Posted: September 13, 2009
8:13 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

President Obama's choice to monitor school safety once boasted that he introduced homosexual advocacy into the school system in Massachusetts by manipulating the message presented to lawmakers.

Technically, Jennings is not one of Obama's "czars," who are special advisers to the president accountable to no one but the president. Jennings was named to a post in the Department of Education. However, his hiring did not require legislative oversight, such as the Senate vetting process required for other appointees.

Jennings is the founder and former executive director of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, which "works to make schools safe for all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity," according to the government announcement of his appointment.

In his position, he's responsible for oversight of

programs that involve "safety" for public schools across the nation.

In 1995, he gave a speech in which he described how he

has used the concept of "safety" in schools to promote homosexual advocacy in

public schools in Massachusetts. He gave a speech called "Winning the Culture

War" at the Human Rights Campaign Leadership Conference on March 5 of that

year.

Excerpts have been posted on the website of MassResistance,

where chief Brian Camenker has worked to oppose the demands of homosexual

activists.

In the speech, Jennings described how he was concerned

about being described as promoting homosexuality, so he chose to campaign on the

idea of "safety" instead.

If the radical right can succeed in portraying us as

preying on children, we will lose. Their language â€" 'promoting homosexuality' is

one example " is laced with subtle and not-so-subtle innuendo that we are 'after

their kids,'" he told the conference.

We must learn from the abortion struggle, where the

clever claiming of the term 'pro-life' allowed those who opposed abortion on

demand to frame the issue to their advantage, to make sure that we do not allow

ourselves to be painted into a corner before the debate even begins."

He continued, "In Massachusetts the effective reframing

of this issue was the key to the success of the Governor's Commission on Gay and

Lesbian Youth. We immediately seized upon the opponent's calling card " safety "

and explained how homophobia represents a threat to students' safety by creating

a climate where violence, name-calling, health problems and suicide are common. Titling our

report 'Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth,' we automatically threw

our opponents onto the defensive and stole their best line of attack. This

framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling from day

one."

Camenker called Jennings' work the "landmark" speech on

how to portray the promotion of homosexuality as a "safety" issue in order to

gain favor in the eye of the public.

Said Jennings, "Finding the effective frame for your

community is the key to victory. It must be linked to universal values that

everyone in the community has in common. In Massachusetts, no one could speak up

against our frame and say, 'Why, yes, I do think students should kill

themselves': this allowed us to set the terms for debate."

MassResistance also has reported that it was Jennings'

group that in 2000 held a seminar for public school teens on the benefits of

"fisting." The group handed out a document called "The Little Black Book" to

young teens, a pornographic homosexual how-to that includes a directory of homosexual bars.

Jennings also has, according to a report from Americans for

Truth, condemned the "religious right" with an obscene suggestion.

The report said Jennings, talking to a church audience in

New York in 2000, said, "Twenty percent of people are hard-core fair-minded

[pro-homosexual] people. Twenty percent are hard-core [anti-homosexual] bigots.

We need to ignore the hard-core bigots, get more of the hard-core fair-minded

people to speak up, and we'll pull that 60 percent [of people in the middle]

over to our side. That's really what I think our strategy has to be. We have to

quit being afraid of the religious right. We also have to quit I'm trying to

find a way to say this. I'm trying not to say, '[Fâ€"] 'em!' which is what I want

to say, because I don't care what they think!"

Jennings strategy was so successful that his state's

governor's "Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" has brought homosexuality

programs into schools throughout the state.

According to the MassResistance website, now parents are

"astounded" that homosexual assemblies, plays, clubs, counseling sessions, books

and other celebrations of a sexual lifestyle are for "safety"

In fact, none of these so-called suicide prevention

programs have any legitimate medical or psychological basis. No one with actual

credentials to deal with suicide, or even mainstream suicide-prevention groups

such as the Samaritans, are ever involved. Yet, they're dealing with vulnerable

children. Upon examination, you see that all of these programs are simply put

together by homosexual activists to normalize homosexuality in the minds of as

many kids as possible and if possible without any parental knowledge or

consent," the analysis says.

WND reported earlier when it became known that Jennings was

appointed.

At the time, Linda Harvey of http://missionamerica.com/" Mission America, which

educates people on anti-Christian trends in the nation, said it is nothing less

than a "tragedy" for an open homosexual who has "had an enormously detrimental

impact on the climate in our schools" to be in such a position.

Jennings also wrote the foreword for a book called

"Queering Elementary Education: Advancing the Dialogue about Sexualities and

Schooling."

Rev. Anthony Martlew, L.Th.

One of the main issues, which are threatening to split an

already crumbling Established Church, is that of sodomy. The Gay lobby, by

insidious methods, has corrupted the nation's thinking processes. Not only the

"man in the street" has been taken in, but much worse, the leaders of the

Church.

The recent

furore over the proposed appointment of the Bishop of Reading caused a national

outcry.Sadly, many clergy, joined by members of the public, shouted down those

who opposed Canon Jeffrey ohn as being suitable to take high office. Some

readers of the Daily Telegraph made comments about those who oppose sodomy as

"unchristian"

Again, in an article in the Daily Telegraph, the Dean of Southwark, the Very Reverend Colin

Slee, reflected the anger of liberals within the Church when he told his

congregation that Dr. John had been a victim of "appalling prejudice". He

went on to say that the news of his withdrawal was, for many in the Church,

"A devastating blow to their hopes for progress and inclusiveness". To make

matters worse, the Archbishop of Canterbury, speaking on the steps of Lambeth

palace, said, "This has been a time of open and painful confrontation in

which some of our bonds of mutual trust have been severely strained. We need now

to give ourselves the proper opportunities honestly to think through what

happened, and to find what God has been teaching us in these difficult

days"

Bible-believing Christians know precisely what God has been teaching us, not only in these difficult days, but also all

through history. Modern "scholars" of Scripture ignore the pointed warning of Malachi 3:6:-

For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are

not consumed."

The architects of modern "cool" Britain, churchmen among them, overlook the

fact that Almighty God is most definitely not politically correct. What He set

down in the sacred Scriptures stands for all time, apart from the Ordinances.

There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that He has relented as far as

sodomy is concerned.

We find it incredible that churchmen can make such naive statements as that quoted above.

It is obvious that Scripture has no place in their thinking, and their only

concern is to be seen to be "worldly". The Lord made

the position quite clear on the subject of sodomy, and yet the churchmen

recommend such a person for the office of bishop. We can only assume that the

"powers that be" have been blinded by satanic influence. Everyone, it

seems, is now welcome aboard the flagship "Gay Enterprise". All

inclusiveness is the order for the twenty-first century of spiritual

enlightenment.

"Come and join us. It makes no difference what you believe, or who you are, because we all learn from each

It is clear from Dr.Rowan's statement quoted above, that he has no conception of the warnings of

Scripture. The spiritual leader of millions of Anglicans worldwide should be

totally conversant with what Scripture teaches. Sadly, there is little chance of

that, for he has openly attacked the Word of God. It is reported that he wrote

of the Book of Revelation as follows, Page

after page of paranoid fantasy" and "the product of a diseased mind".

If the Archbishop were employed as a salesman for a commercial product, and made

scathing remarks as he has done about Scripture, there is little doubt that he

would be handed his P45 before coffee break! A key text

that we ignore at our peril, is Hebrews 1:1-2:-

"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past

unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his

Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the

worlds;"

This is the foundation of our Christian faith; when this text is understood, everything fits

into place, and will keep us from falling into error. There are many Christians

today who boast that they never read or refer to the Old Testament. The incident

on the road to Emmaus should be a major pointer to the importance of the content

of the Old Testament. Luke 24:27 tells us:-

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto

them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself."

Throughout His earthly ministry, our Lord referred to Scripture time and again. He

confirmed its authenticity, and put greater light upon it. Nothing He ever said

contradicted it. But, say the critics of the Old Testament, "Christ came to

put an end to the law, and we are not under the law, but under grace. All those

laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, they were all done away with when the veil of

the Temple was rent in twain. Besides, we don't think much of the God of the Old

Testament; everything that happened in those days was all blood and

fighting"

Has it not occurred to those critics that there is more blood and fighting in these

"enlightened days", than there was previously? When Yahweh ordered the

destruction of certain nations, it was in order to eradicate evil, so that

others could live in peace. Israel, in her "wisdom" chose to ignore those

commands, and instead of destroying the evil nations, made pacts and trade

agreements with them. They also encouraged intermarriage, against God's

commands. Christians who assert that Christ did away with the Law do not appear

to understand what He so clearly taught, as recorded in Matthew 5:17-19:-

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I

am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven

and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till

all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least

commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the

kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be

called great in the kingdom of heaven."

Paul tells us in Ephesians 2: 15 that the Law stands, apart from the ordinances. These basic

facts of our faith should be taught by those in high places in our churches

today. Instead, they have chosen to ignore them, and as a consequence they have

changed the truth of God into a lie.

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of

commandments contained in ordinances., for to make-in himself of twain one new

man, so making peace;" - (Ephesians 2:15)

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts

of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who

changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more

than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up

unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that

which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of

the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that

which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error

which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,

God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not

convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness,

covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity;

whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of

evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers,

without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgement of

God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the

same, but have pleasure in them that do them." -(Romans 1:24)

"Private fortunes, in the present state of our circulation, are at the mercy of those self-created money lenders, and are prostrated by the floods of nominal money with which their avarice deluges us." ~Letter to John W. Eppes (1813)

"It is a cruel thought, that, when we feel ourselves standing on the firmest ground in every respect, the cursed arts of our secret enemies, combining with other causes, should effect, by depreciating our money, what the open arms of a powerful enemy could not." ~Letter to Richard Henry Lee (1779)

"The evils of this deluge of paper money are not to be removed until our citizens are generally and radically instructed in their cause and consequences, and silence by their authority the interested clamors and sophistry of speculating, shaving, and banking institutions. Till then, we must be content to return quoad hoc to the savage state, to recur to barter in the exchange of our property for want of a stable common measure of value, that now in use being less fixed than the beads and wampum of the Indian, and to deliver up our citizens, their property and their labor, passive victims to the swindling tricks of bankers and mountebankers." ~Letter to John Adams (1819)

"That we are overdone with banking institutions which have banished the precious metals and substituted a more fluctuating and unsafe medium, that these have withdrawn capital from useful improvements and employments to nourish idleness, that the wars of the world have swollen our commerce beyond the wholesome limits of exchanging our own productions for our own wants, and that, for the emolument of a small proportion of our society who prefer these demoralizing pursuits to labors useful to the whole, the peace of the whole is endangered and all our present difficulties produced, are evils more easily to be deplored than remedied." ~Letter to Abbe Salimankis (1810)

"The banks...have the regulation of the safety-valves of our fortunes, and...condense and explode them at their will." ~Letter to John Adams (1819)

"I sincerely believe... that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." ~Letter to John Taylor (1816)

"[The] Bank of the United States... is one of the most deadly hostility existing, against the principles and form of our Constitution... An institution like this, penetrating by its branches every part of the Union, acting by command and in phalanx, may, in a critical moment, upset the government. I deem no government safe which is under the vassalage of any self-constituted authorities, or any other authority than that of the nation, or its regular functionaries. What an obstruction could not this bank of the United States, with all its branch banks, be in time of war! It might dictate to us the peace we should accept, or withdraw its aids. Ought we then to give further growth to an institution so powerful, so hostile?" ~Letter to Albert Gallatin (1803)

"It is literally true that the toleration of banks of paper discount costs the United States one-half their war taxes; or, in other words, doubles the expenses of every war. Now think but for a moment, what a change of condition that would be, which should save half our war expenses, require but half the taxes, and enthral us in debt but half the time."

"Everything predicted by the enemies of banks, in the beginning, is now coming to pass. We are to be ruined now by the deluge of bank paper. It is cruel that such revolutions in private fortunes should be at the mercy of avaricious adventurers, who, instead of employing their capital, if any they have, in manufactures, commerce, and other useful pursuits, make it an instrument to burden all the interchanges of property with their swindling profits, profits which are the price of no useful industry of theirs."~Letter to Thomas Cooper (1814)

"Certainly no nation ever before abandoned to the avarice and jugglings of private individuals to regulate according to their own interests, the quantum of circulating medium for the nation -- to inflate, by deluges of paper, the nominal prices of property, and then to buy up that property at 1s. in the pound, having first withdrawn the floating medium which might endanger a competition in purchase. Yet this is what has been done, and will be done, unless stayed by the protecting hand of the legislature. The evil has been produced by the error of their sanction of this ruinous machinery of banks; and justice, wisdom, duty, all require that they should interpose and arrest it before the schemes of plunder and spoilation desolate the country." ~Letter to William C. Rives (1819)

"The art and mystery of banks....is established on the principle that ‘private debts are a public blessing.’ That the evidences of those private debts, called bank notes, become active capital, and aliment the whole commerce, manufactures, and agriculture of the United States...And to fill up the measure of blessing, instead of paying, they receive an interest on what they owe from those to whom they owe; for all the notes, or evidences of what they owe, which we see in circulation, have been lent to somebody on an interest which is levied again on us through the medium of commerce. And they are so ready still to deal out their liberalities to us, that they are now willing to let themselves run in our debt ninety millions more, on our paying them the same premium of six or eight per cent interest, and on the same legal exemption from the repayment of more than thirty millions of the debt, when it shall be called for." ~Letter to John W. Eppes (1813)

It has not been a good week for the Republic. It took quite a bit of trampling of the Constitution, but the bailout bill passed, as I suspected it would.

The bailout failed the first time it was brought to the House. Undaunted, the Senate pressed on by attaching the bailout as an amendment to another House passed bill that was pending in the Senate. The new bailout version had new taxes, so according to the Constitution it should not have originated in the Senate.

The rallying cry heard all over the Hill the past two weeks was that Congress must act. Our economy is facing a meltdown. Would this bill fix it? Nobody could really explain how it would. In fact, few demonstrated any real understanding of credit markets, of derivatives, of credit default swaps or mortgage-backed securities. If they did, they would have known better than to vote for this bill. All they knew was that this administration was saying some frightening things, and asking for a lot of money. And when has Congress ever been able to come up with a better solution to a problem than to throw more of your money at it? So that is what Congress did, enacting a financial PATRIOT Act in the process.

In its embarrassment at being called a "Do-Nothing Congress," the 110th Congress took decisive action and did SOMETHING. No matter that it was the wrong thing. In fact, it wasn’t until the Senate had a chance to load it up with even MORE spending, when it was finally inflationary and horrible enough, at $850 billion instead of a mere $700 billion, that it passed – and with a comfortable margin. In spite of constituent calls still coming in overwhelmingly against it, 57 members switched their vote!

The market went down anyway. Our nation is now just that much more in the hole. You will pay your part of this mess through inflation, and very likely hyperinflation.

Sometimes doing nothing is much better than thrashing about aimlessly. When one is caught in quicksand, for example, or when one doesn’t understand economics and finds oneself in the position Congress was in for the past two weeks, with decades of irresponsible monetary policy coming to a head. Why should we trust the same people who said just a few months ago that the economy was perfectly sound? The same people who just knew there were weapons of mass destruction? The same people that crammed the PATRIOT Act down our throats? Why not consult the people who had the foresight and understanding to see this coming? They would have recommended such logical actions as repealing the Community Reinvestment Act, which forces banks to make bad loans, or allowing the market to set interest rates instead of the Federal Reserve system. How about abolishing the Federal Reserve altogether? There are many things that could have been done, but don’t expect Congress to take a course of action that comes from a place of understanding and competence when they could just spend money.

This bailout will be the legacy of the 110th "Do-Something" Congress, along with record low approval ratings. Here’s hoping the 111th Congress will be a "Do the Right Thing" Congress, and will focus on repealing and abolishing what is wrong with government instead of reinforcing it.

The paper system being founded on public confidence and having of itself no intrinsic value, it is liable to great and sudden fluctuations, thereby rendering property insecure and the wages of labor unsteady and uncertain. The corporations which create the paper money can not be relied upon to keep the circulating medium uniform in amount. In times of prosperity, when confidence is high, they are tempted by the prospect of gain or by the influence of those who hope to profit by it to extend their issues of paper beyond the bounds of discretion and the reasonable demands of business; and when these issues have been pushed on from day to day, until public confidence is at length shaken, then a reaction takes place, and they immediately withdraw the credits they have given, suddenly curtail their issues, and produce an unexpected and ruinous contraction of the circulating medium, which is felt by the whole community.

The banks by this means save themselves, and the mischievous consequences of their imprudence or cupidity are visited upon the public. Nor does the evil stop here. These ebbs and flows in the currency and these indiscreet extensions of credit naturally engender a spirit of speculation injurious to the habits and character of the people. We have already seen its effects in the wild spirit of speculation in the public lands and various kinds of stock which within the last year or two seized upon such a multitude of our citizens and threatened to pervade all classes of society and to withdraw their attention from the sober pursuits of honest industry.

It is not by encouraging this spirit that we shall best preserve public virtue and promote the true interests of our country; but if your currency continues as exclusively paper as it now is, it will foster this eager desire to amass wealth without labor; it will multiply the number of dependents on bank accommodations and bank favors; the temptation to obtain money at any sacrifice will become stronger and stronger, and inevitably lead to corruption, which will find its way into your public councils and destroy at no distant day the purity of your Government.

Some of the evils which arise from this system of paper press with peculiar hardship upon the class of society least able to bear it. A portion of this currency frequently becomes depreciated or worthless, and all of it is easily counterfeited in such a manner as to require peculiar skill and much experience to distinguish the counterfeit from the genuine note. These frauds are most generally perpetrated in the smaller notes, which are used in the daily transactions of ordinary business, and the losses occasioned by them are commonly thrown upon the laboring classes of society, whose situation and pursuits put it out of their power to guard themselves from these impositions, and whose daily wages are necessary for their subsistence.

It is the duty of every government so to regulate its currency as to protect this numerous class, as far as practicable, from the impositions of avarice and fraud. It is more especially the duty of the United States, where the Government is emphatically the Government of the people, and where this respectable portion of our citizens are so proudly distinguished from the laboring classes of all other nations by their independent spirit, their love of liberty, their intelligence, and their high tone of moral character. Their industry in peace is the source of our wealth and their bravery in war has covered us with glory; and the Government of the United States will but ill discharge its duties if it leaves them a prey to such dishonest impositions. Yet it is evident that their interests can not be effectually protected unless silver and gold are restored to circulation.

So what’s the truth? Are the militias malicious? The experts will tell you that they are. But despite their millions of dollars of top-flight research, they can’t come up with better explanations for WHY they’re malicious than these: HATE and PARANOIA.

That would be sufficient, if there were nothing to hate and no reasons to be paranoid.

A Manhattan lawyer who describes himself as "America’s leading expert on the militia movement," writes that he hugged his three-year-old kid the night of the Oklahoma City bombing. He told Junior that it happened "because they hated too much."

For now, let’s accept the premise that one hundred sixty-eight humans died in Oklahoma City because people "hated too much." I think it’s a silly and reductive proposition, but let’s accept it. Now answer these questions, if you’d be so kind:

Did a federal sniper shoot Vicki Weaver in the face because he hated too much? Did our government conduct the Tuskegee Experiment with syphilis on black soldiers because it hated too much? Does our justice system ignore a quarter-million jailhouse rapes a year because it hates too much?

Did LBJ lie about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, causing the deaths of 60,000 Americans and nearly a half-million Vietnamese, because he hated too much? Did our tax dollars recently finance over 200,000 corpses in El Salvador because our government hated too much? Did 116,708 Americans die in World War I because our government hated too much? Did 54,246 Americans die in the Korean "conflict" because our government hated too much? Did "our" government never come clean and admit that these wars were all useless wastes of human life that only benefited the wealthy because it hated too much?

Did the U.S. government intern Japanese citizens in concentration camps during World War II because it hated too much? Did the British police drag IRA members from their beds, drop them from helicopters, apply electrodes to their genitals, drug them, and insert blunt objects in their anuses until they fainted because they hated too much? Do Israeli police shove ball-point pens inside the urethras of Arab political prisoners because they hate too much? Did Stalin and Mao each kill more people than Hitler did because they hated too much?

I’ll expect your answers next Monday morning.

America’s first hate-speech law was 1798’s Sedition Act. Barely twenty years after the Declaration of Independence advocated overthrowing the British government by force, the United States made it a crime to advocate overthrowing the government by force. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. It became a punishable offense to say or publish things that could "excite popular hatreds" against government officials. So maybe all this chest-thumping about "hate speech" has less to do with racism than it has to do with criticism of government. That’s the hate-speech uproar deconstructed.

So now hatred is the enemy that the experts fear. Like all objects of fear, it’s something they don’t understand. The problem with most "experts" on hate is that they seem truly bewildered as to what causes people to hate. They’re aware that hate surrounds them, but they don’t know why. They don’t appear to be people who’ve ever had much legitimate cause to feel burning, frustrated hatred in their lives. People in Northern Ireland know what it’s like to hate. Blacks in America know the feeling. But the experts scratch their heads and ask for more federal grant money to solve the problem.

Some of them actually want us to spend millions of dollars to research what causes human hate. They implore you to fight the hate. They want you to kill it, squash it, suffocate it, exterminate it. Blind as bats, they entirely miss the point that the problem isn’t hate, it’s human nature. Especially when human nature rubs elbows with wealth and power.

Why do people hate? It’s a natural human emotion, not some sinister aberration. Just as love comes from satisfaction, hate comes from frustration. Hate is as useful as love, and it often works a hell of a lot quicker. Hatespeak is usually more honest than lovespeak, and it’s always better than doublespeak.

Some things seem worthy of hate. People hate being told lies, especially when they might die because of those lies. People hate when others are indifferent to their situation. People hate when they realize they’re being robbed and can do nothing to stop it.

HATRED comes from powerlessness, whereas DISDAIN-the sort that highfalutin media yogis show for the redneck rabble-rousers’ ethno-geo-ideological world-is more often reserved to the cushier classes. Poor people hate, while the affluent show disdain. The powerful have always regarded the powerless with a supercilious contempt that could very rightly be called hate. So they’re in no position to act holy about so-called hate speech.

How can you protest your oppression (perceived or actual) and sound lovey-dovey about it? The MOST important type of speech to protect is hate speech, because it often contains desperate truths that would lose their urgency if expressed calmly. Most revolutions throughout history could hardly be called acts of love.

You know what I consider hate speech? Words or phrases that are dangerous falsehoods, such as "friendly fire." That’s hateful to me. Peace with honor. Collateral damage. Pacification programs. Peacekeeping actions. National security. Vital interests. Bald-faced lies that get people killed.

When D.C. powermongers accuse Montana pitchfork-bearers of terrorism and make a garish media parade of it, they should really wipe their own dirty behinds first. When government PR-puppies wag fingers and preach that "with free speech comes responsibility," they should check their own words.

The government never flinched from infecting Americans with hate speech whenever "vital interests" were at stake somewhere on the other side of the planet. My brother had never met a Vietnamese person until the feds armed him with an M16 and told him to go murder them. When he came home on furlough and talked about how he wanted to "kill gooks," it wasn’t the Klan who put that idea in his head, it was his Army officers. At six or seven years old, I remember seeing The Green Berets with John Wayne and being convinced of America’s meritorious mission in Vietnam. Was I influenced by hate speech? Probably.

Maybe they’re brainwashing everyone to love each other because they realize we’ll all be fighting over the same loaf of bread. 

Be sure to check out http://remnantway.com/