Connect with us

Education

Brooklyn College to police: No bathroom for you

Published

on

Brooklyn College to police No bathroom for you

They say a tree grows in Brooklyn. Those trees might be in new trouble, based on an outrageous bathroom policy by a taxpayer-funded public college trying to keep police – including many officers of color – from going anywhere near its precious students.

Brooklyn College, one of the flagship four-year colleges in the taxpayer-funded City University of New York system, is directing officers in need to a dilapidated, filthy and obscure bathroom at the outskirts of the campus. According to one report, the bathroom has an “out of order” sign on one stall, no soap and no paper towels.

A spokesman for the college said the policy is meant to encourage officers to use the select facility rather than “walking across either quadrangle” (the large grassy spaces between the college’s primary buildings). However, anti-police animus among the student body may be the cause.

The current student government president speculates some students are afraid of the police. A college student newspaper recently tied students’ discomfort to a New York Police Department undercover surveillance operation of students at the campus. The discomfort does not appear to be about crime; when a college maintenance worker got arrested in 2015 for selling cocaine on campus, students protested – the police!

A petition to the college president to ban police from the campus entirely is reportedly being circulated. But don’t count on the college administration stepping in to stop the apparent sanctuary campus policy towards criminals, or terrorists. The college invited Bernie Sanders to be its commencement speaker last spring.

Further Reading

Brooklyn College doesn’t want police using campus bathrooms

https://nypost.com/2017/11/19/brooklyn-college-wants-police-to-use-run-down-bathroom/A visit by The Post to the first-floor men’s room in the WEB — located past the school’s tennis courts and next to its athletic field — revealed a broken toilet with a hideously stained seat and an “OUT OF ORDER” sign taped to the door of its stall.

There was also a total lack of soap and paper towels.

Continue Reading
3 Comments

3 Comments

  1. Susan

    November 20, 2017 at 9:10 am

    You call yourselves “educated” college students? I don’t think so.
    How stupid can you be? With all these mass shootings, rapists and muggers running around, and let’s not forget terrorist attacks going on, you’d think police presence would be welcomed on your campus.
    Also, for all you students that are here (from other countries), getting a FREE education …. Go back home if you don’t want our FREE protection!
    DON’T DIAL 911 when something goes horribly wrong.

  2. Dale McNamee

    November 20, 2017 at 1:32 pm

    Maybe the police should not give protection to Brooklyn College nor respond to any emergency calls from it and its students, administrators, and so-called “professors”… Same goes for Fire and EMS…

    Let them fend for themselves…

  3. Pingback: FAKE NEWS: Brooklyn College Wages War on NYPD (It Doesn’t) – the EXCELSIOR

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

Pilot textbook for California 1st graders glorifies Gavin Newsome as “Champion for People’s Rights”

Published

on

Pilot textbook for California 1st graders glorifies Gavin Newsome as Champion for Peoples Rights

First graders are supposed to be getting their first taste of basic math, reading, and history, among other things. What many first graders in California may be getting is indoctrination to leftist perspectives and the crowing of gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsome as a historical figure.

It’s time for new textbooks in California and one in particular is sparking controversy. A book being considered by Elk Grove unified school district portrays the former San Francisco mayor and current Lieutenant Governor as a “Champion for People’s Rights.”

The focus of the controversy is that it sounds like campaign propaganda instead of something appropriate for first graders. What do you think? Is it over the top?

Continue Reading

Education

At G20, Betsy DeVos puts America last

Published

on

On September 5th, 2018, in what can only be described as a mind-boggling stab to the gut of Americans, the US Secretary of Education committed US education to the globalist agenda of collectivism, corporatism, and social engineering; to a global agenda that was decidedly rejected by a diverse array of Americans through the election of Donald Trump in 2016.

DeVos attended the G20’s first ever Education Ministerial Meeting, held in Argentina. Out of those meetings came the eight-page G20 Education Ministers’ Declaration 2018. The document details the goals, priorities, and world-wide agenda of the G20 ministers in the areas of Education and Skills Policies, Financing Education, International Cooperation, and The Way Forward.

THE PURPOSE OF EDUCATION

The first statement of the document’s Preamble illustrates what the authors grievously believe to be the purpose of education (italics and spelling patterns in the original):

We, the Ministers of Education of the G20 members and invited countries, met in Mendoza, Argentina on 5 September 2018 to affirm the unique role of education as a key driver for sustainable development for all nations, recognise the need to place education at the centre of the global agenda and call for collective action.

This is a distressing indication that the US Secretary of Education’s philosophical beliefs are gravely inharmonious with those of most American parents who humbly and rightfully desire a quality education for their children; education which bestows the fundamental skills and knowledge necessary to thrive.

VOWS OF COMMITMENT TO GLOBALIZATION

Statements 20-22, among others, are especially illuminating: the statements therein shine a spotlight on both the relativistic-globalist mindset of DeVos and the other G20 education ministers, as well as these ministers’ narcissistic presumptuousness.

Reading the declaration, it becomes evident that the authors believe themselves to be the noble representatives of the “shared” aspirations and values of all peoples the world over, and the bearers of a fruitful philosophy which will usher in a new and prosperous future to be welcomed with open arms.

Key statements to this effect include:

We commit to facilitating the internationalisation of education.

We will work to meet our commitments affirmed in this Declaration… to building a robust set of education and skills policies from a global perspective that fosters inclusive and sustainable human progress in every nation.

ALLEGIANCE TO UNESCO’S AGENDA 2030

The second statement is quite curious, given that the United States has pulled out of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which will officially take place at the end of this year. Statement 2 reads (italics in original):

In line with the United Nations 2030 Agenda, we affirm our commitment to ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all.

In fact, loyalty to UNESCO and to UNESCO’s Agenda 2030 is communicated several times within the declaration.

At the time of the UN-member adoption of Agenda 2030, Alex Newman of The New American noted:

Top globalists such as former NATO chief Javier Solana, a socialist, are celebrating the plan, which the summit unanimously “approved,” as the next “Great Leap Forward” — yes, the old campaign slogan of the Chinese Communist Party.

Additionally, listed as having provided the “expertise” and “reports” on “key issues” which informed the G20 education ministers’ declarations on educational goals and policy are UNESCO, the Organization for Economic Development (OECD), the World Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank.

This leads one to question whether Secretary DeVos is simply falling in line with the status quo or if she is quietly undermining the president’s America First agenda.

President Trump wouldn’t be the first American president to have his agenda thwarted by his education secretary.

As noted by Mary Byrne at Truth in American Education:

When President Reagan worked to keep his campaign promise to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and restore control of education to parents and local school boards, his vice-president, G. H. W. Bush supported Reagan’s first Secretary of EducationTerrel Bell, in preserving the Department; and it was another Senator from Tennessee, Lamar Alexander’s mentor, Howard Baker, who thwarted Reagan’s effortsAlexander worked to get Devos confirmed as Secretary of Education (or is that Minister of Education?). Now, as President Trump works to keep his campaign promise to return education to the states, his efforts are thwarted by his own Secretary of Education and Senator Baker’s protégé. Trump would do himself a service by requesting Secretary DeVos’s resignation, and Tennessee would do America a great service by settling Senator Alexander’s quandary about running for re-election in 2020, and clearing the way for President Trump to accomplish what he was elected to do.

 

OTHER PROMINENT THEMES THEREIN

Almost too predictable to be worthy of mention, one theme reverberates throughout the G20 Education Ministers’ Declaration: the collectivist-corporatist social engineering of a world-wide labor force and the development of an idyllic, world-wide society.

I have already written an in-depth series on the topic of the Big Data/Workforce movement – within which DeVos is actively involved, attempting to persuade President Trump to merge the Department of Education with the Department of Labor – and the big money which is driving it. Thus, for the sake of brevity, I will not expound further. You may read about this subject here, here, here, and here.

“It is important that education keeps pace with societal and technological innovations such as Artificial Intelligence, Big Data and Internet of Things,” the ministers tell us.

What is worth noting are the education ministers’ emphasis on monitoring the implementation of their policies and measure the success of said societies-altering through the means of data-mining world-wide citizens and international data-sharing of said information.

As statement 13 declares (spelling in original):

We recognise the value of policies based on evidence and the importance of having robust and comprehensive learning assessment systems and data in order to measure progress and learning outcomes, to help ensure quality education for all at all stages of life. More broadly, assessments systems should provide quality input for decision-making at every level…

As elaborated upon in statement 16:

Strengthening governance, management, monitoring and accountability is key to addressing this shared challenge. Increased social and economic returns on investment can have significantly positive impact on human development, and encourage greater commitments in this area.

To assuage (likely anticipated) concerns, the authors commit to “highlighting the importance of interpretation and responsible use of results.”

Also worth noting are the education ministers’ intentions to install upon the peoples of the world a societal consensus which the ministers refer to as a “global and cultural competence” by means of an organized, world-wide, top-down communications effort, “sharing our common values among our education institutions.”

To the same ends, DeVos and the other G20 education ministers emphasize a recruitment process which will “attract and retain the most suitable and passionate individuals from a diversity of backgrounds into the teaching profession.”

“Suitable” teachers are identified as being individuals “equipped with the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes free from gender stereotypes…” The document does not identify which “values and attitudes” an individual must possess.

And, of course, the G20 ministers of education stress international funding for their scheme.

IT’S TIME TO SEND DEVOS PACKING

UNESCO has not changed in the years since an impassioned President Ronald Reagan said, “UNESCO has extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with. It has exhibited hostility toward a free society, especially a free market and a free press, and it has demonstrated unrestrained budgetary expansion.”

Why does Betsy DeVos believe that she has the right to circumvent the president and become a side-line partner with UNESCO? What happened to America First?

In what ways does Secretary DeVos believe that the unsustainable economic and social theories of United Nations bureaucrats, especially the euphemistically named “sustainable development” cause célèbre, have to do with ensuring American youths have the education necessary to succeed?

Under what authority does Secretary DeVos believe she may impose the G20 education ministers’ “shared values” upon American youth?

Who gave her the authority to employ the Department of Education in a scheme against the American people?

Is Betsy DeVos a naive stooge simply falling in line or, given that she has now declared herself a globalist through the full consensus of the G20 team, is the secretary quietly undermining the American First agenda?

Obedient to the status quo or cold betrayal and circumvention of the will of the people?

Truth be told, the answer doesn’t matter; both choices produce rotten fruit.

Americans need a George Washington; not a Benedict Arnold.

It’s time to send Ms. DeVos packing.

Continue Reading

Education

No, NY Times, it isn’t just “white conservatives” who oppose affirmative action

Published

on

No NY Times it isnt just white conservatives who oppose affirmative action

I’m a conservative. I’m not white. I am acquainted with many other conservatives who are not white. I can say based on my anecdotal experience that affirmative action is generally frowned upon by conservatives regardless of race. As a matter of fact, I know of some progressives who accept that affirmative action is no longer necessary.

It shouldn’t have annoyed me so much that a NY Times article singled out “white conservatives” as opposing affirmative action for decades. As with the vast majority of liberal writers and publications, singling out a perceived negative about a race is only acceptable if the race is Caucasian. I’m not surprised they went there, but it still got to me.

Asian-American Students Suing Harvard Over Affirmative Action Win Justice Dept. Support

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/30/us/politics/asian-students-affirmative-action-harvard.htmlBut the Trump administration is turning the same tool against affirmative action in college admissions, a major — and highly contentious — legacy of the civil rights era, and one that white conservatives have opposed for decades. In the past few years, the anti-affirmative action cause has been joined by Asian-Americans who argue that they are being held to a higher standard, losing out on coveted slots at places like Harvard as African-Americans, Latinos and other groups get a boost.

As the Justice Department’s statement of interest indicates, the use of affirmative action by Harvard to reject qualified Asian-American students is discriminatory. Harvard’s policy basically says someone more deserving of enrollment must be passed over in order to fill a diversity quota.

Imagine if these limits and quotas were applied to other types of people. Would Harvard get away with this practice for decades if they capped the number of women who were accepted? What if they said they would only accept a certain number of homosexual students?

Let’s use a direct parallel. What if Harvard said they would only allow a specified number of African American or Latino students every year? Do you think that practice would still be in place for the class of 2022?

Caucasians and often Asian Americans are now the victims of a pendulum that has swung too far in the other direction. Affirmative action may have made sense in the past when diversity needed to be forced in order to get older generations to comply. Those days are gone. The combination of a general embracing of diversity in America and the fear of anything that smells discriminatory (nobody wants to be known as a bigot in 2018) has made affirmative action unnecessary at best and harmful at worst.

For some reason, discrimination doesn’t have the same foul odor to leftists if it’s applied to Caucasian or Asian American students. This inconsistency in their moral compass continues to be a fatal flaw in their overall worldview.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report