Showing posts with label Constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Constitution. Show all posts

Friday, June 26, 2020

The 3 D's of the Democratic Platform: Destroy, Defund, and Dystopia

Staff Writer, DL Mullan 
Democratic Platform / 2020 Presidental Election
___________________________________

Welcome to the Democrat Party where nothing is real and everything is propaganda.

Since Donald Trump was elected as President of the United States, the Globalist elite have done everything in their power to undermine his Presidency and the American people's faith in his leadership. Currently, this foreign collective of wealthy individuals, who hide their money in tax exempt foundations, have been able to rule the world through their technocratic communist administrative state via unelected policy making. These dictates are echoed around the world in government management that are inorganic to the native peoples because the political establishment, i.e., political parties, are easily bought off and manipulated by shiny objects like fame and power.

So the global elite with their monopolies over technology, manufacturing, and industry have become the one world government scaffolding sitting on top of the rest of us in their ivory tower politburo. Technology companies lure people in with free information, search engines, and accessibility all the while manipulating, collecting, and stealing from the public. So tech giants tell their customers what freedoms they are allowed to exercise. Their cohorts in media keep the public distracted with fake news stories about everyone else, so the public does not grasp the seriousness of the politburo's crimes against humanity. Other corporations limit access to food, travel, and electronic funding sources if someone is deemed a "dangerous person" without due process of law, or for the fact that a person does not support the radical communist ideology being thrown at them. The politburo controls every facet of the public's life: communication, food, medicine, manufacturing, industry, education, law, and private affairs. 

Both political parties fell for the Globalist agenda hook, line, and sinker. When Donald Trump became President of the United States as well as head of the Republican (GOP) Party, he deviated that party platform from pure self-destruction. Although there are still Never Trumpers and Rinos plaguing the party as a whole. 

The Democrat Party did not fair as well. With weak leadership by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have strayed beyond Globalism and straight into the Leftist ideology of the Post Modernist's version  of communism, which is tear down, burn down, and strip down people, places, and ideas until the public cannot see the upside from the downside. This move to give credibility to uninformed, uneducated, and incompetent Social Justice Warriors has left Classical Liberals, Moderate Democrats, and Centrists with no home in the Democrat Party. 

Without the strength of knowledge and wisdom of the moderates, the Democrat party no longer appears cognizant. Policies shift daily and whenever the news cycle creates another imaginary or exacerbated crisis: Russian Collusion, Climate Change, COVID-19, George Floyd, or Police Brutality. This schizophrenic dance leaves Americans confused as to what the Democrat party stands for since the real news and ideological worthy subjects are forgotten: China's overreach, China's pollution, China's aggressive behavior in Asia, China's aggressive behavior in Africa, China's aggressive behavior in Australia, China's biomedical problems that lead to continuous pandemics, China's bribery of higher education, the media, and Hollywood. 

Did we mention China? 

For decades China has been a serious issue without one word from Democrats about this National Security threat. As a communist country and a globalist stronghold, China is apart of the system that has compromised our country with Globalism. The Democrat Party has much to answer for in this arena, ask Diane Feinstein about her driver and Harry Reid about Cliven Bundy. 

Instead of engaging the American electorate about China, Americans have been swept away by the incoherent far left cancel culture of destroy monuments and history, defund the police, and live in the communist dystopia of a Marxist uprising while kneeling to the domestic terrorist's demands. 

That is not leadership, Nancy Pelosi; that is a convulsion. 

Your oath is to uphold the Constitution and defend this country from enemies foreign and domestic. Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat Party have failed ad nauseum with this simple set of tasks. The Democrat Party has become impotent, unimportant, and imbecilic. 

There is no substance here. Social justice has destroyed the party and its hope for the future. The Democrat Party is finished. 

If you do not believe so, where does the party go from here? Farther and farther down the leftist path until everyone "identifies" as a rainbow unicorn? That is ridiculous. 

Adults in this country are tired of the immature identity politics, rage/lynch mobs, cancel culture, and rioting. If that is all the Democrat Party has to offer under Nancy Pelosi and corrupt junior politicos like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her buddies, then the party is gone.

Stick a fork in the bylaws, the Democrats are done. 

Joe Biden, you say? He cannot remember who he is and where he is. The only way the Democrats maneuver out of that dud is to nominate someone else at the convention and they do not have anyone else. Everyone that could step in is mired in corruption, corruption, and even more corruption. 

The Democrat Party could have fought for Americans instead of illegal aliens. The Democrat Party could have worked with the Trump Administration instead of falsifying documents and testimony against him and his supporters to create fake news headlines. The Democrats could have healed this nation instead of stoking the fires of racial hatred and revenge of an imaginary systematic racism and illegitimate claims of nationwide police brutality.  

But the me, me, me diva mania could not leave well enough alone. 

The American people will now rise to the occasion and vote the mental illness of leftist ideology out of office. Americans are done being torn down, burnt down, and stripped down economically, mentally, and emotionally for an ideology steeped in psychological decay. 

The roller coaster ride of complete depravity is over and Americans will step up to fill in the void that the Democrat Party left in the wake of their meltdown. 

And, the Democrat Party handed the Patriots in the Republican Party thirty consecutive years running the show. Say good bye to all the liberal ideals that women fought hard to create and maintain...

Oh who are we kidding, the Democrat Party sold out women to men who wear dresses... just like the religious right sells out women to men in robes. Women cannot get a fair shake here. Where are the politicians fighting for women's rights? They are now in the Republican party. 

Did you see that one coming in your ineptitude?

Congratulations, Nancy Pelosi and the left wing radicals, you just lost your party to oblivion.



Thursday, June 4, 2020

No. Defense Secretary Esper, Trump is the Commander in Chief

Staff Writer, DL Mullan 
Insurrection / Enemy Combatants

___________________________________

Defense Secretary Mark Esper is wrong. So wrong the question becomes why is he in a position of leadership in our government?

“The option to use active duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort, and only in the most urgent and dire of situations. We are not in one of those situations now. I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act,” Esper stated. 

But insurrection is already taking place. Once peaceful protests erupt into violence, mayhem, death and destruction, these demonstrations are no longer protected rights under the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. 

Former Ambassador Alan Keyes sums up the Presidents rights and responsibilities under the Constitution in this interview: Only the Commander in Chief Can Stop Civil Insurrection

When life, liberty, and property are being taken from the American people without due process of law, then yes, Mr. Esper, President Trump can act accordingly through the Constitution with the power of the military. 

The Insurrection Act has been updated: 
Public Law 109-364 (H.R. 5122) Oct 17, 2006 2014-06-19

Section 1076
Major changes:

Changed the title of the law from "Insurrection Act" to "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act"

Specifies situations in which the President can invoke martial law (natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident or other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order). These had not been specified before.

Spells out the President's obligation to inform Congress within 14 days when he determines to exercise the authority, and every 14 days thereafter, during the exercise of the authority. This had also not been specified under the Insurrection Act.
President Trump has many other powers granted to him by Congress in the war on terror.

For example:

In 2012, the U.S. Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with relatively little attention from the media―despite the freedoms it obliterated. The NDAA was enacted to empower the U.S. military to fight the war on terror. But buried in this law are two provisions (Sections 1021 and 1022) that authorize the indefinite military detention, without charge or trial, of any person labeled a “belligerent”―including an American citizen.

These NDAA provisions (which have been re-approved by Congress and signed by President Obama every year since 2012) override habeas corpus―the essence of our justice system. Habeas corpus is the vital legal procedure that prevents the government from detaining you indefinitely without showing just cause. When you challenge your detention by filing a writ of habeas corpus, you must be promptly brought before a judge or into court, where lawful grounds must be shown for your detention or you must be released.

Under Section 1021, however, anyone who has committed a “belligerent act,” can be detained indefinitely, without charges or trial, as a “suspected terrorist.” This is a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution and our Bill or Rights. In The Federalist No. 84, Alexander Hamilton stressed the importance of the writ of habeas corpus to protect against “the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.”
Another illustration of the power of the Presidency:
A. Military Commissions Act of 2009. Title XVIII of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010 (the NDAA), signed into law in October 2009, replaced the Military Commissions Act of 2006 with the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (MCA 2009).
The concept of our military commissions "which by law are only for defendants who are not citizens of the United States" remains widely disparaged around the world as a second-class justice system. Some allied countries have refused to provide crucial witnesses or evidence for use in the tribunals.
Arizona has illegal aliens participating in the riots: DACA Illegal Aliens Among 200 People Arrested in Phoenix, Arizona Riots. Those individuals constitute an invading foreign force waging war within the United States.  

ANTIFA and other militant organizations are also contributing to the lawlessness. 

And, have you forgotten about: 
The detainee provisions passed as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012, P.L. 112-81, affirm that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF),P.L. 107-40, in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, authorizes the detention of persons captured in connection with hostilities. The act provides for the first time a statutory definition of covered persons whose detention is authorized pursuant to the AUMF. During debate of the provision, significant attention focused on the applicability of this detention authority to U.S. citizens and other persons within the United States. The Senate adopted an amendment to clarify that the provision was not intended to affect any existing law or authorities relating to the detention of U.S. citizens or lawful resident aliens, or any other persons captured or arrested in the United States. This report analyzes the existing law and authority to detain U.S. persons, including American citizens and resident aliens, as well as other persons within the United States who are suspected of being members, agents, or associates of Al Qaeda or possibly other terrorist organizations as “enemy combatants.” The Supreme Court in 2004 affirmed the President’s power to detain “enemy combatants,” including those who are U.S. citizens, as part of the necessary force authorized by Congress after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, a plurality held that a U.S. citizen allegedly captured during combat in Afghanistan and incarcerated at a Navy brig in South Carolina is entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard by a neutral decision maker regarding the government’s reasons for detaining him. On the same day, the Court in Rumsfeld v. Padillaoverturned a lower court’s grant of habeas corpus to another U.S. citizen in military custody in South Carolina on jurisdictional grounds, leaving undecided whether the authority to detain also applies to U.S. citizens arrested in the United States by civilian authorities. Lower courts that have addressed the issue of wartime detention within the United States have reached conflicting conclusions. While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ultimately confirmed the detention authority in principle in two separate cases (one of which was subsequently vacated), the government avoided taking the argument to the Supreme Court by indicting the accused detainees for federal crimes, making their habeas appeals moot and leaving the law generally unsettled. A federal judge enjoined the detention of persons on the basis of providing support to or associating with belligerent parties under one prong of the definition enacted as Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012, P.L. 112-81 (Hedges v. Obama), but the decision has been reversed on appeal on the basis of standing. This report provides a background to the legal issues presented, followed by a brief introduction to the law of war pertinent to the detention of different categories of individuals. An overview of U.S. practice during wartime to detain persons deemed dangerous to the national security is presented. The report concludes by discussing Congress’s role in prescribing rules for wartime detention, subsequent legislation in the 112th Congress that addresses the detention of U.S. persons, and legislative proposals in the 113th Congress to further address the issue (H.R. 1960, S. 1147, H.R. 2325, and H.R. 3304.
At the moment, the rioters along with city mayors and state governors who are allowing the wanton destruction of American life, liberty, and property fit this definition of a belligerent/enemy combatant. As well, mayors and governors have allowed protests to turn into the legal definition of Rebellion or insurrection.
18 U.S. Code § 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Yet these enemy combatants, militant revolutionaries, and illegal aliens continue to get bailed out of jail to terrorize their neighbors. Enough is enough. These people have no right to behave in this manner.

President Trump as Commander in Chief has numerous options open to him, including the military.

So please, Mr. Esper, tell Americans again the vastness of your wisdom because your knowledge is lacking and it shows.

Sources: Breitbart, Survival Monkey, Banned Video, American Bar, Cornell Law,   

Monday, August 28, 2017

New: CIA Agent Whistleblower Risks All To Expose The Shadow Government

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
CIA / Whistleblower
________________________________

Kevin Shipp was a decorated CIA officer who refused to look the other way in regard to government criminality and cover-up. At a very important public awareness event, held by GeoengineerWatch.org in Northern California, on July 28th, 2017, Mr. Shipp presented a shocking and compelling presentation on numerous, horrific and ongoing government crimes. The total persecution of anyone who dares to tell the truth about rampant government tyranny is also fully exposed. The paradigm we have all known has been built on deception and the dark agendas of the global power structure. The courage Kevin Shipp has shown by doing his best to expose government criminality and tyranny serves as a stellar example to us all.  
We desperately need other individuals in government agencies and the US military to follow Kevin's lead. All of us are essential in the battle to help wake the masses to the truth so that the whistleblowers have the support they need to come forward. If we have any chance of stopping the completely out of control criminal cabal that currently runs our country and much of the world, we must all make our voices heard, we must all join the fight for the greater good. 
Dane Wigington


Source: Dane Wigington

Friday, October 21, 2016

Welcome to the Republic

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
Separation between Church and State
________________________________

Well, what's left of it. 

The United States of America was founded on solid principles of freedoms and rights. In the last 240 years, Americans have been pulled away from this foundation through lies and manipulation. Today, our Republic transformed into a democracy and now is an oligarchy.

A few Americans have taken up the mantle to return the pendulum to the other direction: back to a Republic. In this fight against a worldwide regime called Globalism, the people are standing up against tyranny. Here in the states, our fight has turned from Truth, Justice, and the American Way and into an unwavering theocracy.

A theocracy is a country that is ruled by religious leaders. Does that sound like Americans are being directed back to our founding principles of individual freedoms and rights? When we have politicians in congressional seats, governorships, or even on school boards directing our lives in accordance with their religious belief system instead of following the laws, we do not have a Republic.  

And, you cannot have it both ways.

We have politicians acting in the role of religious leaders who are taking away rights from the People, demonizing medical procedures, preferring one gender over another, and pushing one religion over everybody else.

Houston, we have a problem. Or should I say: Austin?

We have an alternative media that is chalk full of religious zealots that support these political maneuvers. God, this! Jesus, that! To convince listeners, readers, and fandom that if GOD is not placed back into politics and the public sphere that they are all going to hell! The demons will win!

What a bunch of crapola.

Evil happens when good men sit and do nothing. We have a whole bunch of do nothings in this nation. Only the brave are standing up against the Global takeover of the People’s resources and wealth.

God has nothing to do with it. God is the creation of the elite power structure to keep you all slaves. Mental slaves. Emotional slaves. Financial slaves.

I am wrong? Let’s talk this out… So Jesus came to Earth but there is hardly a record of him in ancient times to corroborate the Bible. If he was so groundbreaking wouldn’t everyone be writing about him, good or bad? The first stories of him were written decades after his supposed disappearance and in Greek, not in Aramaic. The Council of Nicea to formulate this newfound power base, I mean religion, did not convene until about 300 years later. Anyone who questioned or argued that Jesus was not divine was excommunicated or killed. The Bible was then created and we are not sure about where these texts derived from or who actually wrote them. Many texts are hidden in the bowels of the Vatican like many ancient manuscripts. Since then the Bible has been rewritten over 200 times. Women are often demonized in Biblical stories and/or made subservient to men.

Do I have that all straight?

When you add comparative mythology/religion into the mix you discover that older religions were stuffed into the Jesus story. The Bible is not original. The Bible steals from other cultures.

That is nothing new. Christians have been stealing pagan traditions for hundreds and hundreds of years. Christmas tree, anyone?

Then the New World was opened up to the peoples of Europe. Tired of the wars between feuding and feudal kings and lords as well as the tyranny of the Catholic Church, people moved away from that system.

Only to set up the exact same oppressive system here!

The Founding Fathers of the United States did not intend for any one religion to reign supreme in this new nation. As a nation that has people, cultures, religions, music and food from around the globe, we can never say we are for only one religion. It is impossible and frankly quite dishonest.

Why the United States of America is a Republic:

There’s a reason why the American founders created a republic, and not a democracy. Republics are the best form of government for protecting the individual from the tyranny of the majority. And there most certainly is a tyranny of the majority that always manifests in democratic style systems.

Here’s how it works: in democratic or republican systems, there is a kind of majority rule. In democracies, the 51% rules over the 49% and has total control. The 51% can do whatever it wants, because in democracies there are not structures in place to protect individual rights.

If 51% vote to steal your bike, you are without a bike. If 51% vote to kill you, you are out of a life. It does not matter if it is right or not, what the majority says is what happens.

A republic is different though, and it operates for the protection of the individual against the majority when they get out of control. It is very important to protect the rights of the individual in a political system, for that is how governments are limited in their power and scope.

Yet we have a religious caste who have separated themselves from the rest of America and voted in their like minded politicians to create this terrible imbalance. Due process has been replaced by bullying the People with Problem Reaction Solution:

  • Abortion laws to take away individual rights from women.
  • Drug testing laws to take away individual rights to the Fifth Amendment.
  • Laws that safeguard polluting corporations and neglectful employers against the health and safety of workers.
  • And, even laws to limit or take away social benefits from individuals even though the religious caste of politicians have moved all our industry and jobs to foreign shores, made higher education too expensive, and created wars to send young people to fight instead of maintain the infrastructure of our own country.
So the religious leaders masquerading as politicians have created poverty, destruction, and the murder of millions and millions of children with their righteous policies of war and conquest.

In this sense, religion has been used to overthrow the very foundations of our government. Treason comes in all forms: Globalism… and right is might. In 1776, our Founding Fathers threw off the yoke of religious based government. The divine right of kings was over.

Yet we have alternative media outlets screaming and yelling about abortion and how their religion is going to fix women… real good.

No abortion. No birth control… next women will have to sacrifice more of their rights for this man made religious cult. Then we won’t be able to own property, have a vote, or be educated at all.

What was that quote from Malala Yousafzai:

"The extremists were and they are afraid of books and pens, the power of education frightens them," Malala said. "They are afraid of women, the power of the voice of women frightens them…”

We have that patriarchal fear in this country too.

The patriarchy is not dead. Patriarchy is when a family, group, or government is controlled by a man or a group of men. When men can do the same acts as women but women are scorned, given the blame, and yet men take none of the responsibility, then you have a patriarchy.

And I did not have to pour pig’s blood all over me in a vain attempt at menstrual reverie and call it art to do it either. I just looked up the definition in the dictionary. Drama queen not included.

If the religious right in this country really wanted to stop most abortions they could, right now, today. They could do it by following their own religious edicts and not by taking away anyone’s individual rights to do it.

Here’s how men could turn abortion around:

  • Abstain from sex, period
  • Do not have sex unless you and your mate want to create a zygote
  • If you have sex against your religious beliefs no matter if it is with a prostitute, one night stand, girlfriend, or wife, a condom must be used at all times
  • After you and your mate are done having children: have a vasectomy
  • When you get diagnosed with Erectile Dysfunction, refuse the little blue pill
In accordance with the conservative views on sex, marriage, and abortion, all men in this group should be adhering to the above rules. Men need to take responsibility for their actions and stop laying it at the feet of women.

If you aren’t abiding by your own religious mandates. then you cannot take the moral high ground on any type of reproductive procedure. A zygote is created with a sperm and an egg… a woman cannot have a child on her own. You are one half of your own problem.

Get a clue.

Conservative mandates and our Republican form of government do not mesh. Religious versus individual rights. In a Republic, an individual’s rights trump religious dogma. But the conservative values are to nullify individual rights and have been trashing our Bill of Rights on a regular basis:
  • Blanket law enforcement laws and militarizing police
  • Blanket intelligence laws; mass spying
  • Illegally invading sovereign countries; regime change
  • Drug testing for employees and food stamp recipients
So much for compassionate conservatives.

But today is about setting the record straight. The United States of America is not a conservative country. It is not a religious country. We are supposed to be a Republic, for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

The god reference was taken out because it was placed in during the red scare of communism. It is not original to our pledge. So I leave it out because it is religious propaganda and against our founding principles.

A nation under One GOD, a candidate said… here’s what our Founders had to say about that:  

1. “If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”
~Founding Father George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789

2. “Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.”
~Founding Father George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792

3. “We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition… In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States.”
~Founding Father George Washington, letter to the members of the New Church in Baltimore, January 27, 1793

4. “The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”
~John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” 1787-1788

5. “The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
~1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by Founding Father John Adams

6. “Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
~Founding Father John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” (1787-88)

7. “We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society.”
~Founding FatherJohn Adams, letter to Dr. Price, April 8, 1785

8. “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802

9. “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is error alone that needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814

10. “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, then that of blindfolded fear.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

11. “I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge Gerry, January 26, 1799

So the next time you want to throw the Constitution and Bill of Rights under the bus of the religious fervor, then you better get your facts straight.

The alternative right, right, conservative base, Christianity, and whatever else extreme views are out there to undermine the Republic, remember that the Founding Fathers are NOT on your side. You stand against the Republic when you lecture and promote your religion over American values and individual rights, if you agree with them or not… it is not for you to say.

From the Center, just one step to the Left… where common sense apparently still lives.






Welcome to the Republic

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
Separation between Church and State
________________________________

Well, what's left of it. 

The United States of America was founded on solid principles of freedoms and rights. In the last 240 years, Americans have been pulled away from this foundation through lies and manipulation. Today, our Republic transformed into a democracy and now is an oligarchy.

A few Americans have taken up the mantle to return the pendulum to the other direction: back to a Republic. In this fight against a worldwide regime called Globalism, the people are standing up against tyranny. Here in the states, our fight has turned from Truth, Justice, and the American Way and into an unwavering theocracy.

A theocracy is a country that is ruled by religious leaders. Does that sound like Americans are being directed back to our founding principles of individual freedoms and rights? When we have politicians in congressional seats, governorships, or even on school boards directing our lives in accordance with their religious belief system instead of following the laws, we do not have a Republic.  

And, you cannot have it both ways.

We have politicians acting in the role of religious leaders who are taking away rights from the People, demonizing medical procedures, preferring one gender over another, and pushing one religion over everybody else.

Houston, we have a problem. Or should I say: Austin?

We have an alternative media that is chalk full of religious zealots that support these political maneuvers. God, this! Jesus, that! To convince listeners, readers, and fandom that if GOD is not placed back into politics and the public sphere that they are all going to hell! The demons will win!

What a bunch of crapola.

Evil happens when good men sit and do nothing. We have a whole bunch of do nothings in this nation. Only the brave are standing up against the Global takeover of the People’s resources and wealth.

God has nothing to do with it. God is the creation of the elite power structure to keep you all slaves. Mental slaves. Emotional slaves. Financial slaves.

I am wrong? Let’s talk this out… So Jesus came to Earth but there is hardly a record of him in ancient times to corroborate the Bible. If he was so groundbreaking wouldn’t everyone be writing about him, good or bad? The first stories of him were written decades after his supposed disappearance and in Greek, not in Aramaic. The Council of Nicea to formulate this newfound power base, I mean religion, did not convene until about 300 years later. Anyone who questioned or argued that Jesus was not divine was excommunicated or killed. The Bible was then created and we are not sure about where these texts derived from or who actually wrote them. Many texts are hidden in the bowels of the Vatican like many ancient manuscripts. Since then the Bible has been rewritten over 200 times. Women are often demonized in Biblical stories and/or made subservient to men.

Do I have that all straight?

When you add comparative mythology/religion into the mix you discover that older religions were stuffed into the Jesus story. The Bible is not original. The Bible steals from other cultures.

That is nothing new. Christians have been stealing pagan traditions for hundreds and hundreds of years. Christmas tree, anyone?

Then the New World was opened up to the peoples of Europe. Tired of the wars between feuding and feudal kings and lords as well as the tyranny of the Catholic Church, people moved away from that system.

Only to set up the exact same oppressive system here!

The Founding Fathers of the United States did not intend for any one religion to reign supreme in this new nation. As a nation that has people, cultures, religions, music and food from around the globe, we can never say we are for only one religion. It is impossible and frankly quite dishonest.

Why the United States of America is a Republic:

There’s a reason why the American founders created a republic, and not a democracy. Republics are the best form of government for protecting the individual from the tyranny of the majority. And there most certainly is a tyranny of the majority that always manifests in democratic style systems.

Here’s how it works: in democratic or republican systems, there is a kind of majority rule. In democracies, the 51% rules over the 49% and has total control. The 51% can do whatever it wants, because in democracies there are not structures in place to protect individual rights.

If 51% vote to steal your bike, you are without a bike. If 51% vote to kill you, you are out of a life. It does not matter if it is right or not, what the majority says is what happens.

A republic is different though, and it operates for the protection of the individual against the majority when they get out of control. It is very important to protect the rights of the individual in a political system, for that is how governments are limited in their power and scope.

Yet we have a religious caste who have separated themselves from the rest of America and voted in their like minded politicians to create this terrible imbalance. Due process has been replaced by bullying the People with Problem Reaction Solution:

  • Abortion laws to take away individual rights from women.
  • Drug testing laws to take away individual rights to the Fifth Amendment.
  • Laws that safeguard polluting corporations and neglectful employers against the health and safety of workers.
  • And, even laws to limit or take away social benefits from individuals even though the religious caste of politicians have moved all our industry and jobs to foreign shores, made higher education too expensive, and created wars to send young people to fight instead of maintain the infrastructure of our own country.
So the religious leaders masquerading as politicians have created poverty, destruction, and the murder of millions and millions of children with their righteous policies of war and conquest.

In this sense, religion has been used to overthrow the very foundations of our government. Treason comes in all forms: Globalism… and right is might. In 1776, our Founding Fathers threw off the yoke of religious based government. The divine right of kings was over.

Yet we have alternative media outlets screaming and yelling about abortion and how their religion is going to fix women… real good.

No abortion. No birth control… next women will have to sacrifice more of their rights for this man made religious cult. Then we won’t be able to own property, have a vote, or be educated at all.

What was that quote from Malala Yousafzai:

"The extremists were and they are afraid of books and pens, the power of education frightens them," Malala said. "They are afraid of women, the power of the voice of women frightens them…”

We have that patriarchal fear in this country too.

The patriarchy is not dead. Patriarchy is when a family, group, or government is controlled by a man or a group of men. When men can do the same acts as women but women are scorned, given the blame, and yet men take none of the responsibility, then you have a patriarchy.

And I did not have to pour pig’s blood all over me in a vain attempt at menstrual reverie and call it art to do it either. I just looked up the definition in the dictionary. Drama queen not included.

If the religious right in this country really wanted to stop most abortions they could, right now, today. They could do it by following their own religious edicts and not by taking away anyone’s individual rights to do it.

Here’s how men could turn abortion around:

  • Abstain from sex, period
  • Do not have sex unless you and your mate want to create a zygote
  • If you have sex against your religious beliefs no matter if it is with a prostitute, one night stand, girlfriend, or wife, a condom must be used at all times
  • After you and your mate are done having children: have a vasectomy
  • When you get diagnosed with Erectile Dysfunction, refuse the little blue pill
In accordance with the conservative views on sex, marriage, and abortion, all men in this group should be adhering to the above rules. Men need to take responsibility for their actions and stop laying it at the feet of women.

If you aren’t abiding by your own religious mandates. then you cannot take the moral high ground on any type of reproductive procedure. A zygote is created with a sperm and an egg… a woman cannot have a child on her own. You are one half of your own problem.

Get a clue.

Conservative mandates and our Republican form of government do not mesh. Religious versus individual rights. In a Republic, an individual’s rights trump religious dogma. But the conservative values are to nullify individual rights and have been trashing our Bill of Rights on a regular basis:
  • Blanket law enforcement laws and militarizing police
  • Blanket intelligence laws; mass spying
  • Illegally invading sovereign countries; regime change
  • Drug testing for employees and food stamp recipients
So much for compassionate conservatives.

But today is about setting the record straight. The United States of America is not a conservative country. It is not a religious country. We are supposed to be a Republic, for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

The god reference was taken out because it was placed in during the red scare of communism. It is not original to our pledge. So I leave it out because it is religious propaganda and against our founding principles.

A nation under One GOD, a candidate said… here’s what our Founders had to say about that:  

1. “If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”
~Founding Father George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789

2. “Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.”
~Founding Father George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792

3. “We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition… In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States.”
~Founding Father George Washington, letter to the members of the New Church in Baltimore, January 27, 1793

4. “The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”
~John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” 1787-1788

5. “The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
~1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by Founding Father John Adams

6. “Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
~Founding Father John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” (1787-88)

7. “We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society.”
~Founding FatherJohn Adams, letter to Dr. Price, April 8, 1785

8. “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802

9. “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is error alone that needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814

10. “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, then that of blindfolded fear.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

11. “I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another.”
~Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge Gerry, January 26, 1799

So the next time you want to throw the Constitution and Bill of Rights under the bus of the religious fervor, then you better get your facts straight.

The alternative right, right, conservative base, Christianity, and whatever else extreme views are out there to undermine the Republic, remember that the Founding Fathers are NOT on your side. You stand against the Republic when you lecture and promote your religion over American values and individual rights, if you agree with them or not… it is not for you to say.

From the Center, just one step to the Left… where common sense apparently still lives.






Friday, June 24, 2016

Movie Night: Pante 3

Staff Writer, DL Mullan 
Government / History 
____________________________________


State capture and martial law in the US; Governors of 50 states and Adjutants General refused to declare the Constitution of 1789 in effect; Federal Judges masquerading; they are not sitting in courts under Article III of the Constitution - the US is in interregnum, and the nations of the world are in a Global Currency Reset.

Source: Karen Hudes

Thursday, October 22, 2015

Manhattan Project: Town Hall with Lyndon LaRouche

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Policy / Government 
_______________________________________


Lyndon LaRouche returns to New York! Every Saturday the LPAC Manhattan Project hosts a Q&A discussion between Manhattan activists and Mr. LaRouche. This week, Mr. LaRouche reiterates his emphasis that so far, the Presidential debates in no way do the crisis the U.S. and the world are in, justice. What is required is a coherent agreement on what people and nations need to move forward, together. Several reports from interventions and deployments from Manhattan are also discussed, demonstrating the Manhattan Project is now a force to be reckoned with in the political and cultural dynamic in Manhattan.

Source: LaRouche PAC

Saturday, January 24, 2015

The State of the First Amendment: 2014

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Bill of Rights / Polls
______________________________________

The State of the First Amendment: 2014 is a report about how Americans view the entire First Amendment, if some of them knew what that was.
When asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 68% of Americans name freedom of speech, followed by 29% who say the freedom of religion, 14% mention the freedom of the press, 7% mention the right to assemble, and 1% name the right to petition. Twenty-nine percent of those surveyed cannot name any of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Those who could name freedom of speech and freedom of religion increased this year from 59% to 68% and 24% to 29% respectively. Meanwhile, the knowledge of right to petition and right of assembly decreased from 4% to 1% and 11% to 7% respectively. The percentage of Americans who can’t name any First Amendment rights dropped from 36% to 29%.
The deprogramming of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must be working, but to combat this limited perspective, here is the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Memorize it, there might be a quiz later.


Source: Newseum, US Constitution

Friday, January 2, 2015

Movie Night: Molon Labe

Staff Writer, DB Holmes
Government / History
______________________________



What is going on in America? History, rights, and the Constitution are discussed in this documentary.


Source: Youtube 

Thursday, November 20, 2014

How to Take Our Court System Back

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
Courts / Constitution
___________________________________

Everyday in this country, citizens are ruled against in court. Judges make up their own rules and deny ordinary people their rights under the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Judges believe they are untouchable. Some do not allow you to defend yourself with court cases or with competent legal counsel. Some believe they are allowed to take away your children on the basis of an agency's personnel non-criminal complaint or filing. 

Actions like these are not allowed under the law.

There is a solution. Federal and State legislative branches can impeach any judge that has violated the Federal or State Constitutions. Anyone who has witnessed a judge violate a person's rights, be it yours or another persons, can file impeachment proceedings.

A remedy has appeared to bring judges and the court system back in line. 

If you would like to file charges against a judge, it is not that difficult. Anyone can do it. Here is the educational tool to help you on your way:




We need to take back our courts.

Won't you get involved and stop the abuses?


Source: American Republican Party , US Constitution, Arizona Constitution

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

The United States Isn't a Country — It's a Corporation!

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Constitution / Government
_________________________________
US CODE: Title 28,3002. Definitions (archived here)

(15) "United States" means —
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States
So what governance are we living under? 

In the essay: The United States Isn't a Country — It's a Corporation!, Lisa Guliani discusses how the Republic of these united States was turned into the corporate delusion called the UNITED STATES. 

Here is an excerpt:
...The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone's pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

"The Constitution for the united states of America".

The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not..


Source: Serendipity, Cornell Law,

Australian Money: What the Banks Don't Want You to Know

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Australia / Currency 
_________________________________

Do Australians know their laws, who owns their money, and how banking is done? 

Leask v Commonwealth [1996] HCA 29 (5 November 1996) "In determining whether a law is 'with respect to' a head of power in s 51 of the Constitution, two steps must be taken. First, the character of the law must be determined. That is done by reference to the rights, powers, liabilities, duties and privileges which it creates[64]. Secondly, a judgment must be made as to whether the law as so characterised so operates that it can be said to be connected to a head of power conferred by s 51. In determining whether the connection exists, the practical, as well as the legal, operation of the law must be examined[65]. If a connection exists between the law and a s 51 head of power, the law will be 'with respect to' that head of power unless the connection is, in the words of Dixon J[66], 'so insubstantial, tenuous or distant' that it cannot sensibly be described as a law 'with respect to' the head of power."

Source: Karen Hudes

Monday, November 10, 2014

Why We Are Not Safe: Police Officers are Private Entities

Staff Writer, R.Patrick Chapman
Corporations / Police Officers 
_____________________________________

Nearly every day on television or via the internet, news comes across the wire about another Police Officer who has stepped away from the Constitution and right into excessive force. 

Children's pets are being murdered. Mentally ill are being murdered. Police Officers attack peaceful protestors in riot gear, with tear gas and military armament.   

These stories are becoming more and more prevalent in our society. 

Ever wonder why? Here might be a clue:

North Carolina Police Departments all over the state have warned their officers to put their personal property (houses, land, cars and other assets) into someone else’s name because they may now be subject to lawsuits from the People of North Carolina. The warning was issued in response to the recent ruling that upheld that the local Police Departments in North Carolina are classified as “private entities” and NOT connected to the state of North Carolina.
Judicial Review Judge, Paul C. Ridgeway, Wake County General Court Of Justice, Superior Court Division, upheld a lower court ruling that most Public Officials / Agencies are “private entities.” Judge Ridgeway upheld the earlier (1.17.11) ruling of lower court Judge J. Randall May in Class v. NORTH CAROLINA, Case No. 10 DOT 7047 (now known as 11 CVS 1559).
The police officers will now also have to fund their own Surety Bonds.
Judge Ridgeway’s September 15, 2011 ruling creates a conflict in the public’s perception of basic government legitimacy because Judge Howard E. Manning, Jr (who recused himself in August 2011) declared in Mr. Class’ 4.21.11 hearing that “the Defendants were NOT ‘private entities’ or ‘private contractors’ “, but were “public officials.” Are the judges confused? Are these “government” agencies and officials NOT what they’re portraying to their constituents? Are they immune because they’re “private”? Do we actually have government “agencies” and elect “Public” Officials OR do we deal with “Private Entities”? Is the public being frauded? So many questions! So many conflicts!
What is even worse is that we pay private entities like cities and towns to provide a security force that ends up endangering the public, breaching the public trust, and ignoring their oaths to the Constitution of the United States.

Isn't the creation of corporations becoming a conflict of interest when it comes to adhering to the Constitution and Bill of Rights? 

Perhaps cities, towns, counties, and states should return to the public realm instead of becoming "persons," the fiction created by an act of law, in order to profit from the very people they are supposed to serve. 

Source: Post Oak Public Relations

Sunday, November 9, 2014

Puerto Rico Corporate Registry Including the United States

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Government / Corporations 
______________________________________

Still do not believe the United States has ever been a corporation unbound from the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Think again.


The question now is: what is the United States incorporated incarnation after the cancellation of this one?


Many entities are under King's Law in Puerto Rico. Are any of the insurance companies you deal with or pay into on this roster? If so, what does that mean?

Like the United Stated, these companies are considered foreign entities. 

Isn't it time the American people found out?


Source: Common Wealth of Puerto Rico: Registry of Corporations and Entities

Monday, July 28, 2014

Snowden - Ellsberg - Timm - HopeX 2014

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Hope X / Constitution
__________________________________

 
Discussion between Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg at the Home X conference 2014.

Source: Youtube

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

President George Washington's Farewell Address (1796)

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Government / Documents
___________________________________

Even historical documents have significance today.



Friends and Fellow Citizens:

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.
George Washington's Handwritten Speech

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.  
The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.

I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.

The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.

In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.

Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.

The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.

While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?

To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils? Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.

How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.

In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the twenty-second of April, I793, is the index of my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it.

After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.

The considerations which respect the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.

The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.

The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.

Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.

Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.

United States
19th September, 1796

Geo. Washington

Transcription courtesy of the Avalon Project at Yale Law School.

Source: Our Documents