Tag Archives: Constitution

How Should I Be? – Advice for the sovereign individual on leadership | Cormac mac Airt

Many people study today’s paradigm in depth and have a good working knowledge of our situational landscape.  However, when we pause to consider solutions we often struggle to articulate what it will take to assemble an alternative course that upholds the moral and reasonable high ground.  If we harken back in time to the Celtic Christian concepts of our Founders, we have only the recollection of their Protestant philosophical roots to draw upon which was sufficient for the tyranny of their time where right and wrong, identity, and purpose was more clear cut.  Today after nearly a century of psychological operations upon the people, the very identity of the People is marred and our course and history is less clear.  Our understanding of the paradigm may be clear but who and what we are on both an individual and collective level is more difficult to grasp.

In this we find it more necessary to delve deeper into our roots for a restoration of that once majestic core identity woven into our human potential.  Thus out of the annals of the most ancient history, come whispers of what the Founders may have at one time known and protected carefully…via a promise of anonymity.   It’s time to remove that anonymity and uncloak what was protected for a new generation in dire need of that small facet of their history.  At this moment the direct provenance is less important to explain than to spend the effort to introduce the content and set the stage for the full restoration of identity.  Through old Laconia, a voice calls you to listen first to the words of the 2nd century Old Irish High King Cormac mac Airt as he spoke to his son Cairbre on the eve of his stepping down from the leadership of Ireland (Eire); his son to step up to that leadership, untried but conscientious of the degree of wisdom he would find needed.  Those words are about leadership and what it takes to be.

In terms of ancient Celtic culture the formulation of Being for the sovereign individual, occurs over many years and with highly detailed training via exposure to knowledge passed down generation after generation.  The words of Cormac comprises not only his own hard earned wisdom over the time of his life, but also that of all leaders and scholars of leadership of every manner and kind who went before him.  This is part of the heritage that was closely guarded by our Founders and in this time of confused identity, is most necessary to resurrect.  The following is but one small excerpt of the advice Cormac gave to his son.  It’s a starting point, not the whole of your inheritance.

QUOTE from the book The Counsels of Cormac: An Ancient Irish Guide to Leadership – A New Translation from the Original Old Irish by Thomas Cleary:

A question, said Cairbre:  How should I be?

That’s easy, said Cormac

Be intelligent to the intelligent, so no one may dupe you by means of intelligence.

Be proud to the proud, so no one may be over you causing you to quiver.

Be humble to the humble, so your will may be done.

Be talkative to the talkative, so you may be respected.

Be silent with the silent when listening to information.

Be hard to the hard, so no one treats you with contempt.

Be soft with the soft, so everyone doesn’t attack.

Cormac also said this: 

One is intelligent until one sells one’s inheritance.

One is foolish until one acquires land.

One is friend until it comes to debt.

One is a judge until it comes to children.

One is slothful until getting married.

One is virile until becoming religious.

One is respected until being defeated.

One is hospitable until refusing.

One is a nomad until homesteading.

One is a servant until one resides in one’s own abode.

One is sound of mind until becoming drunk.

One is sensible until getting enraged.

One is well-behaved until committing sexual misconduct.

One is calm until fostering children.

One is confident until quarreling.

One is free until being denounced.

One is cheerful until misfortune occurs.

One is bold until refused.

One is a pedestrian until one is a charioteer.

All music is noble through the harp.

One who is prosperous is dignified.

One who is wretched is unseemly.

The sweetest sleep is lying together.

The sweetest ale is the first drink.

The sweetest music is music in the dark.

The sweetest person is the worthy one.

A young person who is tractable, humble, obedient, earnest in conscience and confession, will be beloved in youth, esteemed in old age, true in his word, noble in his appearance, high even if lowly, mature though youthful; his destiny with God and humanity will be good.

— This was one small bit of the advice that Cormac gave his son, and it was written down for not only him, but for all people as everyone is sovereign…you were created equal; you are a leader.  Your Being is to be in good standing.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” — The Declaration of Independence.  Jul 4, 2015
Celtic wisdom is most often given in metaphor.  Every piece embodies a subject of knowledge.  It paints a concept landscape.  The book quoted above contains 50 pages of the wisdom of Cormac on leadership.  For the individual serious about reconstructing the character of our heritage, it is this author’s opinion that the content’s of the advice Cormac gave to his son is imperative to learn and understand.  For this reason I strongly recommend the book from which this excerpt comes.  Buy two copies and give one away.   Hard copy can be found on Amazon.com
FiOs.  — Old Irish (Berla Feini:  Vision, Memory, Dream); modern Irish: Knowledge.
From wikipedia can be read more about Cormac mac Airt and his life.
Excerpt:

Cormac mac Airt (son of Art), also known as Cormac ua Cuinn (grandson of Conn) or Cormac Ulfada (long beard), was, according to medieval Irish legend and historical tradition, a High King of Ireland. He is probably the most famous of the ancient High Kings, and may have been an authentic historical figure, although many legends have attached themselves to him, and his reign is variously dated as early as the 2nd century and as late as the 4th. He is said to have ruled from Tara, the seat of the High Kings of Ireland, for forty years, and under his rule Tara flourished. He was famous for his wise, true, and generous judgments. In the Annals of Clonmacnoise, translated in 1627, he is described as:

“absolutely the best king that ever reigned in Ireland before himself…wise learned, valiant and mild, not given causelessly to be bloody as many of his ancestors were, he reigned majestically and magnificently”.

The hero Fionn mac Cumhaill is supposed to have lived in Cormac’s time, and most of the stories of the Fenian Cycle are set during his reign.

 

Cyrellys:  For the ones who have stayed in this nation to fight the good fight; who have not given up hope. You are in the finest tradition of the ancients who left for you this trail of various bread crumbs to your inheritance; your identity.  It was for you this nation was created, not the statists, corporatists, or Illumines.  You are ROAR.

ROAR: that of an ancient and irrevocable order of things; an undeniable power drawn from the Source.

Organ Peaks National Monument | Harney County Related Case in Point

FROM EMAIL 1-22-2016:  QUINTUS DIAS TO MANTICORE –

Organ Peaks National Monument

FYI
We have seen discussion from fedgov about expanding the national monument system and intense opposition to it.  This construct is operative right now in Harney County, OR.  It appears that fedgov and elites are using this construct to even withdraw more land from private ownership.  It also appears that they are subverting and co-opting sportsmen, legislators, and businessmen to encourage and support the system.
Link to Malheur Co. National Monument plan.
image
Walden hosts town hall on Oregon Wild’s Ochoco plan

PRINEVILLE — With a national spotlight hanging over the typically obscure topic of federal land management in the rural West, U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, R-Hood River, v…
Preview by Yahoo
I received a letter from Sen. Martin Heinrich in New Mexico.  Heinrich is a poseur and statist associated with bummer and the green collectivist movement.
January 20, 2016
Dear Friend,
Over the weekend I was honored to join local sportsmen and community leaders in welcoming hunters and anglers from across the nation to Las Cruces to learn about and visit Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. I was also proud to receive the Doña Ana County Associated Sportsmen’s Conservationist of the Year award. I hope you can take the time to read the article below from the Las Cruces Sun-News on my visit.
In the year and a half since the designation of Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks, Las Cruces business owners have seen a boost to local tourism and positive impacts on their businesses. A coalition of national sportsmen’s organizations recently highlighted both Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and Rio Grande del Norte National Monument as model case studies for developing national monument proposals that generate strong support from hunters and anglers and from local communities and stakeholders.
I will continue fighting to protect our public lands for future generations of New Mexicans and Americans to enjoy.
Sincerely,
MARTIN HEINRICH
United States Senator

LAS CRUCES — The conversation was rich at a breakfast early Saturday morning in a small conference room at Hotel Encanto. Sen. Martin Heinrich, wearing a camouflage vest and blue jeans, addressed a dozen sportsmen — hardcore hunters and anglers from as far away as Oregon to learn about Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument.
Attendees included representatives from Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and Trout Unlimited. The group will spend three days in Las Cruces, Friday through Sunday, exploring OMDP and hunting. They have picked up the mantle of political activism, intent on conserving public lands and protecting the rights of hunters and fishermen to access them.
“We are trying to protect the outdoor heritage that we all enjoy,” said Land Tawney, president and chief executive officer of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. “We want to protect the opportunity to find adventure in the great outdoors, to be able to hunt that way, and to ensure that the experiences that I’ve been able to enjoy are available to future generations.”
Heinrich, an avid outdoorsman, was presented with the Conservationist of the Year award Friday night by the Doña Ana County Associated Sportsmen. He said he intends to continue his efforts to protect and improve access to public lands for hunters and fishermen.
“We have, over time, lost access to a lot of public lands, where roads that used to be open get gated,” Heinrich told the Sun-News Saturday. “We have lost legal ways to get into a lot of land that belongs to the American people. So I am working on something called the HUNT Act, which is in the Sportsmen’s Bill, to really prioritize access within the public land agencies like the BLM.”
Heinrich said he would also push to focus Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars on buying easements to trails and roads at fair market value, to provide greater access to landlocked public lands.
“OMDP is actually a great story, from an access point of view,” Heinrich said. “It has really great access, and we just need to keep that in place. We have not had a lot of conflicts over access issues.”
Tawney said it is critical that federally-managed lands remain open as multiple use lands.
“The federal government, or government agencies, manage it for us — that’s our land,” Tawney said. “When that land is managed for multiple use, you can have grazing, mineral development, but also hunting and fishing, which plays a vital role.”
Corey Fisher, from Missoula, Montana, is the energy field coordinator for Trout Unlimited. Fisher said OMDP is a model for the way national monument designations should be approached.
“It’s such a good model for how to bring local stakeholders and interests together to help create a vision for a landscape that everyone cares about,” Fisher said. “We feel it’s a model that can be transferred and applied to other places in the West.”
Fisher said when monuments are designated through the work of coalitions, it creates a greater permanence.
“Without having diverse stakeholders come together and identify common values that want to be preserved for the future, nobody’s values are going to be preserved,” Fisher said.
The conference continues Sunday, when Heinrich is expected to join the group for quail hunting at the monument.

REPLY FROM BOB BOWEN, NEW MEXICO Constitution Party
I received that same letter from Heinrich and when I saw the reference to the Organ Mountains, I deleted the email without reading it.  The Obummer simply wrote an executive order  to place that area inside the National Monument system.  I believe it displaced 9 families, but I can’t remember how many for certain. 
 
–Bob Bowen
  Los Lunas, New Mexico

RE:
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2016 9:02:41 AM
Subject: Organ Peaks National Monument

 

Cy2Dan: Precognitive Dreams and Solutions Dialog at OMF

Cyrellys Geibhendach.  Today’s discussion covered several ‘vector’ bases including the fantastic and the mundane.  Everyone agrees the situation is untenable in several ways.  Can a meeting of the minds on what constitutes a solution be had?  Perhaps a start if the pages match.  Here’s my end of the deal for about 2 cents:

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II – Part 2

Post by Cyrellys Today at 9:39 pm

Dan wrote:12:40————–

Cy,

Yes, you have a very good handle on the many problems facing. I don’t recall seeing any solutions.

I do believe I have the only one that is coherent and comprehensive, namely the BPWH.

We could use your help. What would it take for you to come around. We should have another talk on the phone. My #’s still the same. You number has been disconnected.

I can’t go into all the solutions I’m involved in just yet.  It’s like poker.

Have you exceeded the realm of theory and know how to implement your ideas?  Can you lay it out in a one or two page outline?  This I have not yet seen.

Others are advocating a variety of approaches from the mundane to the spiritual.  All of them require time to arrive at fruition.  Time is not on our side, from what I’m seeing.  Could be wrong.  I did suspect a clinch point back around 2011-2012 but we managed to hang on a little longer.

The navy is running an interesting ad on TV one that says, ‘they have to get through all of us first’.  I hummmed when I seen it.  Is the alt space program on the globals side, the Constitution’s side, or one all of their own?  Or how about the 10th Fleet?  It didn’t stop the situation with the guy screaming to the cops he couldn’t breathe before he croaked, as shown in the clip on James Jaeger’s full length documentary film “MIDNIGHT RIDE“.  a JAMES JAEGER Film — Featuring Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Sheriff Mack, Chuck Baldwin, Edwin Vieira, G. Edward Griffin, Stewart Rhodes, Larry Pratt, Dan Happel, David R. Gillie, Elias Alias, Erich Pratt, Jack Rooney, Rosie Haas, Sheila Matthews and Walter Reddy.

Each party thinks they have a handle on this paradigm and can implement adequate solutions for a situation that will take everyone working together, on the same page — operating with the same understanding of the ‘vectors’ and issues.  But I’d like to know how that’s actually going to happen when no one can get everyone in the same room to even discuss or present their version of the paradigm landscape.  This is an episode of 3-stooges…Larry, Mo, and Curly.

But someone must go first correct?

Who will that be?  Yours truly who the SPLC calls a terrorist for requiring our representatives and others obligated to abide the laws and their Oaths, to actually do so?

Right.

Like I said to Naconah the other day, we can talk about these things till we’re blue in the face, but you’re an ex-cop of the superman kind, who do we take stuff like this to?  Who or what party out there has the power and influence to deal with planetary level corruption and criminals?  Cops these days are trained to not move off their thumbs unless they’ve been so ordered.  The same can be said of the military, who has been ‘sorted’.  Heck, Jade Helm 15 was all about testing the software to do what brass typically do…no need for the brass no more, they were too troublesome with their Oaths to the Constitution anyway.

Its a mile long list of vectors.  Ask Ron about that, it’s probably one of things we’d agree on, at least under the table.  Where we’d get into a fizzing match would most likely be about what’s under Grandma’s skirt.  I say the national security state apparatus, aka SG1 is A-number one offender vying for grandma’s long-johns.  So I can honestly say I’m no fan of underwear.

Would I advocate eliminating all underwear?  Yup.  Is it realistic to do under the current circumstances?  Nope.  The criminals love that underwear…no matter what name it carries, hanes, fruit of the loom, lockheed martin, or CCETI…oops.  You can’t have digestibility when wearing underwear.  It generates its own methane.

In the same vein I’d also advocate returning all power of command to the families…if they deem the grist mill of depopulation unpalatable, then it is their prerogative to recall their children, who then could be redirected to their states under the proven eye of their Governor’s veterans.  Perhaps a bit more realistic than the last, but the effect of pulling the teeth out of Grandma’s long-johns might be satisfied.

Give back to the Governors the ability and horsepower to tell an out of control umbrella to chill out and remember who they serve, and we might then have a road to plow…then all the strange MC Escher tales can be laid out on the table and dealt with, beneath a restored balance of power.  Do we have time to do this?  ET thinks they’re gonna have to do the ‘splaining for us.  But if ET is in bed with DHS and believe the video they said DHS gave them about Christian’s, then again we have another twist in our story plot.  What the truck do we do with that?  ET feels that the brief convo with the liberty comm rep was sufficient to have some clarity wrt ulterior motives on the eugenics factor when it comes to any sorting of the general population.  Sounds intriguing…but without the F2F again we sit at square one without confirmation…so housecleaning is not off the table if the umbrella moves on the general population.  If they so much as sneeze in the wrong directions the gloves come off because now the cops are shooting pets and children and tossing flash grenades into homes with families during no knock raids, and often without even warrants.  So yeah everyone is on notice how this will go…it’ll be a sorting all right…just not resulting in the way the umbrella expects.  Old Hickory advised no one flinch till you see the whites of their eyes.

So yes I’m well aware we need a more digestible solution.  Particularly since we’re all doing the stare across the fence lines.

Information clear, outlined, and thorough can create relational being…but the umbrella is still holding out and demonizing those who could be the most helpful, at least that’s how it would be if they weren’t so busy telling themselves culling the herd is the ‘humane thing to do’.

Are there solutions out there?  Hell ya.  But a conflict rift has been created by the system inhabitants and their think tank masters.  So the paradigm has turned into a mexican standoff.  Solve the standoff equitably and then you can look at solutions.

How to solve the standoff?  Full unadulterated disclosure that does not pull any punches, that eliminates all national security barriers, that opens the door on all possible technology, that essentially creates an open playing field in which all parties may compare notes and work possibilities.  Will that happen?  No.  They’ve had multiple opportunities.  There have been people who’ve tried to set the ball in motion.  And several have ended up dead, and another one was stripped of his service record because the woods were set afire and the bushes were preferable.

Thus these days I also advocate bush burning.  Eliminate the hiding places and make them wear their ‘white hats’ facing forward.  The shield wall must be manned both here and within the system.  The shield wall of liberty, truth, and nature.  Knowledge belongs to the people…unless you prefer that feudalism which is a dead end road.

Re: Hello, Cy, OMF II – Part 2

Post by Cyrellys Today at 10:01 pm

But heck, I’ll tell you what the party who claimed to be part of the TW ET crowd had to say.  TW ET crowd said there are limits as to what they can do.  There is a treaty with Grey Group that is problematic and restricts their options.  The general population must move in mass to nullify through mass, public statements such as “from within their churches where we have people watching” to destroy and nullify the treaty with the Greys, which the Shadow Government made with them.  Then they might have options to help.

They asked if I could influence the public awareness and gain such a declaration with enough of the general population to put it into a ‘legal effect’ as recognized by the Greater Community.  I said I do not control the people and they’ve been lied to for so long that without proof of paradigm and proof of you, we’re in a ketch 22.  ET cannot legally reveal themselves without a nullification, and we cannot take a tall tale to the people and expect them to believe it without the proof in hand.  Doctor Doolittle’s Push-me-pull-u is working over-time here.  The situational landscape is just as ridiculous, whether you’re talking mundane corruption or the steroidal contact control structure influence in the mix.

You’re welcome to quote me on this.  There’s no proof.  Just dialog. Because proof-less dialog costs chicken-shifts nothing.  They care too much about their reputations, their employment, their salaries, their retirement, their pension, and their lives…the world can go to hell in a hand-basket and is, if you look at it objectively.

So nothing changes.  The wheel is rusted and everyone forgot to bring a little WD40 in one of those nifty spray cans with the little red tube for a spray spout.

But I’m still here.  Keeping the lights on and the door ajar.  There’s a hundred people out there who I truly wish had the staying power Dan has put out since before 2008.  Some parties can snot-nosed say what they want, but they can’t deny he’s done the one thing they all failed at.

The Fix Is In — Bummer Administration

image
Justice Department says it still won’t pursue criminal c…

Attorney General Eric Holder The public now knows even more graphic details about the extent of America’s torture program, but it appears that won’t be making any d…
Preview by Yahoo
I stood about 40 feet next to the bummer man in Reno, NV when he was running for President back in 2008.  He emphasized he would restore our Constitutional rights and prosecute all of Bush’s war criminals for crimes against humanity according to the Nuremberg Accords, which the US is a signatory to.
Sure, yeah, right.  Bummer has become a war criminal himself and has continued with the practice of torture and waging war on women and children by remote controlled drones.
Now he has covered up most of Bush’s crimes, and furthermore has declined to prosecute contrary to his campaign promises any of Bush’s officials who perpetrated torture and war crimes.
Is it any wonder that we are now the most despised nation on earth?  And that our government is a Mafia government with the wise guys putting the fix in at every conceivable level?

Washington State namesake of our nation’s first President flushes US Constitution

Cyrellys Geibhendach.  America is a Constitutional Republic NOT a democracy.  Many people forget there is a distinct difference.  A Constitutional Republic places restrictions upon democracy that is reasonable.  A nation founded upon Constitutional principles enshrined within the founding document which defined the conditions upon which our nations states agreed to become a union, risks voiding the contract between the States when it violates the contents and intent of its national Constitution, just as it does when the national structure violates or disregards the constitutions of any individual state.

 

On December 11 of 2014, the Seattle Times not only reported that the State of Washington flushed an integral chunk of our nation’s contract, the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution, but it also described in its editorial statement how it itself approved of the flushing in an incredible example of absolute Statism.   Statism is the belief that the state should control either economic or social policy, or both, to some degree.   It is one of the foundations of Communism.  To promote or uphold statism is the definition of being a statist, which is a very ugly term when living within a Constitutional Republic.

 

The Seattle Times repeatedly referred to the arguments opposing I-594 as smoke screens.  “They also saw through the smoke screen from I-594’s opponents, who claimed the measure would criminalize such transfers as intrafamily gifts.”

 

In true communist fashion it described the legislation as, “Instead, I-594 represents a restatement of the compact gun owners have with society: The fundamental right to keep and bear arms is not absolute.”

 

Since when is the US Constitution and the rights it recognizes, negotiable by the States?  It isn’t, without breaking the contract.  A “restatement of the compact” cannot be done without a formal alteration of the US Constitution.  That would require a Constitutional Convention of the States of the Union.  So when did Washington State host a Constitutional Convention?  Funny but it seems none of the other states agreed to such a Convention, nor were they invited to Washington State’s shin-dig.

 

Washington state took it upon itself to nullify the US Constitution and create in the whole of the nation a Constitutional Crisis…not that one didn’t already exist with Obama violating it every time he turns around.  The man is re-inventing the direct-offense-wheel, once referred to by grade schoolers as ‘go sit and spin‘.

 

Secretary of State John F. Kerry told Congress Tuesday that President Obama wants expansive war powers to pursue the Islamic State terrorists wherever and however he deems necessary, stunning lawmakers by requesting a war authorization that would even allow the Pentagon to commit American combat troops to the fight.  ~  Obama Stuns Congress By Demanding Expanded Powers To Declare War | NTEB Newsdesk

 

That’s the same John Kerry who along with Senator McCain made trips to the Ukraine which resulted in US sponsored regime change which they later blamed on Russia.  And as we know from prior dialogs posted to this site, the general research consensus is that not only is Obama a sock puppet of colossal proportions, but both Kerry and McCain are well known deep state actors for the US Shadow Government as it moves out into the open supplanting elected surface government.  Ref. Catherine Austin Fitts.  Ron Paul in his recent address on the Congressional Resolution defaming Russia, which can and probably will be seen in the international relations venue as a total fiasco at least or an act of war at worst, mentioned the money that was spent on regime change in Russia.

 

One might wonder if the statists who are also generally-speaking supporters of the NWO pursuit of ‘no borders’ or ‘open borders’ and global government which current incarnation is for the corporations and transnational central banks by the corporations and transnational central banks rather than for or of any flesh and blood people; one might wonder if they deliberately devised this little bit of irony as a ‘back-in-your-face’ of the Celtic roots of the Pacific Northwest?  Would it be far from imagining they would strive to impinge upon Celtic Virtues and the celtic contribution of Nature’s God and natural rights by stripping the US Constitution down to its skivvies right in the heart of Celt Country?  This Old Irish American didn’t find it amusing.  There is no part of our natural rights and obligations as citizens according to the Constitution that is negotiable.  What part of “shall not be infringed,” didn’t make sense to Washington State or the Seattle Times?  My father once said, that anyone who doesn’t like this nation as it is should pack up their bucket of rocks and ship out to some other country and try their luck there.

 

Well it gets better yet.  Not only are the Statists laying their grubby hands on our liberties and rights, but the bureaucratic terrorists are also moving on violating our health with allowing their compadre’s their depopulation meme’s via an intent to release GM modified mosquitoes.    ZOONOTIC AND OR INSECT BORN DISEASES’ ARE THE PERFECT CARRIERS FOR PROPAGATING BIOLOGIC WARFARE AGENTS RELEASED WITH GM MODIFIED INSECTS!  We already have a variety of mosquito born diseases plaguing us such as West Nile Virus.  These right on the heels of Ebola which btw hasn’t actually ceased…it’s just not being reported by the media which these days has an attention span shorter than a three year old.  What a way to spread something like Ebola and goodness knows what else, far beyond any ability to contain?

 

It might be easy to swallow a suggestion of coincidink if it weren’t for having patterns traceable to a disturbing number of these various actors illustrating an effort to emminitize the eschaton (Book of Revelations or a parallel track).

 

NOTE:  Emminetizing the Eschaton is about creating the circumstances of Revelations final war and all that goes with it.  It is the cover for global depopulation by the Eugenics crowd.  —name withheld—- has been involved in the academic theology-building to justify or establish a public-usable version of content supporting an Eschaton.  He was making statements in dialogs with a —- name withheld —— and other associates on his blog at ——- at this time, about the Eschaton.  He’s a theoretical physicist and philosophical heretic with a reach that extends not only into the exotic end of academia but also into the environmental movement and evangelical christian community while ————– mentioned above has had visits to the Vatican.  Ref. email 12/08/2014 synopsis on the Ukraine/Russia crisis – forward, backward, and beneath the table.

 

When all the pieces of the puzzle are laid out on the table, we find a sleeping populace who is seemingly oblivious to the proverbial freight trains bearing down on them from opposition directions.  It isn’t the journey or the speed that hurts, it’s the sudden meeting of the minds where X marks the spot.  It reminds me of another one of those long ago wisdoms once applied to errant children, “you’re an accident looking for a place to happen.”

Cyrellys, I am ROAR.

 


 

Other wild and woolly news:

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/deal-reached-to-allow-pension-plans-to-cut-benefits/ar-BBgAimc?ocid=iehp

Russian Missiles Shoot Down Ukrainian Surveillance Drones Over Crimea

US military converting transport planes to carry wave of infected Ebola victims to the United States

CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR JERRY ‘MOONBEAM’ BROWN SIGNS LAW FORCING STUDENTS TO LEARN ‘GAY HISTORY’ IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS!

World facing Armageddon unless Obama and Putin ‘defrost’ icy relationship: Gorbachev warns new Cold War could last for years

Elite Think Tank Admits to Ongoing Climate Engineering Experiments

 

 

 

 

Interesting Read | The History and Danger of Administrative Law by Philip Hamburger

P. Bunyan.  I get this publication every month. It is a short and easy read. This one really got me because we all know this is an issue but it really helps me to explain these things to other folks when someone who would seemingly be on their side comes out and explains that what they do is really wrong.  This guy puts it into a nice context and gives some history of it. I really like how he sublimely suggests that today we have a King and not a President.

Enjoy
The following piece by Philip Hamburger is Copyright © 2014 Hillsdale College. The opinions expressed in Imprimis are not necessarily the views of Hillsdale College. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the following credit line is used: “Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.” SUBSCRIPTION FREE UPON REQUEST. ISSN 0277-8432. Imprimis trademark registered in U.S. Patent and Trade Office #1563325.

September 2014 Imprimis

The History and Danger of Administrative Law

Philip Hamburger
Columbia Law School

PHILIP HAMBURGER is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. He received his B.A. from Princeton University and his J.D. from Yale Law School. He has also taught at the University of Chicago Law School, the George Washington University Law School, the University of Virginia Law School, and Northwestern Law School. A contributor to National Review Online, he has written for several law reviews and journals, including theAmerican Journal of Legal History, the Supreme Court Review, theNotre Dame Law Review, and the Journal of Law and Politics. He is the author of Separation of Church and State, Law and Judicial Duty, and, most recently, Is Administrative Law Unlawful?

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on May 6, 2014, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C., as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series. 

There are many complaints about administrative law—including that it is arbitrary, that it is a burden on the economy, and that it is an intrusion on freedom. The question I will address here is whether administrative law is unlawful, and I will focus on constitutional history. Those who forget history, it is often said, are doomed to repeat it. And this is what has happened in the United States with the rise of administrative law—or, more accurately, administrative power.

Administrative law is commonly defended as a new sort of power, a product of the 19th and the 20th centuries that developed to deal with the problems of modern society in all its complexity. From this perspective, the Framers of the Constitution could not have anticipated it and the Constitution could not have barred it. What I will suggest, in contrast, is that administrative power is actually very old. It revives what used to be called prerogative or absolute power, and it is thus something that the Constitution centrally prohibited.

But first, what exactly do I mean by administrative law or administrative power? Put simply, administrative acts are binding or constraining edicts that come, not through law, but through other mechanisms or pathways. For example, when an executive agency issues a rule constraining Americans—barring an activity that results in pollution, for instance, or restricting how citizens can use their land—it is an attempt to exercise binding legislative power not through an act of Congress, but through an administrative edict. Similarly, when an executive agency adjudicates a violation of one of these edicts—in order to impose a fine or some other penalty—it is an attempt to exercise binding judicial power not through a judicial act, but again through an administrative act.

In a way we can think of administrative law as a form of off-road driving. The Constitution offers two avenues of binding power—acts of Congress and acts of the courts. Administrative acts by executive agencies are a way of driving off-road, exercising power through other pathways. For those in the driver’s seat, this can be quite exhilarating. For the rest of us, it’s a little unnerving.

The Constitution authorizes three types of power, as we all learned in school—the legislative power is located in Congress, executive power is located in the president and his subordinates, and the judicial power is located in the courts. How does administrative power fit into that arrangement?

The conventional answer to this question is based on the claim of the modernity of administrative law. Administrative law, this argument usually goes, began in 1887 when Congress created the Interstate Commerce Commission, and it expanded decade by decade as Congress created more such agencies. A variant of this account suggests that administrative law is actually a little bit older—that it began to develop in the early practices of the federal government of the United States. But whether it began in the 1790s or in the 1880s, administrative law according to this account is a post-1789 development and—this is the key point—it arose as a pragmatic and necessary response to new and complex practical problems in American life. The pragmatic and necessitous character of this development is almost a mantra—and of course if looked at that way, opposition to administrative law is anti-modern and quixotic.

But there are problems with this conventional history of administrative law. Rather than being a modern, post-constitutional American development, I argue that the rise of administrative law is essentially a re-emergence of the absolute power practiced by pre-modern kings. Rather than a modern necessity, it is a latter-day version of a recurring threat—a threat inherent in human nature and in the temptations of power.

The Prerogative Power of Kings

The constitutional history of the past thousand years in common law countries records the repeated ebb and flow of absolutism on the one side and law on the other. English kings were widely expected to rule through law. They had Parliament for making law and courts of law for adjudicating cases, and they were expected to govern through the acts of these bodies. But kings were discontent with governing through the law and often acted on their own. The personal power that kings exercised when evading the law was called prerogative power.

Whereas ordinarily kings bound their subjects through statutes passed by Parliament, when exercising prerogative power they bound subjects through proclamations or decrees—or what we today call rules or regulations. Whereas ordinarily kings would repeal old statutes by obtaining new statutes, when exercising prerogative power they issued dispensations and suspensions—or what we today call waivers. Whereas ordinarily kings enforced the law through the courts of law, when exercising prerogative power they enforced their commands through their prerogative courts—courts such as the King’s Council, the Star Chamber, and the High Commission—or what we today call administrative courts. Ordinarily, English judges resolved legal disputes in accordance with their independent judgment regarding the law. But when kings exercised prerogative power, they expected deference from judges, both to their own decrees and to the holdings and interpretations of their extra-legal prerogative courts.

Although England did not have a full separation of powers of the sort written into the American Constitution, it did have a basic division of powers. Parliament had the power to make laws, the law courts had the power to adjudicate, and the king had the power to exercise force. But when kings acted through prerogative power, they or their prerogative courts exercised all government powers, overriding these divisions. For example, the Star Chamber could make regulations, as well as prosecute and adjudicate infractions. And defenders of this sort of prerogative power were not squeamish about describing it as absolute power. Absolutism was their justification.

Conceptually, there were three central elements of this absolutism: extra-legal power, supra-legal power, and the consolidation of power. It was extra-legal or outside the law in the sense that it bound the public not through laws or statutes, but through other means. It was supra-legal or above the law in the sense that kings expected judges to defer to it—notwithstanding their duty to exercise their own independent judgment. And it was consolidated in the sense that it united all government powers—legislative, executive, and judicial—in the king or in his prerogative courts. And underlying these three central elements was the usual conceptual justification for absolute power: necessity. Necessity, it was said, was not bound by law.

These claims on behalf of absolutism, of course, did not go unchallenged. When King John called Englishmen to account extralegally in his Council, England’s barons demanded in Magna Carta in 1215 that no freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or even summoned except through the mechanisms of law. When 14th century English kings questioned men in the king’s Council, Parliament in 1354 and 1368 enacted due process statutes. When King James I attempted to make law through proclamations, judges responded in 1610 with an opinion that royal proclamations were unlawful and void. When James subsequently demanded judicial deference to prerogative interpretations of statutes, the judges refused. Indeed, in 1641 Parliament abolished the Star Chamber and the High Commission, the bodies then engaging in extra-legal lawmaking and adjudication. And most profoundly, English constitutional law began to develop—and it made clear that there could be no extra-legal,   supra-legal, or consolidated power.

The Rise of Absolutism in America

The United States Constitution echoes this. Early Americans were very familiar with absolute power. They feared this extra-legal, supra-legal, and consolidated power because they knew from English history that such power could evade the law and override all legal rights. It is no surprise, then, that the United States Constitution was framed to bar this sort of power. To be precise, Americans established the Constitution to be the source of all government power and to bar any absolute power. Nonetheless, absolute power has come back to life in common law nations, including America.

After absolute power was defeated in England and America, it circled back from the continent through Germany, and especially through Prussia. There, what once had been the personal prerogative power of kings became the bureaucratic administrative power of the states. The Prussians were the leaders of this development in the 17th and 18th centuries. In the 19th century they became the primary theorists of administrative power, and many of them celebrated its evasion of constitutional law and constitutional rights.

This German theory would become the intellectual source of American administrative law. Thousands upon thousands of Americans studied administrative power in Germany, and what they learned there about administrative power became standard fare in American universities. At the same time, in the political sphere, American Progressives were becoming increasingly discontent with elected legislatures, and they increasingly embraced German theories of administration and defended the imposition of administrative law in America in terms of pragmatism and necessity.

The Progressives, moreover, understood what they were doing. For example, in 1927, a leading Progressive theorist openly said that the question of whether an American administrative officer could issue regulations was similar to the question of whether pre-modern English kings could issue binding proclamations. By the 1920s, however, Progressives increasingly were silent about the continuity between absolute power and modern administrative power, as this undermined their claims about its modernity and lawfulness.

In this way, over the past 120 years, Americans have reestablished the very sort of power that the Constitution most centrally forbade. Administrative law is extra-legal in that it binds Americans not through law but through other mechanisms—not through statutes but through regulations—and not through the decisions of courts but through other adjudications. It is supra-legal in that it requires judges to put aside their independent judgment and defer to administrative power as if it were above the law—which our judges do far more systematically than even the worst of 17th century English judges. And it is consolidated in that it combines the three powers of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—in administrative agencies.

Let me close by addressing just two of many constitutional problems illuminated by the re-emergence of absolutism in the form of administrative power: delegation and procedural rights.

One standard defense of administrative power is that Congress uses statutes to delegate its lawmaking power to administrative agencies. But this is a poor defense. The delegation of lawmaking has long been a familiar feature of absolute power. When kings exercised extra-legal power, they usually had at least some delegated authority from Parliament. Henry VIII, for example, issued binding proclamations under an authorizing statute called the Act of Proclamations. His binding proclamations were nonetheless understood to be exercises of absolute power. And in the 18th century the Act of Proclamations was condemned as unconstitutional.

Against this background, the United States Constitution expressly bars the delegation of legislative power. This may sound odd, given that the opposite is so commonly asserted by scholars and so routinely accepted by the courts. But read the Constitution. The Constitution’s very first substantive words are, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” The word “all” was not placed there by accident. The Framers understood that delegation had been a problem in English constitutional history, and the word “all” was placed there precisely to bar it.

As for procedural rights, the history is even more illuminating. Administrative adjudication evades almost all of the procedural rights guaranteed under the Constitution. It subjects Americans to adjudication without real judges, without juries, without grand juries, without full protection against self-incrimination, and so forth. Like the old prerogative courts, administrative courts substitute inquisitorial process for the due process of law—and that’s not just an abstract accusation; much early administrative procedure appears to have been modelled on civilian-derived inquisitorial process. Administrative adjudication thus becomes an open avenue for evasion of the Bill of Rights.

The standard justification for the administrative evasion of procedural rights is that they apply centrally to the regular courts, but not entirely to administrative adjudication. But the history shows that procedural rights developed primarily to bar prerogative or administrative proceedings, not to regulate what the government does in regular courts of law. As I already mentioned, the principle of due process developed as early as the 14th century, when Parliament used it to prevent the exercise of extra-legal power by the King’s Council. It then became a constitutional principle in the 17th century in opposition to the prerogative courts. Similarly, jury rights developed partly in opposition to administrative proceedings, and thus some of the earliest constitutional cases in America held administrative proceedings unconstitutional for depriving defendants of a jury trial.

* * *

In sum, the conventional understanding of administrative law is utterly mistaken. It is wrong on the history and oblivious to the danger. That danger is absolutism: extra-legal, supra-legal, and consolidated power. And the danger matters because administrative power revives this absolutism. The Constitution carefully barred this threat, but constitutional doctrine has since legitimized this dangerous sort of power. It therefore is necessary to go back to basics. Among other things, we should no longer settle for some vague notion of “rule of law,” understood as something that allows the delegation of legislative and judicial powers to administrative agencies. We should demand rule through law and rule under law. Even more fundamentally, we need to reclaim the vocabulary of law: Rather than speak of administrative law, we should speak of administrative power—indeed, of absolute power or more concretely of extra-legal, supra-legal, and consolidated power. Then we at least can begin to recognize the danger.

Source Link:  http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/current

October 13th of 2014.

Dialog: ISIS on the Border and My Confession

By QUINTAS DIAS.  From Email October 12 of 2014.

image
Report: Feds Arrest Four ISIS Terrorists in Texas

Apprehended in the last 36 hours… Government watchdog group Judicial Watch says they have received intel from high-level government sources claiming that federal …
Preview by Yahoo
Man, all of a sudden we have Fox News (faux news, lol) screaming that ISIS is affiliated now with radical Black Muslims.  The f–[expletive]? What does that mean?  Well, the black chop dude that did that lady recently in OK is a rad black Muslim.  Digressing…
I am very leery about a lot of this.  I’ve been had before and a lot of this stinks.  Especially with ISIS suddenly evolving out of no where.  I do not buy that crap.  Nothing in politics suddenly evolves.  Digressing…
Back in the 1970s, we had the Black Liberation Army (BLA) blowing shit up and killing police officers, robbing banks, and killing folks.  Quite a few of them were Muslims.
My contacts conclude that after making some WAGS (wild ass guesses) and intelligence assessments, that like the Black Panthers, present day radical black Muslims have morphed to serve a new purpose…dunno for sure what it is.  Digressing again…
I had a lot of experience back in my day with the George Jackson Brigade and that asshole, John Sherman, the Brigade’s leader robbing banks and blowing shit up in the Pac NW.  His girlfriend, a gorgeous legal adviser slipped him a handgun that he used to escape custody after he got shot up and was convicted of bank robbery after the memorable Tukwila, WA bank robbery and blazing shoot out that left Sherman wounded.
Back then, I was hot on the trail of Sherman, and before that on the trail of the SLA (Symbionese Liberation Army).  We had set up a road block to intercept Sherman supposedly on his way back from CA, but we were too late.  An act of God?  I don’t know, but we were determined to shoot it out with Sherman and his bad boys.  He got past us.  Good for him, good for me.
I was also assigned to track leads regarding the SLA and Patty Hearst’s movements in the PAC NW back in the day.  I didn’t have a clue about the deep state politics and the agenda involved in these incidents until much, much later.
Today, I and a lot of other cops, wiser, and much more mature, are quite bitter because we had the wool pulled over our eyes many times over by our own government.  We did not like bank robbers or armed robbers (didn’t like the FBI that much either).  But we respected an honest criminal.  Imagine how we felt when we discovered that another bank robber, Cinque (Donald deFreeze) of the SLA (and perhaps Sherman) were in fact manipulated by the Illumines inside the CIA and the FBI.
Note: these later day findings apply equally well to another major asshole we were chasing around back then.  Who was that?  Well, it was that Weatherman dude, Bill Ayers, the bummer man’s mentor, who claims little knowledge of Obama, but then smirks that he maybe wrote Bummer’s biography, “Dreams of my Father” (Bill, you were an [expletive] back then and you are still a [expletive]).
Today, many years later, the inescapable conclusion is that these people were provocation agents, perhaps unwitting, but serving a covert agenda nonetheless.  Today, we know what it was.  “The man”was scared of rising black consciousness and the evolving wide acceptance of black power movements among whites.  That’s right, white kids were buying into black angst and identifying with it.  [expletive] groovy– right on, bro!  That scared the [expletive] out of the man.
What was the purpose of creating fictitious bad guys and terrorists we all could all rally around and hate?  I’ll attempt to explain it.  Basically, it is political warfare 101.
The man wanted to disrupt black unity movements, black aspirations, and the emerging civil rights movement…  Essentially, guys like George Jackson’s Soledad Brothers, Donald deFreeze, the Black Panthers, the BLA assholes served as “useful idiots,” to push forward a preplanned political agenda.  They were usually disposed of by equally stupid cops in spectacular shoot outs like the LAPD and SLA shootout.
So what about that foxy UCLA black professor who got mixed up with the BLA and Panther dudes, the feminist movement, and black power movements?  Maybe despite her Ph.D, professor Angela Davis was just another dumb fuck like me, and the cops out there chasing her bros around.  Fact is, we were COINTELPROED.  WTF?
And the man COINTELPROED a lot of chicks back in the day, when deep cover CIA operative Gloria Steinem and that porn rag devoted to female orgasms and male bashing Cosmopolitan got lots of chicks to burn their bras and to switch from wearing sexy French cut panties to guys’ jockey shorts (oh, no!).  Digressing…
A lot of guys bought into the political drama and social angst surrounding the feminist movement, too.  They dropped their balls and became wussies, another crop of useful idiots for the man. This is not to say that a lot of morons out there fucking around on their women, beating up their wives and girlfriends. getting constantly drunk, screwing the pooch, smoking dope, and acting badly toward women did not lend legitimacy to the feminist movement.  It sure did.  And then some.  However, it would have served us all much better if the women along with decent males had gotten baseball bats and had beaten the shit out of these guys.  Then we could have all gone back to being men and women, loving each other, instead of being enemies playing that “she said, he said bullshit” that drives up apart.  [expletive] man, he be real sly and ya gotta watch his moves.
I gotta say that we were stupid back then.  The “man” knew how to use the cops’ patriotism, willingness to serve, and our blind faith in the goodness of America, and its leaders as weapons against us and the American people.  That has all changed.  There are still plenty of stupid cops out there today, but the people have woken up and they are much wiser today than ever before.
In many cases, the people see right through all the bullshit and political theater.  So now, instead of bank robbing [expletive]s like Sherman and Ayers, we have Ebola, and Muslim head choppers playing these roles.  Same old shit and same old story.  Thing is, the scripts are stale, have been played too many times before, and our people are tired of being led down the primrose path by sly werewolves.  We got guard dog packs watching our backs and those dogs have sharp drooling fangs and they want payback.  Payback is a bitch.
I learned much of this to my horror from army CID operatives and from a former LAPD (LEIU) intelligence cop, who I networked with.  He jumped ship, told “the man” to fuck off and the last I know of, is still driving his tractor around in circles on his remote Alaska homestead.  I wasn’t far behind in following him to Alaska, when something else came up diverting me to another purpose.
See the links–
image
The Lighthouse Report

THE CONSTANTINE REPORT No. 1 “Remote Viewing” at Stanford Research Institute or Illicit CIA Mind Control Experimentation?
Preview by Yahoo
image
vacaville | In Search of Black Assassins

Posts about vacaville written by Prince Ray
Preview by Yahoo
image
Bill Ayers– Profile of Bill Ayers, the Weatherman (aka …

Bill Ayers led the Weathermen, a 1970s student group, to violent action in the quest to achieve a classless society and protest the Vietnam war.
Preview by Yahoo
image
BLACK FEMINISM, THE CIA AND GLORIA STEINEM.

BLACK FEMINISM, THE CIA AND GLORIA STEINEM.
Preview by Yahoo
image
COINTELPRO

COINTELPRO FBI Domestic Intelligence Activities COINTELPRO Revisited – Spying & Disruption
Preview by Yahoo
I am NOT getting down on blacks…do not forget there are legions out there who love America, have served as good soldiers, as cops, as legislators, business men and scientists.  The Illumines, goddamn their rotten hearts want to use our black folks as racial weapons to ignite a devastating race war.
It’s not working very well, is it?  And it will never work, as long as whites and others reach across the divide to assure black folks that we will join with and protect them as they must with us.  That drives the man up the [expletive] wall.
Another thing, the media will have you believe is that blacks are all criminals or criminal wanna bes… You know MOFOS.  Well, there are lots of black criminals.  I put a lot of them in jail and had it out with some of them.   However, there are even more decent black folks then black criminals.  And there are even more white criminals than blacks.  Black criminals just stand out more because they are black, is all.
So, eff the media.  What we need to do is to reach out to our black bros and sisters.  We have much more in common than we realize.  Same goes for decent Muslims who believe in America.  Islam is not my religion, but Muslims have a fundamental right to worship as they please under the First Amendment and the Constitution and that is what is really at stake here.
Don’t know about you folks, but I am sick and tired of being fooled and had by the man.
Quintus Dias

Reply by Cyrellys on October 12 of 2014.
In regards to your story this recent account piece from one of the listeners at Quayle’s Alerts seems apropos to note:

Islamic loyalty in US Military & Russian troops.You must understand the nature of this threat especially, to those who serve along side of those whose job will be to kill you when ‘it happens’I was traveling through the southeast for my business this past wk. I stopped overnight in Johnson City TN before I headed to Virginia. I met some business partners of mine to discuss growth & numbers at a restaurant/bar. Granted our conversation inevitably moved towards the realities of our market place & current economic state of the nation & the world. In the midst of this conversation, a strong, early 30’s black man approaches me & asks me if I’m in the military(he was wearing his dogs tags) I said no but I come from a military family. He then asked what I know. I responded with what do you mean? He then began to aggressive. He pulls out his military ID & says we can’t talk at the table come outside. (I come from a military family & have been around some very influential people in my time & you &I both know what’s coming)

When we got outside his first question to me was are you Russian?! I’m not I said no. Than he kept saying don’t lie to me! You look just like them! You know more than you’re saying!

After i shared with him what I know about money, powers at be, & the times we live in he than asks “who’s side are you on?” I’m an American, I know this country is toast but I’ll stand by my fellow Americans. He then asked again who’s side are you on? I had to ask what do you mean? He then lifts his sleeve & shows his tattoo on his arm, which is a text/quote out of the Quran.. He then looks at me & says plainly, ‘I will not shoot an American citizen, until the EVENTS. If we see each other again when this takes place and I know which side you are on. (I’m a Christian!) I asked why did it matter if I’m Russian? He said ‘they know, & we (radical Muslims) know it’s soon’, we talk. (I also know there’s a large population of Russians in the Smokey Mountain areas & Appalachian/BlueRidge) 

I’d appreciate your insight on this seeing that there is an American Citizen in our military who’s loyalty is ultimately to Islam & apparently they “talk” with the UN Russian troops “waiting” here.

Whatever’s coming is big, & it’s coming soon. CHRIS

Oct 10, 2014



Reply from Bob on October 12 of 2014 via email. 

QD,  I sure am glad that you are on the same page as I on the racial issues!  I have been telling black people for several years now that this entire racial strife is orchestrated by government/illumines/ et. al. to implement their “divide and conquer” game plan of enslavement on all of us, black and white and you can throw the Hispanics into this scam with us !  One of the founders of the NAACP was Jewish Bankster Jacob Schiff, a white man who wanted to divide the races so we couldn’t gang up on the evil banksters and throw them out of the country.
During my last two years of trying to get the Constitution Party moving forward in New Mexico I have spoken to many black Americans trying to explain how we need to join hands (forces?) and convince both of our races that we all are Americans and we are being made fools of ourselves by buying into the racial divide !  The Black people in this country are not AFRICANS !  They are AMERICANS !  Abraham Lincoln tried to convince the black Americans to return to Africa, but most refused because they were born and raised right here in America, and most had been here for many generations.  They would have been in a very strange land (to them) if they had gone to Africa in the 19th century, and more so if they go now !  i.e.  We need to join together and win back our freedom from the global bankster overlords who THINK they own us and want eventually to eliminate us !
What disappoints me today, is that the black people I spoke to seemed to agree with me, but none have contacted me to move forward and bring our two peoples together.  They did appear to be very surprised to hear that message coming from an old white man.  I told them that it may be more difficult for me to convince the white people than it would for me to get the support of the blacks.  Our white people are so brainwashed, but I truly believe that it is our only hope of winning freedom for all of us.  Real education needs to be free of government interference and open to total local control.  Our youth must be educated to the truth and leave the social engineering to the dustbins of history forever!
–Bob ———–
New Mexico

Reply from PB on October 13 of 2014 via email.  I have a short story to tell that I hope give at least a little bit of insight into today’s condition.
When I was a young teenager in the mid 1980’s I attended church with my family at a very active and outreaching church. almost every week we had someone from around the nation or world come in a present something different that would either be very uplifting, heavily warning, or strongly informative.
One Sunday evening a very well dressed black man with jeri curls and a slight islander accent told the church about a subversive movement going on in the seminary schools but especially those of the black organizations. He said they are being literally invaded by islamic men who are not seeking to change themsleves but instead seeking to subvert and change the Christian church. He said they (the “black” church) has been targeted and many ministers in the churches are already (in the 1980s) causing problems. It seemed that NO ONE listened.
I can go on with examples like BOBO calling himself a Christian and that minister “Wright” calling himself a Christian when we know better.  However I just wanted to lay down the idea this has been going on for at least 35 years and those PTBs are definitely generational in their approach.  Christians must stop avoiding generational thinking.