December 16, 2018

Are We Really on the Verge of a Second Civil War?

And ye shall hear of wars, and rumors of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. – Matthew 24:6

Victor Davis Hanson, in National Review, writes of the “Origins of Our Second Civil War.” In his explanation of how the stage has been set, he cites the following: Globalization, High Tech, The Campus, Illegal Immigration, and of course places as much blame as possible on Barack Obama.

Everything that he points out is mostly true and certainly the cause of a point in our history when anger and hatred are at a fever pitch.

I was shocked to read one of Hanson’s remedies to this civil war generating hatred and anger: “Religious and spiritual reawakening is crucial.”

Most often such suggestions for a cure to the evils and sinful lives that Americans lead and live is taboo from the written words of the press. In this case, the reference is quite generic and a bit less toxic to those who find Yahweh as the curse and not the cure.

What we are seeing in our society is the fruit of our labors of the man-god’s building with a definite denial, blindness, and determination to find the right answers from the corrupt government that crafts the “Bread and Circuses” that attempt to keep us all in line. So, are the Bread and Circus owners deliberately working to set the stage of “our second civil war?” Or have they, like so many other Americans, lost their focus on the moral compass of which our Creator provides to those wanting to take advantage of it? You’ll have to decide the answer to that.

Mr. Hanson refers to the Sermon on the Mount as an example of these modern-day troubles as a warning of what our future might look like. It should be pointed out that reading the Sermon on the Mount might provide some historical perspective, fully understanding cannot be achieved unless one is filled with the Spirit of Truth that guides and convicts.

Which brings us to the root cause of a belief that the U.S. is on the verge of a second civil war. There are just too many people looking to government and man-gods for answers. Those answers can never come from there because the foundation of their existence is full of sin and corruption and not on God their Creator.

As with the Sermon on the Mount, the words are incomplete unless Yahweh’s Spirit is leading the way (Hebrews 4:12). That leadership, unlike that of man’s, is voluntary. It requires us as individuals to reach out and take it. It’s a free gift and the only gift that can stop a second civil war.

Share

Prospects of a Civil War…..With Bullets

Share

Buchanan: Pushing Revolution

*Editor’s Note* – We know that the media is controlled by the Ruling Establishment. We also know that those who appear to be in opposition to the Mainstream rhetoric and talking points, are simply controlled opposition, but still doing the bidding for the same rulers of the Mainstream Press – or they are allowed to operate. One must wonder, therefore, if Pat Buchanan is quietly and not so quietly stumping for revolution per his orders in compliance to exist and persist.

I think what he says about the Establishment’s concern over how the masses of servants will respond to the corruption that rules this land, but remember, the anger that exists was created by people just like Pat Buchanan. It has been an ongoing effort for many years now, to piss off the people perhaps enough to drive them to revolution, i.e. civil war.

“What explains the hysteria of the establishment?

In a word, fear.

The establishment is horrified at the Donald’s defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority.

It may rule and run the country, and may rig the system through mass immigration and a mammoth welfare state so that Middle America is never again able to elect one of its own. But that establishment, disconnected from the people it rules, senses, rightly, that it is unloved and even detested.

Having fixed the future, the establishment finds half of the country looking upon it with the same sullen contempt that our Founding Fathers came to look upon the overlords Parliament sent to rule them.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

The Path Toward Civil War II

I am going to present historic accounts for readers. Please bear in mind, and try to lose your biased notions about who, what, when, where and how the Civil War began, was fought and was ended. I am presenting a historic document, that at the time, is what the State Government of South Carolina perceived to be the laws under which they agreed to in signing onto the Constitution to be one of the United States. Wrong or right, is NOT the issue here. What is at issue is WHAT THEY BELIEVED at the time, and what they were willing to undertake to stop it.

The State of South Carolina was the first state to succeed from the Union. This document is their Declaration of Causes of Succession.

It begins: “The People of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D. 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union;”

Later in the Declaration it reads: “For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the Common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself.”

Slavery was a part of the reasons that South Carolina believed the United States Government was violating the Constitution, along with other treaties and agreements. The people got angry enough, knowing their succession, would no doubt, lead to war.

Today, the Texas Governor calls for a Constitutional Convention” for the purpose: “to amend the U.S. Constitution and wrest power from a federal government “run amok.”” 

“If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America,” 

The governor is calling for nine amendments to the Constitution, two of which are:

Prohibit administrative agencies from creating federal law.

Prohibit administrative agencies from pre-empting state law. 

While it doesn’t spell out exactly, it appears the governor is seeking a prohibition on Executive Orders that create federal law. We can kid ourselves all we want in order to fulfill political agendas, but executive orders create federal laws.

It would appear that S. Carolina’s 1860 Declaration of Causes for Succession are very similar to what the Texas governor and many others are calling for.

As a country, we don’t seem to have learned about the importance of the Second Amendment, is there much reason to suspect we’ve learned more about the Civil War?

How far will pissed off Americans go?

Share

Political Correctness

A guest post by David Miller: What is wrong with some people? During a recent inventory of paintings and photographs at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle Barracks, PA. an individual listed as “A Unidentified Official” wanted to know why two generals who fought against the United States (Robert E. Lee & Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson) are there. Now the War College is “mulling over what to do” with their holdings of these two great Americans. I can only begin to imagine who this individual is, but a few “Officials” come to mind as possibilities.

Just maybe the Army needs to outright tell the “Unidentified Official” that great and honorable American’s fought on both sides of that war (which by the way was a “Civil War”). And after that war we again became the United States. Also, it should be noted that both generals were graduates of West Point and served with distinction in the Mexican American War. Also, long after that war General Robert E. Lee was reinstated in 1975 by Congress as a U.S. Citizen as a final act to heel the old wounds of that war. In my humble opinion what should have occurred is that all who fought for the south should have been “officially” given back citizenship.

This so called “Unidentified Official” most likely isn’t up to date on historical facts in that both were and are great American’s and that General Robert E. Lee is considered the best military tactician that we as a nation have ever produced. He was revered by both sides during the war as such, and has been ever since by both the U.S. Military and Historians alike. My family fought in that war on the side of the North; had we been southern born we most likely would have fought on that side. Because the bottom line is that all men (both North & South) fought for their homes, friends, and way of life.

Both of these Great American Generals should maintain their place of Honor in the walls of the U.S. Army War College. Not be driven into obscurity by some want to be politically correct individual or a misguided soul. Our history is a great one made up of our struggles as a nation. There are those among us who are trying to change that for varied political reasons. Our educational systems are currently teaching history and civics that have been modified for political reasons. We need to ensure our children learn our true history.

David Miller
Lexington TWP, ME

    Share

    Multiculturalism is a Failure……..To Some Anyway

    VIDEO

    Share

    Book Review: Killing Lincoln

    I finished reading Killing Lincoln a few days ago. I recommend the book but with some suggestions.

    Killing Lincoln, by Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard, published by Henry Holt and Company, LLC., covers many of the details about President Abraham Lincoln’s assassination. Depending upon your level of knowledge and the amount of research you have done in your lifetime, will depend very much on how much in O’Reilly’s book you would find “new” information and how much as rehashed and regurgitated.

    I have read numerous books and writings on the killing of Lincoln, and I can say this one is well-written in the sense that it keeps your interest, even while constantly moving from one arena to another as the plot unfolds. However, no new information is revealed and the book falls short on any in-depth research into the vastness of the conspiracy.

    Killing Lincoln spends much of the first 16 chapters setting the stage of Lincoln’s death by detailing battles and events that occur leading up to the ultimate surrender of General Lee at Appomattox. Mostly leaving the Civil War battlefields, Killing Lincoln draws in the majority of the conspirators behind the plot to kill, not only Lincoln, but V.P. Andrew Johnson, Secretary of State William Seward, Sec. of War Edwin Stanton and Union General Ulysses S. Grant. O’Reilly provides enough background and information on those he and co-writer Dugard believe to be the main planners in the conspiracy.

    As O’Reilly might call his “Back of the Book Segment”, the back of his book gives readers a glimpse as to what became of many of the key characters in his work. He even goes so far as to reproduce a copy of the April 29, 1865 edition of Harper’s Weekly. O’Reilly’s intent is to help readers get a better understanding of how the country was dealing with the killing of President Lincoln.

    Over the years many theories have existed as to who was really behind the killing of Lincoln. While Killing Lincoln, the book, casually addresses some of those theories, it is my opinion that had the authors spent less time (16 chapters) recounting the Civil War battles leading up to the assassination and more time digging a bit deeper into the most readily recognized and easily proven conspiracy theory, they could have provided readers with more or a real jaw-dropping read.

    The main hypothesis as to who or what was behind the killing of Lincoln points to the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, led by the Jesuits and under the full direction of the Vatican.

    Much discussion can be made as to the Vatican’s involvement or lack thereof in Lincoln’s death but if you consider the testimonies and actions that took place after the assassination, a different light is shed on the conspiracy theory; at least enough to pique the curiosities of some and give pause to others.

    General Thomas M. Harris was a member of the military commission that tried and condemned the conspirators in Lincoln’s death. His accounts of those trials are quite revealing.

    If we follow the trail on one conspirator, John H. Surratt, whose mother ran a boarding house of sorts near Washington, D.C., it was learned that at different times all the conspirators would meet to discuss plans to kill Lincoln. Shortly after Lincoln’s murder, John Surratt was among the missing.

    O’Reilly, a catholic himself, mentions very little of John Surratt. In the Afterword, he tells how Surratt, the son of Mary Surratt who was hanged for her involvement, might have been saved if her son had returned to testify. The book states that John Surratt fled to Montreal and later ended up at the Vatican “where he served in the Papal Zouaves“. However, General Harris describes Surratt’s time at the Vatican as being confined to a room and protected from those searching for him in connection with the death of Lincoln.

    The Pope is forced to arrest Surratt but arranges for his escape. He is eventually captured in Egypt and taken back to America to stand trial. Gen. Harris points out the work of the Jesuits in controlling and manipulating the trial that ends in a hung jury and the release of Surratt.

    Gen Harris’s information is probably some, if not the most, credible of all those claiming theories on Lincoln’s death. His work is well worth the read I think.

    While many books have been written about Lincoln’s murder, Killing Lincoln could have been an even bigger blockbuster if they had taken the time to research into the validity of some of these theories, particularly that of Gen. Harris. Should I create my own conspiracy theory by saying that perhaps O’Reilly purposely avoided this theory because he is Catholic?

    All very interesting.

    I recommend the reading of “Killing Lincoln” and then follow it up with “Rome’s Responsibility for the Assassination of Lincoln” by Gen. Thomas M. Harris and “Fifty Years in the Church of Rome” by Charles Paschal Telesphore Chiniquy.

    An addendum to this story: Charles Chiniquy is key to the story of Lincoln as well as his testimony that members of the Catholic Church were telling people of Lincoln’s death hours before it even happened. Chiniquy, is a friend of President Lincoln and repeatedly warns the president that the Vatican wants him dead and that eventually he will be killed. Of course, even as is revealed in the book, Lincoln not only suspects he will someday be killed but he has recurring dreams about it.

    Tom Remington

    Share