What's the deal with the Ford Foundation?
That's what I want to know.
Consider this interview:
"I don't think there's any question that the principles involved in the Ford Foundation now -- the current president Susan Berresford, her predecessor Franklin Thomas, and the people who -- on the staff who control the giving of the Ford Foundation -- have as its objective to destroy the immigration controls of this country, and they have funded organizations, litigation, ethnic lobbies, and others that have worked mightily for 30 years to dismantle and destroy U.S. interior immigration law enforcement.
The ethic is to create, of course, a multiethnic or multicultural society. They use very neg -- very objective language when they try to describe the grants, but what, clearly, Susan Berresford and others want to do is carry on an agenda that carries -- goes all the way back to Emma Goldman and the radicalization of labor movements in 1910 and '20, Bill, to create essentially a population that the left elite can control..."
Whether the conclusion drawn in the second paragraph accurately represents their goals or not, the first paragraph can't be denied.
A UCLA study says California's constitution should be amended so the state's four and a-half million non-citizen adults can vote in local elections... Study author Joaquin Avila says cities wouldn't be ordered to let non-citizens vote, but would have the choice to do so.
When this story first broke, I considered this guy just a wacky academic with yet another wacky "study." The very idea is preposterous, but, for those who don't think that same way, this editorial discusses some of the many reasons this is a very bad idea.
Is Mr. Avila just a wacky academic? No. In fact, it turns out that Mr. Avila worked for MALDEF as a "staff attorney (1974-76), Associate Counsel (1976-82), and as President and General Counsel."
MALDEF was created from scratch by the Ford Foundation, as this article describes in great depth.
Lou Dobbs Tonight on CNN did a segment on Avila's "study," and the transcript is here: "a UCLA spokeswoman called me after my interview with Mr. Avila today, trying, it seemed, to distance the university from this study. She said it's not a UCLA report. And I asked her, Well, isn't the UCLA Chicano research organization funded by the university, and she said, Yes, partially, also by the University of California."
Is UCLA a willing participant in this, or are they just pawns being used to give respectability to the Ford Foundation's agenda?
I'll ask them, and print whatever reply I receive in a future post.