Tag Archives: Constitutional Law

Bill Lockwood: Identity Politics, Mind Pathogens, and Ketanji Brown Jackson 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

President Biden televised his phone call to Judge Ketanji Brown in which he informed her that she was nominated by him to the Supreme Court. In this short call Biden made clear the criterion by which he chose her. Diversity. As a black woman, she would help the Supreme Court to “look like much of America.”

Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) observed “Not a single justice has been a black woman. You, Judge Jackson, can be the first.”

He went on to say “It’s not easy being the first. Often, you have to be the best. In some ways, the bravest. Many are not prepared to face that kind of heat, that kind of scrutiny, that ordeal and glare of the national spotlight.” Then Durbin added, “We can be confident that the court, its role, and its decisions will be more understandable to the American public.”

Sen. Dick Blumenthal (D-Conn.) gushed, “The appointment of the first black woman to the Supreme Court—let’s be honest—should have happened years ago.” Her nomination “is a giant leap int the present for our country. Your service will make the court look more like America.”

What About This?

This is unabashed irrational identity politics. Appointing an individual to a legal position primarily because she is a black woman, regardless of her qualifications—whatever they may or may not be. She must “look like America” in order for her “decisions” to be “understandable” or acceptable to the American people.

First, this is the opposite of what Dick Durbin stated. He implies that opposition to her will be based upon the fact that she is a black woman, showing a glimpse into the race card that Democrats will use if Republicans oppose her. She doesn’t have to “be the best,” Dick—she will rely primarily upon her race for her selection. What bravery is there in that?

Second, this is a tacit admission by Democrats that Constitutional and case law will be interpreted with bias. This is what liberals prefer. Forget Lady Justice being blind-folded. This destructive mindset demands Lady Justice take off the blindfold and “interpret” law and make decisions based upon the color of one’s skin and one’s gender.

But legal interpretation is supposed to be a “rational process by which we understand” a text– “scrutinizing” the text of the Constitution. Instead, Democrats are endorsing a biased, colored view.

Author and professor Gad Saad, in his The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense, shows that this is the result of a culture that promotes “Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion” above excellence and merit. To see how this mental orientation is a “collective malady” that destroys one’s ability and capacity to think rationally—which Saad calls “idea pathogens,” consider the following example.

In April 2017, the inaugural March for Science rally was held across hundreds of cities around the world to reaffirm the “importance of science.” The key website for this event in 2017 read this way.

At the March for Science, we are committed to centralizing, highlighting, standing in solidarity with, and acting as accomplices with black, Latinx, Asian and Pacific Islander, indigenous, non-Christian, women, people with disabilities, poor, gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, trans, non-binary, agender, and intersex scientists and science advocates. We must work to make science available to everyone and encouraging individuals of all backgrounds to pursue science careers, especially in advanced degrees and positions. A diverse group of scientists produces increasingly diverse research, which broadens, strengthens, and enriches scientific inquiry, and therefore, our understanding of the world.

As Saad comments, this is “anti-science gibberish.” “By definition, science is, or should be, an apolitical process. Scientific truths and natural laws exist independent of researchers’ identities.”

Satirically, he adds, “the distribution of prime numbers does not change as a function of whether the mathematician is a white heterosexual Christian man or a transgendered, Muslim, differently sized (obese) individual.” Neither does the “periodic table of elements” depend on “whether or not the chemist is a Latinx queer or a cis-normative Hasidic Jew.”

These foolish notions promoted by the March for Science highlight that in the ecosystem of university campuses “mind pathogens” spread like wildfire. It is a pathogen because “… the manner by which scientific information is codified within the pantheon of human knowledge is not culture-specific.”

“Science does not care about the privileged position of ‘ancestral wisdom,’ ‘tribal knowledge,’ and ‘the ways of the elders.’’ There are no revealed truths in science. There is no Lebanese-Jewish way of knowing any more than there is an indigenous way of knowing.”

The same holds true of law and legal interpretation. Although one may argue that there are various theories of legal interpretation, a fair evaluation of these shows that without ‘original intent’ there might as well not be a legal text at all, in the Constitution or statutory law. Application of law is color-blind and is not culture-specific. There is not a “variety” of “equally valid forms of discovery” and interpretation.

What Democrats are confessing is that we are laying aside rational and logical thinking in favor of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Since this is the case, we might as well not have a Constitution.

John L. Kachelman, Jr.: The Traitors’ Treachery, Treason and Tenacity! 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by John L. Kachelman, Jr.

Betrayal is the greatest inhumanity. Betrayal’s wound lingers with a sickening feeling, it fuels insecurity and crushes the spirit of those targeted. Betrayal is prodded by narcissism, nurtured by monetary gain, fueled by power and ruled by selfish ambition. The betrayer never acknowledges his black deed and evil motives. The result of betrayal is never the imagined reward when the dark deed is conceived. The tempting bait, seducing the betrayer, is always for “the greater good.” Too late is the self-centered heart revealed; the exaltation and applause once sought are erased by disgrace. The traitor absurdly attempts to justify the betrayal. These laughable justifications highlight the guilt of those involved in treachery. The traitor’s true motives will be exposed. The selfish ambition prodded by money and power will be uncovered. In the end, nothing is gained and all is lost.

The Lord addressed selfish betrayal by asking, “What good will it do a person if he gains the whole world, but forfeits his soul? What will a person give in exchange for his soul?” (Matthew 16:26). Bluntly asked is the piercing query, “How much will it take to buy your soul? What is your integrity and fidelity worth?”

The sale of integrity is a tragic historic constant. This is especially true with political integrity.

Betrayal on a personal level is devastating. Betrayal on a national level is absolute destruction. National betrayal undermines civility and replaces it with an “improved” system imagined by the arrogant mind. This political operation is in the realm of fantasy and not fact.

Treacherous betrayal is as old as human civilization. History’s redundancy reveals that humans never learn; they are always recycling the failed chicanery of the past. There has been and will continue to be arrogant evil politicians attempting to destroy civility. The Psalmist mournfully said, “The wicked bend the bow, they have set their arrow on the string to shoot in darkness at the upright in heart. If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?”

The intent to punish opposition is designed to subvert the prevailing rule of law and replace it with the elitist arrogance (after all betrayal is predicated upon the betrayer thinking s/he has the better scheme, better politics, better formula for the greater good and those refusing compliance are deserving of punishment).

Incredibly this is the predicament where our nation stands at this moment in civilization’s history. Good is evil; evil is good; up is down and down is up! The absurdity is framed by the fact that truck drivers’ pets are seized because the politicians need to retaliate against those suggesting that each human has basic personal rights. So, the oppressive government seizes the hapless animals! And the population of the world is told to believe this punishing action is for “the greater good”?

Over the past years, the history of our body politic in the USA has exposed the disintegration of our Republic’s foundation. No longer are personal freedoms assured. Our freedoms have been assaulted by a seditious tyranny masking the treasonous treachery of those viewing themselves as the “Rulers” over the “ruled.” Anything less than consent and conformity to the Rulers mandates is instantly punished. The basic rights of justice for all that is meted by a consistent standard has been trashed—the obvious criminals are freed and the peaceable are detained. And the ruling body politic is criminally silent!

These events are the historical recycling of a malicious corruption of the government’s “Rulers.” These have seized a role never designed in our governing statutes.

If this is a historical recycling, where is the precedent of historical traitors betraying the trust given them with tenacious treason? Many examples suffice: Christ had His Judas, Caesar had his Brutus; Alexander the Great had his Eumenes; and George Washington had his Benedict Arnold.

Because of the toxic environment of our current national politics, I have enjoyed rereading the “American Revolution” series by Nathaniel Philbrick. The second volume focuses upon the treachery of Benedict Arnold. Several observations regarding Arnold’s actions illustrate the current crisis in the USA.

Perhaps only Judas epitomizes treacherous treason and devilish intent more than Benedict Arnold. Philbrick’s Volume 2 (Valiant Ambition) highlights a number of flaws in Benedict Arnold’s character exposing his traitorous treachery:

• Never worried about the consequences of his actions—guilt was simply not a part of his makeup. Rules were made to be broken—Arnold did whatever Arnold wanted.

• He presented his national interests as “the nearest in his heart and the first in his wishes” even as he disclosed military secrets to the enemy. It is wanton hypocrisy by a public official.

• What he was doing was first and foremost for money—he priced his soul for 10,000 pounds!

• He was magnificent in his fearless and pugnacious pride—pride and arrogance. (I’m sure that he would give a devilish smirk in tearing up a SOTU speech!)

• He attacked the integrity of his accusers by innuendo and insinuations. He claimed his accusers were not patriots and he was the genuine hero—amazing projection of his evil onto others!

• His faith in his own honesty justified his treason—he was delusional!

• He thought he could serve his country best by being a traitor—delusional fantasy ignoring facts.

• Arnold justified his treason by saying he “loved” his country. “I have ever acted from a principle of love to my country…The same principle of love to my country actuates my present conduct.”

• He promised retaliatory killing of epic proportions unless his ultimatums were followed—he displayed an amazing tenacity to sacrifice country for selfish ambition.

• His decision to sell his loyalty to the highest bidder was rooted in a self-serving opportunism masquerading as patriotism.

NOTE: Take each of the above points and list a current politician’s speech and action with the exact act. Those crying conspiracy are themselves guilty; those projecting crimes and hate-speech are themselves guilty; those crying against “undemocratic” and unpatriotic” are the “insurrectionist in the mirror”; those boasting
of their “love” for our nation prompts them to enforce the mandates, speak with empty platitudes masking their own devilish agenda! Every action today that betrays civility and punishes personal freedoms is found in Benedict Arnold’s biography. Let the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches hear this fact!

Philbrick cites Arnold’s sanctimonious defense before the military court. “I stand stigmatized with indelible disgrace, the disgrace of having abused an appointment of high trust and importance, to accomplish the meanest and most unworthy purposes: the blood I have spent in defense of my country will be insufficient to obliterate the stain” (258). How accurate Arnold was in his assessment—all he had done was “insufficient to obliterate the stain” of his treacherous treason!

Nathaniel Greene aptly summarized Arnold’s treachery, “How black, how despised! Loved by none and hated by all. Once his country’s idol, now her horror.” Let the politicians and bureaucrats on the Local, State and National levels listen to history. For how much are you willing to sell your integrity? Whatever your price,
you will find the amount insufficient to obliterate the “stain.” Regardless of the imagined profits your sellout only impoverishes you here and hereafter.

A failure to demonstrate integrity in upholding the Constitutional Rule of Law is inexcusable. It is irrational. It is a choice to join Benedict Arnold as the historic byword for treachery. A failure to stand up, speak out and fight for the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution exposes your true character as a selfish
opportunist fearful of retaliation.

Common Sense teaches…A wound to the physical body must be immediately field dressed or the reality of a destructive infection threatens life. A wound to the national body must be immediately addressed and corrected or the reality of the nation’s foundations being destroyed is inevitable.

When traitors use treachery, the nation’s foundations may be destroyed. But, those guilty of bringing ruin and those guilty of permitting ruin will not escape. History assures that their diabolical, scheming arrogance will “stain” their reputations. And that “stain” forever taints their souls. The Psalmist’s alarm (cited above) that the
foundations are destroyed is answered later in the passage: “The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, and His soul hates one who loves violence. He will rain coals of fire upon the wicked, and brimstone and burning wind will be the portion of their cup” (Psalm 11:5-6).

Let the traitors devise their treachery so their treason is accomplished. Let them cling tenaciously to their evil. But they will never find satisfaction in their betrayal. A contented joy will never comfort their hearts neither here nor hereafter! Their eternal eulogy will be “you have given yourself over to do evil in the sight of the Lord.”

GWP: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/02/kachelman-traitors-treachery-treason-tenacity/

John L. Kachelman, Jr. is a Christian patriot, preacher, and missionary for Jesus Christ to foreign countries. He lives in Montgomery, AL.

John Kachelman, Jr.: “Consider yourselves warned, America!” 5 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by John Kachelman, Jr.

You definitely remember where you were on September 11, 2001 when the Twin Towers collapsed. This article examines where you were 19 years later (September 11, 2020).

Click on this countdown that gives the day when our general election will our nation either secure our liberty or the progressives will sacrifice our freedom…

Each morning’s news briefings highlight the steady march of our nation to a decision regarding its destiny. When each day’s developments are added to the existing analysis of information already made public, a serious alarm is sounded. Below are four points that I ask you to consider. These look at the facts and developments that are the vanguard of the November 3, 2020 general election.

In war the key to victory is formulating a strategy that is communicated simply and deployed easily. The messaging of the invading forces must follow the elementary principles of propaganda so the masses will be “softened” and open to the coming conflict (hence historically military operations have dropped brochures and leaflets to persuade the population of the intended conflict to be less resistant to those about to invade and more willing to oppose those targeted for removal).

In war the key to a successful defense is knowledge, understanding and action that disrupts and destroys the enemy’s strategy.

Currently YOU are involved in this strategy. YOU are targeted by a constant pre-emptive propaganda blitz. The below points are not fiction. They are not idle and inconsequential exercises of “war games.” YOU are being manipulated by fear mongering. YOU are being intimidated by deliberate design. YOU are being censored as you utilize social media platforms generating millions of dollars for the purpose of supporting an agenda with the objective of sedition.

Angrily YOU say, “I DO NOT support such!” This is where the analysis becomes interesting. Exposed is the cleverly designed objective to manipulate you so YOU are a “useful idiot” in the strategy destroying your nation. Hence the warning is applicable: “Consider yourselves warned, America.”

Please read all points below.

A fitting introduction is taken from Kelly’s (see below for link) article (first point) published in American greatness: “Their plan, using the intentionally misleading title, ‘Transition Integrity Project,’ outlines alarming and wholly unconstitutional responses to a number of post-election scenarios. Once upon a time, I would’ve read such a far-fetched document through tears of laughter. But considering the desperation and depravity of the people involved, this terrifying roadmap needs to be taken seriously.”

Alarm #1 Sounding The Resistance War Games a Post-Election Civil War by Julie Kelly was published on September 10, 2020 in American Greatness. She bluntly began her article with the phrase I borrowed for this article’s title, “Consider yourselves warned, America.” In this article Kelly presents an exceptionally reasoned article highlighting why the 2020 General Elections are in peril.

Kelly astutely warns, “A vengeful and well-funded coalition of Trump-hating insurrectionists are prepping the battlefield for a post-election civil war, threatening not only to extend the 2020 election into 2021 but to weaponize every tool at their disposal to make sure Joe Biden assumes the presidency even if President Trump legitimately wins.”

The article details how the DEMS/Liberal Left/Progressives have mapped the plan for the compromise, confusion, chaos, and eventual censure of the election’s results.

“Organizers, including Clinton loyalist John Podesta and NeverTrump leader Bill Kristol, have been playing war games for the past few months, plotting how to deploy media, government, and public armies to install Biden no matter what. Their scorched earth strategy rests on two factors: the use of widespread mail-in voting, intended to delay the official result so they can manipulate the outcome while stoking civil unrest until Republicans cry uncle, and the notion that if he loses, President Trump will claim the Democrats stole the election, a legitimate possibility that this plan only serves to further validate.”

The objective that is planned is that a “constitution crisis” will be announced and the chaos will be exploited for a violent overthrow of the elected officials and the placement of those specifically selected to “transform” the USA from its Constitutional Republic into the “whatever-will-evolve” governing structure.

Key to this operation are the mass protests, the continued poisoning of the public’s mind by the evil propaganda spewed by the hateful media, destruction of valid ballots and the harvesting of false ballots. Critical to this operation will be the constant turmoil that is stirred by the DEMS in their attacks on our President and those in his Administration. The “TIP” group at one point envisioned at least 4 million Biden supporters taking to the streets with warnings of “violent skirmishes and vandalism.”

These insurrectionists plan and predict that there will be “a breakdown in the joint session of Congress by getting the House of Representatives to agree to award the presidency to Biden based on the alternative pro-Biden submissions sent by pro-Biden governors.” January 20, 2021 would arrive with no clear winner, raising the specter of military action.

Alarm #2 Sounding

An EXCEPTIONAL communication was received on 10 September 2020…

Friend, Democrats masked and impoverished America to rig an election. COVID-19 has been wildly inflated to scare Americans and increase the people’s reliance upon the government. Every four years, the Democrats have a new ploy to take the focus away from qualified candidates and stir national pandemonium—thinking that this will scare Americans into voting blue. This year the American people are waking up…Nancy Pelosi’s salon blowout trip without a mask made it clear that COVID-19 is not a real threat to the Democrats. Nancy has no problem putting the single mother who owns the salon out of work and shutting down her business in order to achieve a radical Leftist political agenda. The unhinged far-Left has now become the face of the Democrat party. Children are 20x more likely to die in an accident and 10x more likely to die of the flu than to die of COVID-19 and yet they are masking your small children in school — why?! It all goes back to the election. Democrats are scaring voters into fraudulent mail-in voting. I am working against the radical Democrat party to unleash the truth during this election cycle. The Democrats are using COVID-19 and BLM to push their political agenda and once this election cycle ends they will forget all about the pandemic and the BLM movement. Every Democrat city has been run into the ground and is a distressing scene of poverty and high crime rates. Their policies have not helped minorities and they never will. America needs to wake up and realize that the Left has been lying to them year after year for decades.

I want to wake up America—In Freedom, Candace Owens https://candaceowens.com/

Alarm #3 Sounding

Here is probably the one point that will ignite your ire toward me more than anything else. We are dealing with facts and not what you feel or how you have been manipulated to ignore the facts. The facts are given by those involved. Right before your eyes are the very words of those subtly seeking to manipulate the election (it appears most are as ancient Judah who had ears but would not hear and eyes but refused to see in Jeremiah 5:21). The evidence has been abundantly presented by investigative reporters. This states the FACTS of the situation and not what you FEEL. This may not be YOUR position but YOU are enabling this ungodly agenda to have fuel.

Social Media platforms continue to be used to manipulate the population. A direct threat of murder to those who disagree politically was posted on Twitter. FaceBook is extensively involved in insidious efforts to subvert and destroy our Republic. Yes, there is MUCH about FB that is commendable BUT an evil mission is deliberately embedded. An entire gallon of water can have pure water but a small drop of poison proves fatal to the entire volume!

For years professional security sources have urged people to avoid these platforms. Those posting reveal significant information on every aspect of their lives. The posts are a treasure trove for the unfriendlies. Your name, address, activities, family members, finances, security, EVERYTHING about your life that you consider valuable is exposed. And if not exposed by YOU personally, it is exposed by those linked to you!

Indeed, it is a “social disease” and everyone in contact with you is a point of compromise for your security and the security of your entire family! Photos are rich sources of data mining about your personal security. And the amazing fact is that you eagerly and willingly compromise the security of yourself, your family, your associates! You have willingly provided security details that betray the safety and well-being of your family! This is NOT my personal bias but the repeated warnings of professional security analysts.

By participating in these social media platforms, you provide millions of dollars in revenue that is used to support the sedition undermining our nation.

By participating in these social media platforms, you volunteer to place yourself under the censorship of those dedicated to anarchy. You agree to allow the “censors” to decide what can be used.

This is not my personal opinion. Look at two points brought to light within the past few days…

First, FB has committed to a “censorship” to make sure that which they determine as “hate-speak” is prevented from being published. This hate-speak includes any overtly positive nationalism, “radical” religious tenets (identified as “Christianity”), and political “untruths.” This sounds good. Who would object to a filter that removes hate, lies and division? But YOU are being played! Who are those selected to compromise the FB censorship committee? “18 out of 20 members on Facebook’s fact-checking board have ties to George Soros.”
https://gellerreport.com/2020/09/18-out-of-20-members-on-facebooks-fact-checking-board-have-ties-to-george-soros.html/ 

Second, multiple sources have documented how FB has a subtle campaign to “soften” the American population to accept a prolonged, if not an indefinite, electoral decision. YOU are being played to start thinking that the final results should be allowed weeks or months for certification. YOU are being played to accept the lie that the initial results will be wrong and that Trump is “stealing” the election.

In an incredible interview Mark Zuckerberg tells you this happening and he lays the battle plan out right before your eyes. “Amid election security concerns, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg attempted to normalize the possibility of a delayed outcome of the upcoming presidential election were to occur. This despite the fact that he is not an elected official and holds no government position. ‘One of the things that I think we and other media need to start doing is preparing the American people that there’s nothing illegitimate about this election taking additional days or even weeks to make sure that all of the votes are counted,’ Zuckerberg told “Axios on HBO.” Did you understand the point—YOU are being “normalized”!

FB’s Zuckerberg continued, “In fact, that may be important to make sure that this is an important, legitimate, and fair election.” Administrators will market messaging around this premise “just to make sure people know that’s normal.”

You will probably fuss and cuss me for the above. But you cannot ignore for long the battle plan charted by those deliberately using you. FB, Twitter and other social media platforms pander to the desire of gossip. Remove the “idle talk” and what do you have? You say you do not support such, but by your logging-on and your clicks, you are involved. The damage done to the American culture, civility and conscience by these social network platforms cannot be undone. These allow the most ungodly conversations and communicates acceptance of the greatest immoralities.

These actions are decimating our nation. You may “hide” such comments and such people BUT your continued log-ons and clicks fund and fuel the mechanism that has brought about the current crisis in our nation. You may “hide” the “unwanteds” on your FB page but you cannot hide your support for this evilly designed program.

Think on this—“Aiding and abetting a crime” is a legal doctrine related to the guilt of someone who aids or abets (encourage; support; give material assistance; to join not necessarily in person) in the commission of a crime. It exists in a number of different countries and generally allows a court to pronounce someone guilty for aiding and abetting in a crime even if they are not the principal offender. In war such is a crime deserving death.

Alarm #4 Sounding

Our national security is currently threatened by different actions. We have been compromised (as Owens ably notes above) by the fear mongers of the “scamdemic.” These are hypocritically “protecting your freedom and health” while subtly restricting your personal freedoms and limiting your individual choices! Adding further chaos is the racial unrest that erupted by the design of the BLM/ANTIFA/DEMS/Liberals/Progressives. Everything that clashes with the Progressive Dem agenda is labeled “racist.” BUT the Progressives are the biggest racists in our culture. They accuse the Christians of being “fascists” but the protestors epitomize fascism! Consider this maneuver by the University of Michigan (Tuesday September 8, 2020):

https://archive.is/qkIzq “The University of Michigan-Dearborn hosted racially segregated events on Tuesday, one for ‘Non-POC,’ and the other for ‘BIPOC’ (Black, Indigenous, and People Of Color) students. During the two racially segregated ‘cafes,’ the groups were encouraged to ‘discuss their experience as students on campus.’

“‘The Non-POC (People Of Color) Cafe is a space for students that do not identify as persons of color to gather and to discuss their experience as students on campus and as non-POC in the world,’ read the event description on the university’s website. Although the university has since pulled the relevant pages off their website, archives of the information pages exist.

“‘Feel free to drop in and discuss your experiences as non-persons of color and hopefully brainstorm solutions to common issues within the non-POC community,’ added the description.”

THIS IS WHERE YOU WERE ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2020…

Your nation is NOT in an enviable position. Your nation is precariously perched on a precipice. Have you seriously considered that YOU are unwittingly contributing to this decline? I do not want to hear you protest about the censorship, decline and inevitable criminality of practicing the Christian religion if you sit idly while your country is hijacked and you simply proceed “aiding and abetting” this calamity.

In the 1930’s Germany was being manipulated by the Fascist National Socialist politicians. Their takeover of the German nation was incremental, almost imperceptible. Little-by-little Germany was infected by a malignancy that eventually led to multiple millions dying. An early supporter of the National Socialist was Martin Niemöller. He embraced the politics and was played by the manipulators. Too late he realized his mistake and decided not to cooperate with the manipulators. He left behind this confession: “First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” 

Ancient Judah was precariously perched on the precipice of national existence. God revealed the truth and the machinations of the Evil destroying the nation. The message sent to the nation was simple, “Consider yourselves warned, Judah!”

Historically there is not an encouraging ending to such a national warning. What did Judah do when warned that she was about to be removed? There was an element within the national leaders who refused to listen and the general population followed this “mainstream” urging. The tragedy of the nation’s demise and erasure of existence was announced, “the prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule on their own authority; and My people love it so! But what will you do at the end of it?” (Jeremiah 5:31).

Let this calamitous refrain play over and over in your mind; let it prick your conscience, “My people love it so! But what will you do at the end of it?”

This is where YOU were on September 11, 2020…“But what will you do at the end” of the election? Where will YOU be November 4, 2020?

Click on this link and look at the countdown to the day that either secures our liberty or sacrifices our freedom…

John Kachelman, Jr. is a Christian patriot, preacher, and missionary for Jesus Christ to foreign countries. He lives in Montgomery, AL.

Alex Newman: Democrats Propose Keeping Kids at School Until 6pm 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Alex Newman

Parents should be able to hand the government even more responsibility for raising their children, Democrat U.S. Senator Kamala Harris of California believes. To help make that a reality, she introduced an unconstitutional bill that would keep school doors open until 6 PM or later, as well as during the summer months.

Dubbed the “Family Friendly Schools Act,” Harris’ bill would help further obliterate the family, replacing parents with government school officials for almost the entire life of a child. Under the plan, American taxpayers would be forced to provide even more tax money to government “education” so that parents could spend even less time with their children.

If approved, the legislation would start by bribing 500 government schools across America into creating “activities” for children from 8 AM or before until 6 PM or later. The schools, part of a pilot program, would be required to provide “high-quality, culturally relevant, linguistically accessible, developmentally appropriate academic, athletic, or enrichment opportunities” during that time.

That means millions of children would be eating three government-provided meals per day at their government schools, further cementing the government’s role as provider in the child’s mind. Next up: Bed-time stories and goodnight hugs for children from government bureaucrats, so that parents do not have to worry about those parental duties, either.

The Orwellian scheme would also plow over $1 billion — to start with — into creating “21st Century Community Learning Centers” at public schools across America. These institutions would subject some 2 million American children to what Harris’ press release described as “summer programming,” thereby eliminating summer vacation.

While parents typically spend an hour or two with their children on an average day, government has them captive for about eight hours per day, five days a week, for at least 14 years. In total, children who start school in Kindergarten will spend over 20,000 waking hours in government care, compared to around one fourth that much time with their parents.

Harris pointed to her mother working “long hours” as a reason why America needs children to be in government schools for more hours. Apparently “juggling” school schedules and work is a “common cause of stress and financial hardship,” said Harris, who is descended from slave owners and whose own father has lambasted her disgusting “identity politics.”

“But, this does not have to be the case,” Harris continued, because apparently Uncle Sam is going to make it all better by taking even more money from people to somehow help them deal with their “financial hardship.” Proving that she would destroy a proper understanding of justice if elected in her long-shot bid for the presidency, Harris added: “Justice for students and working families is on the ballot.”

Of course, totalitarians have long believed that government ought to play a much larger role in the raising of children. Indeed, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Castro, and countless other socialist and communist tyrants throughout the 20th century sought to usurp the role of parents in raising the next generation, always with horrific results.

In America, Big Government mongers have similar dreams. Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan, for instance, openly called for government boarding schools that would have some children 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Hillary Clinton argued two decades ago that it takes a (government) “village” to raise a child. And the Obama administration released a policy document seeking home visits that referred to parents as “equal partners” in the raising of children.

THE TAKEAWAY

As American children get dumber and dumber — not to mention more immoral — with each passing year in public school, it is incredible that somebody could seriously propose increasing  the amount of time spent there. What U.S. children need is more time with their parents and less time as inmates in the government’s indoctrination centers. Harris should be ashamed of herself.

Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU or on Facebook

John Anthony: HOW TO ANNIHILATE U.S. SOCIALISM AND FORCE WASHINGTON TO LISTEN 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by John Anthony

Socialism’s barbs have sunk deep into the heart of America’s soul.  We see the Titanic struggle as Democrats and Republicans jointly hamper Trump’s attempts to return choices to the people. Washington will never willingly stop its progressive control, but we can make them.

As one who has studied the progressive/socialist movement from the Congressional halls to small communities across the country, I believe we have a rich opportunity to adopt an explosive method to defeat the anti-Constitutional forces in America.

For years, Constitutionalists have joined marches, attended meetings, written articles, and built networks.   Through speeches, seminars and videos we have exposed regionalists for grabbing local authority, sustainable development for driving up housing costs, and federal regulations for usurping local land use and zoning laws. Experts in education, climate science, and Constitutional law have bared how our federal agencies and court system are turning the land of the free into regions of the fettered.

Despite successes, every week reveals the incessant ‘tick-tock’ of the socialist advance.

In September 2016, the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority used taxpayers’ money to reduce the monthly rents to $75 for HUD residents who visit relatives overseas for up to 3 months.  The agency felt it was unfair that East Africans should have to face fiancial hardship to take an international trip most working Americans may never be able to afford.

In 2014, an affordable housing developer proposed building low-cost housing in a closed Whitehall Township, Pennsylvania warehouse.  When the voters and officials rejected the plan for zoning reasons, the developer contacted HUD who sued Whitehall.  By December 2016, Whitehall agreed to change their zoning laws, operate under a court-appointed monitor, and pay the developer $375,000 for costs including “out of pocket expenses.”

In a socialist society, the government defines ‘fair’ and votes become a minor nuisance.

The progressive movement in America has advanced so far that in 2016, the unelected Thrive Regional Partnership consisting of 16 counties in Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama, urged their faked regional community to take “inspiration” from the works of Parag Khanna.  Khanna is a global strategist who preaches that nations must merge into connected regions overseen by direct technocracy.  He advocates that the American Democracy of our Founding Fathers, (he apparently does not realize the U.S. is a Constitutional Republic,) is “crumbling” and must be replaced by a technocratic intelligentsia.

Khanna’s technocracy model recommends we eliminate the U.S. Senate and replace the President with a 7-member panel of elite, ivy-league educated experts who are better equipped to make decisions than squabbling elected officials and uninformed citizens.  The nation would consist of regions managed by unelected councils. Local community members would merely have an opportunity to offer input. (Think of a regional planning session where all opinions are welcome, but only those that meet the pre-determined outcomes are accepted.)

This Communist nightmare is closer than you think. Regions like San Francisco’s Association of Bay Area Governments and Minneapolis’ Twin Cities Regional Council, routinely force through transit lines, toll roads, complete streets, and housing projects against voter’s wishes.

Along with dozens of other regions, these groups and hundreds of existing Councils of Governments are salivating to turn Khanna’s’ direct technocracy into your future.

President Trump has thrown a monkey wrench into the left’s relentless drive toward a centrally managed nation.  He has been immensely successful in re-working bad trade deals, opening industries for growth, and reducing costly federal regulations.  Perhaps his greatest accomplishment is the exposure of the vitriol and atrocities of the leftist establishment.

Still, Trump is not enough.

HUD’s 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule, handed the progressive movement a legal tool to bludgeon communities into central planning and assault the poor while masquerading as their rescuers.  AFFH represents the clearest threat to independence, property rights, and local autonomy in our history.

Yet, HUD’s recent resolution of the AFFH-based Westchester case and the confirmation of Dr. Carson as HUD Secretary have left the rule fully intact.

We must disconnect local communities from federal dependence because it is the lifeblood of socialism. Big government does not help the poor, it feeds on them.  Since 1965 the U.S. poverty rate has not wavered from between 11% and 15%, ever!  This, despite spending over $20 trillion.

The left needs the poor to be poor.  It is the only way they can garner the votes to remain office.  Imagine entering an election cycle knowing that 11% – 15% of the people think they need you for they fear they will not eat.

It is not just poverty that propels socialism. The socialist movement eliminated Christianity in government and education because they know what our Founders knew. Only a moral society can be a free society.  Without a Christian moral foundation, America devolves into more offenses and violence, which leads to more elitists and tighter state control.

It is time to attack the heart of the progressive beast. The only way to kill the socialist movement is to free the poor, eliminate the demand for federal money and reinstate the church as the center of community life.

A growing society of independent, financially successful, Christian practicing, and capitalist African-Americans and Latinos is the equivalent of an Ebola outbreak inside the haughty progressive political community.

This much-abused base must be realigned with people who have no political axes and no concern other than to help them out of poverty and to share in freedom.

Community programs are already proving that low-income minorities will change their allegiances when they feel the benefits of new opportunities. That is why, in the Spring of 2017 I started the Miss Mary Project.  We are a church-based program that teaches working age members of low-income families in urban and suburban areas, not just how to get a job, but how to excel on the job and become indispensable, promotable employees. Rather than help people rise to just above poverty, we help propel them to a lifetimg of success, reducing the need for federal programs.

Our work is based on 30 years of corporate leadership training experience and builds on existing successful programs for the poor.  The Miss Mary Project has been so well-received that we are already opening publicly supported centers in Chattanooga, TN and Greenville, SC with plans to go nationwide.

We can defeat socialism, but not through reactionary and survivalist methods.  We must once again make the church the center of our community life and engage in and support positive local programs that truly help people become financially independent and free of government.

SFL: https://www.wnd.com/2019/06/your-leaders-never-cared-about-you/https://sustainablefreedomlab.org/2017/08/09/how-to-annihilate-u-s-socialism-and-force-washington-to-listen/

Read John Anthony’s Biography

Bill Lockwood: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

With the recent shootings in America liberal politicians have proposed curtailing the God-given unalienable right to keep and bear arms as a method to stem the violence. From presidential hopeful Joe Biden recently telling Anderson Cooper, “Bingo” when asked about the government coming for “guns” to Kamala Harris’ proposal that if she is elected president she will enact “executive orders” to confiscate “assault weapons” when Congress fails to act, the Second Amendment needs to be re-asserted.

It is a historical fact that in nations where political leaders wish to remove properties and freedoms of the citizenry, they always begin by disarming the populace. This normally begins by requiring registration of firearms and imposing penalties when they do not. This is followed in many cases by federal governments deliberately provoking rioting and violence which is then used as an excuse to confiscate firearms.

The Second Amendment—A Prohibition

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” The first thing to be noted is that the 2d Amendment is a strict prohibition against the federal government. It is not a declaration of rights, period. The right to keep arms was assumed to be God-given by the founders, but they added the Amendments to ensure that the national government would not touch these freedoms.

The Bill of Rights opens with this bold statement, “Congress shall make NO LAW …” What Joe Biden and his Democrat cohorts propose is unconstitutional on its very surface. Federal government has no say so in the matter. Making “no law” is pretty clear.

Second, there is a popular view today, though erroneous, that the 2d Amendment means that the National Guard should be able to keep and bear arms, but that the guarantee does not extend to ordinary citizens. Those who advance such an argument either have not read the Founders themselves who wrote the 2d Amendment, or hope you do not—or both.

The concern has always been, from the time of the creation of America until today, that a centralized federal government would evolve into a dictatorship or totalitarian state. The framers, with one voice, stated that the only counter measure to such gravitational pull over time was the populace itself. Alexander Hamilton, for example, in The Federalist Papers, asserted that liberty would always be ensured as long as the people were allowed to be “properly armed and equipped.”

James Madison, who authored the 2d Amendment, wrote that under the Constitution “the ultimate authority …resides in the people alone [due to the] advantage of being armed which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation.” Joseph Story, an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court (8112-1845), a foremost Constitutional authority, wrote:

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary powers of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

George Washington, commander-in-chief of the Continental Army, noted that

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence….From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable…the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference—they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.

Sam Adams, introduced in the Massachusetts convention the call to ratify the Constitution. In it he said that the “Constitution never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own guns.”

Sir William Blackstone (1725-80), though not a founder of this nation, was one of the top four quoted authorities on Common Law. Lawyers in America until the time of Abraham Lincoln normally carried Blackstone with them. Of the right to keep and bear arms, Blackstone said,

“Of the absolute rights of individuals: the fifth and last auxiliary right of the subject … is that of having arms for their defense …”

He explained that the basis for this right is the “natural right of resistance and self-preservation when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression” (Alan Gottlieb, The Rights of Gun Owners, 1983, p. 6). It is as if Blackstone was mirroring current day America and the push of Democratic and Socialist lawmakers to open our borders to the entire third world, turning our streets into combat zones in some cases.

State Militia

Still, some cling to the wording of the 2d Amendment which states a “well-regulated militia” is necessary for the security of a free people to insist that this right to keep and bear arms be reserved for a specialized unit which one must join. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most Americans do not realize that they themselves belong to the state militia where they reside. Title 10, section 31 of the U.S. Code defines the militia of each state as “all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and under 45 years of age who are or have [made] a declaration of intent to become citizens” (W. Cleon Skousen, The Making of America, p. 694).

The United States Congress has weighed in on this topic as well. In 1982 a Senate subcommittee on the Constitution carefully documented the 2d Amendment understanding in a public report. After lengthy pages of history, it noted that in various states after the War for Independence many proposals called it a general duty for all citizens to be armed. Richard Henry Lee, for instance, observed that “to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them …”

George Mason of Virginia, drafter of the Virginia Bill of Rights, accused the British of having plotted to “disarm the people—that was the best and most effective way to enslave them.” Patrick Henry said that the “great object is that every man be armed and everyone who is able may have a gun.”

St. George Tucker, one of the earliest commentators on the Constitution and Chief Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court, published in 1803 his annotations. He followed Blackstone’s citations (noted above) and pointed out regarding the 2d Amendment that it is “without any qualification.” So also, William Rawle’s “View of the Constitution” published in 1825. He emphasized that,

“The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by a rule of construction be conceived to give Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”

The 1982 Congress summarized some of the above material. First, subsequent legislation in the Second Congress “supports the interpretation of the Second Amendment that creates an individual right. In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined ‘militia of the United States’ to include almost every free adult male in the United States.”

They went on to add that these persons “were obligated by the law to possess a firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment.” “There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress … spoke of a ‘militia’, they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard.” (Skousen, p. 699).

Second, the prohibition is strict and broad against the federal government or its officers from being able to address the issue of firearms or weaponry in the hands of its citizens. The reason is clear. As Joseph Story, in his Commentaries on the Constitution put it this way: the right to keep and bear arms is “the palladium of the liberties of the republic.” This is a natural deterrent to tyranny.

So, whether it is Elizabeth Warren, who wants to have the federal government involve themselves in background checks, or Kamala Harris, who has dictatorship-style plans to move unilaterally on guns if elected president, or Joe Biden, who plans to implement bans on “assault weapons” at the federal level, or Bernie Sanders, who promises some type of executive action on firearms—all of these are theorizing in unconstitutional territory. If the federal government can step into this arena—no matter how small a role—history shows that this foot-in-the-door will expand to larger roles as Constitutionally illiterate people pouring out of the colleges demand more federal control. Voters, beware.

 

Bill Lockwood: The Evil of Socialism-Part Two 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Dennis Prager, founder of the conservative PragerU, conservative talk show host, made an excellent observation regarding socialism while on Fox & Friends this past Tuesday. He was there to advertise the newest instalment of his 5-part popular commentary series on the Torah.

He noted that the founders were distrustful of human nature, and that therefore one’s personal liberty is best secured when as little control as possible is placed in the hands of leaders. Socialism, on the other hand, by definition, entrusts tremendous power over the lives of others in the hands of a very few. The contrast could not be more stark. Let’s explore it a little.

Distrust of Human Nature

The founders were optimistic about human nature, but they were realistic as well. Alexander Hamilton expressed the optimism, but at the same time the realistic view of human nature. “There is a certain enthusiasm in liberty, that makes human nature rise above itself, in acts of bravery and heroism” (The Famer Refuted, Feb. 23, 1775).

But it was James Madison, the father of the Constitution, that succinctly explained in Federalist No. 55 why limited government oversight was necessary:

As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.

George Washington expressed the same sentiment in a letter to John Jay in 1786. “We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals.”

Again, Madison outlined in Federalist No. 51 the importance of checks and balances in a government by viewing human nature.

Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man, must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections of human nature?

The sole theme of the Constitution is to protect people from the concentration of power in the hands of a few government officials.

Illustrative of this skepticism of human nature to aggrandize power in the hands of the few is Article II, sec. 2 which pertains to the Electoral Vote of the states. The states considered collectively are the Electoral College. “Each state shall appoint …a number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled.”

However, the founders added this caveat: “but no senator or representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”

What is the meaning of this negative note? “All human history … has demonstrated that concentrated government power is the greatest threat to individual freedom and states rights.” (1)

“Protecting the electoral system from conquest and occupation by the agencies of the federal government was the purpose of this provision.”

In other words, the only manner in which mankind could achieve happiness and liberty was by self-government. And this can only be gained by maintaining a system of limited government. But limited government would be surrendered if those in power could manipulate the system in their favor.

Socialism—Social Justice

Consider the contrast with socialism, by which we mean redistribution of wealth in the pursuit of so-called “equality.” The National Association of Scholars (NAS) defines “social justice”—socialism in a new dress—as “Advocacy of more egalitarian access to income, through state-sponsored redistribution.”

But what does this demand? In order to accomplish any state-sponsored redistribution, the state must be invested with more control over the lives of its members. This demands massive government power—power at the top.

Max Eastman, an elitist American in Woodrow Wilson’s time who became infatuated with socialism and actually traveled to the Soviet Union to learn how to implement it, later recanted. Would that our modern-day socialists of the Democratic Party would be as honest as Eastman.

Eastman’s book, Lectures in the Failure of Socialism, contains this definition of socialism: “A state apparatus which plans and runs the business of the country must have the authority of a business executive. And that is the authority to tell all those active in the business where to go and what to do, and if they are insubordinate, put them out.” It is all about power. Continuity of control.

(1) W. Cleon Skousen, The Making of America, p. 526.

At the root level, it amounts to the relinquishing of our sacred rights into the hands of the few at the top whom we have entrusted with gigantic levers of authority over our lives. Senator Bernie Sanders, for example, presses for socialized healthcare. What is that? This is to say that he wants the entire healthcare industry to become a government-run monopoly financed entirely by taxes.

How opposite the founders! It all begins with a wrong view of human nature as modern progressives consistently hold. This is the legacy of the so-called Progressive Era—a skewed, unrealistic view of mankind. A refusal to recognize that man’s problem is sin, not lack of material possessions. (2)  This is the evil of socialism.

And to pretend that we have a “Constitutional Crisis” on hand because Attorney General William Barr refuses to break the law and hand over federally-protected testimony to raging Democrats in the House boggles the mind.

There is a Constitutional Crisis in America—has been for over 100 years. It is the complete disregarding of constitutional barriers that forbids the federal government from intruding into the private lives of citizens via the tax code, welfare, government housing, education, health care, and a thousand and one other items. The Democrats are simply trying to lock evil socialism into place by the healthcare proposals of “Medicaid for all.”

(2) The Bible is emphatic, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 6:23).“God saw that the wickedness of man was great … and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was on evil continually” (Gen. 6:5). This is why the founders did not trust their freedoms, liberties, and rights into the hands of a few elitists.

TOM DEWEESE: Green New Deal Reveals the Naked Truth of Agenda 21 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Tom DeWeese

Sometimes if you fight hard enough and refuse to back down, no matter the odds, your truth is vindicated and prevails!

For twenty years I have been labeled a conspiracy theorist, scaremonger, extremist, dangerous, nut case. I’ve been denied access to stages, major news programs, and awarded tin foil hats. All because I have worked to expose Agenda 21 and its policy of sustainable development as a danger to our property rights, economic system, and culture of freedom.

From its inception in 1992 at the United Nation’s Earth Summit, 50,000 delegates, heads of state, diplomats and Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) hailed Agenda 21 as the “comprehensive blueprint for the reorganization of human society.” The 350-page, 40 chapter, Agenda 21 document was quite detailed and explicit in its purpose and goals.  They warned us that the reorganization would be dictated through all-encompassing policies affecting every aspect of our lives, using environmental protection simply as the excuse to pull at our emotions and get us to voluntarily surrender our liberties.

Section I details “Social and Economic Dimensions” of the plan, including redistribution of wealth to eradicate poverty, maintain health through vaccinations and modern medicine, and population control.

To introduce the plan, the Earth Summit Chairman, Maurice Strong boldly proclaimed, “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.” Of course, according to the plan, if it’s not “sustainable” it must be stopped.

In support of the plan, David Brower of the Sierra Club (one of the NGO authors of the agenda) said, “Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license.” Leading environmental groups advocated that the Earth could only support a maximum of one billion people, leading famed Dr. Jacques Cousteau to declare, “In order to stabilize world populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.”

Section II provides the “Conservation and Management of Resources for Development” by outlining how environmental protection was to be the main weapon, including global protection of the atmosphere, land, mountains, oceans, and fresh waters – all under the control of the United Nations.

To achieve such global control to save the planet, it is necessary to eliminate national sovereignty and independent nations. Eliminating national borders quickly led to the excuse for openly allowing the “natural migration” of peoples. The UN Commission on Global Governance clearly outlined the goal for global control stating, “The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.” That pretty much explains why the supporters of such a goal go a little off the rails when a presidential candidate makes his campaign slogan “Make America Great Again.”

The main weapon for the Agenda was the threat of Environmental Armageddon, particularly manifested through the charge of man-made global warming, later to conveniently become “climate change.” It didn’t matter if true science refused to cooperate in this scheme as actual global temperatures really are not rising and there continues to be no evidence of any man-made affect on the climate. Truth hasn’t been important to the scare mongers. Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation said, “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” To further drive home their complete lack of concern for truth, Paul Watson of Green Peace declared, “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”

So in their zealotry to enforce the grand agenda, social justice became the “moral force” over the rule of law as free enterprise, private property, rural communities and individual consumption habits became the targets, labeled as racist and a social injustice. Such established institutions and free market economics were seen as obstructions to the plan, as were traditional family units, religion, and those who were able to live independently in rural areas.

Finally, Agenda 21 was summed up in supporting documents this way: “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced. It requires a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals, and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”

Of course, such harsh terms had to be hidden from the American people if the plan was to be successfully imposed. They called it a “suggestion” for “voluntary” action –  just in case a nation or community wanted to do something positive for mankind! However, while using such innocent-sounding language, the Agenda 21 shock troops lost no time pushing it into government policy. In 1992, just after its introduction at the Earth Summit, Nancy Pelosi introduced a resolution of support for the plan into Congress. It’s interesting to note that she boldly called it a “comprehensive blueprint for the reorganization of human society.” In 1993, new President, Bill Clinton ordered the establishment of the President’s Council for Sustainable Development, with the express purpose of enforcing the Agenda 21 blueprint into nearly every agency of the federal government to assure it became the law of the land. Then the American Planning Association issued a newsletter in 1994, supporting Agenda 21’s ideas as a “comprehensive blueprint” for local planning. So much for a voluntary idea!

However, as we, the opponents started to gain some ground in exposing its true purpose and citizens began to storm city halls protesting local implementation, suddenly the once proud proponents lost their collective memories about Agenda 21. Never heard of it! “There are no blue-helmeted troops at city hall,” said one proponent, meaning policies being used to impose it were not UN driven, but just “local, local, local”. “Oh, you mean that innocuous 20 year-old document that has no enforcement capability? This isn’t that!” These were the excuses that rained down on us from the planners, NGOs and government agents as they scrambled to hide their true intentions.

I was attacked on the front page of the New York Times Sunday paper under the headline, “Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing U.N. Plot.” The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) produced four separate reports on my efforts to stop it, calling our efforts an “Antigovernment Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory.” The Atlantic magazine ran a story entitled, “Is the UN Using Bike Paths to Achieve World Domination?” Attack articles appeared in the Washington Post, Esquire magazine, Wingnut Watch, Mother Jones, and Tree Hugger.com to name a few. All focused on labeling our opposition as tin-foil-hat-wearing nut jobs. Meanwhile, an alarmed American Planning Association (APA) created an “Agenda 21: Myths and Facts page on its web site to supposedly counter our claims. APA then organized a “Boot Camp” to retrain its planners to deal with us, using a “Glossary for the Public,” teaching them new ways to talk about planning. Said the opening line of the Glossary, “Given the heightened scrutiny of planners by some members of the public, what is said – or not said – is especially important in building support for planning.” The Glossary went on to list words not to use like “Public Visioning,” “Stakeholders,” “Density,” and “Smart Growth,” because such words make the “Critics see red”.

Purchase Tom’s latest book “Sustainable: The WAR on Free Enterprise, Private Property and Individuals”.

Local elected officials, backed by NGO groups and planners, began to deride local activists – sometimes denying them access to speak at public meetings, telling them that Agenda 21 conspiracy theory has “been debunked”. Most recently an irate city councilman answered a citizen who claimed local planning was part of Agenda 21 by saying “this is what’s “trending.” So, of course, if everyone is doing it is must be right!

Such has been our fight to stop this assault on our culture and Constitutional rights.

Over the years, since the introduction of Agenda 21 in 1992, the United Nations has created several companion updates to the original documents. This practice serves two purposes. One is to provide more detail on how the plan is to be implemented. The second is to excite its global activists with a new rallying cry. In 2000, the UN held the Millennium Summit, launching the Millennium Project featuring eight goals for global sustainability to be reached by 2015. Then, when those goals were not achieved, the UN held another summit in New York City in September of 2015, this time outlining 17 goals to be reached by 2030. This document became known as the 2030 Agenda, containing the exact same goals as were first outlined in Agenda 21in 1992, and then again in 2000, only with each new incarnation offering more explicit direction for completion.

Enter the Green New Deal, representing the boldest tactic yet. The origins and the purpose of the Green New Deal couldn’t be more transparent. The forces behind Agenda 21 and its goal of reorganizing human society have become both impatient and scared. Impatient that 27 years after Agenda 21 was introduced, and after hundreds of meetings, planning sessions, massive propaganda, and billions of dollars spent, the plan still is not fully in place. Scared because people around the world are starting to learn its true purpose and opposition is beginning to grow.

So the forces behind the Agenda have boldly thrown off their cloaking devices and their innocent sounding arguments that they just want to protect the environment and make a better life for us all. Instead, they are now openly revealing that their goal is socialism and global control, just as I’ve been warning about for these past twenty years. Now they are determined to take congressional action to finally make it the law of the land.

Take a good look, those of you who have heard my warnings about Agenda 21 over the years. Do you see the plan I have warned about being fully in place in this Green New Deal?

  • I warned that Agenda 21 would control every aspect of our lives, including how and were we live, the jobs we have, the mode of transportation available to us, and even what we eat. The Green New Deal is a tax on everything we do, make, wear, eat, drink, drive, import, export and even breathe.
  • In opposing Smart Growth plans in your local community, I said the main goal was to eliminate cars, to be replaced with bikes, walking, and light rail trains. The Green New Deal calls for the elimination of the internal combustion engine. Stay alert. The next step will be to put a ban on the sale of new combustion engines by a specific date and then limiting the number of new vehicles to be sold. Bans on commercial truck shipping will follow. Then they will turn to airplanes, reducing their use. Always higher and higher taxes will be used to get the public to “voluntarily” reduce their use of such personal transportation choices. That’s how it works, slowly but steadily towards the goal.
  • I warned that under Smart Growth programs now taking over every city in the nation that single-family homes are a target for elimination, to be replaced by high-rise stack and pack apartments in the name of reducing energy use. That will include curfews on carbon heating systems, mandating they be turned off during certain hours. Heating oil devises will become illegal. Gradually, energy use of any kind will be continually reduced. The Green New Deal calls for government control of every single home, office and factory to tear down or retrofit them to comply with massive environmental energy regulations.
  • I warned that Agenda 21 Sustainable policy sought to drive those in rural areas off the farms and into the cities where they could be better controlled. Those in the cities will be ordered to convert their gardens into food producers. Most recently I warned that the beef industry is a direct target for elimination. It will start with mandatory decreases in meat consumption until it disappears form our daily diet. The consumption of dairy will follow. Since the revelation of the Green New Deal the national debate is now over cattle emissions of methane and the drive to eliminate them from the planet. Controlling what we eat is a major part of the Green New Deal.
  • I warned that part of the plan for Agenda 2030 was “Zero Economic Growth.” The Green New Deal calls for a massive welfare plan where no one earns more than anyone else. Incentive to get ahead is dead. New inventions would disrupt their plan for a well-organized, controlled society. So, where will jobs come from after we have banned most manufacturing, shut down most stores, stopped single-family home construction, closed the airline industry, and severely regulated farms and the entire food industry? This is their answer to the hated free markets and individual choice.

The Green New Deal will destroy the very concept of our Constitutional Republic, eliminating private property, locally elected representative government, free markets and individual freedom. All decisions in our lives will be made for us by the government – just to protect the environment of course. They haven’t forgotten how well that scheme works to keep the masses under control.

Though the label “Green New Deal” has been passing around globalist circles for a while, it’s interesting that its leaders have now handed it to a naïve, inexperienced little girl from New York who suddenly found herself rise from bartending to a national media sensation, almost over nigh. That doesn’t just happen and there is no miracle here. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a created product. They probably needed her inexperienced enthusiasm to deliver the Green New Deal because no established politician would touch it. Now that it’s been introduced and she is set up to take the heat, the gates have swung open allowing forty-five members of Congress to co-sponsor it in the House of Representatives as established Senator Ed. Markey (D-MA) has sponsored it in the Senate. That doesn’t just happen either. Nothing has been left to chance.

Behind the sudden excitement and rush to support it are three radical groups each having direct ties to George Soros, including the Sunrise Movement – which markets itself as an “army of young people” seeking to make climate change a major priority.   Justice Democrats – which finds and recruits progressive candidates, and New Consensus – organized to change how we think about issues. Leaders of these groups have connections with other Soros-backed movements including Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street. According to The New Yorker magazine, the plan was written over a single weekend in December, 2018. Ocasio-Cortez was included in the effort, chosen to introduce it. This may be the single reason why she was able to appear out of nowhere to become the new darling of the radical left.

So there you have it — Agenda 21, the Millennium Project, Agenda 2030, the Green New Deal. Progress in the world of Progressives! They warned us from the beginning that their plan was the “comprehensive blueprint for the reorganization of human society”. And so it is to be the total destruction of our way of life.

To all of those elected officials, local, state and federal, who have smirked at we who have tried to sound the alarm, look around you now, hot shots! You have denied, ignored, and yet, helped put these very plans into place. Are you prepared to accept what you have done? Will you allow your own homes and offices to be torn down – or will you be exempt as part of the elite or just useful idiots? Will you have to give up your car and ride your bike to work? Or is that just for we peasants?

Over these years you have listened to the Sierra Club, the Nature Conservancy, the World Wildlife Fund, ICLEI, the American Planning Association, and many more, as they assured you their plans were just environmental protection, just good policy for future generations. They have been lying to you to fulfill their own agenda!  Well, now the truth is right in front of you. There is no question of who and what is behind this. And no doubt as to what the final result will be.

Now, our elected leaders have to ask real questions. As the Green New Deal is implemented, and all energy except worthless, unworkable wind and solar are put into place, are you ready for the energy curfews that you will be forced to impose, perhaps each night as the sun fades, forcing factories, restaurants, hospitals, and stores to close at dusk? How about all those folks forced to live in the stack and pack high-rises when the elevators don’t operate? What if they have an emergency?

How much energy will it take to rebuild those buildings that must be destroyed or retrofitted to maker them environmentally correct for your brave new world? Where will it come from after you have banned and destroyed all the workable sources of real energy? What are you counting on to provide you with food, shelter, and the ability to travel so you can continue to push this poison? Because – this is what’s trending — now! And how is it going to be financed when the entire economy crashes under its weight? Is it really the future you want for you, your family, and your constituents who elected you?

Every industry under attack by this lunacy should now join our efforts to stop it.  Cattlemen, farmers, airlines, the auto industry, realtors, tourist industry, and many more, all will be put out of business – all should now take bold action to immediately kill this plan before it kills your industry. Stomp it so deeply into the ground that no politician will ever dare think about resurrecting it.

For years I’ve watched politicians smirk, roll their eyes, and sigh whenever the words Agenda 21 were uttered. As George Orwell said, “The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it”. Today I stand vindicated in my warnings of where Agenda 21 was truly headed, because it’s not longer me having to reveal the threat. They are telling you themselves. Here’s the naked truth – Socialism is for the stupid. The Green New Deal is pure Socialism. How far its perpetrators get in enforcing it depends entirely on how hard you are willing to fight for freedom. Kill it now or watch it die.

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2019/02/25/green-new-deal-reveals-the-naked-truth-of-agenda-21/

Read Tom Deweese’s Biography

Bill Lockwood: Democrats: The Anti-God Party of Karl Marx? 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Several recent agendas pushed by the Democrat Party indicate that they are not only the anti-America Party which pushes for Open Borders and a larger socialist confiscation/redistribution program than already exists, but are aggressively adversarial when it comes to belief in God. From chiding judicial nominees who believe in God to removing ‘so help me God’ from oaths—the Democrat Party is adopting the mantle of atheism.

Sen. Cory Booker, for example, recently asked judicial nominee Neomi Rao if she believed that same-sex relationships were immoral. Rao has been nominated to be on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. She would replace Brett Kavanaugh if confirmed.

Booker pressed her. “So you’re not willing to say here … whether you believe it is sinful for two men to be married, you’re not willing to comment on that?”

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) asked Amy Coney Barrett, “Do you consider yourself an orthodox Catholic?” in a 2017 hearing. Barret was then a nominee for the 7th Circuit Court. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said to Barrett in that same hearing: “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.”

Brian Buescher was nominated to be on a district court in Nebraska. His membership in the Catholic Knights of Columbus was something that brought out the hostility of Democrat Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA). The thought patterns of these prominent Democrats is obviously that any sort of Christian belief is a hindrance to public service.

Removing “So Help You God”

Next, as reported by The Hill, the newly-minted Democrat-led House Committee on Natural Resources is seeking to have the words “so help you God” removed from the oath cited by witnesses who testify before the panel. The proposal was originally obtained by Fox News.

The rules proposal states that witnesses that come before the committee during its hearings would be administered the following oath: ‘Do you solemnly swear or affirm, under penalty of law, that the testimony that you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth [so help you God]? According to Fox News, the “so help you God” phrasing is in brackets in red in the draft and indicates that the words are slated for removal.

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) probably summarized this Democrat-led move with the best critique: “It is incredible, but not surprising, that the Democrats would try to remove God from committee proceedings in one of the first acts in the majority…They really have become the party of Karl Marx.”

Art. VI. Sec. 3–No Religious Test

Some may suppose that these godless Democrats are in line with the Constitution at Art. VI, sec. 3 which forbids a “religious test” for public officers in government. But this is ignorant of the meaning of the Constitution.

Article VI of the Constitution gives Americans several General Provisions. One of them involves an “Official Oath” that is to be required of Senators and Representatives and all “executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states.” They shall be “bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution, but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

First, there is to be an ‘oath’ of office. What seems to have escaped the modernist anti-theism approach is that the very nature of an oath assumes that the one giving that oath believes in God. By definition an oath is a solemn “calling upon God to witness the truth of what one says.” In effect it is to say: If I am not telling the truth then I call upon God to strike me down or to punish me

This is why Washington, when taking the first oath of presidential office, added “so help me God.” In the Old Testament an oath was to be taken in God’s name for the same purpose. To “take the Lord’s name in vain” (Exod. 20:7) then, is making a profession in “God’s name” and failing to live up to that profession. Primarily, this involved a legal oath. By extension the command meant “You shall not use the name of God, either in oaths or in common discourse, lightly, rashly, irreverently, or unnecessarily, or without weighty or sufficient cause” (Matthew Henry).

Obviously, by the flippant and irreverent manner in which Americans misuse the name of God has muddied their thinking about Deity and the very nature of an oath. And none are more confused than the Democrats who press for an “oath” without realizing the nature of it.

Second, the oath is itself is a recognition of God. James Iredell, a Justice of the State Supreme Court of North Carolina (1751-1799), during the founding period, commented on Article VI in the following manner.

According to the modern definition of an oath, it is considered a ‘solemn appeal to the supreme being, for the truth of what is said, by a person who believes in the existence of a supreme being and in a future state of rewards and punishments according to that form which will bind his conscience most.’ It was long held that … none but Jews and Christians could take an oath; and heathens were altogether excluded…Men at length considered that there were many virtuous men in the world who had not had an opportunity of being instructed either in the Old or New Testament, who yet very sincerely believed in a supreme being, and in a future state of rewards and punishments…. Indeed, there are few people so grossly ignorant or barbarous as to have no religion at all.

We have reached the point at which the “barbarians” are now running the government from the Democrat side. Iredell explained further pertaining to the oath:

…it is only necessary to inquire if the person who is to take it [the oath] believes in a supreme being and in a future state of rewards and punishments. If he does, the oath is to be administered according to that form which it is supposed will bind his conscience most. It is, however, necessary that such a belief should be entertained, because otherwise there would be nothing to bind his conscience that could be relied on; since there are many cases where the terror of punishment in this world for perjury would not be dreaded.

Third, what then of the No Religious Test? Article VI also states that “there shall be no religious test.” Many of the colonies were established by groups of people who subscribed to certain tenets of various faiths—that is, branches of Protestantism (see Thomas Norton, The Constitution of the United States, 183-84). Their state oaths would automatically exclude at a state level those who had contrary views.

But when it came to the federal government these same delegates insisted that it had no jurisdiction over religious matters. They were particularly fearful that a “federal test might displace existing state test oaths and religious establishments” (David Barton, “A Godless Constitution?: A Response to Kramnick and Moore,” Wallbuilders.com). In other words, the framers believed that religion was a matter better left to individuals and to their respective state governments, not to the federal government. No religious test primarily referred to the various exclusive doctrinal tests at the state level and kept the federal government in a neutral position.

However, whether one believed in God or did not subscribe to general biblical principles was far from what was intended in Art. VI, sec. 3. The idea that America might one day become a “godless state” as the current Democrat Party embodies was not in the framer’s minds. As Richard Dobbs Spaight (1758-1802), a representative from North Carolina to the Constitutional Convention, put it: “I do not suppose an infidel or any such person will ever be chosen to any office unless the people themselves be of the same opinion.”

This is what makes the comments of the Cory Booker’s and Dianne Feinstein’s so distasteful. They are not even in a “neutral position.” Their anti-God agenda, which is reflected across the board in the Democratic Party, is open hostility against Christian principles. Little wonder then that the socialism of Karl Marx appeals to them. It begins upon an atheistic platform.

« Older Entries