1964 Revisited

The Imperial movement has always been wanting to create class wars. Ferguson is the catalyst opportunity for 1964 Revisited!
Why use “Imperial” to describe the movement? The studied truth is that the ‘isms’ especially the full intent of communism is to build a world empire. The goals of humanist, socialist and the radical communist is world domination. Any honest student of the history regarding the 19th Century to the present will clearly see the several approaches of this imperialism. They clearly are the Fabian and Gramsci slow and methodical approaches that use a nations existing culture, education, churches and political system to make fundamental “Change” from Liberty to chains. Were as the direct approach of radical communist has always been to organize, train and insight the unhappy into a frenzy that leads to terror in the streets.
When one looks at the results of the race riots in 1964 and studies the legal investigative reports by state legislatures, local and federal law enforcement as well as congressional hearings, the results have the common thread of radical individuals or groups with links to or out-right membership in communist organizations or front groups. I know, the people of the United States don’t want their sensitive ears burning with the truth that echoes the warnings from the 1930’s & ‘40’s: “Communism is active and has infiltrated itself into the United States even to top bureaucratic and administrative positions.”
I’m not going to give you all the references because most folks won’t take the time to read more than 500 words. But I’ll start with a simple to read and well-documented book – “Non Dare Call It Treason – 25 Years Later.” If you have the fortitude to read truth that is!
As one looks at the factual historical records from that period of 1964 – 1967 one will find many of the same players or groups as the organizing inciters of rebellion in this present situation. Once again, you smart too so you can google the backgrounds of Al Sharpton, the cronies of Obama and Holder, the Black Panthers/New Black Panthers, the various so called “civil rights and social reformation groups” – who for the most part are communist front groups or sympathizers. I have sympathy for the sympathizers since they may be good-hearted people duped into acting out the will of those influencing their methods and even their ideology.
Is this anything new? Nope, it was warned of all the way back at the debates on the US Constitution itself. But, most never learned our history and with the influx of illegals turned legal don’t want to and won’t! So consider this in the opening statement of the article “Centinel No. 1” published October 5, 1787:
“…All the blessings of liberty and the dearest privileges of freemen, are now at stake and dependent on your present conduct. Those who are competent to the task of developing the principles of government, ought to be encouraged to come forward, and thereby the better enable the people to make a proper judgment; for the science of government is so abstruse, that few are able to judge for themselves: without such assistance the people are too apt to yield an implicit assent to the opinions of those characters, whose abilities are held in the highest esteem, and to those in whose integrity and patriotism they can confide: not considering that the love of domination is generally in proportion to talents, abilities, and superior acquirements; and that the men of the greatest purity of intention may be made instruments of despotism in the hands of the artful and designing. If it were not for the stability and attachment which time and habit gives to forms of government it would be in the power of the enlightened and aspiring few, if they should combine, at any time to destroy the best establishments, and even make the people the instruments of their own subjugation.”
We need the true Historically educated Patriots and Statesman to step forward and lead. These must stop the continued onslaught of Fabian, Gramsci, Stalinites from Revisiting and Re-igniting 1964 in 2014!
Even more so, we need churches and pastors that have been compromised by the social gospel and socialism in general to repent and return to our Founders understanding of Biblical Reformation Truth so that the people will not be led by radicals looking at humanistic government to be the savior but to Jesus who is the Savior and Lord over every aspect of creation including politics.
 
 
 

John DeWitt No. II – Decision Time & Considerations

“John DeWitt” II
The author that used the pseudonym of John DeWitt is unknown.  As the writer challenges the Citizenry to take a hard look at this un-amended constitution.  What would be the perils to the individual and the States that were minimized by a well-constructed State Constitution with Bills of Rights?
The Key Points in this article are:
1.  A PERPETUAL form of government
2.  Difficult to change
3.  Chances of poor administration
4.  Changes opposed by those who benefit most of the power
5.  NO Bill of Rights
6.  Defines a Compact
7.  Those in power through tacit implication would subsume all rights of the people
“John DeWitt” II
Massachusetts, October 27, 1787
Continue reading

Potential of Judicial Tyranny Exposed

Again we have Yates, a scholarly judge, continuing his discourse regarding Article III of the 1787 Constitution.  He picks up from his last delivering a one, two – three punch to the way the judiciary can become despotic and tyrannize the Citizenry:

  1. How it will tend to extend the legislative authority.
  2. In what manner it will increase the jurisdiction of the courts.
  3. The way in which it will diminish, and destroy, both the legislative and judicial authority of the United States.

Talk about being able to see into the 20th and 21st centuries!  Yates knew that the judiciary would be the undoing of any national government, the states in particular and enslaving the Citizenry in the end.  He states below: “The courts, therefore, will establish this as a principle in expounding the constitution, and will give every part of it such an explanation, as will give latitude to every department under it, to take cognizance of every matter, not only that affects the general and national concerns of the union, but also of such as relate to the administration of private justice, and to regulating the internal and local affairs of the different parts.”
Study this predictive article to see that the Anti-Federalist got it right!
And wait until Brutus XIII is expounded on…… Whoa to us for not heading the warnings of the Anti-Federalist.  We live the horrors they foresaw!
(Emphasis added to capture your thoughts)
Continuing for Liberty,
Tom Niewulis
Brutus XII
7 February 1788
Continue reading

Will the National Judiciary Trump the Other Two Branches?

Brutus predicted the present dysfunctionality of the Supreme Court in this letter. 

In actuality, Brutus is Robert Yates.  Yates was one of the leading Anti-Federalist and in 1790 he was appointed as the Chief Justice of the N.Y. Supreme Court.  “From the beginning of the struggle for independence, although he did not sign the Albany Sons of Liberty constitution of 1766, he was prominent in the local resistance to the Stamp Act. By 1774, he had joined the Albany Committee of Correspondence and stood among its first members when the committee’s activities became public in 1775… In 1775, Yates was elected to represent Albany in each of the four New York Provincial Congresses. … In 1776-77, he served on the committee that drafted the first New York State Constitution and also was a member of the “Secret Committee for Obstructing Navigation of the Hudson.”  In October 1777, Yates was appointed to the New York State Supreme Court.

“Yates was appointed with John Lansing, Jr. and Alexander Hamilton to represent New York at the Philadelphia convention to revise the Articles of Confederation. Arriving in Philadelphia, Yates and Lansing felt the mood of the convention to produce an entirely new form of government was beyond their authority. After sending a letter to Governor Clinton urging opposition to the new Constitution, they returned home. His personal notes from the Philadelphia convention were published in 1821.”[i]

In every sense, understanding the context of Article III would be right up Yates area of expertise.  The key elements that Yates addressed and predicted regarding the federal Supreme Court are:

1.   Extend legislative authority.

2.   Increase jurisdiction of the courts.

3.   Diminish and destroy both the legislative and judiciary powers of the states.

Yates foresaw judicial tyranny and despotism.  He writes below that the system:

1.   “…authorize(s) the courts, not only to carry into execution the powers expressly given, but where these are wanting or ambiguously expressed, to supply what is wanting by their own decisions.”

2.    “…that they will operate to a total subversion of the state judiciaries, if not, to the legislative authority of the states”

3.   “…the courts are to give such meaning to the constitution as comports (def. – behaves) best with the common, and generally received acceptation of the words in which it is expressed, regarding their ordinary and popular use, rather than their grammatical propriety.”

4.   “And in their decisions they will not confine themselves to any fixed or established rules, but will determine, according to what appears to them, the reason and spirit of the constitution. The opinions of the supreme court, whatever they may be, will have the force of law…”

5.   “The judicial power will operate to effect, in the most certain, but yet silent and imperceptible manner, what is evidently the tendency of the constitution: — I mean, an entire subversion of the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the individual states.”

6.   “the same principle will influence them to extend their power, and increase their rights; this of itself will operate strongly upon the courts to give such a meaning to the constitution in all cases where it can possibly be done, as will enlarge the sphere of their own authority…”

7.   “…they will have precedent to plead, to justify them in it. It is well known, that the courts in England, have by their own authority, extended their jurisdiction far beyond the limits set them in their original institution, and by the laws of the land.”

As you can see, Yates has predicted that which we have experienced since the late 19th century and worsened in the 20th century. Judicial tyranny has always been a part and possibility of the Constitution of 1787 and although there were these types of warnings; not a single amendment was accepted at that time to put more restrictions on the judiciary.

(all emphasis added to bring your attention to these factors)

Commentary by: Tom Niewulis

Brutus XI

 

31 January 1788

  Continue reading