Archive for 01/02/2010

POLITICO

By ALEX ISENSTADT | 1/1/10

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) reached out Thursday evening to South Carolina GOP Attorney General Henry McMaster, the leader of a group of 13 Republican state attorneys general who are threatening to file suit against the Senate health care bill, and urged him to forgo any legal action, POLITICO has learned.

According to a copy of a memo sent by McMaster’s chief of staff to other GOP state attorneys general detailing the call, Nelson asked McMaster to “call off the dogs,” a reference to recent threats by the state AGs to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a Medicaid provision in the bill that benefits Nebraska at the expense of other states.

Under the terms of a deal Nelson cut with Senate leaders to secure his crucial vote for the health care package, Nebraska would be exempted from having to pay for the coverage of its new Medicaid enrollees—leaving the federal government to pick up the tab. The deal is expected to cost the federal government $100 million over the next 10 years.

Jake Thompson, a Nelson spokesman, declined comment when reached by POLITICO Friday.

The memo, written by McMaster Chief of Staff Trey Walker, explains that Nelson told McMaster that the Medicaid deal had not been his idea, and that the same Medicaid exemption would be extended to other states.

“Senator Nelson insisted that he had not asked for the Cornhusker Kickback to be placed in the U.S. Senate version of the health care bill to secure his vote. Senator Nelson told the attorney general that it was simply a ‘marker’ placed in the U.S. Senate version of the bill and assured the attorney general that it would be ‘fixed,’ says the memo.

The document goes on to say: “Senator Nelson said it would be ‘fixed’ by extending the Cornhusker Kickback (100% federal payment) on Medicaid to every state.”

Senate Democratic leaders have made no reference to a plan to expand the Nebraska deal to the remaining 49 states — a move that would be prohibitively expensive to the federal government and raise serious questions about whether health reform would lower the expected federal deficit, as President Barack Obama claims it would.

At the same time, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said after the Nebraska deal came to light that he envisions other states lining up to seek a similar deal down the road. Under the Nebraska provision, all added expenses from expanding Medicaid to cover the uninsured in Nebraska starting in 2017 would be borne by the federal government forever, not split with the state as they are now.

According to the memo, McMaster responded to Nelson by saying that the goal of the GOP attorneys general was to remove the Nebraska Medicaid provision from the bill and that “he saw no way that he—nor any of the state attorneys general—will support extension of the Cornhusker Kickback to every state nor be a part of a deal like that.”

A source familiar with the call said Nelson called McMaster Thursday evening after first contacting South Carolina GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham to express his desire to speak with McMaster. Graham and fellow South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint asked McMaster late last month to investigate the Nebraska provision.

Nelson has been under tremendous political pressure since details of the deal emerged and on Tuesday, Rasmussen Reports released the results of an automated poll that showed troubling numbers for Nelson, who is not up for re-election until 2012.

One day later, Nelson aired a television ad explaining his vote.

“With all the distortions about health care reform, I want you to hear directly from me,” the Democratic senator said in the ad.

The telephone survey of 500 Nebraskans, conducted Monday, suggested Republican Gov. Dave Heineman would defeat Nelson in a potential 2012 Senate race by a 61-30 margin.

The poll showed Nelson with a 55 percent unfavorable rating and 64 percent disapproval for Democratic health care reform legislation.

“With all the distortions about health care reform, I want you to hear directly from me,” the Democratic senator says in the ad.

Advertisements

Louisiana Recall Mary Landrieu

Posted: 01/02/2010 by Lynn Dartez in 2011

We in New Iberia Louisiana has started the Recall on Mary Landrieu on the Dec. 29,2009. We can recall her and all is being pushed forward on this effort. Other states need to move forward on there Senators and Congressman. We can provide you with the info to do so. She will be going down hard. The paper work has been signed and everything is in motion.

We only have 6 months to get all the signatures we need. Everyone’s help is needed on this. Please contact me here if you can help.

The New Iberia Louisiana Tea Party

Lynn and Lee Ann Dartez

roach1958@cox.net

Recall Elections

Filed under: Uncategorized — Lynn Dartez @ 6:29 pm Edit This


No recall petition may be submitted for certification to or accepted for certification by the registrar of voters or any other official if less than six months remain in the term of office.

Once the first signature is obtained, the recall petition becomes a public record with the chairman or vice chairman as custodian.  After the petition is submitted to the Registrar of Voters, the chairman or vice chairman shall no longer be the custodian.

1.   Copy of recall petition is filed with SOS by chairman of recall committee.

2.   The completed petition is submitted to the Registrar(s) of Voters:

  • Not later than 180 days after being filed with SOS.
  • If there are fewer than 1000 qualified electors in the voting area, the petition shall be submitted not later than 90 days after being filed with SOS.
  • If the final day for submitting the petition falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the deadline shall be on the next day which is not a  Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday.

3.   The Registrar of Voters shall certify the recall petition:

  • within 15 working days after it is presented to him, or
  • within 20 working days after it is presented to him if the voting area contains more than  50,000 registered voters.

4.   The petition is forwarded to the Governor if the required number of signatures are certified by the Registrar of Voters.

5.   The Governor issues an election proclamation within 15 days after he receives the certified petition from the Registrar of Voters.

  • Primary Election Date:  the proclamation shall be issued on or before the last day for candidates to qualify in the election.  (last day of qualifying)
  • General Election Date:  the proclamation shall be issued on or before the 46th day prior to the election.  (same as propositions)

6.   Immediately after the issuance of the proclamation, the Governor shall publish the proclamation in the official journal of each parish where the recall election is to be held.

7.   Within 24 hours after issuing the proclamation, the Governor shall send a copy of the petition and proclamation, by registered or certified mail, to the clerk of the district court for each parish in which the recall election will be held.

8.   A copy of the petition and proclamation also shall be sent to the Secretary of State.  (by the Governor)

9.   Within 24 hours after receiving the copies, the Secretary of State shall notify all other election officials in the parish(es) where the recall election is to be held.

10.  If the recall passes, the public officer is recalled and removed from office and the office is declared vacant when the election returns are certified to the Secretary of State.  The vacancy is then filled as usual.  The recalled official cannot be appointed to fill the vacancy.

11.  If the recall fails, no recall election for the same official shall be held within 18 months from the date of the failed recall election.

For a chart showing the recent history of Recall Elections held in Louisiana, click here.

For a PDF of the Recall Petition form, click here.

December 30, 2009

Secession: The Hope for Humanity

Filed under: Uncategorized — Lynn Dartez @ 3:04 pm Edit This


30/12/2009

by Russell D. Longcore
by Russell D. Longcore
Recently by Russell D. Longcore: Secession, the Second Amendment and Sun Tzu

In this article, I will define secession and make a case why secession is the only reasonable, logical and pragmatic solution to further the cause of human liberty and functional governance.

What is secession?

“Secession” is broadly defined as “the act of withdrawing formally from membership in an organization, association, or alliance.” We are defining it specifically as the action of a state to cease its participation in the United States of America and for that state to create itself as a new independent, sovereign nation.

The American Revolution of 1776 was, by definition, an act of secession. An association of English colonies banded together and issued a Declaration of Independence that was presented to King George III. The King did not accept the secession and a civil war ensued.

Remember that the Declaration of Independence in 1776 was not the legal, formal secession document originating within any state Governor’s offices or the state legislatures. The 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence were lawyers, merchants, farmers and others who took it upon themselves to place the King on notice of the intentions of a small minority of Royal subjects who did not wish to be subjects any longer, and who were leading a revolution against the King. (Read Secession and Attorneys)

Another secession event happened in the United States in the 1860s. This time, it was the actual state governments that issued formal secession documents.

The misinformation widely prevalent in America about secession was written by the winning side of the American War Between The States of 1861–1865. They called it the Civil War. But it was not a civil war by definition.

James Fearon, a civil wars scholar at Stanford University, defines a civil war as “a violent conflict within a country fought by organized groups that aim to take power at the center or in a region, or to change government policies.” Usually, one side of the conflict is the State.

Based on that definition, the actions of the 11 Confederate states in 1861 did not constitute starting a civil war. They weren’t looking to take power, overthrow the US government or change government policies. They just lawfully and peaceably seceded from the Union. The United States actually invaded a sovereign nation, the Confederate States of America, with the intent of overthrowing their government and bringing the states of the CSA back into the USA.

The most recent example of state secession happened in 1989 when the fifteen republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) seceded from the USSR. The USSR ceased to exist as all of the republics rejected the Kremlin government and became sovereign nations. (Go to: Mikhail Gorbachev and Secession)

Despite the fact that the USSR was the second most powerful nation on the planet, it was completely powerless to stop secession. Once the republics reasserted their sovereignty as free nations, the USSR dissolved into the dustbin of history.

What is the difference in secession and nullification?

Nullification is the legal principle holding that any US state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional. It has its legal foundation in the 9th and 10 Amendments of the US Constitution. Nullification has been used by the states throughout US history to prevent unjust laws from being enforced.

The most noteworthy use of nullification by any state was the so-called Nullification Crisis of 1832. Congress had enacted a high tariff that South Carolina rejected in its Ordinance of Nullification, which stated that the tariff was unconstitutional, and therefore unenforceable in South Carolina. The state made military preparations to resist anticipated federal enforcement. Congress responded by passing a Force Bill, authorizing President Andrew Jackson to use military force against South Carolina to enforce the tariff. But Congress simultaneously passed a new lower tariff that was satisfactory to South Carolina. So, Congress wisely chose to back down and compromise against the South Carolina nullification action.

Thirty-nine states of the United States have passed Tenth Amendment resolutions in recent months, stating that they are prepared to re-assert their authority to determine which Federal laws will be enforced within their borders. A few have enacted firearms legislation which states that firearms and ammunition manufactured and sold within the borders of a particular state are not subject to Federal law and regulation. It remains to be seen if Washington will recognize the nullification of Federal gun laws.

So, we see that nullification is a method whereby a US state may effectively control the legislative process of the US Federal Government as it pertains to how Federal law is enacted and enforced within any state. Compare that process to secession, in which a state formally withdraws from the United States to become a sovereign nation. Secession asserts that the relationship between parties has ceased, and that all previous commitments are null and void.

Why should a state consider secession?

First, secession should never be considered for light or transient reasons. Disagreements come and go between parties, and can usually be negotiated to the satisfaction of all parties. But when a long list of abuses exists, when repeated usurpations of state authority are enacted, when the sovereignty of states is trampled and ignored, and when citizens suffer a diminution of both their natural rights and economic freedom, it is the duty of states to solemnly consider either altering or abolishing the government that abuses that state and its citizens.

Who benefits from secession and what are the benefits?

In today’s America, any seceding state will benefit from the repudiation of the United States’ debt load, which will result in the savings of hundreds of billions of dollars that the citizens of the seceding state will never have to pay. Otherwise, if a state secedes and forms a government just like the one from which they seceded, there is limited benefit to the state or the citizen. But if the state protects individual liberty, life and property rights, the citizens will be infinitely more free.

The citizens of a state that secedes benefit to the degree that the seceding state “institute(s) new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” (from US Declaration of Independence)

Also, any persons who immigrate to the seceding state can experience benefits if they renounce their former citizenship and become a citizen of the seceding state. But, an émigré who did not change citizenship would still receive benefit from simply living in the seceding state.

The business community in the seceding state will benefit instantly as the crushing weight of US Federal regulations would vanish. No longer would businesses be required to be the tax collector for the IRS. The economy of a seceding state would be expected to explode with new commerce directly attributable to the competitive advantages of the new state.

The new state government of the seceding state would benefit as they would be free of US government rules, regulations, usurpations and unfunded mandates. No longer would the seceding state be required to enforce US Federal law.

The seceding state would benefit from a general shared attitude of most people of hope, optimism and excitement about the future.

Immigration to the seceding state would explode as liberty-loving individuals worldwide would bring their talents, experience, assets and gifts to the new nation, seeking a bright future for themselves and their progeny.

Who doesn’t benefit from secession?

In this specific example of secession from the United States, the parties who do not benefit are the United States Federal Government and the states that remain in the Union. To them will fall the unconstitutional debt load in greater percentage than before secession. The US Federal Government will also receive no further revenue from the seceding state. Also, the citizens of the seceding state will no longer be available to the United States for military service. And, individual secessions will occur as Americans leave the USA to immigrate to the new nation…people voting with their feet.

Will state secession cause a military conflict between parties?

There is no reason in law or in fact that the parties may not mutually and amicably agree to separate from each other. It would be mutually beneficial to both parties to negotiate the secession issues, which would include issues of Federal lands inside state borders. But it should be stated that, in the 1783 Treaty negotiated between King George III of England and the United States of America, the King “relinquished all claims to the government, propriety and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.”

The seceding state would also be aware that, if the United States Federal Government dissolved or collapsed in like manner to the Soviet Union, any previously negotiated issues or treaties would be null and void.

Can secession be done without armed resistance?

As stated in the previous paragraph, secession should proceed without military conflict. But, the Second Amendment of the US Constitution states that because a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. So, while no reason for armed conflict exists, that does not prevent it from occurring. A seceding state should revitalize its militia and prepare them for armed resistance and the defense of the borders of the seceding state from invasion by the United States military, its hired mercenaries, or United Nations troops.

Can Liberty be restored in America without secession?

The Washington political machine is spinning wildly out of control. Both political parties are two sides of the same coin. Neither party stands for Constitutionality, small government and fiscal responsibility. Even if you elect new representatives, senators and Presidents, the Washington culture will quickly corrupt them by requiring the officials to court contributions while lobbyists shower them with money and perks. In addition, Congress has created vast bureaucracies that grow and infest the nation unabated. Finally, and most importantly, the elected officeholders in Washington do not recognize any control or restraint on their power to enact unconstitutional laws and spend money in excess of tax revenues. Washington has borrowed trillions of dollars from the world that will never be repaid. If there is a solution to bring Washington back into compliance with the Constitution, I have not seen it to this date.

When should secession be done?

Secession should be solemnly deliberated by the elected representatives and the state citizens. Secession should be initiated at the moment that any state reaches the point at which it will no longer accept the despotic tyranny and unconstitutional laws coming from the US Federal Government in Washington, DC. Each individual must come to his or her own conclusion that secession is the only way to regain liberty, and each state must make its secession decision independently.

How would secession be done?

There is no written, formal method for initiating and completing an act of secession. If history can be our guide, we see that the conventions of the seceding states of 1860 wrote and ratified a Declaration of Secession. Each Declaration enumerated that particular state’s reasons for secession, in like manner to the 1776 Declaration of Independence.

Then they passed an Ordinance of Secession. Here below is the simple, succinct wording of the South Carolina Ordinance of Secession of 1860.

AN ORDINANCE to dissolve the union between the State of South Carolina and other States united with her under the compact entitled “The Constitution of the United States of America.”

We, the people of the State of South Carolina, in convention assembled do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the ordinance adopted by us in convention on the twenty-third day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified, and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying amendments of the said Constitution, are hereby repealed; and that the union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of the “United States of America,” is hereby dissolved.

Done at Charleston the twentieth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty.

That is the sum of all the words necessary to complete the secession.

In conclusion, try to envision yourself and your family in a new nation created by secession. All the people you meet are excited and breathless in their anticipation of the future. The general opinion of the populace is pure unbridled optimism. The new nation’s economy is booming, the money is backed by gold and silver, and there is no inflation. “Now Hiring” signs are in all the shop windows. The newspaper’s “Help Wanted” ads are packed full. Prices for goods and services are low, and the stores are loaded with goods. Manufacturers are streaming into the new nation to take advantage of the rare pro-business atmosphere. Wages are climbing steadily in manufacturing jobs as companies compete for the best and brightest to be their employees. New businesses are being created at a fever pace. Residential and commercial construction is at a high level to meet the demand of the new residents.

All because one state recognized this historic opportunity and chased the dream of liberty through the process of state secession.

Secession is the hope for humanity. Who will be first?

December 29, 2009

Russell D. Longcore [send him mail] is president of Abigail Morgan Austin Publishing Company. He is married to “his Redhead” Julie, has three wonderful children and three even more wonderful grandchildren. Visit his secessionist website at: www.DumpDC.com.

Copyright © 2009 Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

DO CHRISTIANS HAVE A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE? PART 1

Posted: 01/02/2010 by Lynn Dartez in 2011

by Brother Gregory Williams
November 7, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Does a modern Christian have a right to self defense? With every right there is a correlative responsibility. The ancient right to bear arms has been described in antiquity as the obligation to bear arms in defense of your community. In those ancient times if you would not arm yourself to defend your community you were often shunned if not run out of town all together.

Chuck Baldwin in and article published by NewsWithViews.com quoted the statistic that “as of 2004, 50% of the adults in the United States own one or more firearms.” My first reaction was, why so few? As someone who once wore a badge and a gun to protect the property and lives of citizens I can testify that my biggest disappointment was the apathy and even cowardice of the people I was often expected to protect.

To refuse to come to the aid of others has been considered a crime and good Samaritan laws have prosecuted citizens who failed to assist and aid people in need of assistance or protection.

Yet, I have heard many people say they would not own a gun or they did not believe in guns. On further inquiry everyone of these purveyors of pseudo-pacifism confirmed that if someone was breaking into their house they would call the police, who will come with guns. The truth is they do believe in guns, but they are either to lazy, to cheap, to cowardly, or just to irresponsible to own one.

One of the last things Christ said to His apostles before His crucifixion was to go and buy a sword, even if they had to sell their garment to do so.[1] When armed men came “with swords and staves for to take” Jesus, one of His disciples, realizing what was coming, asked if they should “smite [them] with the sword.”[2]

Jesus chose not to fight that day. He told Peter to “put up thy sword into the sheath”.[3] Jesus did not tell Peter to throw his sword away. He simply had a better strategy to free the people from the exercising authority of the corrupt government set up by the people who were “making the word of God to none effect.”

The apostles were armed men, but they were also men of peace. They were “gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.”[4] They supported the weak, patient toward all men,[5] with “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, [of] faith,”[6] but they were armed.

Jesus never came to disarm or weaken the people. That would only tempt brutes of the “world”. Had Peter, the apostles and their thousands of supporters began armed conflict to establish their liberty under God there would have been disastrous and fruitless bloodshed. The people needed to learn first hand the courage and sacrifice needed to sustain a truly free society.

There has been a lot of talk about government usurpation, declarations of independence, sovereign states, rights of citizens, and even references to revolution and armed rebellion in America, but such talk is not only foolish, but unwarranted. You have the government you deserve.

The diminishing rights of people are the direct result of personal neglect, abdication or the waiving of rights in exchange for peace, security, and bountiful benefits. The decline of liberty is always due the failure to retain rights. The failure to retain rights is always linked to the failure to put your hand to the responsibilities of the individual to society. The secrets of a free society belong to the diligent, humble, and wise.

There were no greater revolutionists than John the Baptist, Christ, and His apostles. Their call to repentance, was a call for change. The way of John and Jesus was also truly one of hope. It changed the course of history by changing the ways of the people. If the people were to be ruled by God they had to pursue the righteousness of God.

With this renewed spirit of liberty early Christians tended to what Jesus called the “weightier matters of law, justice, mercy and faith” by loving one another in a international network of faith, hope, and charity under the perfect law of liberty. They did not create a socialist state which exercised authority one over the other. That was forbidden by Christ and Moses before Him.

In the decaying Roman Empire the people had returned to the ways of Pharaoh’s Egypt and Nimrod’s Babylon. They prayed daily for the privileges and benefits of those authoritarian governments provided at the expense of their neighbor, but Christians did not.


Advertisement

Christians could not covet their neighbor’s goods through the exercising authority of Rome nor the government of the Pharisees. Christians prayed to their Father in heaven, not the fathers in Rome.[7] The gifts and benefits of a Christian government were freely given by the people in a network of the people in congregations, for the welfare of their society and rightly divided from house to house by the chosen ministers of His Church.

The modern church and their people have relinquished that responsibility of care and sacrifice to the governments of the world that exercise authority. They tickle the ears of their congregations with great swelling words but no longer teach the people to live by true faith, hope, and charity. Because they have forgotten the perfect law of liberty, they are no longer at liberty.

All rights originally come from God, not the State. Christ, Moses, and Abraham were teaching us how to be responsible and free souls under God so that if we were set free from our bondage to men we could live as a “peculiar people”.[8]

Many people who profess Christ as Lord today do so with their lips, but deny the power thereof.[9] They do not really understand how much Christ set the people free. Jesus could have appealed to Rome for protection from the Pharisees, but His kingdom was not a part of the “world”[10] order of Rome. To Appeal to Pilate for protection would have subject Jesus and His kingdom to the jurisdiction of the Roman Patronus, Father of Rome.

Few people today understand how Abraham set many souls free from the bondage of city states like Ur, Haran and Sodom, nor do they understand the persona jurisdiction of the Israelites in the bondage in Egypt. They are again entangled in those elements of the world.[11]

Jesus came to set the captive free from the same sin and bondage that has always enslaved men under the gods of the world. Jesus had kept His apostles separate from that “world” in a unique manner used by Moses and Abraham centuries before.

Anyone in Judea who got the Baptism of Jesus was cast out of the system of social welfare offered by the government of the Pharisees, while the Pharisees went more under the authority of Rome by denouncing Christ who was the king of peace and freedom under God and saying they had no king but Caesar, the Father of Rome.

The Church established by Christ was not subject to the decrees of Caesar because it was not a part of that “world” and they often did contrary to those decrees according to a natural God given right and Liberty in Christ, but they had to care for the needs of their own community and did not pray to Caesar for his benefits.

The Church was “one form of government” recognized by Rome[12], and was called a republic by historians like Edward Gibbon. It taught the people true freedom under God by serving one another in love as Rome declined and fell under the authority and the corruption of a socialist state.

Today, Citizens often bear arms for the defense of themselves and their neighbor not so much by right, as by privilege. They do not like to hear and will undoubtedly protest that truth, but it would be better to follow the advise of men like Patrick Henry who was, “willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it.”

Patrick also said “The great object is, that every man be armed.” To be armed may include the principle of being prepared for any disaster which may strike individuals or communities. Are we prepared to come to the defense of our neighbor or will we continue to rely on the protection of an unresponsive government that serves its own interests?

There are fundamentals in a free society that require that we allow others to be as free as we wish to be free ourselves. There is also the requirement of a free society to come to the aid of their neighbor. The early Christian Church was the social welfare system of the faithful. They provided the needs of society in a way contrary to the system of social security offered by the Pharisees, which made the word of God to none effect.[13]

If we are to be a government of, for, and by the people then the people should be the first line of defense for the protection of the people. If you will not take back your responsibilities for yourself and to your neighbor then the one who bears that responsibility will assume your right. Have we forgotten the wisdom expressed by Plutarch 2000 years ago “Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection”?

If we covet our neighbor’s goods providing our personal welfare through the exercising authority of governments we ordain, then we are bad citizens and Patrick also stated “Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.”

Modern practices, policies, and pandering of US citizens and their governments are seemingly void of moderation, temperance, and frugality, with justice and virtue in short supply when the desire for personal benefits are demanded by the public. The whole truth may hurt, but, for those who are willing to take responsibility for their own part in the decline of liberty and are willing to change their ways, it will be worth the journey.

In Part two of this series on self-defense we will take a deeper look at the problems that arise among a people who are no longer free and the nature of the impediments that makes them subjects of the will of others. For part two click below.

Click here for part —–> 2,

Footnotes:

1. Luke 22:36-38 “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take [it], and likewise [his] scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. … behold, here [are] two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.”
2. Luke 22:49 “When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword?”
3. John 18:11 “Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?”
4. Psalms 103:8
5. 1 Thessalonians 5:14
6. Galatians 5:22
7. Call no man Father, What was Christ trying to tell us about fathers on the earth?
8. Titus 2:14 “Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.” Peculiar is from periousios 1) that which is one’s own, belonging to one’s possessions
9. 2 Timothy 3:5 “Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.”
10. Not of the world
11. Elements of the World
12. Luke 23:38 “And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.”
13. The Corban of the Pharisees

© 2009 Brother Gregory Williams – All Rights Reserved

E-mail This Page

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Brother Gregory was born in America in 1948. His father was a practicing attorney and his mother the daughter of Norwegian immigrants. He Married in 1973, and is the Father of 6 children with a growing number of grandchildren. He grew up in southeast Texas, attending private schools, entering the seminary at 13, where he studied Latin, Greek, and theology. In the course of these studies he began to become aware of secrets hidden for centuries within ancient libraries that began to reveal a more fundamental purpose in the gospel of Christ. His quest to understand the “whole truth” has led him down a labyrinth of law and language, history and prophecy, fable and fallacy, in a unique portrait of bondage and betrayal, liberty and freedom, and the solution and salvation. He is the author of several books, include The Covenants of the gods, Thy Kingdom Comes, and The Free Church Report, dozens of pamphlets, audio, and video recordings. He has appeared on radio and television “preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God” which is at hand, within your reach. His common theme is how are men brought into bondage and how are they made free souls under God. His hope and prayer is to bring man’s relationship with the God of creation and his relationship with the gods of the “world” into a new perspective and light. Knowing the truth shall set you free, if we will do the will of our Father in heaven.

He now lives near Summer Lake, Oregon where he continues to care for his family, tending sheep of the Church and overseeing the edification of the Church established by Christ in the hearts and minds of congregations of the people, for the people, by the people who will seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness.

Website: HisHolyChurch.org

E-Mail: gregory@hisholychurch.org

DO CHRISTIANS HAVE A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE? PART 2

Posted: 01/02/2010 by Lynn Dartez in 2011


by Brother Gregory Williams
November 22, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

As we saw in Part 1, it is clear by an honest reading of the Bible that while the men of the Old and New Testament were consistently armed their motives were equally divided between defending themselves and defending others. Their mandate by Moses and Jesus was always to love others as much as they were to love themselves. This meant they were to diligently tend to what Jesus called the “weightier matters of law, justice, mercy and faith” or lose the rights endowed upon them by God and end up serving those who by nature are not gods.[1]

Paul said there were gods many[2] and of course both the Old and New Testaments tell us that those gods were ruling judges who ruled the people. Men often are cunningly coerced into into giving other men power by waiving their own rights in exchange for personal benefits or security.

People from the beginning were not to oppress the stranger in their midst,[3] nor deprive the workmen of the value of his labor,[4] nor do anything to their neighbor that they did not want done to themselves, nor covet their neighbor’s goods in any way. They were to even love their enemy,[5] being just to all people, defend the weak, and care for the needy without using force.[6] The gods of the “world” often disregard these precepts.

Are Christian soldiers and policeman not to have their weapons any more and give beasts and bullies of society the right to rob and murder with impunity? That is not what John the Baptist said.

“And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse [any] falsely; and be content with your wages.” Lu 3:14

There is a difference between violence and using strength to put yourself reasonably in harms way to defend the needy. Recently in California several men raped a 15 year old girl on school grounds while dozens of people stood around doing nothing. Those who did nothing were just as guilty as the criminals. They did not love their neighbor nor tend to what Jesus’ “weightier matters.” Their apathy, sloth or cowardice was an act of violence.

“Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.” Jermiah 22:3

In a pure Republic the obligation of good government falls on the shoulders of everyman who must come to the aid of his neighbor by every means at his disposal. To righteously defend the lives of others who are unjustly violated by the brutes and criminals of the world is a duty and an obligation of everyman. It is not violence to do so, but violence to fail to do so.

These precepts define and limit the power and authority of the people and therefore it also limits the power and authority of governments defined and ordained by men.

Rep. Fred Maslack with a stricter interpretation of the Second Amendment and the Vermont’s Constitution proposed a bill to register “non-gun-owners.” The bill would require them to pay a $500 fee to the state for the privilege of not owning a gun. That would seem reasonable if the citizenry will not answer the “Hue and cry” of their neighbors in distress then they should bear the weight of hiring more police. Should the government have a right to take money from non gun owners?

There are governments that exercise authority one over the other and force the compliance and contributions of the people, but these institutions are ordained by the selfish and self indulgent nature of men, not by God. Those governments are here to punish the wicked who create them.

Those who reject God by stealing, murdering, or merely coveting their neighbor’s goods are in violation of God’s law already, and are and will be judged accordingly.

Those who are slothful in the exercise of their responsibility to God and their fellow man, those who have gone away from the precepts of God by “consent”[7] deserve the governments their own evil hearts create. The slothful should be under tribute[8] and have no right to rebel, but only repent.


Advertisement

In a recent NWV article “The Republic is Dead; We Are Ready to Fight, Now What?” Greg Evensen wrote “We as a nation of citizens, have been brutalized so badly by criminals inside the government, that we could have easily justified the use of deadly force to beat back the pillaging of our homes and communities.”[9]

I beg to respectfully disagree. The truth is we have brutalized and pillaged our neighbor through wanton social schemes and our personal apathy and avarice. We have no right to rebel against the so called government benefactors which we have elected time and time again for our private gain.

To protest that we have been violated is a point of hypocrisy when we are just as guilty of sloth and coveting our neighbor’s goods through those schemes created by our own democratic hands and consent. The first chapter of Proverbs warns us not to “consent” with others who desire to take from one another for personal benefit or welfare or we would be snared in the net of our own making.

In Part 1 of this series I attributed the legal maxim “Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection” to Plutarch. While I have no doubt he would agree, what I meant to quote was his statement, “The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.” No man can be free in society until he frees his neighbor from the tyranny in his own heart.

Government today is a product of our own greed and sloth. We have no right to fight for liberty until we set our neighbors free from our own wanton desires. We must turn around, repent, and form a society that frees our neighbor from our own covetous schemes. We must learn to live again by faith, hope, and charity under that perfect law of liberty we claim to seek as the early Church once did.

Consent of the people is created in a variety of ways, but the offer of benefits is one of the most common. Peter the apostle warned people that they would become merchandise, human resources, if they coveted each others wealth.[10] He warned that with “feigned words” they would be seduced into giving up their liberty. He knew some men would promise liberty and bring in a corruption that would bring the people back into bondage to the “world.”[11]

Although, Thomas Jefferson never said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have,”[12] it is undoubtedly true. Thomas Jefferson did say “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground.” The only thing that can keep governments in check is the due diligence of virtuous people.

The standards of virtue required are set by God and it is the job of those who serve God including the Church to point out when and where the people and their institutions stray from the moral and virtuous character of God. One problem is that the modern Church has strayed from even the most basic commandments of Christ as a matter of policy. Coveting your neighbor’s goods through the agency of others that exercise authority has become commonplace and acceptable while living by faith, hope, and charity has been, for all practical purposes, abandoned except for lip service.

Even William Pitt, Prime Minister of Great Britain, knew that “As long as we look to government to solve our problems we will always suffer tyranny.” Yet we still look for state or Federal governments to solve all our problems. Could there be a better way? William Penn said it “If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants.”

I know the people want to believe all their natural rights are retained by them, but the people have delegated or relinquished the responsibilities correlative to every natural right. Those who bear the responsibility wield the right.

After almost a hundred years of a steady increase of socialism in the “world” are there any natural rights that have not fallen under the regulating powers of men with power? After all, if you delegate the authority to others to take from your neighbor for your personal benefit and security then it only seems reasonable that those who protect you may also regulate your right to protect yourself.

That may not be a popular concept of law for many, but that is exactly what has happened and in part three we hope to show that there is neither a state nor federal government that you may rely on to retain the rights God has granted you. For part one click below.

Click here for part —–> 1,

Footnotes:

1. Galatians 4:8 “Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.”
2.There are gods many
3. Exodus 22:21 “Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”
Exodus 23:9 “Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”
Leviticus 19:33 “And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.”
Jeremiah 7:6 “If ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:”
Zechariah 7:10 “And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.”
Malachi 3:5 “And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.”
4. Luke 10:7 “And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.”
1 Timothy 5:18 “For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.” See Deuteronomy 25:4 and Malachi 3:5 above
5. Proverbs 25:21 “If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:”
Romans 12:20 “Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.”
Matthew 5:44 “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;”
6. James 1:27 “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.”
7. Proverbs 1:10 “My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not… Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse: My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path: For their feet run to evil…”
8. Proverbs 12:24 “The hand of the diligent shall bear rule: but the slothful shall be under tribute.”
9. The Republic is dead; we are ready to fight, now what?
10. 2 Peter 2:3 “And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”
11. 2 Peter 2:19 “While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.”
12. Gerald R. Ford, in a joint session of Congress on August 12, 1974. Often incorrectly attributed to Thomas Jefferson

© 2009 Brother Gregory Williams – All Rights Reserved

E-mail This Page

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Brother Gregory was born in America in 1948. His father was a practicing attorney and his mother the daughter of Norwegian immigrants. He Married in 1973, and is the Father of 6 children with a growing number of grandchildren. He grew up in southeast Texas, attending private schools, entering the seminary at 13, where he studied Latin, Greek, and theology. In the course of these studies he began to become aware of secrets hidden for centuries within ancient libraries that began to reveal a more fundamental purpose in the gospel of Christ. His quest to understand the “whole truth” has led him down a labyrinth of law and language, history and prophecy, fable and fallacy, in a unique portrait of bondage and betrayal, liberty and freedom, and the solution and salvation. He is the author of several books, include The Covenants of the gods, Thy Kingdom Comes, and The Free Church Report, dozens of pamphlets, audio, and video recordings. He has appeared on radio and television “preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God” which is at hand, within your reach. His common theme is how are men brought into bondage and how are they made free souls under God. His hope and prayer is to bring man’s relationship with the God of creation and his relationship with the gods of the “world” into a new perspective and light. Knowing the truth shall set you free, if we will do the will of our Father in heaven.

He now lives near Summer Lake, Oregon where he continues to care for his family, tending sheep of the Church and overseeing the edification of the Church established by Christ in the hearts and minds of congregations of the people, for the people, by the people who will seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness.

Website: HisHolyChurch.org

E-Mail: gregory@hisholychurch.org

DO CHRISTIANS HAVE A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE? PART 3

Posted: 01/02/2010 by Lynn Dartez in 2011


by Brother Gregory Williams
December 5, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

The right to exercise force to prevent a crime, injustice, abuse to another individual or even yourself has nothing to do with violence, vengeance, punishment, resistance, or judgment. It has to do with what Jesus called the weightier matters of law, justice, mercy, and faith.

If someone or something is out of control driven by greed, anger, lust or vengeance to attack, abuse and even kill another innocent member of society you have every right, every obligation to confront them, restrain them, or stop them altogether by whatever reasonable force is required to prevent further criminal abuse. That being said is there a better way than force of arms to tend to law, justice and mercy?

Christ spoke many times about getting the beam out of our own eye or cleaning our own house first. Modern Americans need to take a sobering and humbling look at their part in the present decline of personal freedom and rights.

Most of the people have responded favorably to this series. A small minority have imagined and applied all sorts of preconceived notion, doctrines and unsupported assumptions to what was written based on their own prejudices or limited view. Some actually claimed that Christians cannot be armed or use armed force at any time. Yet, in every case they agreed they would call the police who would come armed to their aid. Some people cannot see the hypocrisy or sloth of this particular position. Violence has to do with an unjust or unrighteous use of force. Doing nothing to stop the abuse is a crime of omission. Sticking your head in the sand has nothing to do with turning the other cheek.

Most all of these would be pacifist are content to call upon the same forceful hand of government to supply their daily bread in time of deprivation or need. The same could be said of those who think that modern government is out of control with its power to tax. Although some might be willing to give up the benefits supplied by that power of government to tax few would offer to supply the same or similar needs of their society unless they are forced.

Before we can learn how God wants us to be ruled or to rule ourselves we need to examine what we have done or failed to do. First, we have excessively empowered governments contrary to the will of God. In the days of Samuel when the voice of the people cried out to give someone authority and power to protect them it was called a rejection of God.[1] We have been warned through history that a loss of freedom would result, yet, we continuously look to governments of power to solve our problems.[2]

“Society in every state is a blessing, but a government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” [3] “All who have ever written on government are unanimous, that among people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long exist.” [4] “Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks, no form of government can render us secure.” [5] The growth of virtue in society requires free choice in the hands of the individual. If rights are responsibilities, is the dereliction of a responsibility the delegation of a right?

The problem is not the leaders of government but the people who corrupt them by giving them more and more power through neglect and omission. We often think that the myriad of laws and legal codes are a sign of man’s love for law, yet, Tacitus warned that, “In the most corrupt state, the most laws,” [6] I have heard modern Christians boasting that they are “no longer under the law,” while in truth they are under millions of laws today and are less secure for it.[7]

The governments of men are made in their own image. Over the last five decades I have seen abundant evidence of judges, lawyers, and district attorneys abusing, defrauding and even robbing the people. I have also known men amongst the same group who are frustrated with an inability to do anything about that corruption and abuse. The reason those few honorable souls are unable to fight the blatant corruption rampant behind the scenes of modern courts is because of the apathy and sloth of the people. The question remains what can we do and remain righteous in or pursuit of the weightier matters?


Advertisement

There are many who think we must return to the constitution, but such thinking is fundamentally flawed. Most Americans opposed the constitution at the time it was proposed and for many good reason. [8] Even if the warnings against it had not proven to be true it is the character of the people that make the nation healthy or sick.

“I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes to much upon constitutions, upon laws and courts. These are false hopes, believe me; these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no Constitution, no law, no court can save it.” [9]

The modern State is a product of the modern man. Void of virtue he has followed and fallen into a labyrinth of legal subjugation through application, contract, and dependence. People have coveted their neighbors’ goods,[10] muzzled the ox that treadeth out the corn, [11] lurked privily for the blood of others for their own gain.[12] I recently heard someone say at a gathering of men calling themselves the Continental Congress 2009 that they were doing the same thing the Forefathers did. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Early Americans had spent two hundred years striving to obtain true and actual title to land [13] as freemen by the sacrifice of their own blood, sweat and tears, their money actually “paid” debt with present value,[14] they developed a social security system entirely dependent on voluntary charity to maintain the deserving poor of their society, they established an intimate network of local and national groups that would come to each others aid voluntarily at a moments notice. Modern Americans are not doing anything like the early Americans and should not expect to be free, nor claim that right.

As a people, we have stooped to equate license with liberty, favor with freedom, and artificial affluence with autonomy. Such foolishness can only produce tyranny and decay. In a nation morally corrupt only the selfish will reign. Neither freedom nor liberty can flourish nor survive.

It should be clear by now that I have not come to tickle the ears of the people nor their ministers. There is no hope without virtuous societies that loves their neighbor as themselves. Free people must voluntarily and equally accept the duty of protecting their neighbor, as well as themselves, on all levels of social welfare through daily charitable actions if they are to be justified in any form of “self defense”. How to do just that was the roll of the Church in early Christendom.

On the other hand modern Churches have failed to supply the daily bread [15] of their members through faith, hope and charity, but instead have sent their members to the men who call themselves benefactors but exercise authority, even though Jesus and the prophets have consistently said it was not to be that way with you. Abraham, Moses and John the Baptist had previously called the people to live another way.

Moses had said “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”[16] The Old Testament even told us to be kind to our enemy.[17] Jesus command to ‘love your enemy’ is not new to God’s plan, just to the misguided Pharisees. It is the bonds of the love and brotherhood created by people who voluntarily answer the needs and calls of their neighbors through personal and charitable sacrifice that makes a society healthy, wealthy and secure.

Before governments will change men must change. The call was to repent, live another way and not forsake the gathering together.[18] Most people will not come together with the spirit and Character of Christ so those who do need to strive to find the way that sustained and defended the Christians through the decline and fall of Rome and the failure of the unrighteous mammon.

The people of America, and of the world, cannot afford to continue to imagine it is still 1776, nor should they disregard the change in their relationship to governments and community over the last 200 years, nor fail to take into account what they have been doing and failing to do since their youth. You cannot ask men to provide for your health, education and welfare by enslaving your neighbor and expect to remain free. If you want your government to remain a titular servant of the people you must retain your rights by retaining your responsibilities. In Part four of this series we will show the technical reality and results that occur when we fail to do so.

Click here for part —–> 1, 2, 3,

Footnotes:

1. Voice of the People.
2. “As long as we look to government to solve our problems we will always suffer tyranny.” William Pitt.
3. Thomas Paine, Common Sense, February 14, 1776.
4. Edmond Burke.
5. James Madison.
6. Corruptissima republica plurimae leges.
7. Ten Laws.
8. Covenants, Constitutions, and Contracts Series.
9. Judge Learned Hand stated in the Spirit of Liberty (189).
10. Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house… nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. Psalms 119:36 Proverbs 21:26 Jeremiah 22:17 But thine eyes and thine heart are not but for thy covetousness, and for to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, and for violence, to do it. Ezekiel 33:31 And they come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness. Luke 12:15 And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: … Romans 7:7 … Thou shalt not covet. Romans 13:9 For this … Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous … with such an one no not to eat. Ephesians 5:3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; 2 Peter 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
11. Deuteronomy 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. 1 Corinthians 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? 1 Timothy 5:18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.
12. Proverbs 1.
13, The Covenants of the gods, Ch. 2. Law vs Legal
14, The Covenants of the gods, Ch. 11, Money vs Mammon
15, Eucharist
16, Leviticus 19:18 “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.”
17, Proverbs 25:21 “If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:”
18, Find local Network

© 2009 Brother Gregory Williams – All Rights Reserved

E-mail This Page

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Brother Gregory was born in America in 1948. His father was a practicing attorney and his mother the daughter of Norwegian immigrants. He Married in 1973, and is the Father of 6 children with a growing number of grandchildren. He grew up in southeast Texas, attending private schools, entering the seminary at 13, where he studied Latin, Greek, and theology. In the course of these studies he began to become aware of secrets hidden for centuries within ancient libraries that began to reveal a more fundamental purpose in the gospel of Christ. His quest to understand the “whole truth” has led him down a labyrinth of law and language, history and prophecy, fable and fallacy, in a unique portrait of bondage and betrayal, liberty and freedom, and the solution and salvation. He is the author of several books, include The Covenants of the gods, Thy Kingdom Comes, and The Free Church Report, dozens of pamphlets, audio, and video recordings. He has appeared on radio and television “preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God” which is at hand, within your reach. His common theme is how are men brought into bondage and how are they made free souls under God. His hope and prayer is to bring man’s relationship with the God of creation and his relationship with the gods of the “world” into a new perspective and light. Knowing the truth shall set you free, if we will do the will of our Father in heaven.

He now lives near Summer Lake, Oregon where he continues to care for his family, tending sheep of the Church and overseeing the edification of the Church established by Christ in the hearts and minds of congregations of the people, for the people, by the people who will seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness.

Website: HisHolyChurch.org

E-Mail: gregory@hisholychurch.org

DO CHRISTIANS HAVE A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE? PART 4

Posted: 01/02/2010 by Lynn Dartez in 2011


by Brother Gregory Williams
January 2, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

While the State of Montana has recently made an attempt to protect individual rights by enacting state provisions, few understand that individual rights require individual responsibility. Gun rights advocates wait to see what the Federal reaction will be. The difficulty the Federal government faces will remain, as always, how will they maintain the delusion that US citizens still enjoy natural God given rights as free people, while continuing to regulate such rights as the privilege they have become?

“Brian Schweitzer [governor of Montana] has signed into law a bill that aims to exempt Montana-made guns from federal regulation.”[1]

To call on one government to protect your rights from another is simply to shift the authority and power over that right from one agent to another. Truly free societies are based on voluntary networks of liberty minded people who care about their neighbor’s rights as much as they care about their own. Freedom only belongs to a peculiar people that are willing to equally protect their rights and their neighbors while allowing their neighbor the right of choosing to do the same.

Let us face the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The truth is that most people covet their neighbor’s goods through the power of the governments they elect. Most people do not care about your rights as much as they care about their own welfare and comfort. They have long abandoned the precepts of Abraham, Moses, or Jesus Christ, to say nothing of the early American Republic.

Only virtuous people with diligent enthusiasm may consistently secure liberty. Institution of power created by man’s own hand will claim to protect individual rights but like the gods of old[2] they will soon turn those original rights into regulated privileges. If institutions of power protect and secure your rights then those rights will become privileges.

“Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection”[3]

The Natural God given Right to defend yourself and your community requires that the individual and their community recognize their God given Responsibility to equally protect themselves and their community from “any” threat that might jeopardize the life, liberty or the well-being of all.

Americans struggled for centuries to earn the status of freemen or freeholders securing the right to declare unwarranted usurpations in 1776. Few Americans today realize that when you elect men who call themselves benefactors, but exercise authority one over the other, providing security at your neighbors’ expense, you are rejecting Christ, God and your natural rights.

The government that is empowered by you to take from your neighbor for your personal welfare and benefit, using your own standard, has the right to take from you for their benefit. As you judge, so shall you be judged. The contract makes the law. If you want to be free you must first free your neighbor from the tyranny in your own heart.

The truth is Americans are snared in a trap of their own making. No past laurels of dead heroes or patriotic flag waving, nor rationalized hope or imaginary rendition of the truth will alter that fact. Citizens of the United States are no longer free. They have sold themselves slaves to their own sloth and wantonness.[4]

Although you may began to finally realize now that “self defense” is not about guns or self, the recent decision in the Nordyke v. King case[5] is a good place to seek to understand your loss of liberty, if you have the stomach for it.

The Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb claimed “The Heller ruling in 2008 was the first critical step toward full restoration of the individual citizen’s right to keep and bear arms to its rightful position as a cornerstone of the Bill of Rights. This victory in the Ninth Circuit not only reinforces the Heller ruling, it expands upon it.”

Neither the Heller ruling nor the Nordyke opinion do anything to restore individual rights once enjoyed by early American freemen. The Nordyke opinion clearly states that, “The Bill of Rights directly applies only to the federal government.”[6]

It is important to understand that the phrase “We the People” in the Constitution of the United States originally referenced those men whose names appear at the bottom of the page. The States did eventually acquiesce to the provisions of that constitution,[7] but it was never put to the vote of the American people nor were the people, who were opposed to the constitution, a party to it.[8] The people as citizens of the States were far closer to a pure republics than the United States ever was.[9]


Advertisement

The Constitution only granted privileges to a body politic called the United States by the states’ permission. The United States had no way of expanding its power beyond that of the States original power unless the people failed to “retain” rights and consented by word or deed to grant more power to that Federal government.

Americans have failed to retain those rights by failing to recognize the consequences of applications for and acceptance of benefits, along with pervasive participation in social schemes dependent upon mutual surety and debt as seen in Pharaoh’s Egypt, Nimrod’s Babylon, Caesar’s Rome, or Herod’s Judea.

The relationship between the Federal Government and its Citizens is completely upside down from the original intent. But that was their choice. When the leaders are lawmakers liberty is titular.[10] The “government” makes laws, compels contributions, regulates, and licenses almost every aspect and choice of their lives. As regulated “persons” they have few to blame for this subjection more than themselves, although blaming others for their dilemma has become a national pastime.

In Nordyke v. King the Circuit Judge O’Scannlain’s opinion[11] verifies that the Constitution only bars Congress and the National government from infringing on the right to bear arms. But they also recognize that the second Amendment is incorporated against the States by the power of the 14th Amendment.[12]

The far ranging consequences of a former citizen of a State republic becoming incorporated to the Federal government places the federal citizen in subjection to a justified reasonable regulation. Rights, once granted by God, are now incorporated privilege granted to Federal citizens who become merely “residents” of their respective states.

Circuit Judge Gould’s concurring opinion, goes on to clarify that the important governmental interests in this corporate federal citizen allows the government to regulate activities concerning rifles and handguns:[13]

If early free Americans were bound by a corporate Federal Citizenship, subject to the administration of government, described in the 14 Amendment and other subsequent acts [14] they would have no right to halt the actions or claim unwarranted usurpation if officer came to confiscate their guns on April 19, 1775 at either Concord or Lexington.

If every aspect of our care as individuals or communities falls within the province of the State or Federal governments then no activity is immune from regulation. In the original American Republics, citizenship of the individual freeman depended upon his private ownership of land as an estate,[15] but “in the United States ‘it is a political obligation’ depending not on ownership of land, but on the enjoyment of the protection of government; and it ‘binds the citizen to the observance of all laws’ of his sovereign.”[16] If they are sovereign, then you are not. Stop pretending to be what you have failed to be by acquiescence or sloth.

Modern Americans are accustomed to forcing their neighbor to guarantee their personal and community social welfare at the point of a government owned gun. This ungodly approach to secure their society has brought the people back into subjection again and again.

While there is hope, you cannot undo a century of sloth and avarice, covetousness and greed with the waive of the States pen or your own. Early Americans took responsibility for themselves and their community, for every aspect of their social welfare, through voluntary network of charity and sacrifice. Unless individuals come together with a true love of liberty and the rights of others there will be no freedom in this land or any other.[17]

If you will not take back the responsibility to govern yourselves, to care and protect one another, to live by faith with hope through charity under the perfect law of liberty which is love, and the duty of every Christian and God loving man, then you are probably to irresponsible to own a gun without being regulated by one government or another.

Click here for part —–> 1, 2, 3, 4,

Footnotes:

1. HELENA, Mont. (AP) – Gov. Associated Press – April 15, 2009 5:24 PM ET
2. Read the book The Covenants of the gods.
3. Protectio trahit subjectionem, subjectio protectionem. Coke, Littl. 65.
4. “Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap.” Psalms 69:22 “And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:” Romans 11:9 Ex20:17, 23:32, 34:12…; Pr1:10, 6…, 11:15…, 17:18…, 23:1…; Ro13:9, Mr7:22, Mt5:34, Ja5:12, Hebrews 7:22
5. The ruling can be found here.
6. Barron v. Mayor of Balt., 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243, 247-51(1833).
7. Covenants Part III, 3. Is the Constitution constitutional?
8. Covenants Part I The Party of the first part.
9. Chapter 7. Republic vs Democracy, Chapter 8. Democracy vs Demagogue, of the book The Covenants of the gods
10. Republic vs Democracy.
11. II [4]“Although the Supreme Court has incorporated many clauses of the Bill of Rights into the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court has never explicitly overruled Barron.” Nordyke III, 319 F.3d at 1193 n.3 (Gould, J., specially concurring).Therefore, the Second Amendment does not directly apply to the states. See United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 553 (1875) (citing Barron as a basis for the conclusion that “[t]he second amendment . . . means no more than that [the right to keep and bear arms] shall not be infringed by Congress”); see also Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886) (concluding that the Second Amendment “is a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the National government, and not upon that of the State”).
12. “V. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the County on the Nordykes’ First Amendment and equal protection claims and, although we conclude that the Second Amendment is indeed incorporated against the states, we AFFIRM the district court’s refusal to grant the Nordykes leave to amend their complaint to add a Second Amendment claim in this case.”
13, “Also, important governmental interests will justify reasonable regulation of rifles and handguns, and the problem for our courts will be to define, in the context of particular regulation by the states and municipalities, what is reasonable and permissible and what is unreasonable and offensive to the Second Amendment.”
14, Chapter 3. of the book The Covenants of the gods, Citizenship vs. Citizenship.
15, Law vs Legal
16, Wallace v. Harmstad, 44 Pa. 492; etc. Black’s 3rd Ed. p. 95.
17, The Living Network

© 2010 Brother Gregory Williams – All Rights Reserved

E-mail This Page

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Brother Gregory was born in America in 1948. His father was a practicing attorney and his mother the daughter of Norwegian immigrants. He Married in 1973, and is the Father of 6 children with a growing number of grandchildren. He grew up in southeast Texas, attending private schools, entering the seminary at 13, where he studied Latin, Greek, and theology. In the course of these studies he began to become aware of secrets hidden for centuries within ancient libraries that began to reveal a more fundamental purpose in the gospel of Christ. His quest to understand the “whole truth” has led him down a labyrinth of law and language, history and prophecy, fable and fallacy, in a unique portrait of bondage and betrayal, liberty and freedom, and the solution and salvation.

He is the author of several books, include The Covenants of the gods, Thy Kingdom Comes, and The Free Church Report, dozens of pamphlets, audio, and video recordings. He has appeared on radio and television “preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God” which is at hand, within your reach. His common theme is how are men brought into bondage and how are they made free souls under God. His hope and prayer is to bring man’s relationship with the God of creation and his relationship with the gods of the “world” into a new perspective and light. Knowing the truth shall set you free, if we will do the will of our Father in heaven.

He now lives near Summer Lake, Oregon where he continues to care for his family, tending sheep of the Church and overseeing the edification of the Church established by Christ in the hearts and minds of congregations of the people, for the people, by the people who will seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness.

Website: HisHolyChurch.org

E-Mail: gregory@hisholychurch.org

The Flute Maker

Posted: 01/02/2010 by Lynn Dartez in 2011


In the park in a small Midwest town there was each day an old man sitting on

a bench whittling on a piece of wood and little Johnny after seeing him there for several days came up to the old man asking what are you doing with that old piece of wood?  The old man replied I’m making a flute!  A flute, what is that Johnny asks?  The old man with tired blue eyes looked at Johnny and replied if this is made right and the wood is good and sound this will someday make beautiful music.  So each day Johnny would watch as the old man whittled on that old piece of wood.

The old man said this piece of wood must be worked with care and each hole must be the right size and grooved right to make the proper note; one day when Johnny went to the park the old man was just setting there doing nothing but looking at that piece of wood that he had been carving for so long as Johnny approached the old man’s bench he took his flute and started playing the most beautiful music that Johnny had ever heard and everyone that was in the park that day came over in a hushed mood to hear the old man play on that old piece of wood

That became a beautiful musical instrument that sent tingles down Johnny’s spine

as he listened to that old man play. Each day the people would gather there to hear and enjoy the music played on that old piece of wood that became a finished instrument that played beautiful music for all to hear.

One day sometime later Johnny went to the park and saw that the old man was just setting there with his hands in his lap, there also was his flute and attached

To that flute was a note, but the old man made no movement at all so Johnny ran home to get his mom and upon returning there gathered around the old man was a crowd of people as Johnny approached the crowd parted and standing next to the old man was a police man holding the flute and the note attached upon seeing Johnny the police man cleared his throat and handed to Johnny the flute, all became very quiet as the police man read the note.

Little Johnny you have watched me make this flute from a discarded piece of wood that no one wanted. But I could see something special in that old piece of discarded wood and now Johnny I give this to you. I pray that you will always remember we all have something very special to give. But first, the master carver must find that special quality and work it so it makes beautiful music as this old discarded piece of wood that no one wanted. “That master craftsman Johnny is THE LIVING GOD”.