Learn to Rape Themselves"

I have nothing but contempt for Bill Maher, that smug comedian who delights in insulting every great American tradition we have left in the hope that it will die out. Maher, an atheist, takes delight in insulting people of faith. He has impugned George W Bush's reserve military service-even though he himself (Maher) never served a day of his life in uniform. He has also implied that our military were cowards in the manner in which they fought. Now, Maher, (in questioning why we have troops in Germany and Japan) has used our troops as the butt of a joke, in which the punch line implies that our troops in German and Japan are rapists.

See for yourself:



"At some point, these people are going to have to learn to rape themselves."

There is nothing funny about this joke-though obviously some of Maher's fans think there is. As a veteran who served in Germany back in the 1960s, I would like to tell Mr Maher that I never raped anyone. Were there cases of rape in Germany (and Japan)? Yes, unfortunately, there were. As an MP, I had occasion to respond to a couple of sexual assault incidents. But to imply there was or is an epidemic of rapes committed overseas by American troops is just plain wrong.

Maher prides himself on attacking "sacred cows" in American society. He has the freedom to do that. But to make accusations (or imply though the use of a tasteless joke) that our troops are rapists is unconscionable. One wonders how Maher will explain this one away in the coming days.

Ten Bill Mahers could not make one American soldier, airman, sailor or Marine.

Celebrity Endorsements-Keith Olbermann for Johnson & Johnson

"Good night and good luck-Oh,...wrong line.

Hi, I'm Keith Olbermann, and I'm here to talk to you about Geor...., I mean the good folks at Johnson & Johnson. When you're a news commentator always on the go like me, you need to make sure you are always at the top of your game. That's why I rely on Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceuticals. They have something for my every need.

Take for example when I go on the air every night. Just before the show begins, I take this little white pill here to make sure I don't have a heart attack during air time. And boy, every time I mention the name George Bush, I can feel the big one coming on.

Then, I take this red one here to combat fatigue cause virtually every night, I can feel myself getting "bushed"-if you know what I mean.

I also drink a glass of this purple liquid here for memory loss because I always seem to forget that George Bush isn't president any more.

And don't forget anger management medicine. Just before air time, I pop this big green pill here so's I don't wind up on top of the NBC Studio building with a high-powered rifle, or sometimes, just throwing papers around the set or breaking windows.

Johnson & Johnson also makes a great anti-delusional pill, like this brown capsule here, which I take every time I start thinking George Bush is going to be indicted for war crimes.

A great commentator (like me) also needs to be clearly focused-so he can make a clear decision-like who's gonna be the Worst Person in the World. Johnson & Johnson also has the answer for that as well-that's this little round yellow pill right here, see?

I also recommend Johnson & Johnson to my friends. For example, I got Chris Matthews to start taking these little blue pills for his restless leg syndrome, which he gets every time he sees Barack Obama. He also takes these orange thingies to treat nausea, like when he sees Bobby Jindal.

In fact, all my friends at MSNBC are big customers of Johnson & Johnson.

Well, I gotta go now. Show time is in 5 minutes. That means It's time to take my clear-thinking pill so I can decide who will be the Worst Person in the World.

Gulp.

There, that's better. Now let's see........hmmmm.....

I got it! Bill O'Reilly!!"

Maxine Waters & Goldman Sachs- What is Your Point, Ms Waters?

Sadly, there is a certain amount of poison going around the Internet about "The Jews on Wall Street who are behind" this whole financial catastrophe. Certain elements in the Middle East are also pushing this theory for their own obvious purposes. The Wall Street Financial firm of Goldman-Sachs (with a strong Jewish history)is the target of a lot of these anti-Semitic accusations. It appears that Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) may be buying into this stuff as well. Last Tuesday, Waters was grilling Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner-specifically about Goldman Sachs. In her questioning,......well, as Jeno Leno would say, "here, take a look at the tape."




First of all, Waters has two absolute defenses in that:

1 She never mentioned the word, "Jews".

2 She is basically an ignorant woman.

But she is a congresswoman and wields a certain amount of power, which she has not hesitated to abuse over and over again. She also has a reputation for playing racial politics, so I think it is fair to ask, just what is it you are getting at Ms Waters?

Did you note the manner of how she formulated the questions? First of all, it is clear that Goldman Sachs was the focus of her questioning. Waters was obviously fixated on Goldman Sachs. Without naming names and sources, she referred vaguely to "linkages" and "connections" and "a small group of Wall Street types" making decisions. She referred to "the talk underneath", "people are thinking", and "you hear a lot....".

Ms Waters, who is talking "underneath"? Underneath what? What people are thinking about "the small group of people" on Wall Street? What linkages and connections are you talking about? Why are you so fixated on Goldman Sachs?

Is it "those damn Jews" again, Ms Waters?

If Maxine Waters is prepared to make charges of illegality on the part of Goldman Sachs and its officers, she should do so. But for a congresswoman to sit up there and talk vaguely about "linkages", "connections" and "you hear a lot about" is pretty irresponsible, in my view. She is feeding into a dark undercurrent because she knows that her viewers and supporters are making inferences. She knows the game because that type of talk has been historically used to imply negative thoughts about blacks.

But what can one expect from Maxine Waters?

The Wagoner "Resignation" and Abuse of Power in Washington

Rick Wagoner, ex-CEO of GM (a private company) fired by the President of the United States


Let me say at the outset that I have no idea whether Rick Wagoner was or wasn't an effective CEO at General Motors. Maybe he deserved to be canned from the top position in a company for which he had worked for 32 years. For all I know, he may be the biggest villain in the whole auto industry mess. However, I am bothered greatly by the manner he was forced out. Doesn't it bother anybody in America that a CEO of a private company was fired by the Federal Government, specifically, the Treasury Department and the White House? This points out a much greater problem than the future of the auto industry. This goes right to the future of our democratic and capitalistic system.

Of course, one might argue that when a private enterprise accepts government bailout money, the government has a right to make decisions and call the shots. That's what government does when it hands out money. It sets rules.

I won't waste a lot of time pointing out that no one in the federal government knows the first thing about making automobiles, and darn few know how to run a business, let alone a major corporation. That's common sense. As a retired government employee, I know first-hand how inefficient government is, at least when you get into the depths of Washington DC HQs. Now that the government has taken over GM and Chrysler, they can only run them further into the ground. Does anybody seriously think that Chris Dodd (who recently called on Wagoner to resign) has the answers? Speaking of resigning, Dodd probably has too many questions of his own to answer these days without having to worry about the auto industry.

But let's get to the crux of the problem: Since when does a president of the United States and his cronies in the Treasury Department have the legal or constitutional right to fire a CEO of a private company? That is precisely what happened here. One wonders what discussions went on between the White House and Treasury Department with the United Auto Workers. The UAW has spent decades building job protection rules for its members that have greatly led to the auto-industry's financial problems. Do they care that Wagoner was fired by the President of the United States?

Of course they don't. They know that this administration is on their team and will make them and other unions stronger with their card check legislation that is in the works.

But back to the point: In this headlong rush toward socialism, we are seeing the creation of a system whereby the US Government can come in and seize any company or industry it wants-even if no bailouts are involved. What they are designing is the acquisition by the government of any business entity whose failure would impact the US economy. Who in the government will decide which companies are in danger of failing? Who decides if the company's failure represents damage to the US economy?

And once this idea takes effect, make no mistake- corruption is on the way. Right now, these people are thinking about saving the US economy or instituting socialism. How long will it be before members of Congress start taking advantage of their "oversight" powers to start padding their own wallets?

This is scary stuff, indeed.

Celebrity Endorsements- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Bud Lite

"Let's have a cool one"

Hi beer-drinkers! This is yer old buddy Mahmoud for my pals at Bud Lite. You know, at the end of a long hard day of carryin' out my official duties, like you know, attendin' the mass hangings and such, I like to relax and unwind with a few ice-cold Bud Lites. Since I like to maintain my skinny body, I drink Bud Lite cause it never fills me up.

And since I'm not supposed to drink alcohol, Bud Lite is the perfect choice for me cause it's brewed under the strict Iranian Reinheitsgebot (purity law) of 1979 (water only-no other ingredients added).

So take it from Mahmoud. Try an ice-cold, frosty Bud Lite-or drink it warm-what's the difference? Then you'll be fresh and rarin' to go for the next day's mass hangings.

Bud Lite- Drink several gallons tonight!

Norman Finklestein Posting on a Terror Attack in Israel

Norman Finklestein


Of all the controversial professors who infest American universities, few can match ex-DePaul University Professor of Middle East Studies Norman Finklestein. I say ex-professor because Finklestein lost his position at DePaul (after a nasty fight)when they refused to give him tenure. He is one of those many professors who detest the state of Israel and deny its right to exist. Since losing his job at DePaul, Finklestein, now going under the label "independent scholar", has joined the lecture circuit traveling around the country and appearing at one university after another where he accuses the Israelis of every crime imaginable while also pouring insults on his own country-especially the previous administration. Finklestein's main thesis is that the Jews and Israel are using the Holocaust to drive their own agenda in favor of the Jewish state at the expense of the Palestinians. Interestingly, he is the son of Jewish Holocaust survivors. Whatever his motives, Finklestein is one of many Jewish academics who allow themselves to be used as "Jewish voices" in opposition to Israel.

As we speak, more universities around the nation are extending invitations for this character to speak:

4/04/09 – Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis
4/07/09 - University of Connecticut
4/08/09 – University of Maryland
4/09/09 – University of Massachusettes, Lowell
4/13/09 - California State Universty, Chico (Political Science
Department, Middle East Studies Program)


In at least one(California State University at Chico), his appearances are being sponsored by academic departments, a testament to their "dedication" to bringing a fair debate to the issues for the benefit of their students.

On January 31, I attended a completely one-sided forum on Israel/Palestine at UC Irvine. Finklestein was one of several left-wing academics who sat on a couple of panels and poured abuse on the Jewish state. According to Finklestein et al, Israel committed a massacre in the recent fighting in Gaza, deliberately targeting innocent Palestinians and using bombs given by dear old Uncle Sam. According to Finklestein, the reason Israel has fought virtually all of its wars was to instill fear in the Arab world and put a halt to any peace efforts when cute little groups like Hamas got too "moderate" and desirous of peace. These are all statements that Finklestein made in my presence and are included in the two reports I wrote both for Campus Watch/Frontpage and my own blog.

Finklestein is a character who oozes arrogance and condescension. In a previous appearance at UCI, he angrily berated a young student who had the temerity to ask him about his invitation to attend a Holocaust denial conference in Iran. Once he has the podium, you need to send in the Army to get him to relinquish it. The man can literally drone on forever. Yet, college audiences love him-especially at UC Irvine where deans and above gather at his feet, laugh at his nasty quips and applaud his insulting statements. Finklestein has few words of praise for anyone and plenty of insults for those he doesn't like-which is just about everybody. At UCI in the space of a few hours, he called Israeli historian Benny Morris, who has produced many works on the Middle East conflict, a "part-time historian and full-time propagandist", George W Bush "an idiot" and Dick Cheney a "thug and a murderer".

At that same event, I sent up a written question to the panel which was selected and directed to Finklestein. I asked if he and his colleagues would condemn recent comments and chants heard at anti-Israel rallies around North America in the wake of the Gaza fighting, such as "Long live Hitler", "Jews go back to the ovens", etc (all of which are readily available on YouTube and can be seen on this blog). Finklestein's answer was that he had not heard of such statements, suspected they were wildly exaggerated, made up, or committed by "Zionists" masquerading as Jews. (That answer caused the audience to erupt in cheers when he closed by making a reference to people who should pull themselves out of their navels.)

This, ladies and gentleman, is an academic-a professor!! This is what I want to be when I grow up.

Enough of the background on Finklestein. I would like to make a comment here about something that has appeared on his website (normanfinklestein.com):


On March 6, 2008, an Israeli-Arab terrorist entered a Jewish seminary in Jerusalem (Yeshiva Mercaz HaRav) and opened fire on the occupants. By the time it was over, eight Jewish students, seven of whom were teenagers, were dead, senselessly murdered for no other reason than they were Jewish.

Victims of the terror attack at Yeshiva Mercaz HaRov


While the reaction in Israel was one of shock and horror, many Palestinians in Gaza, Lebanon and other places took to the streets to celebrate in joy. Some imams in mosques praised the killer as a hero. Below are photos of Palestinians celebrating this incident.




Finkelstein's website features a statement written by the board of the Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) in March 2008 condemning the horrific terrorist attack. The statement is posted without comment but appears under the title (apparently added by Finklestein): NAZI PHDs FOR PEAXE mourn death of ubermenschen.

Uebermenschen is a term originally associated with Friedrich Nietzsche, which is roughly translated as "superman" or "overman" and later became related to the old Nazi term Untermenschen-"sub-humans", which was used to refer to Jews and other groups not deemed worthy by the Nazis.

(See: http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=1553).

First of all, let me state that the SPME is a national organization made up largely of Jewish professors, current or retired. They support Israel and are concerned about the situation on US campuses where anti-Israel voices have made many campuses unpleasant for Jewish students. For Finklestein to label this organization as Nazi is outrageous. They are not anti-Muslim or anti-anything else. What Finklestein has done is take a moderate organization that defends Israel and label it as made up of Nazis. Also, why does Finklestein label the innocent, young, Jewish victims as "Uebermenschen? What kind of hateful message is he trying to send by implying a Nazi connection here? He should be ashamed of himself, but I suspect Mr Finklestein is beyond shame.

I don't know what drives this man, nor do I particularly care. Perhaps, he is just a product of the 1960s college generation (that I survived). What I do believe is that Norman Finklestein-along with others such as Ward Churchill-represent the very worst in American academia. Finklestein has the constitutional right to spout his venom and twisted version of history, but we have the same right to comment on it and shine the public spotlight on the ravings of this character.

He should take great care before he goes around calling people Nazis. (I have just recently called certain people Nazis, but I am prepared to back that up.) He should especially remember that it was the very people he champions who cheered and celebrated the massacre of March 2008.

The Oakland Murders

Last Saturday, four Oakland police officers were shot and killed by a man identified as Lovelle Mixon, who was a suspect in a rape case. Two officers were gunned down as they made a vehicle stop on Mixon, and two others were killed by Mixon as he was barricaded in a relative's apartment. Mixon was also killed in the final exchange of gunfire.

Police deaths always strike close to home for me because of my own law enforcement background with US Customs and DEA. Many years ago, I worked a case with the OPD in Oakland, and two of my former DEA colleagues were also ex-OPD officers. In addition, one of my fellow former Military Police colleagues from Germany was in the Oakland PD. Undoubtedly, they are grieving even if they didn't know the dead officers.

From most news accounts, it is heartening to read that the community is supporting the Oakland PD in numerous ways. Don't forget that Oakland is still trying to recover from a very questionable shooting by a BART transit officer of an unruly passenger. (That officer has since been fired and indicted.)

In spite of the massive support from the Oakland public, there was an unfortunate incident Wednesday, when a crowd of about 60 yahoos marched against the police and in support of Mixon. Even more unfortunately, the San Francisco media, no friend of the Oakland police, gave them wide publicity. CNN has also been accused of accentuating the negative in reporting the relations between the police and community in the wake of this tragedy. It is disgusting, but that should not be allowed to mar the otherwise impressive outpouring of support coming from the good people of Oakland.

The New Politically Correct Language

Illegal alien gang member




Nazis in London




Nazis in Iran hanging gays




Nazi in New York City



War on Terror


I thought the British couldn't be outdone when they recently began referring to Islamic terrorism as "anti-Islamic activity". Now comes the Obama Administration declaring that the war on terror will now be called "Overseas Contingency Operations"!!?? It looks like we are entering a new world of Orwellianism with the liberals running this country.

Already, schoolchildren in many American schools are coming back from school and informing their parents that St Patrick's Day is being called, "Potato Day" or Shamrock Day", as it was just labeled at the White House celebration.

For a few years now, many of us have been called to task for using the term, "Islamofascist" to describe terror carried out in the name of Islam, as well as everyday incidents of intimidation and calls for imposition of Shariah law in the West. Actually, radio talk-show host Michael Medved has it right; what we are experiencing around the world is not fascism (a rather difficult term to define), but more like Nazism-very easy to define and containing anti-Semitism at its core-as does militant Islam. I have no problem referring to Islamic terrorists and other radicals (such as we see on the streets of London damning everything about British society)as Nazis. Yes, those Muslims who are assaulting and intimidating Jews on the streets of European cities are acting like Nazis. Those who carry placards on British streets calling for the beheading of those who "insult" Islam are acting like Nazis. Those who recently demonstrated against Israel on American streets and campuses and shouted out, "Long Live Hitler" and "Jews go back to the ovens" are acting like Nazis.

Similarly, a person who is in this country illegally-or in any country illegally- is an illegal alien-not an "undocumented worker". (MS-13 gang members are not workers to begin with).

I recently wrote a piece on that insane university, the University of California at Santa Cruz, where the word "queer" has been injected into a myriad of courses and departments. Have you ever heard of "Queer Theory"? Don't take my word for it. Go to the UCSC course catalog. It's online. When I was growing up, the word "queer" was a pejorative-just like the word, "fag". Now it's in at UCSC.

Similarly, universities still use that silly term, "Chicano" to refer to Mexican-Americans. When I was growing up in Los Angeles, the word implied a young tough, not a self-respecting adult person of Mexican or Latin descent. Somehow, in the 1960s, universities fell in love with the term, and it is still used today.

In yet another example, when I was a child, polite terms for blacks were "Negroes" or "colored people". The term "Negro" has been out of favor for years now, as is "colored people". But "people of color" is in. Go figure. It is also frustrating to a lot of people of all races that as hard as we have tried to rid ourselves of the N-word, which should be dying out from simple disuse, so many young blacks are embracing the word among themselves.

What we see in the US, Canada and Europe is political correctness gone wild. First it was speech codes on our university campuses. Now it is the twisting of the English language to the point where it loses its meaning and becomes laughable. Certainly, any form of ethnic or religious epithet is unacceptable, but we should never lose the ability to call something what it is.

What to Do About Mexico

As much as has been written about the situation in Mexico, at this point, it appears that the crisis is reaching critical mass. The cartel drug wars along the Mexico-US border have escalated dramatically and are spilling over across the border. Phoenix is now the kidnapping capital of the US as Mexican drug gangs kidnap other Mexicans-mostly over unpaid drug debts. Over 6,000 people have been murdered in Mexico in the past year, either by shooting or in some cases, by beheading. Some voices are even saying the country is in danger of collapsing. Police officials are also being gunned down in northern Mexican cities. As I write this, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in Mexico City conferring with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who, to his credit, has sent the Mexican Army north to fight the cartels along the border. Clinton is pledging more financial aid to Mexico and laying much of the blame on the US for furnishing weapons in cross-border smuggling as well as our insatiable drug habit. She is correct in both those respects (though Mexico has always been awash in weapons), but both countries now have reached the point where drastic action is necessary. As a retired DEA agent, here is what I think needs to be done.

First of all, I don't think more money is the answer. We have pumped billions into Mexico in trying to help them fight the drug war. Much of it has been wasted due to corruption. Yes, we should step up our efforts to stop the weapon smuggling. Yes, we should try to decrease our demand for drugs-an effort that has failed to now to our national embarrassment.

What Mexico must do-in its own defense-is make the drug traffickers disappear, and I don't much care how they do it. At the point when any segment of society is threatened with death if they stand up to the traffickers-as the police are-then I say let them do what they have to do and ignore the human rights crowd. At the same time, they need to be told that the US will no longer be a safety valve for their impoverished citizens to find a way to make a living. Mexico needs to clean up its corruption and provide a decent education and employment opportunities for their citizens or they can face the wrath of their own people.

What we must do is:

First, the State Departmnent has to take the (for them) drastic step of issuing a full-scale travel advisory. Travel to Mexico is dangerous to your health. Don't go.

Then we must:

Secure the border-and the interior. This is way beyond the question of illegal immigration. As I have said before, we can't possibly round up and deport 12-15 million persons, and there are valid arguments for treating them in a humane manner. We can, however, go after the criminal element among them. That means that the federal government has to make it clear to sanctuary cities that their federal funding will be cut off if they persist in not cooperating with ICE. If we don't now have the laws to prosecute local officials who ignore federal immigration laws, then we need to pass laws and start locking up these officials. City and state police must work with ICE-in the jails, on the streets and in their file rooms to exchange information, identify criminal illegal aliens and go get them. Once they are in custody, they should be quickly deported and turned over to their own governments (I am talking specifically about Mexico and El Salvador.) It may take some changes in immigration laws or policies, but there is no constitutional protection for another citizen to be in this country illegally.

When I say secure the border, I am not talking about sending another 500 agents to the border along with more technology. Certainly, the government in Washington needs to stop treating the Border Patrol like bastard step-children and start supporting them. But that is not sufficient. What is needed is a double fence and a large military presence along the whole 2,000 mile border with Mexico. We could start by using the National Guard troops from the four border states. By doing that, we can put a serious crimp in the number of illegal aliens getting across the border as well as drugs. It could also help cut down on the weapons smuggling-though what may be needed is expanded Customs export search authority-which many nations have. We use it to enforce laws against smuggling of currency out of the country; we can use it for weapons as well. We can also tell all these banks that the Government wants to dictate to that they must stop giving mortgages to people who present nothing more than a Matricular Consular card (furnished by Mexican consulates) as ID.

The US-Mexican border is now probably the biggest crime area in the world. From Matamoros to Tijuana, people are dying every day. What is happening to the decent population of Mexico is an atrocity. We cannot allow this to continue to spill over onto our side. By allowing this situation to continue we do no favor to the Mexican people. It is a national security issue for both countries at this point. It should be treated as such.

March in Luton (UK)

The below posting is crossed posted from Maggie's Notebook (blog) and concerns a scheduled march in Luton (UK) on March 28 to support British troops, as well as stand up to Islamic thuggery going on in the UK. It is also concerns the British blogger, Lionheart, who puts his life and freedom on the line to speak out on the outrageous behavior of radical Muslims in the UK, who are trying to take that country over.

"The Pentagon, under the direction of Barack Obama, has banned the use of "The Global War on Terror." But we all know where the terror is, and it is global, and all of it is perpetrated by Islam. Our friends in England are fighting a battle that is being denied by those in the media and Parliament. Brits are running scared. They are afraid to speak out or show-up...with some brave exceptions.

Lionheart is a frequent contributor here and other blogs passionately concerned about terrorism. If you do not know his story - and a story that is evolving and very serious to his life and liberty, and that of his family - then visit him at Lionheart. Don't stop at the homepage. Dig into his archives. Americans need to know what is going on in Britain, because we are the next stepping stone.

On March 28th, this Saturday at 12:25 p.m., there will be a protest in Luton, England, Lionheart's hometown and where his saga began. Here's what the march is all about:

After watching our soldiers from the Royal Anglian Regiment being aboused by the British wing of Al Qaeda on the streets of Luton, the wider community are now going to march in demonstration against them and in support of our troops.
Here's a message for Lionheart:

The threat to the life of the nation has never been greater since the Second World War, and it is happening now in our generation.

The militant wing of the Islamic religion is hell bent on causing mass murder and mayhem against the British people as they seek to force us to bend and bow in submission to their religious ideology – This cannot be doubted!

7/7, the Glasgow airport car bombing, the ‘Tiger Tiger’ nightclub failed car bombing and all other thwarted attempts are proof enough of their intent towards us. It might only be a small minority who carry out these acts, but that does not mean that they are not supported by the vast majority (a debatable issue).

The Home Secretary has now stated, after being given a new report on tackling Islamic extremism in Britain, that there is an increased threat of a dirty bomb attack being carried out against us.

The threat is not new, so as the report states regarding the proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical substances, it is only a matter of time until there is a successful terrorist attack that outweighs in gravity the attacks that have already been perpetrated against us by Al Qaeda.

It’s not ‘if’. It is ‘when’, ‘where’, and ‘how big’?

The Home Secretary has said that it is the responsibility of not just the Government to tackle the threat now posed to our national security, but also that of the wider community.

Quote: She cited the example of the Muslim activists who recently protested at a homecoming parade in Luton for British forces returning from Iraq.

She said: "The civil challenge means that, if people feel it appropriate to demonstrate against our troops coming home from defending this country abroad, we - as Government and others - will say in turn that we think that that's wrong.

"Not that they've broken the law - one of the things we're defending in this country is the right to free speech, but that isn't free speech that will go unhindered or unchallenged by either Government or, I think, the broader community."

After watching our soldiers from the Royal Anglian Regiment being abused by the British wing of Al Qaeda on the streets of Luton, the wider community are now going to march in demonstration against them and in support of our troops.

The organiser of the official event pulled out of leading this through fear of controversy, and has rearranged for London in April. We the people, are so incensed at what took place on March 10th that we will be meeting in Luton on Saturday with or without Luton Council’s permission. That is just the common consensus amongst the people.

If we the people cannot stand up to this abhorrent behaviour by this civil enemy, then who is going to?

As the Home Secretary has said: “but that isn't free speech that will go unhindered or unchallenged by either Government or, I think, the broader community."

The broader community will be meeting in Luton on Saturday March 28th at 12.25 to demonstrate and challenge those extremists living in our country.

Each and every person working within the mainstream media have a responsibility to your country too. Are we not all in this together? What if it is you or one of your relatives caught up in a mass ‘dirty bomb’ attack in London at some point in the future?

We the people need your help to tell the country that we will be meeting in Luton on Saturday.

The BBC and ITV give Anjem Choudry, the Osama Bin Laden of British militant Islam a platform to promote his vile ideology, yet they refuse to help those seeking to challenge that.

Isn’t it about time, for the sake of the future life of the nation, that those in power start to help the common people with their aims and objectives?

Now is that time, and it concerns Luton, which has been the scene of so much Al Qaeda terrorist activity, including Al Qaeda’s deceleration of war against us on the morning of 7/7.

We can do what we do through the internet, and arouse the few, but with mainstream media coverage we can arouse the many from amongst the broader community to come out in support.

Now is the time for you to do what the Home Secretary has said, or go back to sleep and remember this message when you are reporting the next Al Qaeda terrorist attack to hit our shores.

Those on the Left within the Establishment should not refuse what the Home Secretary herself, has said because this is their country too. If they do, it proves the point that they are just as much our enemy as militant Islam itself. No Moslems in positions of influence should refuse either because if they are true to their words about there being moderates from amongst them, then they should welcome a demonstration against the militants from within their own religion particularly as they have never demonstrated against this element themselves.

We will be in Luton on Saturday at 12.25pm whether it is just one elderly man with a sandwich board protesting against this disgusting behaviour on our streets, or 10,000demonstrators.

Once again Al Qaeda in Britain has started this and this will be our response.

Help us or hang your heads in shame!!!

This is not a political march; this is a demonstration of the people."

Fousesquawk comment: Here is hoping that March 28 marks the beginning of the British resolve to stand up to terrorists and their supporters in the UK. The outrageous and seditious behavior over there has gone on long enough.

A Portrait of Hate in Malmo, Sweden

British Plan March in Luton to Support Troops March 28

Remembering Johnny Weissmuller

Johnny Weissmuller


Last year, my wife and I were taking a city tour of Acapulco. During the bus ride, the tour guide pointed out a heavily vegetated location on the fringes of the town where at least one Tarzan movie had been filmed when Johnny Weissmuller was playing the role of Tarzan. She also pointed out Weissmuller's former home and the fact that he was buried in Acapulco. It reminded me of a time when I was a child that Weissmuller visited our home.

Johnny Weissmuller, for you younger readers, was an Olympic swimmimg champion in the 1920s, winning five gold medals. He then went on to become the most famous of the Tarzan actors in the 1930s and 1940s. After a wild and tumultuous life and five wives, he retired to Acapulco in poor health where he died in 1984 at the age of 79.

During the 1950s, our family was living on Corinth Avenue in the Mar Vista section of West Los Angeles. My father was a golfing (and drinking) buddy of a certain Ward Gates, a local golf pro/gambler. Gates was also a noted drinker, spending a lot of time on the 19th hole of the Fox Hills Country Club(often with my Dad). Gates and his wife were also social friends of our family. I believe her name was Martha.

At any rate, Ward Gates daughter, Allene, herself a golfer, became the 4th wife of Johnny Weissmuller, who was living in LA and acting in various movies. They were married from 1948-1962, when they were divorced. I remember at least one occasion when our family joined the Gateses at Weissmuller's home and I swam in his pool. (He was not there at that time.) If I recall correctly, the house was located in Baldwin Hills though I could be in error.

I also recall one occasion in the 1950s when Weissmuller dropped by our house in Mar Vista with his father-in-law. I was about 10 at that time, but I knew who he was and recall him as being extremely gregarious. He told us of a story when he was in a hospital and restricted from getting out of bed, but rather than use the bedpan, he would pull the tubes out, jump out of bed and use the bathroom instead. I don't recall the details, but he told it as a funny story. My impression of Weismuller that day was that he was a wild and crazy guy, which his biographies pretty much corroborate.

At any rate, if anybody who lives at 3261 Corinth Avenue in Mar Vista happens to read this, Johnny Weissmuller was in your house over 50 years ago.

Death of a Cub Fan

Somewhere on the north side of Chicago an old man well into his 90s lies dying surrounded by four generations of his offspring, many with tears in their eyes.

"Don't cry for me", the old man says. "I have lived a long and full life. I have done everything I wanted to do. I have achieved all of my dreams. I have seen everything......."

At that moment, a TV can be heard in the next room:


"WGN brings you Cubs baseball....."

"Damn", says the old man with his last breath as his head drops onto the pillow.

"Papaaa!".

Barney Frank Attacks Justice Antonin Scalia

Antonin Scalia





Barney Frank


I know I have been writing a lot lately about Barney Frank, but that's because every time I look around, the man sinks to a new low. Not only is this man doing more than any other person in Congress to destroy the American economy, now he makes a completely gratuitous attack against Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia-calling him a "homophobe" without any reason or proof.

In an interview with a Gay media outlet, Frank spoke about the possibility of the question of gay marriage going to the Supreme Court. Frank spoke pessimistically about the prospect because "that homophobe Scalia" was on the court and went on to say that he (Scalia) controlled other votes.

What a disgusting attack on a decent man like Antonin Scalia. One may not agree with Justice Scalia's legal opinions or legal philosophy (I do), but that is no reason to label him a homophobe or anything else without solid proof. Frank should remember the old adage about people living in glass houses before he goes around name-calling. Antonin Scalia has never been involved in the questionable controversies that Frank has been involved in over his long years in Congress.

In fact, Frank's entire Congressional career has been marked by one example of conflict of interest, poor behavior or poor judgement after another. This is the guy whose Washington residence was once used as a male-escort service HQs by his live-in boyfriend while Barney was on Capitol Hill. Later, Barney's significant-other was a Fannie Mae executive while Barney was on the Congressional Banking Committee.

Of course, the whole banking mess, just like the OJ murder scene, has Barney's DNA all over it since he was the one who pressured lending institutions to give mortgage loans to folks who couldn't afford the homes they were buying. Barney also took the lead in securing a 12 million dollar bailout to OneUnited, a bank in Massachusetts, in spite of the fact they were under investigation by the SEC (I'm sure it had nothing to do with the fact that Maxine Waters' husband, Sidney Williams, had been on the board of directors and had a couple of hundred grand invested in the bank. Nah, just a coincidence, strictly legit).

Now comes Congressman Frank, who should be in total seclusion hiding from the world, accusing Justice Scalia of being a homophobe. Where does this guy get the chutzpah?

But there is good news. Barney Frank, as we speak, is in the process of redeeming himself. He is one of the guys charged with fixing the whole financial mess. Why just the other day, he was grilling AIG CEA Edward Lilly and demanding the names of the AIG execs who had received big bonus payouts.

"The names, Mr Liddy."

Someday, hopefully, if we ever get to the bottom of this bailout mess, someone will demand "The Names" and one of the first given will be:

Barney Frank.

Random Shots in the Dark (13)

I'll start off by announcing the winner of the Rachel Maddow look-alike contest, which is... Tim Geithner.









(Tim's the one with the tie.) That outta wake 'em up, eh boys?

If I get this straight, the Geithner-Obama plan is now for the government to buy up all the toxic assets of the banks (didn't they do that already?), and if that doesn't work-to nationalize the banks. I'm sure one of those two ideas will work (law of averages, you know). But if it doesn't, we can always blame Rush Limbaugh.

For a guy who a lot of folks think should be fired, Treasury Secretary and Rachel Maddow look-alike Tim (Turbo Tax) Geithner sure seems to be asking for a lot of power. Does he really want to seize big companies in danger of failing and regulate bonuses by companies not getting federal funds?

Meanwhile, out here in Der Demokratische Volksrepublik of Kalifornia, Governor Screwupernator is pushing a new proposition on the May ballot. It's called the "Spending Cap Initiative". What it really does is extend the newly-passed 2-year tax increases another two years. Slick packaging, eh? I remember about 5 years ago when a lot of Republicans wanted to change the law about presidents having to be born in the US so this boob could run for the White House someday. How many times do I have to point out that Austrians don't know to run other countries.

Have you heard about the California bonds we are now being asked to buy? I'm not making this up. I heard the first commercial a couple of days ago on the radio. And believe it or not, there has been talk about state tax refunds being replaced by IOUs!!

Tuesday night's Presidential press conference: zzzzzzzzzzz

Obama first reads his statement from the back wall screen (Look Ma! No teleprompter!) then takes 13 questions and dances around them with a bunch of mumbo-jumbo trying to justify a 3.6 trillion dollar budget while Helen Thomas sits there in the front row decomposing on national TV. But according to MSNBC cheerleaders, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, it was the Gettysburg Address.

Matthews: "'We can't wait.'" A great line! I love that line!"

Then the "analysis" continued with Olbermann interviewing Sr White House Advisor David Axelrod for his reaction to Obama's press conference!! After that, it was on to a mysteriously greying Howard Fineman talking about Obama's "great win-win" before Keith segued on to Countdown and the usual Bush/Cheney/O'Reilly bashing.

Fair and Balanced segment: Sean Hannity, seconds after calling Jud Gregg "Jed Grugg", takes Obama to task for mispronouncing the word "Orion". Wake up, Sean. Your show was better with Alan Colmes arguing with you.

Who in the House of Representatives is reading my posts on Barney Frank....hmmm?
(source: Site Meter)

Has anybody checked to see if Helen Thomas is still sitting in the East Room of the White House?

Fousesquawk's Form 1040

"Being a CEO ain't all it's cracked up to be."


Like the rest of you, I am doing my income taxes. This is the worst time of year. No football, no baseball-just income taxes-which means either I spend 3 days putting the info together for some tax accountant to charge me 160 bucks to tell me I owe more money to the US and California governments, or I spend 2 weeks trying to do it myself. This year, I thought I would do it in the simplified version. Here goes.

Name: Gary Fouse ssn 000-00-0001
Occupation- CEO blogger (Fousesquawk)
Wife's name: Mary Jo Stalin- ssn: 000-00-0002
Wife's occupation: ball breaker

Address: 0000 Dead End Rd
Bullsnuts, Calif. 90000

Annual income (from AdSense) $50.00
Taxable amount: $50.00
Deductions: None (Since last month)
Taxable rate: 90% (That's because I am a CEO)
Total tax owed: $45.00 (check attached)

There, that was easy. Now for my state form (California). This should be easy. What's 10% of $50.00?.......$5.00.

Got it. Check for $5.00 to California.....and I'm finished!

We're all finished!

Government Takes Over Detroit Lions

Detroit Lions-under new ownership


In a stunning development today, the United States Government has taken over control of the Detroit Lions football team that went 0-16 last season. In a press conference this morning, government officials promised Lions fans that better days were ahead.

When asked by reporters for specifics, the officials were quick to list the items on their agenda:

1 All players and coaches from last year are being retained and their salaries tripled.

2 Those players cut or traded during last season will receive "severance payouts" amounting to 10-45 million dollars per player.



3 The monies listed above will be taxed, however, at 90%.



4 Senator Chris Dodd will take over as President and CEO, while Representative Barney Frank will be the general manager.

"Losing is not an option!!"



5 The Lions team jet has been confiscated. Bus rides should make them tougher, according to one government official, who asked not to be named.

6 During next year's Super Bowl (in case the Lions aren't playing) all players, coaches and executives will spend a week at the Super Bowl in a first-class resort with parties, gourmet dinners, hookers, and seats on the 50 yerd line.



7 A new domed stadium



8 Finally, an exitiing new logo representing the team's bold new leadership.

(Order your Lions merchandise online at http:www.lionssuck.gov)



9 Oh yeah, ticket prices to Lions games will be tripled (first come, first served).

"Would you please rise and............."

Who Are the Real "Little Eichmanns"?

Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al-Husseini,
aka "Little Eichmann", meets with Hitler in Berlin


My colleague Donald Douglas from American Power blog alerted me to the fact that the civil trial of Ward Churchill vs the University of Colorado is on-going in Denver. Perhaps, it is fitting that Churchill's current activities are passing without much notice. (While I hope he loses his lawsuit against CU, it is hard to sympathize with a university that hired Churchill in the first place.) Yet, his loony supporters, the usual collection of rag-tag "revolutionary organizations", are making a big production out of supporting Churchill-especially his infamous reference to 9-11 victims as "Little Eichmanns". It is not even worth my while to mention their names, yet it is worthwhile to take their defense of the "Little Eichmann" moniker and point out the obvious contradiction.

In browsing the words of these losers, I noted references to those who died on the top floors of the World Trade Center being "targeted because they made their living on the bodies of Arab children", thus justifying Churchill's sick description of those poor lost souls. I'll set aside the obvious link that has been established between Middle Eastern radicals and the far-left in America. The real point I want to make here is who are the real "Little Eichmanns?"

First, let us go back to when the real Adolf Eichmann was walking around in Europe during World War II. One of his allies was a certain Amin al-Husseini, the Jew-hating Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a vile man, who was the most powerful and influential religious leader of his time in the Middle East. During WW II, Husseini actually resided in Hitler's Berlin, made anti-Semitic radio broadcasts back to the Middle East urging pogroms against Jews and helped to organize a Muslim brigade in Bosnia that fought alongside the Germans and carried out massacres of Jews in their region. Oh yes, he himself also collaborated with the real Adolf Eichmann. Only post-war realpolitik prevented this monster from being prosecuted for war crimes and hanged. In other words, the victorious allies were afraid of angering the Arab world.

There was a real Little Eichmann!

(Looking at the Left blog has a good essay on al-Husseini in connection with Churchill and the "Little Eichmann" issue at the below site.)

http://www.lookingattheleft.com/2009/03/americans-are-not-little-eichmanns/

Bringing us back to the present-day, Churchill's admirers might want to consider why Hitler's Mein Kampf is, to this day, a top best-seller in the Middle East-translated in Arabic as Mein Jihad. Or why millions of people in the Middle East still admire the memory of Hitler.

Do you think there are some "Little Eichmanns" running around the Middle East today?

Note that above I said the Middle East. Yet, in recent pro-Palestinian protests in the United States and Canada in the wake of the fighting in Gaza, some Arab protesters were heard (and seen on YouTube) shouting, "Long live Hitler!", "Jews go back to the ovens!", "You need a bigger oven!" "Hitler rest in peace!", "Go Nazi Germany!", "Hitler didn't finish the job!", and on and on. These words were heard from Ft Lauderdale to Los Angeles to San Francisco to Toronto to who knows where else.

Do you think there are some "Little Eichmanns" among the US and Canadian Muslim communities today?

Churchill and his supporters, of course, would argue that the references to Eichmann have been made because Eichmann never shot or gassed anybody personally, but was a bureaucrat who signed orders and helped run the machinery of the death transports. Does Eichmann have his modern-day counterparts, and if so, who are the real "Little Eichmanns" of today?

Are they those who believe that Jews should be killed?

Are they those who shout, "Hitler didn't finish the job"?

Are they the imams who preach hatred in mosques and call for the destruction of Jews and Western Civilization-knowing that their words will incite murder-as they have certainly done?

Are they those who, like in the UK, carry banners calling for the beheading of anyone who "insults" Islam-including cartoonists?

Are they those who recruit and send out suicide bombers?

Are they those who organize phony Middle East charities, whose real purpose is to support world-wide terrorism?

Are they those who contribute to these charities in the full knowledge that they are funding terrorism?

Are they those radical leftists in the West who form ideological bonds with terrorists as a way of venting their opposition to their own societies?

Are they the supporters of people like Ward Churchill?

Who are the real "Little Eichmanns"?

Will Hillary Clinton Help Obtain Release of Israeli Captive?

Gilad Shilat



The above video concerns Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier, who has been held captive in Gaza by Hamas for 1,000 days.

In light of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's announcement of several hundred million dollars in aid to Gaza, US Representative Shelley Berkley (D-NV) has written a letter to Secretary Clinton asking that the funds be held contingent on Hamas ceasing its rocket attacks into southern Israel and the release of Shalit.

Here is the text of the letter.

March 5, 2009

The Honorable Hillary Clinton
Secretary of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Madam Secretary:

"I write to you today regarding the situation in the Middle East. In the wake of Hamas’ attacks on Israel, and Israel’s defensive operations, I understand the U.S. government has pledged to grant $900 million for the rebuilding of Gaza and for assisting the Palestinian Authority. I am concerned that this money will end up helping Hamas and hurting the very Palestinian people we intend to help.

For years, the U.S. has infused money into the Palestinian Authority (PA), with very little to show for it. Their leaders are no more ready to govern today than they were before we began our funding. After years of mismanagement, their basic institutions are in shambles and they have shown very little ability to govern in the West Bank without the presence of the Israeli Defense Forces. Instead of helping average Palestinians, our money has lined the pockets of the Arafats and other corrupt Palestinian leaders.

I also understand our funding will not be conditioned on any reciprocal actions by Hamas or the PA. Despite Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, Hamas still refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, has not stopped raining rockets on Israeli territory and still holds captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. It is essential that we condition our funding on Hamas’ reciprocating with these basic demands. Without such links, Palestinians will see the U.S. as providing aid while Hamas continues to terrorize the Israeli people, with no consequences from the U.S. government.

I am also concerned that much of the funding will be directed through the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). Unfortunately, UNRWA has proven itself to be a biased agency, with very little oversight. During the most recent violence in Gaza, UNRWA issued numerous statements attacking Israel for their self-defense actions, while failing to criticize Hamas for launching missiles at innocent Israeli citizens. Much of UNWRA’s money and services end up in the hands of people who are wealthy enough not to need the assistance, or worse, with members of terrorist organizations. UNRWA officials have even admitted that they cannot guarantee their money does not go to Hamas. I believe helping UNRWA does not further the cause of peace."


To date, Berkley has not received a response from Clinton.

Kudos to Rep. Berkley for taking the initiative to write to Secretary of State Clinton on this matter. This seems to me to be a quite reasonable condition to place on the release of US funds to Gaza.

Mrs Clinton................?

RNC Video on AIG

The above video was sent to me by the RNC (who still think I'm a Republican). It shows White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Thomas Dodd and President Obama trying to answer questions about AIG. Of the three, I like Obama's answer the best.

As for Gibbs, this man is headed for immortality, but not in a way he would hope.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

On March 3, Congressman Joseph Crowley (D-NY) of the House Ways and Means Committee asked Tim Geithner a question in which he referred to the AIG bonus payments and mentioned the specific sum of 162 million dollars due to be paid out in the coming weeks. (See above video of Geithner's testimony.) Geithner has now said he didn't know about the full scope of the bonuses until March 10.

Anybody got a pair of handcuffs?

"Free Speech" at DePaul University

DePaul University in Chicago


The below article was written by Brett Cohen of StandWithUs (a Jewish advocacy group) at DePaul University. It was published on the StandWithUs website. It concerns a speaking event at DePaul, in which a representative of the Israeli community of Sderot was invited to speak. Sderot is the town near the Gaza border which has been hit with barrages of rockets fired by Hamas. As you will see, opponents of Israel on American university campuses have no tolerance for differing opinions.


Brett Cohen - Campus Coordinator for StandWithUs


"On March 16th, I attended a DePaul University event that I helped to organize, which was meant to bring greater understanding about the recent Hamas-Israel War in Gaza to the campus. The goal of StandWithUs, Hillel, and the Political Science department, co-sponsors of the evening, was straightforward: After weeks of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) events filled with anti-Israel and anti-Jewish rhetoric and titles like “Gaza Under Fire,” Israel’s side of the story had yet to be heard. StandWithUs brought Jacob Shrybman from the Sderot Media Center to give personal, human accounts of the impact of incessant rocket attacks on the daily lives of Israeli men, women, and children living in Sderot. The hope was to show that Israelis also suffered from the conflict, and to foster more reasonable dialogue. Instead, the right to free speech was shattered.

From the moment planning began, SJP worked to derail the program and subvert its purpose. SJP had claimed that the Qassam rockets were as harmless as toys or firecrackers. SJP attacked the event’s Facebook page with anti-Israel and anti-Semitic diatribes such as,

“That’s right, continue whimpering and whining over the people who are committing genocide against [the] firing of a few rockets! You have really descended into psychotic, fascist racism, utterly unable to have any regrets over the massacre of hundreds of Palestinian men, women, children, babies, and old people, many of them incinerated by white posphorus shells. Your group is a joke, a mouthpeice of a corrupt, colonialist state. You can burn in hell for what your beloved Israel did to the poor people of Gaza.”

SJP even circulated a letter condemning the event. It was signed by several campus organizations, including the College Democrats and Amnesty International. Shamefully, several of the signers have admitted that they never read the letter, and had no idea where Sderot was. SJP had inverted the facts, giving them the impression that Sderot was a city in Gaza, and that Israelis were the ones who had fired over 10,000 rockets at civilians over the past eight years.

After weeks of SJP generated conflict, the event took place. When we arrived, over ten people held signs that mocked the crisis in Sderot, denied that Qassams are dangerous, and claimed that Sderot’s residents deserved to live in terror because of the Israeli “occupation.”

The event began with a few dozen people, but by the end, SJP members and their sympathizers swelled the number to 100. They laughed and mocked at footage of Qassams smashing into playgrounds with kindergarteners running for their lives. More disgracefully, they attacked the speaker, screaming accusations of war crimes, hurling curses in Arabic and English, shouting down the speaker every time he attempted to answer their off-topic questions. One SJP member shouted, “If Hamas is not supposed to throw rockets on Sderot, then where should they throw them?” Apparently he and his peers had never considered the possibility that Hamas should end its violence.

When the angry mob began chanting for more terrorism against Sderot citizens, the speaker and the Hillel staff had to be escorted out by security.

The anti-Israel students claim to be pro-peace and pro-human rights but they exposed the fact that they are quite the opposite. They did not want to hear—and did not want others to hear—another side to the story. And they showed that they have no empathy for Israelis who are suffering from constant rocket attacks. The story of Sderot could not be told at DePaul. Freedom of speech died at DePaul on March 16th 2009."

Fousesquawk comment: Apparently the ghost of ex-professor Norman Finklestein is still wandering the halls of DePaul. I went to the DePaul website to see if there is any mention of this. All I could find was the usual happy-face stuff telling me what a great institution DePaul is. Similarly, no mention of the incident on the DePaul President's webpage-just the same puff. The campus paper, DePaulia, dated March 20, had no mention of the incident but did report on a panel discussion at DePaul on March 4 hosted by SJP and featuring three pro-Palestinian speakers. There was no such disruption at that event.

This is an embarrassment to DePaul that they would allow thugs to disrupt an event with which they don't agree. Of course, this tactic is typical of the left-especially on college campuses-when they don't want opposing voices to have their say. What I would like to know is the reaction of the university to this act of hooliganism and disruption of free speech.

I'll be looking for the university's reaction in the days ahead.

Bailout on the Orient Express

As the Orient Express rumbled through Eastern Europe between Istanbul and Paris, an American taxpayer was found dead in his sleeping cabin with a knife plunged into his back. Fortunately, Interpol Inspector Obama happened to be on board riding along in the engine compartment. After examining the body and determining that the victim had been dead for approximately 6 hours, he immediately launched an investigation.

The first thing Inspector Obama did was setup his TelePrompter, gather all the other passengers together in one car and express his shock and outrage. He then went around the room and asked each passenger where he or she had been the night before.

"I was right here on this train, of course", answered Barney Frank.

"Could you be a little more specific?", replied Obama.

"I was in the locomotive making sure the train was running smoothly.", answered Frank.

"Do you own a knife, Mr Frank?"

"Who me?" answered Frank. "I would never cut anything, you know that."

Inspector Obama then turned to the youngest on the train, Tim Geithner, who appeared too young to kill anybody.

"Mr Geithner, when did you last see the taxpayer alive?"

"Sometime last night", answered Tiny Tim. "I saw him about 10 o'clock with Mr Dodd. I remember because it was just before the porter tucked me into bed."

"That's a lie", shouted passenger Chris Dodd. The guy was just giving me change for a 5 dollar bill. In fact, I saw the taxpayer with Geithner around 11."

At this point, Inspector Obama asked Mr Dodd to empty his pockets. Reluctantly, Dodd stood up and turned out his pockets. Over $100,000 fell out onto the table.

"Where did this come from, Sir?" asked Obama?

"I won it playing cards with Barney last night", answered Dodd.

"Is that right, Mr Frank?" asked the inspector.

"Yeah, yeah, that's right", replied Frank.

"That's a lie," shouted another passenger. "They weren't playing cards last night. That money must belong to the taxpayer!"

At this point, Dodd and Frank looked at each other, shrugged and Dodd said, "Well, ok. There was no card game. We got the money from Freddie and Fannie. You can ask them. They're right here."

"What about it?" Obama asked the two passengers in the corner who hadn't muttered a sound up to this point.

"Yes, that's true," said Ms Mae.

"Mr Mac looked at his shoes and said, "Yeah, we gave 'em the money."

Obama then turned to passenger Maxine Waters.

"Ms. Waters, when did you last see the victim?"

Waters, replied, "I saw him about 5 hours ago. He was in perfect health."

"But I determined that he has been dead for 6 hours, how can that be?"

Waters looked back defiantly at Obama for a long moment then blurted out, "you can ask Franklin Raines. He was with me when I saw him. He can back up my story."

"Where is Mr Raines"? asked Obama.

"Why, we don't know", answered everyone in a chorus. "He must have gotten off the train in Budapest."

"He was an OUTSTANDING passenger," added Waters. "a good friend of my husband."

"Very confusing", mused Inspector Obama. He then turned to his partner, Vice-Inspector Joe Biden, and asked, "What do you think, Joe?"

"It was probably some Indian guy. We got any Indians on board?"

"No."


(Wrong train, Joe)


"Then beats the hell outta me," said Biden.

At this, a porter walked up to Inspector Obama and whispered in his ear, "Mr Leno is waiting for you in the club bar."

"OK, tell him I'll be right there. OK everybody, we'll meet back here in an hour."

"This is a tough nut to crack, eh Jay?"


An hour later, the group reassembled in the same location.

Obama began the session by informing the group that he had concluded that the taxpayer had been killed for his insurance money.

"I find it very strange that everybody on this train has the same insurance company including the taxpayer-AIG."


(A little suspense music, Maestro)



At this point, everybody began to squirm and look at each other.

Obama rose from his seat and slowly walked back and forth the length of the car-carrying his TelePrompter in front of him.

"That's right, AIG. Interesting also that we have both the past and current CEOs of AIG on board this train, isn't that right, Mr Greenberg? Isn't that right Mr Liddy?"

Hank Greenberg looked away and stated, "Hey, don't blame me. I ain't even CEO any more. I'm clean."

At which point, Edward Liddy jumped out of his seat and shouted, "you can't pin this rap on me. I just became CEO three hours ago. The taxpayer was dead before I even got the job."

Inspector Obama stooped pacing and patted Liddy on the arm, now talking smoothly, "I'm not blaming you, Ed, relax."

Obama then turned to Dodd, who was now sweating profusely. After what seemed an eternity of silence, Obama asked, "Mr Dodd, did you do it?"

Dodd was now crying silent tears as he looked down at the floor....

"They made me do it, he sobbed."

"Who made you do it?.............."

Just as Dodd was about to answer, the train ran off a cliff.





And suddenly, it didn't matter anymore.

Nancy Pelosi Trashes ICE

On March 7, 2009, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke in front of a mostly-Hispanic audience at St. Anthony's Church in the Mission District of San Francisco. The appearance was part of a nation-wide series of speeches entitled "Family Unity" tour organized by the leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. The principle organizer is Luis Gutierrez (D-Il), a man who has referred to government agencies, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Border Patrol, as "Gestapo". Pelosi, in her speech, not only pandered to the audience, but condemned the efforts of ICE to enforce our existing immigration laws. Her remarks were unworthy of a House Speaker when referring to federal law enforcement agencies.

Here are some of the quotes of statements made by Speaker Pelosi (which were recorded by a member of the audience unknown to Pelosi):

"Our future is about our children."

"Taking parents from their children...that's un-American."

"Who in this country would not want to change a policy of kicking in doors in the middle of the night and sending a parent away from their families?"

"It must be stopped...What value system is that? I think it's un-American. I think it's un-American."

"I can't say enough, the raids must end. The raids must end."

"You are special people. You're here on a Saturday night to take responsibility for our country's future. That makes you very, very patriotic."

First of all, we all know that Pelosi is an ultra-liberal politician from San Francisco, and nothing in this posting will cause outrage in her district. They have the representative that they want and deserve. But somewhere out there in the heartland of America, this must anger someone that the Speaker of the House of Representatives would make these statements about federal law enforcement authorities who are enforcing the law. Pelosi talks as if the Congress were holding hearings into police corruption as in the Knapp Commission hearings into New York City Police corruption decades ago.

That is certainly not the case here.

What about the accuracy of Pelosi's charges? Is it true that ICE is kicking down doors in the dead of night to capture one or two illegal aliens in a family? Although it has been alleged, my experience as a DEA agent (who also worked in a task force with US Immigration) tells me something different. Even 20-30 years ago, if Immigration got a tip that John Doe was an illegal alien and living at such and such an address, they would do nothing because they didn't have the resources to go after one or two persons at a time. That is ten times as true today. Doors being broken down in the dead of night sounds more like drug raids (when night-time warrant execution is authorized by a magistrate). Raids described by Pelosi sound more to me like raids on a business where ICE figures to round up dozens of illegal aliens or more during works hours. Could it be that some of these cases quoted by Pelosi and the open-borders crowd involve illegal aliens who are wanted on other criminal charges?

Similarly, what about about the charges of ICE agents dragging parents away from their children? ICE has already refuted those charges. They have taken great care to insure that when a parent is arrested, no child is left unattended. Is someone trying to use the example of Elian Gonzalez here, which was conducted by the Clinton Justice Department under Janet Reno? (I supported the action of the Justice Department in that case since I felt that Elian's father had every right to reclaim his son.)

Or maybe you would care to bring up the case of the Mexican woman in Chicago who was finally arrested in Los Angeles and sent back to Mexico a couple of years ago-leaving her young son in the care of US church officials, with whom she had enjoyed sanctuary? Let's be clear: If an illegal alien parent is subject to deportation, they have every right to take their entire family with them back to their home country-regardless of the citizenship status of the child. If they choose to leave them behind-for whatever reason-that is on them.

Our immigration and border officials are doing an impossible job-with precious little support from our government in Washington. Nancy Pelosi's outrageous comments underscore that point. Ms Pelosi should be ashamed of her comments and apologize to the men and women of ICE.

Who Dunnit?

Who put the line in the Stimulus Package that protected bonus payments agreed to before February 11, 2009?


"C'mon Dodd, Talk. We know you did it."

"No, I swear-I didn't do it!"

"Yes, you did."

"No I didn't"- Ok, Ok, I did it, but they made me do it."

"Who's they?"

"......... I can't.....they'll......."

"Pick up Geithner and bring'em downtown."

Let's Play, "Name That Kid!"

Can you name the kid in the above photo?

a The Cisco Kid
b Doogie Howser MD
c A recent American Idol winner
d Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (soon to be ex-Treasury Secretary)

If you guessed b-you are a winner!! If you guessed d-you are close.

Obama in Orange County-No Clue

"What do I do, Mr President?"


Driving home from work this afternoon, I caught parts of President Obama's town hall meeting in Orange County. While I missed parts of it, I did come away with a definite impression based on the parts I did hear.

The man has no clue.

First of all, it is undeniably true that once you take that telePrompter away from him, he is lost. The great oratorical skills vanish into thin air as he is reduced to a string of verbal tics and joking asides as he attempts to formulate an answer.

The first portion I heard was when someone asked him what he was going to do about immigration reform. Obama, realizing that his questioner was for a lenient policy, proceeded to wander through every talking point on both sides of the issue in an effort to please everybody. He wanted "comprehensive reform"-but not amnesty, mind you. He expressed concern about undocumented workers being exploited. He referred to a path to citizenship-again assuming they all want to be US citizens. He said they had to go back to the end of the line. They had to learn English. he's going to Mexico to meet with President Calderon, etc. etc....... Bottom line?

Hell if I know. However, if you read between the lines, don't look for this president to seal that border or put a stop to illegal immigration.

Then I heard the final question from a man who had lost his job (auto worker) and was unable to find another job because he had committed a felony 20 years ago.

"What do I do?" asked the man.

Unfortunately, he asked the wrong guy because Obama had no idea what to tell the man. As he began his long, tortured reply, Obama talked about how the man had obviously put his past mistakes behind him. He talked about the bad economy. He talked about the "programs" he wanted to initiate. He talked about the need to build environmentally friendly cars, solar energy, wind-something-or-others. He asked the man what company he had worked for, and the reply was "Toyota". (Too bad Obama couldn't mention any bailouts). Finally, the President wished the man well and said goodbye to the crowd.

"What do I do?"

President Obama must be thinking the same thing right about now.

Outrage Grows Over the Great Fousesquawk Bailout

(Tip of the hat to MattandPhilipsjokebook.com)


Congress reacted in fury today over reports that Fousesquawk, the blog giant, will be given another 150 billion dollars in tax-payer funds to cover bonus payments. This on top of the previous 150 billion, Fousesquawk had already received in TARP payments earlier this year.

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) said that Fousesquawk CEO Gary Fouse should kill himself. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said that he and Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT)would introduce legislation to tax any bonuses paid out by Fousesquawk at 100%. Secretary of the Treaury Tim Geithner issued a statement today that he would personally meet with Fousesquawk this week as soon as he (Geithner) finished doing his income taxes on Turbo-Tax. President Obama was unavailable for comment as his TelePrompTer is down for repairs after the fiasco at yesterday's St Patrick's day party with the Irish Prime Minister when they were reading each other's speeches. (That's not a joke.)

Earlier this morning, reporters caught up with CEO Gary Fouse at his cubicle at UC Irvine where they asked him a series of questions.

When asked how many bonuses were involved, Fouse replied only one since he was the only executive. He denied that any bonus money would go to Lance and Bryan, his two chief co-respondents.

"They never agree with me on anything anyway", Fouse stated.

Fouse did, however, admit that a few billion would go to the Radarsite and Grizzly Groundswell blogs, which are Fousesquawk affiliates.

When asked about the critical statements made by members of Congress, Fouse grew defiant.

"Who are they to criticize me? Dodd? I own that bum. Check his contribution list and see how much money I've given him. Check out what Maxine Waters said about me a few years back on the floor of the House.....'Fousesquawk, under the OUTSTANDING leadership of Gary Fouse.......' And Barney Frank? He's complainin' now, but remember when he said the US couldn't afford to let a giant like Fousesquawk go under. Besides, Barney better watch his mouth. I know a few things."

Fouse grew evasive, however, when asked how much advertising revenue Fousesquawk brings in.

"Well, uh....I don't really know. I got this deal with Adsense, and last time I checked the account, they owed me about 55 bucks......, but ya see I don't get nothin' until it reaches a hundred bucks. Yeah, that's it! That's the ticket!"

Finally, when asked by reporters what he would say to the American tax-payers who are forking over all these billions, Fouse retorted,

"Suck it up."

Letter From a College Teacher to a Freshman

Being a political conservative who has been teaching on college campuses for almost 14 years, I have come to some reflections that I think should be shared with an incoming freshman (or woman) about to enter college. To me, the most important thing for an incoming college student is to obtain a quality education that prepares him/her to go out into the world and make a career and living. That also includes the ability to think about the issues of the day, form a belief system, and genuinely care about what is going on in our country and the world. Whether a young person becomes a liberal or conservative is beside the point. The important thing is to really think about issues and form one's own opinion based on considering all sides.

I was a college student during the 1960s and was exposed to a bit of opinions being propagated by professors in the classroom. I basically resented it-especially after I had served three years in the Army and obtained some real life experiences that enabled me to form some of my own views.

Today, as a teacher (English as a Second Language) at the University of California at Irvine, I have set my own rules for what I say in the classroom to my students, not because I fear retribution, rather because I consider it to be my personal professional code of conduct. First of all, my subject matter is the English language, and there is no real need to discuss hot topics in class-even in a speaking and listening class. Unfortunately, many of our textbooks have politically-correct texts in them-especially regarding the environment. In those cases, I tell the students that political opinions expressed in texts are just opinions, and they are free to agree or disagree. As for my opinions, my students have no idea what I think about various issues. If I am asked, I tell them that my opinions don't matter. What matters is their opinion. My only advice is to expose themselves to all sides of an argument and then decide what they think is right. What I am trying to say here is that I don't see it as my role to tell my students what to think about the world or counter the liberal bias that exists in so many college classrooms. I have expressed my views among my colleagues in the office as well as various campus forums outside of the classroom, which I feel is valid, but the classroom is off-limits as far as I am concerned.

So what do I say to a college freshman who is going to be exposed to a certain point of view in the classroom and on campus in general? Well, I would start by the old rule of critical thinking. First of all, what you read and what you hear spoken should be held up to one question: Is it fact or opinion? Is what you are reading designed to inform-or to persuade? There is an old saying; opinions are like noses-everybody has one (only we didn't say noses).

Another question the student must consider is whether they are being given both sides of an issue-and if not-why not? Are both sides being given fair consideration? If not, why not? After all, the very definition of a university is where all sides and arguments are presented-even if controversial. Just because it is considered controversial by some to criticize our country or our president doesn't mean it can't be just as controversial-on a college campus-to defend our country or our president. Ask yourself this question: Which is considered riskier on a college campus-to criticize George W Bush or to praise him? To condemn our actions in Iraq or defend them. To condemn Israel or defend her?

Students should also consider whether or not their university is really living up to its definition when certain points of view are considered unacceptable to express. For example, why should it be risky for a student to express support for the US including its policy in Iraq, the Bush Administration and Israel? Why is it that so few voices are heard expressing those sides of the whole Middle East issue? Why are people in college reluctant to oppose gay marriage or illegal immigration? Why is it that the entire debate is dominated by those who love to criticize our own country, our ex-president and the State of Israel? Why is it that those students and those faculty (and there are some faculty, believe it or not) choose to keep their opinions to themselves rather than risk ostracism, career damage and possibly even physical intimidation?

Also, why is it that leftists are so dominant on college campuses, and why is it that many of them insist on pushing their beliefs down the throats of their students? Why is it that some of them will berate a student in front of the class who dares to express a different opinion? Why is it that some of them will penalize a student's grade for expressing an opinion opposed to that of the professor?

That leads to the next question: Are opposing (conservative) points of view being suppressed in the classroom and on the campus by faculty/administrators? If so, why? Is it because the suppressed views are so inherently evil that they should not even receive a hearing? Or is it because it is feared that if the other points of view get a fair hearing in the free marketplace of ideas that they will prevail? I would submit that the side that suppresses is not the right side.

That leads to the next question a young student should consider: If one philosophy actively suppresses the other, which philosophy should be considered morally correct? For example, the next time you witness a protest rally, watch the level of respect one side shows for the other's right to express their point of view? Which side acts in a more obnoxious manner? Which side has to be restrained by police? Which side engages in violence? Which side's speakers express hatred for America? Now I realize there can be exceptions on both sides from incident to incident, but over time, I think you will see a pattern. Is it not legitimate if one side tends to act like thugs to conclude that their point of view may not be correct?

Of course, many young students know what is happening, but they say that there is campus peer pressure to conform to a certain point of view. They also reply that in a classroom, the professor is an authority figure who can easily win a debate with a student, make that student look foolish and even destroy the student's grade. Many professors are guilty of this, and it is hard to advise a student concerned about his or her grade how to handle it.

What is crucial here, however, is that the students have to recognize when they are being fed facts and when they are being fed opinions. They have to be able to separate education from indoctrination. They have to remain true to their own belief system, and if that is still evolving, they need to get all sides before deciding on their own which is right and which is wrong. Failure to do that will mean that they will graduate with a diploma and little else, for they will be little more than robots. And if that is the result, those students will be good for little more than becoming the next generation of college indoctrinators.

Our Government in Action-What We Can Expect

Government DMV



Government car




Government housing




Government health care




Government banks




Our Government

Washington' s "Outrage" Over AIG

Congress in session


Several years ago, I had an acquaintance who worked on the staff of Iowa Senator Charles Grassley back when he was serving his 43rd term in Congress. My friend used to do Grassley imitations which clearly made the point that the senator was a demanding loudmouth jerk. That all came back to me this morning in hearing about Grassley's latest ridiculous statement in Iowa City yesterday (wherever that is). Grassley, in reacting to the news that AIG had given 165 million dollars in bonuses to their executives-after receiving millions in government bailouts- stated that the Japanese would do the honorable thing and resign or commit suicide. Genius Grassley even added something about resigning after committing suicide. My question is this: How come none of the real architects of this mess (our political leaders) resign?

Let's take President Obama for example. Yesterday, he was telling a crowd how mad he was about the AIG bonuses. He then added that his trusty Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, was "on the job" trying to get the money back (probably going through the Turbo-Tax directions). Then he took care to add that current (and just installed) AIG President Edward Liddy had taken over after the bonuses had already been agreed to. Don't blame him, folks(must be a friendly Democrat).

As a matter of fact, AIG had reported to Congress a year ago that they had made contractual obligations to pay these bonuses-which just came due. In other words, our "outraged" leaders in Washington had known all along about these bonuses-even as they were handing out the money.

But here comes the real lollapaloosa. Senator Chris Dodd, who always seems to have a hand in these money deals, inserted language into the big Stimulus Package to the effect that contractual obligations made before February 11, 2009 would not be tinkered with. That includes the AIG bonus deal. Yet, Dodd is now speculating with reporters about finding a way to get that money back-possibly by placing huge taxes on the bonuses.

How disingenuous is that?

None of this is meant to excuse misbehavior on Wall Street. But it is highly ironic that the same people in Congress (like Barney Frank) who orchestrated poor financial practices with their Community Reinvestment Program are now screaming the loudest.

Maybe the honorable thing to do would be for our entire Congress to resign

.....but please don't commit suicide.

UC Santa Cruz-America's Wackiest University?

UC Santa Cruz Banana Slugs-an Appropriate Mascot


Being a part-time teacher at the University of California at Irvine, I have taken recent note of the activities at other UC campuses in regards to left-wing activities. It seems to me that of all the UC campuses-even UC Berkeley-that UC Santa Cruz seems to be taking the lead in left-wing nuttiness these days.

David Horowitz, in his Frontpage Magazine blog, is featuring an article this week on some of the wacko classes that are being offered in the UCSC course catalog, in particular, the so-called Community Studies Department.


"Browse through the University of Santa Cruz course catalog, however, and you will find courses such as the following, offered through the “Community Studies Department,” which informs students: “The goal of this seminar is to learn how to organize a revolution. We will learn what communities past and present have done and are doing to resist, challenge, and overcome systems of power including (but not limited to) global capitalism, state oppression, and racism.” As we note in the book, this is the outline of a political agenda, not the description of a scholarly inquiry, and a clear instance of the kind of political indoctrination that the school’s own regulations prohibit – in theory, if not in practice." (Frontpage)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Being so enticed, I searched through the Community Studies section of USSC's website and noted the following- from the UCSC catalogue:

"Community studies is an interdisciplinary major that integrates scholarship and community engagement in both research and teaching. Since its founding in 1969, and across radically changing political landscapes, the department has maintained a focus on identifying, analyzing, and helping to construct sites for social change and cultural transformation. To this end, we address principles of social justice and the dynamics of racial and class inequity as well as explore constructions of community and their implications.

The range of the faculty’s disciplines, research interests, and arenas of civic engagement permits the department to delve into cross-cutting contemporary approaches that color every aspect of social life. The major offers community studies students a lively choice of concentrations in which to specialize, including public health and health politics, political economy, agriculture and food justice, race and racism, historical and contemporary social movements, globalization, politics of culture, and systems of documentary representation. Pedagogically, community studies relies on developing a dynamic critical awareness of the relationship between the theoretical and practical issues involved in social change, and of the wider global contexts in which social justice is defined and achieved. The department’s model of specific communities through residence and participation in (mostly) non-profit organizations with a social change mission. The undergraduate core curriculum focuses on the development of academic tools for social analysis and field observations/participation while deepening students’ knowledge of specific histories and theoretical perspectives that are essential to the student of communities and transformation. Students complete the major by preparing a senior capstone project integrating academic course work, field study, and original research work. The major usually takes about two years to complete.

With the intellectual guidance of a faculty adviser and a field study coordinator, community studies students choose field placements related to one of the department’s areas of focus. Placements have been with health centers, immigrant rights organizations, newspapers, minority media outlets, city planning departments, neighborhood organizations, civil rights groups, farm-to-school programs, battered women’s shelters, legal clinics, programs for seniors, tenant unions, government agencies and the offices of elected officials, trade unions, and other organizations committed to and working for social justice in communities."

Some of their course offerings:


114. Whiteness, Racism, and Anti-Racism.
Examines the social, cultural, institutional, and personal ways that white privilege and racial domination are constructed, maintained, and reproduced in U.S. society. Goal is to reveal the "hidden" quality of whiteness and illuminate effective strategies for anti-racist activism. Enrollment limited to 25. (General Education Code(s): E.) D. Wellman


122. Experiments in Community: Utopia and Communalism in Post-War California.
Traces history and flowering of urban and rural communal experiments in postwar California. Critically examines the counterculture—both alternative and revolutionary wings—and its legacy of, for example, sexual politics, child rearing, art and culture, foodways, environmentalism, architecture, and anti capitalism. (Formerly Experiments in Community: History of Communes in California.) I. Boal

123. Wal-Mart Nation.
Examines origins and growth of Wal-Mart stores as powerful guides to understanding dynamics of contemporary global political economy and, relatedly, the changing fortunes of global social classes.

(Fousesquawk comment- Can you imagine-USSC actually has a course devoted to Walmart??!!)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aside from Community Studies, a couple of other "departments" caught my eye.


Queer and Sexuality Studies

Feminist Studies
315 Humanities 1
(831)459-4324
fmst@ucsc.edu
http://queer.ucsc.edu/


Program Description

"Scholarship pertaining to the critical study of gender and sexuality can be found across a broad range of departments at UCSC. This presence is manifested in a diverse faculty, in course offerings, and in research programs. Courses with queer content can be found in American studies, anthropology, community studies, feminist studies, film and digital media, history, history of consciousness, legal studies, literature, sociology and theater arts.

For more specialization, departments such as Community Studies, Feminist Studies and Literature have sufficient flexibility to allow students to design a course of study within those majors to explore these interests. For students who prefer to take a more self-directed approach, there is the option of designing an individual major.

Research activities are sponsored by the Queer Theory research cluster (a part of the Center for Cultural Studies), the Center for Justice, Tolerance and Community, the Queer and Sexuality Studies Working Group, and many campus departments and student organizations."

The Lionel Cantú GLBTI Resource Center serves as a clearinghouse for queer activities on the UCSC campus. Each quarter, the center prepares a list of all course offerings with queer content. Information is available at http://queer.ucsc.eduor via e-mail at queer@ucsc.edu.

Fousesquawk comment: How is it that a university department actually names itself "Queer and Sexuality Studies"? The term "Queer" is a term I stopped using to refer to homosexuals when I was in high school.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there is this department:

History of Consciousness
415 Humanities 1
(831) 459-2757
http://histcon.ucsc.edu/

Faculty

Gopal Balakrishnan, Associate Professor of History of Consciousness
Classics of political thought from Plato to Rousseau, early modern and modern European intellectual history, historical sociology, the history and future of capitalism, nationalism-----(This guy is associated with the New Left Review- a journal that is aptly named.)

James T. Clifford, Professor of History of Consciousness
History of anthropology, travel, and exoticism; transnational cultural studies, museum studies, indigenous studies

Angela Y. Davis, Professor of History of Consciousness and Feminist Studies
Feminism, African American studies, critical theory, popular music culture and social consciousness, philosophy of punishment (women's jails and prisons)

Teresa de Lauretis, Professor of History of Consciousness, Literature, and Film and Digital Media
Semiotics, psychoanalysis, feminism, film theory, literary theory, queer studies

Barbara L. Epstein, Professor of History of Consciousness
Social movements and theories of social movements, 20th-century U.S. politics and culture, Marxism and related theories of social change

Donna J. Haraway, Professor of History of Consciousness and Feminist Studies
Feminist theory, cultural and historical studies of science and technology, relation of life and human sciences, human-animal relations, and animal studies

David S. Marriott, Professor of History of Consciousness
Literary theory, psychoanalysis, black cultural theory and philosophies of race, literary and visual cultures of modernism

Victor Burgin, Professor Emeritus of History of Consciousness

Hayden White, Professor Emeritus of History of Consciousness

Extended Department Faculty

John Brown Childs, Professor of Sociology
Ethnic conflict and transcommunal cooperation; sociology of knowledge; African American, Native American, Latino interactions

Michael H. Cowan, Professor of American Studies
American cultural theory and history, history of American studies, symbolic expression in American life, urban cultural studies, American literary studies, studies in the institutional culture of higher education

Gina Dent, Associate Professor of Feminist Studies, History of Consciousness, and Legal Studies
Africana literary and cultural studies, legal theory, popular culture

Shelly Errington, Professor of Anthropology
Globalization of folk art, visual and social semiotics, photography, film, the Internet and digital media, Southeast Asia, and Latin America

Carla Freccero, Distinguished Professor of French Literature and Feminist Studies
Renaissance studies, French and Italian language and literature, early modern studies, postcolonial theories and literature, contemporary feminist theories and politics, queer theory, U.S. popular culture

Herman S. Gray, Professor of Sociology
Cultural studies, media and television studies, black cultural politics, social theory

Susan Harding, Professor of Anthropology
Culture, politics, narrative, gender, local/global studies, ethnographic writing, fundamentalism, Christianity, state-making, aging, America, and Spain

David C. Hoy, Professor of Philosophy
Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Derrida, Foucault, phenomenology, poststructuralism, and contemporary European philosophy

Robert L. Meister, Professor of Politics
Political and moral philosophy, law and social theory, Marxian theory, institutional analysis, antidiscrimination law

Helene Moglen, Professor of Literature and Feminist Studies; UC Presidential Chair
The English novel; feminist, critical, cultural, and psychoanalytic theory; gender and genre in social and psychological contexts

Triloki Nath Pandey, Professor of Anthropology
Native peoples of North America, cultures of India, political anthropology, anthropological theories and comparisons

Andrew Szasz, Associate Professor of Sociology
Environmental sociology (environmental movements, policy, environmental justice); theory

Richard Terdiman, Professor of Literature
Nineteenth- and 20th-century French and European literature and culture, literary and cultural theory, contemporary critical theory, cultural globalization

Anna Tsing, Professor of Anthropology
Culture and politics, feminist theory and gender in the U.S., social landscapes and tropical forest ethnoecologies, ethnicity, local power and relations to the state in Indonesia, Southeast Asia, and the U.S.

Judy Yung, Professor Emerita of American Studies

Patricia Zavella, Professor of Latin American and Latino Studies
Relationship between women's work and domestic labor, poverty, family, sexuality and social networks, feminist studies, ethnographic research methods, and transnational migration of Mexicana/o workers and U.S. capital
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reading the descriptions of the above professors, you have any doubts as to their political bents, I invite you to google them and determine how many of them are not on the far left of the political spectrum.

Here are the courses offered in this exciting department.

Lower-Division Courses Program Description

"History of consciousness is an interdisciplinary graduate program centered in the humanities, with links to the social sciences, physical and biological sciences, and arts. It is concerned with forms of human expression and social action as they are manifested in specific historical, cultural, and political contexts. The program stresses flexibility and originality. Interest is focused on problems rather than disciplines. Although students are prepared to teach in particular fields, the emphasis is on questions that span a number of different approaches.

Over more than 30 years of existence, the history of consciousness program has become widely recognized as a leader of interdisciplinary scholarship. Program graduates are influential scholars at prominent universities, and dissertations have been published by major publishing houses and academic presses. Graduates currently find academic employment in a wide range of disciplines, including literature, feminist studies, science studies, anthropology, sociology, American studies, cultural studies, ethnic studies, communications, the study of religion, and philosophy. In addition, history of consciousness graduates work as filmmakers, museum researchers, free-lance writers, postdoctoral researchers, and academic administrators.

Since the curriculum concentrates on theoretical and methodological issues and is concerned with the integration of disciplines, candidates for admission are expected to have a relatively clear idea of the project they wish to pursue. Experience of advanced work in one or more fields is preferred, but not required.

History of consciousness emphasizes a variety of topics in its seminars and research pursuits. These areas of research include studies at the intersection of race, sexuality, and gender; global capitalism and cultural processes; psychoanalytic and semiotic theories of the image; science and technology studies; theories and histories of religion; social movements; and literary studies and poetics. Seminars are regularly offered in these and other areas of ongoing faculty research.

History of consciousness has strong cooperative relations with associated faculty from other campus programs, scholars who offer seminars and participate in advising, qualifying exams, and thesis committees. Within the limits of seminar size and faculty time, cross-disciplinary work in graduate courses offered by other departments is encouraged. The formal list of associated faculty is a non-exhaustive indication of advising possibilities beyond the program’s core faculty. Campus research organizations, such as the UCSC Center for Cultural Studies, the Institute for Humanities Research, the Institute of Advanced Feminist Research, and the Chicano/Latino Research Center, also provide venues for collaborative work."

Requirements

Students are required to enroll in a minimum of two courses per quarter until advancement to candidacy (normally achieved no later than the fourth year).

Incoming students are required to take a minimum of five history of consciousness graduate seminars during the first two years. In the first year, students are required to take the introductory seminar, course 203A, Approaches to History of Consciousness. In the course of the first year, students must also take a writing intensive “B” seminar, either 203B, Approaches, or a “B” seminar following another seminar the student has taken. By the end of the first year, students are expected to complete a full seminar paper. Unless an exception is approved by the director of Graduate Studies, “B” courses do not count toward the five seminars selected to fulfill the basic department requirement. The remainder of the courses taken to fulfill university enrollment requirements may include not only history of consciousness seminars but also independent study with specific faculty or graduate seminars offered in other departments.

Additional requirements for the Ph.D. vary with individual disciplinary and interdisciplinary needs and are determined in consultation with relevant faculty and the chair of the program.

Advancement to candidacy depends on the general quality of a student’s work; demonstration of proficiency in a foreign language relevant to the student’s area of work, either by passing a written exam administered by the department or successfully completing a language course approved by the department; success in the qualifying exam; and proposal of an acceptable thesis topic. The qualifying exam is centered on a qualifying essay that demonstrates the candidate’s ability to do extended, dissertation-level research and analysis relevant to the proposed thesis topic and dissertation plan. The exam focuses on the student’s research project and on the fields of scholarship it presupposes.

After advancement to candidacy, required by the end of the fourth year, students concentrate on the writing of the dissertation. The current normative time to degree limit of seven years means that a student usually has at least three years after advancement to candidacy for completion of the dissertation.

Students also have the option of doing advanced work in a traditional discipline and receiving a parenthetical degree notation of this specialization. In such cases, students must satisfy the appropriate department’s criteria. Currently such degree notations may be negotiated with American studies, anthropology, literature, philosophy, sociology, and feminist studies. Students are expected to complete at least one year of supervised teaching as part of the degree requirements.

Applications

The deadline for applications to the History of Consciousness program is December 1 of each year. Admissions information and application materials are available online at graddiv.ucsc.edu.

Applications are invited from students with backgrounds and interests in the humanities and social sciences and are especially encouraged from individuals with a clear idea of the project they wish to undertake. Strong preference is given to applicants working in areas for which the faculty resources in history of consciousness are appropriate and available. Graduate Record Examination (GRE) scores are required as is a writing sample of no more than 10 pages.

Admission is for the fall quarter only.

It is important to note that in light of California’s elimination of affirmative action as an admissions criterion, the history of consciousness department reaffirms its commitment to the principles of affirmative action. These principles mean a commitment to diversity, equal opportunity, and outreach to underrepresented communities. Further, this commitment underlines our understanding that the very fabric and quality of our scholarship depends on the representation and interplay of diverse experience and perspectives. So defined, affirmative action is reflected in every aspect of the history of consciousness program, including scholarship, teaching, admissions, hiring, and the process of departmental governance."

Fousesquawk comment: First of all, does the above comment about affirmative action implicate that despite the law, this department is taking the position of -TO HELL WITH THE LAW?

Secondly, can anybody make sense of this "Consciousness thing"? Please excuse me, folks. I only have a Masters degree, but to me, consciousness means something like being awake. Is that opposed to the "History of Being Passed Out Drunk" (which I can relate to)? Seems to me, once you get around this thing about being conscious, this is a bunch of leftist rigamarol.

But then, all you have to do is get to the name, Angela Davis, and it all becomes crystal clear. For those of you to young to remember, Angela Davis, one of the department honchos, is much more than just a PHD on the list of professors. Back in the 1960s and 1970s, Angela Davis was a leading radical in California, associated with the Communist Party and the Black Panthers and charged in the courthouse killing of a judge in an attempted prisoner breakout. Subsequent to the incident, she became a fugitive, was arrested in New York and tried in California (where she was acquitted.) Since then, Davis has become (again) a darling of the academic left at UCSC where she teaches to this day.

Here are the courses they offer:

80A. Culture and Ideology in the 20th Century.
A survey of the principle ideological issues of the 20th century—attitudes toward sex, race, class, work, violence, and knowledge—viewed from the perspective of structuralist and semiological theories of culture. (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) A. Davis

80B. Constructions of the Exotic.
Analyzes ethnographic and auto-ethnographic representations of non-Western peoples. Films, video, ethnographies, novels, and journalism are considered, paying attention to specific histories of colonial and postcolonial contact which influence images of "culture" and "identity." (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) J. Clifford

80E. Myth and Religion.
A study of the nature of religion and myth as well as their interrelationship; the beginnings and functions of myth, its major themes in various cultures, its relationship to sacrifice and ritual, and its role in selected religions and cultures throughout the world. Offered in alternate academic years. (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) G. Lease, The Staff

80I. Philosophy, Race, and Gender.
What is the concept of the human? How is the concept of the human related to race and gender? How has it changed from the 18th century to the 20th century? Focuses on the founding texts of the German Enlightenment. (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) The Staff

80J. Social Movements in the U.S.
Traces the history of social movements in the late 19th- and 20th-century U.S., including populism, labor, socialism, Communism, the New Left, civil rights, feminism. Looks at the relationship between cultures of protest and mainstream popular and political cultures. (General Education Code(s): T5-Humanities and Arts or Social Sciences.) B. Epstein

80L. Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?.
Christianity claims but one Jesus at its foundation; the sources, however, reveal many Jesuses. Is there a "real" Jesus among the memories of the earliest Jesusites, or among the Jesus-types of Late Antiquity? Or only contradictory choices? (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) G. Lease

80M. Imagining Popular Culture.
Focuses on representations of race, class, and gender in contemporary popular culture images, particularly film and television. Attendance is required at both lectures and screenings. (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) The Staff

80N. Politics of Emotion/Emotion of Politics.
Engages histories of affect, the complex realms of the senses, feelings, emotions, and the body. Asks questions about the role of emotions in the making and unmaking of the contemporary political order and marginal cultures of feeling. (General Education Code(s): T5-Humanities and Arts or Social Sciences.) T. Spira

80O. Hitler, National Socialism, and Religion.
A critical evaluation of Hitler as a religious leader and his National Socialism as both a religious movement and an example of 20th-century political theology: a study of the relationship between religion and politics. (General Education Code(s): T5-Humanities and Arts or Social Sciences.) G. Lease

80Q. Science as Culture and Practice.
Using tools from the analysis of social history, visual and material culture, narrative, and laboratory and field practices, introduces students to modern science, technology, and medicine studies. Examples come especially from 20th- and 21st-century life and human and information sciences. May be repeated for credit. (General Education Code(s): T5-Humanities and Arts or Social Sciences.) D. Haraway

80T. Art and Life: Introduction to Interventionist Art and Visual Studies.
Emphasizes how interventionist practices and activist art might inform students' political development and actions. Explores modes of expression and political identities that are useful after college. Leads to the production of alternatives to mainstream media. (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) L. Kelley

80U. Modernity and Its Discontents.
Offers an introduction to the idea of modernity from Kant to Freud, Niezsche to Fanon. (General Education Code(s): T4-Humanities and Arts.) D. Marriott

Upper-Division Courses

102. Philosophy and Poetics.
Introduction to the relationship between philosophy and poetics in some major 19th- and 20th-century poets and thinkers. Enrollment restricted to juniors and seniors. Enrollment limited to 30. D. Marriott

111. States, War, Capitalism.
Survey of seminal work on ancient origins of the state, diverse geo-political systems of war and diplomacy, and consequences of the formation of the world market on the evolution of geo-political systems up to and beyond the wars of today. Enrollment restricted to juniors and seniors. Enrollment limited to 35. G. Balakrishnan

113. Participatory Dissent.
Brings together debates in feminism, contemporary art, and radical pedagogy, investigating the impact of the feminist revolution in the arts and humanities on debates in radical pedagogy and art as social practice. N. Loveless

118. Jewish Social Movements.
Jewish social movements of the late 19th and 20th centuries, in Europe (Eastern and Western) and the U.S.: the confrontation between Hasidism and Haskahah, tensions between socialism and Zionism, between religiosity and secularism, the mutual influences among these tendencies. (Also offered as History 185D. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to juniors and seniors. Enrollment limited to 20. (General Education Code(s): E.) B. Epstein

126. Film Fantasies.
A focused study of cinema as a social technology for the production of public and private fantasies: how films contribute to shaping the image a culture has of itself and how film viewing may influence individual fantasies, values, and identities. Enrollment restricted to juniors and seniors. Enrollment limited to 80. T. De Lauretis

145E. Topics in Medical Humanities.
Medical humanities is an interdisciplinary field of humanities (literature, philosophy, ethics, history, and religion) concerned with its application to medical education and practice. The humanities provide insight into the human condition, suffering, personhood, and our responsibility to each other; and offer an historical perspective on medical science. Course helps prepare students for the reading comprehension and writing parts of the MCAT. Satisfies the Modern Literature concentration. Students cannot receive credit for this course and Literature 80K. (Also offered as Modern Literary Studies 145E. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) W. Godzich

199. Tutorial.
A program of individual study arranged between an undergraduate student and a faculty member. Students submit petition to sponsoring agency. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

Graduate Courses

203A. Approaches to History of Consciousness.
An introduction to history of consciousness required of all incoming students. The seminar concentrates on theory, methods, and research techniques. Major interpretive approaches drawn from cultural and political analysis are discussed in their application to specific problems in the history of consciousness. Prerequisite(s): first-year standing in the program. See the department office for more information. (Formerly course 203.) The Staff

203B. Approaches to History of Consciousness.
Writing-intensive course based on readings in course 203A. Prerequisite(s): course 203A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 9. G. Balakrishnan

204A. Introduction to Cultural Studies.
Classic texts from the British cultural studies tradition. Traces later developments in North America, Latin America, Australia, and elsewhere. Asks how class analysis has been complicated by work on race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and postcoloniality. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 20May be repeated for credit. J. Clifford

204B. Introduction to Cultural Studies.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 204A. Prerequisite(s): course 204A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 20. J. Clifford

205A. Theories of Slavery.
Explores philosophical, legal, and socio-historical analyses of slavery. Focus on Atlantic slavery and the production of race and gender formations, complemented by discussion on contemporary forms of slavery. Impact of historical slavery on prevailing discourses and institutions. (Also offered as Feminist Studies 225A. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. A. Davis

205B. Theories of Slavery.
Writing-intensive course based on readings in History of Consciousness 205A and Feminist Studies 225A . (Also offered as Feminist Studies 225B. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Prerequisite(s): course 205A or Feminist Studies 225A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. A. Davis

207. Theory of the Text.
An introduction to contemporary theories of textual interpretation: anthropological, linguistic, historical, literary, semiotic, and philosophical. Consideration of different kinds of texts and ways of reading them: from dream reports, folktales, and myths, through musical scores, monuments, rituals, games, and codes, to poems, novels, and political tracts. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. T. De Lauretis

208A. Radical Critiques of Penality.
Examines recent theories of imprisonment, focusing on the philosophical and criminological literature associated with scholarly and activist movements arguing for prison abolition. In considering the disarticulation of crime and punishment, race, class, and gender serve as principal analytical categories. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. A. Davis

208B. Radical Critiques of Penality.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 208A. Prerequisite(s): course 208A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. A. Davis

209A. Women of Color: Feminist Theories and Practices.
Examination of feminist consciousness in the indigenous and diasporic cultural histories of women of color. Analysis of "feminist moments" in these histories and their epistemological implications for the construction of feminist theories that take into account intersections of gender, ethnicity, class, and sexual orientation. Discussion of possible paradigmatic shifts in feminist theory. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. A. Davis

209B. Women of Color: Feminist Theories and Practices.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 209A. Prerequisite(s): course 209A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

210A. Cultural and Historical Studies of Race and Ethnicity.
Explores the historical construction of racial and ethnic categories in the Americas, especially the U.S., in interaction with gender, sexuality, class, and nationality. Intended to introduce current work by UCSC faculty and Bay Area scholars and to stimulate graduate student research projects, the course is organized by intensive reading around key questions, followed by presentations by invited scholars. Emphasizes research resources and methodologies. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

210B. Cultural and Historical Studies of Race and Ethnicity.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 210A. Prerequisite(s): course 210A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

211A. French Hegel.
Introduces the "return to Hegel" in the work of some major 20th-century French thinkers. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

212. Feminist Theory and the Law.
Interrogation of the relationship between law and its instantiating gendered categories, supported by feminist, queer, Marxist, critical race, and postcolonial theories. Topics include hypostasization of legal categories, the contest between domestic and international human rights frameworks, overlapping civil and communal codes, cultural explanations in the law, the law as text and archive, testimony and legal subjectivity. (Also offered as Feminist Studies 212. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Dent

213A. Representation.
An introduction to contemporary theories including semiotics, psychoanalysis, poststructuralism, and the feminist critique of representation. Emphasis on questions of difference and the construction of the subject in culture. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. T. De Lauretis

213B. Representation.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 213A. Prerequisite(s): course 213A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. T. De Lauretis

214A. Studies in History, Religion, and Myth.
Selected events, figures, and ideas from histories of religions: their sources, production, and functions. Emphasis on 19th- and 20th-century theories of religion, the problems of origin and institution, and the relationship between particular histories and their mythologies. Enrollment restricted to graduate standing. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. G. Lease

214B. Studies in History, Religion, and Myth.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 214A. Prerequisite(s): course 214A. Enrollment restricted to graduate standing. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. G. Lease

215A. Critical Theory in the Marxist Tradition.
An introduction to classic texts of the Frankfurt School, focusing on works by Adorno, Horkheimer, Benjamin, and Marcuse. Explores their uses and critiques of Marxism, emphasizing questions of the relation between philosophy and history, theory and praxis, aesthetics and politics, and identifying issues relevant to contemporary debates around race, class, and gender. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. A. Davis

215B. Critical Theory in the Marxist Tradition.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 215A. Prerequisite(s): course 215A . Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. A. Davis

217A. Seminar: Topics in Feminist Theory.
Studies in the theory and history of feminist consciousness; analysis of the main areas of a specifically feminist interest; determination of the theoretical bases for a distinctively feminist perspective on the principal problems of the life and human sciences; examination of relations of class, race, and gender in feminist theory and practice. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

217B. Seminar: Topics in Feminist Theory.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 217A. Prerequisite(s): course 217A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

218A. Postcolonial Theory.
Study of selected topics in postcolonial theory, including decolonizing critiques of Western knowledges and epistemologies, nationalism, gender and sexuality, cultural representations of neo-colonialism and imperialism, subalternity, history and historical transformation, and global relations of dominations. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

218B. Postcolonial Theory.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 218A. Prerequisite(s): course 218A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

219A. Psychoanalysis and Cultural Criticism.
Readings in Freudian psychoanalytic theory from Freud and his contemporaries to the present, with emphasis on concepts (such as the unconscious, sexuality, fantasy, narcissism) that have informed recent cultural criticism around questions of social identity, subjectivity, marginality, and power. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. T. De Lauretis

219B. Psychoanalysis and Cultural Criticism.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 219A. Prerequisite(s): course 219A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. T. De Lauretis

220A. Globalization and Cultural Process.
Discusses theories of globalization and its cultural effects. How are cultural forms destroyed, imposed, appropriated, hybridized, translated, invented, and reinvented at local, national, regional, and transnational levels? Historical and ethnographic focus on tourist encounters, museums, nativisms, film/media performances, etc. Enrollment restricted to graduate students Enrollment limited to 20. May be repeated for credit. J. Clifford

220B. Globalization and Cultural Process.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 220A. Prerequisite(s): course 220A. Enrollment limited to 20. May be repeated for credit. J. Clifford

222A. Theories of Late Capitalism, Nationalism, and the Politics of Identity.
Looks at the theoretical literature on what is variously called late capitalism/postindustrialism/postfordism, and in that context considers the rise of nationalism and identity politics in the latter part of the 20th century. The primary focus is on the U.S. and Western Europe, but questions of the globalization of capital and the transformation of relations between "the West" and "the Third World" are also considered. Written work for the course consists of weekly short papers. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. B. Epstein

222B. Theories of Late Capitalism, Nationalism, and the Politics of Identity.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 222A. Prerequisite(s): course 222A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. B. Epstein

223. Recent European Philosophy.
Seminar on recent developments in European philosophy, with particular attention to German theorists such as Nietzsche, Heidegger, Gadamer, Horkheimer, Adorno, or Habermas. Theorists such as Sartre, Merleau-Ponty, Derrida, Foucault, Bourdieu, Levinas, Laclau, or Vattimo may be read as well. (Also offered as Philosophy 223. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. D. Hoy

224. History of Consciousness.
Examination of contemporary theories of consciousness in both analytic and continental traditions. Among those who deflate modern philosophy's preoccupation with consciousness are not only Dennett, Davidson, and Rorty, but also Heidegger, Foucault, and Derrida. Among those who argue for irreducibility of subjectivity are not only Searle, Nagel, and Chalmers, but also Sartre, Merleau-Ponty, and Levinas. Discussion of parallel readings from both philosophical perspectives. (Also offered as Philosophy 256. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 25. D. Hoy

225. The Politics of Affect.
Point of departure is the question of the political, posed with respect to psychoanalysis. The underlying question is what the political does to psychoanalysis, but also what the unconscious does to the political. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

228. Fundamental Problems of Metapolitics.
Focuses on seminal works of political thought: the first half devoted to ancient and modern classics; the second considering several major contemporary reflections. Aims to reconstruct and assess the claims regarding epistemic conditions and criteria of metapolitical judgment. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Balakrishnan

229A. Aesthetics and Politics.
Studies the connections between questions of aesthetics and politics, including questions of beauty, genre, pleasure, narrative form, structures of feeling and style, in literature, film and music, as these relate to the politics of class, race, gender, sexuality, and decolonization. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

230A. Poetry, Language, Thought.
Introduces the relation between philosophy and poetics in some major 20th-century poets and thinkers. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

230B. Poetry, Language, Thought.
Writing-intensive course based on readings in course 230A. Prerequisite(s): course 230A, or permission of instructor. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

232A. Third World Feminisms and Globalization.
Studies third world feminist theories and struggles and their relations to globalization; topics include nationalism, development, transnational practices, identity politics, human rights, especially the ways in which Third World feminisms respond and contribute to political, economic, social, and cultural transformations. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

233A. Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity.
Study of social and cultural theories of modernity and postmodernity; analysis of various conceptualizations of the modern and the postmodern and their relation to production, history, aesthetics, cultural identity, social struggle; texts from a variety of disciplines (literature, sociology, philosophy). Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

233B. Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 233A. Prerequisite(s): course 233A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. The Staff

234A. Social Movements in the 20th-Century U.S.
The history of major social movements in the 20th-century U.S., including populism, labor, socialism and communism, civil rights, the women's movement, the anti-nuclear movement. Various theoretical perspectives on the rise and fall of social movements. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. Offered in alternate academic years. May be repeated for credit. B. Epstein

234B. Social Movements in the 20th-Century U.S.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 234A. Prerequisite(s): course 234A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. B. Epstein

235A. Theory of Religion.
The difficulty of defining religion (universal essence vs. local/individual experience), of specifying its categorical boundaries, and of generating a theory based on more traditional disciplines (anthropomorphism, societal, psychic, transcendent, cognitive/ritual, historical/cultural/political). Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Lease

235B. Theory of Religion.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 235A. Prerequisite(s): course 235A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Lease

237A. Historical Materialism.
Students read landmark works of classical and contemporary Marxism. Writings from Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Lukacs, Gramsci, Adorno, Benjamin, Sartre, Althusser, Anderson, Jameson, and Zizek are addressed. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Balakrishnan

239A. The Dialectical Legacy.
From Adorno to Zizek rediscoveries of Hegel have provided the impetus for some of the most innovative currents of 20th-century Marxism. Examines the philosophical and historical problems that Marx inherited from Hegel through close readings of their major works. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Balakrishnan

239B. The Dialectical Legacy.
From Adorno to Zizek rediscoveries of Hegel have provided the impetus for some of the most innovative currents of 20th-century Marxism. Examines the philosophical and historical problems that Marx inherited from Hegel through close readings of their major works. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Balakrishnan

240. Basic Principles of University-Level Pedagogy (1 credit).
Provides training for graduate students in university-level pedagogy in general. Under the supervision of the department chair, coordinated by a graduate student with substantial experience as a teaching assistant. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

242A. Violence and Phenomenology: Fanon/Hegel/Sartre.
Study of the work and influence of Frantz Fanon from a range of viewpoints: existential, phenomenological, psychoanalytic, and political; a variety of genres: film, literature, case history, and critique; and a set of institutional histories: clinical, cultural, and intellectual. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

242B. Violence and Phenomenology: Fanon/Hegel/Sartre.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 242A. Prerequisite: course 242A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

243A. Nationalism, Anti-Semitism, and Jewish Resistance in World War II.
Jewish resistance to Nazism during World War II, in Eastern Europe, and its historical context. Includes the pre-war rise in nationalism and anti-Semitism in Poland and Lithuania, Jewish integration in the Soviet Union, and the consequences for wartime resistance. (Also offered as History 256. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to seniors and graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. B. Epstein

247. Performance/Performativities.
Performance acts and theories of performativity in visual culture from modernity to present. Major theoretical positions subtending the emergence of performances/performativities: subjectivity, identity, temporality, media, ritual, the event, the body and embodiment, collaboration, and politics. (Also offered as Digital Arts and New Media 247. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Qualified seniors accepted with permission of instructor. Enrollment limited to 15. C. Soussloff

250A. Foundations in Science Studies.
Critical inquiry into topics in the history, sociology, anthropology, and philosophy of science and technology. Organized around the position that science is its practice, the seminar explores practices of representation, science studies and cultural studies, local/global tensions and networks, and the science question in feminism and antiracism. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. K. Barad

250B. Foundations in Science Studies.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 250A. Prerequisite(s): course 250A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Haraway

251A. Readings in Science Studies.
Focus is on recent literature in social, cultural, and historical studies of science, medicine, and technology. This seminar familiarizes students with current scholarly debates, research networks, national traditions, international exchanges, conference proceedings, interdisciplinary projects, and publication sites. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. D. Haraway

251B. Readings in Science Studies.
Second quarter of two-quarter course. Writing-intensive course based on the readings studied in course 251A. Prerequisite: course 251A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Haraway

252. Poststructuralism.
French poststructuralism, with particular attention to the main philosophical texts of Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault. Other representative theorists as well as critics of poststructuralism are studied as time permits. (Also offered as Philosophy 252. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. May be repeated for credit. D. Hoy

253A. Topics in Cultural Analysis.
Advanced graduate seminar in which students do research on focused topics. Each quarter centered on single thematic area. Students read works of culture-theory and exemplary studies illustrating methodologies, problems, and current controversies. Prerequisite(s): minimum of second-year status in the history of consciousness program; instructor evaluates student's ability to participate. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. J. Clifford

255A. Carl Schmitt: Political and Legal Order in Modern Thought.
Students study the main translated texts of Carl Schmitt's work, as well as certain secondary commentary on his body of thought. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Balakrishnan

256A. Theories of the Visual.
Study of psychoanalytic theories of the visual including the emergence of psychoanalysis and cinema as parallel discourses and the mobilization of key psychoanalytic concepts—scopophilia, voyeurism, fetishism—in Freudian and Lacanian understandings of the gaze so central to film and photographic theory. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. D. Marriott

256B. Theories of the Visual.
Writing intensive course based on readings in course 256A. Prerequisite: course 256A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

259A. Kant, Lacan, and the Ethics of Psychoanalysis.
Offers an introduction to Jacques Lacan's "Return to Kant" and the response it provokes as a reading of sadism, politics, and ethics. Specific point of entry adopted for course is Lacan's seminar on "The Ethics of Psychoanalysis." Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

259B. Kant, Lacan, and the Ethics of Psychoanalysis.
Writing-intensive course based on readings in course 259A. Prerequisite(s): course 259A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Marriott

260A. Film and the Visible.
Study of selected topics in film theory, including the construction of vision and spectatorship; the relations of look, image, and narrative; the formative effects of classic, experimental, and independent cinema in contemporary visual culture; the feminist critique of representation; the role of cinema in the production of public and private fantasies, cultural memory, and identity. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. T. De Lauretis

260B. Film and the Visible.
Study of selected topics in film theory, including the construction of vision and spectatorship; the relations of look, image, and narrative; the formative effects of classic, experimental, and independent cinema in contemporary visual culture; the feminist critique of representation; the role of cinema in the production of public and private fantasies, cultural memory, and identity. Prerequisite(s): course 260A. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. T. De Lauretis

260C. Film and the Visible.
Writing intensive course based on readings in courses 260A and 260B. Prerequisite(s): course 260A or 260B. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. T. De Lauretis

261. Modern Intellectural History.
Survey of 19th- and 20th-century intellectual history that focuses on a cross-section of major works from Hegel to Levi-Strauss. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Balakrishnan

264. The Idea of Africa.
Examines the position of Africa in cultural studies and the simultaneous processes of over- and under-representation of the continent that mark enunciations of the global and the local. Themes include defining diaspora, the West as philosophy, and Africa in the global economy. (Also offered as Feminist Studies 264. Students cannot receive credit for both courses.) Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. G. Dent

291. Advising (2 credits). F,W,S
Independent study formalizing the advisee-adviser relationship. Regular meetings to plan, assess and monitor academic progress, and to evaluate course work as necessary. May be used to develop general bibliography of background reading and trajectory of study in preparation for the qualifying examination. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

292. Practicum in Composition.
A practicum in the genres of scholarly writing, for graduate students working on the composition of their qualifying essay or doctoral dissertation. Enrollment restricted to graduate students. Enrollment limited to 15. D. Haraway, T. De Lauretis, J. Clifford

293. Field Study.
Research carried out in field settings, based on a project approved by the responsible faculty. The student must file a prospectus with the department office before undertaking the research and a final report of activities upon return. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

294. Teaching-Related Independent
Study. F,W,S
Directed graduate research and writing coordinated with the teaching of undergraduates. Students submit petition to sponsoring agency. The Staff

295. Directed Reading.
Systematic working through a prearranged bibliography which is filed as a final report at the end of the quarter with the signature of the instructor. Students submit petition to sponsoring agency. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

296. Special Student Seminar.
A seminar study group for graduate students focusing each quarter on various problems in the history of consciousness. A statement and evaluation of the work done in the course will be provided each quarter by the students who have participated in the course for that quarter, and reviewed by the responsible faculty. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

297. Independent Study.
Independent study and research under faculty supervision. Students submit petition to sponsoring agency. The Staff

298. Doctoral Colloquium.
Under the supervision of a History of Consciousness faculty member, students finishing their dissertation meet weekly or bi-weekly to read and discuss selected draft chapters, design difficulties and composition problems. May be repeated for credit. The Staff

299. Thesis Research.
Prerequisite(s): advancement to candidacy. May be repeated for credit. The Staff



Fousesquawk comment: While some of the above courses seem benign on the surface, who knows what is put out in the classroom? Others are pretty obvious as to their content.

What is going on at UCSC? From reading the above, it looks like everybody up there is smoking their socks-and teaching the students that everything about America and Western Civilization is EVIL. Whoever dreamed up these departments anyway- Queer Studies, Community Studies, and History of Consciousness?

Is there any question but that the agenda of UC Santa Cruz is to turn out a bunch of little leftist graduates?

Economic Jealousy and Anti-Semitism

Nazi caricature of Jews
(Borse-Stock Exchange. Geld-money)


I've been writing a lot lately about the the rise in anti-Semitism brought to the surface by the fighting in Gaza. I genuinely feel that we are seeing a rise in anti-Jewish feeling in North America and Canada-even in Venezuela, where Hugo Chavez has jumped into the Middle East mess and stirred up anti-Semitic feeling against his small Jewish community. It seems to me that people are starting to say things publicly that I hadn't heard for a long time-the idea that Jews are all-powerful and to blame for a myriad of problems in the world. Now it's the financial crisis.

Yes, according to some folks (largely in the Middle East), the financial crisis we are facing and the failure of the banks is all the fault of the Jews. Why? Simple. Look at the names: Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke-and don't forget Bernie Madoff! Why it seems that when you look at the big financiers, bank presidents etc, all you see is Jews-according to these voices.

What we are witnessing is the revival of the old canard that the wealth of the world is controlled by -----Jews.

And don't forget Hollywood. All those big producers and studio heads? They are mostly Jews (albeit liberal Jews). The names that immediately come to mind are Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffry Katzenberg.

And as would be chairman of the National Intelligence Council, Charles Freeman reminded us-there is a big pro-Israel lobby out there (Jews) that submarined his job (Actually, it was mostly Nancy Pelosi that did him in over controversial pro-China statements he had made.)

And what about those (pro-Israel) "Neo-Cons" who pushed for a strong, pro-Israel Middle East policy (Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and David Wurmser)?

Conservative radio-talk show host Michael Medved, himself a practicing Jew, was recently involved in a conversation over the air regarding the predominance of Jews in the high levels of Hollywood studios. Medved made the point that rather than be embarrassed or defensive about it, Jewish people should feel proud that so many Jews have reached the pinnacles of the motion picture industry. They did it by hard work and should not have to feel ashamed.

Similarly, why should Jews have to apologize for the fact that they have done so well in the banking industry? They did it the same way the Hollywood moguls did it-through hard work, ingenuity and talent. Just because a scoundrel named Madoff came along shouldn't cast a shadow on the others. (Madoff's victims were virtually all Jewish). People like Greenspan and Bernanke are honorable men.

The fact is that Jews have reached the high positions they hold because of their own hard work and talent. They are also successful in medicine and law. To me, it all boils down to the fact that Jewish people value education and hard work. As a result they rise into the best professions of our society.

Are we to resent the fact that American Jews do well in their lives? That is nothing more than simple jealousy. If they appear to be over-represented in a particular profession, I say, "so what?" It's not like the profession is closed to me.

Similarly, are we supposed to resent the fact that we see so many Asian-American students on our university campuses especially in the California state system? Why is this? It is because their culture insists on getting a good education. If they are running circles around the rest of us, maybe we (including us white folks) should look ourselves in the mirror and ask why we are not doing better. To me, the the fact that the majority of students at UC Irvine are Asian-American is great. They are serious students who don't join in the radical nonsense; they are too busy studying and enjoying their college experience.

You also hear a lot of voices complaining about the jobs that Mexican immigrants (legal or illegal) are taking away from Americans. There is a lot of validity in this, but let's acknowledge the fact that Mexicans (contrary to the old stereotype) are hard-working people who quickly learn a variety of manual skills. I marvel at their ability to work with their hands, something I never became any good at. Of course, since Mexicans tend to come to this country poor, they start out at the lower end of the economic scale. Assuming they remain (legally), the hope is that their children will go on to higher education and enter the other professions as well. That would be true assimilation.

But back to the Jews. I use the above examples to try and make my point. Let's don't be jealous of any group that attains success in America. As long as it is done legally, it should be respected and applauded. Nobody ever kept me out of law school because I wasn't Jewish. The reason I am not a banker has nothing to do with the fact that I am a Gentile. The reason I never became a studio head has nothing to do with the fact that I am a Gentile. (Actually, my father was a unit production manager at several famous studios. He got me a job as a grip one summer at Sam Goldwyn Studios. I hated it.)

Economic jealousy is a powerful and dangerous form of jealousy. (and don't overlook the class envy many of our leaders push even today.) It has haunted Jews in the past in places like tsarist Russia and Germany under Hitler. It is still present. The Israel-Palestinian conflict has unleashed some ugly sentiments against Jews far removed from the Middle East, first, over their perceived universal support for Israel, and now, once again, fingers at being pointed at Jews for other reasons.

Many of these old canards have been brought back to life in the Middle East (where Mein Kampf remains a best-seller to this day), and have spread back to Europe and America through their western-based spokespeople, many of whom are in our universities as students and professors, aided by the usual anti-American leftists who infest our institutions of higher learning. This new form of Jew hatred must be repudiated by all decent people in the West. We know all too well from history where this kind of talk leads to.

And as for who is to blame in this financial crisis, there are many places we can point the finger to in banking, politics and other institutions. However, it has nothing to do with religion, race or any other ethnic factor. We have all been losers, and we are all in this together. Any suggestion that The Jews are too blame for this mess is absurd on its face and should be repudiated.

Mrs Sidney Williams (Maxine Waters) and Conflict of Interest

Mrs Sidney Williams aka Maxine Waters (D-CA)


Maxine Waters (D-CA) is one of the most obnoxious of all the people serving in Congress. This is the woman who tried to make a case that the CIA had deliberately helped smuggle drugs into the inner city of Los Angeles in order to poison black people. This is the woman who interceded in a DEA investigation involving a Houston-based rap producer-who just happened to be a childhood friend of Waters' husband, Sidney Williams. According to today's Orange County Register, Waters interceded last year with the US Treasury Department to help a company linked to her husband.

According to the article (p 5), Waters called for a meeting last year between bank regulators and minority bank representatives of OneUnited Bank, in which the representatives asked for 50 million dollars in bailout funds. This is the same Massachusetts bank that Rep Barney Frank has recently lobbied on behalf of.

During the September 2008 meeting, Waters failed to mention that her husband, Mr Williams, had served on the bank's board of directors and has owned "at least $250,000 of stock in it." The article quoted one of the former Treasury officials, Jeb Mason, a former deputy asst secretary of the Treasury Dept.

..."They should have least let us know" (about the relationship),said Mason to the New York Times.

Although OneUnited did not get the $50 million, it did receive $12 million from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), according to the OC Register article. (That $12million came courtesy of the efforts of-you guessed it-Barney Frank.)

However, I am sure there was no connection with Maxine Waters and her husband. What say you, Mr Frank? What say you, Ms Waters?

Charles Manson Withdraws from Obama Cabinet Post

This morning, Charles Manson withdrew his name from consideration for the post of Special Assistant to the President Without Portfolio in the Obama Administration citing malicious rumors about his past and needing to spend more time with "his Family". The President accepted Manson's resignation "with regret" while wishing him success in his future endeavors. This latest withdrawal continues a string of similar withdrawals plaguing the Administration in its on-going efforts to fill government posts.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs blamed the Manson problem on a "bureaucratic snafu" related to the vetting process. Apparently, there were no records available for Manson prior to 1970, making the vetting process more difficult.

"Mistakes were made", said Gibbs.

According to an FBI spokesman, the Bureau was unable to find anything in Manson's background. "We checked back almost 40 years, said the spokesman. "His record was clean."

Manson, in announcing his withdrawal, blasted the "Republican Smear Machine" and unnamed special interests for spreading rumors about his past prior to 1970. Asked about his plans, Manson said that he will return to his home in California, where he will continue working on the issues that matter to America (like prison reform, prison overcrowding, prison food etc).

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expressed sadness that Manson was being denied an opportunity to continue "his great record of public service to America." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was unavailable for comment as she was flying somewhere on her own government jet. (Where was she flying to? Nobody knows..... She even doesn't know.)

Finally, Vice President Joe Biden said.......forget it-you don't want to know.

Random Shots in the Dark (12)

Now that Barack Obama has been president for 50 days, it's time to give him his tentative grade-F. Is there anyone else out there that still thinks this guy is The Messiah?

That's right. The economy, which all yee suckers told us Obama would fix, is tanking worse than ever. The stock market has dropped 3,000 points since he was elected. His Secretary of the Treasury, Tim (Turbo-Tax-Cheat) Tim Geithner, who Obama told us had to be confirmed immediately, is running around like a turkey with its nuts cut off and doing nothing. Meanwhile, everybody else Obama has nominated has had to drop out for one reason or another (something about not paying taxes or being on the dole from countries like Saudi Arabia and China). The latter case is a guy named Charles (Saudi Doody) Freeman, who is blaming that "pro-Israel cabal" for having to step down from his post as Chairman of the National Intelligence Council.

"Hi! I'm Saudi Doody. I was going to be the Chairman of the National Intelligence Council until those #@%&%$#*s did me in."


Spending? You bet'cha. Now Obama's signing a 410 billion earmark-laden spending bill even though he told us he wanted no part of earmarks. What was that about going line through line to eliminate wasteful government spending? Well, when you have 8,500 lines to go through, that a lot of work, isn't it?

"That's a lotta pork!"

And don't forget the $900 million for Gaza.


Then there is Obama's great choice for Secretary of State, Miss Obnoxious Herself, Hellary Clinton, who is flying off around the world pissing off one country after another. I confess I get a bit of Scadenfreude watching all these people around the world finding out that Mrs Clinton is nothing but a colossal jerk, something we Americans could have told them two decades ago. She just told a bunch of Palestinian schoolkids about how they're going to live in peace in a two-state solution with the Israelis-the same people their teacher and Mickey Mouse said they were supposed to kill.

"Next stop Canada, where we can piss off our "Little Brothers".


If you watch Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" show, you would think somebody forgot to tell him that George W Bush is no longer president. Now Keith and his "legal expert", Johnathan Turley are on a two-man campaign to get Bush declared a dictator and indicted as a war criminal. And speaking of MSNBC, somebody should put a cheerleader's dress on Chris Matthews when he goes on the air and says anything about Obama. When Ann Coulter came to speak at UC-Irvine last year, she referred to him as "the semen-splattered Chris Matthews" (as university officials squirmed in their seats). I couldn't agree more. Now that Matthews has made his infamous, "Oh God" comment about Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, a Matthews-Olbermann political event coverage is more like watching tag-team wrastlers in action.

That's right.

Great to know that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd are taking the lead in cleaning up this mortgage mess-that they did so much to create. It's like asking a horse to clean up his own droppings. And Frank wants to see people indicted, does he? We can start with him and half of his financial committee. It was he and his co-conspirators who got us into this mess by forcing banks to loan to everybody but Charles Manson while protecting Fannie Mae "...under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines" (Maxine Waters quote)-and Freddie Mac.

That's right.

Meanwhile in California, our so-called Republicans made a back-room deal with the tax-happy Democrats to give us the highest state tax raise in US history-even though we already pay the highest income, sales and gas taxes in the nation. And to pay for what? Illegal alien services and state employee unions, that's what. And don't forget the "Octomom", that loopity-loop woman who lives in a shoe with her 14 kids. Her "personal choices" are now going to be funded by the tax-payers.

"You should respect my choices"


Meanwhile our Strongman Governor and his wife are spending more tax-payer dollars making TV ads to get people to "Kom to Kalifornia". They're coming all right. Illegal aliens by the millions while everybody else is leaving in droves unable to deal with the taxes and regulations.

But there is good news:

For you Cleveland Browns fans-that's the football team in Pittsburgh. They are called the Steelers, and they won the Super Bowl-again.

Islamophobia -What is it?

Since I have been periodically accused of being Islamophobic, I thought it might be a good idea to examine the term and try to define it while engaging in a little self-introspection myself. I am fully aware that as much as I decry anti-Semitism-largely by Muslim voices-that I lose credibility if I engage in a similar sentiment against Muslims in general.

The dictionary term for phobia ranges from a fear of something to a strong dislike of something. In everyday English, we use the two definitions pretty much interchangeably, but there is a strong difference when we are talking about fellow human beings. For example, I have a phobia for high places and sharks. Yet, I don't feel hatred in my heart for sharks.

So what exactly does it mean if a person is Islamophobic, and is it a damning label to put on a person considering the situation in the world today and the undeniable behavior of many (but not all) Muslims?

First, let's take the issue of fear. When I was a kid, I had a healthy fear of the schoolyard bullies. It didn't mean I was a hateful person. Similarly, are there places in the world where non-Muslims live in fear of Muslims? Undoubtedly, there are. Take the Ba'hai believers in Iran, who are truly persecuted by the Muslim majority. How about Jews, what few are left in the Middle East (that were not driven out)? What about Europeans, Jew or non-Jew who fear wandering into a Muslim precinct in a major European city, like Malmo, London or Paris? Are they to be condemned for being racist or Islamophobic because they have a genuine fear of Muslim militants? What about Americans after 9-11? I think some degree of fear is justified given the things that are going on in the world today. I choose not to be afraid here in America or when I go to Europe, but that's just me.

This leads to the next question: Are we here in the West anti-Muslim per se? Or how about in India in the wake of Mumbai? Are we afflicted with the curse of racism, in this case a dislike or hatred of Muslims due to world events? Let's not forget that until about 1970, we in America never gave the Muslim world a thought, did we?

This takes us to one central question: Do we have a problem with the Islamic religion-as a religion- or only as a political ideology? I do maintain that aside from being a religion, Islam is also a political ideology. It is a faith that by its own definition is designed to govern every aspect of a person's life. It is a faith that seems to believe in a political system of theocracy-though countries like Turkey have been able to resist that idea. This is what the whole idea of Shariah law is about.

As a religion per se, I think most people have split thinking on that point. On the one point, Americans traditionally believe in freedom of religion. Historically, we have pretty much gotten it right in that regard. Today, there are Islamic mosques all over the country. When it comes to the religion itself, few of us have any problem with people praying to the same God we do-if it's five times a day, all the more reason to respect it. If Muslims are devout to the point that their religion is the central point of their lives, that is to be respected as well. Islamic standards of modesty and chastity applied to their women including the hijab are no problem as long as the women choose to follow those rules. We can respect that.

Yet, there are certain aspects of the religion that we see in the Koran, the life of the Prophet Mohammed, and references to non-Muslims that we find disturbing. Yet, if a Muslim is willing to live peacefully side by side with non-Muslims in mutual respect-as millions are-then we can deal with that as long as they don't encroach on our own free societies. When it comes to issues of stoning women for adultery, real or perceived, or violent jihad, then we need to stand firm and defend our values and our freedoms in our own countries.

I think a good analogy would be to go back to when we were fighting World War II against the Germans. We did not feel we were fighting against the German people, rather we were fighting against the Nazi ideology. Anyone who has met and dealt with a number of Muslims knows that there are many who want to live in peace with other peoples. They must be encouraged, welcomed and supported.

When it comes to Islam itself, the real danger that we perceive is Islam as a political ideology that many of its adherents feel they need to impose on the rest of the world. The imposition of Islam-or any religion as a theocracy-is antithetical to the values of American and Western freedom and must be resisted at all costs. Today, there is no attempt by any religion-except Islam-to impose itself as a theocracy. Even in the Jewish state of Israel, other religions, including Islam, enjoy complete freedom of practice.

Aside from the obvious problem of Islamic terrorism and other related violence, it is undeniable that many Muslims in the West-especially in Western Europe- are not behaving in a manner befitting immigrants. That is not to say that all Muslim immigrants to the West are guilty of this. I have lived 8 years in Europe and go back every couple of years. I know that not all Muslims in the West are behaving badly. Yet, there is a significant element-especially in the UK-that is behaving atrociously. They are completely alienating themselves from the native populations. When I see images of British Muslims rioting in the streets, advocating violence, hurling insults at British troops returning from Iraq, I feel a sense of outrage. When I see American Muslims whether native born or immigrants, using anti-Semitic language directed at American Jews, I feel outraged. When I see the Muslim Student Associations on American universities bringing in speakers who not only condemn Israel, but America as well, I ask myself whose side they are on. And on that topic, let's be brutally frank. It is undeniable that many Muslims are driven by hatred toward those who are different from them.

Which begs the question: Are we suspicious of Muslims in the West? Let's be honest. Most of us are to a great extent. Many Americans have come to the conclusion that Islam is anything but a religion of peace. But does that mean that we are to reject and hate every Muslim we come into contact with? No. I interact with Muslims every day. I have no reason to feel negatively about them. I still believe that most Muslims can put aside teachings in the Koran that would put them at odds with Western values in the interest of living in harmony. For those who cannot, there is no place for them in our society.

Muslims and non-Muslims in the West must come to an understanding. Our tradition is to respect other religions and allow them to be practiced freely. Yet, it must be clearly understood that we in the West are rightfully concerned about terrorism and militant Islam. We will never give up our freedoms in the name of placating a minority religion-or a majority religion for that matter. Those that envision Shariah law in America will never achieve their goal. We will never tolerate so-called "honor killings" or any other practice that goes against our laws and constitutional rights. On that, there can be no compromise. If the Europeans choose to compromise their freedoms, shame on them. We will not.

For Muslims living in the West, the choice is theirs. They can become part of our society and accept our values, or they can live isolated and alienated from the mainstream, which clearly is not in their interest. I think they can do the former without giving up their religion or accepting our obvious vices. For those who choose to live in harmony and mutual respect, I would hope they are not subjected to "Islamophobia", if that is the correct term. However, for those who choose to spit in our eye, so to speak, Islamophobia is what they will encounter. As long as that Islamophobia is restricted to the haters, the militants, the terrorists, the Jihadists or whatever term you care to use, and not applied to decent, peaceful Muslims, I see no need to apologize for it.

The Employee "Free Choice" Act- Here it Comes

"Whadda ya mean youse don't wanna sign da union card?"


Now that the Democrats in Congress have introduced the so-called "Employee Freedom of Choice Act"-which will quickly take away employees' rights of free choice as to whether or not to join a union, here's what we can expect.

First of all, it looks like with the Democrats in control of Congress and President Obama and Vice-President Biden solidly behind this fraud, it is going to become reality.

This is the so-called "card-check system" that I have previously written about. Under this act, if unions can get a majority of employee signatures, the union would be certified without a secret election (unless 30% of employees ask for a secret ballot). The signatures would be gathered by "Vinnie and Sluggo" paying a call on employees "asking" them to check the card in favor of unionization.

Get it?

So, under this system, if an employee refuses to check the card for union representation, he just might find his tires slashed the next day at work. Obviously, this card check system will result in a dramatic increase in union power regardless of how individual workers feel about the idea. They will be forced into a position of choosing whether to stand up against an institution that is notorious for corruption and worker intimidation.

Of course, everybody in Congress with half a brain knows this. For the Democrats, however, this is part of the strategy. They know that the unions are solidly in the Democratic column. Therefore, the bigger the unions are, the more member dues they can count on being sent to Democratic coffers in the form of union contributions. Currently, union members account for a small percentage of the total American work force. The Democrats obviously want to change that. They see this as a method of rigging the system to ensure the dominance of their party into the foreseeable future.

This is a dispicable act that, like many other government bills, has the audacity to use a title that is the exact opposite of what it truly represents. What this should be called is the "Union Thug Act".

So you non-union workers get ready. The next time you see some burly guy with a baseball bat approaching your work station, it won't be Barry Bonds or Mark McGuire.

Another Resignation From Obama's Team

Who are these people?

a baseball fans leaving a ballpark in the 1930s
b car buyers checking out a used car lot
c people at an antique car show
d Obama government appointees dropping out


Yesterday, Charles Freeman resigned his post as chairman of the National Intelligence Council only hours after National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told a Senate committee that he stood behind him (Freeman).

Freeman had been appointed as chair of the council responsible for producing objective and non-partisan intelligence estimates based on information and analysis from the national intelligence agencies.

Yet, Freeman's background suggested that his recommendations would be less than objective. Freeman, formerly US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, has been a critic not only of Israel, but of the war in Iraq as well as the war on terror. In addition, Freeman served as president of the Middle East Policy Council, which had received funding from Saudi Arabia. As if that wasn't enough, Freeman is on the board of advisers to an oil company owned by the Chinese Government.

Well, I don't see why he wouldn't be an excellent choice for the position, do you?

Not surprisingly, several Republican lawmakers and a few Democrats had questioned Freeman's ability to be objective in the light of his past comments about the Israeli Government and his ties to other governments.

In announcing his resignation, Freeman huffily wrote, "I have concluded that the barrage of libelous distortions of my record would not cease upon my entry into office".

Libelous, Mr Freeman? You are a public figure serving in a government post closely tied to the public interest. I would suggest that the bar is pretty high for you to prove libel if you are indeed considering a lawsuit.

What to do with the Terrorists at Gitmo?

Today, it has been reported that accused 9-11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four co-defendants at Guantanemo Bay are pleading guilty to all charges.

But we're closing Gitmo. So what do we do now?


"Today's the day, Khalid. Call it. Heads or tails?

Tip of the hat to the great Don Martin.

What if They Held a Demonstration-and Nobody Reported it?

Governor Schwarzenegger's "head on a stick"

(Photos from John and Ken Show blog)


Isn't it interesting how the news media loves to cover demonstrations by the usual suspects on the far-left? You remember of course, the "million-man" marches, the illegal alien rallies in major cities? Front page news, right? Of course, ordinary citizens rarely if ever have protests and demonstrations. They don't have the time on their hands. You know, they have jobs, families to care for, they don't despise their country, so what is there to demonstrate against?

Well now, with the out of control government spending going on in Washington-and Sacramento for those of us who live in California-there is reason to demonstrate. We are in the process of being taxed to death. In California, what few Republicans we have in Sacramento have sold us out to the tax and spend Democrats. Now the most-heavily-taxed people in the US are facing huge increases in our taxes. Why? To cover for the huge deficit that Sacramento has rung up while taking care of its main constituent groups-illegal aliens and state worker unions.

Saturday, LA talk jocks, John Kobylt and Ken Champiou of KFI radio 640 (John and Ken Show) organized a tax revolt rally in Fullerton. People were encouraged to bring tea bags, as well as Arnold Schwarzenegger videos and DVDs which would be smashed to show people's disdain for this sell-out governor who let his wife, Maria Shriver of the Kennedy clan, drag him over to the tax and spend bunch of Sacramento Democrats.

And what a demonstration it was. An estimated 15,000 people showed up to voice their anger at the political system that is robbing them blind. With Kobylt and his bullhorn egging them on, people smashed Schwarzenegger memorabilia and cut off cardboard images of his head.

So one would think that this would gain huge media coverage, right?

Wrong.

True, the Orange County register put it on their front page. Not so the left-wing LA Times. They totally ignored it. When flooded with complaints from the public through their blog, an editor responded (via blog) that they did not consider it "relevent". They don't normally cover these types of protests, which they viewed as a promotional event to benefit John and Ken.

Yet the same day, the Times had a full page article devoted to a month-old event in Oregon in which school teachers demonstrated for a tax INCREASE!

One KFI listener called in afterward to John and Ken to report on the lack of coverage by the LA ABC affiliate (KABC). After being sluffed off by a newsroom person who took the call, she called back later and reported that a 1,000 man illegal immigrant demonstration was being held near her home. The person who took the call tried desperately to get the exact location so they could send a team of reporters to the scene-before being informed it was a spoof.

This is our mainstream media in action, folks. They pick and choose what they will report-and not report-based on their political agenda.

Tax revolts? Not interested.

UK Troops Returning from Iraq Face Insults in Luton

Today in Luton, England, British Troops returning from Iraq held a march through the downtown. Unfortunately, about 20 Muslim protesters marred the event insulting the troops and calling them names such as "baby killers". Tip of the hat for the videos goes to Atlas Shrugs and Hot Air.com.




Grateful British citizens thank their troops



Then there was this



And this



And this



And this



Finally, someone in the UK has had enough. Get that man's name. I want to buy him a pint.

Holocaust Remembrance Day in UK

This video shows what happens when British Jews in the UK attempt to commemorate the Holocaust on what is referred to as Holocaust Remembrance Day (January 27). What happens is that local Muslims desecrate the commemoration with their own demonstration. You will note in the trailer at the end that this video was produced by Muslims themselves. Yet, I choose to show it anyway because it is indicative of the total disrespect they show Jews in regard to the Holocaust. It is beyond disgust.

(Tip of the hat to Lionheart.)

My Speech Before ACT for America

Bridgette Gabriel-President and founder, ACT for America


Last night, I had the pleasure of speaking before the Mission Viejo chapter of ACT for America, Bridgette Gabriel's organization. The speech took place in Santa Ana. There were about 50 people present. The main focus of ACT is to alert the public on the spread of militant Islam into Western society and the threat to our basic freedoms that this poses. This is not an organization that is anti-Muslim people, rather it is opposed to militant Islam as an ideology. My speech focused on the rise of anti-Semitism that I see in the West as a result of the Israel-Palestinian conflict and the role played by academia.

In my presentation, which lasted 30 minutes, I spoke of the recent anti-Israel demonstrations that have taken place around the country, both in the streets and on campuses. I listed the anti-Semitic statements that have been shouted, such as "Long live Hitler" and Go back to the ovens". I also spoke about the activities of the various Muslim Student Associations on campuses like my own at UC-Irvine. I described some of the more vitriolic speakers who have appeared at UCI and the anti-Semitic statements they have made. I described the so-called "forums" held at UCI, UCLA and UC Santa Cruz, in which no one spoke for Israel. I also talked about the inaction of the various university administrations in the face of intimidation and harassment of Jewish students. I also described the fragmentation within the Jewish community in response to this increasing danger.

I think it is important to mention here that even before I took the floor, I heard several references to UCI from those in attendance, and they were not complimentary.

Celebrity Endorsements- Chris Brown for Clearisil

Hi folks, Chris Brown here for my friends at Clearisil.


You know, there's nothing I hate more than when one of my girlfriends has problems with her face. And you know what I'm talking about, don't you? But it's good to know there's a cure for those times when a little facial disfigurement comes along.



That's why I always recommend Clearisil to my girlfriends. Just take a big glob of Clearisil, rub it onto your face-all over-and let it sit there for a few weeks. Before you know it, your face will have that fresh, clear look again, and you'll be ready to get back with Chris and hit the night club circuit


...until that next outbreak, anyway. Then simply repeat the treatment.


(It even works for acne.)

Sweden Hosts Israel in the Davis Cup-Sort of

This week, Davis Cup tennis play featured Israel visiting Sweden in the southern city of Malmo. Unfortunately, the Israeli tennis players were treated as anything but guests. That is because Malmo is host to other "guests", their large immigrant population, mostly Muslim, and anything but good guests. Malmo's Muslim population, largely concentrated in the Rosengard section, has basically taken over the city. Periodically, they turn out on the streets to voice their displeasure with their host country-most recently during the Gaza fighting when they engaged in violent street protests.

Because of fears of violence, the Swedish authorities dictated that the tennis matches would be played in a near empty stadium. Only special guests could enter and watch the matches. Nevertheless, the protesters turned out in force on Saturday, throwing stones and incendiary devices at police and vandalizing their vans. Nine people were formally arrested and about 100 others detained.

You can view the festivities below:


http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/webbtv/artikel_2565305.svd


I am going to say this as carefully and diplomatically as I can. As an American, I am a big supporter of immigration (I am married to an immigrant). Our country needs new blood, especially from those who appreciate our liberties and want to contribute to our country, as most do. What I expect from immigrants is simple; they should come legally, stay legally, obey the laws, give their allegiance, assimilate, and adopt the values of the host country.

Is that asking too much?

Having said all that, what I see happening in places like Malmo and other cities in Europe is outrageous. I don't see why for the life of me, the Europeans are tolerating this. Why are these people not arrested, prosecuted and when the courts are done with them-deported back to where they came from? In Malmo, Swedes cannot enter certain parts of their own city. Ditto for the surrounding suburbs of Paris.
There are parts of London where British Jews dare not enter. In the Netherlands, a film maker was butchered to death on a public street, a prominent Muslim apostate has to live in hiding-as well as Dutch MP Geert Wilders-all for daring to criticize Islam.

Europe has not seen such a dark age since it was occupied by Nazi Germany. When does a self-respecting nation stand up and tell these troublemakers that if they can't obey the laws and respect the nation they have chosen to immigrate to-they can leave? This is precisely what Australian leaders have stated publicly. Why can't the Europeans?

AFL-CIO Fights for the Working Guy-at the Fontainebleau

Hotel Fontainebleau, Miami Beach

John Sweeney

"I'll have the roast quail a'la Pigalle and a bottle of the 1923 Chateau Lafitte du Boeuf..... burp"


Guess who's been down in Miami Beach gallivanting at the luxurious Hotel Fontainebleau this week? Big Labor, that's who. None other than the AFL-CIO has had their big convention in Miami Beach to figure out ways to fight for the Working Guy-you know, the unionized workers who pay their union dues so the AFL-CIO can funnel money to the Democratic Party-and allow their bosses like John Sweeney to hold conventions in places like Miami Beach.

Yesterday, none other than Vice-Boss Joe Biden ("Just Plain Joe") spoke at the convention and assured the union bosses that they had a friend in the White House. New Labor Secretary Hilda Solis spoke Monday night and wowed the crowd. She should. She is solidly pro-union. Now they can all get down to business and figure out ways to help the Working Guy (who will never afford the $400-a-night rooms at the Fontainebleau) like passing the card check system that will allow unions to get around that pesky secret ballot system for having union representation. If that passes Congress, which it probably will now that the Dems are in control, that average Working Guy will be paid a visit by Vinnie and Sluggo "asking" him to sign the card in their presence so that their union will be certified. Then someday all Working Guys (and Gals) will be unionized and John Sweeney and all the other bosses will be able to afford even nicer hotels for their future conventions dedicated to figuring out more ways to help the Working Guy (and Gal).

Burp.

Howard Dean as Surgeon General?

News item: Reuters is reporting that Howard Dean is under consideration by the Obama Administration to become Surgeon General.

Durban II- Obama Makes the Correct Decision

Boycott Durban II from ICEJ USA on Vimeo.



In deciding to pull out of Durban II, President Obama has made the correct call even if he hesitated and took longer than he should have to decide. Nevertheless, this critic is going to give him credit when he does the right thing.

Italy has also taken the lead among European nations in boycotting this absurd conference, whose only objectives are to condemn Israel as a racist state and make it a world-wide crime to say anything that might be construed as insulting to Islam.

Hopefully, the other European countries will stop their dithering and take a stand for righteousness. At this point, we are still waiting for The Netherlands, the UK, France and Germany to make their decisions.

I am especially watching Germany due to their unique history and relationship with Israel. Many European observers are of the opinion that Germany has evolved into the most decent country in Europe-precisely because of its past. I agree with that assessment, and I hope Germany won't disappoint me.

This whole conference is a disgusting farce and only brings further discredit to the long-discredited United Nations.

The Middle East For Dummies

There is an interesting article in today's Orange County Register about the crisis in Darfur. On Wednesday, the International Criminal Court indicted Sudan's president Omar al-Bashir for war crimes. In response to the indictment, al-Bashir has kicked 13of the largest aid organizations out of the country further worsening the situation for the people of Darfur. According to the report, over one million people will now face a lack of food, water and medical supplies. One would think that this monster al-Bashir has no friends and supporters.

Think again.

As all this was taking place, al-Bashir's local supporters in Khartoum were chanting, "Jihad" and "With our souls and our blood, we will sacrifice ourselves for you, al-Bashir." (The Khartoum government is dominated by Islamic fundamentalists.)

But surely, al-Bashir couldn't possibly have any support outside of Sudan, right?

Think again.

As all this was taking place, a delegation of well-wishers was visiting Khartoum and pledging their support for al-Bashir. Said delegation was made up of the following "dignitaries".

First of all, the friendly folks of Hamas sent their deputy leader Moussa Abu Marzouk. Hezbollah in Lebanon sent one of their "top officials", Palestinian Islamic Jihad sent their top boss, whoever that is, and Syria sent their parliament speaker, whoever that is.


Hamas


Hezbollah



But that's not all.

Iran also sent its parliament speaker, one Ali Larijani (whoever he is) to pay homage to the man who has sent his Arab militiamen to kill and rape as many of the ethnic Africans in Darfur as they can. Larijani said that the arrest warrant for al-Bashir is "an insult directed at Muslims".



By the way, you remember Iran, don't you?

Yes, this is a country that has come a long way in the 30 years since they took power from the Shah and turned the country over to a bunch of fanatical mullahs. From the Ayatollah Khomeini, they have now progressed to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who promises to wipe Israel off the face of the map. In addition, Iran has resolved that pesky gay marriage issue in their own special way.


As Ahmadinejad said himself recently, there are no (more) gays in Iran.

So, for you "dummies" who can't figure out the good guys from the bad guys, ask yourselves why Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Syria and Iran would line up to voice their support for a genocidal leader in the Sudan who has given the world Darfur

Because they are the bad guys, that's why.

The Chandry Levy Murder-Another Illegal Alien Gang Member

Chandra Levy


Chandra Levy, the young Washington DC worker who was murdered years ago, may now finally find justice. Police have charged Ingmar Guandique of El Salvador with the crime. Guandique, who was serving time in California for related offenses had reportedly bragged about having committed the murder. Shortly after Levy went missing, Guandique was arrested in the same area of Washington DC for two different assaults on two other women. Yet, as expected, the mainstream news media is playing down a significant angle of the story.

First of all, Guandique is in the US illegally. Secondly, if his body is any clue, he is a member of the notorious Salvadoran gang, MS-13 (he has numerous gang-related tattoos including at least one that identifies him as an MS-13 member.

Why was Guandique allowed to remain in the US? As a result of the earthquakes in El Salvador in 2001 which killed thousands of people, President Bush, acting on a request by the Salvadoran president, issued a special exemption to Salvadoran immigrants allowing them to remain in the US-even if here illegally. Guandique applied for the exemption but was eventually denied such exemption because he never submitted fingerprints.

On May 7, 2001, only six days after Levy had gone missing, Guandique was arrested by DC police for breaking into a woman's home on the edge of Rock Creek park (where Levy's remains were found.)

Though the man could not furnish sufficient documentation to identify himself, a judge released Guandique on his "personal promise" to return for trial. The judge obtained Guandique's promise that he would verify his address with the court and "Refrain from committing any criminal offense."

In the ensuing weeks, Guandique attacked two other women in Rock Creek Park. Both of them managed to escape. On the second occasion, July 1, he was captured by police. This time, he was not released. In February 2002, he was sentenced to two concurrent sentences of 10 years for the two attacks in Rock Creek Park.

So here we have yet another case of an American citizen murdered (allegedly) by an illegal alien gang member-yet another monument to our government's negligence in enforcing our immigration laws. One wonders when it will end.

What's the Hubbub Over Rush Limbaugh?

One can't turn on the radio or TV these days without hearing all about this big fuss over Rush Limbaugh's remarks about Barack Obama. Limbaugh, as is his wont, has again stirred up the liberal hornet's nest by stating that he wanted Barack Obama to fail. From Harry Reid to Keith Olbermann, the reaction has been predictable.

Olbermann, last night on his "Countdown" show (which should be changed to "Meltdown"), even implied that Rush should be taken off the air. Of course, in Olbermann's perfect world, that is precisely what would happen-and may happen yet if the Democrats in Congress pass that Fairness Doctrine they are so fond of. Reid would probably write another letter to Limbaugh's producers, but he knows what would happen there. (It would be sold for charity on E-bay and make Reid look like a fool again.) At any rate, it seems the liberals in the media can't stop talking about it. They even "discuss" it on Barbra Walters' "Four Views Against One" show in the morning as Elizabeth Hasselbeck tries to get a sentence in while four liberals talk over her at the same time.

Here is my take on the whole imbroglio:

First of all, Limbaugh has repeatedly stated that what he wants is for Obama's economic policy to fail because it will bring in socialism and destroy the nation's economy. Limbaugh is trying to make the case that the public should reject it.

Second of all, Limbaugh is once again playing the liberal left media like a violin. He pushes the buttons, they explode, and he laughs all the way to the bank-same as Ann Coulter does when she pushes their buttons.

You see, people like Limbaugh, Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Dr Phil (McGraw) and Dr Laura (Schlesinger) are not successful because everybody loves them. They realize that is impossible. They are successful because half the people love them while the other half hate them. In other words, everybody is paying attention to them. They know this, and they play up to that reality. Why do you think Rush makes outlandish statements he knows will upset those on the left? Why do you think he plays the tongue-in-cheek role of the conceited, cigar-smoking, sexist self-aggrandizer? His fans know it is a form of humor. His enemies think it is real, and it makes them explode in fury.

Nevertheless, liberals see this latest flap as yet another opening to discredit and destroy a man who articulates the conservative cause better than anybody else. They know he has a huge following and is extremely influential. Why else would they make a big to do over the momentary flap between Rush and RNC Chairman Michael Steele?

As you watch all these liberals in Congress and the media fume over Limbaugh, just consider just how stupid it makes them all look.

UC Santa Cruz Postpones its Anti-Israel Bash

UC Santa Cruz mascot (It's a banana slug)


Reference is made to my March 3 posting entitled, "The Bias at UC Santa Cruz" which described this week's forum dedicated to bashing Israel. Strangely, it has been postponed until further notice. Reason? One of the featured speakers has reportedly cancelled his or her engagement.

"EVENT CANCELED - Rescheduled Date TBD

Understanding Gaza, a student-initiated event originally scheduled
for 3/5 at College Nine and College Ten, has been canceled due to
the schedule of our primary speaker.

Further information will be forthcoming. Please spread the word.
Our apologies for any inconvenience.

Wendy Baxter
ACAO, Cocurricular and College Programs
College Ten: Social Justice and Community
College Nine: International and Global Perspectives
University of California, Santa Cruz
1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064"

Here's my reaction: There were two featured speakers, both anti-Israel. If one of them bowed out, seems to me UCSC could have easily dug up another Israel-basher from its own faculty to step in. Was there another reason? Was UCSC receiving complaints beyond those already registered by professor Ilan Benjamin?

If the latter was a reason, I would not applaud the idea of censorship. However, I do applaud the idea of an awakened public holding a university's feet to the fire and demanding a more balanced approach to issues-especially as they affect the education of our children. At any rate, that is all hypothetical since the university has given a different reason for its postponement. (It's rather difficult to penetrate those hallowed halls of ivy, you know.)

"Go Banana Slugs"

Fousesquawk Global Warming Poll-The Results

It's official, folks. The polls have closed, the final numbers are in, and the people have spoken.

On the question of whether Global Warming is real-or just a bunch of hooey, the final count is as follows:

Hooey 1
Real 0

(What do you think this is-The Huffington Post?)

For you Cleveland Browns fans, in percentages, that would be:

Hooey-1000%
Real-0%

That, of course, is well beyond the margin of error of + or - 3%.

So now that public opinion is so clear on this point, maybe we can get on to more important issues.


"You needed a poll?"

Let's Play, "Name That Jury!"

The above scene is a US Federal Court in Washington, in which Louie "the louse" Snodgrass is standing trial on income tax evasion charges before a jury of his PEERS.

And the jurors are: Ron Kirk, Hilda Solis, Tom Daschle, Tim Geithner, Nancy Killefer, Bill Richardson......

Defense attorney to Louie: "Don't worry Louie, we got a great jury."


(News item: Ron Kirk, former Dallas Mayor, who is designated US Trade Representative, must pay about $10,000 in back taxes. The White House says it is a minor matter and Kirk is "on track" to be confirmed.)

One wonders what Kirk will be "trading"-favors?

York University President's Statement on the Events of February 11

York University President Mamdouh Shoukri

Below is the text of a speech by York President Mamdouh Shoukri to the University Senate in response to the events of February 11, 2009 at York University. On February 11, a mob of about 100 pro-Palestinian students chased a large group of Jewish students into the Hillel building on campus where they remained barricaded until police could escort them out amid a chorus of insults from the mob.

As a result of the incident, 4 campus organizations were suspended-2 of which were Jewish organizations (Hasbara and Hillel). Then, two weeks after the incident, President Shoukri speaks.


"Good afternoon. My remarks today will not be the usual variety of university news and topics, because the state of our affairs here at York is not usual, nor is it sustainable. I want to speak to you today about the future of our University.



We are all here today because we believe in York. We believe in what it stands for: accessibility to the very best education, equity, social justice. We believe that this place has great strengths and even greater potential. No other university in Ontario — maybe in Canada — has the potential that York has. But before we can realize that potential, before we can build the York University of the future, we must address the shared challenges we face, as well as the threats to this institution that are holding us back.



There’s a lot of good work happening here, but it’s being overshadowed by recent events. York is at a critical point in its history and we need to change. We need to address the issues that threaten our institution and our academic reputation. As the University’s academic governing body, I call on you to rise to this challenge and to help deliver the change York needs.



We have just endured the longest university strike in the history of English-speaking Canada. Our students have returned to class and to examinations, only to be faced with a barrage of disruption, hostility and even intimidation from their fellow students. This state of affairs is unacceptable to me, and it should be unacceptable to you. Intimidation, bullying, and discrimination will not be tolerated here, and we are taking action to protect the rights and the safety of all students and staff.



If these challenges were not enough, the world is entering the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Tens of thousands of our fellow Canadians are losing their jobs. Parents have told me what a struggle it is to send their children to university; students have told me how difficult it is to juggle part-time jobs with their education and how worried they are about their prospects for summer jobs.



The Government of Ontario has put us on notice that it will be looking for savings in university operating grants. Along with most other universities, our endowment payouts — which benefit students and faculty directly — are dwindling. Our budgets — which were already being cut by two per cent per annum — will have to be cut further. Our pensions are facing a shortfall and will have to be topped up to meet our legal obligations. The strike has cost us many millions of dollars in direct costs. The costs in lost opportunities cannot be measured. Our applications are down 10 per cent, our first-choice applications are down 15 per cent.



The academic budget is under unprecedented pressure, and that pressure will only increase. We’re still working through the details, and we need to do further consultations with the Deans on cuts in the academic units, but it’s clear that tough choices will have to be made in every unit and department on both the academic and administrative sides.



At this point, we’ve identified targeted cuts to the administrative side of the University. Cuts totaling more than $10 million over two years that will help offset some of the pressure have already been applied on the administrative side. We have deferred important infrastructure projects, and senior university administrators have voluntarily accepted a salary freeze at the 2008/09 level.

The point is that we’re in this together — every part of this University is feeling the pain.



We hope to provide the community with an update in late spring, once the budget for 2009-10 has been further developed. And we need the community’s ideas on how to maintain the quality of faculty and students as we make tough decisions on the budget.



But at a time when our community should be pulling together, we turn on each other instead — academic disruption, intimidation, sit-ins, name-calling, shouting people down, banging on the doors and windows of Senate or the Board of Governors or student clubs. Then we run to the media and tell anyone who will listen how bad York is.



Is it any wonder our own students are disconnected? Or that turnout at our student elections is so low? Or that our students and their families are voting with their feet? Our public face is not demonstrating the core values a university should stand for:



Freedom of speech – especially for those with whom we disagree
Mutual Respect
Reason
Discourse
Objectivity
Being able to teach — and learn — without disruption
Being open to other ideas and other people.
And yes, social justice.


But we cannot demand social justice only for ourselves and for those who think like us. Social justice is for everyone, or it is for no one. York has a history of social activism, but the events of the past weeks — intimidation and shouting each other down — have nothing to do with social activism.



That is why I am asking you today, as Senators and key representatives of the academy, to make your voices heard and say, “enough is enough.”

I want to give a couple of examples of how the academy can contribute to open dialogue on tough issues. At other universities in this province, faculty members participate as guest speakers at lecture series organized by student clubs. These events tackle the very same issues we are struggling with:



Islamophobia
Anti-Semitism
Racial profiling
Overcoming stereotypes


The goal is not agreement or endorsement of each others’ ideas, it is to create safe spaces where people can come together to articulate their views — without fear and without being shouted down.



I’ll give you another example happening right here at York. Next week, the York Centre for International and Security Studies is hosting an event that will examine the idea of academic boycotts. Speakers will explore the topic in a reasoned way in an academic forum. These two examples share one common element: faculty involvement.



Our faculty needs to become more involved in leading these conversations. Students look up to their professors. They look to you for direction. You are in a position to mentor and guide them and to teach them how to talk with passion about things that anger us, but without anger, without hate, without fear. I am asking you to help us fix our community, because this truly is our problem.



We talk a lot about diversity here at York, but somehow we have allowed that diversity to divide us. We need to focus now on unity, on our common values and on what makes us a community. We must identify the challenges and work as a community to address them.



We talk about educating citizens of the world and about developing critical thinkers, but we must do more. We must teach a sense of responsibility so that our graduates can contribute to the life of their times.



I believe we have two major tasks ahead of us.



Our highest priority is to protect the quality of the academic experience on campus. That means protecting the quality of our teaching and research, the quality of our faculty, and the quality of our academic resources — libraries, labs, and infrastructure — in a very difficult budgetary situation. Realizing that additional budget cuts will be needed, we are mindful of the need to ensure that these cuts will not compromise the future of our academic enterprise.



While developing the next phase of our Integrated Resource Planning project, we have started an initiative to help our decision making in the short-term aimed at:



· Reviewing the current budget allocation model

· Identifying the percentage of our budget that is allocated to the academic enterprise and bench-marking it against that of other universities, and

· Providing alternative models that ensure linking the budget allocations or cuts to our academic priorities. The results of this project will inform our decision making in the short term.



To move forward on protecting and advancing our academic enterprise in this difficult time we need your ideas.



The other priority is an urgent need to commit ourselves to fixing the way we relate to each other. We must build trust, deal with each other in good faith, and communicate in an open and honest way. We must replace the tension and negativity with reasoned dialogue, so that we can talk to each other and to the wider world.



I have also heard from the community that we need to explore the fundamental issues underlying our labour relations. We will have a task force on relationships on campus once arbitration is resolved in late spring.



These are our two urgent tasks: enhancing and protecting the academic enterprise at a time of extreme financial restraint, and fixing the way we relate to each other. These are difficult at the best of times, but these are not the best of times. I must be very clear when I say that these two tasks are highly interdependent: unless we fix the way we relate to each other, we will not be able to protect the quality of the academy. York needs your leadership, your willingness to embrace change and our combined collegial efforts at this crossroads in our history.



Given York’s location at the heart of the GTA, given our potential, I continue to believe that our future development must focus on making York a more comprehensive university by building on our 50 years of success.

Universities in the 21st century must have a culture of planning if they have any hope of maximizing their potential. York can no longer afford new growth without corresponding new funding. The Deans will be instrumental in the decisions affecting their faculties, and in this, they will work closely with their colleagues and the students enrolled in their programs.


Strengthening research is integral to our University Academic Plan and to our success in achieving our goals. This means defining areas for strategic growth in light of the University’s vision. If we get this right we will emerge even stronger in the new economy; if we get this right, we will realize our full potential.

I would like to conclude by recalling — lest we forget! — that York is now in its 50th year. In light of our financial circumstances, the events to mark the 50th will be more modest than originally planned. But this is an important opportunity for York.



Our 50th should be the start of York’s new beginning. We have a unique opportunity to acknowledge the achievements of the past 50 years as we look to the next 50. This is the time to recognize our academic achievements and the contributions of our students.



The vast majority of the more than 90 U50 initiatives are academic events enhanced by the U50 umbrella. You should also know that the 50th media activity is largely the result of sponsorship provided by donors. I also want to remind Senators that the Foundation has already achieved $180 million of our $200 million target. All of this money goes to support endowments for students’ scholarships, faculty chairs, and to support infrastructure.



Many of you will be aware of the announcement the University made recently of a special 50th Anniversary Bursaries and Awards program. This program is designed to help our students right now as they deal with the financial hardships of the extended school year. This expendable fund will help our returning students on a needs basis starting immediately and into the fall academic term.

The goal for this fund is $5 million.



While assisting returning students is a top priority, we also know that the economic climate is making the goal of higher education a challenge for students just beginning their academic careers.



With this in mind, I am pleased to announce that a great friend of the University — who prefers to remain anonymous — has come forward with an additional gift of $2.5 million. This will create 500 awards for incoming students, valued at $5,000 each. Awards will be made over a two-year period starting in the fall of 2009. Combined, the 50th Anniversary Bursaries and Awards program and these new Entrance Awards will help minimize financial barriers to qualified students.



Finally, I would like to thank Senators and all the members of the York community for their continuing commitment to York and its students. I have spoken at length about our challenges, but let’s not forget the good things happening here at York.

Earlier this month, Professor Hamzeh Roumani was awarded a 2009 3M National Teaching Fellowship. This prestigious fellowship recognizes excellence and leadership in Canadian university teaching. Professor Roumani is a senior lecturer in the Department of Computer Science & Engineering.

You probably heard about Bridget Stutchbury’s groundbreaking work on the migration of songbirds. This was the first time songbirds have been tracked for their entire migration. It turns out scientists have dramatically underestimated their flight performance.

And last Saturday, the York Lions women’s volleyball team defeated McMaster to claim the provincial championship.

These are the types of stories we should be focused on — stories that demonstrate our excellence in teaching, research and student life. These are the types of stories that people should think about when they think of York University.

I began by saying that York has the potential to be great. We have the greatest opportunity of any university in the province. Let’s work together to achieve that potential. I ask all of you to do your very best to ensure that we remain true to our historic mission — so that we can build our common future.

Thank you."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

York University Media Relations . Fax: 416-736-5779 . Address: York University, West Office Building, 4700 Keele St., Toronto, ON M3J 1P3

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fousesquawk comment: What a joke! This is so typical of the statements that university presidents are making all over North America when their campuses become scenes of hate speech and mob behavior directed toward Jewish students or anyone else supporting the state of Israel. They cry out for reasoned discourse and mutual respect without really identifying or punishing the culprits. They make moral equivacations between anti-Semitism and other forms of hate-which probably don't even exist on their campuses. And they suspend the victims along with the perpetrators-just to make it all seem even.

Examine President Shoukri's list of hatreds:

Islamophobia
Anti-Semitism
Racial profiling
Overcoming stereotypes

With all due respect (and not being an expert on the social situation in Canada), is there really a problem on the York campus of racial profiling?

Is there really a problem on the York campus of overcoming stereotypes?

Is there really a problem on the York campus of Islamophobia?

We already know there is a problem of anti-Semitism on York's campus. Yet, President Shoukri, like other university presidents and chancellors all over North America, put it all in one big pot. Has there been a case at York when Jewish thugs chased Muslim students into a building and barricaded them there until police (finally) responded?

Not only does Shoukri lump anti-Semitism together with Islamophobia, he lumps the whole topic together in a speech complaining about the economy, reduced funding and..............

"And last Saturday, the York Lions women’s volleyball team defeated McMaster to claim the provincial championship."

Some Professors Stand up and Speak Out

York University, Toronto, February 2009

(I don't think they're singing, "Oh Canada".)


What follows below are two examples of university professors standing up and speaking out on the outrages occurring on Canadian university campuses against Jewish students. The below letters were posted on "Blazing cat fur" and "Then there was light" blogs and brought to my attention by my friend and colleague Gilead Ini.

Shalom Lappin, a Professor at King’s College in London, had been scheduled to speak in the Colloquium of the Cognitive Science Program of the Philosophy Department at York University, Instead, he sent York President Shoukri a letter of withdrawal and canceled his appearance due to Shoukri’s lack of a satisfactory response to the incident on February 11 on York's campus when a group of Jewish students was chased into the campus Hillel building by a mob where they remained barricaded until Toronto police responded to escort them out.

"Dear Dr. Shoukri,
(President and Vice Chancellor, York University)

I am Shalom Lappin Professor of Computational Linguistics at King’s College, London, and I am currently a visiting professor in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Toronto, where I am on sabbatical for the semester.

I was recently invited to give a talk on my research on computational modeling of grammar induction in the Colloquium of the Cognitive Science Program of the Philosophy Department at York, on March 25. I accepted the invitation with great pleasure. I received my BA in Philosophy from York in May 1970, and I welcomed this opportunity to return to my first academic home. It is therefore with considerable regret that I must now withdraw from this engagement in light of the York administration’s handling of the attack on Jewish students that took place on the afternoon of February 11.

The reports of this attack that I have read in both the Canadian and the foreign press (confirmed by eyewitness accounts that I have received) converge on a disturbing sequence of events. A group of approximately 100 students supporting the York Student Federation broke up a press conference organized by other students campaigning to impeach the YSF. This group then pursued approximately 40 of the students from the press conference, most of them Jewish, to the offices of the campus Hillel, where the latter locked themselves in for fear of physical assault. The YSF supporters banged on the door and the windows of the offices, shouting threatening comments at the students trapped inside. The students in the Hillel headquarters appealed to campus security for assistance but received none. They then called the Toronto Police, who eventually arrived to escort them out of the offices, (emphasis mine) through lines of hostile YSF supporters chanting angry slogans and hurling insults at them.

To date I have seen no public statement by any University official on this incident, beyond the expression of an intention to investigate it. I called your office on Monday, February 23 to seek clarification of the administration’s view of the attack. A member of your staff called me back today and graciously listened to my concerns. However, she was unable to do more than reiterate the University’s official position that the matter is still under investigation. Given that the incident took place two weeks ago, I find it odd that the administration has been unable to come to any conclusions on what took place. It is particularly remarkable that it felt no need to release at least a general statement specifying that violence and abuse of any kind will not be tolerated on campus, and confirming that all students have the right to express their views without fear of intimidation.

The fact that the University has not taken up this assault with the students who launched it, nor acted to reassure the students who they targeted indicates a severe failure on the part of the administration to fulfill its reponsibility to sustain a campus free of physical violence and harrassment. Several of the Jewish students at York claim that the assault was not an aberration, but part of a general atmosphere of extreme hostility that they have been forced to contend with over an extended period of time. I am in no position to evaluate this assertion. But it seems to me that the administration is obliged to address the grievances of students who feel that they are being victimized, particularly in light of a significant incident which lends some credence to their charge.

I do not regard the ethnic identities or the political views of any of the participants in this event as of relevant concern. All sides to a controversial question have an equal right to be heard in a civil environment of tolerance and mutual respect. Nor do I see criticism of Israel as the problem here. I have frequently spoken out publicly against the policies of the Israeli government, most recently in a joint letter and comments critical of Israel’s operation in Gaza, published in the Observer in January.

If one group of students is permitted to engage in violent harrassment of another without the decisive intervention of the University’s administration, then the conditions for a free and unfettered exchange of ideas are completely undermined, and the primary purpose of university life is betrayed.

When I was an undergraduate at York in the late 1960s the University was home to lively political activity on a variety of issues. The Israeli-Palestininan conflict was one of these, and discussion was intense, occasionally heated. However, at no time did this discussion degenerate into systematic bullying, initimidation, or expressions of bigotry. Nor would the administration of that period have allowed it to do so. It is a source of great sadness to me that the current administration is either incapable or unwilling to insure the existence of a basic culture of decency, civility, and free speech on its campus. This culture is a necessary feature of any serious institution of higher learning.

Sincerely,

Shalom Lappin
Professor of Computational Linguistics
King’s College, London"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fousesquawk comment: Well, York University has indeed done something. It has suspended the Jewish group which was attacked. Read below a letter from the university to Hasbara and Hillel at York:


"On Tuesday February 25th, Vice-President Tiffin issued four notices of suspension and fines to the following clubs for various recent academic disruptions in Vari Hall this year. Each of these groups, like you, have been provided with numerous warnings about the impact that academic disruptions have on students and professors.

The following clubs have been provided with an opportunity to explain their actions and this submission will be taken into account before the Vice-President’s final decision on their status is made. These groups are:

Hasbara Fellowship at York
Hillel@York
Students Against Israeli Apartheid
The Tamil Students’ Association

Let me again remind each of you that, as detailed by both President Shoukri and Vice-President Tiffin, academic disruption is unacceptable, injures students academically and simply cannot be permitted to continue."

So the suspensions applied to the victims and well as the perpetrators.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Below is a letter is a letter from Professor Edward Vrscay of Waterloo University (Canada) to Professor Sebastian Fernando, the chair of Mathematics at Ryerson University in Canada:

"Dear Sebastian:

Sebastian, I regret to inform you that I shall not be able to give the
colloquium talk to your Department which was scheduled for Thursday, March 19. In fact, “shall not be able” does not describe the situation properly. Let’s say that I am cancelling my talk, in response to “Israel Apartheid Week” which is being held at Ryerson, U of T and York this week. Particularly disturbing to me was the poster showing a missile shot from an Israeli helicopter and heading toward a Gazan boy
holding a teddy bear. And this was only a still image from an even more disgusting video posted by the “Toronto Social Forum”.

Please understand - this is NOT a statement of any kind against the
Department of Mathematics, which had nothing to do with this “Week”.And it’s not a “boycott” of Ryerson. It’s simply a personal decisionbased upon my disagreement with the “Week” and concern about its consequences, include hate-mongering and anti-Semitism. What would have been the reaction this week if someone posted a cartoon showing a missiles launched from Gaza headed toward an Israeli child with a teddy bear? Or an atlas of the Middle East, with a bubble coming from most countries with the message, “We do not believe in the existence of Israel!”?

Believe me, I was looking forward to meeting and conversing with people in your Department. You might think that the seemingly-distant political actions of a militant few should not be allowed to affect our academic activities, especially in a department as “removed” as Mathematics. But I think that enough is enough as
far as politically-correct acts such as Israel-bashing are concerned. It is convenient for academics in their comfy offices and jobs to avoid the unease created by such situations by simply turning their eyes away and dismissing everything with an escape clause to the effect, “It’s not such a big deal.” I’m afraid, however, that by not thinking it was a big deal, it has become a very big deal — the proverbial elephant in the room that everyone wants to avoid. And it doesn’t stop with Israel.

In any case, it’s not my intention to castigate your Department or Ryerson as a whole. My “statement” is simply that the activities of a few can, and should, affect the lives of others. I regret all inconvenience that my cancellation will cause. Please feel free - in fact, I encourage you - to circulate this e-mail to members of your department so that they know that there is absolutely nothing personal here.

Sincerely yours
Ed Vrscay"


Edward R. Vrscay
Department of Applied Mathematics
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kudos to the above professors for taking a stand on what is happening on university campuses across North America. What is needed is for like-minded faculty to set aside their concerns about tenure, job security and funding for their projects and call out the cowardly administrators who allow their campuses to be taken over by student mobs.

The Bias at UC Santa Cruz

UC Santa Cruz students on the march


On March 1, 2009, I wrote an article on this week's anti-Israel forum being held at the University of California at Santa Cruz, in which the speakers were both known opponents of Israel. One UCSC professor, Ilan Benjamin, wrote to officials at the university protesting the one-sided nature of the forum. (Professor Benjamin is Israeli-born.) I am attaching below (with Professor Benjamin's permission) the correspondence between him and university officials regarding this event. In the interest of privacy, I am deleting e-mail addresses and names of the other university officials involved.


On Mar 1, 2009, at 12:26 AM, Ilan Benjamin wrote:

Dear ___________________

I am writing this letter to express several grave concerns I have about the "teach-in" entitled "Understanding Gaza," that Colleges 9 and 10 are presenting this coming Thursday (announcement reproduced below):

1. It is clear that this is a politically-motivated event, whose sole purpose is to demonize and delegitimize the Jewish State. The two featured speakers are well-known for their extreme anti-Israel bias: Ms. Barrows-Friedman spoke at Cowell College in January and, among other anti-Israel statements, called for supporting the boycott of the Jewish State and accused Israel of "ethnic cleansing" and creating a "massive concentration camp" in the Gaza Strip. Hatem Bazian signed a public document that included the statement: "We reaffirm our rejection of Zionism as a form of racism, and emphasize our active refusal to normalize either with Zionists or with their institutions." (In case you do not know, Zionism is the national movement to establish a Jewish State). If you wish, I can provide you with numerous additional quotes that demonstrate the anti-Israel animus of these two speakers. In addition, according to your flyer, representatives of Jewish Voice for Peace and the International Solidarity Movement will also be present at the event. Both of these organizations are committed to political activism against the Jewish state, as is clear from their respective mission statements.

2. I find it highly misleading and, frankly, quite offensive to suggest that this event will provide a "Jewish American" perspective. The vast majority of American Jews would strongly object to Ms. Barrows-Friedman's calls for divestment and boycott of the Jewish State and would be highly offended by the characterization of Gaza as a "massive concentration camp." Moreover, "Jewish Voice for Peace" is an extreme fringe group, not recognized as legitimate within the mainstream Jewish community.

3. This university-sponsored event will undoubtedly be highly offensive and hurtful to many Jewish students on our campus. Coming on the heels of the egregiously anti-Israel Cowell College event "Pulse on Palestine," as well as many other extremely biased anti-Israel events that have taken place at UCSC over the last few years, many Jewish students on our campus are feeling emotionally and intellectually threatened. (In fact, 90 students signed a petition to Cowell College administrators describing how hurtful that college's sponsorship of "Pulse on Palestine" was to them). Even more troubling for Jewish students on our campus is the knowledge that while no college would ever sponsor an event that was homophobic, sexist or racist, some colleges, including Colleges 9 and 10, are more than willing to present events like "Understanding Gaza," which are so insensitive to their feelings as Jews.

4. The situation in Gaza is very complex. As a service to students and in keeping with the educational mission of the University, you could have organized a teach-in featuring scholars who were not politically-motivated, and who could have explained to our students both sides of this issue: on the one hand the difficulties that Israel, as a democracy, faces when trying to balance the need to protect its civilian population from terrorists who seek its destruction with the need to minimize Palestinian casualties, and on the other hand, the difficult conditions of the Palestinians in Gaza. But by having such a one-sided, politically-motivated event, in which both speakers will undoubtedly vilify and demonize the Jewish State, you are not only depriving our students of an excellent opportunity for learning about and discussing this complex issue, you are also violating the most cherished values of our University.

As a professor on this campus for 20 years, the president of a local synagogue for the last 8 years, and the father of two UC students, I am certain that this event will be deeply offensive and hurtful to many faculty and staff on this campus, to members of our local community, to UCSC parents, and, especially, to our students.
I ask you to please reconsider your college's sponsorship of this extremely one-sided and offensive event. I am looking forward to hearing from you soon.
-----------------------------------------------
Dr. Ilan Benjamin
Professor of Chemical Physics
Department of Chemistry
University of California, Santa Cruz

------------------------------------------------



On Mar 2, 2009, at 11:18 AM, ___________ wrote:

Dear Ilam Benjamin,

We are responding to your email regarding the "Understanding Gaza" event on 3/5/09. We acknowledge that one event can not incorporate all aspects of a complex issue such as this one. This is a student-initiated and -planned event and we trust it will do a good job of showcasing some perspectives on this important crisis. We have hosted events on the Israel-Palestine conflict in the past that have displayed various perspectives and opinions on the conflict and related issues, and we will continue to do so in the future. We hope that by modeling respectful listening and engaged discourse we can help students learn more about various issues including this one.

Sincerely,

___________________



From: Ilan Benjamin
Date: March 2, 2009 9:47:05 PM PST
To: ____________
Cc: ____________

Subject: Re: "Understanding Gaza" teach-in at Colleges 9 and 10

Dear ___________,

I find your response to be highly insensitive and deeply disturbing.

You completely ignore the serious concerns I raised about how hurtful this event is to the Jewish community, and especially to Jewish students at UCSC. Your college's goal of fostering "respect for diversity" apparently excludes respect for Jews. Why else would you bring two speakers who are well-known for their profound animus towards the Jewish State and their numerous calls for boycotts against it, and are considered anti-Semitic by many in the Jewish community? Even more troubling is your blatant double standard: You would never present an event that was offensive to students of color or to gays and lesbians, yet time and again you present events that are deeply offensive to Jews. Why?
-----------------------------------------------
Dr. Ilan Benjamin
Professor of Chemical Physics
Department of Chemistry
University of California, Santa Cruz


Here is another example of UCSC's academic bias, which concerns an attempt to have conservative talk-show host and supporter of Israel, Dennis Prager, appear at UCSC in 2004. What follows below is correspondence between Professor Benjamin and university officials.


From: Ilan Benjamin
Date: February 11, 2004 1:41:10 PM PST


Subject: letter to ___________


Dear ____________,


In response to my request to co-sponsor a talk by Dennis Prager
I got from ___________ a reply, which I believed you received as well,
that said: "After consultation with our Provost, CAO, other professional and student staff, and given our goals of fostering an environment of respectful dialogue on this multi-faceted issue, as well as the amount of programming we have already done on this issue this year, Colleges Nine and Ten have decided not to cosponsor the talk by Dennis Prager."

Implying the talk we are advertising may not foster an environment of respectful dialogue.

A few days ago we learned that on the same night and at the same time of Prager's lecture a second showing of a controversial movie is planned and is sponsored by college 9 and 10. This movie was shown last year and made a large number of Jewish students upset for its extreme one-sided depiction of the situation in Gaza. I would not categorize this movie as fostering dialogue.

Beside the obvious unfairness of this whole episode, I think you should know that this makes a lot of people in the community very upset.


Ilan Benjamin, Ph. D.
Professor of Chemistry
University of California, Santa Cruz


Fousesquawk comment: For those of you not familiar with Dennis Prager, he always keeps his debates respectful, and I find it curious that the university official(s) would imply that Prager would not engage in respectful dialogue. It is precisely what he does.

As for the present week at UCSC, it looks like students will be again subjected to a one-sided "forum" on the Israel-Palestine conflict. No one will be there to speak for Israel. No one will be there to speak for America when our country is, as always, damned for its support of Israel.

Announcing the Fousesquawk Poll on Global Warming

"Do I get a vote?"


This is to announce the definitve, official Fousesquawk poll on Global Warming.

During the next 24 hours, you will have an opportunity to weigh in on the issue of Global Warming. This is your chance to put the issue to rest once and for all. All you have to do is enter your vote in the comments section of this blog.

The question is:

Is Global Warming real or just a lotta hooey?

Polls close at midnight Wednesday night. The results of this scientific poll will be announced on Thursday (sometime after I wake up).

Let every vote be counted!

Here's Proof of Global Warming!

Al Gore sweltering in the Washington heat at an inauguration



Drowning polar bears



Scientific experts






Melting ice



And the smoking gun

Modern Day War of the Worlds

Orson Wells








"Attention, America. We interrupt this broadcast to bring you a special report. This is not a drill. Reliable reports indicate that our polar ice cap has completely melted due to Global Warming. The temperature in Antarctica is 80 degrees. NBC Miami is reporting sightings of drowned polar bears floating on Biscayne Blvd. The FBI is asking all citizens to stay in their homes and turn down the heat. Do not, repeat, do not drive your cars. This will only make the situation worse. Now our correspondants are reporting people jumping out of high rise buildings in every major city. This could be it, folks-The End of the Woooorld!"

"Mr Gore, it's time for a commercial........"






Meanwhile, the northeastern United States continues to be blanketed by record snowfall and low temperatures.

A Voice of Reason From Canada

Coming to a street or campus near you


I am pleased to cross-post this impressive essay by Josh Xiong, a University of Toronto undergraduate on the topic of this week's so-called Israel Apartheid Week being held in various places around the word. As I have mentioned many times before, Canada is experiencing the same wave of radical pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah activity that we in the US are.

"In the first week of March this year cities around the world will hold the annual Israel Apartheid Week, or IAW for short. Organized by the Students Against Israeli Apartheid, or SAIA, it is a Molotov cocktail of political intolerance, illiberal personal attacks, and lurking, latent antisemitism.

The purpose of the event is to dupe the general public, especially impressionable students, into thinking that Israel is an apartheid state akin to South Africa before the ANC’s triumph in 1994. Never mind that Israel affords all of its Arab citizens equal political and legal rights, something noticeably absent in South Africa. Never mind that access to public institutions, such as education and health care, is granted to all equally. Of course, if one repeats a lie a thousand times, people will recognize it as truth.

The week also features a series of events and speakers pinning every imaginable crime the Palestinian people have suffered at the hands of Israel, from ethnic cleansing to labor exploitation. No mention of the radical Hamas, or the brutally corrupt Fatah. No mention of Camp David in 2000, or the various efforts among Israeli doves to give Palestinians their own state. The objective is clear: Israel - the refuge for Jews, the state that could have provided safe haven from the countless pogroms and the Holocaust had it existed earlier in human history - can only do wrong.

Proponents of IAW argue that they are not antisemitic, but merely anti-Israeli. Sure, criticism of any state’s policies and actions are necessary, even welcome. But why is it that those who claim to represent Palestinian interests in North America will ignore all the other problems the Palestinian people face in order to target Israel and Israel only? Surely, some of the blame has to fall to Hamas, who is more interested in launching rockets than providing basic services to its own people. And surely some of the responsibility lies with Yasser Arafat, who walked away from a deal for Palestinian sovereignty and half of Jerusalem, and who stole from the Palestinian people’s own coffers as they were dying for his “Intifada”. How far can we single out a state and attribute it responsibility for all the world’s ills before we approach the territory of antisemitic paranoia akin to the Protocols of Zion?

If IAW is not antisemitic in name, its supporters have done a poor job of arguing the case. They are an illiberal, intolerant, and racially charged bunch. My personal experience bears witness to paranoid old women whispering of possible “Mossad agents” lurking about at their events. For arguing against IAW, I have been labelled racially confused, as if it were the duty of “colored people” to stand with the agenda of radical politics. Jewish friends of mine who have dared to criticize SAIA’s actions have been spat at. IAW organizers routinely block the press from investigating their events - no photography or video recording is ever allowed (though SAIA provides its own photographers at every event - Big Brother has it taken care of). One wonders why they have to hide from the media if they are so righteous in their cause.

In an age where one can pass off charges of a Jewish cabal in American foreign policy - whether they are the Neoconservatives or the Israel Lobby - as critical scholarship, one begins to see the contours of the new antisemitism creeping into the public consciousness. It reveals itself in efforts to prevent Israeli academics from engaging in exchanges with their colleagues around the world. It reveals itself in the suppression of free speech on campuses such as Concordia, where the reception of public figure Benjamin Netanyahu for a speech was drowned out by glass-shattering violence from hostile students and the harassment of Jewish students who wished to see the speech. It reveals itself recently in the intimidation of Jewish students at York University, where SAIA members disrupted a Hillel news conference, called the Hillel president a “dirty Jew”, and prevented students from exiting the Hillel building.

This is the new antisemitism we live with. It manifests itself in Israel Apartheid Week, where we will see a state singled out and impugned beyond all reason, students of differing political opinions intimidated and suppressed, and Jews on all university campuses alienated and marginalized. Mark your calendars everyone."

Fousesquawk comment: Thank you, Josh. I have linked Josh's blog (joshxiong.com) to my own. I invite my readers to check out Josh's blog.

CAIR's Reaction to Orange County Arrest

Below is the official statement appearing on the website of the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in response to the arrest last week of Ahmadullah Niazi in Tustin, California (see Orange County Man Claims to Have Infiltrated Local Mosque, 2-27-09).


CAIR-LA Calls for Probe into FBI's Arrest of Ahmad Niazi
Posted 2/25/2009 5:05:00 PM


"(LOS ANGELES, CA, 2/24/09) - At a news conference on Tuesday, February 24, the Greater Los Angeles Area chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-LA) called on the U.S. Attorney General to investigate FBI's reportedly coercive and questionable tactics in the arrest of Tustin resident, Ahmad Niazi. CAIR-Los Angeles representatives were joined by an Islamic Shura Council of Southern California official and the wife of Mr. Niazi.

At a hearing Tuesday, Mr. Niazi's bail was set at $500,000. He faces charges of perjury, naturalization fraud, misuse of a passport obtained by fraud, and making a false statement to a federal agency. He maintains the charges are in retaliation for his refusal to become an FBI informant.

Mr. Niazi previously reported to CAIR-LA and other community members that, during a raid of a friend's house, an FBI agent urged Mr. Niazi to work with the agency, saying that if he refused to cooperate his life would be made a "living hell."

The letter, sent to Attorney General Eric Holder today, stated in part:

"In April 2008 Mr. Niazi reported to our office that he had been at the home of a potential business partner when it was raided by the FBI. He told us that, during the raid, Special Agent Thomas J. Ropel III urged Mr. Niazi to "work" with the agency, saying that if Mr. Niazi refused to cooperate his life would be made a "living hell."

"Many similar incidents have been reported to our office. This apparently retaliatory persecution is a reality that many American Muslims, unfortunately, are forced to face.

"We therefore urgently request a formal investigation into the FBI and Joint Counter-Terrorism Task Force's arrest of Mr. Niazi, and their investigative, surveillance, and intelligence gathering strategies in connection with the American Muslim community. This investigation should examine when and how agents and officers seek to recruit American Muslims as informants and how these individuals are treated if they refuse recruitment."

SEE: Letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder on FBI Tactics
SEE: Bail Set for Man Arrested by Terrorism Task Force (KNBC)
ALSO SEE: Bail OK'd for alleged in-law of al-Qaeda official (AP)


"What we suspected all along is confirmed in a court of law, today," said Shakeel Syed, executive director of the Shura Council, at the news conference. "FBI's use of provocateurs and informants in mosques is unacceptable. While we recognize FBI's outreach efforts, we wish they stop playing the dual role of a buddy and a bully toward law-abiding Muslim Americans."

Jamilah Amin, wife of Mr. Niazi, also addressed reporters at the news conference.

"He is a wonderful husband and a daddy to my kids. He could not be any harm to anybody, to any human being on this earth," she said."

In addition, CAIR's website has posted this article to its readers:

CAIR-LA: Visited by an FBI Agent? Know Your Rights
Posted 2/27/2009 4:57:00 PM

Source: CAIR-LA


"American Muslims strongly support law enforcement and the protection of our national security. As Americans, we also value the civil rights of every individual. All Americans have the constitutional right of due process and to be politically active.

If you know of any criminal activity taking place in your community, it is both your religious and civic duty to immediately report such activity to local and federal law enforcement agencies.

Considering recent events and the increase in FBI/Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) related incidents reported to our office in the last two months, we suggest to the Muslim community the following steps if visited by FBI/Task Force at their home or workplace:

Understand that your speaking to the FBI/JTTF, absent a subpoena, is strictly voluntary. You are not obligated under law to answer any of their questions, other than giving your name and sometimes your address.

If an FBI/JTTF (including officers from the Department of Homeland Security, local police, sheriff or fire departments) agent shows up at your residence or workplace, and they do not have a search or arrest warrant and absent exigent circumstances, you do not have to let them in or speak to them.

If they do have an arrest or search warrant, you may exercise your right to remain silent. Comply with all directives and do not physically resist an officer.
Be polite and respectful at all times.

If an agent or officer says they have some questions for you, you may refuse to let them into your home or workplace, and you may ask them what their questions are regarding.

If the questioning is regarding a matter that is of a legitimate law enforcement interest, you may choose to assist law enforcement.

If the questioning is regarding a vague matter, or something you do not feel comfortable discussing, you may tell the agents or officers that they may contact your attorney if they wish to speak to you.

Get the names, agencies, badge numbers, and business cards of any and ALL agents or officers who approach you.

Contact your attorney and CAIR to report the incident and to discuss next steps.

Note that anything you say to an agent or officer can be used against you in a court of law, and lying to an agent or officer is considered perjury and is a criminal offense.

Please note: This is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Should you have any questions about the material herein or about a specific case, please consult with your attorney."

ALSO SEE: FBI Interviews: Knowing the Law Can Protect You (InFocus)

UC-Santa Cruz Anti-Israel Teach-in

Hatem Bazian


On March 5, UC-Santa Cruz, one of the most leftist universities in America (and home of Angela Davis), will be putting on an event labeled as an "informational teach-in" entitled; "Understanding Gaza". The event is specifically being organized by Colleges 9 and 10 (Cocurricular Office) of UCSC. The two principle speakers are Hatem Bazian, lecturer at UC-Berkeley and Nora Barrows-Freedman, described as an "independent investigative journalist and news correspondent", who "will offer her narrative as a Jewish-American". Also participating will be "Jewish Voice for Peace" and the "International Solidarity Movement". Below is the actual announcement:


Understanding Gaza
03/05/2009 Thursday 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM

"This informational teach-in will provide some historical background on Gaza and its political/social/economic struggle to survive, as well as providing narratives from both Palestinian American and Jewish American perspectives. Hatem Bazian, Palestinian-American Lecturer at UC Berkeley, will discuss the history of Gaza and the current conflict as well as providing his narrative as a Palestinian American. Nora Barrows-Freedman, independent investigative journalist and news correspondent, will talk about her many trips and experience in Gaza, the West Bank, and Israel, and offer her narrative as a Jewish American."

This looks on the surface to be some sort of debate or balanced discussion of the Israel-Palestinian issue. Actually, it is anything but that. "Jewish Voice for Peace" is, like the "International Solidarity Movement", committed to activism against Israel as a Jewish state.

As for Ms Barrows-Freedman, here is a sample of her writing:


Shadows and Distortions
The Nakba in Palestine
By NORA BARROWS-FRIEDMAN

"As the heavy shadow of the 1948 Nakba hovers and recedes over the narrow alleyways of refugee camps and Diaspora communities this week, Palestinians remain at Israel's whim to starve, die, or become displaced and divided."

"Nakba" is the Arabic term for "catastrophe" referring to the creation of the state of Israel. I think you get the message.

As for Mr Bazian, here is an excerpt from his Wikipedia entry:

"Bazian has been accused of anti-semitism. American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us quotes him at a 1999 conference of the American Muslim Alliance as saying:
[5]

'In the Hadith, the Day of Judgment will never happen until you fight the Jews. They are on the west side of the river, which is the Jordan River, and you're on the east side until the trees and stones will say, oh Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him! And that's in the Hadith about this, this is a future battle before the Day of Judgment.'

Bazian said on The O'Reilly Factor that this statement was falsely attributed to him, and that he was considering legal action as a response.[6][7]

A former SFSU student has alleged that Bazian prevented his appointment to the Student Judicial Council on the grounds that he supported the state of Israel and was therefore a racist.[8].

Conservative commentator David Horowitz lists Bazian as one of The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America.[9]"

In addition, Bazian has also been quoted as calling for an intifada in the US. (He claims it was taken out of context-nothing violent, of course).

So once again, in coordination with the world-wide movement to use the first week in March as "Anti-Israeli Apartheid Week", we have a University of California campus putting its imprimatur on an event misleadingly worded but devoted to presenting a one-sided exercise in the bashing of Israel (and bet your bottom dollar, America will be bashed as well). This event will surely take its place alongside recent similar events at UCLA and UC-Irvine.

What is especially despicable is the on-going tactic of bringing in Jewish figures to bash Israel in the guise of providing Jewish perspective. In this case, it appears that the so-called "independent scholar" Norman Finklestein is booked at some other university this week. To me, this tactic is akin to having a discussion on the German occupation of France and having a Nazi represent Germany while Pierre Laval "offers the French narrative". Ditto for Norway and Vidkun Quisling.

This is what passes for scholarship at UC Santa Cruz and countless other universities across North America. Who will speak for Israel at this "teach-in"? Nobody listed on the program will that is for sure. Will it take a lone solitary voice in the audience to point out the obvious bias of the speakers and incur the wrath of the audience and panel, as Eric Golub did at UCLA and I did at UC-Irvine? At what point do our esteemed universities and radical academics come to grips with the fact that they are inciting not only passions against Israel, but against our country and our own Jewish citizens as well?

Will someone in the audience ask one of the esteemed scholars to condemn recent chants heard at pro-Hamas rallies such as, "Long Live Hitler!" and "Go back to the ovens"? If so, will they be told by the panelists that such incidents, which can be seen on YouTube, are "exaggerated", "made up" or perpetrated by "Zionists" masquerading as Arabs-and that we should "pull our heads out of our navels"-as Finklestein retorted to my written question at UC-Irvine?

Folks, this is not scholarship. This is not education. This is indoctrination.