campconstitution

The Terraforming of America by Scott Faulkner

Published February 21, 2022 | By campconstitution

The Left is moving rapidly to change America forever.

Except for isolated pockets of resistance, such as during Virginia’s 2021 elections and 2022 executive and legislative actions, decades of the Left’s preparations are paying off for reshaping America into a unitary totalitarian state.

Starting with the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, the Left has acted like Chess Grandmasters.  They devised a detailed strategy, thinking and implementing many moves ahead of their opposition.

The Left’s actions, many decades in the making, is nothing less than “Terraforming” America into their Communist vision.  They are deliberately, and systematically, changing our nation’s entire landscape, modifying America’s institutions, civic culture and society to make them more habitable for their uch-heralded “Great Reset.” [John Holdren in his own (radical) words – CFACT]

The “Great Reset” is the global devolution or destruction of capitalism, democracy, entire energy and economic systems, and personal freedoms, in the name of preventing climate change. It is about eradicating “white privilege,” and the institutions and cultures of “white exploitation,” to remake society based on “equity, diversity and inclusion.” [The Great Reset | Reset and shape the future]


(Stuart Chase)

It all began with Stuart Chase, one of the founding members of President Franklin Roosevelt’s (FDR) “Brain Trust.” Chase coined the term “The New Deal” and promoted eliminating America’s free enterprise system, “by firing squad if necessary.” [The Rise of the Administrative State – The New American]

Chase gained inspiration and insights into how to implement a Communist state during his 1927 meetings with Stalin and Trotsky. In his 1932 “New Deal” book, Chase mused, “Why should the Russians have all the fun of remaking the world?”

FDR’s Brain Trust thought well beyond building the massive New Deal bureaucracy. Rexford Tugwell, another “Brain Truster,” drafted a “Constitution for the New States of America.” His goal was nothing less than remaking America as the next Soviet Union.  [Constitutional Convention | Proposed Constitution for the Newstates of America (sweetliberty.org)]

 

Tugwell’s Constitution abolished all aspects of federalism. It eliminated states, turning them into uniform administration districts with equal population. It abolished the “Bill of Rights,” creating a laundry list of “Rights and Responsibilities” for citizens to act on behalf of the state. Any individual actions could be erased based upon “declared emergencies” (think Trudeau’s Canada in recent weeks) and for “conforming to such standards as may improve health and welfare.” Tugwell knew Sovietizing America would  “require the laying of rough, unholy hands on many a sacred precedent.” [The Rise of the Administrative State – The New American]

The Left’s “Terraforming” of America is guided by the Chase/Tugwell vision. Capturing the cultural levers and the media were achieved by the 1960s. Dumbing down the youth, and ultimately indoctrinating them in Leftist thought, began with Howard Zinn’s 1980 revisionist history, “A People’s History of the United States,” which became the standard high school textbook for a generation. [A People’s History of the United States: 1492 – Present – Zinn Education Project (zinnedproject.org)]

A parallel project was shrinking civics education to the point where only 23% of eighth-graders perform at or above the proficient level on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) civics exam, and only 26% of Americans can name all three branches of government. [020618_CivicsEducation-UPDATED.pdf (AmericanProgress.org)]

An intensified phase of Terraforming began after a 2011 Harvard Study claimed that participating in historical/patriotic celebrations promoted conservative voting patterns. [Harvard: July 4th Parades Are Right-Wing | Politics | US News]

The Left realized that America’s history must be entirely reshaped to achieve the “Great Reset.”

The Left had to prevent Americans from separately honoring the morality, integrity and greatness of Washington and Lincoln. They did so by lumping all 46 Presidents’ birthdays together in 1971. Since then, all other presidents (including mediocrities like Pierce, Fillmore and Carter) get to dilute the commemoration of our most accomplished presidents.

Communists usually use economic jealousy as their wedge issue. Focusing on America’s racial history was determined to gain more traction.

In 2019, through the New York Times and other media, the Left launched their 1619 History Curriculum Project. Under the banner of “inclusive history,” “Critical Race Theory” (CRT) and dozens of other labels, versions of the 1619 curriculum rapidly spread to thousands of schools. [Project1619]

Their final solution was demonizing everything that made America America. Their mantra became “a country built on stolen land and slavery.” [U.N. Official: U.S. Founded on Land Stolen From Indians, Built on Race-Based Slavery, BLM Movement Is Result | CNSNews]

1619’s politically correct “wokism” declared that “everything is racist” and built cases for eliminating the Electoral College, the Senate Filibuster, the Senate itself, our Founding documents, the American flag, America’s National Anthem, and even the nuclear family. All these initiatives aligned with Tugwell’s new Constitution. [Citizen Oversight: The Left’s Final Solution] 

Reshaping our collective memory, and the physical touchstones that validate our memory, is directly from the Communist playbook.

Eliminating statues and eradicating holidays are central to Terraforming America. Once our national symbols and rituals are uprooted, American society will be adrift, ripe for reshaping. Thus Juneteenth is now considered more “inclusive” than the Fourth of July. One day only the “woke” holiday will remain. [Citizen Oversight: Assault on July 4th]

The Left is methodically replacing the existing “pro-America” calendar with their perverse “Advent Calendar for Anarchy.” We are now expected to annually focus on Floyd, Ferguson, Charlottesville and January 6, instead of true milestones like the signing of the U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1787.

The Left has a hundred-year head start on us and commands the levers of power. It will take years of dedication, courage, perseverance and providence to turn the tide. Let us begin in 2022.

Scot Faulkner was the first Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of Representatives; his business-based reforms generated sustained savings of $4.5+ billion. He is the author of the critically acclaimed bestselling Congressional memoir, “Naked Emperors.” The second edition is available on Amazon.

Additional biographical notes:
Mr. Faulkner was Director of Personnel for the 1980 Reagan Campaign. He also served on the Presidential Transition team and on the White House Staff. He held executive positions at the Federal Aviation Administration, the General Services Administration, and the Peace Corps. He earned a Master’s Degree in Public Administration from American University and a Bachelor’s Degree in Government from Lawrence University. He also studied at the London School of Economics and Georgetown University.
(This article was originally published by Paul Driessen of CFACT
Contact me: pkdriessen@gmail.com

The Power to Declare War by Dr. Lee Button

Published January 29, 2022 | By campconstitution

Dr. Lee Button explains the power to declare war under the U.S. Constitution.  This is from a weekly show that aired in New Hampshire and hosted by the National Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies

https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/shurtleffhal/episodes/2022-01-28T15_15_03-08_00

For information on the National Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies, please visit their website http://www.nhccs.org

 

Refuting Left-Wing “Virtue Signaling” Lawn Signs by Darrell Pack

Published January 24, 2022 | By campconstitution

I am disturbed by the evil and dishonesty of these signs. Since they have never in my own knowledge been responded to, I will in the hope that people will not be deceived. Worse, is when you find this in front of a Christian household, a pastor’s household, or even a Church.
In this house, we believe:    As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. Joshua 24:15
Love is Love: Sex is not Love.
 No, Love is not Love. The Bible distinguishes types of love. They are communicated through four Greek words (Eros, Storge, Philia, and Agape) and are characterized by romantic love, family love, brotherly love, and God’s divine love. Many Languages have multiple words for Love. In Arabic there are 11. But in the context of this yard sign, it is referring to sex. In particular, it refers to what people do because it feels good. Sex is not love. In fact, not only is it about self-gratification, but it is also often used as violence against others as in the case of Rape. In the last several years, within the midst of this same group of people, there has been a concerted effort to normalize sexual relations between adults and children. This is one of the worst-case examples of false moral equivalency perpetuated by the morally bankrupt people who would display this disgusting sign in their yard.
Black Lives Matter: All Lives Matter in the eyes of the Lord.
 Black Lives Matter has become a rallying cry for the Marxist Left. In the words of the founders of BLM, they are trained Marxists., This slogan was created to divide us based on race. This is a group that calls for reparations based on the evils of Slavery, yet most people in America, even at a time when it was prevalent, did not own slaves. Additionally, these same people say and do nothing about the slave trade which is still in existence to this day. While it is impossible to know, according to the Thomas Reuters Foundation, in 2018 there were more than 40 million people in the world in Slavery.  These organizations do nothing but undermine a country that outlawed slavery more than 156 years ago.
No Human is Illegal: But their actions often are.
 So why is the left so intent on bringing people illegally into the country? Because that is how they support politicians with a socialist agenda.  People who believe in Liberty understand that this is a way to break down traditional American values and worse, traditional family values because with people illegally coming across our border are rapists, drug cartels, terrorists, and criminals. They are not here to assimilate. While many people are in search of a better life, this creates a dangerous environment for those innocent people as well. If America is so bad, why are those people taking such great risks to get here? Why is the Left (Socialists and Marxists) trying to change it?
Science is Real :But they do not follow Science.
 This is to perpetuate the idea of manmade climate change and false pandemic protections on our nation. It is not science to say that science is settled or prevent proper research and challenges to scientific theory. Yet they silence opposing voices, including some of the top scientists in the world if they disagree with the leftist political organizations. Science is ever-changing and never settled; however, some people will ignore science when it comes to gender. They ask everyone to be accepting of gender dysphoria as if it is a legitimate and sensible point of view.  Science says it is a dangerous mental disorder that often leads to suicide even after gender reassignment surgeries and therapies. They attempt to make it illegal to challenge this view, yet they claim science is real. One thing is for sure. Hypocrisy is real. They ignore the science that contradicts the Leftist narrative. Real science is not created by consensus. Consensus is not created by the limited samples of leftist political organizations.
Woman’s Rights are Human Rights Well, Human Rights are Women’s Rights.
 Following this logic, a baby in the womb is not human with rights. This is even more hypocritical if the baby aborted is a female. Let’s face it, if we were talking about human trafficking (like what happens at our open borders) conservatives would be in agreement, but considering their position that no person is illegal, this is not what they are talking about. The truth is that this is about abortion. Abortion is inconsistent with Christianity. Psalm 139: 13-16 13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful; I know that full well.  15 My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. Perhaps this would be more honest if the sign read abortion is a Human Right. This is actually listed in the UN Charter of human rights. In actuality, that is what this means. Anyone who is properly educated in the origin of rights knows that this cannot be a right because it is exercised at the cost of another individual’s rights. If those on the left were to say exactly what they mean, their ideas would be rejected by most, at least by intellectually honest and thinking people.
Kindness is everything Kindness without truth is not kindness. It is deception.
 If you are in Unity but not in Truth, you are united against Christ.

Darrell Pack is the hosts Restore the Intent Constitution Study Group in Alton, NH and is the owner of Lakes Region Cabinet Company.

 

Don’t Ignore This Warning by Mike Rothfield of Foundation of Applied Conservative Leadership

Published January 24, 2022 | By campconstitution


H. L. Mencken once said, “For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” 

Mencken’s words aptly apply to a “Convention of States,” also known as an “Article V Convention,” “Constitutional Convention,” — or as I have known it for 30 years, the “Con Con” — the cure-all hoax to “fix the federal government” that takes root among some grassroots activists every time a Democrat occupies the White House. 

It offers the quick fix and masks a danger worse than any Socialist proposal to the Biden or Pelosi agenda. 

Promoters of this terrible idea would have you believe the answer to all that ails us is clear — all we have to do is pass new amendments at a Constitutional Convention to limit what the federal government can do. 

They’ll tell you this solution is simple, and contrary to the belief of some “fearful” nay-sayers, nothing bad will happen. 

First of all, the Constitution already does this… which politicians and courts too often ignore. 

How will new “rules” change that?  They won’t.  If you cannot force change now, (and you CAN… that is what FACL teaches you, but it takes time, effort, and organization) you will not force change then. 

Worse, the Con-Con itself will be manned by career politicians (from Red and Blue states) and Leftists (at least from Blue states).  Once assembled, they will do as THEY please, not as you or I please.  No “rule” will prevent it.  History shows again and again that conventions write and rewrite their own rules. 

The arguments are so absurd for a Con-Con, I struggle to try to be fair to the sincere but misguided folks who promote the agenda. 

If you’re receiving this email, chances are you’ve been actively fighting FOR liberty legislation and AGAINST threats to liberty at the state level for a while now. 

So it should be obvious to you that state legislators are at least as big a threat to your liberty as their federal cohorts… if not more so. 

One only need examine what the states have done in response to COVID-19 to get a sense of how little they can be trusted with your liberty. 

After all, it was Governors — Democrat AND Republican — who forced businesses to close, robbed children of over one year of their lives, and authorized jailing mothers, fathers, grandmothers, and grandfathers for trying to open their businesses so they could pay rent and put food on the table. 

And most state legislatures — Democrat AND Republican — refused to do a single thing about it. 

Despite that, the “Convention of States Project” would have you believe these very same turncoat state politicians can, and should, be trusted to open up the U.S. Constitution for alterations at a convention. 

To be sure, there are some limited-government champions in states across the country. 

But they are not in the majority.  If they were, you wouldn’t have to work so hard to kill bad bills and pass good ones! 

What’s more, these few champions of liberty will likely not even be invited to a convention. 

In fact, some states have already made clear their intention to send the very same State House and Senate leadership that you struggle against every legislative session. 

Can a convention really be limited? 

In recent years, Con-Con promoters have spent millions of dollars from wealthy donors to enlist a team of so-called “experts” to reassure conservatives that a convention will be safe because it will be “limited,” and delegates will be “forced to follow rules” their own state legislators will set. 

They go on to insist the rules of the convention itself will bind them down further and will likely follow Mason’s Manual, which is currently used in most states. 

This includes Nebraska, where Con-Con operatives recently succeeded in bringing their resolution back from the dead by “suspending the rules” and vote trading. 

You see, the resolution was nearly dead in committee, so an attempt was made to usurp the normal process.  When that attempt failed to garner the required votes, it was fully dead under the rules. 

So the bill sponsor, Republican Senator Steve Halloran, traded some votes and agreed to support some Big Government legislation if opponents of the convention would agree to vote to break the rules and bring his Convention of States resolution back to life. 

Yes, the bill sponsor voted to GROW the government so he could maybe one day LIMIT the government — and he broke the rules to do it! 

And they were able to do that under Mason’s Manual, the legislative procedure most argue would be used at a convention. 

In Kansas, a state which also uses Mason’s Manual, Con-Con politicos have been frustrated by the State Constitution, which requires a voter-ratified two-thirds majority to pass this type of legislation, a threshold they have never been able to achieve. 

So Convention of States insiders conspired with the Kansas Senate President, Ty Masterson (also a Republican) — in direct violation of the State Constitution and the will of the people of Kansas — to “deem” the resolution passed if a simple majority was achieved (it wasn’t).  This is the same trick-play Nancy Pelosi uses in Washington. 

If Convention of States Project political operators and their own hand-picked bill sponsors can’t be trusted to follow the rules, just how can you expect anyone to follow so-called “rules” convened to rewrite the Constitution? 

It defies all logic! 

What they did in just those two states is a perfect example of the vote trading and rule breaking that will happen if a convention is called and your fundamental rights are on the line. 

And it will not be conservatives trading and cheating then… it will be the hard-Left, bankrolled by George Soros and others.  In fact, they also fund groups calling for a Con-Con (for Left-wing purposes).

 

(Mark Meckler founder of Convention of States with Joanne Blades of the Soros funded MoveOn.Org)


Let’s take a look at the Red Fox Four Score on this issue. 

*** More money/people:  -1

Both sides will raise some money on this issue, but it can (and does) divide liberty activists into opposing camps, leaving support for vital projects that can actually advance liberty or thwart Big Government in the lurch. 

The fact is, Convention of States is overwhelmingly funded by a handful of wealthy donors, not grassroots donations.  Consistent conservative leaders who oppose the Con-Con risk alienating some of our own donors who, in honest frustration and fear, have been taken in by the Con-Con hype and happy-talk. 

*** Help friends:  -3

This is where it gets painful.  Good legislators who support great causes get wrapped up in these fights, become a danger to liberty, and then can’t be trusted as a bill champion on vital legislation. 

And good legislators who do not support the Con-Con are branded as enemies by convention supporters.  This further waters-down what was already a very small “champion” universe. 

*** Hurt enemies:  -5

No liberal has ever lost his or her seat over this issue — this is almost exclusively a fight within the conservative movement.  If the Left ever sees the very real opportunity to seize power at a convention, this might change. 

And tax-and-spend Republicans love this issue because they can cover up the truth of their liberal voting records by focusing on their support of “limiting” government, and then they don’t have to worry as much about primary election problems. 

*** Policy Ratio:  -10/0

If it passes: -10.  This is speculative, but Congress already tries to openly ignore the Bill of Rights.  This gives Big Government lackeys the opening to repeal what they don’t like, edit what suits them, and pass things like packing the courts, ending the electoral college, and installing a Universal Basic Income. 

There is no upside to a convention.  The dangers of a runaway convention are very real, especially since the media and billionaire Leftists like George Soros WILL be involved. 

(Does anyone really believe hard-core Leftists will simply walk away dejected and consider themselves down for the count if a Con-Con is called?) 

If it fails, then nothing happens.  There is NO upside to this battle for conservatives, except to stop it in order to protect our liberties from frustrated “friends.” 

*** SCORE:  -19 to -9 — one of the worst scores I have ever seen for a serious proposal.

Whenever Democrats take control of the federal government, going all the way back to President Jimmy Carter, their cries for a convention reach a fever-pitch. 

They’ll tell you they don’t support either side in D.C., but then celebrate when Big (federal) Government RINOs like Senators Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio proclaim their support! 

There is no doubt that D.C. is broken. 

Federal government power has far exceeded its constitutional authority. 

But it can’t be fixed by sending a bunch of modern-day politicians to a convention so they can modify (or do away with) our founding document. 

The states have allowed the federal government to become the behemoth it is today. 

They have done so by accepting Big Government federal “mandates” just so they can get their hands on more federal taxpayer dollars. 

States need to get their own houses in order and start fulfilling their own constitutional duties. 

They can shrink the federal government — right now — by refusing to accept and spend federal taxpayer dollars on unconstitutional Big Government programs. 

To sum up, there is no way to predict what constitutional amendments the delegates to a convention might adopt. 

The only Constitutional Convention in U.S. history — in 1787 — went far beyond its mandate.  Charged with amending the Articles of Confederation to promote trade among the states, the convention instead wrote an entirely new governing document.  A convention held today could set its own agenda too. 

Now, if America’s leaders looked like Washington, Madison or Henry, maybe, maybe it might be OK (though even Patrick Henry opposed the final product, even AFTER the Bill of Rights was added). 

But as the late Supreme Court Justice Warren E. Burger said, “[T]here is no way to effectively limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention.  The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda.  Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey.  After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the Convention if we don’t like its agenda.” 

It is past time for this harebrained scheme to die and for all limited-government advocates to band together and clean up their own local and state governments. 


  JUST A REMINDER:  The Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership increased the number of schools last year and are hoping to do more in 2022. 




Don’t see a school in your neck of the woods? 

Host a School



Did you know about FACL’s Secret Vault? 

We have been sending out weekly emails since June, 2010.  There are some good articles you might have missed and they are stored in our archives.

But don’t share this information with just anyone.  Remember, tactics are philosophically neutral and can be used against you by those fighting for the other side.  For that reason, I’ve password protected this content. 

After clicking here, you will be prompted to login.

Please use the unique login that you created, and let us know if you have any questions.





© 2022 All Rights Reserved

Donate securely online to the Foundation by clicking here.

Would you like to mail in a tax-deductible gift to our Foundation?    Make checks payable to “FACL” and mail to:

Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership
101 Washington Street
Falmouth, Virginia 22405

Please, don’t even think about reproducing, forwarding or posting this document or its contents on the Internet without written permission from the Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership. 

For reprint permission, please contact us at:

kirk@kirkshelley.com or dp@facltraining.org
 
Please click here to opt out of future emailings.


The Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership is an IRS recognized 501(c)(3) Foundation and contributions are tax-deductible for income tax purposes. 
Contact us at www.facltraining.org. 
Our mailing address is 101 Washington Street, Falmouth, Virginia 22405. 

 

 

 

Camp Constitution at the U.S. Supreme Court

Published January 22, 2022 | By campconstitution

Liberty Counsel hosted several events prior to and after oral argument of  Shurtleff v Boston https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shurtleff-v-boston/

On Monday night January 17, we participated in a prayer vigil and on Tuesday morning, a rally was held prior to the oral argument. Speakers included Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler, Tim Goeglein (Focus on the Family), Dean Nelson (Frederick Douglass Foundation), Kalisia Richer (Turning Point USA),  Barbara from Harlem, Patrick Mahoney (Christian Defense Coalition), Mario Diaz (Concerned Women for America), Jeremy Dys (First Liberty), Larry Cirignano (Choose Life),  Pastor David Whitney (Institute on the Constitution), Andrew Beckwith (Massachusetts Family Institute), Adrian Jones (Mordecai Mission), Hal Shurtleff, Rev Steve Craft and Earl Wallace (Camp Constitution), and Liberty Counsel attorneys Harry Mihet, Roger Gannam and Jonathan Alexandre.

9A link to an audio of the oral argument:  https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/shurtleffhal/episodes/2022-01-20T12_52_59-08_00

This is a news release from Liberty Counsel:

Supreme Court Heard Religious Viewpoint Case Today

Jan 18, 2022

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver presented oral argument today to the U.S. Supreme Court in Shurtleff v. City of Boston, arguing that the City of Boston violated the Constitution by censoring a private flag in a public forum open to “all applicants” merely because the application referred to it as a “Christian flag.”
Liberty Counsel represents Boston resident Hal Shurtleff and his Christian civic organization, Camp Constitution. Shurtleff and Camp Constitution first asked the city in 2017 for a permit to raise the Christian flag on Boston City Hall flagpoles to commemorate Constitution Day and Citizenship Day (September 17) and the civic and cultural contributions of the Christian community to the City of Boston, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, religious tolerance, the Rule of Law and the U.S. Constitution.

There are three flagpoles outside City Hall that fly the U.S., Massachusetts and Boston flags, plus a fourth flag on Congress Street, which runs parallel to City Hall. For 12 years from 2005-2017, Boston approved 284 flag-raisings by private organizations with no denials on the flagpoles that it designated as a “public forum.” Had the flag been referred to as anything but Christian, the city would have approved it. The flag itself was not the problem; it was the word “Christian” describing it in the application that was the issue. The year before Camp Constitution’s application (2016-2017), Boston approved 39 private flag-raising events, which averaged three per month. In 2018, Boston approved 50 private flag raising events, averaging nearly one per week. One included a flag of a private credit union.

Boston now argues that despite the policy and longstanding practice, the private flag raisings are actually government speech.


Liberty Counsel Legal Team and Client Hal Shurtleff

Today, the Supreme Court seemed united in favor of Liberty Counsel’s argument that this censorship is unconstitutional, and that Boston was wrong to deny the Christian flag, a white banner with a red cross on a blue background in the upper left corner.

During today’s argument, Boston’s attorney, Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, admitted that if the High Court finds that if the city created a public forum, then Boston has no defense.

When the city’s attorney attempted to justify the policy to fit their agenda, Justice Alito said, “You did some after-the-fact gerrymandering of your policy and reverse engineered it.”

Hallward-Driemeier also stated that the city’s “goal is to foster diversity of communities” and “commemorate events or occasions.”

In response, Justice Clarence Thomas stated that if Christians are not a part of that diversity the city purports to support, “that’s limited diversity.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett also asked the city attorney, “Isn’t celebrating Constitution Day considered an event?”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh also acknowledged that it seems the Establishment Clause is not the issue in this case since there has not been equal treatment of religious groups or religious speech.

Justice Neil Gorsuch also noted that the city cast religion into the same category as speech deemed offensive by censoring the religious viewpoint.

Liberty Counsel’s Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Today is a historic day and I was honored to present this religious viewpoint case before the U.S. Supreme Court. This case is so much more significant than a flag. Boston cheated when it opened the flagpoles to all applicants and then excluded Christian viewpoints. The city then claimed that the flagpoles never were a public forum despite its history and express policy. The city’s censorship is clearly unconstitutional, and government cannot censor religious viewpoints.”

For more information on the case, visit www.LC.org/flag.

Liberty Counsel provides broadcast quality TV interviews via Hi-Def Skype and LTN at no cost.

 

 

EVALUATING THE LEGACY OF ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU by Dr. Peter Hammond

Published January 9, 2022 | By campconstitution

Channeling Dan and Jane to confront Biden policies   What could be better than SNL for examining Biden Administration energy policies? by Paul Driessen

Published January 2, 2022 | By campconstitution

As Covid lockdowns eased this past year, people all over the world went back to work and play. But while oil, natural gas, coal and electricity demand predictably shot up, President Biden canceled and hyper-regulated pipelines, leases and drilling permits. European leaders took similarly shortsighted actions. Inadequate global supplies chased rising global demand, and prices predictably skyrocketed.

Regular gasoline that averaged $2.17 per gallon in 2020 hit $3.49 in November 2021, costing American motorists $17 more to fill their tanks.

Biden Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm laughed it off, saying, “If you drove an electric car, this wouldn’t be affecting you.” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg echoed her flippant comment; so did White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki.

President Biden begged Russia and OPEC to produce more oil, siphoned oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and told the Federal Trade Commission to investigate price gouging by American oil companies. Meanwhile, his administration and their environmentalist allies continue pressuring banks and financial institutions to deny loans to oil and gas companies and refuse to invest in them.

Less charitable folks among us might wonder if the Marx Brothers or Bevis and Buttheadgeek are now setting energy policy. Others might channel Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin, and their raucous Saturday Night Live skits. A current events version might go something like this.

Den Astroyd: Hello, I’m Den Astroyd, host of Weekend Update. Despite recent setbacks, President Biden remains committed to “Building Back Better” and “transforming” America away from oil, gas and coal. During tonight’s Point-Counterpoint, Jan Granski will take the pro-transformation viewpoint, and I’ll take the anti-transformation counterpoint.

Jan Granski: Den, only a complete climate crisis denier and fossilized idiot like you could possibly oppose replacing dirty fossil fuels with clean renewable energy. If we don’t, Earth will fry, icecaps will melt, coastal cities will be inundated by rising seas and destroyed by hurricanes, and precious wildlife will be driven to extinction. But when haven’t you ignored reality? You’re a capitalist pig who lives to line the pockets of Big Oil. You think every American should have a big house and fly or drive wherever and whenever they want. You don’t give a damn about preserving a livable climate and planet, you jerk.

Den Astroyd: Jan, you ignorant slut. Your climate crisis exists only in worthless compute models and your fevered imagination. Your pals’ real objective is amassing more power, while they make commoners freeze jobless and hungry in the dark. Saving the planet? What a joke. Under your asinine policies, China will eat our kungpao lunch, while it spews out more greenhouse gases every year and turns our planet into a massive open pit mine and toxic waste dump – to extract raw materials needed to blanket our country with bird-killing wind turbines and habitat smothering solar panels. And you’ll just keep hopping into bed with any Climate Industrialist who’ll pay you twenty bucks to shill for their greenbacks energy scams.

I miss SNL’s old spunk and mojo. But you only have to look at the actual evidence to realize Mann-made climate cataclysms exist only in junk-science computer models that rely on the bogus assertion that plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide has replaced the complex, powerful, natural forces that have always governed Earth’s climate and weather.

The slight rise in measured average planetary temperatures is half of what models predicted (chart, p. 5). The discrepancy gets worse every year, and to blame the rise on humans is pure junk science. Moreover, increasing CO2 is greening our planet, helping forests, grasslands and crops grow faster, better and with less water. Indeed, the worst possible outcome is a colder climate with less atmospheric CO2. That would shrink arable land, shorten growing seasons, reduce plant growth, and starve humans and animals.

As horrific as recent (and all) tornadoes are, 40% fewer strong to violent tornadoes (F3-F5) hammered the United States the past 35 years than the three decades before that (1954-1986). And the history of hurricanes making US landfall since 1850 shows no consistency, pattern or upward trend. In fact, the only reason climate alarmists can claim an increase in Category 3-5 hurricanes in recent years is that Harvey, Irma and a few others came after a record-setting 12-year absence of powerful hurricanes hitting the USA (October 2005 to August 2017).

As to buying an electric vehicle to avoid more pain at the pump, that’s a lot easier for jet-setting, limo-riding elites than it is for Average Joe families. The sticker shock of $50,000-100,000 EVs is just the beginning. If you want a fast charge when you get home, you’ll have to upgrade your neighborhood and home electrical systems to 220 volts – and hope AOC’s utopian wind and solar power cooperates.

Europe’s wind turbines performed at barely 14% of their “rated” or “nameplate” capacity during the fourth quarter of 2021. That’s barely one day per week; four days a month. It means you’ll also need expensive PowerWalls, to ensure backup electricity during extended blackouts when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.

Pray, too, that you don’t get stuck in a blizzard. Even if you turn off your heater, the cold will quickly kill your EV’s battery. Don’t get caught in a traffic jam trying to escape the next fiery conflagration roaring through a mismanaged California forest, either. And be careful where you park your EV, as those half-ton battery modules have a nasty habit of bursting into flames that cannot be extinguished easily.
If you still insist on buying an EV, please think about the poor kids and parents slaving away for a couple dollars a day in cobalt and lithium mines. Pay Fair Trade prices, so that they can get living wages.

Any Net Zero economy means a lot of turbines, panels and batteries – and a lot of mines, processing plants and factories to extract the raw materials and manufacture the non-renewable equipment.

Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. calculates that replacing all US fossil fuel use (today’s electricity generation, home heating and cooking, factory power, and vehicle fuel) with “green” electricity would require over five million 2.5-megawatt, 650-foot-tall wind turbines, sprawling across two-thirds of the continental USA – or solar panels blanketing 40% of that land mass – plus thousands of miles of new transmission lines.

Give some thought too to what we’re going to do with all those turbine blades, solar panels, battery modules and other “renewable” energy equipment when they’ve reached the end of their productive lives – often in just 10 or 20 years. We’re going to need some massive landfills. Perhaps the Grand Canyon?

“Clean, renewable, sustainable” energy, my eye.

Keep one other thing in mind. Democrats, environmentalists, bureaucrats and judges despise mining, processing and most manufacturing. Very little will happen in the United States – and it can’t be done without fossil fuels. It will happen overseas, under minimal environmental and safety safeguards.

That means China, India and other countries will continue burning fossil fuels for all these operations, and to lift more people out of abject poverty. That means it’s pointless for the USA, Britain, Canada, Australia and Europe to “decarbonize” their economies – and send their economies down the toilet – while all these other countries keep growing, mining, manufacturing and emitting greenhouse gases.

A final reality: Africans, Asians and Latin Americans will no longer tolerate living in huts and slurping gruel – under the eco-imperialist, carbon-colonialist, energy-Apartheid rules that rich-country environmentalists have been imposing on them.

In fact, Americans and Europeans won’t tolerate Net Zero de-carbonization and de-industrialization much longer, either. Especially to “save our planet” from a nonexistent manmade climate crisis.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books and articles on energy, environment, climate and human rights issues.

Electric car fire
Contact me: pkdriessen@gmail.com

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel Interviews Camp Constitution Director Hal Shurtleff on the Christian Flag Lawsuit Being Heard by the U.S. Supreme Court

Published December 27, 2021 | By campconstitution

 

After four years, from Liberty Counsel’s demand letter to the City of Boston back in September of 2017, Camp Constitution’s Christian flag lawsuit will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on January 18.   Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, recently aired an interview of Hal Shurtleff, director of Camp Constitution:

Episode 29: Standing Up for Judeo-Christian Values – Good Life Broadcasting (subsplash.com)

A link to the Shurtleff V Boston from the U.S. Supreme Court’s website which contain amicus briefs pro and con:

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shurtleff-v-boston/ 

 

80 Years Ago-The Real Story Behind the Attack on Pearl Harbor by Dr. Peter Hammond

Published December 7, 2021 | By campconstitution

To view the video of this presentation, click here.
To view the screen capture video, click here.
To view the Power Point presentation, click here.
To listen to the audio of this lecture, click here.

As my history teacher, Mr Rees-Davies, MP, in Rhodesia cautioned us: “Beware the victor’s version of history!” The story of what led up to the Japanese attack on the US Navy at Pearl Harbour is both fascinating and surprising.

Battle of Taranto
On the night of 11 to 12 November 1940, British Naval forces under Admiral Andrew Cunningham, including Aircraft Carrier HMS Illustrious, launched Fairey Swordfish biplane torpedo bombers in the Mediterranean Sea to attack the Regia Marina Battle Fleet at anchor in the harbour of Taranto. Despite the shallow depth of the water, the aerial torpedoes proved devastatingly effective, crippling the Italian Navy, which lost half of its capital ships in one night.

Naval Air Power
The Royal Navy raid on Taranto Bay marked the ascendency of air power over sea power. The Fleet Air Arm proved to be the Navy’s most devastating weapon.

Trained by the Royal Navy
As the Imperial Japanese Navy had initially been trained by the Royal Navy and studied the Royal Navy’s tactics and strategies most carefully, it should have been obvious that the Imperial Japanese Navy, the third most powerful Navy in the world in 1941, with 10 Fleet carriers, would begin practicing with torpedo bombers and carefully evaluate the possibility of them being used against the American Pacific Fleet based in Pearl Harbour. Japan had the largest and most modern carrier Fleet in the world in 1941. By comparison the USA had 7 aircraft carriers (only 3 of which operated in the Pacific) and Britain had 8 aircraft carriers (of which only one operated in the Indian and Pacific Oceans).

The Danger of Torpedo Attack
The claim that no one could have anticipated torpedo attacks in the shallow waters of a harbor before 7 December 1941, is false. The British had proved that torpedoes could be effective in their attack on the Italian Navy at Taranto, 11 November 1940. The Royal Navy used Swordfish Bi-planes to deliver the torpedoes. The US Navy had discussed this new threat in a June 1941 Memorandum. Torpedo nets were considered to be installed in Pearl Harbour as a precautionary measure.

 

Overruled by Politicians in Washington D.C.
Admiral Kimmel and his staff testified that the decision not to install torpedo nets and booms had been made by the Navy Department in Washington DC, not in Hawaii.

Classified Documents Denied to the Public
There are many documents relating to Pearl Harbor which are still classified by the United States government and have not yet been made public. Many of the documents were destroyed during the war. Some of the public records of the United Kingdom containing Churchill’s “Most Secret” war time intelligence briefs, were marked as “closed for 75 years”, including the sections dealing with events from November 1941 through March 1942.

Was the Japanese Raid on Pearl Harbour Unprecedented?

Mers-El-Kébir
Seventeen months before Pearl Harbor, the British Royal Navy attacked the French Fleet at anchor on the coast of French Algeria. The Battle of Mers-el-Kébir on 3 July 1940, resulted in the deaths of 1,297 French servicemen, the sinking of a French battleship and the damaging of 5 other ships. The combined air and sea attack was carried out against Britain’s official ally – France.

Attacking an Ally
The attack remains controversial and created much hostility between France and Britain. Britain argued that “the times were desperate; invasion seemed imminent; and the British government simply could not afford to risk Germany seizing control of the French Fleet… the prominent British motive was thus dire necessity and self-preservation.” However, the French insisted that, as their terms of surrender with Germany did not require them handing over their Fleet, which was still in French controlled territory, the British action was treacherous.

Swift and Surprising Action
French ships that were in Alexandria and believed that they were allies of Britain were shocked to be blockaded, boarded and seized by the Royal Navy at the same time. Also, on 3 July, French ships in Plymouth and Portsmouth, England, were boarded and captured. This included the French submarine, Surcouf (the largest submarine in the world at that time), four other submarines, the battleships Paris and Courbet, destroyers Triomphant and Leopard. Some officers and sailors were killed in the struggles. These attacks were justified by the British strategy of Copenhagening the Fleet.

Copenhagening the Fleet
Admiral Horatio Nelson’s famous battle of Copenhagen on 2 April 1801 was a clear inspiration for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, 1941. Although Denmark was officially neutral during the Napoleonic Wars, Britain feared that her Navy may be seized by the French, if Denmark fell to the French.

Targeting Neutrals
The Battle of Copenhagen was a result of multiple failures of diplomacy. With Britain enforcing a strict blockade of France and any country trading with France, even neutral nations, such as Denmark, Sweden and Prussia, were regarded as legitimate targets.

The Battle of Copenhagen
Admiral Sir Hyde Parker and Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson led the attack on the Danish capital, Copenhagen. The British attack, during which Admiral Nelson famously placed his telescope to his blind eye ignoring a command to withdraw, was, from the British perspective, spectacularly successful. 1,600 Danish soldiers and sailors were killed, or wounded and most of the Danish Navy either sunk, severely damaged, or captured.

The Second Battle of Copenhagen
Although ostensibly neutral, Denmark was again attacked by the Royal Navy 16 August – 5 September 1807, when the Royal Navy bombarded Copenhagen, seized the Danish Fleet “as a precaution” in case Denmark did choose to join the French. 3,000 soldiers and civilians, including 195 children, in Copenhagen died as a result of the bombardment. As the majority of the Danish Army was at the Southern border to protect against a possible attack from the French, this second assault on a neutral country was a scandal at the time.

Ignoring Historic Precedents
Knowing that the Imperial Japanese Navy was modelled on the Royal Navy, these famous battles, strategies and tactics of Copenhagening the Fleets of even neutral countries where a potential threat was perceived, including against Britain’s French allies and most tellingly at the Battle of Taranto where aircraft launched from aircraft carriers using torpedoes had crippled a battle Fleet, should have been taken into consideration.

Deception by Entertainment
As modern American films such as Tora! Tora! Tora! and Pearl Harbour tend to ignore these historic precedents and pretend that the attack on Pearl Harbour was both “unprecedented” and “unexpected” and “the first surprise attack by aircraft on ships,” generations have been deceived into thinking that Pearl Harbour was a treacherous, unexpected and unprecedented attack “A day that will live in infamy!”

“Now these things became our examples, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted… Now all these things happened to them as examples and they were written for our admonition…” 1 Corinthians 10:6-11

Desperately Seeking War
William Henry Chamberlin in America’s Second Crusade (1950) wrote: “It is scarcely possible, in the light of this and many other known facts, to avoid the conclusion that the Roosevelt Administration sought the war which began at Pearl Harbour. The steps which made armed conflict inevitable would take months before the conflict broke out.” (Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoovers Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath).

Failing to Give US Servicemen a Fighting Chance
General Albert C. Wedemeyer is quoted by Herbert Hoover in Freedom Betrayed as stating: “When on, December 6, our intercepts told us that the Japanese were going to attack somewhere the very next day, whether in the Central Pacific, or to the South in the Philippines and Dutch East Indies, the president of the United States, as Commander in Chief of our Military Forces… could have gone on the radio and broadcast to the wide world that he had irrefutable evidence of an immediate Japanese intention to strike. This would have alerted everybody from Singapore to Pearl Harbor. Even though inadequate in some cases to defend effectively, nevertheless, our forces would have been able to take a toll, which would have blunted the Japanese attack. In Hawaii, the capital ships might have been moved out of the congested harbor to sea, where Admiral Kimmel at least had the foresight to keep the far more vital aircraft carriers. Furthermore, our Carrier taskforce in the mid-Pacific might have attacked the Japanese task force when its planes were aloft. There are many possibilities which could have given our men a fighting chance.”

Blind Service to Stalin and the Soviet Union
“Roosevelt ignored the whole communist infiltration into his administration. Much of it was to be exposed before his death. But of more importance, he ignored the whole international purpose of communism and its morals in international relations. Its purposes and methods had been blatantly stated to the world ever since 1917 and its statements in books were widely distributed in the United States. Roosevelt was not a communist. His leanings towards Stalin and blindness to communistic activities arose partly from his own Leftist-leaning and partly from the usefulness of the communists in support of his administration politically throughout his 13 years in office.”

Co-operating with Communism
“His leanings towards Stalin and the communist began with the recognition of the Soviet Union immediately upon taking his office in 1933… During 15 years prior to the recognition, Democratic and Republican administrations alike had barred any relations with a country which had returned huge numbers of mankind to slavery and was constantly conspiring against the welfare of other peoples. By recognition, Roosevelt gave the Soviet Union certain respectability in the family of nations, but also of importance. By that act, he had opened the door to communist penetration and conspiracies in the United States.” “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the just, both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord.” Proverbs 17:15

A Madman’s Desire to Get US into War
In Herbert Hoover’s Freedom Betrayed, General Douglas McArthur’s views are reported that: “the whole Japanese war was a madman’s desire to get us into war.” McArthur was convinced that the “Financial sanctions in July 1941 were not only provocative but that Japan was bound to fight even if it were suicide, unless they could be removed, as the sanctions carried every penalty of war except killing and destruction and no nation of dignity would take them for long.”

An Unnecessary War
McArthur said that: “Roosevelt could have made peace with Konoye in September 1941 and could have obtained all of the American objectives in the Pacific and the freedom of China and probably Manchuria. Konoye was authorized by the Emperor to agree to complete withdrawal.”

Callous Indifference to the American Army Beleaguered in the Philippines
McArthur was bitter about: “Roosevelt’s starvation of supplies to him at a time when the whole fate of the South Pacific and their allies in Asia was at stake.” “Roosevelt had shown his vindictiveness in many ways.”

The Truth about Pearl Harbour
In September 1944, John Flynn, a member of the America First Committee, published The Truth about Pearl Harbour:

Provoking Japan to Get America into the War
Rear Admiral Frank Beatty, who at the time of the Pearl Harbour attack was an aide to the Secretary of the Navy, Frank Knox, testified: “Prior to 7 December, it was evident even to me… that we were pushing Japan into a corner. I believe that it was the desire of President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill that we get into the war, as they felt their allies could not win without us and all our efforts to cause the Germans to declare war on us had failed. The conditions we imposed upon Japan were so severe that we knew the nation could not accept them. We were forcing her so severely that we could have known that she would react towards the United States. All her preparations in a military way – and we knew their overall import – pointed that way.”

“Worth the Price”
Jonathan Daniels, Roosevelt’s administrative assistant at that time of Pearl Harbour, presented an eye-witness viewpoint: “The blow was heavier than he had hoped it would necessarily be… But the risks paid off; even the loss was worth the price…” (“1941: Pearl Harbour Sunday: The End of an Era”).

To Save the Soviet Union from Collapse in Europe
In Day of Deceit, by Robert Stinnett, a memorandum prepared by Commander McCollun stated that a memorandum issued in the immediate pre-war period declared that only a direct attack on US interests would sway the American public, or Congress, to favor direct involvement in the European war. Anderson and Secretary Knox, offered eight specific plans to aggrieve the Japanese Empire “If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt active war, so much the better.” The McCollun memo of 7 October 1940, remained classified until 1994.

Reckless and Irresponsible
Admiral James Richardson was fired by President Roosevelt for complaining about the president’s order to station the Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbour. Admiral Richardson blamed the president for the “initial defeats in the Pacific” as “direct, real and personal.” Richardson believed that stationing the Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbour made the ships “extremely vulnerable to attack” and provided “a poor and nonstrategic defense.”

A Travesty of History
“No reasonably informed person can now believe that Japan made a villainous unexpected attack on the United States. An attack was not only fully expected but was actually desired. It is beyond doubt that President Roosevelt wanted to get his country into the war, but for political reasons, was most anxious to ensure that the first act of hostility came from the other side; for which reason he caused increasing pressure to be put on the Japanese, to a point that no self-respecting nation could endure without resort to arms. Japan was meant, by the American President, to attack the United States. As Mr Oliver Lyttelton, then British Minister of Production, said in 1944: ‘Japan was provoked into attacking America’s Pearl Harbour. It is a travesty of history to say that America was forced into the war’.” – British Historian Captain Russell Grenfell Main Fleet to Singapore as quoted by President Herbert Hoover in Freedom Betrayed.

Dereliction of Duty
Captain L.F. Safford, US Navy, in charge of the Communications Security Section of Naval Communications in Washington, testified before the Admiral Hart Board that: “On 4 December 1941, we received definite information from two independent sources that Japan would attack the United States and Britain… at 9pm Washington time, 6 December 1941, we received positive information that Japan would declare war against the United States at a time to be specified thereafter. This information was positive and unmistakable and was made available to Military Intelligence virtually at the moment of its decoding. Finally, at 10:15am Washington time, 7 December 1941, we received positive information from Signal Intelligence Service, War Department, that the Japanese Declaration of War would be presented to the Secretary of State at 1 pm, Washington time that date; when it was 1pm in Washington, it would be daybreak in Hawaii and approximately midnight in the Philippines, which indicated a surprise air raid in Pearl Harbour in about three hours. President Roosevelt had ample time to broadcast a warning.”

Criminal Negligence
An Army Enquiry conducted July to October 1944, condemned negligence by General Marshall and other senior officers for having prior knowledge of the attacks from the intercepts and for not having alerted the Military Commander at Pearl Harbour. Congress was not satisfied with the Military investigations and reports and from November 1945 to May 1946, the Congressional Pearl Harbour Investigation, a Minority Report by Senate Members of the Committee condemned the endeavor to “throw as soft a light as possible on Washington.”
Attempted Cover-Ups
“The Roberts Commission Report was so hasty, inconclusive and incomplete. Some witnesses were examined under oath, others were not. Much testimony was not even recorded… several records were missing, and most inadequate explanations were supplied… Army and Navy information indicated growing imminence of war was delivered to the highest authorities… including the President. The fatal error of Washington was to undertake a world campaign and world responsibilities without first making provision for the security of the United States, which was their prime constitutional obligation. High Washington authorities did not communicate to Admiral Kimmel and General Short adequate information of diplomatic negotiations and of intercepted diplomatic intelligence, which, if communicated with them, would have informed them of the imminent menace of a Japanese attack in time for them to fully alert and prepare the defense of Pearl Harbour… the failure to perform the responsibilities indispensably essential to the defense of Pearl Harbour rest upon Franklin D. Roosevelt, Henry L. Stimson, Frank Knox and George C. Marshall…” (Freedom Betrayed)

Dragging a Reluctant America into War
George Morgenstern in his book, Pearl Harbour: The Story of the Secret War, published in 1947, wrote: “With absolute knowledge of war, they refused to communicate that knowledge clearly, unequivocally and in time, to the people in the field, upon whom the blow would fall… Pearl Harbour provided the American War party with the means of escaping dependence on a hesitant Congress in taking a reluctant people into war… Pearl Harbour was the first action of the Acknowledged War and the last battle of a Secret War, upon which the administration had long since embarked.

The Secret War of Deception and Propaganda
“The Secret War was waged against nations which the leadership of this country had chosen as enemies’ months before they became formal enemies, by declaration of war. It was waged also by psychological means by propaganda and deception against the American people… the people were told that acts which were equivalent to war were intended to keep the nation out of war. Constitutional processes existed only to be circumvented. Until finally the war making power of Congress was reduced to the act of ratifying an accomplished fact.”

Rejecting Every Overture for Peace
Herbert Hoover declares in his book Freedom Betrayed: “It can never be forgotten that three times during 1941, Japan made overtures for peace negotiation. America never made one unless a futile proposal to the Emperor the day before Pearl Harbour could be called peace. A peace could have been made in the Pacific that would have saved China from ravishment and would have protected the American Pacific flank. If Roosevelt was still determined to carry on his undeclared war with Germany, until it provoked reprisals, that Pacific protection was the only sane course. It would have limited our engagement in any case to the European theatre. As a result of this policy – an undeclared war upon Japan – we suffered the greatest military defeat in our history – with immeasurable consequences.

Fanning the Flames of Hate by a Mass of Lies
“Public opinion was overwhelmingly against our being involved in the war up to the day of Pearl Harbour… America came into World War One 33 months after its outbreak. She came into World War Two 27 months after it started. The processes and the months of lag were the same: the appeal to crusade for freedom, for independence of nations, for lasting peace; the same pictures of atrocities; the fanning of hate and above all, the mass of lies and stimulation of fear of invasion – they were identical. But in World War Two the people believed much less of it and they believed much more that they were being deliberately pushed into the war. They dimly recognized that they were being ground in the mills of power politics and the personal ambitions of men.”

Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt’s War
“The First World War had been conducted in the Allied side in the name of ‘the peoples’. This war was in the name of Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt. At times the whole political and military scene seemed their personal property – as it was.” (Herbert Hoover, Freedom Betrayed). “While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption …” 2 Peter 2:19

Many Recognized They Were Being Forced and Deceived into War
“In the first World War, our sons marched to war with flowers in their rifles. Bands and cheering people were on every platform. There were no bands, no flowers and no cheers on the railway platforms to World War Two. There was little singing of war ballades by soldiers or civilians, except at the urging of paid conductors of propaganda. The station platforms were stages for grieving and tears. The promises, the speeches, the propaganda filled the air as in World War One, but this time the people received it grimly and with little believing.” – Herbert Hoover.

Double Standards
President Herbert Hoover in Freedom Betrayed documents: “Roosevelt’s contemptuous refusal of Prime Minister Konoe’s proposals for peace in the Pacific of September 1941 was a lost opportunity. The acceptance of these proposals was prayerfully urged by both the American and British Ambassadors in Japan. The terms Konoye proposed would have accomplished every American purpose except possibly the return of Manchuria – and even this was thrown open to discussion. The cynic will recall that Roosevelt was willing to provoke a great war on his flank over this remote question and then gave Manchuria to Communist Russia.”

The Threat of Communism
Herbert Hoover documents in Freedom Betrayed that American Military officials strongly urged FDR to accept the Three Months’ Stand-Still Agreement offered by the Emperor of Japan in November 1941. Japan was alarmed at the threat of the Soviet Union and a 90-days delay could have kept war out of the Pacific. Secretary of War, Stimson, in his Diary, disclosed that Roosevelt and his officials were seeking for a method to stimulate an overt act of aggression from the Japanese.

Betraying Asia to Communism
“Then, Secretary of State, Hull, issued his foolish ultimatum and we were defeated at Pearl Harbour. By Roosevelt insisting that Chinese Premiere Chiang Kai-shek include Mao Tse-Tung’s communists in a Coalition government and Roosevelt’s Secret Agreement at Yalta to betray Mongolia and Manchuria to Russia, future generations were betrayed. All of China was sacrificed to the communists in the years of President Truman – at the insistence of his Left-wing advisors and General Marshall. The Second World War ended with 450 Million Asiatic peoples betrayed under communist dictatorship.” (Freedom Betrayed). “It is an abomination for kings to commit wickedness, for a throne is established by righteousness.” Proverbs 16:12

The Only Beneficiary was Communism
Herbert Hoover in Freedom Betrayed declared: “I had warned the American people time and again against becoming involved. I stated repeatedly its only end would be to promote Communism over the earth; that we would impoverish the United States and the whole world. The situation of the world today is my vindication.” “… Should help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Therefore the wrath of the Lord is upon you.”
2 Chronicles 19:2

Christian Resistance
“Despite these physical losses and these moral political disasters and these international follies… Despite the drift to collectivism, despite degeneration in government, despite the demagogic intellectuals, despite the corruption in our government and the moral corruptions of our people, we still hold to Christianity, we still have the old ingenuity in our scientific and industrial progress.”

The Public-School Front
“We have 35 million children marching through our schools and 2.5 million in our institutions of higher learning…

Hope in the Homes
“The promise of a greater America abides in the millions of cottages throughout the land, where men and women are still resolute in freedom. In their hearts the spirit of America still lives. The boys and girls from those homes will someday throw off these disasters and frustrations and will re-create their America again.” “Hate evil, love good; establish justice in the gates.” Amos 5:15

Forewarned is Forearmed
In order to anticipate problems and threats in the future we need to study the past.
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana.
“If we do not know our own history, we will simply have to endure all the same mistakes, sacrifices and absurdities all over again.” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Truth does not fear investigation
“You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:32

Dr. Peter Hammond
Frontline Fellowship
P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725
Cape Town South Africa
Tel: 021-689-4480
Email: mission@frontline.org.za
Website: www.FrontlineMissionSA.org
Website: www.livingstonefellowship.co.za
Website: www.ReformationSA.org

Understanding Economic Principles What is Money, Inflation, the Federal Reserve Bank and the Free Market by John McManus

Published November 16, 2021 | By campconstitution

What is Money:

Money is simply a medium of exchange. As a store of value, money may be traded for goods or services, which allows for commerce to flourish. A person buys money when he sells his goods or services; and he sells money when he buys goods or services. Once money is universally accepted, it spurs commerce, allows for a wide diversification of labor, stimulates productivity, fills the need for a measure of value, and advances civilization. Without money, people must resort to the impreciseness of bartering, which hampers commerce. Sound money characteristics History clearly indicates that good money has these characteristics: (1) divisibility, (2) transportability, (3) durability, and (4) relative scarcity. Gold and silver both fit these qualifications. In fact, gold has been employed as money for at least 3,000 years. Money should be a commodity valued for its own properties aside from its use as money, unlike the paper money now in use.

Types of money There are three types of money:

 Commodity

Commodity money is sound money with the four characteristics described above, which includes gold and silver. Commodity money serves to ensure personal freedom by minimizing arbitrary increases in the money supply by the government.

Fiduciary

Fiduciary money is a substitute for commodity money, including Bank or Treasury notes, token coinage, checking accounts, etc. Its value will be equivalent to the commodity money it represents if everyone has complete confidence that the substitute is fully and easily redeemable for the real thing. Fiduciary money combines the soundness of commodity money with the convenience of paper currency. Even electronic transactions can be backed by commodity money.

 Fiat

Fiat money is essentially a valueless substance, such as a small piece of paper, which does not serve as a substitute for commodity money. It’s like a token one gets at an arcade or a subway. Made legal tender by law or fiat, it is redeemable neither in a valuable commodity nor in fiduciary money. When a currency’s value is diluted by issuing more paper than there are tangible assets backing it, wealth is transferred away from one segment of society to another. Typically, the poor and middle class are the ones who end up short. Fiat money empowers the government at the expense of personal freedom and prosperity by permitting inflation of the money supply which always leads to higher prices. Fiat money is what we all have now in the form of the Federal Reserve Notes we all carry and consider to be “cash.”

What Does the U.S. Constitution Say About Money?

Regarding money, the Constitution grants the following powers to Congress in Article I, Section 8: “To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures; To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States.”

The founders intended “to coin money” to mean taking precious metal and stamping it into coinage for use as a medium of exchange

 James Madison explains further

By “regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin,” power was granted to Congress to create what James Madison explained was “uniformity in the value” of both domestic and foreign coin. The founders sought to prevent disputes about the value of domestic and foreign coinage among the states, and by the states with foreign nations, so they gave power to Congress to keep this from occurring. The Constitution lists no grant of power to Congress to print paper money or emit “bills of credit,” the term for paper money in common use at the time. And if no such power was granted, Congress has no authority to engage in the process — or to delegate it to any central bank including the Federal Reserve.

Counterfeiting

As for the constitutional grant of power to punish counterfeiters of both “the securities and current coin of the United States,” the founders intended that the same governmental unit possessing power to insure uniformity in the value of the coin of the United States would also have the power to punish anyone who counterfeits it. Note that there was no power given to punish counterfeiters of U.S. paper money or bills of credit, since the Constitution does not authorize U.S. paper money or bills of credit.

While Article I, Section 8 granted specific powers to the federal government, Article I, Section 10 lists restrictions on state power. These restrictions were freely accepted by the delegates. Yet they agreed to several prohibitions including: “No State shall … coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold or silver a tender in payment of debts….”

Thus, the Constitution clearly states that the only permissible legal tender is gold and silver money.

What is Inflation?

. Inflation is an increase in the amount of currency in circulation, resulting in a  relatively sharp and sudden fall in its value and a general rise in prices.

Value Stolen

During inflation, the value of money ends up in the possession of whoever does the inflating. The counterfeiter is the simplest example of an inflator at work. If he produces some good-looking bills, he can “spend” them and walk away with someone else’s goods or services for the cost of paper, ink, and some time on a printing press. He has traded essentially worthless paper for valuable goods.

The previous owner of the goods or the provider of the services is left holding the counterfeit bills. If he fails to realize that they’re counterfeit, he will pass them on in some other transaction. In virtually all cases, the fact that the bills are illegitimate will eventually be discovered and someone will be defrauded.

If the counterfeit currency is not discovered to be bogus and the counterfeiter continues to introduce quantities of it into the system, then all holders of currency are defrauded. Inflation, in a very real sense, steals from those who hold money. When practiced by governments, inflation is a hidden tax on all holders of money including all deposits and investments denominated in the unit of currency being inflated.

Inflation as a Hidden

Tax Properly and simply defined, taxation is the taking of the wealth of the people by government. Inflation fits that definition exactly, just as surely as does an income tax, a sales tax, or any other kind of tax. Therefore, anyone figuring his tax bill must add amounts taken not only via income tax, corporation tax, excise tax, and others, but also the hidden tax of inflation.

 How the Federal Reserve Inflates

  Simply put, the Federal Reserve creates currency with a simple bookkeeping entry and then purchases government securities (Treasury bills, bonds, or notes) on which it then collects interest. This newly created currency expands the money supply, which constitutes inflation of the money supply.

Inflation is a tactic turned to by governments in debt, a hidden way of forcing the people to pay for programs they would not allow if direct taxation were demanded of them.

 What is the Federal Reserve?

  Congress established the Federal Reserve on December 22, 1913, to control the U.S. money supply and interest rates. The Fed is not a federal agency and not a private corporation, but rather a hybrid of the two. This central bank is the third under the U.S. Constitution. The previous two were rejected amidst controversies over their artificial inflation of the money supply, abandonment of sound money, and lack of constitutional authorization.

No Oversight

No branch of the federal government owns any portion of the Fed, and there is no official oversight of the Fed from Congress or any government entity, even though the Fed claims otherwise. It alone is responsible for controlling the money supply and has special powers to invoke extraordinary actions during times of “economic crisis.” In essence, the Fed can manipulate the entire economy by creating inflation or deflation, recession or boom, and sending the stock market up or down at whim. The Fed’s website suggests that its duties fall into four general areas: conducting the nation’s monetary policy; supervising and regulating banking institutions; maintaining the stability of the financial system; and providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions.

 Mismanagement

Yet, since the establishment of the Federal Reserve, the U.S. dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power while the Fed maintains a monopoly over the issuance of bank notes or cash. The temptation to issue more paper money than can be redeemed by the issuing agency has proven irresistible. This inflationary policy produces predictable results: people are defrauded, commerce slows, confidence in the credit of the U.S. suffers, and bankers, merchants, and their allies in politics become wealthy.      Powerful banking interests like to blame their failures on deregulation or “free banking,” even though competition among banks would lead to a healthier marketplace. Honest banks would remain in business; fraudulent banks would fail; and bank customers would have learned a great deal about honest banking, honest bankers, and honest money. The nation would be spared future agony because of the awareness of the people and free banking.

Does the Free Market Work?

It does when it’s tried. But America does not now have a truly free market and has not for a long time. The economy has been harmed by excessive government spending, debt, taxation, and regulation. It has also been harmed by the creation of money out of thin air by the Federal Reserve. Yet the problem is being blamed on the free market. And the solution that is being offered by Congress is to spend more, borrow more, tax more, regulate more, and create more money out of thin air. Never mind that doing more of what caused the problem can only make the problem worse!

Common sense demonstrates that the economy cannot be moved out of recession or depression with increased spending. Children are taught that a penny saved is a penny earned via a trusty Piggy Bank. Responsible parents know that they cannot provide for themselves and their families through endless borrowing. They have learned to live within their means and save, for living above their means leads to painful decisions.

It’s no different with the government, except that the government can (and does) finance its debts by borrowing money from the Federal Reserve. The Fed, in turn, creates the money out of thin air. The Fed also pumps newly created money into the economy through the banking system by artificially lowering interest rates.

Children are taught that money does not grow on trees. But the Fed treats money as if it does. It expands the amount of money in the economy claiming that the additional money will jump-start the economy. The problem is that expanding the money supply (the true definition of inflation) devalues the money already in circulation, causing prices to rise. Monopoly players see this firsthand in the phenomenon of the rapid increase in the value of properties when they have more money to spend.

But inflation is only part of the problem. Fed manipulation of interest rates below what the market otherwise would dictate has encouraged bad loans and malinvestments that later provided the “rationale” for government bailouts in late 2008. So too has the Community Reinvestment Act, which has effectively compelled banks to make sub-prime loans to people who couldn’t afford it.

But government bailouts will only make the problem worse, since the money for the bailouts will come out of the pockets of the American taxpayers one way or another. Moreover, government bailouts reward the recipients for their bad business decisions and spending habits and encourage more of the same. The real way to help the economy is to slash government spending, reduce debt, restore sound money, and unfetter the market from big government regulation. Without the economic drain and the malinvestment now caused by government intervention, Americans would be better able and would have a greater incentive to save, with the savings fueling future economic growth.

(A link to a PDF version of this article:  https://campconstitution.net/wp-content/themes/campconstitution/documents/Understanding_Economic_Principles_–_What_Is_Money_Inflation_Federal_Reserve__Free_Market.pdf

About the author

Mr. McManus was named the president of The John Birch Society in 1991 and served as such until 2015. He also served many years as Publisher of The New American and the JBS Bulletin.

Mr. McManus has written and produced numerous audiovisual programs, including the popular DVD “Overview of America”, which is a moving tribute about America’s constitutional roots. He has also written several books including “Financial Terrorism” (1993), “Changing Commands: The Betrayal of America’s Military” (1995), “William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment” (2002), and “The Insiders” (2004), and his most recent– “The John Birch Society: Its History Recounted by Someone Who Was There”. He is also an instructor at Camp Constitution’s annual family camp.

Designed by Eric Conover.