The Weekly Sam: Darwin Versus Intelligent Design By Samuel L. Blumenfeld

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.

Camp Constitution Loses One of its Co-Founders and Camp Manager with the Passing of Charles Everett

We are sad to report the passing of our dear friend and Camp Constitution’s co-founder and manager, Charlie Everett.  I knew Charlie since 1990, when we spent a few days training me for my new job as field rep for the John Birch Society.  In December of 2008, when I got word that its summer camp program-then named Freedom Generation-was being canceled, Charlie was the first person I called to see if he would be on board with our own camp program.  He immediately answered in the affirmative, and his first job was to contact a local lawyer friend to get some legal advice.

Among his duties as camp manager-a volunteer position- Charlie would handle and process all of the camp applications, the bank transactions, insurance for camp events, and prepare the annual report for the State of New Hampshire.

Our prayers go out to his wife Linda, his three daughters, and his grandchildren.

Countering the Marxist Hate Group Southern Poverty Law Center By New Tolerance Campaign’s Hate Map

This is a news release from New Tolerance Campaign which exposes left-wing hate groups and counters The Southern Poverty Law (SPLC) which has Camp Constitution on its hate map.  They have us listed as “antigovernment” and based in Charlotte, North Carolina. https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map?state=NC We tried to let them know that we are New Hampshire based a few months ago but they didn’t make the correction.

I am sure that the map below will be filled with many more left-wing hate groups.

 

 

New Tolerance Campaign Launches Hate Map Documenting Political Violence by Leftist Organizations

“We are committed to upholding true tolerance and providing a resource that ensures all hate in the United States is addressed, regardless of political affiliation.”

Washington, DC — The New Tolerance Campaign (@New_Tolerance) today announced the launch of its groundbreaking “Hate Map,” a comprehensive resource documenting instances of political violence perpetrated by leftist organizations across the United States.

This interactive map aims to fill the gaps left by traditional civil rights organizations, such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which have largely overlooked or ignored such acts.

Click here to view the NTC Hate Map.

Watch the launch video below:

The NTC Hate Map is designed to be a vital tool for journalists, researchers, and news organizations seeking to understand and report on the full spectrum of political violence in the country. Unlike other resources that selectively highlight certain types of intolerance, NTC’s map provides an unbiased, detailed account of incidents, ensuring a more balanced and thorough perspective.

“For too long, groups like the SPLC have failed to address the violence and intolerance stemming from the far-left,” said Gregory T. Angelo, President of New Tolerance Campaign. “Our Hate Map is a critical step towards exposing and documenting leftist hate and violence.  We are committed to upholding true tolerance and providing a resource that ensures all hate in the United States is addressed, regardless of their political affiliation.”

The map includes detailed profiles of numerous leftist groups known for their violent activities, such as ANTIFA chapters nationwide, Black Lives Matter affiliates, and various radical organizations. It features incidents ranging from vandalism and physical assaults to threats and intimidation, providing a comprehensive view of the political violence landscape.

Key features of the NTC Hate Map include:

  • Extensive Coverage: Documentation of incidents across the United States, providing a wide-ranging view of leftist political violence.
  • Regular Updates: The map will be continually updated to include new incidents and developments, ensuring it remains a current and reliable resource.
  • User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use by journalists and researchers, with intuitive navigation and detailed incident reports.

“Traditional civil rights groups have been selective in their condemnation of hate and intolerance, often turning a blind eye to violence from the left,” Angelo continued. “Our Hate Map addresses this imbalance, providing a crucial resource for anyone committed to understanding and combating all forms of political violence.”

The NTC Hate Map is now live and accessible to the public on the New Tolerance Campaign website. NTC encourages all interested parties to utilize this resource to gain a more comprehensive understanding of political violence in America and to support efforts in promoting true tolerance.

Media requests: communications@newtolerance.org

The Best Enemy Money Can Buy: A Presentation by Alex Newman

Author and journalist, Alex Newman conducts a class at Camp Constitution’s 16th annual family camp.  This presentation explains how elements in the US. government have aided, abetted and promoted our nation’s enemies from the Bolshevik Revolution to present day.

Mr. Newman hosts a show called the Liberty Sentinel which airs on Frank Speech and other platforms:

https://libertysentinel.org/alex/

The Weekly Sam: Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Israel By Samuel Blumenfeld

What makes Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama think that peace is
possible between Israel and the Palestinians so long as Iran threatens to nuke Israel, is
rearming Hisbullah in Lebanon, and arming Hamas in Gaza, which is still determined to
destroy Israel?

What makes the Obama administration think that the Palestinians want peace when they
propose that Israel no longer maintain itself as a Jewish state and insist that it take in over
three million descendants of the 700,000 Arabs who once lived there? Forgotten are the
800,000 Jews expelled from Muslim countries after the 1948 war.
All the fuss being made by Biden and Clinton over the building of 1,600 new housing
units in Jerusalem is a case of misplaced indignation. Short of Israel committing suicide,
the Palestinians under Abbas are not about to assume the responsibilities of statehood
which would require it to behave like a legitimate sovereign nation. And that is why
they have rejected every offer the Israelis have made in the pursuit of peace.
The Palestinian government is the recipient of world charity which makes it unnecessary
for it to create anything of value. As the recipient of billions in free money, why bother
to work for a living? And as long as there is no peace agreement, they can continue to
launch suicide attacks against Israel at will.

Ever since the Oslo peace process began in 1993, Israel has had to make concession after
concession in the interest of peace. The Palestinians saw this as the successful result of
their intifada waged from 1987 to 1993. Many Israelis saw the Oslo process as the road
to a real peace that would bring untold prosperity to the region.
After President Clinton’s famous Camp David summit in the summer of 2000 between
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Yasir Arafat, Barak offered the Palestinians the
most generous peace terms any Israeli government could ever offer: 88 percent of the
West Bank and most of East Jerusalem. The response? The second intifada of
2001-2002 in which over 1,000 Israelis were killed in terrorist and suicide bomber
attacks.

In 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza, destroying the homes, farms, and
businesses of over 8,000 Israeli citizens. Did this disengagement bring peace? From the
date of withdrawal to the 2009 war, Gazan terrorists fired about 6,000 rockets and
mortars into Southern Israel. And even after the Gazan war, Hamas is still rearming
with the help of Iran, and Al Qaida has made inroads in the territory.
In September 2008, Prime Minister Olmert offered to withdraw from 94 percent of the
West Bank and create international Muslim control over Jerusalem’s holy sites. This
far-reaching offer was also rejected by the Palestinians.
Israel’s unceasing efforts to achieve peace in order to demonstrate to America that it truly
believes that peace is possible flies in the face of the intransigent realities on the ground.

The simple fact is that more and more Israelis are beginning to acknowledge that peace,
seemingly so near at hand, yet so elusive, is in the long run unachievable. Why?
Because the pre-conditions set by the Palestinians are simply impossible to meet.
Another fact is that despite the absence of peace, Israel has not only survived for 61
years, but has become a high-tech powerhouse, achieved a high standard of living, and
has managed to fare much better than most countries during the world financial crisis.
Yet, sixteen years of piecemeal concessions made under pressure from America and the
Europeans have convinced Israel haters that the Jewish state is quite vulnerable. Thus,
Israel’s yearning for peace and willingness to uproot its own people in Gaza and the
so-called settlements in Judea and Samaria, has encouraged its enemies to go for the
jugular.

And that is why what Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton hotly said in response to the notice
of the building in Jerusalem will provide ammunition to those who claim that it is Israel
that stands in the way of peace. Israel wants to please its American ally, but suicide is
not the most practical way to do it.
It should be noted that Israel now has a population of over 7 million inhabitants, of which
1.5 million are Muslim citizens of Israel, most of whom would object to becoming
citizens of a Palestinian state. Meanwhile, no Jews are permitted to be citizens of
Palestine. So much for a democratic, multicultural Palestinian state. There were even
Israelis in Gaza willing to live under a Palestinian government provided they were not
persecuted by that state.

Why doesn’t the American government insist that the projected Palestinian state permit
Jews to live in it? Unfortunately, the Palestinians would have to stop hating Jews, and
Barack Obama is not about to impose on the Palestinians their Allah-given imperative to
hate and kill Jews.

This article was from the Sam Blumenfeld Archives:  https://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/

The Blumenfeld Archives      

The Untold Story- The book entitled The Transfer Agreement: The Controversial Haavara Agreement between the Nazi Regime and the Zionist Movement as a rescue operation. A Review by Dr. Maria Perez

 

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

  1. God can use for good what the devil intended for evil—such as the Nazi Regime.
  2. God is always thinking about tomorrow: the nation of Israel was birthed well before its 1948 founding.
  3. God sets the stage for His future agenda, even using and changing the hearts and minds of adversaries.
  4. When God is doing great work, bumps along the way can be expected: conflicts, opposition…no easy journey.

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?

 

Works Cited

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.

A Report on Camp Constitution’s 16th Annual Family Camp

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:

2024

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

Camp Constitution 2024 Archive Update

Campers:

It was a great week. I was glad to see all our returning campers and it was a pleasure to meet soooo many new campers. We had quite a talent pool at our campfires this past week and much of it was captured in video and in pictures. You will be glad to know that all those shared photos and videos were uploaded to the archives.

Use the Camp Items Menu->Camp Pictures or this link to visit the archive.

Also, the newspapers from last week are avail under the Camp Items Menu->Camp Archives. Once there choose the Camp Journal Archives link or use this quick link to get there.

Keep in mind, if you are a repeat camper or parent of several campers, all the surviving photos and newspapers are available going back to the beginning in 2009.

Have fun revisiting past camps and I hope to see you all next year!

A Runaway Slave and First Republican Platform

Read American Minute

By the time of the Civil War, the slave population in the United States had grown to four million.

 

The two major political parties in America were the Democrats and the Whigs…. continue reading …

Download as PDF …

The Strength and Genius of Booker T. Washington

Democrats were pro-choice regarding slavery, wanting to protect the slave owner’s choice as to whether or not to own a slave, similar to sharia Islamic countries.

 

The Whigs were the opposition party, taking their name from the British political party of the same name that opposed the king.

Though many Whigs were against slavery, they tried to be a “big tent party” to keep members from defecting to smaller parties, such as the Free Soil Party or the Know-Nothing Party.

 

Tensions over slavery grew. An attempt was made to reconcile national differences with “The Missouri Compromise of 1820” and with “The Compromise of 1850.”

 

Slavery was opposed by Christians, most notably Quakers and Methodists, as well as Second Great Awakening preachers.

 

This is similar to England’s anti-slavery movement which was championed by William Wilberforce, and the Christian minister who influenced him, former slave-trader and composer of the song Amazing Grace, John Newton. Newton corresponded with John Wesley.

Wesley, who wrote in his Thoughts Upon Slavery, 1773:

 

“… that detestable trade of man-stealing … I come back to the same point; better no trade, than trade procured by villany. It is far better to have no wealth, than to gain wealth, at the expense of virtue. Better is honest poverty, than all the riches brought by the tears, and sweat, and blood of our fellow-creatures.”

 

American preacher Charles Finney was president of Oberlin College where he graduated the first black woman with a college degree, Mary Jane Patterson.

 

Finney proclaimed “I had made up my mind on the question of slavery, and was exceedingly anxious to arouse public attention to the subject … In my prayers and preaching, I so often alluded to slavery, and denounced it, that a considerable excitement came to exist among the people.”

 

It is worth noting that it was Christians who pushed to end slavery.

The push to end slavery did not originate with other religions, such as sharia Caliphs in Arabia; nor Ottoman Sultans in Turkey; nor Shahs in Persia; nor Hindu Brahman in India; nor Ashanti chieftains in Ghana; nor Aztec Emperors in Mexico; nor Inca Emperors in Peru; nor the thousands of years of Buddhist, Taoist, and Confucian Emperors in China.

 

It was vocal Christian preachers who championed ending slavery.

 

In 1850, the Democrat-controlled U.S. Congress passed the infamous Fugitive Slave Act, pushed through by Democrat Speaker Howell Cobb and Democrat Senate President William King, and signed by Democrat President Millard Fillmore.

 

The Fugitive Slave Act mandated that if a runaway slave escaped to the North, the Federal government mandated that citizens help capture him and return him to his Southern slave owner. This put the slavery issue in the face of the anti-slavery North, whereas before they could ignore it as being a Southern problem.

 

The Fugitive Slave Act imposed severe penalties on those who aided escaped slaves with food or shelter on their trek to Michigan or Canada. It made it a federal crime to interfere with the slave catchers’ recovery of runaway slaves.

 

A person could be criminally liable, fined $1,000, and imprisoned for six months if they failed to report a neighbor suspected of helping slaves.

 

Some states defied the federal government by passing “personal liberty laws,” effectively nullifying it, and other communities insisted on jury trials before an alleged fugitive slave could be taken by federal authorities.

 

Some juries refused to convict those indicted. Other communities forbade local law enforcement officials from using local jails to hold the accused.

 

In 1854, a slave named Joshua Glover ran away from his master in St. Louis, Missouri, and fled to Racine, Wisconsin, where he worked at a sawmill. In March of 1854, authorized by the Fugitive Slave Act, police from St. Louis traveled across state lines to Racine.

 

On March 11, 1854, they bribed an acquaintance of Joshua Glover with $100 to open the cabin door. They stormed in and ambushed Glover. Taking him by surprise, they hit him with the butt of a gun and St. Louis Police Deputy Marshal John Kearney clubbed him several times in the face.

 

The bleeding Glover was thrown in the back of a wagon and taken to the Milwaukee jail. The kind jailer treated his wounds. The next day, word of Glover’s arrest spread through Racine. The largest crowd ever in the town’s history gathered in the square. Over a hundred residents rushed to Milwaukee.

 

There they joined a crowd, which by evening had grown to 5,000. They grabbed lumber and pickaxes from a nearby construction site and broke through the jail wall, freeing Glover. He was quickly put in a wagon and whisked out of town.

 

The Racine Daily Morning Advocate printed March 12, 1854: “Imagine a crowd of four to six thousand persons smashing in the jail, releasing the negro and then running as they could the distance of a mile, and every man in town running too—windows open, handkerchiefs waving.”

 

The Sauk County Standard in Baraboo, Wisconsin, printed the Glover story, Wednesday, March 22, 1854.

 

After nine stops on the Underground Railroad Joshua Glover made it to the Racine harbor where he was smuggled onto a boat headed across Lake Michigan to Canada.

 

Racine citizens printed a resolution in the Daily Morning Advocate, March 12, 1854:

 

“Resolved, that inasmuch as the Senate of the United States has repealed all compromises heretofore adopted by the Congress of the United States, we as citizens of Wisconsin, are justified in declaring, and herby declare, the slave-catching law of 1850 disgraceful and also repealed.”

 

A historical marker in Milwaukee’s Cathedral Square Park is titled “The Rescue of Joshua Glover”:

 

“Joshua Glover was a runaway slave who sought freedom in Racine. In 1854, his Missouri owner used the Fugitive Slave Act to apprehend him. This 1850 law permitted slave catchers to cross state lines to capture escaped slaves.

 

Glover was taken to Milwaukee and imprisoned … Word spread about Glover’s incarceration and a great crowd gathered around the jail demanding his release. They beat down the jail door and released Joshua Glover. He was eventually escorted to Canada and safety …

 

The Glover incident helped galvanize abolitionist sentiment in Wisconsin. This case eventually led the state supreme court to defy the federal government by declaring the Fugitive Slave Act unconstitutional.”

 

A few days after Joshua Glover was freed, the same anti-slavery Wisconsin citizens met on March 20, 1854, in a schoolhouse in Ripon, Wisconsin, to form an anti-slavery party. They named it the Republican Party.

 

Congress made the situation worse on May 30, 1854. Democrat Senator Stephen A. Douglas pressured Democrat President Franklin Pierce to sign the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which let inhabitants in those territories have the freedom of choice to decide if they wanted to come into the Union as slave states or free states.

 

It prescribed “dividing the land into two territories, Kansas and Nebraska, and leaving the question of slavery to be decided by the settlers.” Instead of slavery diminishing, as many founding fathers had hoped, now it was expanding.

 

Pro-slavery Democrats flooded into Kansas in an effort to make it a slave state. The violence and bloody battles that followed gave rise to the name “Bleeding Kansas.”

 

Contrary to the 1619 Project’s historical revisionism, slavery was not a black versus white issue, it was a Republican versus Democrat issue. It was not a hardware problem but a software problem. It was not a skin problem but a brain problem.

 

Anti-slavery activists soon organized the Republican Party in other states, aided by church members who could no longer sit silent. These included Quakers, pietistic Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Scandinavian Lutherans.

 

Ohio’s held the first “Anti-Slavery in Nebraska” Republican Convention, March 22, 1854.

 

Michigan held the first state-wide Republican convention on July 6, 1854.

 

Indiana held its first Republican “Peoples’ Convention,” on July 13, 1854, led by Henry S. Lane.

 

New York established their state Republican Party in 1855.

 

The first National Republican Convention met in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on February 22, 1856, calling Americans to: “resist and overthrow the present National Administration (of Democrat President Franklin Pierce) as it is identified with the progress of the slave power to national supremacy.”

 

The first Republican Presidential Nominating Convention was in Philadelphia, June 17-19, 1856, where they selected Senator John C. Frémont of California to be the first ever Republican Presidential Candidate.

 

The original Republican platform was adopted June 18, 1856. It was the first ever political party in history to have abolition of slavery in its official party platform:

 

“This Convention of Delegates … are opposed to … the extension of Slavery into Free Territory …

With our Republican fathers, we hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are endowed with the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior design of our Federal Government were to secure these rights to all persons …

 

Our Republican fathers … abolished slavery in all our National (Northwest) Territory … It becomes our duty to maintain this provision … against all attempts to violate it for the purpose of establishing Slavery …

 

We deny the authority of Congress … to give legal existence to slavery … It is both the right and the imperative duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism—Polygamy, and Slavery.”

 

Dred Scott was another slave in St, Louis, Missouri, who travelled with his master to the free states of Illinois and Wisconsin, and then back to the slave state of Missouri.

 

Since he was not allowed to learn to read, he was unaware that while he was in the free states of Illinois or Wisconsin he could have just walked away from his master.

 

Some of Dred Scott’s abolitionist friends helped him sue for freedom, including Republican Congressman Henry Blow, whose wife started the first kindergarten in the United States.

 

On March 6, 1857, the Supreme Court, with 7 of the 9 justices being Democrat, issued their infamous Dred Scott decision.

Chief Justice Roger Taney, who had been appointed by Democrat President Jackson, wrote that Dred Scott was not a citizen, but property and belonged to his owner, writing in his decision that slaves were:

 

“… so far inferior … that the Negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for their own benefit.”

 

Instead of settling the slavery issue in hopes of averting the Civil War, the Supreme Court precipitated it.

 

Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, declared in Springfield, Illinois, June 26, 1857:

 

“Two weeks ago Judge Douglas spoke here on the … Dred Scott decision … He finds the Republicans insisting that the Declaration of Independence includes ALL men, black as well as white … He boldly denies that it includes Negroes … I protest against that …”

 

Lincoln continued:

 

“Chief Justice Taney, in his opinion in the Dred Scott case, admits that the language of the Declaration is broad enough to include the whole human family, but he and Judge Douglas argue that the authors of that instrument did not intend to include Negroes …

 

I think the authors of that noble instrument intended to include all men … Dred Scott, his wife and two daughters were all involved in the suit … Judge Douglas is delighted to have them decided to be slaves …”

 

Lincoln added:

 

“How differently the respective courses of the Democratic and Republican parties …

Republicans inculcate … that the Negro is a man; that his bondage is cruelly wrong … Democrats deny his manhood; deny, or dwarf to insignificance, the wrong of his bondage; so far as possible, crush all sympathy for him, and cultivate and excite hatred and disgust against him.”

 

Prior to the Civil War, America was divided into five categories:

 

1. Radical Republican North: whose attitude was slavery is wrong–end it now.

 

2. Moderate Republican North: whose attitude was slavery is wrong but the country should transition out of it gradually over time so slaves could be prepared for freedom.

 

3. Money Motivated Voters: who did not care about the value of human life. They were more concerned about financial issues such as wages, jobs, pocketbook, economy, taxes, and tariffs.

 

4. Moderate Democratic South: whose attitude was slavery is wrong, but it is settled law, the nation should just live with it, just have it be rare and few, and treat your slaves nice.

 

5. Extreme Southern Democrats: whose attitude was slavery is good and should be expanded into new territories. They wanted Northerners, who were morally opposed to slavery, be forced to participate in it with the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the Dred Scott decision of 1857.

 

Interestingly, these same categories regarding the value of human life are similar how America is divided today:

 

1. Pro-Life Republicans: whose attitude is abortion is wrong, end it now.

 

2. Establishment Republicans: whose attitude is to gradually limit abortions.

 

3. Money Motivated Voters: who did not care about the value of human life. They avoid social issues and vote for candidates who will give them money, welfare benefits, and help their pocketbook–“It’s the economy, stupid.”

 

4. Pro-Choice Democrats: whose attitude is that abortion is “settled law” and the nation should live with it, just have it be “safe, legal, and rare.”

 

5. Radical Democrats: whose attitude is that abortion is good and should be expanded world-wide though nationalized healthcare and global U.N. initiatives.

 

Reagan wrote in “Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation,” The Human Life Review, 1983:

 

“Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should be slaves …

 

Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion.”

 

In 1861, Lincoln was elected the first Republican President.

 

Southern states seceded and formed the Confederacy. The President of the Confederacy was the Democrat Senator Jefferson Davis of Mississippi, who had stated: “African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing.”

 

Lincoln addressed the Indiana Regiment, March 17, 1865:

 

“Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally.”

 

Lincoln stated in his Second Annual Message, December 1, 1862:

 

“In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free … We shall nobly save — or meanly lose — the last, best hope of earth … The way is plain … which if followed the world will forever applaud and God must forever bless.”

Download as PDF …

Read as American Minute post

The Strength and Genius of Booker T. Washington

William J. Federer

AmericanFaith

Rumble

YouTube

Schedule Bill Federer for informative interviews & captivating PowerPoint presentations: 314-502-8924 wjfederer@gmail.com
American Minute is a registered trademark of William J. Federer. Permission is granted to forward, reprint, or duplicate, with acknowledgment.

Camp Constitution’s Third Annual Weekend Family Camp Friday September 27 to Sunday September 29

 

Camp Constitution’s third annual weekend family camp will be held from Friday September 27 to Sunday September at Camp Sentinel in Tuftonboro, NH.  https://www.campsentinel.org/

This year’s weekend instructors include  Rev. Steve Craft, author of  America:  Home of the Brave or Land  of the Slave, Michael King of the Massachusetts Family Institute, and New Hampshire State Rep. Paul Terry.  Mrs. Jessica Whitworth will run the Junior Patriot Camo for children 4-12.

Recreational Activities include canoeing, basketball, gaga and a field trip to the Wright World War II Museum and Apple Picking.  Cost is $150. Per person.  A link to the application: https://campconstitution.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Family-Weekend-Release-form-2024.pdf

For more information, please contact Hal Shurtleff at (857) 498-1309 or E-mail campconstitution1@gmail.com