Saturday, April 09, 2005


For example, there is Jane Christensen who teaches at North Carolina Wesleyan College. One look at her webpage makes me proud to be a Methodist. It isn't really the picture of Jane holding an M-16 with a black hood over her head that bothers me...... Her webpage links to some interesting articles, which say some interesting things. An example follows:

"America is fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq under Zionist control...Jews rule America (and most of the world) by proxy. They trick us into fighting and dying for THEM. Politicians of the 'free world' are too cowardly to oppose Zionism."

Another link presents the theory that Ariel Sharon is preparing to launch attacks in America:

"Israel is embarking upon a more aggressive approach to the war on terror that will include staging targeted killings in the United States and other friendly countries..."

Another link says that Israel is preparing to launch a nuclear attack on Iran:

"a team of U.S. computer specialists flew to Diego Garcia to fit the latest version of the software known as 'over the horizon.' This would allow a Harpoon (equipped with a nuclear warhead) to hit Iran's nuclear establishments with pinpoint accuracy."

The first reader comment on that article is posted under the name "Killing Jews is Good." Nothing more need be said.

Given these "recommended readings," I know most of you will be shocked at the first two questions on Christensen's final exam for a class called "The American Presidency":

"1. How has the war on terrorism contributed to the powers of the Bush presidency? (Discuss at least 4 ways).

2. Discuss the sweeping attack on democratic rights under the Bush administration and what this means for the future of democratic government in America."

No leading questions, here!

More from Mike Adams here


The anti-phonics religion marches on despite all the evidence of how bad it is for kids

An immediate review of how children are taught to read was demanded yesterday after MPs cast doubt on one of Tony Blair's key reforms. The one in five children who cannot read properly at the age of 11 is "unacceptably high" eight years after the National Literacy Strategy was introduced in primary schools, the Education and Skills Select Committee said.

The Labour-dominated committee cast doubt on Mr Blair's claims that primary school standards have improved under Labour and was sceptical about improvements in the results of the national curriculum English test at 11. It contrasted the failing of English schools with Scotland where the restoration of the more traditional phonics approach has recorded some remarkable improvements.

The MPs said that a large-scale inquiry was necessary to establish the best ways to teach children to read. It concluded: "It may be that some methods of teaching (such as phonics) are more effective for children in danger of being left behind." It disputed claims by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) that the literacy strategy was based on the best available research.

In Clackmannanshire, 300 children received intensive instruction in a method known as synthetic phonics, learning the sounds of the alphabet and combinations of letters for 16 weeks as soon as they started school. By the age of 11, they were more than three years ahead of their peers.

There was no difference between girls and boys, unlike their counterparts in England, and children from poor backgrounds performed as well as those from better-off homes.

The committee urged the DfES to commission an independent evaluation of trends in reading standards to make clear "the scale and nature of the problem". "Even if government figures are taken at face value, at age 11 around 20 per cent of children still do not achieve the success in reading (and writing) expected of their age. This figure is unacceptably high," it said. "Furthermore, there is a wide variation of results achieved by schools with apparently similar intakes. This . . . suggests that problems do exist, either in the implementation of the Government's strategies or inherently in the methodologies it promotes."

The dispute centres on whether existing methods work as effectively as synthetic phonics. The committee said that the literacy strategy had been a compromise between competing approaches. It included a form of phonics but also encouraged pupils to work out the meaning of words using context, grammatical understanding and pictures. The idea was that if one failed, others would help children to decode words. But some argue that the strategy takes too long, leaves many children confused and encourages them to guess. Some children come to believe that they are not good at reading and never learn.

More here


For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

Comments? Email me here. For times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here


No comments: