American Library Association's Social Activism Undermines Public Trust in a Community Institution

Read this report highly critical of the American Library Association's "social agenda":

• Agenda on the Shelves; The American Library Association's Social Activism Undermines Public Trust in a Community Institution, by Emily Whitten, WORLD Magazine, 6 July 2012:

  The ALA's increasingly vocal social agenda combined with policies that prevent local librarians from responding to their community's values are very real dangers.  And these policies may be undermining library relevance and public trust at a time when both are sorely needed.

Read this response by librarian David Lee King:

• "Bad Reporting and Weird Views about ALA," by David Lee King, David Lee King, 7 July 2012.

Now read my own comment:

The ALA's actions include not only those described above, but also intentionally false and misleading actions intended to mislead an entire nation.  For example, ALA publishes each year an annual list of the top 10 most challenged books.  This year’s list, for example, notes the "jump" of "The Hunger Games" from 5th position to 3rd position, likely as a means to ride the wave of the movie's popularity, and no actual proof of actual numbers is ever given despite request.

But in 2010, the ALA rode another wave.  It pushed 2 books on the list as being opposed for their LGBT content.  It said the top book was challenged dozens of times.  In reality it was challenged only 4 times all year across the entire nation.  It said another LGBT book was challenged for its LGBT content.  In reality the parents objected to the graphic of two Boy Scouts watching two people having anal sex, and, more significantly to the matter of the ALA's intentional deception, the author of the book admitted that ALA told her other books had been challenged more often that hers, but it pushed the book up the list due to its LGBT content and its successful removal from a single school.

And I have the tape recording of the author saying this in public at her speech at a New Jersey Library Association annual meeting.  See/listen for yourselves: http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2011/09/banned-books-week-is-gay-promotion.html

So the ALA essentially faked its 2010 annual list of top 10 challenged books to push the LGBT issue.

That said, I have no evidence that ALA was pushing the LGBT issue to promote it.  Rather I suspect it pushed the LGBT issue to cynically take advantage of the false controversy it was intentionally faking so the LGBT community would pick up the issue and carry the ALA's false censorship message further than the ALA could do alone.  I think the ALA was stepping on the LGBT community to use it to its own advantage.  Similarly in 2011, the ALA dropped all LGBT books from its annual list and is now riding The Hunger Games movie wave to push its false message.

Remember, the last book censored in the USA was "Fanny Hill" and that was about half a century ago.  So the ALA definitely needs help in spreading its false message that censorship is occurring everyday in nearly every community.  Desperately faking / manipulating lists to promote falsity is a sure sign the ALA knows people are not buying the bull.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Now, tell everyone what you think about the Emily Whitten report in the comments below.

Follow @SafeLibraries

ALA Promotes Red-Green Alliance and Is a Leftist Anti-War Group Supporting Radical Islamist Terror

The American Library Association promotes the Red-Green alliance?  Is it a leftist "anti-war" group supporting radical Islamist terror?  Do libraries censor out the politically incorrect and promote the opposite?  I advise, you surmise:

• "Leftist 'Anti-War' Groups Supporting Radical Islamist Terror," by Lisa Graas, Lisa Graas, 20 March 2011, hyperlinks and emphasis in original:

As Osama Bin Laden himself noted: "The interests of Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders."

....

The groups listed here are all listed at Discover the Networks as leftist "anti-war" groups with radical agendas and appear as signatories on a recent letter authored by one of the groups, the ACLU, protesting the hearings on radicalization.  Though these organizations do not focus solely on an 'anti-war' agenda, they are lead players in the so-called "anti-war" movement, paving the way for smaller groups that make all the noise, like Code Pink.

....

Librarians?  You betcha.  The American Library Association (ALA) is the "oldest and largest library association in the world" with 61,043 members in America and abroad.  The ALA is anti-Israel, opposes the Patriot Act and actively works against anti-terrorism measures.

....

While refusing to acknowledge any threat from within the Muslim community, ALA has falsely accused Israel of destruction of "Palestinian" libraries, and even reserves the right to make such false accusations despite proof that they are false.  In the view of the ALA, then, Islamists are above scrutiny while Israel may be blamed even for good intentions.

....

If you are providing support for your local library, you may want to check to see if they are supporting ALA.  Your money could be used by this organization to undermine America’s efforts to prevent terrorism.

Having read that, get a load of this eye opener on library censorship.  The author comments on the Lisa Graas post quoted above then adds revealing information about library censorship:

• "Five Groups Promoting the Red-Green Alliance," by Carl in Jerusalem, Israel Matzav, 21 March 2011, hyperlinks in original:

This hit home because my late mother was an ALA member, and saw which way the organization was heading.  When I googled my mother's name with the ALA, I found two local publications of the Boston chapter, one announcing her initial employment by the Boston Public Library, and the second announcing her transfer to a different branch.

My mother was a big supporter of local libraries and was forever advocating for our local suburb to build a good public library - which they did long after my brother and I could have benefited from it.  But for the last 25 years or so of her career, she was employed at a local community college, where she was constantly spending money from her own pocket to buy books that gave a more balanced view on Israel to counteract her radical Leftist boss who was constantly buying pro-'Palestinian' books using the library's budget.

I've mentioned before on this blog that both my parents were (and my father still is) knee0jerk Democratic voters.  But the ALA is obviously much more radical since my parents were Democrats but were (and my father still is) strongly pro-Israel.  I guess Mom's boss was much more in line with the librarians' thinking.

/sigh

Read the whole thing.  (Yes, the rest of it is just as exhaustively researched).

Given what I just wrote about the ALA ("ALA Joins CAIR to Oppose Radicalization Hearings Sponsored by Congressman Pete King"), I believe the material presented above about the ALA is largely accurate.  However, some of the support for certain statements is a little dated and does not include more recent information, like the George Soros money flooding into the ALA.  I do not know about the remaining non-ALA subject matter.

See also Librarians For Fairness. 

What do you think?  Does the ALA promote the Red-Green alliance?  Is it a leftist "anti-war" group supporting radical Islamist terror, as Lisa reports?  Do you think libraries buy materials they support politically and censor out those they do not, as Carl reports?  Do you think the ALA includes books having "a more balanced view on Israel" being kept out of libraries in its Banned Books Week hoax?  Please comment below.

"If you are providing support for your local library, you may want to check to see if they are supporting ALA.  Your money could be used by this organization to undermine America’s efforts to prevent terrorism."

.

ALA Oppresses Kids on Banned Books Week and All Year Long; Opinion: There Is a Time to Ban Books from School Libraries

It's National Hogwash Week.  In addition to the gems linked therein comes the latest about the American Library Association's [ALA] oppression of children and its political correctness in public schools.  Yes, oppression and political correctness.  In public schools.  In your community.  Your children are the target.  As the author explains, do not trust the ALA.

Here is an outstanding opinion from Sylvia Cochran, bold emphasis mine, italic in original:

"Opinion: There Is a Time to Ban Books from School Libraries"

by Sylvia Cochran, Associated Content, 25 September 2010

Banned books are a sign of an oppressive regime.  That said, forcing age-inappropriate reading materials on youngsters not ready to deal with the material -- and doing so just for the sake of a bigger principle -- is just as oppressive.  Enter the American Library Association.

The ALA reports that between 2009 and 2010 there were three instances of school library book bans.  With Banned Books Week commemorated during the last week of September, it is only fitting to review the appropriateness of book bans in school libraries.

While I do not believe that a book should be banned from a public library, I do see the logic of declaring some reading material off-limits in the school setting.

The one and only reason to ban books from a school library?  They're not age-appropriate.

I have no problem with religious, political or even some adult situations in books placed in school libraries.  In fact, I believe that exposing kids to a variety of lifestyles, viewpoints, beliefs and politics is a good thing -- as long as it is done in small, age-appropriate doses on a voluntary basis.  I do, however, object to children being made to read books that are not appropriate for their emotional or intellectual maturity level.

Take for example The Fashion Disaster that Changed My Life, a thoroughly enjoyable book by Lauren Myracle.  Amazon quotes the School Library Journal, which rates it as appropriate for grade four to seven.  The story's 12-year-old protagonist experiences a static, cling-induced fashion faux pas as she enters seventh grade with her mom's panties stuck to her pants.

For me, the problem begins on page five, when one of the boys leers, "Strip show, baby!" and "Take it all off!"  A few pages later the same boy suggests to the hapless protagonist to "get a job at the Pussycat Palace" because "you could get paid to take off your undies."

I really, really don't want my fourth-grade son or daughter reading this.  (In part, because I really do not want to explain to either of them what a stripper is and why some people pay others to take off their clothes. At least not in fourth grade.)  Thus, I would like to see this book banned from school library shelves accessible to kindergarten students and other very young elementary school kids.

Can't we trust the ALA to look out for the kids?

The short answer is a resounding "no."  As outlined in the ALA's materials for how to conduct a challenge hearing, the organization advises librarians that, "All those selected to testify should be reminded they are defending a principle more than an individual title.  The actual title in question should play a secondary role.  It is very difficult to disagree with the freedom to read, view and listen in a democratic society."

Unless you are willing to sacrifice your child at the altar of political correctness, it may be wise to question the age-appropriateness of some books.

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc.  All rights reserved.

 

.