All candidates for office promise to “improve education,” but when they are elected, they
haven’t the faintest idea of how to proceed from there. That’s because the whole idea of
education reform is based more on the deliberate falsehoods produced by the educators
than on the reality of why our schools are the way they are.
I have been writing critically about education for the last forty years. My books include
The New Illiterates, How to Tutor, Alpha-Phonics, NEA: Trojan Horse in American
Education, The Whole Language Fraud, Homeschooling: A Parents Guide to
Teaching Children, The Victims of Dick and Jane, and Revolution via Education.
In those books I showed that every problem we have in public education today has been
deliberately caused by the educators themselves, and that no true education reform is
possible as long as we rely on the educators to create and implement those reforms.
Here are the realities that you as a candidate or concerned citizen should be aware of:
1. The public schools were taken over in the early 20th century by a cabal of progressive
educators whose goal it was to use the schools as a means of turning children into little
socialists who would then bring about a socialist society. The plan for all of this was
outlined by John Dewey in an article entitled “The Primary-Education Fetich”
written in 1898 and published in Forum magazine, May 1898. In it, Dewey
advocated changing the way children were taught to read so that they could be
deliberately dumbed-down. High literacy was considered an obstacle to socialism
because it developed independent, individualistic intelligence not conducive to
collectivist group think.
2. The new “sight” or “look-say” method of teaching reading was put in the schools in
the 1930s, and by 1955 the reading situation had become so bad that Dr. Rudolf Flesch
was compelled to write Why Johnny Can’t Read. In it he explained, “The teaching of
reading–all over the United States, in all the schools, in all the textbooks–is totally
wrong and flies in the face of all logic and common sense.” And believe it or not, the
situation is as bad today as it was in 1955. In fact, in 2007 the National Endowment for
the Arts issued a report on America’s declining literacy, Reading at Risk. Endowment
Chairman Dana Gioia stated: “This is a massive social problem. We are losing the
majority of the new generation. They will not achieve anything close to their
potential because of poor reading.”
3. In order to implement these new socialist programs in the schools, the Progressive
Cabal decided to take over the National Education Association and turn it into a powerful
political instrument in order to pressure the Federal Government to pour billions of
dollars into the public schools. Their success has been achieved. Back in 1967, the
NEA’s executive secretary proclaimed: “NEA will become a political power second to no
other special interest group….NEA will organize this profession from top to bottom into
logical operational units that can move swiftly and effectively and with power unmatched
by any other organized group in the nation.” In short, the NEA is a political
organization attached to the radical left-wing of the Democratic party.
4. The Progressive program has been fully implemented in the public schools, paid for
by the taxpayer who is barely aware of what is going on. Thus American children are at
risk in four ways in the public schools: academically, spiritually, morally, and physically.
Academically because of the reading programs that create dyslexia and reading failure;
spiritually, because of the undermining of the children’s religious beliefs through the
philosophy of secular humanism; morally, because pornographic sex ed, drug ed, and
moral relativism; and physically, because of school shootings and massacres, violence,
and school-bus accidents.
5. So what is a conservative candidate to do or say when it comes to education? He or
she must support the idea of educational freedom, the right of parents to home-school,
and the right of entrepreneurs and religious denominations to create good private schools.
A conservative can support the idea of the charter school, which in reality is a public
school, provided that the charter issuing board will approve of schools with traditional
teaching programs.
As for the public schools, the conservative candidate should advocate the complete
reform of the primary school curriculum so that it includes intensive, systematic phonics,
cursive writing instruction, and basic arithmetic. It is in the primary school where the
greatest damage is done to the children. Therefore a detailed plan to completely revamp
the primary school curriculum should be the basic educational reform offered by a
conservative candidate. Such advocacy would be an excellent way to gain the support of
parents in the community. It would be very difficult for your opponents to argue against
such reforms.
(Editor’s Note: This article was written over 20 years ago but stands the test of time. For more articles like this, and PDF versions of most of Sam’s books, please visit the Sam Blumenfeld Archive: http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/main.htm

The Blumenfeld Archives
Climate historian Tony Heller discusses the heat wave of 1910-1911 which led to icebergs melting and the sinking of the Titanic. Temperatures in Maine got up to 112 degrees and thousands died- facts that the high priests of today’s climate cult refuse to acknowledge.
Mr. Heller’s; website is realclimatescience.com
Tony’s bio from his website:
My name is Tony Heller. I am a whistle blower. I am an independent thinker who is considered a heretic by the orthodoxy on both sides of the climate debate.
I live in Columbia, Maryland – an amazing city where I can ride my bicycle everywhere through the forest, and never need to get in a car.
I am a lifelong environmentalist. I testified at my first Congressional subcommittee hearing at age 15 in Kanab, Utah, in support of a wilderness area – very close to the one which President Obama recently set aside. I worked to get the Clean Air Act passed. I worked as a volunteer wilderness ranger for two summers in the Cibola and Santa Fe National Forests in New Mexico. I worked on the Safety Analysis Report for DOE’s nuclear waste disposal site in New Mexico. I probably have the smallest electricity bill in Columbia, Maryland because I am very careful not to waste. I have never turned on my heat or air conditioning.
I have degrees in Geology and Electrical Engineering and worked on the design team of many of the world’s most complex designs, including some which likely power your PC or Mac. I have worked as a contract software developer on climate and weather models for the US government.
I do not receive any funding other than small donations on my blog, which have worked out well below minimum wage. I have tried to obtain funding, but skeptics with money are terrified of political attacks directed by the White House and/or being targeted by the IRS. They openly state this to me.
It’s the first line of our Constitution. But do we really know what it means?
Dave Zuniga, author of the 2024 book, Now When We Rise, searched for years to discover the
meaning of these 3 words handed down by our founding fathers as they created our U.S.
Constitution. Zuniga states:
“Now I have a definition of We the People; of the collective sovereign as the first chief justice of
the supreme Court, John Jay, called us in his ruling in Chisolm v. Georgia, the first important
ruling of our servant high court. We The People refers only to the subpopulation of Americans
who take responsibility to oversee our servants and to enforce the Constitution against violations
by those servants, at all levels from school boards to DC.”

This supreme Court ruling is packed with some truly revealing facts. First, Americans are a
collective sovereign that requires individuals to work “collectively” to maintain its sovereign
status. And what is the first order of business? Enforcing the supreme law of the land and that
happens to be our U.S. Constitution. Equally important is the fact that every state has a state
Constitution. When an elected official repeats their oath of office, they commit themselves to
upholding, protecting and defending the Constitution (and their state Constitution for state
offices).
Secondly, it emphasizes the term “subpopulation of Americans who take responsibility to
oversee our servants and enforce the Constitutions”. What does this mean? I believe the court is
saying, the subpopulation of “We the People” are the enforcers (the bosses) of elected officials
who are our servants, NOT the current system that federal and state governments operate by
where they do as they please in ignoring the constitutions and nobody holds them accountable
for violating their oaths. That has to change. And no Presidential election will do that. It will
require We The People, as collective sovereigns, to stand up to the cabals of DC right down to
our local towns and enforce constitutional governance.
So, how do we learn how to implement such a plan? Zuniga, along with his brain trust of
repentant men, have created a long term plan, called Tactical Civics. The goal of TACTICAL
CIVICS™ is to restore a repenting remnant of We the People to implement constitution
enforcement utilizing the two law enforcement tools stipulated in the Constitution. One of the
first objectives is to launch and build a TACTICAL CIVICS™ chapter in every county.
Aroostook County has a chapter. Learn more about the mission, goals and objectives and how
you become a chapter member by visiting https://tacticalcivics.com. You can contact us via
email at: tcaroostook@gmail.com
Jay Leno, in his amusing Jay Walking adventures, interviews young Americans whose
appalling ignorance of history, geography, and other areas of basic knowledge, has
become the subject of great hilarity. Many of them couldn’t tell you who was buried in
Grant’s tomb.
But now we learn from across the pond that young Brits have been so dumbed-down that
23 percent of them believe that Winston Churchill was a mythical figure, and 58 percent
believe that Sherlock Holmes was a real person.
According to the Boston Herald (2/6/08), seventy-seven percent of these clucks readily
admit that they don’t read history books, and three out of five never watch historical
programs on television. Of course, the reason why they don’t read history books is
because they are functionally illiterate.
In fact, a new book, The Great Reading Disaster, has just recently been published in
England exposing the fact that young Brits are taught to read with the dyslexia-producing
Whole Language method, which has also become the present ruin of American education.
The authors, Mona McNee and Alice Coleman, write: “Forcing children to read whole
words by the look-say method is like telling young piano learners to play a piece in the
correct tempo, without being taught the individual notes or the significance of their stave
positions….It is cruel to inflict such frustration on children and the cruelty is not
restricted to childhood. It is even more cruel and humiliating when it leaves people
illiterate for life.”
Even Margaret Thatcher couldn’t get the educators to change their ways, though she
appointed a Committee of Inquiry to investigate the teaching of reading in the schools.
Apparently, the Progressives were clever enough to pay lip-service to phonics, ridiculing
their advocates, but meanwhile continuing to support the whole-word method.
We’ve experienced the same situation here in the U.S. where No Child Left Behind was
supposed to change the way reading is taught in American schools. In fact, a special
billion-dollar reading initiative was passed by Congress to get phonics back into the
schools. But the educators charged the government with a bias in reading instruction,
which was discriminatory against Whole Language educators. And from what I have
been told by teachers in the field, Whole Language is still the dominant way reading is
taught in American schools.
The two British authors write: “It took 40 years to produce the first six million adult
illiterates but only another ten to increase the total to nine million. The annual rate has
doubled.”

And the reason why nothing will change despite the alarm sounded by this new book is
because of the tight control that the Progressives have over the entire British education
system. According to the Sunday Telegraph of June 27, 1993, the controlling cabal is
called the All Souls Group, which holds its “clandestine thrice-yearly meetings” in an
oak-paneled room at Oxford University.
No minutes are kept of the meetings and no papers or public statements ever emerge.
The discussions over evening sherry or dinner are protected by Chatham House Rules
which dictate proceedings are off the record. Chatham House is the British equivalent of
our Council on Foreign Relations. Membership is by invitation and the criteria are
shrouded in mystery.
Does such a secret education establishment exist in the United States? It does. It is
called the Cleveland Conference and was organized in 1915 by Prof. Charles Judd, head
of the University of Chicago School of Education, where William Scott Gray concocted
the Dick and Jane look-say, whole word, reading program. In his book, Managers of
Virtue, David Tyack writes:
[Judd] had a vision that both the structure of the schools and the curriculum
needed radical revision but that change would take place “in the haphazard
fashion that has characterized our school history unless some group gets together
and undertakes, in a cooperative way, to coordinate reforms.”
It is easy enough to follow the machinations of the Progressives by simply reading the
annual reports of the National Society for the Study of Education, founded in 1901. This
is the gathering place of the educational elite, and their annual reports can be found in
any university library.
For American parents, the only way to free themselves from the stranglehold of the
Progressive elite is to remove their children from the government schools and either
educate them at home or place them in a private school based on traditional principles
and teaching methods. As for the Brits, we hope that the new book awakens enough of
them to break the hold of the All Souls Group. But don’t hold your breath.
(This article was written in 2008 and can be found in the Sam Blumenfeld Archives along with most of Mr. Blumenfeld’s writings–Ed) A link to the archives http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/main.htm

The Blumenfeld Archives
From Matt Staver at Liberty Counsel:
Sandra Merritt’s undercover journalism revealed horrors like that of Nazi Dr. Mengele’s gruesome experiments. Sandra’s videos revealed that Planned Parenthood was selling butchered baby parts, so that the children’s skin and organs could be used to treat “baldness,” among other things.
Instead of investigating the people participating in this gruesome human organ trafficking scheme, then-CA Attorney General Kamala Harris launched a criminal investigation into Sandra.
Now Sandra faces up to 10 years in prison and hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments, thanks to Kamala Harris’ attempt to hide the abortion industry’s crimes. Sandra’s case is the longest and most expensive case in Liberty Counsel history.

Lest you think this butchery is somehow justifiable because it “saves lives,” consider this — some of the baby body parts Sandra documented were being used to treat “baldness.”
Advanced Bioscience Resources was named in the investigation as a buyer in Planned Parenthood’s unlawful baby parts sales scheme. In sworn testimony before the court, witness Albin Rhomberg revealed the gruesome truth — the babies weren’t being butchered to save lives, but to treat baldness.
They were scalping the babies and taking their scalps and grafting them on to immune-suppressed mice, and then using various pharmaceuticals on these humanized mice to test the effect upon preventing or, I suppose you might say, treating baldness.
Not too dissimilar to the H.G. Wells horror story and ensuing Marlon Brando film, The Island of Dr. Moreau, these laboratory researchers are creating human-animal hybrids, not to save humanity, but for the vanity of a full and luxurious head of hair.
A recent University of Pittsburgh taxpayer-funded study, titled “Development of humanized mouse and rat models with full-thickness human skin and autologous immune cells,” explains just how “humanized mice” are created.
According to the Pitt study, babies were scalped and flayed like butchered animals. The entire “full thickness of human skin” from 18-20 week gestation babies’ heads and backs was sliced from their bodies. To put the baby’s age into perspective, 18-20 weeks gestation is 4.5-5 months gestation — right about the time most expectant mothers start having baby showers. Instead, these children were being prepared for slaughter, their skin sewn onto the back of a living rodent to create “humanized rat models.”
Babies were also carefully butchered for their livers, thymuses, spleens, and other organs, which also were grafted on to the mice and rats to further “humanize” them.
Skin from dead babies is also being used to treat scarring on adult skin.
Baldness, it turns out, isn’t the only vanity these gruesome researchers are working on. Several studies published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) show that the skin sliced from aborted babies is also being grafted on to rats to prevent visible scarring.
In a study titled “The fetal fibroblast: the effector cell of scarless fetal skin repair,” researchers noted with glee that aborted baby skin can prevent scarring when sewn above and below the outer layers of rats, and therefore is a candidate for treating or preventing injury and surgery scars on adults.
What will history say about a nation whose citizens paid for children to be murdered, and for those dead children’s bodies to be used to help those citizens look younger, prettier, and have full heads of hair and be visibly unscarred by life?
What will history say if we allow the woman who exposed that evil to spend 10 years in prison for revealing the truth?
We need your financial help to save Sandra from prison. Some of the most powerful people in the world are trying to punish Sandra Merritt for exposing the abortion industry’s demonic underbelly. In punishing Sandra, they hope to not only continue their baby killing, and their Nazi-like experimentation, but also to silence any and all who might dare expose baby butchery ever again.
We cannot allow that to happen. Praise God, a special Challenge Grant has been established that will DOUBLE the impact of every donation. But the Challenge Grant won’t chip in unless you do. Please, help us defend Sandra and the unborn with your generous gift today.
Finally, please pray that our country abandons its wicked ways.
“If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land” (2 Chron. 7:14).
Mat Staver
Founder and Chairman
Liberty Counsel
TAKE ACTION
Make a recurring monthly gift and let the Challenge Grant DOUBLE THE IMPACT OF YOUR REGULAR GIFT!
Demand Congress PROTECT OUR CHILDREN. Tell them to VOTE No on the extreme LGBTQ and abortion bill — HR 15. And don’t forget to sign the petition.
Sources:
Lane AT, Scott GA, Day KH. Development of human fetal skin transplanted to the nude mouse. J Invest Dermatol. 1989 Dec;93(6):787-91. doi: 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12284423. PMID: 2584745.
Lorenz HP, Lin RY, Longaker MT, Whitby DJ, Adzick NS. The fetal fibroblast: the effector cell of scarless fetal skin repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995 Nov;96(6):1251-9; discussion 1260-1. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199511000-00002. PMID: 7480221.
Osburn, Madeline. “University of Pittsburgh Uses Taxpayer-Funded Aborted Babies for Medical Research.” The Federalist, May 7, 2021. Thefederalist.com/2021/05/07/university-of-pittsburgh-uses-taxpayer-funded-aborted-babies-for-medical-research/.
Back in 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a 1981 Louisiana law which
mandated a balanced treatment in teaching evolution and creation in the public schools.
The Court decided that the intent of the law “was clearly to advance the religious
viewpoint that a supernatural being created humankind,” and therefore violated the First
Amendment’s prohibition on a government establishment of religion. In other words, the
Court adopted the atheist position that creation is a religious myth.
In speaking for the majority, Justice William J. Brennan wrote: “The legislative history
documents that the act’s primary purpose was to change the science curriculum of public
schools in order to provide an advantage to a particular religious doctrine that rejects the
factual basis of evolution in its entirety.”
The learned Justice seemed unaware that some of the world’s greatest scientists were and
are devout Christians and, that dogmatic atheism, not religion, is destroying true science.
Also, though his job requires him to uphold the Constitution, Justice Brennan willfully
ignored the historical fact that, to the Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution, an
“establishment of religion” meant a state church, such as they have in England with the
Anglican Church, which is the official church of England.
Belief in God is not the same thing as establishing an official government-sponsored
religious denomination. Belief in a supernatural being who created mankind is not an
establishment of religion.
What exactly is the Theory of Evolution? For the answer, we must go to the source:
Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the
Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, published in 1859. In his book,
whose racist subtitle has been suppressed in modern editions for obvious reasons, Darwin
claimed that the thousands of different species of animals, insects, and plants that exist on
earth were not the works of a Divine Creator who made each of the “kinds” in its present
immutable form, as described in Genesis (e.g., frogs produce frogs, not princes), but are
the products of a very long natural process of development from simpler organic forms to
more complex organisms.
Thus, according to Darwin, species continue to change or “evolve,” through a process of
natural selection in which nature’s harsh conditions permit only the fittest to survive in
more adaptable forms. However, while controlled breeding can produce varieties inside
the dog species, from Chihuahuas to Great Danes, dogs are still dogs. “Survival of the
fittest” is incapable of turning one species into another. Whatever external conditions we
may provide for a dog, these will not change its basic dog DNA.
Darwin also believed that all life originated from a single source – a kind of primeval
slime in which the first living organisms formed spontaneously out of non-living matter
through a random process – by accident.
The first false idea in Darwin’s hypothesis is that non-organic matter can transform itself
into organic matter. Although this belief in “spontaneous generation” was common at the
time, Pasteur and others have conclusively disproved it. Life does not arise from non-life
at the macro level, and at the micro level all the laboratory experiments that claim to
produce “building blocks” of life have failed to do so, in spite of all the hype to the
contrary. See the book Icons of Evolution by Dr. Jonathan Wells for some eye-opening
debunking of this and other myths still taught in your local school’s textbooks.
Justice Brennan called evolution “factual,” which simply indicates the depth of his
ignorance. There is no factual basis to evolution. The fossil record shows no intermediary
forms of species development. We’ve never seen it happen, either. No scientist has been
able to mate a cat with a donkey and get something in between. And modern genetics has
shown us that we need complex “programs” to grow from a single cell into a human
being. But mutations, which destroy information, can’t add more complexity to
succeeding generations. So neither Darwin’s simplistic belief in the inheritance of
acquired characteristics nor our newer knowledge of genetics provides any way
species-to-species evolution could ever happen.
The enormous complexity of organic matter precludes accidental creation. There had to
be a designer.
There is now a whole scientific school devoted to the design theory. William A.
Dembski’s book, Intelligent Design, published in 1999, is the pioneering work that
bridges science with theology. Dembski writes:
“Intelligent design is three things: a scientific research program that investigates the
effects of intelligent causes; an intellectual movement that challenges Darwinism and its
naturalistic legacy; and a way of understanding divine action. It was Darwin’s expulsion
of design from biology that made possible the triumph of naturalism in Western culture.
So, too, it will be intelligent design’s restatement of design within biology that will be the
undoing of naturalism in Western culture.”

Dembski proves that design is “empirically detectable,” because we can observe it all
around us. The birth of a child is a miracle of design. The habits of your household cat
are a miracle of design. All cats do the same things. These are the inherited
characteristics of the species. The idea that accident could create such complex behavior
passed on to successive generations simply doesn’t make sense. The complexity of design
proves the existence of God. Dembski writes:
“Indeed within theism divine action is the most basic mode of causation since any other
mode of causation involves creatures which themselves were created in a divine act.
Intelligent design thus becomes a unifying framework for understanding both divine and
human agency and illuminates several long-standing philosophical problems about the
nature of reality and our knowledge of it.”
So why are the courts and the schools so fanatically opposed to even allowing children to
know there are arguments against evolution? Because evolution provides the perfect
“scientific” excuse for keeping the God of the Bible out of public education. It’s not the
idea of design per se that worries them; it’s Who the Designer is. That’s why the media
are showing increasing support for the “life came from outer space” theory and even the
“life came from intelligent aliens who seeded our planet” theory. Evolution is tottering,
and the search is on for any Designer except the real one.
So, while what the Intelligent Design movement has to say can be helpful, let’s just
remember that the real issue is not whether there was a Designer or just a bunch of
Random Accidents, but whether the God of the Bible created the universe just like it says
in Genesis or not.
The Transfer Agreement
A story that largely has gone untold, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Zionist Rescue of Jews from the Third Reich to Jewish Palestine recounts the controversial Haavara Agreement between the Zionist movement (as a rescue operation) and the Nazi regime for expediency to achieve an objective.
Some stories largely hidden in the dark recesses of history fairly cry out to be told, and this overview is about one: the dramatic Zionist rescue of Jews from the Third Reich to Jewish Palestine starting in in 1933. The Third Reich, as a result, transferred some 60,000 Jews and $100 million (almost $1.7 billion in 2009 dollars or $2.3 billion in 2022) to Jewish Palestine. In return, Zionists agreed to halt a Jewish-led worldwide anti-Nazi boycott that had threatened Hitler’s regime in its first year.
Ultimately, the transfer (Haavara) agreement saved lives, rescued assets, and seeded the infrastructure of the Jewish state. This book chronicles the anguish underlying that agreement and documents one question: When will the Jewish people not be compelled to make such heart-rending choices?
Indeed, when will all people similarly confronted be freed from the desperation of such choices?
Was the Haavara Agreement madness…or genius? Clues lie within the folds of myriad details.
Jews were first to recognize the threat posed by Hitler and first to react. The Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, and the Supreme Muslim Council all endorsed the Hitler regime. The United States, England, France, Italy, Russia, Argentina, Japan, Ireland, Poland, and dozens of other nations signed friendship and trade treaties, knowingly contributing to Germany’s economic and military recovery.
Hitler was unique: especially, he was organized. Among Hitler’s enemies, none were so well organized as the Zionists. While world leaders increasingly recognized the Hitler threat, they hoped it would not arrive. Zionists recognized Hitler’s threat—and had always expected it to come in some form. Those factors ultimately determined events of the era and the transfer agreement.
The Nazis had promised that upon assuming power, they would rebuild Germany’s economy, dismantle its democracy, destroy German Jewry, and establish Aryans as a master class—in that order.
With Hitler’s installation, Nazi atrocities intensified. Midnight home invasions by Brownshirts forced Jewish landlords and employees to sign papers at gunpoint favoring tenants or employees in disputes. Leading Jewish physicians were kidnapped from their hospitals to the outskirts of town and threatened with death if they did not resign and leave Germany. Dignified Jewish businesspeople were driven from their favorite cafes, savagely beaten, and sometimes forced to wash streets.
As these atrocities intensified, the American Jewish Congress released a statement: “The time for caution and prudence is past; we must speak up like men; how can we ask our Christian friends to lift their voices in protest against the wrong suffered by Jews if we keep silent?”
At the time, opinions were conflicted about anti-Nazi boycott movements—working to Hitler’s advantage because the Jewish-led worldwide anti-Nazi boycott was one weapon Hitler feared.
Many Jewish organizations believed in the power of Jewish boycotts: a weapon that Jews were ready and willing to use in emergencies to dissuade anti-Semitic forces.
Every implementation of a worldwide boycott set in motion atrocities in Germany against German Jews, however. German medical and judicial societies immediately expelled their Jewish members. In German cities, local SS contingents surrounded Jewish stores, smashed windows, and lobbed stench bombs. Frequently, police demanded that stores owned by Jews close.
The Jewish community in Germany reacted with terror. Prior outbursts had been sporadic, unorganized acts of intimidation and violence against individual families and businesses. The boycott against Jews of the 1930s, however, would become a systematic economic pogrom that would plague every German Jewish business and household. No one would be spared. What professional could survive if he could not practice? What store could survive if it could not sell?
So it was that as the worldwide Jewish boycott was organized against German goods, the German government instituted a boycott against German Jews. This anti-Jewish boycott, violent or disciplined, would be disastrous for Germany’s fragile economy at the time, and virtually everyone in Germany with realistic business sense knew it.
The anti-Jewish boycott in Germany created economic vacancies that eventually would be filled by unqualified rank-and-file Nazis. In Berlin alone, about 75% of the attorneys and nearly as many of the doctors had been Jewish before the Zionists’ boycott.
The Nazis essentially launched war against Jews, mobilizing all Germany. The Jews would launch their own war against the Nazis, mobilizing all the world. Anti-Hitler/Nazi boycotts, protest marches, and meetings were now in store. Germany was to be isolated politically, economically, and even culturally until she cast off the Nazi leadership, to be taught another bitter lesson.
The Zionist Solution
In the eyes of Zionists, the outrages of Hitler were nothing unexpected. Zionist ideology predicted periodic Jewish oppression in even the most enlightened lands of the Diaspora. Anti-Semitism had been part of Jewish life in Europe since the Jews’ emancipation in the mid-19th century, when Jews were permitted to emerge from the ghettos and participate in society with other Europeans—but on a less equal footing.
Zionists therefore saw Hitler’s rise as simply the latest anti-Semitic episode. German Jews were not impoverished peasants or lower-class merchants who owned few valuables. German Jews were solidly middle class, owning lands, homes, furnishings, and stock shares. They were lawyers, doctors, engineers, scientists, artists, and civil servants. They owned department store chains and commercial banks.
These men and women who’d had no place in the German Reich would find an indispensable place in the new Jewish nation. Behold: Israel was waiting within the borders of the Third Reich.
Here was a turning point for Zionism. The Movement’s task was to maneuver to the forefront of the international Jewish response and interpose Zionism and Palestine as the central solution to “the German Jewish problem.”
One of the primary founders of Israel, Theodor Herzl, detailed a blueprint for building the Jewish state that would organize the withdrawal of all Jews from Europe—a feat that carried an obvious appeal, even an unintended justification, for anti-Semites. That political arrangement was promised in 1917, when England issued its Balfour Declaration, committing Turkish Palestine to a Jewish homeland, should the Allies win World War I.
Nazi leadership, of course, relished the prospect of Jews’ expulsion, though the concurrence was clearly perverse: the Nazis sought Jewish cultural destruction and the Zionists a Jewish renaissance.
In response to Hitler’s anti-Jewish policies, Zionists organized a worldwide anti-Nazi boycott at the beginning of Hitler’s reign. Many Jewish organizations believed that was the only effective restraint against Nazi policies.
German leaders realized this anti-Hitler/Nazi boycott threatened to kill the Third Reich in its infancy, either through utter bankruptcy or by promoting an imminent invasion of Germany by its neighbors. Nazis realized that if they were to survive, the boycott would have to be ended.
Every revelation of an atrocity against German Jews, however, propelled the need for the Zionists’ countering boycott.
In a feat of truly divergent thinking, Hitler then proposed linking the purchase of German goods to the settling of German Jews in Palestine: by cultivating orchards in Palestine and using the Jewish national homeland as capital, the anti-Nazi boycott could be broken. The Zionist movement would not only be obliged to refrain from—and oppose—any boycott on German goods; it also would be obliged to sponsor German exports aggressively.
Moreover, the systemic aggress against German Jews would create vast pools of blocked German marks that Germany could use to pay debts. Every German pipe sold, chemical purchased, and pound of foreign currency earned contributed toward another dunam (measure of land area used in Israel and other parts of the former Turkish empire) and another citizen for Eretz Yisrael, the Holy Land, the territory of which include biblical Israel. At the same time, every economic or diplomatic knife slashed at Hitler merely lacerated hopes for a Zionist solution. The plan carried abundant political and financial incentives for the Third Reich.
Jews around the world were now having to choose between fighting Hitler or building Palestine: preserving the old or securing the new. The transfer agreement is the point at which Zionist and Nazi philosophical spheres first touched. German Jews could settle in Palestine if they brought German-manufactured goods with them, thereby breaking the economic boycott against Germany.
As German Zionists had conceived the idea, this massive influx of liquidated Jewish capital would not only bring the first wave of Jewish citizens’ money to Palestine; it would also deliver the investment capital needed to establish the Jewish state.
To Nazis, the territory of Palestine was a convenient dumping ground—in a sense, a remote, self-run concentration camp. To Zionists, this territory was the Promised Land, destined to be a Jewish state.
Palestine was now the crucial gateway to expanding German exports throughout the emerging Middle East market, including Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and North Africa. The Reich deemed this market essential if certain strategic raw materials Hitler craved for war were to be acquired via bilateral trade agreements.
Agreeing to the transfer, the German government felt sure, would trigger the breakup of the anti-Nazi boycott—because the Zionist movement would now essentially be in the German export business.
German Jewish wealth and immigrants would be transferred in a flow wholly dependent on the purchase of German merchandise and commodities.
Through liquidation of their assets, Jews would achieve independence for the first time in 2,000 years.
Those who rejected the anti-Nazi boycott in favor of the Zionist solution questioned whether Jews could ever win such a war…and if they did, would the battles only continue from generation to generation?
After praying for supporters and allies of the Jews for decades, Zionists finally realized that the opportunity to transfer would come not from friends but from foes, as Herzl had predicted.
After forty years of struggle to create a Jewish state, a sudden, spectacular turning point was reached.
For 40 years, there had never been enough money, land, or men; so long as those essentials were lacking, the Jewish state would never be.
But in an office on August 7th, 1933, all this changed. A few men working with telegrams, letters of introduction, images, and the power of prejudice and pretense, glimpsing an opportunity for salvation in the abyss of Nazi injustice, managed to help arrange that miracle.
Henceforth, when Jews were threatened, as they often had been and likely always would be, they would have a nation of their own to come home to: to enter not as a refugee or stranger, but as a full citizen.
The price of this new nation would be the abandonment of the boycott war against Nazi Germany. Whole branches of Judaism would wither, but the trunk would survive.
18th Zionist Congress opens in Prague
In August 1933, a week-long 18th Zionist Congress began, with each Jewish group bringing its own notion of whether such an agreement might represent a betrayal of the Jewish people or a daring move to save German Jews and create a national wellspring for Eretz Yisrael.
We now can see that God used the Zionist Movement in 1933 to bring about the transfer agreement—at the very end of the conference: delegates had spent the whole week disputing the agreement, discounting it, and then—only at the last minute—approving it.
Many future leaders of the new nation of Israel attended the congress in Prague. Clearly God was at work, preparing the Jewish people’s future well before 1948.
On September 3rd, 1933, at 4:30 pm, the final session of the 18th Zionist Congress began for 300 delegates from around the world, plus alternates. Each had one vote.
Those who understood the power of the transfer agreement knew in their hearts that the Jewish state would rise from the anguish and ashes of German Jewry. Indeed, German Jewry would be only the first wave of immigrants.
While it’s always the last key on the ring that opens the door, the passage of the transfer agreement was truly a miracle, confirming that God uses people, situations, and circumstances to bring about His greater purposes. What the devil had meant for evil, God utilized for good to save many of His people.
Most everyone at the 18th Congress had seemed to be against the agreement…until everyone was for it. God, the master chess player always strategizing seven steps ahead, changed men’s hearts to bring about His will and purpose: deliverance for His people 15 years before the nation Israel was founded.
Some compared the Zionists’ confrontations with Hitler to the biblical confrontations in which Moses engaged with the Egyptian Pharaoh, when the question was about freeing stubborn, reluctant people from their captivity—and from their cattle, goats, and possessions. Was Moses to refrain from negotiating with Pharaoh? If he had, the Jews never would have made the exodus to Israel with the possessions they needed to establish themselves.
Hitler was a new pharaoh, the Transfer people argued, and German Jews were descendants of the enslaved people who had been so reluctant to depart from Egypt. As in Pharaoh’s day, without negotiation, there would be no freedom—no Israel.
God, hard at work on a reconstruction project amid all the chaos, was accomplishing an excellent thing.
4 Biblical themes in this story
For years, Nazi leaders had cooperated with Zionists—not out of sympathy with Jewish nationalism, but simply to effect the removal of Jews from Germany and break the anti-Hitler/Nazi boycott.
Jewish Palestine’s rapidly expanding economy brought worker and commercial opportunities. More doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, hoteliers, restauranteurs, and entrepreneurs were needed. Several thousand German Jews who came to Israel on limited capitalist certificates filled many niches.
Fifteen years earlier, the nation of Israel hadn’t existed. Few could visualize what was to come into being, but one small group of men foresaw it all. Nothing would stop them—no force was too great to overcome. These men were instrumental in the creation of Israel, each leaving a fingerprint on the most controversial undertaking in Jewish history: the Transfer Agreement that paved the way for the state of Israel.
Was it madness…or genius?
Black, Edwin (2022). The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Zionist Rescue of Jews from the Third Reich to Jewish Palestine. Washington: Dialog Press.
The dramatic Zionist rescue of Jews from the Third Reich to Jewish Palestine. Washington: Dialog Press.
Camp Constitution’s 16th annual family camp ended last Friday. For the fifth year in a row and we hope for the foreseeable future, the camp took place at the Singing Hills Christian Camp in Plainfield, NH. “This may have been our largest turnout in our camp’s history with attendees coming as far as Frankfurt, Germany, Cape Town, South Africa, Florida and Texas” said camp director and co-founder Hal Shurtleff
Returning instructors included Professor Willie Soon, one of the world’s top atmospheric scientists, who attended with his family, Pastor David Whitney of the Institute on the Constitution, Rev. Steve Craft who serves at the camp chaplain, Mrs. Catherine White of the Constitution Decoded, and author and host of the Liberty Sentinel program, Alex Newman. Alex had to leave Tuesday due to the fact that his wife is expecting but he gave three classes on Monday and even did an episode of his show which runs on a number of platforms including Frank Speech https://frankspeech.com/shows/sentinel-report-tv-show-alex-newman



Our guest instructors were Mrs. Julie Wilkerson who played the abortion nurse in the movie UnPlanned: The Abby Johnson Story and author Dr. Felecia Nace. Dr Nace attended out 2020 camp and was the guest speaker at this year’s Ladies “Spring Fling”. For the tenth year, Mr. Mert Melfa served as our videographer and uploaded videos of our classes and activities. A link to our 2024 Family Camp YouTube playlist: https://studio.youtube.com/playlist/PL7jnzBzBiNYBuAEivmEE9B-L1wy4ZKTEc/videos
We start our day with an optional run and/or swim at 6:30. Wake up is 7:00 and morning devotions and flag-raising at 7:50. As he has for the past few years, veteran camper Franklin Soon plays “Reveille” on the trumpet followed by the firing of our cannon: https://youtu.be/vlj4Kz-TV3w?si=KqfpCG8-wvJYbGOz
After a hearty breakfast, the camp conducts three 45-miniute classes

During the first class, Head Counselor Chris Kalis conducts room inspection where we look for cleanliness, as well as a Patriotic and Christian theme. Chris will give the room points towards the room inspection contest where the occupants of the winning room get treated to free pizza on Thursday after campfire. The Girls of Room 11 in Mountain View were the winners. The daily inspection results are posted in the camp’s daily newspaper, “Camp Constitution Journal” distributed in the evening. The paper, edited Mark Affleck, also has articles written by campers about the daily activities and classes. A link to PDF versions of the paper: https://s3.amazonaws.com/camppictures/CampArchive/index.html




Monday afternoon, we offered an optional martial arts training class taught by Mr. George Dewhurst of Alton, NH.

Over the years, we have been blessed with talented campers and staff and this year was no exception. From Mrs. Paulie Heath, our campfire director who is a Christian recording artist to the Soons-Emily, Ben, and Franklin to Josh Viliniskis, to Mrs. Catherine White to new campers Elayna, Alise and Christie Uhl from Wisconsin to Jonathan Cohler, a world-renowned clarinetist, our ears were treated to some incredible music. These talents are showcased at our evening campfires, where in addition to music and singing, attendees tell “Dad” jokes, skits, and recite poetry. Campfire ends with a devotion and the playing of “Taps.”


Our junior campers -ages 5-12- also attend classes taught by Mrs. Edith Craft, Mrs. Kathy Mickel who also serves as our nurse, Mrs. Jessica Whitworth, and Mrs. Roberta Stewart. On Thursday, the Junior Campers have a parade through camp:

For the second year, Mr. Keith Hanson and his team at Critical Dynamics taught the optional firearms training on Tuesday afternoon. We had a number of first-time marksmen on hand.

Mr. Chris Kalis who drives all the way from Michigan, also serves as recreational director. He runs the afternoon program which includes volleyball, basketball, “steal the bacon” a chess tournament, and our annual wiffleball game between “The Shurtleff All Stars” and “The Kalis Barnstormers.”



Wednesday afternoon, we had an optional field trip to the Precision Museum in nearby Windsor, Vermont where we learned about our nation’s role in the Industrial Revolution.

On Thursday afternoon, Junior campers were entertained by Alan “Spunky” Bellanger:

The camp has both a pond and a pool which are popular with the campers:

On Thursday evening, the camp held its closing ceremony where the Super Camper and Super Staffer awards along with and our new “Willie Soon” Award for Instructional Excellence. are presented. Mrs. Jessica Whitworth was awarded the Super Staffer award, Professor Willie Soon was awarded the first “Wille Soon Award.” Campers Ben Soon and Elisabeth Krutov were the Super Campers, and Jonathan Larson and first-time camper Alise Uhl were the runner ups. Super Campers win a free tuition for next year’s camp. Junior camper program director Mrs. Edith Craft presented certificates of completion to our junior camper camp program


(Ben Soon, Jonathan Larson, Elisabeth Krutov and Alise Uhl)
Here is a link to pictures and videos of activities of our camp:
Thanks to all of you who through your prayers, financial support, promotion, and participation have made this camp and Camp Constitution possible, and a special thanks to Mr. Phil Lee and his staff at Singing Hills.

Next year’s camp will run from Sunday July 13 to Friday July 18 and returns to Singing Hills Christian Camp in Plainfield, NH.
Couldn’t make it to our annual family camp, consider attending our 3rd annual weekend family retreat which runs from Friday September 27 to Sunday September 29, and held at Camp Sentinel in Tuftonboro, NH. A link to the application: https://campconstitution.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Family-Weekend-Release-form-2024.pdf

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should a child be forced to attend a public school that will turn him into a functional illiterate? Since no public school will guarantee that a child will be taught to read in a manner that will help him achieve high literacy, why should a parent send a child to that kind of school? Indeed, why should compulsory school attendance laws force parents to do something that wil1 harm their children? It is assumed by the vast majority of Americans that the issue of compulsory school attendance is a settled matter, part and parcel of every civilized nation-state, and a prerequisite of a democratic society. We all acknowledge that a representative form of government requires an educated electorate for its survival. But what happens when that government’s schools no longer know how to teach children to read and write, when those schools turn children not into civilized citizens, but into barbarians?
What happens when millions of parents feel compelled to remove their children from government schools in order to make sure that their children do get an education? What happens is that the basic premises of compulsory attendance and government education come into question. The glaring fact is that despite our compulsory attendance laws, we now have more illiteracy and more ignorance among Americans than before such laws were enacted. The first compulsory school attendance law was passed in Massachusetts in 1852 and by 1918 every state in the Union had such a law. Yet, the fact is that these laws have merely increased the amount of time children spend in school, not the amount of learning or knowledge they acquire. The Way It Was To find out how much better educated Americans were before compulsory attendance laws and government schools existed, all we have to do is read DuPont de Nemours’ fascinating little book, National Education in the United States of America, published in 1812. He writes: “The United States are more advanced in their educational facilities than most countries. They have a large number of primary schools; and as their paternal affection protects children from working in the fields, it is possible to send them to the school-master–a condition which does not prevail in Europe. “Most young Americans, therefore, can read, write and cipher. Not more than four in a thousand are unable to write legibly–even neatly. “England, Holland, the Protestant Cantons of Switzerland more nearly approach the standard of the United States, because in those countries the Bible is read; it is considered a duty to read it to children; and in that form of religion the sermons and liturgy in the language of the people tend to increase and formulate ideas of responsibility. Controversy also has developed argumentation and has thus given room for the exercise of logic. “In America, a great number of people read the Bible, and all the people read a newspaper. The fathers read aloud to their children while breakfast is being prepared–a task which occupies the mothers for three quarters of an hour every morning. And as the newspapers of the United States are filled with all sorts of narratives… they disseminate an enormous amount of information.”
Obviously, back in the very early days of this republic, education was a family affair closely connected to religious practice. A nation built on Biblical principles had to be a highly literate one. In addition, all of this education was achieved without any government involvement, without any centralized educational bureaucracy, without any professors of education, or accrediting agencies or teacher certification. And, most significantly, without any compulsory attendance laws. The Way It Is Contrast that happy picture of complete educational freedom and high literacy with the present situation in which the State has asswned the function of educator, at great expense to the taxpayer, with all sorts of laws and regulations forcing the population to patronize a system that is turning out functional illiterates by the millions.
According to an article in the Spring 1989 issue of Education Canada, published by the Canadian Education Association: “It is currently estimated that one million Canadians are almost totally illiterate and another four million are termed ‘functionally illiterate.’ In the United States these figures are estimated respectively at 26 million and 60 million.” Both Canada and the United States have had compulsory attendance laws for decades. The purpose of these laws was to make certain that every child was educated. The laws were particularly aimed at the children of the poor, and yet it is they who have suffered the most at the hands of government education. Even Secretary of Education Cavazos, in 1989, admitted in the frankest terms that the government education system was failing the American people. In his sixth annual report card on American schools, he repeated the well-known litany of failures that still plague American education: declining SAT scores, declining interest in math and science, declining literacy, and a soaring dropout rate in Washington, DC.
He said that we were still wallowing in a ‘tide of mediocrity,” and that “we must do better or perish as the nation we know today.” Has anything changed since 1989? Yes, it has all gotten worse. In fact, it was an alarming report on American literacy issued in 2007 by the National Endowment for the Arts that informed Americans that the reading problem had deteriorated further since Secretary Cavazos issued his own alarming assessment. The chairman of the Endowment, Dana Gioia, stated: ‘This is a massive social problem. We are losing the majority of the new generation. They will not achieve anything close to their potential because of poor reading.” The Endowment report revealed that the number of 17-year-olds who never read for pleasure increased from 9 percent in 1984 to 19 percent in 2004. Almost half of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 never read books for pleasure. Why? Because reading has become a painful, tortuous exercise that they wish to avoid.
The simple truth is that literacy is not at all difficult to achieve, provided the schools use the right phonetic teaching methods. Indeed, the home-school movement has already proven that parents can actually do a better job of teaching reading than our high-priced professionals. It has also been shown that children progress better academically when taught at home, and that the cost of educating a child at home is less than $1,000 a year. So why do we need compulsory attendance laws? We need them so that the ruling liberal elite can dumb down the population and make sure they can’t read.
For proof of this, listen to the words of Professor Anthony G. Oettinger of Harvard University, given in a lecture to an audience of Telecom executives in 1982: “The present ‘traditional’ concept of literacy has to do with the ability to read and write. But the real question that confronts us today is: How do we help citizens function well in their society? How can they acquire the skills necessary to solve their problems? “Do we, for example, really want to teach people to do a lot of sums or write in ‘a fine round hand’ when they have a five-dollar hand-held calculator or a word processor to work with? Or, do we really have to have everybody literate–writing and reading in the traditional sense–when we have the means through our technology to achieve a new flowering of oral communication? “What is speech recognition and speech synthesis all about if it does not lead to ways of reducing the burden on the individual of the imposed notions of literacy that were a product of nineteenth century economics and technology? . “It is the traditional idea that says certain forms of communication, such as comic books are ‘bad.’ But in the modem context of functionalism, they may not be all that bad.”

I doubt that there are any parents in America who send their children to school to learn to read comic books. If anything, they want their children to be taught to read and write in the traditional manner. They don’t consider learning to read as a “burden imposed on the individual.” Rather, if taught in the proper phonetic manner, learning to read becomes a joyful experience for children eager to expand the use of their minds and language.
Although the compulsory attendance laws were enacted to make sure that everyone learned to read, their new application by the likes of Professor Oettinger and his liberal colleagues is to make sure that the population can be controlled and manipulated by schools that serve the agenda of the ruling elite. There is no longer any need for compulsory attendance laws since the ruling class no longer believes that literacy is for everyone, the poor and the rich. In reality, the compulsory attendance laws are the linchpin in the plan for a socialist world government. Such laws have been used by every modern dictator to control the people and mold the minds of the children. Such laws are not only not needed in a free society, but ultimately lead to its demise.

The Blumenfeld Archives