Darrell Castle talks about the victory of Gibson's Bakery over Oberlin College and how truth was revealed through a bottle of wine.

IN VINO VERITAS—WINE BRINGS TRUTH

Hello this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, June 21, 2019, and on this Report I will be talking about how truth sometimes does come from a bottle of wine, as the Latin title translates. The legal battle between Oberlin College and Gibson’s Bakery is the real subject for today as well as how truth was revealed in that case through a bottle of wine.

Oberlin College is a private liberal arts college and conservatory of music in Oberlin, Ohio. It is the oldest co-educational liberal arts college in the United States, having been founded in 1835. It claims to be the first college to admit women and the first to admit African Americans, and today it is described on Wikipedia as “known for its progressive student activism.”

The other side of the case we are talking about is Gibson’s Bakery, a small business located near the Oberlin campus since 1885. Gibson’s then is a fifth generation family owned business which has been owned and operated by the same family for more than 130 years. The elder Gipson is now 90 years old and still works in the bakery, and was present for much of the trial.

This case actually started the day after the 2016 presidential election. Apparently a lot of students at Oberlin, as well as the college administration, had a hard time accepting the results of that election. The day after Donald Trump was elected, I suppose in despair and wanting to drown his sorrow, a student, who happened to be African American, along with two companions, came into the bakery, stuck a bottle of wine in his coat and walked out without paying.

Allyn Gibson, whose great-great-grandfather founded the bakery, confronted the young man and told him he was going to call the police. There was a physical altercation outside when Mr. Gibson tried to take a picture, and when the police arrived Mr. Gibson was on the ground, apparently having been beaten and kicked by the three. The three men, all black, were arrested and charged, and then the president of Oberlin sent the following email to the student body:

“This has been a difficult few days for our community, not simply because of the events at Gibson’s Bakery, but because of the fears and concerns that many are feeling in response to the outcome of the presidential election. We write foremost to acknowledge the pain and sadness that many of you are experiencing. We want you to know that the administration, faculty, and staff are here to support you as we work through this moment together.”

The administration of Oberlin clearly had a political agenda and was willing to tie it to the incident at Gibson’s. The poor students at one of the most elite colleges in the country have apparently never experienced very much pain and suffering in their lives because they were simply unable to cope with not getting the results they wanted from the election. The College’s agenda, at least implicitly, encourages the left wing actions of the students and lets them know that it sympathizes.

The Gibson’s were accused of racial profiling since those arrested were black and the Gibson family is white. Student protests formed outside the Bakery, including a boycott which the college participated in, as well as cancelling business with the Bakery. Dean of Students, Meredith Raimondo, participated in the protests along with the students although she said she was there only to support the students and protect them, but she was seen handing out flyers along with the students. The Bakery was severely damaged economically, and was virtually out of business. For several months it struggled to make ends meet and had to lay off most of its 12 employees, some of whom were black. When this type of confrontation is going on outside a business no one wants to risk going there especially with ...

Darrell Castle talks about how human sexuality is degraded and used as a weapon against Christian Civilization.

Transcription / Notes

HUMAN SEXUALITY—IT’S KIND OF IMPORTANT

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, June 14, 2019, and on this Report I will be talking about a subject that is very dear to most of us. Yes, human sexuality is kind of important, but right along with it in terms of importance is human civilization. The degrading of human sexuality is just one of the many termites eating away at the foundations of human civilization. Obscenity and pornography, both tools of the termites, are perversions of the sexuality given to humanity by God.

Sexuality, when used as a destructive weapon, is very effective because it appeals to our base and uncivilized nature. Civilization is in fact far too important for those of us who remain civilized, to have turned it over to a bunch of uncivilized people to set the agenda under which we must live, but that’s apparently what we did.

We have about 2000 years of this civilization behind us with all its achievement in science, music, art, literature, architecture, and yes even religion. This civilization that we call "Western" or "Christian" Civilization has that name because it was the creation of the church and Christianity. The very foundation of Western Civilization, the same one the termites are eating today, was the creation of the Church. Many of the things we used to take for granted, but which now seem quaint or even backward, such as respect for and protection of women grew out of the Catholic tradition of devotion to Mary, the mother of Jesus. The art, literature, music, architecture, etc. that followed was simply an expression of that faith.

Human sexuality, and especially the treatment of women, is the obvious best weapon to use in the War on Civilization and the order of being. A good example today would be a bill the Democrats call “The Equality Act”, which should tell you that it has nothing to do with equality. Instead, it is an attack on Christianity and the tenants of Western Civilization. The bill was recently passed by the House but probably doesn’t have much chance of passage in the Senate so we will hopefully escape its threat for awhile at least. In the House, every single Democrat, plus eight Republicans, voted for it.

The legislation would add sexual orientation and gender identity to characteristics protected by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The LGBTQ community is a top priority for Democrats, as Nancy Pelosi said, so they are willing to place these draconian measures on the rest of us in order to buy the votes of that community. The act would require high schools to allow biological males to compete on girl’s sports teams if they identify as a female and are in the process of becoming a transgendered person. At the last minute, an amendment was added to preserve Title 9 and women’s sports but the Democrats, the party of women, soundly defeated it.

Title 9, which requires equality for women’s sports on the high school and college level, was a hard fought battle nearly fifty years ago but Democrats in the House today just throw it away as if it means nothing. They misname their bill “The Equality Act” I suppose to obscure the fact that it deprives a large portion of the population of legal protection and equality.

Sexuality, used as a weapon, is not a new thing at all. We have to go back about 100 years to see the beginnings of the long fight to take away the community standards, which allowed individual communities to regulate and prevent what they deemed to be obscene. Little by little, and film by film, the battles were fought with the pornography industry, unwilling to ever concede defeat but always taking the fight to the next level. The real and final battle began in the 1970’s with the court struggles over the Paris Adult Theater cases and the Deep Throat Cases.

Darrell Castle talks about the recent Supreme Court opinion in the case of Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky.

Transcription / Notes

ABORTION AND EUGENICS         

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, June 7, 2019, and on this Report I will be talking about the United States Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky. The Supreme Court reversed in part a ruling from the 7th Circuit which favored Planned Parenthood, but left the 2nd part of the 7th Circuit ruling intact.

In 2016, Indiana passed a law that forbade Planned Parenthood from disposing of fetal remains as “infectious waste.” Yes, that’s how they referred to the bodies of the babies they killed, infectious waste. The state law said that from now on the remains have to be treated with respect, dignity and properly buried.  The second part of the Indiana law prohibited abortions on the basis of race, disability or sex selection. It’s pretty easy to see that both provisions of this law come very close to recognizing the “fetal remains” as a once living human being.

Planned Parenthood of course, immediately filed suit alleging that both provisions were unconstitutional and they won each step of the way up the legal ladder including the 7th Circuit. Indiana continued its appeal to the Supreme Court and that court agreed to hear it. People interested in the status of abortion law, as well as those interested in how this new court would handle such matters, watched the case with great anticipation.

By a vote of 7-2 with only Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonya Sotomayor voting no, the court ruled the burial provision is constitutional. That ruling, without really saying it, recognizes that there is humanity in that “infectious waste” that deserves dignity and respect. Not the two ladies though, no way would those women grant any respect or dignity to unwanted “infectious waste.”

On the second provision prohibiting what amounts to eugenics, the court decided to drop back and punt. They ruled that normally they don’t like to decide something that has not been looked at by at least two appellate courts and this issue has only been looked at by the 7th Circuit so they would not rule on it. That was an easy way out for them and they obviously did not feel ready to make a ruling that would prevent abortions for race, disability or sex selection.

To rule that law constitutional would be paramount to saying, wait a minute you are killing innocent and helpless human beings. The Court was not ready to say that and yet they didn’t want to rule that it was ok to do so, and instead, they just let the 7th Circuit ruling that the law is unconstitutional stand. So, just to keep beating this horse for a minute, it is perfectly legal to kill babies in their mother’s womb because you don’t like their race, disability, or sex, but Planned Parenthood, as a consequence of the fetal burial provision, will have its very lucrative business of selling dead baby parts curtailed, at least in Indiana.

Although he concurred in the court’s opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote his own long concurring opinion in which he gave the court and the American people a history lesson in the use of abortion for eugenic and racial purposes. He traced the long ugly history of eugenics and how abortion has been used for that purpose in the past. “Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex or disability of an unborn child, as Planned Parenthood advocates, would constitutionalize the views of the 20th century eugenics movement.”

Justice Thomas held the entire history of the abortion for eugenic purposes movement up for the whole world to see, and he rubbed the court’s nose in it for refusing to recognize it as he Quoted Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes writing for the 1927 court, “It is better for the entire world,

Darrell Castle talks about the insanity of warfare as a foreign policy strategy against people who have not harmed the United States.

Transcription / Notes

THE AGE OF INSANITY

Hello this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, May 31, 2019, the last Friday of May, and on this report I will be talking about what I call insanity, because it makes no sense to me. It should make no sense to anyone but to those whose brains are wired to a certain end, I suppose that ripping apart the fabric of civilization in the pursuit of raw political power makes some degree of sense.

May is the 50th anniversary of the Battle for Hamburger Hill and my local newspaper, the Memphis Commercial Appeal, did a special report on that battle.

 “As Americans this weekend memorialize the casualties of our war dead, a small band of U.S. soldiers of the 101st airborne division will recall in their collective memories that they were comrades’ in-arms of a famous battle during the Vietnam War. The Battle of Hamburger Hill, fought 50 years ago this month, is seared into the memories of its participants; a struggle in the heavily contested A Shau Valley. Fought over a specific mountain, known as Hill 937, denoted for its height in meters (approximately 3000 feet), it was also called Dong Ap Bia by the North Vietnamese, which translates into “Mountain of the Crouching Beast.”

The airborne battalion of the 101st suffered 71 dead and 372 wounded, a casualty rate equal to more than 70% per cent of the battalion. This report goes on to say that they spent their last breath in a hellish place so remember them. Nothing I say in this Report is intended as a criticism of those who fought and died there or in any other place our military is committed. I was one of them almost 50 years ago and today I criticize only those who sent us and who still send us. Wasting one of the best battalions in the United States Army by sending it up that hill seems like either a monumental mistake or the height of insanity, but perhaps hindsight is 20/20.

The problem lies with a foreign policy that puts people in positions of fighting wars that don’t need to be fought and frankly should not be an American concern. The United States had many opportunities to avoid what happened in Vietnam in 1945, in 1954, in 1958, and in 1963. The leadership could have chosen different paths, but instead they chose the paths with all the traps and in they went.

I know that during my years as a Marine Officer almost 50 years ago, I and the other young officers with me didn’t spend a lot of time pondering these things, at least not openly. Open criticism of overall strategy by the officer corps and/or the civilian leadership would have seemed disloyal and would never have happened. We just assumed that the people we were supposed to fight needed to be fought so that’s what we did.

I have had many opportunities to think about it in the intervening years, however, and I have tried to take advantage and think. It has occurred to me that when we go abroad to kill foreigners, the people we are killing, and who are trying as hard as they can to kill us, should be a direct threat to the United States to at least some degree. The people we fought in Vietnam had zero ability to harm the United States in any way whatsoever. If our enemy is not a direct threat, and in fact, is totally incapable of harming the United States then what’s the point. We fought them and they killed almost 60,000 of us and we killed God only knows how many of them, perhaps a couple of million and yet they could not have directly harmed us if we had remained as far away from there as possible.

The other thing that has occurred to me over the years is that the United States has actual enemies fully capable of helping to crack apart our entire civilization sitting in the halls of Congress and the Senate. It requires a strange leap of insanity to allow that to happen,

Darrell Castle continues with part two of A Hero's Journey leading into Memorial Day.

Transcription / Notes

A HERO’S JOURNEY—PART TWO

Hello this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday May 24, 2019 the Friday before Memorial Day, just a three day weekend for most people but for us a chance to pause and remember. To that end we continue with part two of our Hero’s Journey to honor some of those who fought World War Two, and made that hero’s journey.

 The early days of World War Two were desperate times for the naval and marine aviators trying to defend their ships from attack in the pacific. The only fighter aircraft they had for the first 15 months or so of the war was the F4F Wildcat which was vastly inferior to its main opponent the Japanese zero. The Wildcat did not have automatically retractable landing so the gear had to be manually retracted by the pilot turning a crank in the cockpit that operated a set of wheels and pulleys. It was less agile, less maneuverable, and slower than the Zero which all added up to a lot of dead American pilots.

The pilots used to joke about the Wildcat that it was so bad that when they launched from the deck of the Carrier the aircraft should immediately be reported as missing. One man named Jimmy Thach, decided that he would do something to change that. Lt. Com. Thach said that even though the aircraft was inferior to its Japanese counterpart, the men who flew them were not. He picked two other flyers from the squadron he commanded, and invited them to a training session in his quarters.

He took a few matchsticks and laid out for the other two pilots his tactical method. That method of changing tactics to accommodate the aircraft’s strengths and weaknesses redefined American fighter tactics and saved countless American lives as well as protected their ships from destruction. His theory was that since their aircraft were inferior to the enemy’s aircraft tactics had to change to even the score. His tactical change became known as the Thach weave whereby two Wildcats would weave back and forth in a kind of figure eight fashion thus making it almost impossible for a Zero to get on a Wildcat’s tail without exposing itself to attack from the other Wildcat.

The three of them went up and practiced the maneuver over and over until they had it down, and then they taught it to the rest of the squadron, and to the other squadrons on their ship, the USS Lexington. Jimmy Thach went on to become the best known tactician in the navy. He also developed what became known as the big blue blanket, to help protect ships from kamikaze attack later in the war.

Jimmy Thach was born in Pine Bluff Arkansas just across the river from where I live now. He did about everything a good hero can do during his journey. Throughout his forty years in the navy he was a theoretical innovator and a tactical genius. In the last year of the War he was a task force operations officer, and during the Korean War he was an aircraft carrier commander. During the cold war he contributed greatly to the navy’s anti-submarine warfare efforts.  There is still an award for excellence named for him at the navy’s anti-submarine school.

He was also a great fighter pilot credited with many enemy aircraft, including six in one day. He served on the staff of Vice Admiral John McCain, that’s the senator’s father, and was aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay for the Japanese surrender. He was eventually promoted to four star rank and commanded the US naval operations in Europe. He retired from the navy in 1967 with 40 years of service.  He died on April 15, 1981 four days before his 76th birthday thus completing his journey.

One of those men sitting at Jimmy Thach’s table to learn about the Thach weave was Edward “ Butch” O’Hare. You might recognize that name if you’ve ever flown into Chicago because O’Hare airport is named for Butch O’Hare although he was not from Chicago and never liv...

Darrell Castle pays tribute to the Tokyo Raiders and their leader, Lt. Col. Jimmy Doolittle and explains why it is important to remember them as we approach Memorial Day.

Transcript / Notes

  A HERO’S JOURNEY—PART ONE

 Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, May 17, 2019, and on this Report I will begin the first part of a two part Report as a lead in to Memorial Day coming up on Monday May 27th. The two part series will concentrate on the stories of those who fought World War ll; one, because those men deserve it; and 2, because history is vitally important and the stories of what those men did unfortunately often die with them. It’s a different world now than the world of the World War ll veterans. It was simpler then because we knew who we were and we knew that we had something worth killing and dying for.

In mythology, the hero’s journey, involves the tales of a hero who goes on an adventure, and in a decisive crises wins a victory and comes home changed by it. That is certainly the tale of the men we are going to talk about today except that many of them missed out on the coming home part of the adventure.

In the early days of the war, the U.S. Navy had almost ceased to exist in the Pacific due to the Japanese attack on the naval base at Pearl Harbor. Fortunately, the only three aircraft carriers in the Pacific were at sea that day and thereby survived the attack. American industry had to be rebuilt and retooled almost overnight to completely rebuild the Navy to fight a world war.

President Roosevelt wanted some way to lift the morale of the American people who were enduring the news of one Japanese victory after another, culminating in the surrender of the Philippines, along with 70,000 Filipino and American troops. The President told his military commanders that he wanted to strike at the mainland of Japan itself, but none of them believed it could be done because no land-based bombers had the range to reach Japan. Well then, what about a carrier based attack? No as well, because Japanese anti-ship and anti-air defenses would not allow a carrier to approach close enough to launch an attack.

The President told them to find someone who believed it could be done and who was willing to do it. That man turned out to be Lt. Col. James (Jimmy) Doolittle, an officer who had been in the Army Air Corps, as it was known then. Since 1917. Lt. Col. Doolittle had been an accomplished flyer, having tested many types of aircraft and holding the cross country speed record as well. He was one of the pioneers in the early days of military aviation.  In addition, he was an intelligent, educated man, with a PHD in Aeronautics from MIT.

Lt. Col. Doolittle thought it could be done, and he set about the task of building a team of 80 men to do it. He asked for volunteers for an extremely dangerous mission and he soon had more than enough volunteers to select from. He needed 16 crews of five men to a crew or 80 men. They were tasked with something never before attempted, launching a twin engine land-based bomber, the B-25, from the deck of a carrier at sea, bombing the Japanese capitol and flying to China, knowing they could not make it and could not return to the carrier.  

The purpose of this Report is not to talk about airplanes, ships, or their ordinance but to tell the stories of the men who flew in them and who served on them so let’s look at what happened to those 80 men. The aircraft carrier USS Hornet was selected for the mission and the 16 B-25’s were loaded aboard and chained down on the deck. The ship and its battle group set sail for the coast of Japan intending to launch the raid 400 miles from the coast. That would leave them just enough fuel to complete their bomb runs and just make the coast of China where the Chinese would hopefully help them. However, when they were 600 miles from Japan the task force encountered a Japanese fishing vessel and the captai...

Darrell Castle talks about the economic and psychological warfare currently being conducted against Iran and asks who is really in charge of this government.

Note: Just because I am critical of American foreign policy does not mean that I want some other government to prevail in this struggle.

Transcription / Notes

WAR—ECONOMIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL—FOR NOW

Hello this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, May 10th 2019, and on this Report I will be taking you back to the Middle East since that seems to be where the action is this week. You probably remember that early in his term President Trump canceled the Iran deal negotiated by the Obama Administration.

In addition to canceling the deal he re-imposed economic sanctions that severely curtailed Iran’s ability to sell its oil on the world market. The sale of oil is 40% of the Iranian GDP so preventing its sale is a crippling blow to the Iranian economy. The President did leave Iran a way out however, by granting waivers to eight countries, China, Greece, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Turkey. The exemptions were originally for six months, which expired May 2, and the President said he will not renew them thus cutting Iran’s oil sales to zero.

A wise tactic in negotiating is to always leave your opponent an honorable means of escape. When you trap a wounded animal and he has no means of escape he has nothing to lose by fighting. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has called on all nations to reduce Iran’s oil exports to zero. The Iranians responded by announcing the resumption of their nuclear program, and more ominously, threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz to shipping.

Iran’s statement regarding the strait was something like, if our oil doesn’t pass through the strait then no other country’s oil will either. If the Iranians closed or tried to close the strait then the U.S. would have to respond militarily and we would find ourselves in a dangerous war with the potential to spread rapidly. The Iranians have said that if attacked by the U.S. they would also hit Israel, and you can be certain that Israel would hit back even harder.

The United States and Iran move ever closer to war, closer perhaps than we’ve been in many years. These things usually happen step by step until some small spark ignites the explosion. Do the lives and economies of millions of people really come down to the egos of one or two people? Does President Trump really want war with Iran and is therefore trying to provoke them to action? Wouldn’t he rather go to Florida and play a couple of rounds of golf than he would to command a war possibly involving nuclear powers? Is he really in charge of this government or not? If not, then who is?

If he doesn’t want war, why does he surround himself with neo-con hawks such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo? The two of them serve as National Security Advisor and as Secretary of State, and have been pushing their “get tough” policy since they were first appointed. It’s pretty clear that they were responsible for the decision to cancel the waivers which allowed Iran a way to sell its oil, thus giving Iran no face saving way out. This whole thing stinks to high heaven and I am starting to see a nation being maneuvered into a corner with war as the only possibility.

John Bolton announced last Sunday that the strike carrier Abraham Lincoln and its battle group would be sent into the eastern Mediterranean to support the carrier John Stennis already in the Persian Gulf.  My understanding is that the “Abe”, as the sailors call it, transited the Suez Canal yesterday. In addition, four B-52 bombers from Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, have been sent to Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar as additional striking power, and as a psychological show of force.

There is intelligence that some type of Iranian attack against U.S. forces, possibly in Syria or Iraq, was imminent,

Darrell Castle discusses why history is important and why so many seek to control and rewrite it.

Transcription / Notes

WHY HISTORY IS IMPORTANT

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, April 26, 2019, and on this Report I will be talking History, and why it is important, and why so many who also apparently think it’s important seek to control and re-write it until it suits their world view.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word history as having evolved from an ancient Greek verb that means “to know”. The Greek word historia originally meant inquiry, the act of seeking knowledge, as well as the knowledge that results. If one accepts that definition then the reason for rewriting history to suit today’s ideology becomes apparent and that is to control us and our destiny by controlling who we think we are. Control of culture determines whose group or what group will dominate and determine what is known and believed and what is left unknown or unbelieved.

In Marxist philosophy, cultural hegemony is the domination of a society by a group whose control comes through control of culture. It would be hard to control a society’s culture without controlling and writing its history for it is history, which allows a people to know who they are, who their ancestors were, and where they came from. Were their ancestors’ people to be proud of, to be honored, perhaps even revered and memorialized through monuments, or were they people to be ashamed of in the dominant culture of the day?

Continuing with our description of cultural Marxism and how it has gained control of our culture we can see that domination of society comes through control of culture and the ideology contained within that culture. Through control of all values, beliefs, norms, attitudes and their explanations the dominant group worldview becomes the worldview of the majority who come to see its values as good for all and even inevitable. The controlling group leads the majority to see that its view is the way things should be and its values are thus justified and legitimized.

Christianity dominated the West and its people for so long, and it was so ingrained in the culture, that in order for Cultural Marxism to control and dominate, Christianity had to be destroyed as the majority world view because the two are not compatible., Christianity was so commonplace and accepted that even those who followed a different religion or who didn’t accept any religion as true understood that it was good for society and so they accepted its cultural dominance.

Now it seems that we are embarrassed or not permitted to even say the word lest someone hear us and lift himself out of the mind prison that has been carefully built for him. Reporting on the recent terrorist attacks in Sri Lanka, in which more than 300 Christians attending church on Easter were massacred, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton could not bring themselves to say the word Christian, listing the victims as “Easter worshippers". Both used the expression almost simultaneously, which leaves little doubt that the expression was planned and discussed in advance. Nevertheless, through the phenomenon of hive think, I have heard the expression many times since. That is cultural dominance at its most obvious.

Christianity is so fearful and dangerous to Cultural Marxists that they can’t, or won’t, say the word. We can’t be allowed to know that Christians are being massacred all over the world even here in America. They first erase it from the history books and schoolbooks, then from the minds of our children through school indoctrination, then through politicians and celebrities who fancy themselves thought leaders. Their plan has worked remarkably well, and they now have almost complete control of the culture. Christian clergy, quite often it seems, are pedophiles, rapists, or guilty of some other egregious offense,

Darrell Castle talks about the Notre Dame Cathedral fire, the arrest of Julian Assange, and the Blind Man's Matrix of 2019.

Transcription / Notes

WHO IS REALLY BLIND

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, April 19, 2019, and on this Report I first want to mention that this is Good Friday, or the Friday before Easter. There is not much good news in this Report, however, because as King Solomon told us about 3000 years ago, there is nothing new under the sun. Said in today’s vernacular, the expression would be' the more things seem to change, the more they stay the same". Solomon told us that he had everything and had tried everything. He had more than 1000 women at his beck and call. He was considered the richest man in the world as well as the wisest. People come from all over the world to see his treasures and partake of his wisdom but none of it was enough.

Vanity, vanity all is vanity he told us when he searched for green grass but found nothing but dry wilted grass wherever he looked.  As we continue to seek the green grass today, there are two stories that happened in the past week that I want to talk about and those are the fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, and the second is the arrest of Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Both these events feed into and illustrate the point of our Report and that is that often it is the ones who are not actually blind who cannot see. They are blind to what is happening and blind to the truth.

For the beginning of our story, fast forward about 1000 years from Solomon to that brief three year window when Jesus was about his public ministry. This account is recorded in the 9th chapter of the book of John, from which my pastor preached a wonderful sermon last Sunday and inspired my decision to tell the story in this manner.

Jesus, as witnessed by some of his disciples, encountered a man who had been blind from birth. Jesus spit on the ground and made some mud with his saliva. He put the mud on the man’s eyes and told him to go bathe in the pool of Siloam and when he did his sight was immediately restored. The religious leaders, and the Jews who were the power structure of the day, were outraged, saying that this man healed on the Sabbath, therefore, he cannot be of God because he violated one of our rules. They went to see the man’s mother and asked if he had really been blind from birth, and she said yes.   When they continued to question her she said look go ask him, he’s a grown man, let him answer you.

The man’s mother threw Jesus under the bus because she was afraid of being cast out of the Synagogue. When they told the man that Jesus was a sinner, he said, I don’t know about that but I do know that I was blind and now I see. He had a face to face encounter with truth and he could not deny it but they cast him out of the Synagogue anyway. Jesus said those who are blind are the ones who see and those who see are the blind ones. When those who are blind are exposed they turn mean and seek retribution and revenge.

We make up our reasons because we simply cannot accept the truth, especially when it contradicts the political narrative that we desperately cling to. The truth is a rebuke to whatever system we have chosen to believe in, so we must deny it. That is the backdrop for our story today and now you can fast forward to the year 2019.

We live in a false reality today, a matrix if you will. Some of the matrix has been built by ourselves, but most of it is designed and built by the political systems under which we live, and most of all it is enforced and reinforced by the worldwide media of all different platforms. They tell us,” oh yes, all smart people see it that way so if you want to be considered smart and not a social outcast you will see it that way too.” We are just like the blind man’s mother not wanting to be cast out so we silently comply.

Darrell Castle talks about the politically correct movement and how it determines what we think by controlling what we say and the words we use to say it.

Transcription / Notes

THE THINGS WE SAY      

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle Report. Today is Friday, April 12, 2019, and on today’s Report I will be talking about one of the many termites eating away at the foundation of Western Civilization, and that is the Politically Correct movement, specifically how that movement affects our right to speak freely. A recent quote from Paul Craig Roberts says it well: “I can remember when words now said to be offensive gave no offense to anyone. What has happened is that people have been taught to regard the words as offensive.”

I do not believe that the people who push the politically correct agenda on us have good intentions. Their intentions are the opposite of good because they want to change the way we think, the way we see reality by changing the words we use, and by changing the meaning of those words.

They are apparently doing so because they are opposed to the things which made Western Civilization the greatest civilization in history. We were once unique among all civilizations of history and our civilization was better than any other on earth delivering to us such things as; individualism, personal freedom, self reliance, capitalism, and I mean real capitalism as opposed to the crony capitalism of today, economic liberty, free thought, free speech, and the like.

It starts with controlling the words we say, the words we are allowed to use without fear of retribution, such as social media banning and de-platforming, social shaming, loss of job and with it the ability to earn our living using the best gifts that we have, along with many other things. It is just as Orwell predicted in his book “1984”, where he created the concept of Newspeak. That was a new version of the language using all kinds of new words meaning the opposite of what was familiar to us. It was then impossible to think clearly because the words were purposefully misdefined.

Examples of the misdefinition of words are numerous today, as are examples of the invention of new words to control and define us. Such terms as gender inclusivity, gender fluidity, cultural appropriation, and white privilege are spreading and becoming common thereby controlling our thought process. To some these terms are just a ridiculous joke but to others they define the world. The thinking seems to be that a person should be able to be what he thinks he is rather than how his birth defines him.

If one is born a man and he would rather be a woman then we must pretend that he is a woman. I have a certain degree of sympathy with that argument from the standpoint of human freedom. If a person wants to pretend that he is a fencepost that is fine with me as long as I am free to see him for what he is. If he or she is permitted to see himself or herself any way he or she wants then why am I not permitted to see that person anyway I want? The politically correct crowd will not allow me that freedom, however. They want to legislate that I must accept the psychologically aberrated as normal.

They demand laws, rules, and regulations governing what you say, think, and feel. We must be forced to respect, admire, and pay for the fantasies of a tiny minority. Disapproved speech will soon be criminalized in America as it has been in Europe, of that I have no doubt. The things we are not permitted to say quite possibly could be hate crimes and if so they could be criminally sanctioned.

In Michigan right now a “hate crimes database” is being created by the state’s Attorney General, working with the Department of Civil Rights to create a database of hate and bias incidents that don’t rise to the level of crime or civil infraction. The “hate crimes unit” apparently comes on the advice of the Southern Poverty Law Center,