Dear Editor, after reading your July 8th article titled: “Montgomery Enacts Security with Metal Detector Screening for Township Committee Meetings,” I might fit the description of a public speaker “seeming to harass elected committee members” that you reference. In reality, I am persistent in holding our township committee accountable for bringing communism and Mao Zedong into our township committee body.
My appearances at committee meetings address shameless behavior by our mayor, Ms. Devra Keenan and committeeman, Mr. Marvin Schuldiner, then deputy mayor. How can it be that then deputy mayor Schuldiner quotes Mao Zedong’s “All political power flows from the barrel of a gun” without repercussion? After being tasked by me in a personal meeting, editorials in the Montgomery News and my statements at township committee meetings to hold Mr. Schuldiner accountable, why does Mayor Keenan do nothing?
Eventually I asked mayor Keenan during public meetings if she stands for America, and she remained silent. Then I and others presented the committee with a “Resolution in Support and Defense of America,” and she remained silent.
The historical fact that Mao Zedong murdered over 60 million of his own people and buried 24,000 scholars alive, usurping Hitler and Stalin combined, by massive margins, apparently has little relevance to Mr. Schuldiner nor Ms. Keenan. Allowing communism in our midst is insidious, allowing Mao Zedong into our midst is hideous.
After about eight months of my complaints regarding Mr. Schuldiner’s remark, an article and four editorials in The Montgomery News on the topic, no apology from Mr. Schuldiner and silence from Mayor Keenan, it is no surprise that former committeeman, Mr. Kent Huang, a Chinese American, resigned.
For ten months our mayor failed to hold Mr. Schuldiner accountable, remained silent on her stand for America and silent on the proposed Resolution in Support and Defense of America. Then she adds more armed police officers and a metal detector at township committee meetings. I think that she adopted Mao Zedong’s flair for political power and guns.
Meanwhile, The Montgomery News dutifully reported our mayor’s new added armed officer policy because of security risks like me, without challenge. Given the gravity of this added security, citizens expect the reporting to include which of the 565 municipalities in NJ have two or more plainclothes officers in committee meetings or metal detectors at their entrance.
Instead, a patriotic citizen like me winds up characterized as harassing, insulting and argumentative, when The Montgomery News should be thanking me for doing its job holding our township committee accountable for its un-American behavior.
Belle Mead, NJ
School is underway and the new government sex education standards will be inculcated into your child’s education from K-12. Our children’s psychological development will be materially and adversely impacted by these new standards at the expense of parental rights and our children’s morality.
It appears that many parents have no idea that beginning this term, strangers will begin sexualizing prepubescent children. NJ Standards, for example, specify teaching masturbation to 5th graders, however our School Board claims teaching this particular act has been removed; we’ll have to see exactly what forms of sexualization instruction will happen when it happens. Meanwhile 8th graders are instructed about all forms of sexual penetration practices. We believe this because this is what Governor Murphy’s sex education standards specify.
Instead of completely rejecting Murphy’s child sexualization standards, such as has the town of Garwood, Montgomery School District embraced them.
In times of sanity, actions such as unrelated adults discussing sex acts with minors would be considered pedophilia. In NJ this is legal government sanctioned sexual indoctrination and appears to also be “grooming” that I learned about as a Boy Scout Committeeman.
The good news is that parents can opt their children out of these new standards. The bad news is that parents don’t know when or how to opt out their children because our Board of Education remains obtuse about this critical information.
Every health class grade and potentially class, teaches this junk on a custom schedule so you need to request copies of lesson plans and direct the teacher in writing which lesson plans that you wish to protect your child from. Then monitor your child to make sure that your instructions are followed.
Further be on the lookout for seemingly harmless surveys that violate parental and student privacy.
Coach and role play with your children to not divulge any family information verbally or in a child survey. These surveys are for third party research to fine-tune future means and methods to violate parental protections, the sanctity of the family and further sexualize our kids.
Also, children have 5th amendment rights and a child’s misstatement about family matters can result in child protective services showing up at your home. Role-play this as well with your child like you would “stranger danger.”
Write and record everything and be prepared to send cease and desist notices to the school principal with supporting evidence.
If all of this sounds complicated, it is this way by design so that busy parents do not allocate the necessary bandwidth to properly protect their children.
In the meantime, our Montgomery Township School system needs more parents to attend school board meetings and insert themselves in board decision processes that advance parental rights and begin re-setting Montgomery’s school system to insure only the family teaches proper morals and the school focuses on academics.
It has been ten years since Montgomery shifted school board elections from April to the November general election cycle. We resisted the shift because of politics and today there is no doubt that our school board elections are politicized, thanks to The Montgomery News (TMN) and our School Board (SB).
By law, SB elections are non-partisan, yet this last election showed shameless tactics by our SB shilling for its full-day-K ballot question by applying school resources deploying campaign signs to illegally influence voters.
Then after the election we have TMN’s December 2022 article titled: “2 School Board Winners Lean Conservative – in Juxtaposition to Their Democratic District” making the same lawless mistake of injecting partisanship into Montgomery’s SB election results. The article divisively compared a “highly educated” Harvard graduate, California law school classmate of our democratic VP, gay, outgoing SB member with two of our new members, Joanna Filak and Anna Wolecka-Jernigan. Both are parents, have school children and regularly participate in school board meetings so it should be no surprise to anyone that Joanna and Anna prevailed, yet the TMN article and headline shouts that that it thinks politics should have defeated them.
Further, TMN propagated wanton division by its affiliating potentially divisive CJCU political positions towards the two school board winners. Thus, TMN’s article is fundamentally counterproductive from any rational perspective, conflicts with the law that school board elections are to be non-partisan and violates common ethics.
Political elections are about citizens and are often a nasty blood sport as typified by TMN’s attempts to turn our school board elections into an “us vs them” cage fight. By contrast and by law, school board elections are non-partisan, solely about parents and by proxy, about protecting the children.
Let’s all be mindful to protect our children and follow the law.
A Princeton friend invited me to the November 30th book signing of: “Teaching White Supremacy-America’s Democratic Ordeal and the Forging of Our National Identity” held at Labyrinth Books. The author, Donald Yacovone and commentator Eddie Glaude, Princeton Distinguished University Professor, hosted a presentation of the book followed by a question-and-answer session. A personal discussion with Mr. Glaude after the event that should have been a positive, educational experience for both of us quickly turned into a verbal brawl.
Why can’t an audience member ask the panel to describe what they mean when they refer to a person becoming the “best human” and get an explanation without being instructed to read the book? Of course, reading the book is always “an” answer but to further communicate the importance of the work, during a book signing, there needs to be a ready and meaningful understanding of its key concepts such as what the author and commentator means when referring to the “best human.” This commentator came up empty leaving this attendee feeling the book’s ideas lacked credibility.
A subsequent personal discussion with the commentator resulted in his becoming antagonistic and disparaging when asked whether the racism that was advanced in the book really existed and therefor that the books premise was much ado about nothing. I was told that racism was everywhere and as an example that it is evident in the zoning regulations in Princeton where neighborhoods separated by a street have homes suited to those with different economic means. One can easily argue, as I did, that America is the freest country in the world and that he is wrong to look at things this way. That triggered the commentator into a raised voice, pointed finger and lecture.
As if that was not enough, he made an ad hominin attack that the entire room could have heard. To his credit he did apologize when it was clear that he said a terrible thing.
One wonders if racism has long been displaced by one of the many fundamental premises in our country’s founding; that all men are created equal. Yet that there remain those among us that dedicate their efforts on insisting that America is racist when all that can be objectively observed are simply the results of individual freedom of opportunity. Regardless, one would expect an intelligent or wise professor to handle any question with dignity and perhaps grace and be appreciative of any meaningful question that might further a mutual understanding.
We are entitled to expect such from Mr.Glaude, as a representative of our distinguished Princeton University.
We understand that many events in our lives are driven by emotionally charged reactions. At a time like this, educating ourselves about the facts becomes ever more important so that we are less likely to be swept up by excessive emotionality. This webpage and editorial seeks to provide meaningful, educational information on this and related topics.
There is no doubt that our police forces and other emergency responders are fundamental to maintaining law, order, and societal safety. Without these basics, there can be no meaningful freedom because Citizens cannot effectively provide these services as an individual.
News media outlets showcasing protesters calling for abolition of law, order, and safety services offer limited information to visualize what society would look like without, thus precluding meaningful consideration of such an apparently ludicrous proposal.
Protesters and news outlets claim police racism during protests while honoring the names of alleged bias victims, and loop police incidents on TV to dramatize alleged police bias. But where are the facts and data supporting police racism or bias?
Our group has spent untold hours assembling and referencing statistics for everyone to ingest to draw individual conclusions from information available on our website.
However, you might recall the Harvard economics professor named *Roland G. Fryer Jr. whom in 2016 enraged with police incidents such as the arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr. for breaking into his own home in Cambridge, Massachusetts took it upon himself to sift through crime data and determined that: "On the most extreme use of force - officer - involved shootings - we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextualized factors are taken into account."
You can view and/or download the complete study by clicking on the link that follows.
Further there is evidence that the aftermath of viral incidences of police deadly force leads to large and statistically significant increases in homicides and total crimes because of that is called the "Ferguson" effect. This term was coined after the rioting caused by an officer stopping a violent personal attack that triggered officers to fear becoming similar institutional victims for simply carrying out their duties, as actually happened to that Ferguson Officer. Viral reactions to policing forces officers into risk calculations between proactive policing and career cancellation. Again, this leads to excess murders and felonies.
Thus, radical responses to police us of deadly force, by protesters, and news media outlets, indirectly cost lives and some might argue that these radicals and related news media outlets repetitively broadcasting such narratives have blood on their hands.
*Mr. Fryer at age 30 was the youngest African American to ever receive tenure at Harvard.
The Editorial that The Montgomery News ("TMN") refused to publish because it was critical of TMN and because the editor did not agree with the citizen writer:
"The Montgomery News Misses the Mark on Reporting the October 21st TC Meeting"
The November 2021 issue of The Montgomery News (TMN) published an article titled “Cultures Clash at Township Committee Meeting” penned by Ms. Anna Reinalda regarding the November 21 st Township Committee meeting chaired by Deputy Mayor Marvin Schuldiner.
After reading Ms. Reinalda’s representation of that meeting and after having attended and actively participated in the meeting it is apparent to me that TMN continues to live up to its reputation as a leftist-biased publication. They accomplish this by siding with the authority of the TC instead of challenging its actions, failing to properly contextualize obvious points and by soft pedaling egregious remarks by members of the TC.
Here are examples taken from the above referenced article that demonstrate my assertions:
1. Ms. Reinalda accurately reported my remarks regarding Deputy Mayor Marvin Schuldiner quoting Chairman Mao about “power flowing from the barrel of a gun” and that under no circumstances is it ever appropriate in America for an elected official to quote a communist leader. However, Reinalda goes on to define “Chairman Mao as the Chinese communist revolutionary who was the founding father of the People’s Republic of China.” Reinalda is technically correct, however her choice of the words “founding fathers” and "revolutionary” suggests an equivalency between America’s founding fathers, America’s birth through revolution in 1776 and Mau Zedong. Nothing can be further from the truth. The proper way to define Chairman Mao is: “The greatest mass murder of the 20th century having buried alive over 46,000 scholars and murdered an estimated 65 million of his own Chinese citizens through mass starvation, surpassing body counts of both Stalin and Hitler combined.
By omitting the truth about the reference, Reinalda failed to do her job by communicating the horror of the words emitted by our Deputy Mayer Marvin Schuldiner.
Reinalda soft-pedals egregious TC remarks at the expense of truth.
2. Ms. Reinalda’s reporting that I believe that there is not enough Christian influence in Montgomery Township by “echoing her (Ms. Rogers) call to Christendom” in public schools mischaracterized my point: simply that if we can brief Montgomery Citizens on Diwali that I recommended that the TC provide a similar briefing on Christmas. Second, I was not echoing anybody because I spoke on this topic first. Lastly, in the context of my remarks Reinalda characterizes them as religious zealotry by using the term “Christendom” when my point was simple and innocuous.
Reinalda mis-contextualize obvious points at the expense of speaker’s reality.
3. Ms. Reinalda accurately reported my remarks regarding the TC’s reticence during the Pledge of Allegiance and my question to the TC regarding when in person public meetings will resume. Thank you.
4. Ms. Susan Rogers had a number of points to make and in advance requested for more than the 3-minute permitted time. That the TC neither accepted nor rejected her request, effectively dismissing her request, was an important point missed by Ms. Reinalda. Instead, Reinalda
prefaced her reporting on Rogers’ remarks by inventorying Rogers’ speaking durations for the October 7th and October 21st meetings all of which were over the 3-minute time limit allowed by the TC and blaming Rogers for the TC being forced to terminate her calls at those meetings because of her failure to cede the floor.
Thus, Reinalda characterized the TC as the victim yet it is Rogers that was denied her freedom to address her TC and Reinalda should have challenged the TC’s 3 minute policy as an authoritarian tactic to limit the TC’s exposure to citizen participation.
Reinalda sides with the TC at the expense of citizen’s rights of representation.
5. Ms. Reinalda criticized Rogers for lack of clarity regarding her remarks on Christian representation in public schools by reporting that “it is unclear what type of representation Rogers believes is missing from Montgomery schools.” thereby discrediting Rogers. Yet Reinalda could have challenged the TC to hear out Rogers and if there was any misunderstanding of her points, challenged the TC to seek clarification from Rogers.
Reinalda sides with the TC at the expense of citizen’s rights of representation.
For the 18 years that I have lived in town, TMN’s reputation demonstrates favor for democratic government officials, democratic candidates and liberal policies while simultaneously undercutting conservatives and their policies. One can only speculate why this is, however, the insight offered by this editorial might help TMN better understand why so many do not take its reporting seriously, shake our heads at one faux pas or another and enjoy quite a few chuckles when its reporting gets carried away.