Culture Wars: Cultural Marxism vs. Judeo-Christian Culture

Culture Wars: Cultural Marxism vs. Judeo-Christian Culture

How Cultural Marxism stole our culture

keyHaving grown up during the 1950s, I have seen how our beloved country has tragically changed during my lifetime, but I did not know how it started or that it was part of Marxism all along. In the following excerpts, William Lind tells us who stole our culture, and what we can do about it. This is a very meaty piece, but it is well-worth studying in depth. In fact, understanding of this history is vital to the survival of our Judeo-Christian culture. ~C.A. Davidson

Culture Wars

History Lessons

Who Stole Our Culture?

How America’s Judeo-Christian values were replaced by Marxist ones—and almost no one noticed

By William Lind, June 2012 Whistleblower Magazine, pp.43-46

(Excerpts)

“Sometime during the last half-century, someone stole our culture. In the 1950s, America was a great place. It was safe. It was decent. Children got good educations in the public schools. Even blue-collar fathers brought home middle-class incomes, so moms could stay home with the kids. Television shows reflected sound, traditional values.

Where did it all go? How did that America become the sleazy, decadent place we live in today—so different that those who grew up prior to the ‘60s feel like it’s a foreign country: Did it just ‘happen’?”

(Summary)

hammerandsickleIt didn’t just “happen”.  It was deliberately planned that way. Lind takes us back to World War I and the history of how “political correctness” started. During that war, when the Communist revolution erupted in 1917, the goal was to spread the revolution throughout Europe, and to destroy Western civilization through an uprising of the workers (proletariat). The only trouble is, it didn’t work. The workers didn’t support it.

Unwilling to admit that there could be anything wrong with Marxism, two Marxists—Georg Lukacs in Hungary and Antonio Gramsci from Italy—decided that Communism could not prevail in the West, until both Western culture and the Christian religion could be destroyed. They did not diverge from this which had been their goal from the beginning, but they did change their strategy.

A New Strategy

(Excerpts indicated by quotation marks)

“Gramsci famously laid out a strategy for destroying Christianity and Western culture, one that has proven all too successful. Instead of calling for a Communist revolution up front, as in Russia, he said Marxists in the West should take political power last, after a “long march through the institutions”—the schools, the media, even the churches, every institution that could influence the culture.”

Gramsci was jailed by Mussolini, so his influence was limited until the 1960s when he was rediscovered. Georg Lukacs, on the other hand, gained some administrative power in Hungary as early as 1918, where he instituted what he called “cultural terrorism.”

war-on-christianity“One of its main components was introducing sex education into Hungarian schools. Lukacs realized that if he could destroy the country’s traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying its traditional culture and Christian faith.”

The Hungarian workers were outraged, so Lukacs went to Germany, where he teamed up with a Marxist named Felix Weil, who had inherited millions. With the help of psychologists and a number of Jewish intellectuals who promoted feminism and matriarchy, Weil used his wealth to start the Institute for Marxism.

The Use of “Front” Organizations

(Satan goeth abroad, deceiving the nations ~D&C 52:14)

wolf-in-sheeps-clothing-150x150“The Cultural Marxists realized they could be far more effective if they concealed their real nature and objectives.” They changed the name to the more neutral-sounding “Institute for Social Research.” (For the sake of simplicity, hereafter referred to as the Frankfurt School.)

NOTE: This deceitful naming technique, called “front organizations”, has been used for decades by Communists for infiltration purposes, and is still used by socialists, communists, and most other ideological persuasions who want to destroy America.

The Frankfurt School was well on its way to developing political correctness, until Hitler came along, who hated both Marxism and Jews. In 1934, the Frankfurt School re-located in New York City with help from Columbia University. Its focus shifted from destroying Western culture in Germany to doing so, with far too much success, in the United States.

Smear Tactics

schoolindoctrination2In the 1950s, cultural Marxism was greatly advanced by Herbert Marcuse and Theodor Adorno.

“Critical Theory: To serve its purpose of “negating” Western culture, the Frankfurt School developed a powerful tool it called “Critical Theory.” What was the theory? The theory was to criticize. By subjecting every traditional institution, starting with family, to endless, unremitting criticism (the Frankfurt School was careful never to define what it was for, only what it was against), it hoped to bring them down. Critical Theory is the basis for the “studies” departments that now inhabit American colleges and universities. Not surprisingly, those departments are the home turf of academic political correctness.

“Studies in prejudice: The Frankfurt School sought to define traditional attitudes on every issue as ‘prejudice’ in a series of academic studies that culminated in Adorno’s immensely influential book, ‘The Authoritarian Personality,’ published in 1950. They invented a bogus ‘F-scale’ that purported to tie traditional beliefs on sexual morals, relations between men and women and questions touching on the family to support for fascism.

Today, the favorite term the politically correct use for anyone who disagrees with them is ‘fascist.’

“Domination: The Frankfurt School again departed from orthodox Marxism, which argued that all of history was determined by who owned the means of production. Instead, they said history was determined by which groups, defined as men, women, races, religions, etc., had power or ‘dominance’ over other groups. Certain groups, especially white males, were labeled ‘oppressors,’ while other groups were defined as ‘victims.’ Victims were automatically good, oppressors bad, just by what group they came from, regardless of individual behavior.

Really Sick Smear Tactics

“Though Marxists, the members of the Frankfurt School also drew from Nietzsche.[1] They incorporated into their cultural Marxism what Nietzsche called the ‘transvaluation of all values.’ What that means, in plain English, is that all the old sins become virtues, and all the old virtues become sins.”

isaiah-good-called-evilIsaiah warned us about this very thing when he said:

Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! ~Isaiah 5:20

“Homosexuality is a fine and good thing, but anyone who thinks men and women should have different social roles is an evil ‘fascist.’ That is what political correctness now teaches children in public schools across America.

“Media and entertainment: Today, when Hollywood’s cultural Marxists want to ‘normalize’ something like homosexuality (thus ‘liberating’ us from ‘repression’), they put on television show after television show where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual. That is how psychological conditioning works; people absorb the lessons the cultural Marxists want them to learn without even knowing they are being taught.”

PC-dark-ageIn the 1930s, there was a question of who would replace the working class as the cause of the Marxist revolution. “In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question, saying it would be a coalition of students, blacks, feminist women and homosexuals—the core of the student rebellion of the 1960s, and the sacred ‘victims groups’ of political correctness today.

“Marcuse further took one of political correctness’s favorite words, ‘tolerance,’ and gave it a new meaning. He defined ‘liberating tolerance’ as tolerance for all ideas and movements coming from the left, and intolerance for all ideas and movements coming from the right.

“When you hear the cultural Marxists today call for ‘tolerance,’ they mean Marcuse’s ‘liberating tolerance’ (just as when they call for ‘diversity,’ they mean uniformity of belief in their ideology).

poisonPoisonous Ideology

“As was true from the [Frankfurt School’s] beginning, Marcuse and the few other people ‘in the know’ did not advertise that political correctness and multi-culturalism were a form of Marxism.

But the effect was devastating: a whole generation of Americans, especially the university-educated elite, absorbed cultural Marxism as their own, accepting a poisonous ideology that sought to destroy America’s traditional culture and Christian faith. That generation, which runs every elite institution in America, now wages a ceaseless war on all traditional beliefs and institutions. They have largely won that war. Most of America’s traditional culture lies in ruins.

What Can We Do?

“Now you know who stole our culture. The question is, what are we, as Christians and as cultural conservatives, going to do about it?

“We can choose between two strategies. The first is to try to retake the existing institutions—the public schools, the universities, the media, the entertainment industry and most of the mainline churches—from the cultural Marxists. They expect us to try to do that, they are ready for it, and we would find ourselves with but small voice and few resources compared to theirs, making a frontal assault against prepared defensive positions. Any soldier can tell you what that almost always leads to: defeat.”

characteredA Promising Strategy: Homeschooling

“We can separate ourselves and our families from the institutions the cultural Marxists control and build new institutions for ourselves, institutions that reflect and will help us recover our traditional Western culture.”

Many grass-roots conservatives “are already part of a movement to secede from the corrupt, dominant culture and create parallel institutions:

the homeschooling movement.”

“Gramsci called for Marxists to undertake a ‘long march through the institutions.’

Our counter-strategy would be a long march to create our own institutions.

It will not happen quickly, or easily. It will be the work of generation—as was theirs. They were patient, because they knew the ‘inevitable forces of history’ were on their side.

Can we not be equally patient, and persevering, knowing that the Maker of history is on our side?”

Historian William S. Lind is director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation and former director of the center for Cultural Conservatism of the Free Congress Foundation in Washington, D.C.


[1] Someone else they admired for his defiance of traditional morals was the Marquis de Sade. (Have you ever heard of someone being “sadistic”? That’s where sadism comes from.)

History Heroes: Immigration Quotes

History Heroes:

Immigration Quotes

reagan2resizeA nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation. ~Ronald Reagan

Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have from for but one flag, the American flag . . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language . . . and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people. ~Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

 

Founders’ Wisdom

America’s Founders were joined in purpose: to pursue and protect individual liberty. But due to the left’s decades-long obsession with multiculturalism—because they find every other culture superior to ours—the unique, unified, successful American culture is being replaced by dysfunctional Third World attitudes. ~Rush Limbaugh

jeffersontyrannygovMay not our government be more homogenous, more peaceable, more durable? Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom? If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of a half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here. ~Thomas Jefferson, 1787

The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass. . .it ha served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils. ~Alexander Hamilton, 1802

The safety of a republic depends essentially on  the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias, and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family.” ~Alexander Hamilton, 1802

alexanderhamiltonForeigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments. . .The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend. . .to confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency. ~Alexander Hamilton

Biblical Worldview, Character Education, and Moral Compass

Biblical Worldview, Character Education, and Moral Compass

Why the Bible Matters: Defining Right and Wrong

keyThere is a right and wrong to every question—Paying attention to your conscience is what helps you develop good character.

Do what is right; be faithful and fearless.

right-wrongsignOnward, press onward, the goal is in sight.

Eyes that are wet now, ere long will be tearless.

Blessings await you in doing what’s right!

Do what is right; let the consequence follow.

Battle for freedom in spirit and might;

and with stout hearts look ye forth till tomorrow.

God will protect you; then do what is right!

~Anonymous; The Psalms of Life, Boston, 1857

 

See More Defining Moments

Month-Defining Moment

Truth-Zone

 Birthright

More about Birthrightbirthright_cvr

A historical novel by C.A. Davidson

picnicwyouthIn this excerpt from the historical novel Birthright,  college history professor Jacob Nobles uses discovery teaching and ancient ruins at a historic site to lead his students in a discussion of truth, and discerning right from wrong.

      “Okay—” Preston spoke with caution. “I’ll give you that the Bible is actually a history. But why does it matter?

                “That is the million-dollar question …” Jacob smiled. “And you can find the answer here—for free!

                Jacob held up the Bible. “Now, Preston, you have asked why the Bible matters. Would you agree that the Bible is a history of God’s dealings with man?”

creationhands                “I guess you could say that. Apparently, somehow God’s version of the creation was given to Moses, and Moses wrote it down,” Preston commented carefully.

                “It makes sense to take God’s word for it,” Allison remarked with her usual bluntness. “After all, He was there when it happened—a distinction the rest of us cannot claim.”

                Preston shook his head. “Still, none of us were there for the creation process—not even Moses.”

                “That’s true.” Jacob chewed thoughtfully on his ham sandwich and inclined his head. “Hmm. So we have here two explanations for the Creation process—to keep it simple, we’ll call them two different stories. Since we were not present for the event, we’re forced to accept either one story or the other—on faith.”

                Puzzled, Preston tilted his head.

“What is faith, anyway?”

  “Well now, faith is to hope for things which are not seen but which are true,”[1] Josiah Bianco said.

 shepherdboy               Folding his arms across his chest, Preston surveyed the surrounding hills and glimpsed a boy leading a few sheep. “Are you saying that everybody just blindly follows …” He paused. “I’m sorry. I don’t mean to offend.”

                “No offense taken.”

                “Don’t worry,” Ben said. “We all have done the same thing.”

                “Really?”

                “Of course. It’s called academic freedom.”

  “Sure. Bring it on!” Allison took a sip out of her can of grape juice. “Only frauds and liars are afraid to answer questions.”

                “Why is Dr. Marlow so afraid of other points of view?” Nola asked.

                “He doesn’t want to lose the debate!” Allison interjected.

“Yes. Debate is an important part of academic freedom, but anyone can win an argument without teaching truth. A friendly discussion with free exchange of ideas is more effective in discovering truth.” Jacob chuckled. “However, when you prefer to control what others say and think, truth can get in your way.

   “Now that we are away from the university, we can actually look at more than one point of view! We will look at two stories of the Creation—one, in the Bible, and the other, Dr. Marlow’s version.”

                “The Bible version seems too simple,” Preston said.

                “Well, what is Dr. Marlow’s version called?” Nola inquired.

                “Dr. Marlow believes in a theory called Natural Selection which, simply put, proposes that everything somehow creates itself by chance,” Jacob replied.

                “That doesn’t make sense.” Nola frowned in disagreement. “The human body—and mind—are complicated. Something can’t be produced by nothing.[2] My experience has shown me that nothing worthwhile happens by chance. Everything takes work, and effort, and planning.

                “Yes, Nola. That’s why some scientists say that the Bible history discloses an intelligent design, a purpose, or an orderly plan.”

                “Aren’t Bible stories for children?” Preston wondered.

                “Men struggle to explain their philosophy. The Bible explains the Creation so a child can understand—so that parents can teach their children through the ages. Who is more intelligent?” Jacob shrugged. “Anyway, the important thing is, who is telling the truth—Man, or God?”

                “Can you just assume there is a God?”

Preston asked.

Jacob laughed. “We can look at some evidence. Where is evidence of chance?”

            No one answered for a moment.

            Josiah Bianco chortled. “Shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not?” he quipped, quoting Isaiah.[1]

[1] Isaiah 29:16

“What about evidence of design?”

                “The ability to think, for one thing,” Allison said, “ …one of many.”

                “As I said, the human body,” Nola added, “and life itself. I know many very intelligent scientists and doctors, but no one can earimageduplicate an eye or an ear.”               

  Preston’s gaze rested momentarily upon Nola’s face—round blue eyes, delicate sculpted features like a work of art. “All right,” he said. “Let’s say God is the intelligent Creator. Couldn’t He have made man out of apes?”

“Of course, He could, but would He? He is a God of order. As Creator of earth and all living things, He set up the rules for justice and science. Why would He violate His own laws?”[3]

         “What do you mean?”

                “Okay, if the Bible is really a history, and if it is true that we humans are created in the image of God, how are we different from animals?”

                “We can reason, while animals use instinct,” Preston said. “You’ve already established that.”

teotihuacanserpent               “Humans can draw, read, and write,” Allison said. “I have yet to see an animal who could carve something like this creature.” She poked her finger into the big teeth of the dragon carving, but withdrew her hand quickly. “Yikes! I don’t think an animal would make something this weird, even if it could!”

Free Will

  Jacob grinned. “True. Also, you chose to come here today, others did not. Ruben left early; the rest of you stayed. What does that mean?”

                “People have the power to choose,” Ben said.

                “Yes, that’s called Free Will. We have no empirical evidence of such a thing, but let’s suppose we have here a creature who is half man and half ape—by whose laws would this creature live—by the laws of man or nature? You’re the law student here, Preston. What do you think?”

   “Uh …”

                “If the creature is half man, would it be fair to make him live like an animal? Or if he is half animal, and cannot reason fully as a man, would it be just to impose upon him the laws of men?”

                “This is really getting confusing!”

   “Yes, Preston, it is confusing. But when He had completed the creation, God blessed human beings and all living things to multiply, each after their own kind.[4] There is nothing confusing about that.”

                A flutter of wings announced the arrival of a dove which lit next to his mate upon a limb of the tall tree.

How Do You Know What Is True and Right?

“The human soul can never die. So you see, it is created, not evolved, because God is not the author of confusion.[5] Therefore, to avoid confusion, would you agree we need some kind of law to bring order and justice to our lives?”

                “Absolutely,” Preston said. “We must have justice.”

 KJV Bible              “Let’s think for a moment about the two kinds of laws—which law provides true justice? Dr. Marlow makes no distinction between humans and animals. His law is simple: those who are strong rule and prevail over everything and everyone else.” Jacob placed his right hand firmly upon the rock and continued. “The law of Nature requires animals to kill other animals for food. In the law of the Bible, on the other hand, God tells us not to kill or eat other people. Why not?”

“It’s wrong!” The students exclaimed indignantly, in vigorous unison.

                “How do you know it’s wrong?”

                Jacob waited.

                “Well,” Preston began slowly. “There simply is no justice in murder and cannibalism. I don’t know why … Somehow I just know that.”

compass liahona   “Men often create laws to try to change God’s commandments,” Jacob continued, “but God’s laws never change. When He created our eternal souls, He planted those unchangeable moral laws in our minds and hearts. It’s called—”

                “Our conscience.” Preston nodded. “Of course! I see that now.”

                “Yes. The Bible contains our true moral compass in writing. And that, Preston, is why the Bible matters.”

birthright_cvrCopyright © 2016 by C. A. Davidson

More about Birthright

[1] Hebrews 11:1

[2] John Locke, Essay Concerning Human Understanding; Great Books of the Western World, vol.35

[3] These are the eternal, immutable laws of good and evil, to which the Creator Himself in all His dispensations conforms. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1:59-60

[4] Genesis 1:22,24

[5] 1 Corinthians 14:33

Truth Matters: Science Facts vs. Fake News, Global Warming Hoax

Truth Matters:

Science Facts vs. Fake News, Global Warming Hoax

Another Huge Global Warming Data Scandal

Rush Limbaugh

global-warming-hoax1

RUSH: I need to tell you something that you’re not going to see in the Drive-By Media, and it’s huge. In setting this up, I want to remind you why I have spent so much time on the whole subject of climate change and global warming throughout the entirety of this program, 29 years.

A Front for Socialism

It is because that issue, climate change, contains every element of extreme liberalism and socialism that needs to be understood and opposed. Climate change, if they succeed in this, climate change is close to health care in terms of, if you get nationalized climate change, nationalized health care, then you are very close to totally controlling the way people live their lives.

You have succeeded in restricting people’s liberty and freedom in perhaps the greatest way you can. That’s why climate change or global warming, whatever you want to call it, is of such paramount importance to me, because it’s not just a single issue. It’s every wet dream the left has encapsulated in an issue. It has government control, it has tax increases, it has the expansion of government, it has decisions and mandates of what kind of car you can and can’t drive, what kind of food you can and can’t eat, what you can do with your own private property. It would go a long way to eliminating the concept of private property.

NOAA manipulated land readings

NOAA manipulated land readings

The unstable land readings: Scientists at NOAA used land temperature data from 4,000 weather stations (pictured, one in Montana, USA). But the software used to process the figures was bug-ridden and unstable. NOAA also used ‘unverified’ data that was not tested or approved. This data as merged with unreliable sea surface temperatures

I mean, it’s just horrible. And it turns out there’s yet another scandal of totally fake data that was purposely made up and lied about right before the Paris accords that was designed to sway duped nations into spending, wasting millions of dollars in implementing policies designed to stop runaway temperature increases when there have not been any. And the fake data came from the United States. It came from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the people that give you your weather forecast.

Data Science,Climate and satellites Consultant  John J Bates at his home in Arden North Carolina Picture Chris Bott

Data Science,Climate and satellites Consultant John J Bates at his home in Arden North Carolina Picture Chris Bott

It was exposed by a whistleblower in the organization who had seen enough, a scientist named Bates, a Dr. Bates, and he had had his fill of the lies and the distortions.

The Daily Mail on Sunday in the U.K. revealed a landmark paper exaggerated global warming. It was rushed through in time to influence the Paris Agreement. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules.

RUSH: To the global warming hoax. I want to remind you that Donald Trump is ridiculed to this day for claiming… All my little buddies on their tech blogs and many places on the left still ridicule Trump for claiming that global warming is a hoax started by the ChiComs to make American businesses uncompetitive. Now, global warming is a hoax. It is a hoax perpetrated on an unsuspecting population of the world who have been blamed for doing great damage to our climate through no fault of their own.

Liberal Lies

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection for another great cartoon

cartoon-global-warming-hoaxThe CO2 is pollution. The stuff that you exhale is pollution. Barbecue pits and driving around your SUVs emits the greenhouse gas. The earth is broiling! The earth isn’t gonna be habitable in another 35 years. But there is redemption, and that is if you let government take over and if you stop driving these behemoth cars and let government tell you what kind of car to drive.

Stop eating Big Macs, beef, and all this other stuff and agree to tax increases and globalization. Let the United Nations basically determine how nations can function; then you can redeem yourself. And for every Prius you see on the road — for the most part, not all, but for the most part — you see a dupe. You see somebody who actually thinks they’re saving the planet, doing good. Everybody wants their lives to have meaning — and if you can save the planet, man, can you feel proud of yourself! You feel like your life has meaning.

So you go out, you buy an electric car or you keep your thermostat at 79 or 80 in the summer, and at 65 in the winter — and you sweat your butt off and then you freeze — and you’re saving the planet and all that. It’s bohunk. We don’t have the power to stop climate change, which means we don’t have the power to affect it at all. We can’t stop it. Lord knows we’ve been trying. Anyway, the point of all this is that there’s enough clear evidence out there that it is a hoax, that data is faked, that data is forged. But the Drive-Bys will not believe ’cause it’s a leftist cause, folks.

The reason that I’m so devoted to explaining this issue over and over is because it contains practically every aspect of liberalism that is dangerous.

That’s why it is a seminal issue to the left. Everything they want is wrapped up in it. Every bit of power, every bit of control. You couple climate change and health care, and freedom as you have known it ceases to exist. It is that evil, and it is that dangerous. And I’m gratified most polling data today shows that we’re nowhere near a majority of Americans who accept it or believe it or even consider it to be crucial.

It doesn’t stop the media from portraying it is an issue that all the right people agree with, that all the smart people agree on. If you don’t see this, then you’re a denier, you’re a kook, you’re equivalent to people that didn’t admit the Holocaust and so forth. The first substantive indication we had that this stuff is all faked and phonied up was a hack of an email server at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. in which the whistleblower there was somebody within the climate change movement, the so-called scientific community.

By the way, there’s another reason that… It’s real simple how this is not science. All you have to hear them say, “A consensus of scientists agree.”

There is no consensus in science. Science is not a democratic thing. It doesn’t get a vote.

A consensus of scientists thinking the earth is flat, for example, it doesn’t make the earth flat. There is no vote. A consensus of scientists doesn’t mean anything. In this issue, it means that they found all the scientists who are being paid via the grant process to produce research that the sponsors want.

global-warming-hoax4-moneyAnd they get their consensus. Algore has become filthy rich off of this hoax. The emails at East Anglia indicated — emails from scientist to scientist back and forth, back and forth — indicated and illustrated how they were changing and faking data from the Medieval period. They have to show throughout history temperatures much lower than today in order to make people believe that there’s an unstoppable warming going on that can be tied to industrialization. You go back to the Medieval period when we didn’t have any industrialization at all.

There were no fossil fuels, for example, so the only thing putting CO2 in the atmosphere was cows via methane and humans exhaling. But aside from that, you know, ’til the railroads came along and the Industrial Age. Smokestacks, factories, and this kind of thing. So they want to try to tie this unstoppable, dangerous warming to the invention of the combustible-fuel engine and progress related to that, as a means of indicting capitalism.

global-warming-hoax5-leaders-dupedClimate change is basically an anti-capitalist, pro-communist enterprise.

 

Truth unreported

You haven’t seen it yet, and I doubt you will see it. I know you won’t see this in the New York Times, and therefore my little tech blogger buddies will never see it. You won’t see it at BuzzFeed, which means my tech blogger buddies will not see it. You will not see this in the Washington Post; you won’t see it on the ABC, CBS, NBC. It’s in the Sunday edition of the U.K. Daily Mail. Headline:Exposed: How World Leaders Were Duped into Investing Billions Over Manipulated Global Warming Data — The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming.

“It was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change. America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules.” In other words, the culprit in the latest exposing of the hoax is NOAA! They run all the weather satellites supposedly collecting all the temperature data.

FAKE NEWS:

chickenlittle1“The report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

“The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 … never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected.” In other words, up until this report came out, there hadn’t been any warming, and the climate change people were alarmed.

This report says the fact that there was no warming was a mistake, that there was no pause, that record heat breaking had continued to happen when everybody thought there was no warming taking place. And they said instead of the fact that no warming took place that in fact temperatures have been rising faster than anybody expected.

This report was “launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

TRUTH:

global-warming-hoax2-big-gov” The problem these people are all having is there hasn’t been any warming in the last 15 to 18 years. Actually (sigh), even to say that gives their existence some credence. (sigh) But it has to be done to illustrate this.

There hasn’t been any warming! Their climate models said that by now temperatures would be X degree warmer and sea levels would be X centimeters higher.

None of it’s happened, and so they have to come up with an excuse for it. They have to come up with a reason for the “pause” in the warming. “The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organization that is the world’s leading source of climate data,” which is NOAA, “rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.

“A high-level whistleblower has told” the Daily Mail… This is an American scientist. His name is [Dr. John] Bates, he works at NOAA, and he’s fed up seeing what he’s seeing. He told the U.K. Daily Mail “that [NOAA] breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and [U.K. Prime Minster] David Cameron at the U.N. climate conference in Paris in 2015,” . . . .

which, by the way, Trump says we’re pulling out of and we’re not gonna live by, and thank goodness for that.

But the whistleblower, Dr. John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.”

chickenlittle2They made it up, just exactly what happened with the email chains and threads at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. The report that was submitted to scientists and world leaders before the Paris meeting was never subjected to rigorous internal evaluation, the kind that this whistleblower himself had devised. This is the old peer review. They had not run the new report by anybody to let them review it, to make sure that it was right. It was not evaluated. Somebody just wrote it up and submitted it.

“Dr. Bates’ vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overridden –” He objected at the time, “You can’t do this. You can’t do this. We’re lying, it isn’t right.” But his superiors at NOAA overrode his observations in what he says is “a blatant attempt to intensify the impact of what became known as the Pausebuster paper.”

Again, the Pausebuster paper is the paper presented to people like Obama and others before the Paris meeting is to say, “You know what, that pause that we think we’ve had for 15 years, it actually hasn’t been a pause. We have been setting heat records these last 15 years. We need to act even faster than we ever knew.” It was all lies. There was no truth to it.

science-fraud-money-not-truth“The whistleblower’s disclosures are likely to stiffen President Trump’s determination to enact his pledges to reverse his predecessor’s ‘green’ policies, and to withdraw from the Paris deal. … In an exclusive interview, Dr. Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data.”

 This does not surprise me. I think this whole movement is fraudulent because I don’t think that they can accurately tell us what global temperatures were in the 1600s and 1700s, the 1800s, just not possible. The tree trunk data, tree ring data, ice core, it’s all made-up stuff to be beyond our ability to comprehend. They’re scientists, they wear the white coats, we, therefore, believe them.

Cooler Today

global-warming-hoax5-noaa-adjusted-readingsThe ‘adjusted’ sea readings: Average sea surface temperatures are calculated using data from weather buoys (pictured). But NOAA ‘adjusted’ these figures upwards to fit with data taken from ships – which is notoriously unreliable. This exaggerated the warming rate, allowing NOAA to claim in the paper dubbed the ‘Pausebuster’ that there was no ‘pause’

The fact of the matter is it has been much warmer previous times on earth than it is today. That cuts against every theory they’ve got about industrialization and burning of fossil fuels creating CO2. But before you even get to that this whole thing is bogus to me because I don’t believe that we human beings are capable of doing what we are being accused of doing. Because if we were, we would be able to stop the process.

By the way, and I’m not convinced that the warming is bad, even if it is happening. And we know it is. The climate is never constant. You know, the big question for me, folks, is one about the vanity and the arrogance of all this. These people in the scientific community promoting this hoax have got everybody believing that the temperatures and the climate and everything as of this moment in the history of the earth is what’s normal, and any deviation from the present is a crisis.

 How do we know what is normal? You know, ice ages have lasted 10, 20, hundreds of years, and they ended. How did they end? What caused the ice to melt way back when before there was fossil fuel? Way before there was humanity living lives of progress, what ended ice ages? What brought about warming areas when we weren’t doing anything to cause it? The answer is, it’s way beyond our pay scale.

Hoax

global-warming-hoax3-swindleWe just simply don’t have the ability to do this. And the evidence is — to show you how inept they are, we supposedly have had a pause — this is how stupid they are, folks. Listen to me, look at me. We supposedly had a pause for 15 years. During those 15 years, why didn’t they say, “See? Our research is working. See? Our suggestions are working. Our reduction of CO2, our elimination of SUVs, our increased usage of the electric car, whatever, is working, we need to do more of this.”

Why did they greet the pause as a problem, instead of looking at it, “Wow, we can say we’re succeeding, we can say that we’re on the right track, we need to double down on the kind of restrictions we’ve already –

They’re so stupid politically they didn’t even realize an opportunity to claim success and credit. They saw a pause as panic city. I’m telling you, folks, this is the biggest bunch of fraud, one of the biggest hoaxes that has been perpetrated on a free people in I don’t know when.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/02/06/another-huge-global-warming-data-scandal/

 

Related Links

Culture Wars: Social Experiment, Immigration Ban Protesters, and Liberal Hypocrisy

Culture Wars:

Social Experiment, Immigration Ban Protesters, and Liberal Hypocrisy

Refugee in House (Social Experiment) at Muslim Ban Protest

 

Trump immigrant-ban protesters asked if they’d let refugees live with them. Here’s how they respond.

Well-known video prankster Joey Salads — who also performs self-described “mind-blowing social experiments” — said he conducted a mock solicitation on hidden camera at Los Angeles International Airport amid protests against Republican President Donald Trump’s temporary immigrant ban.

So, arming himself with spectacles and a “Feel the Bern” T-shirt, Salads went “undercover, as a leftist” to ask the question: Would protesters be willing to put their money where their mouths are and offer to let refugees live with them?

Approaching a group of protesters sitting on a ledge at LAX, Salads introduces himself as a member of an outfit that “just got approved by the commissioner of naturalization.”

He then asks if any protesters would be willing to “give donations or to possibly offer shelter.”

Salads’ first victim says, “I have no resources. Sorry.”

A second guy writes in a “small donation” on the clipboard, Salads notes in the video, but declines to offer shelter.

Another guy says he’s “not able to do that” when asked to provide shelter to refugees.

“I live with a man who is a Trump supporter,” one woman replies, “so I don’t think he’d go for it.”

“I’m very interested in helping,” one guy answers. “I’m a little apprehensive, and I also have a female roommate who’s, like, a very nervous girl … but I’m very interested.”

“How many refugees will you be willing to hold?” Salads asks him.

The guy says he has only a couch to spare.

When Salads tells him that would be enough — in addition to providing “food and water” — the guy wonders how long he’d have to keep that up.

“Until legislation passes,” Salads replies.

“I don’t know that I could commit to that,” the guy answers.

A female who told Salads she lives by herself and is “also apprehensive” did request to be added to an email list — but another who says she lives in a studio with her boyfriend indicates she doesn’t have enough space.

One guy standing on a ledge with signs around his neck gets a little miffed with Salads’ continued pressing: “I already answered you, OK?”

 

Trump immigrant-ban protesters asked to house refugees—oops!

Truth Matters: President Trump vs. Fake News

Truth Matters:

President Trump vs. Fake News

keyoldAnd those judges were angry with him because he spake plainly unto them concerning their secret works of darkness; nevertheless, they durst not lay their own hands upon him, for they feared the people lest they should cry out against them. ~Helaman 8:4

Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man. ~Colossians 4:6

Trump to Media: ‘Public Doesn’t Believe You People Anymore’

By Mark Swanson (Newsmax)

 

trump-calling-out-mediaPresident Donald Trump spent a significant part of his press conference Thursday – called to announce his new labor secretary nominee – stepping up his attacks on the mainstream media and debating several members of the press in attendance.

After announcing Alexander Acosta for labor secretary, Trump began prepared remarks by taking the media to task.

“I’m making this presentation directly to the American people . . . because many of our nation’s reporters and folks will not tell you the truth,” Trump said from the East Room of the White House.

“The press has become so dishonest that if we don’t talk about it we are doing a tremendous disservice to the American people – tremendous disservice,” Trump said. “We have to find out what’s going on because the press honestly is out of control.

I ran for president to represent the citizens of our country. I am here to change the broken system so it serves their families and their communities well. I am talking and really talking on this very entrenched power structure.

media1-harmful-swallowed“The level of dishonesty is out of control.”

During his question-and-answer period, Trump got into a debate with reporters over “fake news,” including with CNN’s Jim Acosta, a frequent Trump target.

“The reporting is fake. Jim, you know what it is, here’s the thing, the public isn’t — they read newspapers, they see television, they watch. They don’t know if it’s true or false because they are not involved. I’m involved. I’ve been involved with this stuff all my life,” Trump said.  

“So, I know when you are telling the truth or when you are not. I just see many, many untruthful things. I will tell you what else I see. I see tone. You know the word tone. The tone is such hatred,” Trump continued.

trump-thumbs-up“I want to see an honest press. When I started out by saying it’s important for the public to get an honest press. The public doesn’t believe you people anymore. But if you were straight, I would be your biggest booster. I would be your biggest fan.” 

Trump dismissed recent reports in The New York Times and CNN his campaign aides had been in contact with Russian officials before his election. Trump called Paul Manafort, his former campaign manager who has ties to Ukraine and Russia, a “respected man.”

Trump called the reports a “ruse” and said he had “nothing to do with Russia.” Trump added, “Russia is fake news. This is fake news put out by the media.”

Amid reports of widespread leaks within his administration, Trump also warned he would clamp down on the dissemination of sensitive information, saying he had asked the Justice Department to look into the leaks.

“Those are criminal leaks,” adding, “The leaks are real. The news is fake.”

Book Review: Historic Rescue of World War 2 Soldiers

Book Review:

Historic Rescue of World War 2 Soldiers

The Forgotten 500

Gregory A. Freeman

keyThe communists have always been experts at lies, deceit, and disinformation. This heart-wrenching story of courage and loyalty betrayed and smeared is but one example of their treachery. It took way too long for the truth to surface in this case. The media, which have bought into these lies and disinformation  for decades,  is in full swing today as well. It is our responsibility to discern and ferret out the truth, and do so relentlessly, so  that truth and innocent people are spared the evils of being sacrificed for political expediency. ~C.D.

 

forgotten-500-bookHere is the astonishing never-before-told story of the greatest rescue mission of World War II—when the OSS set out to recover more than five hundred airmen trapped behind enemy lines in Yugoslavia. . . .

During a bombing campaign over Romanian oil fields, hundreds of American airmen were shot down in Nazi-occupied Yugoslavia. Local Serbian farmers and peasants risked their own lives to give refuge to the soldiers while they waited for rescue, and in 1944, Operation Halyard was born. The risks were incredible. The starving Americans in Yugoslavia had to construct a landing strip large enough for C-47 cargo planes—without tools, without alerting the Germans, and without endangering the villagers. And the cargo planes had to make it through enemy airspace and back without getting shot down themselves.

Suppressed for more than half a century for political reasons, the full account of this unforgettable story of loyalty, self-sacrifice, and bravery is now being told for the first time ever. The Forgotten 500 is the gripping behind-the-scenes look at the greatest escape of World War II.

 

 

Disinformation and Betrayal

Draza Mihailovich, Serbian hero who steadfastly protected American airmen from Nazis

Draza Mihailovich, Serbian hero who steadfastly protected American airmen from Nazis

Serbian leader Draza Mihailovich was opposed to both Nazism and Communism and fiercely loyal to the Allies. However, Klugmann, one of several communist moles in Great Britain, spread disinformation and lies about him, and convinced Churchill and FDR that Mihailovich was in league with the Nazis. This kept Britain and American governments from supporting the Serbian locals of Yugoslavia, who were unwaveringly loyal to the Allies, who gave the American airmen the food off their own tables. The loving support of those villagers for those Americans is deeply moving.

Thanks to the help of those locals, 512 airmen were rescued, with no lives lost. Nevertheless, due to the influence of Klugmann and his minions, Mihailovich was subjected to a war crimes trial after the war, and convicted.

Americans were outraged when they learned of the government treachery. Churchill finally learned the truth, how he had been deceived, but it was too late. Only after the damage was done, was Eisenhower able to persuade Truman to give Mihailovich a posthumous  Legion of Merit award. Even then, the award was given in secret, and kept secret for 20 years, because the State Department was “concerned” about ruffling relations with the communist dictator Josip Tito, who handed Yugoslavia over the communists after the war.

 

Reagan Tribute to Mihailovich, and Warning

Ronald-Reagan-AP                Avowed anti-Communist Ronald Reagan, then governor of California and about to become president in the next year, paid respect to Mihailovich on September 8, 1979. He wrote to the California Citizent’s Committee to Commemorate General Draza Mihailovich:

I wish that it could be said that this great hero was the last victim of confused and senseless policies of Western governments i dealing with Communism. The fact is that others have suffered a fate similar to his by being embraced and then abandoned by Western government in the hope that such abandonment will purchase peace or security. Thus, the fate of General Mihailovich is not simply of historic significance—it teaches us something today as well. No Western nation, including the United States, can hope to win its own battle for freedom and survival by sacrificing brace comrades to the politics of international expediency.

 

Reagan went on to say that the betrayal of Mihailovich showed “beyond doubt that both freedom and honor suffer when firm commitments become sacrificed to false hopes of appeasing aggressors by abandoning friends.”

National Security: US Marine Steven Gern Video tells Truth about Trump Travel Ban, goes Viral

National Security:

US Marine Steven Gern Video tells Truth about Trump Travel Ban, goes Viral

keyPatriot Steven Gern gives true first hand account of what the Trump travel ban means for our national security. Don’t believe the hypocritical protestors and fake news outlets. This man knows the truth.

Just here to tell the truth. Thank you all for your support.

 

Truth Matters: Refugee Ban Executive Order is Constitutional, supported by majority; President Trump Needs God; Spicer Thanks March for Life

 Truth Matters:

Refugee Ban Executive Order is Constitutional. . .

Trump’s order constitutional and prudent

constitution2“The president put in place a pause, specifically as it relates to seven countries that the Obama administration designated as particular areas or countries of concern …. [And] when you’ve got the director of the FBI [and] the director of Homeland Security saying we cannot determine appropriate vetting and we know that ISIS and their ilk want to use refugee floats for access as they’re already done in Europe, what the president did was prudent.

“The first obligation of the president of the United States is to keep the American people safe – that’s number one. By the way, President [Jimmy] Carter prohibited Iranian asylum refugees for a period of time as well. So those who are acting as if this is somehow out of the constitutional norm of the United States are ridiculous – they don’t understand history, and they certainly don’t understand the law.”

Jay Sekulow
American Center for Law and Justice

supported by majority. . .

jamiel_shaw_football-dad-supports-immigration-ban‘Angel’ Dad: ‘I’m Happy’ About Trump’s Immigration Orders

Son killed by illegal immigrants . . .

Rasmussen: 57 Percent Support a Temporary Ban on Refugees From Terror-Exporting Countries

Katie McHugh

A strong majority of voters support a temporary ban on refugees from unstable and violent countries, Rasmussen Reports found.

Nearly two-thirds of voters want the U.S. government to halt refugee resettlement until better controls to screen foreigners can be implemented, according to Rasmussen:

immigration-refugees-terroristA new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57 percent of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists form coming here. Thirty-three percent are opposed, while 10 percent are undecided.

Similarly, 56 percent favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent oppose this temporary ban, and 11 percent are undecided.

Public sentiment is largely unchanged from August, when 59 percent of likely voters wanted a temporary immigration moratorium placed on countries who export terrorism. In September, 59 percent opposed failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s plan to dramatically increase the importation of Syrian refugees, while only 25 percent approved. Another poll conducted in August found only 36 percent of voters wanted to import thousands of Syrian refugees, including only 18 percent of Republicans.

These numbers reflect the broader public mood on extreme immigration levels. For example, another non-partisan poll found 54 percent of voters would like to see immigration levels halved or reduced to zero. Another 58 percent think illegal aliens should not be allowed to stay in the U.S. at all.

Rasmussen questioned 1,000 likely voters from Jan. 25 to Jan. 26, with margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.

(Another) Media Fail: 57% Support Temporary Ban on Refugees From Terror-Exporting Countries

President Trump Needs God;

Now that he’s president, Donald Trump admits he needs God more than ever

Chris Enloe

trumpNow that he is president of the most powerful country in the world, President Donald Trump says he needs God more than ever.

Speaking with David Brody of “The Brody File” for the Christian Broadcasting Network, Trump said in a recent interview that the weight of the White House is enormous and that his decisions have massive life or death consequences for real people.

That realization has caused him to lean on God more than ever, Trump told Brody.

“I would say that the office is so powerful that you need God even more,” Trump told Brody. “There’s almost not a decision that you make when you’re sitting in this position that isn’t a really life-altering position. So God comes in even more so.”

“Your decisions are no longer, ‘Gee, I’m going to build a building in New York,’ or ‘I’m going to do this.’ These are questions of massive life and death, even with regard to health care,” Trump explained. “So yes, you realize these decisions are all so important.”

During the interview, Trump also labeled the mainstream media, which openly opposed his presidential candidacy and incorrectly predicted that he would lose to Hillary Clinton, the “opposition party.”

He also said that Christians will love his choice to replace the vacancy on the Supreme Court, which was left after Antonin Scalia passed away early last year.

Trump’s sit-down interview with “The Brody File” of the CBN was only the third sit-down interview of his presidency so far, and it proves that the Trump administration plans to make good on their promise to take interviews and questions from non-mainstream media sources, something the Obama administration rarely did.

pro-life-baby-not-abortionSpicer Thanks March for Life

Liberals explode over WH press sec. Sean Spicer thanking people for coming to the March for Life

 

 

Critical Thinking: Liberal Intolerance vs. Christianity, Freedom of Speech

Critical Thinking:

Liberal Intolerance vs. Christianity, Freedom of Speech

The Verse the Culture Misquotes Most Regularly in an Effort to Quiet Christians

As a Christian, I’m often at odds with the culture around me. As our society embraces a growing number of unbiblical behaviors and attitudes, I find myself becoming more and more vocal in my opposition. I’m not alone; many other conservative Christians are also taking a stand for what the Bible teaches, particularly when it comes to moral behavior.

Liberal Intolerance and Judgment vs. Discernment

Maybe that’s why I seem to hear Matthew 7:1 tossed around so frequently by those who want Christians to quiet down:

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged.”

discernment-christianWhenever we, as Christians, speak out against something in the culture, one of two labels is immediately employed in an effort to silence us: we are either branded “intolerant” or “judgmental”. To make matters worse, the second label is often attached to the teaching of Jesus Himself. Are we Christians defying the words of our Master when we speak against the behaviors, attitudes or worldviews affirmed by others? Did Jesus command us to be silently non-judgmental?

This selective use of scripture by the opposition is perhaps the finest example of what we at Stand to Reason are addressing when we caution people to “never read a Bible verse.” Matthew 7:1, when read in isolation from the larger context of the Sermon on the Mount, may seem to command a form of silent acceptance and tolerance advocated by the culture, but a closer examination of the verse reveals Jesus’ true intent. If Jesus was advocating some form of quiet tolerance, how do we explain the following statements?

“Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.” (verse 6)

“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (verses 13 and 14)

“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.” (verse 15)

war-on-christianity-free-speech“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’” (verses 21, 22 and 23)

Wow, Jesus seems vocally judgmental in these passages. Some people are dogs and swine, unworthy of our efforts. Some people are wrong about the path they choose. Some people are false prophets. Some people are true disciples and some are not. Jesus sure seems comfortable making judgmental statements about people in these passages. How could Jesus say such things when he began this part of the sermon by saying, “Do not judge so that you will not be judged”? Maybe we should revisit the first verses of Matthew 7:

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” (Matthew 7:1-5)

Liberal Hypocrisy

hypocrisyIt turns out that Jesus is not prohibiting vocal discernment in these passages, but is cautioning against a certain kind of unbecoming behavior: hypocritical judgmentalism.  We are called to live differently so that we can effectively identify and address unbiblical behavior in our culture. I cannot be a practicing thief and effectively caution against thievery. I cannot be an active adulterer and effectively advocate monogamy. I’m going to have to “first” stop and assess my own behavior (take out my own “log”) before I can “then” caution others about their behavior (help them take the “speck” out of their eye). This is a “first / then” commandment. Both sides of the directive are important; Jesus is commanding two equally critical actions.

First, we must change our behavior; become people of God who are above reproach. Second, we must actively engage others about their behavior. Some ideas are good and some are bad. Some prophets are true and some are false. Some people are right, some people are wrong. We are called to make statements about such things after we eliminate hypocrisy in these areas of our own lives. We, as Christians, are called to (1) live righteously, and (2) speak out about unrighteousness. We are less likely to do this, however, if we allow folks misquote Jesus in an effort to silence us.

J. Warner Wallace is a Cold-Case Detective, a Christian Case Maker, and the author of Cold-Case Christianity, Cold-Case Christianity for Kids, and God’s Crime Scene.

Comment or Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email

 

Resources for Greater Impact

Cold Case Christianity (Paperback)

Read More