Tag: Declaration of Independence

Know Your Enemy – Roman Empire & British Empire –> American Empire

Roman Empire – Religion (Pharisee) 1st Century power/control partnership (the state)

I was not always aware of the entity that sees me as the enemy. I did not one day just decide that it was my enemy. Over my six decades I have seen more clearly what was hidden by those with evil intentions. Evil prides itself as being seen as a friend, providing benefits even if they have to rob someone else to achieve that. This entity has no ethics, no principles and is selfish to its core. This enemy is the state.

In my youth I knew of this entity, and saw how it dealt with those that would not bow down to it (i.e. JFK assassination in 1963). I saw how corrupt this entity was that sent tens of thousands of young men to Vietnam based on lies that it told (i.e. the domino theory of Communism and the Gulf of Tonkin incident) and following this the details laid bare by the Church Commission in the mid-1970s that showed to the people just a tip of the iceberg called government corruption.

In spite of this I joined the US Navy when the 1960s policy of Affirmative Action made college aid non-attainable. For over six years I learned the inside of one arm of the state, the military-industrial complex and the federal government itself. I then understood how the US Postal Service, Amtrak and other government entities could never become “customer-centric” and would always soak the taxpayer as it ran services in the most inefficient and ineffective ways. Yet, I thought that this disease had not spread to other areas of government “safety-nets” like Social Security and Medicare, but I was wrong.

By the 2000s, with the War on Terror effort to scare Americans into a new world order and the 9/11 Commission’s inability to come to grips with the real truth behind the scenes, I finally saw things coming together. I saw and understood how other nations like Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria are treated by the American Empire, like 2nd class citizens of the world that could be made into refugees as their communities, societies and nations were destroyed based on lies.

Domestically, the Federal Reserve helps to make self-sufficiency and saving money impossible with the constant printing of money to offset the government’s spending of trillions of dollars with no thoughts towards honoring their debts to the Military-Industrial Complex’s effort to ensure their pockets get filled in the years of potential peace after the Cold War, the people of the United States are viewed as tax cattle OR more appropriately in 2020/2021 called tax sheep (slaves) that can be scared into total submission and total slavery in this new era of bio-terrorism.

The 2019 Event 201 / Covid-19 Plan-n-Case-demic PLUS the Great Reset has been Coup d’tat 9.0 in this nation’s history. (The US Constitution in 1787 was Coup d’tat 1.0) The peak of freedom and liberty actually being enjoyed by the pioneers that escaped Europe mainly in the mid-1700s for the British American colonies. The relative minor clampdown on these liberties with the Stamp Act, Sugar Act and the like triggered the common man (men and women and children) to see the British Empire as their enemy. The entity of the state had made itself known from the Egyptians to the Greek and Romans and then matured (sarcasm) into the modern state where monarchy (royalty and religion) ruled. Sure there were alternative efforts that reduced the state’s direct control of their populations by the Dutch Republics from 1550s-1750s approximately as well as the Swiss Confederation of cantons. But the majority structure to control the masses was the king.

It was in this context that American colonists attempted to create a novel solution to what they had seen go bad in every monarchy. In each American colony there were micro-efforts that preceded the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. A federated republic were words that mattered, and carried with it an idea that government needed to SERVE the people wisely in the limited areas that they were chained down to.

In order to understand the enemy, even one that is chained down, requires understanding the birth of the state (no, the state is not eternal, it neither was historically always there, nor will it live forever) as well as the health of the state.

In search of understanding my enemy (which my own government has declared blatantly over the past year or so) I have started reading a book ( Chaining Down Leviathan) authored by a European that targets a thorough review of the attempt to chain down the state here in America from 1776-1865.

This is a study of American political thought between the secession from Britain and the War Between the States. This period was a struggle between the Jeffersonian and the Hamiltonian visions of America. The Jeffersonians favored a highly decentralized federation of sovereign states, whereas the Hamiltonians favored a highly centralized state with a veto on state legislation. This sort of polity has been called “the modern state,” which was a creation of European monarchs. When the monarchies were overthrown, it took on the form of mass democracy and national elections, both of which greatly expanded central power beyond anything the monarchs could have imagined.

When Britain tried to incorporate the colonies into a British version of  the modern state, they resisted and won their independence. Most of the founders did not want an American version of the same planted in America. But some did. Hamilton and others seceded from Britain not because they opposed the modern state, but because they wanted to create an American version and govern it themselves. They failed. The Jeffersonians, though contested, dominated from 1776 to 1861. Lincoln inherited this Hamiltonian tradition and launched an invasion of the South, not to free slaves, but to prevent secession and securely plant a modern style European state in America where none had existed before.

In the balance of my years I desire to know my enemy so I can prepare myself, my family and my friends for the road ahead. We need many more wise students of history to take of the research necessary to help us all understand not only what the colonists faced with the British Empire in the 1770s but also what Jesus-followers faced with the Roman Empire in the 1st century.

Hope for liberty and freedom is an idea that has never been needed more than now in today’s American Empire. Keep the flame alive for the next generations!

-SF1

PS A possible companion book to this more historical one is a recent publication that deals with Coup d’tat 9.0 called The Truth About Covid-19: Exposing the Great Reset, Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports and the New Normal.

Since early 2020, the world has experienced a series of catastrophic events―a global pandemic caused by what appears to be an engineered coronavirus; international lockdowns and border closings causing widespread business closures, economic collapse, and massive unemployment; and an unprecedented curtailment of civil liberties and freedoms in the name of keeping people safe by locking them up in their homes.

We are now living in a world that is increasingly ruled, not by our democratic systems and institutions, but by public health fiat, carried out by politicians who rule by instilling fear and panic.

In The Truth About COVID-19, Dr. Mercola and Cummins reveal new and emerging evidence that:

  • The SARS-CoV-2 virus was, indeed, lab-engineered and emerged from a negligently managed bioweapons lab in Wuhan, China
  • The global pandemic was long anticipated by global elites who have used it to facilitate and hide the largest upward transfer of wealth in human history
  • PCR testing, case counts, morbidity, and vaccine safety and efficacy data have been widely manipulated and misrepresented
  • Obesity, diabetes, and heart disease are known to worsen COVID-19 outcomes, but the junk food industry continues to push its agenda at the expense of public health
  • Safe, simple, and inexpensive treatment and prevention for COVID-19 have been censored and suppressed to create a clear path for vaccine acceptance
  • Effectiveness of the vaccines has been wildly exaggerated and major safety questions have gone unanswered

The good news in all of this is that we can take control of our health and that, together, we have the power to unite and fight back for our health, democracy, and freedom.

No matter how accurate you think Dr. Mercola and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are in their research, there is bound to be a lot of information that is spot on. Their distrust of the state is not just a way they gain popularity, believe me, being a proclaimed enemy of the state is not the easy way forward, but a required one for those whose hearts are burdened for the generations that follow. In this regard, these two men have indeed “stayed the course”.

Be like these men and rise to the challenge to do the same!

 

Lost Opportunities: 1776, 1787 and 1861 led to 1865 and Beyond

The efforts toward freedom and liberty have been frustrated for centuries, and it was in the mid-late 1700s where such promise seemed at hand. The American colonies were left on auto-pilot until the British Empire was hoping for some ROI and decided to push for some taxes and control. Please note that human nature’s default is that those in power will push for control as well as compensation for their “management” of society towards orderly conduct.

It does seem to be that the people of this era were pretty well versed (no pun intended) in what they experienced and learned in nature as well as what wisdom could be found in the Bible. It was these kind of people (think Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine) that would help draft the Declaration of Independence.

There is a line in this document that does acknowledge ” the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” as well as “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” as well as “that all men are created equal”. That last quote never implies that we are to be made equal by man, but that God sees us each as equal, as in made on God’s image, uniquely.

So in God’s/Nature’s God eyes, we are all equal, BUT we are each unique and never equal while on this earth. We are born with different gifts and talents, with various thinking capacities as well as emotional and physical capacities. Men are not the same as women, but equal in God’s eyes.

The problem comes with the progressive always wants to play god and make plans to “make” everyone equal, to “make” the climate perfect and to second-guess God’s decision that we are either male or female. They think so highly of themselves that they feel they can improve on what God has created. I am guessing if they want to work on themselves, then I say let them. However, they are never content with that .. they want their ideas to be applied across society with force. This is where government enters.

The opposing force to these ideas used to be the church but it seems like there is so much in-fighting in those circles that there is little energy left to bring wisdom to the discussion. Another opposing force, or so I thought, were “conservatives”. Well, while we have heard for decades about the conservative (political) fight .. it is just smoke and mirrors because obviously there are zero principles involved.

The conservatives have not just recently let the people down in this regard, even in 1871 critical thinkers saw the GOP “conservatives” for what they are .. Robert Lewis Dabney here calls them out for what they were in his day:

“.. Northern conservatism. This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation..”

“.. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always—when about to enter a protest—very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its “bark is worse than its bite,” and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent role of resistance. The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it “in wind,” and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy from having nothing to whip…” [source https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/equality-is-not-americas-founding-principle ]

In summary, it seems like the opportunity presented in 1776 birthed 13 free and independent colonies by 1783, but quickly was swallowed up by the political fears that led to 1787’s coup d’etat when the US Constitution was secretly birthed and ratified in the next two years. No longer was Nature’s God acknowledged until the Confederate Constitution was ratified in 1861.

The failure of the seven, eleven or thirteen states to secede peacefully from the United States of America would put an end of a reliance on “Almighty God” and His Word, the Bible, in trusting Him with our future as a people and as a country.

The future looks more and more like being first century Christians in the Roman Empire.  Always in the minority and always despised until they see the love we can share from our Almighty God and then things may turn around.

-SF1

What Do Americans Celebrate July 4th? Political Extremism

I have found it more entertaining every year to hear what Americans think of the 4th of July. Most have never read the Declaration of Independence or even understand the political dynamics of the days in 1776. Most just know it is a day off, an excuse to party. The state (government in control of this land) could not be happier.

Test drive these words and see if your average politician might be tempted to put up barb-wire fences and gun turrets around the US Capitol:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation .. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…

Alter or abolish is the remedy for a government that no longer has the consent of the people, yet here we are.

The role of government in society has been argued for centuries, yet common sense dictates that every generation could and should struggle with the proper extent that government (i.e. force, coercion, monopoly) should try to “help”.

From an insightful article written by a man 10 years my senior, I have found some interesting “truths” for me to ponder, as well as my kids and grand-kids. For example:

.. can’t we at least be happy when the government helps needy people? No, we can’t. The more goodies the government doles out, the more violent society becomes. That’s because it becomes more and more vital to be at the head of the line for those goodies; without them, you’re left with a crippling tax bill and nothing to show for it. The higher the fraction of people’s income that comes from the government, the more intense becomes the jockeying. You do your best to smear anyone who is claiming to be more worthy of largess than you. Society becomes spontaneously pulverized and at war with itself, all thanks to “help” from the government.

A society at war with itself is advantageous to the state as this distraction can serve to allow it to not only offer to fictitiously broker peace between the warring factions while “managing” the “crisis but also allows it to weigh in violently around the globe as a world-stage bully. A hobby that the state/empire loves to do, experiment around the world with ideas for democracy which then can be modified for use domestically to enhance the “police state”.

The rights that the founding fathers were willing to be called and hunted as “traitors” for can be seen in the following list of illegitimate government actions:

  • If you are sick, you have the right to be treated by whomever you please, for a price negotiated to the satisfaction of both parties, without government intrusion.
  • If you have services you wish to offer to the world, you have the right to do so without asking permission from the government. Only if you engage in force or fraud does the government have a right to intrude.
  • The government has no right to enslave you or your children to fight and die in some trumped-up war. If the nation were ever in genuine danger, there would be no shortage of volunteers to defend it.
  • The government has no right to tax an amount approaching half of your earnings. The legitimate functions of government can be financed by a tiny fraction of that.
  • The government has no right to rob you in order to pass out money to some favored victim group. Genuine charity is voluntary, but when the government gets involved, waste and fraud and theft are built in.
  • The government has no right to force you to pay for the worthless indoctrination centers called “public schools.” That money rightfully belongs to parents so they can make an informed decision for how best to educate their children.
  • The government has no right to deprive you of the means of self-defense. Any government official who attempts to use force to do so is committing the worst order of crime and should expect an appropriate response.
  • The government has no right to pull your car over on the highway and steal any cash you may be carrying. Any criminals who participate in this practice should expect an appropriately enraged response from those they seek to rob.
  • The government has no right to condemn and raze your home to enable some private developer to build a shopping mall.
  • The government has no right to lock you up if you have committed no crime, on the pretense that some people are irrationally frightened of some microscopic bug, and therefore everyone must hide until the last traces of irrational fear have vanished.
  • The government has no right to shut down your business for any reason, unless you have been found to have engaged in force or fraud by a non-corrupt court of law.
  • The government has no right to require you to wear a diaper on your face, or to be injected with an experimental biological agent.
  • The government has no right to force you to do business with someone you don’t want to do business with. It’s not nice to be a bigot, but bigots pay for discriminating through higher labor costs, lost trade, and a general echoing back of the world to the spirit one projects onto it. For the law to criminalize bigotry merely bottles it up, where it achieves higher and higher pressure until it explodes. It also creates a lawsuit-happy nation where everybody is terminally aggrieved over some perceived slight and wants to whine about it endlessly. The right to freedom of association is absolute.
  • The government has no right to apply coercion in any way to stop or influence anything you are doing, unless you are violating someone else’s rights. A free individual runs his own life, and that’s how it’s supposed to be. Anything else is tyranny.

On July 4th, will you be celebrating your “freedom”? Asking for a friend!

Those who advocate the strategy of “elect better officials” are deluding themselves. Candidates for office always promise to be the new, different, actual, genuine representative of the people who would never violate anyone’s rights. But once they’re elected, it’s only the biggest donors they give a flying consideration about, and they have taken care to ensure that there is no way to sue them for breach of contract. They are accountable to no one but themselves and their own selfish interests, financed with what used to be your money.

Ever-larger government peddles itself as the solution to society’s problems, but intrusive, thieving government is the source of a huge fraction of society’s problems. We do of course need to deal with actual private criminals in order to keep people secure in their homes and property, but when the government turns criminal we have a much bigger problem, and we are left to ourselves to deal with it.

I do hope you see clearly that politics is not the way the people can exit from our existing ramped up tyrannical paradise.

Most people would read that and assume that violence is the only other option at this point, however, as the author of this article suggests, no, but if one is violently attacked by an illegitimate government, self defense is itself a natural right regardless of the law:

Am I in favor of violence? Quite the opposite: I vehemently oppose it. Violence is never justified except in self-defense, where it is absolutely called for in measure proportionate to the threat. That’s why when government officials initiate illegitimate violence, they should not be shocked if their violence is met by necessary self-defense. It is they, and no one else, who are responsible for the illegitimate violence they initiate, and when it is returned to them in equal measure, they have no one to blame but themselves.

When the Redcoats headed to Concord and Lexington to capture the guns the militia had stored in those locations, natural self defense rights were being violated and measures appropriate to the threat were put in place.

Remember that. Wise as serpents, harmless as doves .. and if you don’t have a sword, sell your coat and buy one .. it sure came in handy in Concord and Lexington back in 1775!

-SF1

The Hole That is In the SS United States – Why It Seems We Are Always Bailing Water

Simple thinkers see water coming into a ship, and they start bailing and KEEP bailing saying the water is the problem. But some may be aware that the root issue is actually the hole in the hull in the ship, the water in the ship is actually the symptom of the problem.

The United States of America has a huge hole in it. Now some may claim that it is (one or more of the below):

  • Liberal Democrats
  • Muslims
  • Russia
  • Iran
  • China
  • Racism
  • BLM/Antifa
  • Trumpsters
  • (fill in the blank)

Nope, all of these are symptoms of the problem according to Chuck Baldwin’s August 2018 message, and I agree!

Today in 2020 we have a whole generation of truth-avoiders and no one, especially a business or a corporation wants to tell them the truth. The media and even churches take part in spreading some of the latest propaganda and manipulations that the evil elites have given light to .. to distract the masses like Marxist Democrats, Anti-Constitutionalists (anti-Electoral College, etc) and the belief that global wars and interventions are essential for the USA’s safety. Feelings are the rule of the day.

Back in 1775 there was a spark from what was the compass of this country, an entity that would help to set this country’s course from Declaration of Independence in 1776 to the Articles of Confederation adopted in 1781 during a pandemic while fighting the most powerful empire on the earth.

The spark of independence came from men like Jonas Clark, a pastor in Lexington, Massachusetts colony of the British Empire. He and almost 100 of the men from his congregation did an amazing thing that day, 19APR in 1775 as told by Chuck Baldwin in a Renew America article in 2015:

.. Being warned of approaching British troops by Dr. Joseph Warren (who dispatched Paul Revere to Lexington and Concord with the news), Pastor Jonas Clark alerted his male congregants at the Church of Lexington that the British army was on its way to seize the colonists’ weapons and to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock. Both men had taken refuge in Pastor Clark’s home with about a dozen of the pastor’s men guarding the house. Other men from the congregation (around 75-80 in number) stood with their muskets on Lexington Green when over 800 British troops appeared before them at barely the break of day.

According to eyewitnesses, British soldiers opened fire on the militiamen without warning (the British command to disperse and the British opening salvo of gunfire were simultaneous), immediately killing eight of Pastor Clark’s parishioners. In self defense, the Minutemen took cover and returned fire. These were the first shots of the Revolutionary War. Again, this took place on Lexington Green, which was located in the shadow of the church-house where those men worshipped each Sunday. The men that were guarding Adams and Hancock escorted them out of harm’s way shortly before the troops arrived. Without a doubt, the heroic efforts of Pastor Clark and his brave Minutemen at the Church of Lexington saved the lives of Sam Adams and John Hancock. And eight of those brave men gave their lives protecting two men who became two of America’s greatest Founding Fathers. But, mind you, Jonas Clark and his men are as important to the story of America’s independence as any of our Founding Fathers.

Can you see this happening today? Is there any church out there in the US that would go gun-to-gun with Redcoats (local/state police, DHS agents, etc) to physically protect the cause of liberty?

.. two elements of American history are lost to the vast majority of historians today: 1) it was attempted gun confiscation by the British troops that ignited America’s War for Independence, and 2) it was a pastor and his flock that mostly comprised the “Minutemen” who fired the shots that started our great Revolution.

Let’s hear some more about the caliber of pastors we had in the 1770s:

James Caldwell:

James Caldwell was called “The Rebel High Priest” or “The Fighting Chaplain.” Caldwell is most famous for the “Give ’em Watts!” story.

During the Springfield (New Jersey) engagement, the colonial militia ran out of wadding for their muskets. Quickly, Caldwell galloped to the Presbyterian church, and returning with an armload of hymnals, threw them to the ground, and hollered, “Now, boys, give ’em Watts!” He was referring to the famous hymn writer, Isaac Watts, of course.

The British hated Caldwell so much, they murdered his wife, Hannah, in her own home, as she sat with her children on her bed. Later, a fellow American was bribed by the British to assassinate Pastor Caldwell – which is exactly what he did. Americans loyal to the Crown burned both his house and church. No less than three cities and two public schools in the State of New Jersey bear his name today.

John Peter Muhlenberg:

John Peter Muhlenberg was pastor of a Lutheran church in Woodstock, Virginia, when hostilities erupted between Great Britain and the American colonies. When news of Bunker Hill reached Virginia, Muhlenberg preached a sermon from Ecclesiastes chapter three to his congregation. He reminded his parishioners that there was a time to preach and a time to fight. He said that, for him, the time to preach was past and it was time to fight. He then threw off his vestments and stood before his congregants in the uniform of a Virginia colonel.

Muhlenberg was later promoted to brigadier-general in the Continental Army, and later, major general. He participated in the battles of Brandywine, Germantown, Monmouth, and Yorktown. He went on to serve in both the US House of Representatives and US Senate.

Joab Houghton:

Joab Houghton was in the Hopewell (New Jersey) Baptist Meeting House at worship when he received the first information regarding the battles at Lexington and Concord. His great-grandson gives the following eloquent description of the way he treated the tidings:

“[M]ounting the great stone block in front of the meeting-house, he beckoned the people to stop. Men and women paused to hear, curious to know what so unusual a sequel to the service of the day could mean. At the first, words a silence, stern as death, fell over all. The Sabbath quiet of the hour and of the place was deepened into a terrible solemnity. He told them all the story of the cowardly murder at Lexington by the royal troops; the heroic vengeance following hard upon it; the retreat of Percy; the gathering of the children of the Pilgrims round the beleaguered hills of Boston; then pausing, and looking over the silent throng, he said slowly, ‘Men of New Jersey, the red coats are murdering our brethren of New England! Who follows me to Boston?’ And every man in that audience stepped out of line, and answered, ‘I!’ There was not a coward or a traitor in old Hopewell Baptist Meeting-House that day.” (Cathcart, William. Baptists and the American Revolution. Philadelphia: S.A. George, 1876, rev. 1976. Print.)

Back to Jonas Clark:

On the one-year anniversary of the Battle of Lexington, Clark preached a sermon based upon his eyewitness testimony of the event. He called his sermon, “The Fate of Blood-Thirsty Oppressors and God’s Tender Care of His Distressed People.” His sermon has been republished by Nordskog Publishing under the title, “The Battle of Lexington, A Sermon and Eyewitness Narrative, Jonas Clark, Pastor, Church of Lexington.”

In summary, although not every pastor was able to actively participate in our fight for independence, so many pastors throughout Colonial America preached the principles of liberty and independence from their pulpits that the Crown created a moniker for them: The “Black Regiment” (referring to the long, black robes that so many colonial clergymen wore in the pulpit). Without question, the courageous preaching and example of Colonial America’s patriot-pastors provided the colonists with the inspiration and resolve to resist the tyranny of the Crown and win America’s freedom and independence.

When I look around today, I don’t even see 1% of US churches prepared to withstand tyranny like the churches in colonial America had back in the 1700s. Yet, truth be told, the churches today have the capability to influence the American citizens more than the mainstream media, more than the US Congress and even more than the US President! However, what we have today in churches is a leadership vacuum, no resolve, but mainly an attention to the feelings of the people while avoiding truth, the truth of the Bible, the truth of liberty (and the freedom it beings in Christ) and the truth of natural law.

The hole, the root issue in the USS United States, is the church and pastors!

The truth that needs to be told but is withheld, because of feelings is, you can’t elect us out of our current problems in the USA. No country has ever been made more free using politics! Vote all you want, get petitions out there signed as such, and you are really just bailing water.

There are six things that Chuck Baldwin attributes to the impotence of the church in the United States of America:

  1. The church in general willingly cowers behind the 501C3 (1954 law) tax-exempt status (the corporate church). The IRS employs lawyers to approach most churches on a regular basis with brochures and visits to ensure they are aware of their “license” requirements, what they can say and what they can’t say, what they can do and what they can’t do. Jesus must be so ashamed of the church that the Gates of Hell could not prevail from.
  2. The church in general is teaching an enslaving version of Romans 13 that has turned men into sniveling subjects instead of having no king but Jesus. What most preachers do not understand that in a republic, the PEOPLE are king .. so render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s is not about giving resources and allegiance to a president, congress or federal government.
  3. The church in general has abandoned “blessed are the peacemakers” and have cheered and encouraged the warfare state in everything it says and does to the detriment of many oppressed people groups around the globe. The number of Christians in two countries the US brought “democracy” to in the last 20 years have very few Christians left as they have either been killed or became refugees.
  4. The church in general has glorified the GOP and GOP presidents allowing them to violate the US Constitution the same way the previous Democratic president did (when they were “constitutionalists”). Principles DON’T CHANGE!
  5. The church in general has traded unpopular truth that might hurt feelings for success, whether that be more members, bigger staff, bigger buildings and more programs.
  6. The church in general, especially in evangelical circles, allow believers to be blinded by the Zionist Israeli program that has been used to prop up a secular state enabled by the US Empire to be exempt from following international laws while funding them with foreign aid while the US’s deficit spending causes us to go broke and our kids to become tax slaves or worse in the next 20+ years.

In summary, at a minimum, especially after it was shown how impotent the churches were when the lock-down orders were given this spring and summer, there should be a movement to uncouple the churches from the government, sacrifice the 501C3 tax-exempt status and become the compass of each state in this federal republic. After this the following five items need to be addressed by each gathering/spiritual family. Maybe it is time again for the church to go underground like they did in the 1st century when persecution came to Jerusalem and Jesus-followers were scattered all over Asia, Africa and Europe!

Get back to basics!!! This republic needs a spiritual reset to plug that hole!

Peace out

-SF1

 

Honorable Rebellion, Honorable Leaders and the Naming of Army Forts

I am sure this title caught your eye. The point is that rebellion is actually GOOD once in a while. Personally, teenage rebellion is good as well, otherwise the teenager stays in one’s basement for decades and no honorable person, parent or child, wants that long term. Allowing and encouraging these young adults to “be all that they can be” is a most honorable path I would think.

Countries and cultures are similar in that there comes a time when going separate ways brings out the best for all parties.

Thomas Jefferson was one that spoke to the benefits of rebellion:

God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13 states independant 11 years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.- Thomas Jefferson (1787)

Rebellion is a warning shot that liberties have been violated. This is an honorable recourse when peaceful approaches have been ignored time and again. Liberty can grow in the way that the American Revolution’s conclusion was conducted, not so much how the French Revolution was conducted.

If the 1776 rebellion was honorable, why not the 1860/1861 rebellion? What might help to set the context is to compare the presidential inaugural addresses of both President Lincoln and President Davis.

Lincoln’s 1st Inaugural Address 04MAR1861

Lincoln made the strongest case ever in the defense of Southern slavery even supporting its enshrinement in the text of the constitution to be a perpetual right but on the issue of tax collections he would definitely go to war to enforce the newly doubled federal tariff.

Davis defined the South as an international trading community that sought free trade with the world and promised to resort to the sword if the North were to invade to put an end to the Confederacy’s free trade policy.

Davis also set the context for the formation of an agent to work on the principle’s (13 sovereign states) behalf when he said:

The declared purpose of the compact of the Union from which we have withdrawn was “to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterity

He continued on why the seven states had voted to leave such a Union:

When in the judgement of the sovereign states now composing this Confederacy, it had been perverted from the purposes for which it was ordained, and it ceased to answer the ends for which it was established, a peaceful appeal to the ballot box declared that so far as they were concerned, the government created by that compact should cease to exist. In this they merely asserted a right that the Declaration of Independence of 1776 had defined to be inalienable .. they, as sovereigns, were the final judges, each for itself ..

What few people know is that this man was so honorable and such a Unionist up until his home state of Mississippi seceded, that his logic, actions and words were honorable to their core.

So what do we do with men like this after a War for Southern Independence is fought and lost? We honor honorable men of that day by naming military forts after them, even when they in the end were not victorious in securing an independent country against a country who secured a victory in less than honorable means.

Walter E. Williams addresses this in his article at Lew Rockwell today. He lays the groundwork as to why we have forts in the US today that bear the name of honorable Confederate generals who were fighting for their homes and families against a tyrant who violated the US Constitution left and right.

Walter addresses a statement made by an ignorant military man, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who said in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee arguing in favor of renaming Confederate named military bases:

The Confederacy, the American Civil War, was fought, and it was an act of rebellion. It was an act of treason, at the time, against the Union, against the Stars and Stripes, against the U.S. Constitution.

Ignorance knows no bounds, as I pointed out yesterday that Lincoln himself was the one that acted treasonous and also acted violently against the US Constitution. The Southern state’s secession was NOT an act of treason, even if your feelings and emotions convince you and Gen. Mark Milley that way. He needs to find a safe space, and by renaming these forts I do hope he feels better soon.

But I digress ..

Walter E. Williams starts with context of the union in the first place:

Let’s start at the beginning, namely the American War of Independence (1775-1783), a war between Great Britain and its 13 colonies, which declared independence in July 1776. The peace agreement that ended the war is known as the Treaty of Paris signed by Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Jay and Henry Laurens and by British Commissioner Richard Oswald, on Sept. 3, 1783. Article I of the Treaty held that “New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States.”

This fact is something that Lincoln himself ignored to retain his narrative that the “Union” preceded the states, which then dovetails into his own personal thought that the states should have asked permission of all the other states before leaving.

Walter continues:

Delegates from these states met in Philadelphia in 1787 to form a union. During the Philadelphia convention, a proposal was made to permit the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, rejected it. Minutes from the debate paraphrased his opinion: “A union of the states containing such an ingredient (would) provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.”

The fact that Lincoln never acknowledged the states as having seceded, left him with the complicated aspect that he actually violated the principle above, that his making war on states still in the union meant the compact was in fact dissolved. He wanted to ask for the “divorce”, he did NOT want the spouse(s) to have that status!

With this thought, that each of the sovereign states would voluntarily join this union one at a time, each state also understood that they each could voluntarily leave this union.

During the ratification debates, Virginia’s delegates said, “The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.” The ratification documents of New York and Rhode Island expressed similar sentiments; namely, they held the right to dissolve their relationship with the United States.

Note that northern states also expressed interest in the ability to exit. Only 16 years later, there was talk of that from that section of the federation:

Many New Englanders were infuriated by President Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase in 1803, which they saw as an unconstitutional act. Timothy Pickering of Massachusetts, who was George Washington’s secretary of war and secretary of state, led the movement. He said, “The Eastern states must and will dissolve the union and form a separate government.” Other prominent Americans such as John Quincy Adams, Elbridge Gerry, Fisher Ames, Josiah Quincy III and Joseph Story shared his call for secession.

Sparking secession talk again was the War of 1812 that hurt the New England commerce the most, rekindling this viable option:

While the New England secessionist movement was strong, it failed to garner support at the 1814-15 Hartford Convention.

By early 1861, many Northern government officials and presses were well aware of the dangers of not allowing an honorable rebellion to take place and voiced such before Lincoln took action to send armed reinforcements to Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor:

  • Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, “Any attempt to preserve the union between the states of this Confederacy by force would be impractical and destructive of republican liberty.”
  • New-York Tribune (Feb. 5, 1860): “If tyranny and despotism justified the Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861.”
  • The Detroit Free Press (Feb. 19, 1861): “An attempt to subjugate the seceded States, even if successful, could produce nothing but evil — evil unmitigated in character and appalling in extent.”
  • The New-York Times (March 21, 1861): “There is a growing sentiment throughout the North in favor of letting the Gulf States go.”

Walter summarizes this so well in saying:

Confederate generals fought for independence from the Union just as George Washington fought for independence from Great Britain. Those who label Robert E. Lee and other Confederate generals as traitors might also label George Washington a traitor. Great Britain’s King George III and the British parliament would have agreed.

Spot on Walter, you rock as an 80-something!

Named for Confederate General Braxton Bragg, who had previously served in the United States Army in the Mexican-American War.

Should the ten forts named after Confederate officers be renamed? No. But it seems that stupid people with a lot of feelings now rule. While the name of a fort does not do anything physically, it is a part of the culture cleansing going of to remove whatever is left of this country’s honorable past.

In my mind, the past was already being erased a little at a time over the last 100+ years. I think it is the shear momentum of this now that has many feeling that it is over the top and openly wondering when if ever will it stop.

Honestly, can we start talking secession now, or is it too early yet? Asking for a friend.

Peace out.

-SF1