Musings on Indoctrination by Teachers

Caliphate crescent moon
Photo: Wikipedia

The depth of blatant ignorance and naiveté of American teachers, even smart ones, is astonishing. I have asked one of my former students, who is a math teacher, why she placed a crescent moon and a star together as a topper on her Christmas tree, an exact and huge replica of the symbol of the Islamic Caliphate. She replied that she did it for her son who likes the moon.

Is it any surprise that teachers across the country willingly indoctrinate their students many hours a day into the tenets of Islam, collectivism, environmentalism, and perverted and inappropriate for their age sexuality, in an eager attempt to implement Common Core (Conformity Core) as dreamed and financed by Bill Gates' millions and other billionaires who are determined to change the character and the fabric of this country to the detriment of its citizens, forcing three alien ideologies inside the minds of our children, Islam, Communism, and Environmentalism.

The third ideology, environmentalism, a Gaia-worshipping religion onto itself, has been successfully advocated for decades and it has now born fruit at the CO21 Paris conference. Congress is funding all the climate nonsense in its Omnibus Bill due to pass this week, including all the funding necessary for the regime's planned Muslim and Hispanic invasion of this country, an overt attempt to change the demographics of this country because progressives have decided that we are not multi-cultural and diverse enough.

Colleges and universities are busy cesspools of fascism where independent thought and divergent opinions and discussions are verboten by the progressive left, eager to stifle any free speech with political correctness and overprotection of any self-proclaimed racist minority students who shout down anybody who has inexistent "white privilege" also known as work ethic.

Instead of emphasizing our American character of generosity, inventiveness, entrepreneurship, hard work, and altruism, qualities that have made America an exceptional country, raising the standard of living, health, and safety of many other nations, professors of fluff and often ridiculous social studies subjects are busy preparing tomorrow's global citizens, persons without a country, without a culture, without a common language, and without borders, angry, confused and divorced from their roots and their history.

Why would we the people support such preposterous national self-suicide without as much as a whimper? Because decades of brainwashing and drug use have turned the nation into a lazy society, numbed and dumbed down, entertained with the proverbial Roman pane et circenses, game and circuses - sports, beer, smoking pot, and reality television.

College Endowments and Donations on the Taxing Block?

Congress is looking at college and university endowments and at their donors as a source of revenue. Tax endowment fund earnings have been exempted from federal income tax and those who contributed to such endowment funds were able to “deduct the value of their contributions from income subject to tax.”

A recent CRS report is advising Congress on their “options for changing their tax treatment” in order to increase federal revenue and to “encourage additional spending from endowments on specific purposes” such as tuition assistance. This administration has promised free tuition and it must find ways to fund that promise. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44293.pdf

The policy options discussed were as follows:

1.      “A payout requirement, possibly similar to that imposed on private foundations, requiring a certain percentage of fund be paid out annually in support of charitable activities; (distributing more financial aid to students)

2.      A tax on endowment earnings;

3.      A limitation on the charitable deduction for certain gifts to endowments; (some of the endowment money is spent over a long period of time yet the donor takes the entire tax deduction immediately)

4.      A change to the tax treatment of certain debt-financed investments in strategies often employed by endowments.” (off shore investment for example)

The report did not discuss the ever-escalating cost of higher education but it did mention Senator Chuck Grassley’s and Representative Peter Welch’s 2008 round table discussion, “Maximizing the Use of Endowment Funds and Making Higher Education More Affordable.” http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/ranking/release/?id=38a762b5-0fc7-4a9c-a130-3ddf23812279

A hearing of the House Ways and Means Committee focused on “The Rising Costs of Higher Education and Tax Policy” is also mentioned. http://waysandmeans.house.gov/event/39840295/

A university maintains a fund called endowment in either cash or property. Income from any endowment can be used to cover the operating costs and capital expenditures, to fund special projects, or to reinvest. Universities can have hundreds or thousands of funds, based on special agreements made with various individuals who donate with strings attached such as how the fund is to be used, when, and how the principal or the income earned are to be used.

Some endowments are dedicated to scholarships and others to faculty support. A true endowment is a permanent endowment. When a period of restriction expires, the university can use the funds as they wish – these are considered term-endowments. General gifts and bequests are considered quasi-endowments. Congress is looking at all three types of university endowments.

Endowments are tax-exempt because they are part of tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations or the endowment itself has a 501 (c)(3) tax-exempt status. Any contribution to such endowments is tax deductible to a contributor under the Internal Revenue Code Section 170. Additionally, any investment earnings of an endowment are also tax free. A university is considered charitable and educational in purpose and it is thus tax exempt.

According to the writers of the CRS report, “College and University Endowments: Overview and Tax Policy Options,” dated December 2, 2015, “If the return from endowments of colleges and universities were taxed currently at 35%, the revenue gain is estimated at $16.2 billion for FY2014. If only private universities and colleges were subject to a tax, the gain would be estimated at $11.1 billion, since public institutions are responsible for 31.7% of assets.” (p. 7)

The data for this report was collected from the U.S. Department of Education, the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO), and the Internal Revenue Service. The report lists 25 private colleges with the highest per student endowments. The top ten listed are Yale, Princeton, Harvard, Stanford University, MIT, Rice, University of Chicago, Pomona College, Swarthmore College, and Amherst College. (pp. 11-12)

The CRS report also lists the top 100 colleges and universities with large endowments and their cumulative share. (p. 28)

Statistics show that the average endowment per student in 2014 at private doctoral-granting universities was $214,300 and the median was $70,900. (p. 12)

The total college and university endowment for 2014 was $516 billion, with assets concentrated with 11 percent of institutions holding 74 percent of endowments. Yale, Princeton, Harvard, and Stanford held each more than 4 percent of total endowment assets. (Summary, p. 2)

The average payout rate (spending) from endowments was 4.4 percent and endowments earned a 15.5 percent average rate of return in 2014, resulting in income of $79 billion. (p. 16) According to the CRS chart, the payout rate has oscillated between 4.2-5.1 percent from 1998 through 2014. (p. 14)

College and university endowments make investments in equities (buying stocks in a company, derived dividends, and capital gains from the sale of the stock), fixed income (U.S. Treasuries, money market instruments, mortgage and asset-backed securities, and bonds), and alternative investment strategies (hedge funds and private equity).

College and university endowments could be a potential cash cow for the federal government in need of additional revenue to add to its spending ceilings, exacerbating the $18.8 trillion in national debt.

 

Crybullies' Safe Spaces or Spaces to Whine?

In the face of worldwide “refugee” crisis, the poor ISIS fighters who had slaughtered, tortured, and enslaved thousands in their wake, sneaking into Europe and U.S., blowing up and killing more than 129 innocents in Paris and 14 in San Bernardino, injuring hundreds others, the world’s leaders have met in Paris not to discuss the existential Islamist threat to the world, but their faux concerns of the climate change industry, potentially worth trillions, instead of the imminent threat of Islam around the world coming from ISIS. Elites are more interested in fleecing and spreading the western world’s wealth to the third world, whose leadership dominates the U.N., rather than in the safety of their own citizens.

It is frightening how, after Parisians were killed in an attack orchestrated by ISIS, who recruited and convinced EU nationals to join them, how our regime and the leftist response is, "Wow, we need more of those Muslim refugees here!”

If you disagree, you are ignorant, racist, un-American, and un-Christian, even though Islam is not a race but a theocracy. And no one says, let’s bring in more Christian refugees who legitimately face crucifixion, or Muslim gays who risk being thrown from rooftops, or Muslim single mothers who risk being stoned to death for adultery, or Syrian atheists who risk being burned alive, or Syrian girls who risk being turned into sex slaves, abused, murdered, or sold. According to the regime, it is "against American values" to accept anyone other than regressive, radical Muslims. The regime’s anti-American conspiracy has become mainstream liberal foreign policy.

Donald Trump’s poll numbers have surged since he suggested that we should enact a temporary pause in admitting any more Muslims into our country until the vetting process is actually valid and working.

The media ignores the fact that Jimmy Carter revoked Iranian visas during the hostage crisis in 1979. Rush Limbaugh described and posted the video from the ABC News archives that demonstrates that, what Trump had suggested, had been done before by President Carter and it is neither bigoted nor xenophobic, it is acting in the best interest of the American people, protecting their safety. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/12/11/abc_news_digs_up_video_of_jimmy_carter_announcing_ban_on_iranian_immigration

The few libertarians still residing on American campuses cannot publicly post or voice their divergent opinions because their progressive colleagues are so indoctrinated by the "poor, innocent, cuddly" refugee idiocy that they can't see objective reasoning and will skewer them.

My friend K. received unbelievable backlash for saying "they should be screened not just for terror, but to make sure they believe in the American principles of equality, dignity, and freedom of religion--we don't need to import more bigots."

It reminded me of our conversation in D.C., "Don't liberals and gays have any sense of self-preservation?" Many of his liberal gay friends want to open America's doors to these Muslims who would love to toss gays off of rooftops and stone women to death for engaging in unmarried relationships or for dressing in revealing clothes.

Liberal academics would probably walk into areas where illegals have taken over the local government, have exhausted welfare services, have changed the face and demographics of schools, and turned the area into a cesspool of Sharia compliant ghetto and would say, “Wow, diversity!” then leave to go eat, stay, and vacation in their pretty white yuppie neighborhoods and hangouts.

Black Lives Matter, Stalinist “useful idiots” and “crybullies” on the left’s payroll, have fanned around the country, shrieking successfully in the faces of academics and administrators who cower in fear and give in to their outrageous demands, transforming the campus into an intolerant blitzkrieg, take no prisoners atmosphere, if anyone disagrees with their views and demands.

And the namby-pamby students themselves now whine about “safe spaces” on campus where they can be sheltered from reality, work, and any kind of strenuous thinking that might upset their drug-induced, rose-colored haze in vaunted majors such as women’s studies, race studies, and communist social justice. They are frightened by the sight of sober reality, American flags, Confederate flags, Halloween costumes, Christian symbols, people with white skin and non-existent “white privilege,” personal responsibility, entrepreneurship, and work ethic.

The concept of “safe space” involves retreating from the challenges of college, of life and reality in general, from the fear of uncertainty, an expression of the coddled generations raised by liberal parents and perhaps well-intentioned conservatives who wanted everything for their children that they did not have.

Did we have a safe space in schools under socialism/communism? Maybe it was the dark, dank, smelly, and dirty bathrooms flooded with urine. The courtyard was not a safe place either because we were only allowed there when we arrived and assembled in rows before we could go into the building, during PE classes once a day, and when we left school – congregation or protests of any kind were not allowed.

If anybody protested anything, they were dealt with speedily and efficiently – they never could nor would do it again. We could not go to the teacher’s office because they did not have one and talking to them would be like talking to an information gathering agency that would be used against you.

It was not allowed to congregate in the hallways unless one wanted detention. The classroom was not a safe space either. You had to sit in your chair at rapt attention and take notes. You had to keep your mouth shut unless asked a question. Should you give the wrong answer, or talk out of line, you were given a verbal dress down, physical punishment, but the next day you tried a little harder to blend into conformity.

Life and reality have few safe spaces. While these cowardly college students whine about escaping from the “harsh” reality of the world, coddled and sheltered their entire lives by liberal schools and misguided parents, brave American soldiers go to places around the world most of us cannot even imagine, the last line of defense between us and invading “refugees” who wish us harm.

Is a college “safe space” a misguided escape to communist dystopia, the dystopia in which Saul Alinsky still teaches his radicals to shake down the hard-working taxpayers under the guise of “social justice” and “fair share?”

Colleges have created “free speech zones,” tiny corners where divergent opinions may or may not be tolerated. Now they demand “safe spaces” on their campuses. Do these college students truly want safety in their country, on their campuses, or do they just want spaces to whine and shake down the social structure?

 

HUD Will Choose Your Neighbors through a Massive Social Engineering Rule

Home, Sweet Home Photo: Andrei Pandele

On July 8, 2015, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced the final rule on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH). HUD describes this rule – “everyone can access affordable, quality housing regardless of their “race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, or familial status.”  http://www.hud.gov/news/index.cfm

HUD’s Secretary, Julian Castro, stated that “unfortunately, too many Americans find their dreams limited by where they come from, and a ZIP code should never determine a child’s future.” To make sure all Americans have access to “safe, affordable housing in communities that are rich with opportunity,” HUD will socially reengineer where we live.

This new AFFH (15-084) HUD rule was issued based on “recommendations made by a 2010 Government Accountability Office report, stakeholders, and HUD program participants.”

Those who receive grants from HUD must analyze “their fair housing landscape and set locally determined fair housing priorities and goals through an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH).

“To aid communities in this work, HUD will provide open data to grantees and the public on patterns of integration and segregation, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disproportionate housing needs, and disparities in access to opportunity.” Armed with such sensitive information, HUD grantees will then force their goals onto existing communities and housing planning processes. “In addition to providing data and maps, HUD will also provide technical assistance to aid grantees as they adopt this approach.” http://www.huduser.gov/portal/affht_pt.html#final-rule

Tom DeWeese, President of the American Policy Center, explained that the AFFH Rule “will virtually erase the very concept of local rule by your locally elected representatives.” Massive demographic analyses will be undertaken on communities that apply for HUD grants “to determine if there are enough low income and minority people living in every neighborhood. HUD will search the records of every person in each neighborhood for income levels, race, color, religion, national origin and much more.” Such data mining will take place every five years.

According to Ken Blackwell and Rick Manning, “AFFH rule seeks to radically reinvent local zoning laws in the United States – reengineering America’s neighborhoods based on racial and ethnic quotas. Under the rule’s assessment tool, local governments are required to ‘identify neighborhoods or areas in the jurisdiction and region where racial/ethnic groups are segregated.” www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/12/04/congress-must-stop-team-obamas-plan-to-radically-reengineer-americas-neighborhoods.html

The AFFH Rule has transformed the $3.5 billion annual program into “a political redistricting tool.”

Tom DeWeese warned that the AFFH Rule will cause property values to plummet, equity in homes will disappear, the government will replace your locally elected representatives, wealth will be redistributed, private property ownership will be destroyed, and local control will disappear.

Key features under this HUD AFFH Rule are as follows:

-          Clarifying existing fair housing obligations (standardization and transparency)

-          Publicly open data on fair housing and access to opportunity (HUD will provide open data and mapping tools)

-          Balanced approach to fair housing (invest to revitalize distressed areas and expand access to HUD housing throughout the entire community regardless of pre-existing zoning)

-          Expanding access to opportunity (“The strength of America’s economy, the stability, and security of its neighborhoods, and the ability for all to prosper depends on all Americans having equal access to opportunity – no matter what they look like or where they come from.”)

-          Valuing local data and knowledge (publicly open data will assist with their assessment of fair housing)

-          Customized tools for local leaders (fair housing assessment data and tools are specific to local jurisdictions, public housing authorities, and states and Insular Areas)

-          Collaboration is encouraged (regional fair housing priorities and goals)

-          Community voice (community participation in analyzing fair housing conditions)

-          A phased-in approach (additional time to adopt AFFH rule)

-          Additional time for small grantees and recent regional collaborations (for areas receiving $500,000 grants or less, and areas receiving HUD’s Sustainable Communities competition grants)http://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/AFFH_Final_Rule_Executive_Summary.pdf

Tom DeWeese called this AFFH what it really is – communism. To fight back, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-4th district) of Arizona introduced an amendment to prevent HUD from implementing AFFH. The House passed this amendment (229-193) and attached it to Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development Appropriations bill (THUD).

Senator Mike Lee of Utah introduced a similar amendment in the Senate called the “Local Zoning Decisions Protection Act” (S.1909). Co-sponsors are Senators Jeff Sessions, David Vetter, Mike Enzi, and Marco Rubio. THUD will come up for a vote any time now. It is up to you to call your senators to fight against this massive and irreversible social engineering of America and redistribution of your wealth. Forcing people to live in neighborhoods of the government’s choosing has been tried under communism with disastrous results.

Venezuela Ran out of Other People's Money

Venezuelans rejected socialism. They’ve run out of other people’s money; the long lines to buy basic food and toilet paper did not help either. The main stream media has glossed over this massive defeat of President Nicolas Maduro’s socialism.  In a great St. Nick gift, his opposition took back control of the National Assembly in a landslide election on December 6, 2015.

According to the National Electoral Council, the Democratic Unity coalition won 99 of the 167 seats in the National Assembly, a legislative majority, while the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela won 46 seats.  If the opposition wins 13 of the 22 remaining races, it will gain a two-thirds supermajority, possibly running a referendum to get rid of Maduro before his term expires in 2019. A simple majority could amnesty all political prisoners.

Of the 19 million registered voters, 74 percent showed up to cast their ballots, a huge turnout, a sign that people have grown weary and tired of sixteen years of Hugo Chavez’s style socialism that brought Venezuela to the brink of destruction.  

USA Today quoted Minerva Lopez, a seamstress from Caracas, who said, “What a relief. The nightmare is ending.” But is it? The opposition has a hard road ahead to undo sixteen years of economically destructive policies. www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/12/05/venezuela-election-national-assembly-maduro-voting/76883170

The opposition leader is Henrique Capriles, the governor of the state of Miranda. After Hugo Chavez died, a special presidential election was held in April 2013 when Capriles lost to Maduro, a successor picked and approved by Chavez.  Maduro is a former bus driver. In socialism credentials and expertise are not necessary to run a country; one needs to be faithful to the socialist party line even though it may drag the country into economic abyss.

Capriles promised to rein in the political corruption. Because “The government has used state funds to finance their campaigns,” he promised to make changes “legally, constitutionally, and peacefully.”

Even though Venezuela has one of the largest oil reserves, the mismanagement of the socialist economy and of the monetary policy has translated into an inflation rate of 150 percent. As crude prices have dropped around the world, Venezuelan oil revenues have declined considerably, causing a sizable contraction of the economy.

Maduro had supported Hugo Chavez’s legacy of “Chavismo,” an anti-capitalist system centered on keeping the poor pacified with more welfare, promises of higher pensions, scholarships, and public housing, Chavez and his ruling elites amassed billions in ill-gotten wealth. Chavez stayed in power by bringing in free sub-standard health care from Cuba for the poor and by making promises of perennial dependency on the socialist government.  And that is not all that Chavez brought from Cuba. “Venezuela has promised 100,000 barrels of oil per day to Cuba, and in exchange Cuban intelligence runs the Venezuelan state security apparatus.”  http://bwcentral.org/?p=25545

Once the money dwindled due to reduced oil revenues, the generous handouts soured and the economy tanked.

Opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez warned, “The world needs to know that the abuses of Venezuela’s government have put us on a path toward economic collapse and social devastation, with implications that will spread beyond our borders.” http://bwcentral.org/?p=26797

Standing in huge lines for hours to buy food and rationing by fingerprint were just some of the indignities the citizens of socialist Venezuela had to endure.

“Patricia Gamboa arrived at a government-run supermarket in western Venezuela at 2:00 am, six hours before doors opened, to be first in line and buy whatever she could get her hands on.  As dawn broke, about 200 people stood behind her outside the Bicentenario shop in San Cristobal, with numbers written on their wrists with green markers to avoid arguments over who came first.” http://bwcentral.org/?p=26019

The Chicago Tribune wrote on April 11, 2014, “Crisis in Venezuela: Too much crime, not enough toilet paper.” People could not find enough milk, cooking oil, sugar, flour, coffee, cornmeal, and toilet paper.  Hoarding became a crime in Venezuela and people received an electronic identification card with their fingerprints. These cards alerted the authorities when people tried to buy more than they were allowed by government decree.

The socialist government blamed their inadequacy on the greedy capitalists who allegedly drove up prices. Farmers and store owners blamed the socialist government price controls that forced them to sell below cost.

Chavez was worshipped by the poor because he spent billions from the huge oil revenues (when prices of crude were high) on government subsidies, controlled food and gas prices, and nationalized farms and small businesses that “supposedly were not keeping up with production. He even awarded a free government-built home to his 3 millionth follower on Twitter.”

I understand the indignity of socialist mismanagement of the economy well. Centralized planning forced us to stand in food lines all the time to survive in Ceausescu’s Romania. This uneducated cobbler with grandiose aspirations imposed on his people a socialist/communist nightmare that lasted 44 years before people finally said “enough.”

A centralized socialist government always blamed their disastrous and ever-failing economic policies on greedy capitalists and on business “profiteers.” Socialists eventually ran out of other people’s money and wealth. They silenced in the process any opposition and critics if they dared speak out against the collectivist philosophy, the elites like Chavez, and the “useful idiots” who understood just enough to be dangerous.

 

 

Witold Gadowski, Polish Journalist, Talks about Syrian Refugees to Fronda.pl

Award-winning Polish journalist Witold Gadowski

Anca Cernea translated on September 26, 2015, an interview given by Witold Gadowski, investigative journalist from Poland, to Jakub Jalowiczor from fronda.pl. Gadowski traveled to Syria and Turkey this past summer as war correspondent to document the “refugees” flooding Europe. http://inliniedreapta.net/adevaratele-victime-ale-statului-islamic-nu-sunt-printre-migrantii-care-vin-in-europa-witold-gadowski/

Cernea introduced Gadowski as producer of several documentaries on terrorism, organized crime, corruption, and the old communist system. He is an expert, writer, and journalism teacher at the Pontifical University of John Paul II.

In his movie, “Insha Allah, Blood of the Martyrs,” Gadowski describes the horrors that Yazidis and Christians must endure in Iraq and Syria under ISIS:  rapes, killings, and kidnappings. Jakub asked him if Europe might be next.

Gadowski responded that the true victims of wars are in camps in the Iraqi section of Kurdistan, in southern Turkey, and in Lebanon:  Shia, Yazidis, and Christians. In his opinion, the Shia are killed immediately when caught. Yazidi women are raped, Yazidi children are sold into slavery, and their men are killed. The Christians are converted to Islam by force, killed, or taxed Jizya. “These are the most persecuted groups in Syria and Iraq in the Diyala, Anbar, Ninive, and Salah ad Din provinces,” Gadowski alleged.

From the valley of Ninive, 60,000 Christians had to flee from Karakos in one day in order to escape the Islamic State. All fled to the Iraqi Kurdistan, Gadowski added. He recounted how he spoke to a teary-eyed Archbishop Nicodim, the patriarch of Mosul. He explained that religion is treated just like in the Bolshevik revolution days – “hordes enter churches, rob them, deface all the symbols, and destroy them.”

Gadowski said that “the borders of the Islamic State (ISIS) are controlled by troops led by Emir Al-Turki. If anyone tries to flee, the punishment is crucifixion.” If anybody escapes, it is because the Islamic State allows them to flee. Their secret service, AMNI, is very effective, he added. ISIS controls the border because it is a source of income – contraband and border traffic.

Gadowski alleges that ISIS has a budget of $800 million per year and that “The Islamic State sells illegally more than 60,000 barrels of oil per day,” mostly to Turkish and Iranian companies, oil that eventually makes its way to Israel and Europe.”

The young men, flooding Europe, are not refugees. “The real victims of the war are in the camps,” he repeated. “Why are the camp survivors pleading unsuccessfully to obtain visas for various European nations and being denied, while the young men are immediately taken in with open arms and presented as refugees?”

“It is a profound injustice when these invaders take the place of the real victims of war.” There are few Christians, Yazidis, and even fewer Kurds among them who truly suffered at the hands of ISIS. Gadowski believes that most of them are opportunists who could afford the $10,000 fee to be brought by coyotes to Europe; “90% of them are brought by the Turkish, Albanian, and Russian mafia,” he alleges.

The camps in the Middle East are financed to an extent by France, Germany, Great Britain, and Poland. Most help is illusive, said Gadowski. People have to endure hot weather in tents while the entire Europe is suddenly embracing these “law breakers” who have no documents, nobody knows who they are, nobody knows what their intentions are, and where they are headed. “Most of them are Muslims who will not integrate in society. It is a grave danger; there will be an Islamic problem in each of the countries where these refugees will settle. ”What is the Islamic problem is on full display in Paris, Brussels, and in German towns.”  Jakub mentioned Marseille as a classic example of the ‘Islamic problem.’ “Marseille is Arabic, pure and simple,” added Gadowski.

Gadowski believes that the Islamic State is composed of Saddam Hussein’s officers and prisoners released from Iraqi and Syrian jails. The superior officers morphed from BAAS party supporters into Islamists. ISIS is led by Iraqis, not Syrians, Gadowski pointed out. Sunnis, persecuted by Al-Maliki’s Shia government, joined the ranks of ISIS as well. Adding 85,000 from the 100,000 Sunni militias dissolved by Al-Malaki, and some Chechen volunteers, ISIS grew even larger. Money is coming in from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and other sources, Gadowski said.

Bombing ISIS is futile, he said, since they insert themselves among civilians. Bombing refineries is inefficient as well. Specialists from China, Russia, and Iran make immediate repairs and the refineries are back in business.  Oil can also be refined on a smaller scale with portable refineries, Gadowski added, 1,000 barrels per day, they are relatively inexpensive. He alleges that ISIS sells art and archeological treasures to bring in revenue.

Gadowski stated that AMNI agents had been infiltrated among the “refugees.” According to him, these ‘lone wolves’ were sent around the world as “shahid” (martyr), an entire network of suicide bombers and murderers that are strictly controlled.

NOTE - included Witold Gadowski's accomplishments as presented by Anca Cernea on the website inliniedreapta.net

• În anii ’80, membru NZS (Solidaritatea Studențească) și fondator al clubului politic subteran Okop (Tranșeea); membru fondator al Comitetului Civic Solidaritatea din Malopolska.
• În anii ’90 a fost corespondent de război în Balcani; a organizat convoaie de ajutor pentru victimele războiului din Kosovo.
• 2000-2002 – director al Departamentului de Informații al Universității Nicolaus Copernicus și purtătorul de cuvânt al primarului Cracoviei Andrzej Gołas.
• 2007-2009 – directorul filialei Cracovia a Televiziunii Poloneze, mai – octombrie 2010, șeful Programului 1 al Televiziunii Poloneze.
• A publicat, printre altele, în Rzeczpospolita, Wprost, Dziennik Polskil și în ziare poloneze din exil.
• Jurnalist și reporter de investigație la Gazeta Polska, din 2012 colaborează la revista Wsieci.
• A realizat seria de reportaje Negustorii Morții, despre terorismul contemporan.
• Co-autor al unor interviuri cu Ilich Ramirez Sanchez („Carlos Șacalul”) și soția acestuia, Hans Joachim Klein, Astrid Proll, fondatoare a Rote Armee Fraktion (RAF), Peter Juergen Boock, unul dintre liderii celei de-a doua generații RAF și cu fiica lui Ulrike Meinhof.
• Co-realizator a două reportaje privind conexiunile poloneze ale lui Abu Nidal.
• În 2004, laureat al premiului Grand Press, categoria jurnalism de investigație pentru filmele de televiziune Mafia combustibilului 1 și 2.
• În 2006, nominalizat pentru premiul Andrzej Wojciechowski.
• În 2006, laureat al premiului Watergate al Asociației Jurnaliștilor Polonezi, categoria jurnalism de investigație, pentru reportajul Meciul pentru PZU (despre sforăriile legate de privatizarea companiei de stat de asigurări din perioada comunismului).
• În 2008, laureat al premiului Watergate pentru reportajul Mafia rusă, guvernul polonez și gazul.
• În 2009, laureat al premiului Grand Prix la cea de-a III-a Gală a Reportajelor TV de Investigație și de Intervenție Camera Ascunsă din Łodz,
• Laureat al Galei Bazar, Poznan, laureat al Premiului Jurnaliștilor din Malopolska pentru jurnalism de investigație.
• Autor al volumului Negustorii Morții. Conexiunile poloneze cu terorismul mondial, apărut în 2010.
• A regizat primul documentar din Polonia despre piața internațională a traficului de organe umane.
• În 2013, laureat al premiului internațional acordat de Organizația Internațională pentru Migrație, la Festivalul Internațional de Film de la Chișinău.
• Laureat al Grand Prix pentru regia celui mai bun film polonez la Festivalul Internațional de Film Human Doc.

Cooking Was Not Fun Because It Was Survival

Mamaliga with sourcream

People have asked me why I never really enjoyed gourmet cooking nor was I interested in developing such talents beyond feeding my family an inexpensive meal. As a woman, mother, and wife, that is anathema to a failed human being. How can you not be interested in providing the most delicious, appealing, and nutritious meals for your family?

To understand where I come from, you must walk in the shoes of women and children under the communist regime where I grew up, women with children in tow who had to stand in line every day at an early age if they wanted to buy bread and basics. Moms sent their children to stand in the bread and milk lines, and they stood in the meat and fresh vegetable lines and canned veggies in winter. Fresh was a stretch even in summer time, we had to contend with wilted seasonal spinach, green beans, and peas and shriveled potatoes and apples. Meat meant choice cuts of fat attached to bones with which mom used to make soup. Refrigerators were rare and expensive and freezers did not exist for us, window sills doubled as such in winter time. Crows loved our storage system.

We ate well when grandpa dropped by and brought us a chicken, a pat of butter, and a quarter of a gallon of milk from his country “farm” where he raised rabbits, chicken, a sheep, a pig, and a cow. His farm consisted of a small barn and enough land to have a garden and space to grow some rows of corn.

The communist cooperative grew wheat and the crop was split among the villagers who toiled in the fields each day after the communist party received its demanded quota. It was almost like paying the mafia. After the communist party (the mafia) confiscated their lands for “the good of the people,” these former landowners had to work the land, put in the crop, harvest it, really backbreaking manual labor, and then pay the lion’s share to the land confiscator, the communist party. What a deal!

How can anyone be interested in fancy cooking when ingredients were impossible to find, when we lived from day to day on most basic foodstuff after we stood in endless lines daily?

Can spoiled Americans understand how it feels to enter a grocery store and see rows after rows of empty shelves? Can they imagine real lines for food extending sometimes for a mile, winding around the block and the entire neighborhood?

Can they imagine the fist and tug-of-war battles for a merchandise deal they see on Black Friday magnified to the point of exhaustion? If fat Americans give each other black eyes and bruises over a television set, an electronic game, or other silly gadget in order to save a few bucks while claiming that they are exploited, marginalized, poor, and downtrodden by non-existent “white privilege,” how would they react when faced with severe shortages of food and water? Unbelievably, the next day after they give thanks for what they already have, they pull each other’s hair out fighting for a TV that was probably cheaper a few days earlier.

Normally people fought for the five salamis hanging in the deli window, or a hundred bottles of cooking oil, or a few pallets of sugar and flour, that day’s delivery to the store. Even with rationing coupons, there was never enough food or necessities because planning was centralized, not based on free market supply and demand, it was based on five-year plans crafted and decided by uneducated communist bureaucrats who had no idea what they were doing nor did they care as long as they had their own grocery stores, department stores, doctors, clinics, pharmacies, and hospitals.

It was a privilege to find some food with shorter lines around Christmas time when the communist government supplied more pallets to grocery stores in order to pacify the stupid masses and to continue the real exploitation of the proletariat by the elites who pretended to be taking care of them, to be shielding them from the “evil” capitalists.

We were thin from lack of food, but we were not healthy. Pharmacy shelves were empty too, even vitamins and cotton balls were hard to find. There was a thriving black market at ten times the price that most people could not afford on the government-dictated meager salaries. Equality was painful, miserable, and stomach growling and churning.

I am hearing this tune again from bratty liberal kids who demand social justice and equality.  P.J. O’Rourke called them “spoiled, miserable, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic, and useless.” Somehow, in an alternate universe, these “sniveling brats” blame capitalism for the generational welfare that fat and comparatively well-off Americans accept and demand from the Democrat Party that keeps them “poor.” Personal responsibility is an alien concept to most who are accustomed to being taken care off by taxpayers’ generosity.

Poverty is a relative term and most people ill-define or misunderstand poverty. According to the World Bank, almost 600 million citizens of the globe make less than $2 a day. Are you poor compared to them?

When people tell me how rewarding it is to cook fancy meals for their families, I just see spoiled individuals who have so much to be thankful for but have no idea how lucky they are to be given so many choices by a free market system promoted by capitalism, not by the socialist egalitarian non-sense.  

Americans don’t understand the concept of the starving goose of socialism who was kept pacified and faithful by feeding her one kernel a day, just enough to prevent starvation. This way, she always knew who her masters were and was kept under control, no leash necessary, just a barbed wired fence to keep geese from escaping.