Darrell Castle talks about the destruction of our nation’s moral consensus and the necessity of secured borders. Transcription / Notes OUR CRUMBLING CIVILIZATION AND IMMIGRANT RIGHTS Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report.  Today is Friday, December 15, 2017, and on today’s report, I will be talking about how our civilization is starting to crumble at the foundation.  It seems that when advancements are made by humanity, sometimes taking thousands of years to achieve, these advancements are often given back or destroyed in a few decades. Western Civilization, for example, is based on a shared moral consensus as its foundation.  When that consensus is destroyed, or even weakened, the foundation of our civilization crumbles.  The moral consensus underpinning Western Civilization has now been replaced by a set of amoral rules, which make up our new amoral code.  The new set of rules is absolutely binding on most of us, but for a few they are not so binding.  The rules we are now expected to live by make up the system of politically correct multiculturalism that totally dominates our society.  You violate one of the rules at the peril of losing your job and often having your life ruined. Since there’s no morality anymore, only rules, we have lost our ability to separate right from wrong and not just the ruling elite either.  Even the man and woman on the street who raise their children, go to work each day, vote, and serve on juries, seem to have lost discernment.  For example, they allow their civic leaders to declare their cities sanctuary cities, meaning those who have entered this country illegally, whether they are honest, hard working people, or seven-time felons, can flee to that sanctuary city for protection.  Sanctuary cities don’t want illegal immigrants to be subject to deportation, even if they have seven prior felony convictions, as did Jose Garcia Zarate when he killed Kate Steinle. Mr. Zarate had been deported five times and illegally returned to the United States each time.  He was nearing release from prison for his seventh felony when the Federal Immigration Authorities, or I.C.E., requested that he be released to them so that he could be deported for the sixth time.  The people of San Francisco, through their elected representatives, said no he can stay here in our sanctuary city.  That decision cost a young woman named Kate Steinle her life. Mr. Zarate fired a previously stolen .40 caliber Sig Sauer handgun into a crowd of people, walking on a pier in San Francisco.  The bullet apparently ricocheted off a piece of concrete and struck Ms. Steinle in the back, fatally wounding her.  He then threw the stolen gun into San Francisco Bay and ran, but it was all captured on video tape.  First he said he fired on purpose but was aiming at a seal, then he changed his story to say that he found the gun on the pier and when he picked it up it accidentally fired. It seems pretty clear that Mr. Zarate did not intend to kill Kate Steinle, but firing a handgun into a crowd of people has to at least constitute negligent homicide, or extremely reckless homicide, or grossly negligent second degree murder with implied malice doesn’t it?  Under the law, in most areas shooting into a crowd would carry implied malice for murder, but no, the jury said not guilty, of anything, except being a felon in possession of a hand gun.  I guess their reasoning was that possession of a gun is a crime but using it to kill is not.  The felon in possession charge carries a sentence of three years, for which Mr. Zarate was given credit for time served and has probably been released by now. If so, Mr. Zarate walks the streets of his sanctuary city a free man while Kate Steinle is in her grave.  Apparently our culture has become so perverted that we can’t even begin to tell the difference between right and wrong?  Perhaps the many years most of us spend under government control, in government schools,