What in the name of John Blutarsky is happening on our university campuses? A new survey from the Pew Research Center reveals that a shocking number of Millennials support curbing free speech. According to their findings, 40 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 believe the government should be able to ban any speech that is offensive to minority groups. We have apparently raised a generation of snowflakes so fragile that their psyches can’t handle offensive words or photographs or images. It seems the only free speech this perpetually offended generation supports is speech they agree with. And it appears our nation’s public universities have become breeding grounds for such anti-American and un-Constitutional beliefs. Websites like Campus Reform have done a tremendous job documenting the methodical way in which our public institutions have been turned against us. Administrators, faculty and student government leaders who do not agree with the rampaging mob of anti-free speech protesters are threatened – their voices silenced. From the University of Missouri to U.C. Berkley — where they are creating safe spaces to protect persons of color and those who identify as gender queer. The University of Michigan added a three-year diversity requirement to its undergraduate curriculum in the school of business. As Campus Reform reported, they will teach students “how race, gender and sexual orientation connect to larger systems of power, privilege and oppression.” At Dartmouth, Black Lives Matter protestors invaded the library — verbally assaulting white students. “F*** you, you filthy white f***s!” That’s what they screamed at the kids trying to study for exams. And at the Uersity of Vermont white students were carted off to the woods for a three-day retreat on white privilege. Universities are now judging students on the color of their skin, instead of the content of their character. Oh, what have liberal educators unleased on our great nation? We are watching the coming of age for a new generation — a generation of intolerance — a generation that will one day shutdown free speech, a generation that will purge dissenting viewpoints, a generation that will shutter our churches and burn our books. We are watching the generation that will destroy America.
Let’s hope you’re wrong, Todd. Todd Starnes, the author of that piece, makes some great points. The political correctness and intolerance of these whiny liberals who don’t want to even be exposed to other viewpoints are being allowed to undermine what college is really all about; to be challenged and to think critically. Ohh… and for those who didn’t get the whole “John Blutarsky” reference.. That was a reference to John Belushi’s character, “Bluto,” in the movie “Animal House;” a classic. :-)
The nation’s top homeland security official said Sunday there are no credible threats of a Paris-style attack on U.S. soil, despite rumors that the Islamic State or other extremists could attack the country. Security officials said they are testing their communications systems and conducting other drills ahead of holiday-season events, including the Thanksgiving Day parade in New York City. The ramp-up comes as Belgian officials shut down the subway system in Brussels and asked the public to avoid large crowds, citing the risk of an imminent attack. “We have no specific credible intelligence about a threat of the Paris-type directed at the homeland here,” Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “We are always concerned about potential copycat acts, home-born, homegrown, violent extremism of the types that we’ve seen in recent months and years.” Suicide bombers and gunmen linked to the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq killed about 130 people in Paris on Nov. 13, kicking off a round of anxiety in the U.S. and debate over President Obama’s plan to resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees in the U.S. Mr. Johnson said about 2,100 Syrians already have been resettled through a “very extensive vetting process,” and that the real concern is a visa waiver program that makes it easier for travelers from some countries, mainly in Europe, to get onto American soil. The fear is that Europeans will be recruited by the Islamic State — a dynamic that played out in the Paris attacks — and then take advantage of their countries’ relationship with the U.S. “The visa waiver program is something that we’ve been focused on, frankly, since I’ve been secretary, because there are a number of foreign terrorist fighters who have gone into Iraq and Syria from countries in Europe and elsewhere,” Mr. Johnson said. He said the program shouldn’t be eliminated, however. “It’s a very popular program that people use virtually every day,” Mr. Johnson said. “But there are security enhancements that we have made and we should evaluate whether more is necessary and I’m happy to have that conversation with our friends in Congress.”
Jeh Johnson is just another yes-man fool, and brazen liar, in this Administration… For him to say, with a straight face on national tv, that there is no “credible threat” of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil is mind-boggling. The man should either be fired or impeached for incompetence and lack of integrity. He is cabinet-level Secretary, for crying out loud, and has access to all sorts homeland security reports (including classified reports), and knows better. Of COURSE there are “credible” threats from ISIS/ISIL and other Islamo-fascist wackos to America’s national security…on a daily basis!! Has he NOT turned on the tv recently, and seen all of these middle eastern men caught illegally crossing our borders recently? This is beyond outrageous. Hopefully Congress will call this idiot on the carpet for this. We need to demand better from our civil servants; especially ones like Jeh Johnson who make 6 figure salaries…courtsey of we-the-taxpayers. Unreal..
The terrorist attack on the Radisson Blu Hotel in Bamako, Mali (a former French colony) offers another grim reminder to those in the West of the wide and lethal reach of practitioners of radical Islamic extremism, notwithstanding recent claims to the contrary of U.S. President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. It occurred a week after deadly Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris, France, which took the lives of at least 129 innocents and injured 352 others. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks. The Malian local Islamic terrorist group Al Mourabitoun (The Sentinels in Arabic, with ties to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, composed mostly of Tuaregs and Arabs from the northern Mali regions, including Algerians, Tunisians, and other nationalities) reportedly claimed responsibility for the hotel attack in Bamako. The hotel is a favorite lodging place of Westerners in a city of 2 million people. The attackers reportedly took over 170 hostages, killing about two dozen innocents, before local Malian forces, with varying degrees of United States and French support, subdued them. The penultimate issue facing Western governments like the United States, and those like Great Britain and France who once had African colonies, is how deeply they can afford to get involved in African affairs and in chasing terrorists like the group responsible for the attack in Mali. Here are some basic facts and problems for them to consider: First, they need to fully grasp the growing influence of Islam, which produces ISIS and al Qaeda movement operatives and sympathizers among its extreme practitioners. Muslims comprise about 42 percent of the population of Africa (464 million of 1.1 billion people). They represent a heavy presence in 38 of 54 countries (10 percent or more of the population). Moreover, 27 African nations, including Mali, are Organization of Islamic Cooperation members — a group promoting Islam, Islamic interests, and Shariah law. Mali’s 15.5 million people are 90 percent Muslim. Second, the allies must be able to distinguish Islamists and jihadists from the overall Muslim population. An Islamist is any Muslim who wants to impose and enforce Shariah — whether by violent or nonviolent means. A jihadist is an Islamist terrorist. The Muslim Brotherhood, which gestates Islamists, uses mostly nonviolent means to create Shariah-compliant constitutions. Islamist terrorists — like al Mourabitoun and al Qaeda affiliates Ansar al Shariah (Partisans of Islamic Law), Katibat Moulathamine (The Masked Brigade) and Ansar Dine (Helpers of the Islamic Religion), which attacked the American mission in Benghazi, assaulted the Algerian gas plant and helped take over northern Mali respectively, and ISIS affiliate Boko Haram (Western education is a sin) in Nigeria which drew international outrage for kidnapping schoolgirls and is considered by the Institute for Economics and Peace (Global Terrorism Index) as the globe’s most deadly terror group, respectively — use violent means to install and enforce Shariah. Third, the allies need to understand Shariah law. Shariah totally subordinates women and mandates many other human rights violations, such as relegating non-Muslim minorities to a much lower legal status than Muslims and dispensing cruel and unusual punishment. It also rejects freedom of speech and conscience and mandates aggressive jihad until the world is brought under Islamic hegemony. Fourth, the allies must learn as much as possible about Mali and its civil war. The war mostly pits northern Muslim Tuareg desert nomads and stateless Ansar Dine jihadists who served as Moammar Gadhafi mercenaries in Libya against southern, poorly equipped and trained Muslim military troops from the savannah. French troops and warplanes entered the war on the side of Malian troops, who had several months earlier overthrown Mali’s duly elected government, once considered a model African democracy. Although the French and Malian troops gained the upper hand, the Bamako terrorist attack illustrates how tenuous the situation remains. The fifth thing for the allies to be aware of is the nation-building trap. The United Nations and other organizations will expect the allies to rebuild Mali’s political, economic, educational, and social institutions once their military mission is complete. This will be an enormous undertaking. The Malian life span averages 53 years, 69 percent of the population can’t read and write, the average annual income is $1,100, and the civil war has already displaced more than a quarter-million residents and worsened a drought-driven food shortage expected to impact 13 million people. Sixth, the allies need to understand that many African countries are prone to civil wars, genocide, anarchy, and political upheavals. Former colonial powers entering Africa for military purposes could trigger more continental violence. Angola, Burundi, Congo, Liberia, Libya, Mozambique, Rwanda, Somalia, and Sudan exemplify the madness that has killed and displaced tens of millions in recent decades, fueled as much by racial, ethnic, or religious animosities as by ideological fervor and hatred of former colonial masters. Seventh, since the 1950s, developed countries have poured more than $1 trillion of aid into African humanitarian projects with little success. The average African life span is 54 years, the average annual income is $2,900, and the literacy rate is 58 percent — compared with the rest of the world’s 71-year average life span, $13,763 per capita gross domestic product, and 89 percent reading and writing proficiency. Additionally, Freedom House’s 2015 annual report reveals that only 124 million of Africa’s 1.1 billion residents enjoy full freedom. Finally, hostile African leaders, like Zimbabwe’s dictator-for-life Robert Mugabe, harbor deep resentment toward the United States and former colonial rulers. They can easily whip up African opposition against Western military interventions and antiterrorism policies. Any Western-led military foray into Africa is fraught with danger and should be limited to humanitarian missions. The allies’ Libyan military misadventure set off a deadly chain of events, causing calamities in Libya as well as Mali and Algeria. Prime responsibility for Mali and Greater Africa peacemaking, peacekeeping, and nation-building should primarily rest with the African Union, the Economic Community of West African States, and the United Nations — not France, Great Britain, or the United States.
Agreed!! Our experience in Somalia taught us the importance of really considering ALL possible outcomes of getting involved in ANY military involvement in ANY African nation. We simply cannot afford to get involved in these African nations unless there is a VERY clear reason that is in OUR national security interest, AND there is a VERY clear exit strategy. Getting involved just because we “feel bad” is not sufficient reason to. For those too young to remember what happened in Somalia, go see “Blackhawk Down.” But, read what lead up to that.. Bottom line, it was a disaster. We sent money, “humanitarian aid,” and then later it became a military operation to go after a local war lord in the country’s capital. It was a waste of BILLIONS of tax-payer money, aid, and many American soldiers’ lives…and for what? Nothing. Somalia is still a complete disaster. We got nothing out of it, and we never were going to. Most African nations are third-world, are overwhelmingly Muslim, and they HATE America. So, why on earth would we be so dumb as to get involved? Because we “feel bad.” Sorry. Not good enough.