Netanyahu was right. He has warned of a nuclear arms race.

Netanyahu: Iran deal would create a nuclear arms race in the Middle East
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/05/netanyahu-iran-nuke-deal-will-spark-middle-east-arms-race/
———-
Saudi Arabia Promises to Match Iran in Nuclear Capability

“We can’t sit back and be nowhere as Iran is allowed to retain much of its capability and amass its research,” one of the Arab leaders preparing to meet Mr. Obama said on Monday, declining to be named until he made his case directly to the president. Prince Turki bin Faisal, the 70-year-old former Saudi intelligence chief, has been touring the world with the same message.

“Whatever the Iranians have, we will have, too,” he said at a recent conference in Seoul, South Korea.

But by leaving 5,000 centrifuges and a growing research and development program in place — the features of the proposed deal that Israel and the Arab states oppose virulently — Mr. Obama is essentially recognizing Iran’s right to continue enrichment of uranium, one of the two pathways to a nuclear weapon. Leaders of the Sunni Arab states are arguing that if Iran goes down that road, Washington cannot credibly argue they should not follow down the same one, even if their technological abilities are years behind Iran’s."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-promises-to-match-iran-in-nuclear-capability.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

BREAKING: GotNews IDs Gay Activist Train Engineer Who Caused Amtrak Crash UPDATED W/ PHOTOS!

http://bit.ly/1F89Js9

http://gotnews.com/breaking-gotnews-ids-gay-activist-train-engineer-who-caused-amtrak-crash/

"Brandon Bostian…"

http://www.captainsjournal.com/2015/05/12/criminals-perpetrate-a-no-knock-raid-claiming-to-be-police/ Criminals Pose as a Police SWAT Team in Utah and Perpetrate a "No Knock" Police Raid, to conduct a Home Invasion burglary!

This is becoming more common and is one of the many reason’s ( Not to mention the Blatant Un-Constitutionality ) Of why Police "No-Knock" raids should be used under only the most Extreme Circumstances!

TERROR ATTACK: Palestinian Muslim runs over FOUR students at bus stop in Jerusalem ISRAEL
NATIONAL NEWS – Four teenage boys have been wounded after being run
over by a Palestinian Arab motorist in a car terror attack, at the entrance to the town of Alon Shvut in Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem.

Three of the victims – all 16-year-old students – are all described in light
to moderate condition; the fourth is in serious condition.

http://therightscoop.com/terror-attack-palestinian-muslim-runs-over-four-students-at-bus-stop-in-jerusalem/

Marines Helicopter missing in Nepal rescue efforts.

Prayers.

If you want to understand what the Marxist Progressive Left and the Obamunists intend for the future of Education in America you must understand the marching orders prescribed for them by the Godfather of Modern American Cultural Marxism Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci wrote the following instructions for Communist Education while in prison in Italy in the 1930’s.

Please plow through this material as boring as it may seem to you. It explains everything. And it gives you an indication of how close we are in America to being "transformed" in the way the Marxist Dear Leader envisions.

Written by Antonio Gramsci:

THE ORGANIZATION OF EDUCATION AND OF CULTURE

It may be observed in general that in modern civilization all practical activities have become so complex, and the science so interwoven with everyday life, that each practical activity tend to create a new type of school for its own executives and specialists and hence to create a body of specialist intellectuals at a higher level to teach in these schools. Thus, side by side with the type of school which may be called “humanistic”—-the oldest form of traditional school, designed to develop in each individual human being an as yet undifferentiated general culture, the fundamental power to think and ability to find one’s way in life—a whole system of specialized schools, at varying levels, has been being created to serve entire professional sectors, or professions, which are already specialized and defined within precise boundaries. It may be said, indeed, that the educational crisis raging today is precisely linked to the fact that this process of differentiation and particularization is taking place chaotically, without clear and precise principles, without a well-studied and consciously established plan. The crisis
of the curriculum and organization of the schools, i.e. of the overall
framework of a policy for forming modern intellectual cadres, is to a great
extent an aspect and a ramification of the more comprehensive and general
organic crisis.

The fundamental division into classical and vocational (professional) schools was a rational formula: the vocational school for the instrumental classes, the classical school for the dominant classes and the intellectuals. The development of an industrial base both in the cities and in the countryside meant a growing need for the new type of urban intellectual. Side
by side with the classical school there developed the technical school
(vocational ,but not manual), and this placed a question mark over the very
principle of a concrete program of general culture, a humanistic program of
general culture based on the Graco-Roman tradition. This program, once questioned can be said to be doomed, since its formative capacity was to a great extent based on that general and traditionally unquestioned prestige of a particular form of civilization.

The tendency today is to abolish every type of schooling that is “disinterested” (not serving immediate interests) or “formative”—keeping at most only a small-scale version to serve a tiny elite of ladies and gentlemen who do not have to worry about assuring themselves of a future career. Instead, there is a steady
growth of specialized vocational schools, in which the pupil’s destiny and
future activity are determined in advance.

A rational solution to the crisis ought to adopt the following lines. First, a common basic education, imparting a general, humanistic, formative culture; this would strike the right balance between development of the capacity for working manually (technically, industrially) and the development of the capacities required for intellectual work. From this type of common
schooling, via repeated experiments in vocational orientation, pupils would
pass on to one of the specialized schools or to productive work.

One must bear in mind the developing tendency for every principal activity to create for itself its own specialized school, just as every intellectual activity tends to create for itself cultural associations of its own; the latter take on the
function of post-scholastic institutions, specialized in organizing the conditions in which it is possible to keep abreast of whatever progress is being made in the given scientific field.

It may also be observed that deliberative bodies [elected legislatures–ie., Congress] tend to an ever increasing extent to distinguish their activity into two “organic” aspects: into the deliberative activity which is their essence, and into technical-cultural activity in which the questions upon which they have to take decisions are first examined by experts and analyzed scientifically. This latter activity has already created a whole bureaucratic body, with a new structure; for apart from the specialized departments of experts who prepare the technical material for the deliberative bodies, a second body of functionaries is created—more or less disinterested ‘volunteers”, selected variously from industry, from the banks, from finance houses. This is one of the mechanisms by means of which the career bureaucracy eventually came to control the democratic regimes and parliaments; now the mechanism is being organically extended, and is absorbing into its sphere the great specialists of private enterprise, which thus comes to control both regimes and bureaucracies.

What is involved is a necessary, organic development which tends to
integrate the personnel specialized in the technique of politics with personnel
specialized in the concrete problems of administering the essential practical
activities of the great and complex national societies of today. Hence every attempt to exorcise these tendencies from the outside produces no result other than moralistic sermons and rhetorical lamentations.

The question is thus raised of modifying the training of technical-political personnel, completing their culture in accordance with the new necessities, and of creating specialized functionaries of a new kind, who as a body will complement deliberative activity. The traditional type of political “leader”,
prepared only for formal-juridical activities, is becoming anachronistic and
represents a danger for the life of the State the leader must have that minimum of general technical culture which will permit him, if not to “create” autonomously the correct solution, at least to know how to adjudicate between the solutions put forward by the experts, and hence to choose the correct one from the “synthetic” viewpoint of political technique.

A type of body which seeks to incorporate the technical expertise necessary for it to operate realistically has been described elsewhere, in an account of what happens on the editorial committees of some reviews, when these functions at the time both as editorial committees and as cultural groups. The group criticizes as a body, and thus helps to define the tasks of the individual editors, whose activity is organized according to a plan and a division of labor which are rationally arranged in advance. By means of a collective discussion and criticism (made up of suggestions, advice, comments on method, and criticism which is constructive and aimed at mutual education) in which each individual functions as a specialist in his own field and helps to complement the expertise of the collectivity, the average level of the individual editors is fact successfully raised so that it reaches the altitude or capacity of the most highly skilled—thus not merely ensuring an ever more select and organic collaboration for the review, but also creating the conditions for the emergence of a homogeneous group of intellectuals, trained to produce a regular methodical “writing” activity (not only in terms of occasional publications or short articles, but also of organic, synthetic studies).

Undoubtedly, in this type of collective activity, each task produces new capacities and possibilities of work, since it creates ever more organic conditions of work: files, bibliographical digests, a library of basic specialized works, etc. Such activity requires an unyielding struggle against habits of dilettantism, of improvisation, of “rhetorical” solutions or those proposed for effect.

The work has to be done particularly in written form, just as it is in written form that criticisms have to be made—in the form of terse, succinct notes: this can be achieved if the material is distributed in time, etc.; the writing down of notes and criticisms is a didactic principle rendered necessary by the need to combat the habits formed in public speaking—prolixity, demagogy and paralogism. This type of intellectual work is necessary in order to impart to autodidacts the discipline in study which an orthodox scholastic career provides, in order to Taylorize intellectual work. Hence the usefulness of the principle of the “old men of Santa Zita” of whom De Sanctis speaks in his memoirs of the Neapolitan school of Basilio Puoti.: i.e., the usefulness of a certain “stratification” of capabilities and attitudes and the formation of work-groups under the guidance of the most highly-skilled and highly-developed, who can accelerate the training of the most backward and untrained.

When one comes to the study the practical organization of the common school, one problem of importance is that of the various phases of the educational process, phases which correspond to the age and intellectual-moral development of the pupils and to the aims which the school sets itself. The common school, or school of humanistic formation (taking the term “humanism” in a broad sense rather simply in the traditional one) or general culture, should aim to insert young men and women into social activity after them to a certain level of maturity, of capacity for intellectual and practical creativity, and of autonomy of orientation and initiative. The fixing of an age for
compulsory school attendance depends on the general economic conditions, since the latter may make it necessary to demand of young men and women, or even of children, a certain immediate productive contribution. The common school necessitates the State’s being able to take on the expenditure which at present falls on the family for the maintenance of children at school; in other words, it transforms the budget of the national department from top to bottom, expanding it to an unheard of extent and making it more complex.
The entire function of educating and forming the new generations ceases
to be private and becomes public; for only thus can it involve them in their
entirety, without divisions of group or caste. But this transformation of scholastic activity requires an unprecedented expansion of the practical organization of the school, i.e., of buildings, scientific material, of the teaching body, etc.

The teaching body in particular would have to be increased, since the
smaller ratio between teachers and pupils the greater will be the efficiency of
the school—and this presents other problems neither easy nor quick to
solve. The question of school buildings is not simple either, since this type of school should be a college, with dormitories , refectories, specialized libraries, rooms designed for seminar work, etc. Hence initially the new type of school will have to be, cannot help but being, only for restricted groups, made up of young people selected through competition or recommended by similar institutions.

The common school ought to correspond to the period represented today by the primary and secondary schools, reorganized not only as regards the content and the method of teaching, but also as regards the arrangement of the various phases of the educational process.

[The following paragraph should chill any American’s blood. In it Gramsci announces the true objective of Common Core State run education. It is to instill the pre-school and primary school children with a "new conception of the world" based on "rights and duties" imposed by the State that challenge and trash the traditional "conceptions" of God given rights and duties which Gramsci characterizes as "folkloristic" or mythical and that are imposed and imparted by "various traditional social environments" — a chilling and dark reference to the Family and the Church. The Family and the Church are to be replaced by the State as imposers and imparters of "conceptions of the world".

I am not making this up. Gramsci and the Communists made this up. It is come to full fruition in America today.]

The first, primary grade should not last longer than three or four years, and in addition to imparting the first “instrumental notions of schooling—reading, writing, sums, geography, history—ought to deal with an aspect of education that is now neglected—–i.e. with “rights and duties”, with the first notions of the State and society as primordial elements of a new conception of the world which challenges the conceptions that are imparted by the various traditional social environments, i.e., those conceptions which can be termed folkloristic.

[ In the following paragraphs Gramsci schools the Communists in the real task of Common Core State run education. You have to replicate what the Family
does to instill values, morality, culture and religion inside the Common School using Marxist proxies (teaching staff) to replace mothers and fathers. Moreover, this arduous task will be facilitated by placing they really young pre-schoolers and primary school age children in State run colleges–preferably on a 24/7 basis–removing them physically from the influence of Family and Church–and drilling Marxist approved values into them.]

The didactic problem is one of mitigating and rendering more fertile the dogmatic approach which must inevitably characterize these first years.
The rest of the course should not last more than six years, so that by
the age of fifteen or sixteen it should be possible to complete all the grades
of the common school.

One may object that such a course is too exhausting because too rapid, if the aim is to attain in effect the results which the present organization of the classical school aims at but does not attain. Yet the new organization as a whole will have to contain within itself the general elements which in fact make the course too slow today, at least for a part of the pupils.

[ What has to be replaced by the State to be as effective as the Family and Church in transmitting culture, values and religion to very young 3 and 4 year old children?]

Which are these elements? In a whole series of families, especially in the intellectual strata, the children find in their family life a preparation, a prolongation and a completion of school life; they ‘breathe in” , as the expression goes, a whole quantity of notions and attitudes which facilitate the educational process properly speaking. They already know and develop their knowledge of the literary language, i.e. the means of expression and of knowledge, which is technically superior to the means possessed by the average member of the school population between the ages of six and twelve. Thus city children, by the very fact of living in a city, have already absorbed by the age of six a quantity of notions and attitudes which make their school careers easier, more profitable and more rapid.

[ In the following paragraph Gramsci outlines The Ultimate Objective of Common Core for our American babies that the Progressive Left in America is pursuing one incremental step at a time: "The common school should be organized like a college, with a collective life by day and by night"—24/7— to replace "dysfunctional parents, family and church.]

In the basic organization of the common school, at least the essentials of these conditions must be created—not to speak of the fact, which goes without saying, that parallel to the common school a network of kindergartens and other institutions would develop, in which even before the school age, children would be habituated to a certain collective discipline and acquire pre-scholastic notions and attitudes. In fact, the common school should be organized like a college, with a collective life by day and by night, freed from the present forms of hypocritical and mechanical discipline; studies should be carried on collectively, with the assistance of teachers and the best pupils, even during periods of so-called individual study, etc.

The fundamental problem is posed by that phase of the existing school career which is today represented by the liceo 1/, and which today does not differ at all, as far as the kind of education is concerned, from the preceding grades—except by the abstract presumption of a greater intellectual and moral maturity of the pupil, matching his greater age and the experience he has already accumulated.

1/ Perhaps the nearest English-language equivalents of ginnasio and liceo are the American junior high and high school, though in the Italian system they are selective schools (like English grammar schools) leading to a university education.

In fact, between the liceo and university, i.e. between the school properly speaking and life, there is now a jump , a real break in continuity , and not a rational passage from quantity (age) to quality (intellectual and moral maturity). From an almost purely dogmatic education, in which learning by heart plays a great part, the pupil passes to the creative phase, the phase of autonomous, independent work. From the school, where his studies are subjected to a discipline that is imposed and controlled by authority, the pupil passes on to a phase of study or of professional work in which intellectual self discipline and moral independence are theoretically unlimited. And this happens immediately
after the crisis of puberty, when the ardour of the instinctive and elementary
passions has not yet resolved its struggle with the fetters of the character
of the moral conscience which are in the process of being formed. Moreover, in Italy, where the principle of “seminar” work is not widespread in the
universities, this passage is even more brusque and mechanical.