Maoist Confucius Institute Infecting U.S. College Campuses

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

A China Post article reported in 2014 that “Certainly, China would have made little headway if it had named these Mao Institutes, or even Deng Xiaoping Institutes. But by borrowing the name Confucius, it created a brand that was instantly recognized as a symbol of Chinese culture, radically different from the image of the Communist Party. Where indoctrination is incubated and spies are made, courtesy of China and idiot university presidents.

Modern day Mao era propaganda and education explained.

Thank you Ethan Epstein:

Last year, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte made an announcement to great fanfare: The university would soon open a branch of the Confucius Institute, the Chinese government-funded educational institutions that teach Chinese language, culture and history. The Confucius Institute would “help students be better equipped to succeed in an increasingly globalized world,” says Nancy Gutierrez, UNC Charlotte’s dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and “broaden the University’s outreach and support for language instruction and cultural opportunities in the Charlotte community,” according to a press release.

But the Confucius Institutes’ goals are a little less wholesome and edifying than they sound—and this is by the Chinese government’s own account. A 2011 speech by a standing member of the Politburo in Beijing laid out the case: “The Confucius Institute is an appealing brand for expanding our culture abroad,” Li Changchun said. “It has made an important contribution toward improving our soft power. The ‘Confucius’ brand has a natural attractiveness. Using the excuse of teaching Chinese language, everything looks reasonable and logical.”

Li, it now seems, was right to exult. More than a decade after they were created, Confucius Institutes have sprouted up at more than 500 college campuses worldwide, with more than 100 of them in the United States—including at The George Washington University, the University of Michigan and the University of Iowa. Overseen by a branch of the Chinese Ministry of Education known colloquially as Hanban, the institutes are part of a broader propaganda initiative that the Chinese government is pumping an estimated $10 billion into annually, and they have only been bolstered by growing interest in China among American college students.

Continue reading


DOJ Official Explains the Terror and Immigration Report

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Politico published an item regarding the White House press briefing on 1/17/2018 where a Justice Department official, Ed O’Callaghan explained several terror cases inside the United States had connective tissue to chain migration as well as illegal immigration in an effort to give rise to the whole debate on Capital Hill as it relates to DACA, funding the border wall and shutting down the Federal government if no deal is reached. The only paragraph that did not have some bias slant to it is:

The report’s release, part of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump last year, comes as the White House is pushing for changes in the U.S. immigration system that would end the diversity visa lottery program — through which a terrorist who killed eight people with a rented truck entered the U.S. — and chain migration, the practice of legal immigrants sponsoring family members’ entry into the country.

So, what is in this report?

Executive Order 13780 Section 11 Report – Final by zerohedge on Scribd

Most of the critical national security enhancements implemented and effectuated as a result of Executive Order 13780 are classified in nature, and will remain so to prevent malicious actors from exploiting our immigration system.

However, to “be more transparent with the American people and to implement more effectively policies and practices that serve the national interest,” Section 11 of Executive Order 13780 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, to collect and make publicly available the following information:

(i) Information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation with or provision of material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national-security-related reasons;

(ii) Information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and who have engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States;

(iii) Information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including so-called “honor killings,” in the United States by foreign nationals; and, (iv) Any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.

According to a list maintained by DOJ’s National Security Division, at least 549 individuals were convicted of international terrorism-related charges in U.S. federal courts between September 11, 2001, and December 31, 2016. An analysis conducted by DHS determined that approximately 73 percent (402 of these 549 individuals) were foreign-born. Breaking down the 549 individuals by citizenship status at the time of their respective convictions reveals that:

1. 254 were not U.S. citizens;
2. 148 were foreign-born, naturalized and received U.S. citizenship; and,
3. 147 were U.S. citizens by birth.

8 specific cases were listed in the report with a summary of each case. The Boston bombers were not listed in this report. They went from a tourist visa, to asylum status, to green card and one got citizenship. We also have the San Bernardino killers that arrived on a marriage visa and a cultural visa. Both of those have stay limits. The argument here in both cases they are in the spirit of chain migration.

Diplomatic favors? How about that Christmas Day bomber? How was he granted a visa?

The Christmas Day bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, had initially had his visa denied in 2004, four years prior to his 2008 application. In 2004, he applied again, and the initial denial was overturned because a supervisory consular officer decided Abdulmuttalab’s father was too prominent in Nigerian politics and finance to upset the U.S. diplomatic applecart in that country and deny his son a visa. Ironically, this was the same father who four years later visited the U.S. embassy in Nigeria and sought to help the U.S. keep his son out of the U.S., only subsequently to have the U.S. decide he was not important enough to listen to.

The legal kicker in this visa story is that on Abdulmuttalab’s 2008 application, he lied and said he had never received a prior denial, enough to deny him a visa under law and keep him out of the country. As the matter was “considered resolved,” State Department did not look again at the 2004 denial when the young Al Qaeda operative sought another visa in 2008. Instead, he was granted the multi-year visa he used to attend an Islamic convention in Houston in 2008 and again for airline check-in on Christmas Eve.

This is incredibly embarrassing to the State Department. Despite State’s spin on this “new” fact, what this makes clear is that: (1) the intelligence community was not primarily to blame after all for failure to revoke the visa, as it should never have been issued in the first place; but (2) raises – once more – a larger issue of the State Department’s policies regarding visa issuance; and (3) whether State should continue to be responsible for the visa process. More here.

The Democrats are in a pre 9/11 mentality. After the 9/11 Commission Report, recommendations and solutions were drafted of which the congressional leaders all approved. In particular, go to page 24 of the summary as it relates to immigration.


MN Governor Candidate Phil Parrish: ‘Islam is incompatible with the US Constitution’

By: Trevor Loudon | New Zeal

Muslim Brotherhood front group CAIR and the chronically dishonest Southern Poverty Law Center are very upset with Phil Parrish, a Republican candidate for Governor of Minnesota.

According to the SPLC:

Regina Mustafa, founder of the Minnesota-based Community Interfaith Dialogue on Islam, reached out to Parrish after learning he attended a talk by Usama Dakdok called “Revealing the Truth about ISIS.” Dakdok is one of a number of anti-Muslim speakers who have created a cottage industry touring the country to malign Islam as an inherently violent religion. In his Minnesota presentation, Dakdok said ISIS was the “true representation of Islam.”

Mustafa sent Parrish an email, offering to meet with him face-to-face. “Since you have attended this talk about my faith,” she wrote, “I figured you would also like to hear from a person who actually practices Islam.”

In Parrish’s reply, he condemned Islam as fundamentally incompatible with U.S. law.

First, he claimed to have, “a very unusual in-depth level of training, experience, and understanding regarding multiple faiths and the practice of Islam,” which he has suggested in public interviews is related to his time in the U.S. Naval Reserve working in intelligence.

He continued, “I separate Islam from the word faith because faith takes belief and Islam requires only submission. I will not participate in any faith dialog because Islam is ultimately not a faith.”

Parrish demanded Mustafa “publicly denounce Sharia and swear to adhere to, protect, comply with, accept, and defend the United States Constitution.” He suggested that as a practicing Muslim — or as he put it, “practicing Islamist” — she would be unable to do so. He also wrote, “Islam, Sharia, and the Quran are the antithesis of the U.S. Constitution.”

From the Center for Security Policy: Shariah Law vs. the Constitution

I’ve seen Phil Parrish speak at a GOP event in Minnesota. He’s a serious candidate. Check out his website.  Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. Send a message to all the gutless politicians out there. Send him some money today.

This man is smart and courageous. He deserves your support wherever you live in the United States.



MAGA – Make American (high schools) Great Again! Part III of III

By: Thomas Wigand | New Zeal

“We can turn Gramsci and Alinsky and Ayers on their pointy little Commie heads!”

MAGA – Part I

MAGA – Part II

In Part II of this series we stated: “The following curriculum, along with the rest of the proposals in this series, is intended to provide a roadmap for taking back our educational system – re-Americanizing it as we de-Progressivise it.” That choice of words was deliberate, for decades ago the Gramsci-inspired Leftists, the Progressives, identified our education system as one of the institutional lynchpins in their “long march through the institutions.”   We see the results today in mediocre (at best) academic skills in our K-12 and college graduates, and near-absent intellectual integrity or rigor amongst their instructors. At the same time, the political correctness, ideological indoctrination, suppression of debate and forced conformity within our educational system are “world class” (at least by totalitarian standards).

As a thought exercise, imagine if our Founding Fathers had been cursed with transiting something equivalent to today’s education system and curriculum – had that been the case, do you believe that they would have been capable of later establishing our divinely inspired country? Of course not. There would never have been a United States of America. And that is the point, for the Progressives have long realized that while they can’t undo the past, they can (as they like to put it) “bend the arc of history” going forward … including the eventual undoing of what the Founding Fathers wrought.  As a consequence of today’s Progressive-run education system, just imagine iall of the human talent idled or suppressed, the opportunities forgone!

But we can undo their undoing, and do so by (in part) wielding their own tactics back at them. We can turn Gramsci and Alinsky and Ayers on their pointy little Commie heads! Including our own “long march” through, and around, the institutions they’ve “occupied” (pun intended). And we can employ a variation of their “non-reformist reforms” mechanism.

A quick introduction to “non-reformist reforms” is necessary. In the excellent book “Radical in Chief” “ author Stanley Kurtz did a masterful job of explaining the concept; and while space doesn’t permit a full recounting, for our purposes first know that it was peddled by a French Communist strategist named Andre Gorz. The basic idea is that stealth revolutionaries who’ve burrowed into the system, to undermine it from within, introduce “reforms.”   For public purposes the “reforms” are portrayed as fixing or alleviating some problem, but that actually are intended to create new and bigger problems to help undermine the system, or to achieve some other unspoken goal. Well, the “reforms” proposed in this series will effect genuine and beneficial reforms, they too will also be the catalyst for numerous after-effects that will emanate out – albeit in our case those effects will be beneficial and, because of that, we need not hide them, nor engage in subterfuge regarding our ultimate intentions. That ultimate intention being not just “re-Americanizing” and “de-Progressivizing” our educational system, but our entire body politic.

As a thought exercise, imagine if our Founding Fathers would have been cursed with transiting today’s education system and curriculum – had that been the case, do you believe that they would have been capable of later establishing our divinely inspired country? Of course not. There would never have been a United States of America.”

Let us present the proposals with a bullet-point cascade.  As you read, note how typically the benefit of one enables, or produces,  the benefit that follows – and that the benefits tend to expand from individuals into families, and then into society at large. After the bullet-points, we’ll briefly discuss and conclude.

  • The higher-quality curriculum described in Part II will benefit all students, of whatever racial or socioeconomic group;
  • In particular, minorities currently trapped in K-12 public schools would then acquire a meaningful path out of the economic apartheid in which current Progressive / Democrat Party policies (virtually) imprison them;
  • This in turn will help promote “economic assimilation” as Americans of all backgrounds can realistically aspire to becoming middle class, and to enjoy the upward mobility that is characteristic of a vibrant middle class. They will embrace those “bourgeois” values to their own benefit, and greater benefit to their children;
  • Speaking of children, that widening embrace of those “bourgeois” values will provide incentive to pursue a career, then get married, then start having children.  As single parenthood is a (if not the) primary indicator of future poverty, this too will help lower poverty rates because;
  • This resurgence of the nuclear family will (once again) provide children with positive role models, and help transmit those positive “bourgeois” values to the next generation. Tragically, poverty rates have remained stagnant (moving within a range) since the so-called Great Society / War on Poverty was launched over a half-century ago. This change back toward a traditional family structure could be the single catalyst that finally breaks the back of the Progressive’s policy structure that operates to maintain a perma-poverty voting bloc. Thus, it could herald-in declining poverty rates for as far as the eye can see;
  • The heightened skill-set enjoyed by high school graduates of all socioeconomic backgrounds and ethnicities means that they will be ready to enter the workforce from day one, and without debt. Increasingly over recent decades the academic industry has been committing a fraud on the American public – for as the skill set denoted by a high school diploma became devalued, often granted to those with an 8th grade skill set (if not less) – employers compensated by requiring bachelor’s degrees even for (relatively) entry-level jobs. This was the employers’ attempt to limit their applicant pool to those with (at least) what once was high school level literacy in language and math. Simultaneously, the public was fed the mantra that “a college degree” was now necessary in order for their children to “get a decent job” and to “live a middle class existence.” As a result we now have multiple generations of people who’ve pursued a degree, saddled with a debt load that takes a good part of their working career to payoff, merely to get their foot in the door of an employer. It doesn’t have to be this way! If prospective employers can once again have confidence that a high school graduate brings with them a decent level of literacy in the “three R’s” (and more), they’ll recruit accordingly.  And so, as stated, young people will be able to enter right into the workforce, in productive jobs, without student loan debt;
  • That, in turn, should result in higher rates of savings and investment (recall the personal finance part of our proposed curriculum), with great benefit to themselves and their families, and with the economic stimulation increased savings and investment provides for our overall economy;
  • The heightened skill-set enjoyed by high school graduates means that those who, whether by desire for, or need of additional education to advance their career, may have enough of a head start on their skill set to be poised to fulfill their additional needs without having to commit to a minimum of four years for a bachelor’s degree (and even more for a graduate degree). Thus increasing their earning-time in the workforce, and decreasing the amount of “student debt” they need incur.  And increase our economy’s productivity overall.
  • The content of our proposed curriculum, and their heightened skill-set, means that a large portion of future college attendees will be more discerning about what they want, and so more discriminating in their course of studies (i.e., less likely to pursue frivolous gender / race / grievance “studies” degrees). They will have less tolerance for the current diet of “required” indoctrination courses on “diversity,” “gender” and other Progressive causes célèbres. This even more so, since …
  • The significantly lowered demand for college degrees enabled by meaningful high school diplomas will help burst the college bubble, because the pool of people pursuing a bachelor’s degree just to have their ticket-punched to meet entry level job requirements will dry up. That will, in turn, disproportionately impact the “professors” of frivolous gender / race / grievance “studies” because much of their classes are comprised of those who are there to just get a “bachelor’s degree” – any “bachelor’s degree” that doesn’t require too much rigor – no matter that once out in the real world they will find that their majors qualify them only for employment in fields such as: an academic peddling the same material, a “community organizer,”  a union organizer, Democrat Party staff, or the proverbial “Starbucks barista with a bachelor’s degree.” (Ponder the billions of dollars this country has wasted over the years incurring tuition and student loan debt for courses of study that produce neither economic nor societal benefit.) As the future slots for academic positions peddling such “studies” shrinks, and declining poverty rates decimate the “demand” for “community organizers” and other jobs for which there’s not a free-market demand, a self-reinforcing cycle of fewer and fewer students wasting their time on such nonsense degrees will take hold;
  • As colleges and universities struggle trying to fill seats in a significantly declining market, they’ll get a firm reintroduction into the immutable laws of economics. In recent decades they’ve been unjustly subsidized by the dynamic of devalued high school diplomas forcing parents and young persons to pursue bachelor’s degrees, merely so that they’d possess the hallowed “B.A.” threshold required for an ever-increasing number of middle-class level jobs. With that subsidy gone, the higher education industry will find that it has to entice customers, rather than parasitically gorge itself on the backs of a captive clientele. In turn, that will require responding to what the customers want  and need, rather than imposing a Progressive sociological experiment cum indoctrination regime on students. Plus, the declining revenues will force decisions setting priorities and, as the “grievance studies” programs become increasingly non-revenue generating, they will be reduced, if not eliminated;
  • That, in turn, means that the hatching grounds and academic think tanks for some of the most noxious cultural effluent that that can be dreamt up by Progressive minds will be damaged, if not hobbled;
  • In turn, those forces will be far less able to oppose the increasing adoption of our curriculum and transmission mechanisms, so that the beneficial effects of those will become even more widespread. (If that isn’t a virtuous circle, what is?);
  • On the world stage, the increased percentage of our people gainfully employed in the workplace, with their higher skill-set, will make us more economically competitive;
  • Which will provide fertile economic ground for our growing, vibrant middle-class composed of all races, creeds and colors;
  • And so all of the foregoing, once it takes hold will, like the proverbial silver spike through a vampire’s heart, will inflict a fatal blow on the Progressives’ / Democrats’ identity politics, and so will derail their agenda.  We will indeed accomplish de-Progressivising, and so achieve re-Americanizing our great nation.

In conclusion, just as the anti-American Progressives identified decades ago, our education system is a lynchpin for their intended “fundamental transformation” into the Collectivist utopia they intend to impose (history informs us that promised Collectivist utopias actually deliver dystopian hells). Well, our education system can also be a lynchpin for our “fundamental restoration” back to an America consistent with that divinely inspired vision of our Founding Fathers.

Let’s roll!

Mr. Wigand is the author of Communiqués From the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracywhich is available on Amazon in both print and Kindle versions.  Comments or questions for Mr. Wigand may be sent to: [email protected] — he will make every effort to personally respond to every email.


China Has Been Eliminating CIA Informants – The FBI Arrests The Mole Responsible

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Jerry Chun Shing Lee, aka Zhen Cheng Li, 53, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer, was arrested on charges of unlawful retention of national defense information. He’s been a very bad spy. This one was particularly bad as a matter of fact. He’s being charged with mishandling secret information concerning the recruitment of CIA agents, the Justice Department announced. And I would imagine those charges will expand quite a bit. Lee was at New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport when he was taken down. But his stomping grounds are in Hong Kong.

Lee had been under surveillance since 2012, when agents secretly searched his Honolulu hotel room and found two books containing secrets about recruited CIA “assets.” You can read the criminal complaint here. Lee is a naturalized US citizen who resides in Hong Kong and works for a well-known auction house. He was in the Army from 1982 to 1986. He graduated from Hawaii Pacific University in 1992.

Lee became a CIA agent in 1994 and was with the agency until 2007. According to FBI Special Agent Kellie R. O’Brien, he was trained in “methods of covert communications, surveillance detection, recruitment of assets, handling of assets, payment of assets, operational security, and documenting, handling and securing classified information.” O’Brien was the FBI counterspy who wrote the criminal complaint filed in federal court on Jan. 13. It was just unsealed. Dana J. Boente, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security and US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, and Andrew W. Vale, Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office, made the announcement.

Lee held a top-secret clearance. He is said to have had access to sensitive compartmented information. That info was utilized to protect intelligence programs. According to court documents, in August 2012, Lee and his family left Hong Kong to return to the United States to live in northern Virginia. While traveling back to the United States, Lee and his family had hotel stays in Hawaii and Virginia. During each of the hotel stays, FBI agents conducted court-authorized searches of Lee’s room and luggage, and found that Lee was in unauthorized possession of materials relating to national defense. Specifically, agents found two small books containing handwritten notes that contained classified information, including, but not limited to, true names and phone numbers of assets and covert CIA employees, operational notes from asset meetings, operational meeting locations and locations of covert facilities.

There are no specifics in the criminal complaint stating that Lee was spying for China, but it’s a good bet he was. The CIA is not commenting on that and neither is the Department of Justice. That pretty much speaks for itself. The arrest appears linked to the ongoing US counterintelligence probe into how the Chinese government systematically crippled CIA agent networks inside China. The Chinese have been killing off CIA informants and that is probably linked to Lee’s activities. In May, the New York Times reported the Chinese government had unraveled all CIA spying operations in China beginning in 2010. The report, quoting intelligence officials, suggested the loss of the agents was the result of a retired Chinese-American CIA officer who spied for China.

Because of the betrayal, China eliminated between 18 and 20 CIA sources in China. CIA counterspies focused on “a Chinese-American who had left the CIA shortly before the intelligence losses began.” That is most likely Lee. “Some investigators believed he had become disgruntled and had begun spying for China,” the Times reported. “One official said the man had access to the identities of CIA informants and fit all the indicators on a matrix used to identify espionage threats.” Lee was in court this week in New York City and was charged with unlawful retention of national defense information. If convicted, he can get up to ten years in prison. That’s pretty light for treason don’t you think? Is that all 20 lives are worth these days?

Officials familiar with the case say it is unlikely that Lee will be charged with espionage, which can carry the death penalty. It may be that the government doesn’t have the proof required for such a charge, or that it doesn’t want to air secrets in an open courtroom. That is a travesty all in itself. Officials said the number of informants lost in China rivaled losses in the Soviet Union and Russia during the betrayals of both Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, formerly of the CIA and the FBI. They divulged intelligence operations to Moscow for years.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant US Attorney Neil Hammerstrom of the Eastern District of Virginia. He prosecuted the case of Pentagon official James Fondren who worked at Pacific Command. Fondren was convicted in 2009 of passing classified information to a Chinese agent. Let me tell you something, this country is just lousy with Chinese spies. A concerted effort should be made to ferret out all of them in government agencies, universities and corporations in the US. And charges for espionage should be a lot stiffer than this. It’s almost a certainty that the Chinese have hacked the CIA’s lines of communication. Perhaps they should do something about that as well. This is one of the worst intelligence breaches in decades. But it’s the ones we don’t know of or haven’t caught that worry me.