“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical… known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom–Lucifer.”
~ Saul Alinsky
Click here for the completely falsified account of the Occupy Wall Street protest portrayed in the Scholastic newsletter for teachers. You have to read this for yourselves to get the full impact of the deceitful propaganda it spews.
Scholastic, self-proclaimed as America’s leading news source, ignored the occupiers’ attacks on the police, the filth they took pride in, the diseases, the rapes, the drugs, the defecating and peeing wherever, the rodents running about, their spitting on passersby, and the public nudity and sex.
Oh, and the anti-semitism was conveniently overlooked. There is no mention of the extremism and the fact that the occupiers have the unmitigated gall to believe they can occupy public and private property without permission, which they left filthy and marred by graffiti.
There was no mention of the fact that 99% of the 99%ers are Obama supporters echoing his campaign mantra of class warfare.
The first claim Scholastic makes is that the movement started small with 1,000 protesters.
That’s a bald faced lie. I was there and there were no more than 300 and, except when the union troops were called in, they rarely had more.
Secondly, the newsletter claims that it spread from Wall Street to more than 1,500 cities around the world, including more than 100 U.S. cities.
In actuality, nothing spread from Wall Street, but rather, Occupy Wall Street, and their comrades in other cities, are the outgrowth of the Anarchist group, adbusters, the unions, Soros groups, and the Global Revolution, a worldwide Communist green movement. They were planned and well-funded from day 1. I know this because I was there. The statist occupiers openly discussed their funding from Adbusters, Daily Kos, MoveOn, Brookfield Properties, Media Matters, United Steel Workers, and so on.
Third, the newsletter states that the common thread is all the protesters are suffering from tough financial times and want to know who is to blame for them. One of the biggest issues is the growing gap between the rich and the poor. The richest 1 percent of Americans earn nearly 25 percent of all U.S. income, according to a recent study.
That is one of the biggest lies. Many protesters were young people from wealthy families. Yes, many had signs calling themselves the 99%ers, but their common thread, if there is one, is that they wanted to overthrow the government, something they had no problem repeating over and over.
To make matters worse, this is what the teachers are encouraged to share with the children. Their newsletters for children are as deceptive. Scholastic newsletters are given liberally to schools and cover every grade level. Take a look at this one for 4th graders which I took off the WND site.
Now look here for their view on the Tea Party protests. They claim that it is a Republican Party movement, which was certainly not the case. I know this from experience. The Tea Party started with Rick Santelli’s rant on TV and it was a spontaneous grassroots movement. They sprouted up with the help of handfuls of enthusiastic citizens and others sought them out after seeing a few on TV. It was that spontaneous.
Scholastic’s propaganda against the Tea Party begins by quoting a comment by a Tea Party leader followed up by a stat that says only 18% of the population agrees with the Teas, which has never been an accurate figure. Then they quote Sen. Inouye calling them extremists and people who do not cover the soul of America.
The Teas never committed crimes, performed sexual acts or did drugs in public, they never left filth, and they are pro-Israel. There were only the invented and unproven stories of racism.
Scholastic editors felt no need to present two views for the occupation movement nor did they include the favorability stats. There was only one positive view presented and it was a lie.
Now colleges like NYU are going to offer courses on Occupy Wall Street. That’s up there with the basket weaving electives. I’m sure NYU will be as honest and fair as Scholastic.
What does liberal mean nowadays? Does it mean revolution, lying, changing history, lauding fringe movements? It would seem so as long as it furthers their cause. The end justifies the means for them, how very Alinsky of them.