The Liberal Fascists continue to deny evidence of their Komrad KGB's
espionage in America.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArti...px?ARTID=35211
__________________________________________________

Putin’s Spies in America

If you thought the Cold War was over...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArti...px?ARTID=35277
__________________________________________________

Iranian Intelligence Ministry Broadcast Encouraging People to Snitch
on Spies Features "John McCain" Masterminding a Velvet Revolution in
Iran from the White House

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2147.htm
__________________________________________________

Liberal Fascist Propaganda: Christopher Columbus Was Trying to Recruit
the Chinese Emperor to the Liberation of Jerusalem When He Stumbled
upon America

[Throughout history, among common Middle-Easterners, Egyptions were
considered as liars.]

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2143.htm
__________________________________________________

Islamic Speakers Bureau Backed By Radical Profs

A California nonprofit dedicated to "teaching about Islam & Muslims"
at U.S. high schools and college campuses features a board of advisors
that is stacked with some of the most controversial activist
professors in the field of Middle Eastern studies today. The
imprimatur of these scholars may signal a troubling shift toward the
support of proselytizing efforts and the further unraveling of Middle
East Studies in America.

http://www.terrorismawareness.org/ca...radical-profs/
__________________________________________________

Of late, there have been a number of articles and news reports
labeling Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court nominee, and her
supporters as “leftwing” etc. There are times when the word
“communist” should be used; not the misleading word “leftwing”. The
title of one such article could very well read: “Sotomayor’s Communist
and Racist Connections,” instead of “Sotomayor's Leftwing and Racist
Connections."

We have got to start calling a spade a spade. We should not be afraid
of the "C" word! If writers, commentators and reporters would dig just
a little deeper, they would find that essentially these so-called
"left-wing" groups such as ACORN and LaRaza are Communist and or
Communist front organizations.

I have spent the last 47 years studying Communist tactics and methods,
and dealing directly with communists and communist fronts such as, the
Students for A Democratic Society (SDS), the Progressive Labor Party,
the Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, Hands off Latin
America, African National Congress, etc. I have met and dealt with
such communists as Herbert Aptheker, one time historian and
theoratician of the Communist Party USA and member of its national
committee; folk singer Pete Seeger, Moscow's song bird; James Scully,
head of the International Committee Against Racism; and even Angela
Davis, member of the communist Black Panther Party.

My point being that I have dealt enough with communist organizations
and individuals, to be able to recognize them when I see them.

http://www.jbs.org
__________________________________________________

On April 16, the Board of Trustees at the College of DuPage, a large
community college in Illinois, made history by voting unanimously to
adopt the Academic Bill of Rights and include it in the school’s
policy manual, making DuPage the first campus in the nation to have
adopted the actual text of the Academic Bill of Rights and only the
third campus to recognize student-specific academic freedom
protections. But the teachers unions, understanding the threat the
Academic Bill Rights posed to their political agendas on the DuPage
campus, were ready for this development and engineered the
installation of a new Board to reverse this decision on May 4, a scant
two weeks after DuPage had committed itself to academic freedom.

The NEA, which has opposed scholarships for inner city black and
Hispanic children and has fought the Academic Bill of Rights since its
introduction over half a decade ago, had seen the victory of the
Academic Bill of Rights coming. It had poured $100,000 into the
community college trustee election on March 7, and succeeded in
gaining a four-seat majority on the DuPage Board of Trustees. On May
4, only days after being seated, the four new union-backed trustees
voted to rescind the months-long work of the previous board (which NEA
sympathizers had tried to stigmatize as “a lame duck board”),
culminating in the April 16 vote. Kory Atkinson, a member of the
previous board who helped to pass the Bill, commented: “The decision
by the new College of DuPage board to rescind the Academic Bill of
Rights is nothing more than the exercise of raw political power. The
faculty union poured over $100,000 into recent board elections and
essentially bought 4 board members. It is noteworthy that the Board
voted to rescind its ABOR policy by a 4-3 vote, and that each of the 4
trustees voting to rescind the policy received all of their campaign
contributions, totaling tens of thousands of dollars apiece, from the
faculty union.”

The quick reversal should not come as a surprise to anyone familiar
with the history of the Academic Bill of Rights at DuPage. An intense
power struggle over the Bill’s adoption has been ongoing since last
fall when it was first publicly announced that the DuPage Board of
Trustees was considering including the Bill among several revisions to
the campus policy manual. Aided by the national teachers unions and
left-leaning academic associations, the DuPage Faculty Association
coordinated an underhanded and manipulative disinformation campaign
against the Bill in the local and national media, falsely claiming
that it would “give elected officials the power to dictate what
theories, data and critical interpretations would be allowed in a
classroom”—an absurd charge given that it was the university’s own
trustees who initiated these reforms.

Additionally, a letter sent by the Faculty Association to the Board of
Trustees last winter claimed in Orwellian language that the Bill has
“political connotations” (it is in fact designed to remove politics
from the curriculum) and that “ABOR supporters apparently hope that
the bill will give elected officials the power to dictate, for
example, whether creationism should be taught alongside evolution in
college biology” (a flat out lie).

The Faculty Association was joined in these attacks by the Illinois
Community College Faculty Association and the Illinois chapter of the
American Association of University Professors which is the chief
opponent of the academic freedom campaign. The AAUP claimed that the
proposed policy changes including the Academic Bill of Rights
represented “an extraordinary attack on academic freedom, shared
governance, and intellectual liberty” and sought to discredit Academic
Bill of Rights author David Horowitz as a “controversial polemicist.”
The term “shared governance” as interpreted by the AAUP is a doctrine
under which professors are accountable to no one but themselves for
what goes on in the classroom.

In fact, the Academic Bill of Rights bears little resemblance to the
caricatures created by the leftwing teacher unions and their faculty
spokesmen. It ensures political neutrality in the classroom, and does
not require the teaching of any doctrine. The exact language of the
ABOR states that “Exposing students to the spectrum of significant
scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a
major responsibility of faculty.” Any controversies as to what
constitutes a scholarly viewpoint would be resolved by the college,
not by politicians.

The provisions in the Academic Bill of Rights are drawn explicitly
from the classic academic freedom statements of the American
Association of University Professors (AAUP) in the days before it
became a radical organization. These statements have been embraced by
universities across the country, though there is currently little
enforcement of their tenets as regards students. The Academic Bill of
Rights guarantees the rights of both faculty and students to academic
freedom regardless of their political or religious views. It prohibits
discrimination in hiring, firing and promotion of faculty based on
political or religious beliefs and forbids faculty from abusing their
positions for the purposes of “political, ideological, religious or
anti-religious indoctrination” in the classroom.

While the ABOR was being considered by the DuPage in the early spring,
the Faculty Association claimed that not enough time had been allotted
for public debate and consideration. But only days after the new
members elected with union funds were seated, the new union board
voted to rescind the ABOR without any opportunity for a public
hearing. “This defeat shows that while the left is prepared to
conduct a war to defend their campaign to indoctrinate America’s
students in radical hogwash,” says David Horowitz, architect of the
Academic Bill of Rights. “Ever since I first introduced the Bill of
Rights in 2003, the teacher unions have conducted a campaign of
misrepresentation and slander to protect their political agendas in
the classroom. The actions of the incoming trustees at DuPage are not
a commentary on the Bill so much as an illustration of how determined
the left is to corrupt our universities and use them for their
political ends. I am encouraged however, by the willingness of the
previous courageous DuPage trustees to regroup for the next round of
this battle.”

Despite the temporary setback, Board of Trustess member Kory Atkinson
vows that the fight is not over: “The students and taxpayers of the
College of DuPage district will not stand by while the faculty bought
trustees place the interests of their faculty patrons above the
interests of the students.”

http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org
__________________________________________________
http://www.globalmuseumoncommunism.org