"The preservation of a free government requires, not
merely that the metes and bounds which separate
each department of power be invariably maintained, but
more especially that neither of them be suffered to
overleap the great barrier which defends the rights
of the people. The rulers who are guilty of such
encroachment exceed the commission from which they derive
their authority, and are TYRANTS. The people who
submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves
nor by an authority derived from them and are slaves….."
-James Madison
***
HEY, PEOPLE! Please don't just
read what I post here (or anywhere), and nod your head sagely or
approvingly and then move on to other things. I don't post in order
to affirm your sense of things. I post in order to equip you with
perspectives and arguments with which to
educate others, and in the
expectation that you will forward my posts to other people (or
direct them to those posts). PLEASE do those things.
We won't win by YOU knowing what I
present. We will win by LOTS OF OTHERS knowing what I present.
Exposing The Vaccine Hustle
The facts plainly show the
relative irrelevance of even real C19
vaccines (should anyone come up with one)
and the truth behind the exploitative
"vaccine rollout".
LET'S START WITH how vaccines
work-- it's pretty simple and very
common-sense. No rocket science involved.
When an alien organism such as
a virus invades a person, that person's
immune system detects the invasion, analyzes
the organism, and designs and produces a
cure-- antibodies-- with which it destroys
the invader. The cure design goes on file in
the system's hard drive and that person has
become immune to that alien organism (or any
other of closely-similar nature).
The immunized person is
incapable of becoming infected or contagious
with the targeted pathogen, because every
representative of that organism which finds
its way into the body is killed by
immediately-produced, custom-equipped
antibodies cranked out by the
incomprehensibly sophisticated biochemical
factory of a human body.
At least, this is what happens
if the immune system has time enough to do
its work.
Sometimes immune systems are
compromised (either directly due to long
periods of isolation from other people, or
indirectly due to the impact on all systems
of a dangerous pre-existing condition, such
as obesity, COPD, and so forth). Some
invading organisms are highly aggressive. In
these cases incursion, entrenchment and
multiplication can take place too quickly
for the immune system to do its work; the
person is either successfully treated with
an externally-administered "cure" that
inhibits the invader long enough for the
immune system to catch up and do its job, or
dies.
Diseases thought of as
inherently dangerous or deadly (meaning
serious threats to otherwise healthy people
if not treatable with an effective
externally-administered cure) are so due to
being of the fast-moving sort (with "fast"
being a relative term, btw, meaning "faster
than the typical immune system can mount its
successful defense, due either to the
invader's subtlety or its very rapid
replication"). Such diseases, left
untreated, will kill a significant number of
the people they infect.
The real problem with such
aggressive invasive diseases, then, is one
of timing (assuming a normal healthy immune
system). Such diseases don't give the immune
system enough time to do its necessary
analysis and design before the person is too
thoroughly or pervasively infected for
antibodies to either be successfully
produced or deployed. This is the problem
solved by vaccines.
VACCINES ARE PRE-EMPTIVE
PROMPTS to the immune system to undertake
its analysis and design tasks BEFORE an
aggressive, overwhelming invasion by the
dangerous pathogen. The prompting is done by
introducing into the body a reduced-threat
representative of the targeted pathogen--
one which is weakened or even dead, or is
introduced into an inhospitable area.
The controlled introduction
inhibits aggressive replication of the
pathogen while the immune system does its
analysis and put its custom-defense design
on file. Once that design is on file, the
threat from that pathogen is over, then and
into the future. The needed antibodies will
be immediately produced should the pathogen
invade, denying it any chance to gain a
foothold.
Vaccines simply buy their
recipients a little time, allowing those
recipients to become immune just as if they
had fought off an invading pathogen without
the help. Everyone immunized by a vaccine
becomes incapable of being infected or
contagious by the targeted pathogen-- just
like people who achieved immunity by
fighting off an inadvertent infection, with
or without externally-administered
treatments of some kind.
The protection will last some
period between five years and lifetime.
Short-span protection (the five-year+
variety) will be extended every time one is
exposed to the same (or a very similar)
pathogen during its pendency, at which the
design-file is pulled into RAM, antibodies
are produced, and the "retain in memory"
timer is thereby reset.
SO, HERE IS THE POINT of this
recital:
Every single person who has been exposed to C19 (the pathogen of interest
right now) IS IMMUNE. That person is
incapable of becoming infected, and
incapable of carrying or transmitting live
virus.
Since C19 is basically a
version of last
year's seasonal flu,
tracking the same dates and vectors as any
other such virus, we know that 35 to 50
million Americans were outright infected by mid-March
of 2020. We can reasonably project that if
half of what has been endlessly-claimed
about the contagiousness and persistence of
C19 is true, pretty nearly all of the other
280 million+ ended up thoroughly exposed to
the virus during that same period or over
the subsequent months (even if with only
asymptomatic and very brief viral incursion
before successful immune response).
Again, all of these folks (the vast majority of the American
population) have become immune. None of
these people need a vaccine.
WE DON'T NEED A "VACCINE
ROLLOUT", and we certainly don't need
"vaccine passports". Those behind the
vaccine push know these things very well.
In fact, the "vaccine push" is
really just an effort by certain parties to
cash-in on the C19 scam during its sunset
months. It also serves as a pretense by
which dictatorial edicts and those behind
them will be credited with slaying the dire
virus.
That sunset will likely go by
quickly, so as to keep big numbers of the
already-restive peasantry from reaching the
point of ripping off the masks-- in every
sense of the expression-- and digging deeply
and skeptically-enough to uncover the truth
about this massive, ruinous, deadly fraud
that has been practiced upon them. Not every
aspect of the scam will fade away, however.
As much of the "new normal" as
the people will still tolerate now will be
retained without interruption. That
infection will be leveraged in the
imposition of more, at a slower pace, going
forward. There WILL be a strong lobby for
vaccine passports, notionally-based on the
persistent Kool-Aid-fed demands of some to
be assured that they are not coming into
contact with possibly sick people.
Those Jonestowners could
simply be told by participating businesses
and bureaucrats, "Hey, if you are so worried
about getting sick, go get vaccinated
yourself... And if you don't think that's
good enough to solve your problem, then you
have no reason to demand that someone else
display proof of having undertaken a
violation of their personal integrity to get
what you plainly believe to be an
ineffective treatment." But they won't be.
Whether that push succeeds and
we end up with the passports (which will be
for everything, buying and selling, travel,
entertainment, everything) will hinge on how
many have already gotten the jab by the time
the rest rise up to forcefully say, "NO!"
So, don't wait too long...
We don't need a "vaccine
rollout". What we need is a renewal of
common-sense rollout, and a
renewal-of-liberty rollout.
And some prosecutions of the
perps.
"Like a muddied stream or a
polluted fountain is the righteous man who
gives way before the wicked."
-Proverbs 25:26
"There is no safety for honest
men but by believing all possible evil of
evil men."
-Edmund Burke
"Those who can make you believe
absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
-Voltaire
***
P.S. THE LATEST ENTHUSIASM
OF THE STATIST COMMUNITY is denunciation and suppression of
"domestic terrorism". This is not a new
chew-toy.
I wrote about the precursor push
down this road to Hell
here back in 2009 (and predicted its
revival), and I recommend the article to
everyone.
P.P.S. AS MY CONTRIBUTION TO
the "new normal", these newsletters, which
have been a weekly affair for most of the
last 15 years or so, will now officially
become "occasional". It may well be that
editions continue to appear each week but,
for a variety of reasons, I'm no longer going
to commit to that schedule.
Let me remind everyone that
being assured of notification upon the
posting of each upcoming edition is easy.
Simply go to
this page and subscribe to the group--
leave all options in their default states.
Archived newsletters going back
the last several years can be found
here. Updates and additions to LHC pages
and posts will continue, on no particular
schedule, as usual. The LHC site map can be
found
here.
P.P.P.S. An idea for the
writers at Marvel Studios: The Avengers form
up to rip a wall off Belmarsh Prison in
London and free Julian Assange! I'd pay a
lot for a ticket to see that kind of serious
hero-work.
With Sleepy Joe
Nodding Out, Kamala Harris's Awkward
Citizenship Problem Becomes Acute
...and no one should let the
Obama "Birther" business function as a
pre-emptive poison pill for this very real
legal issue.
MORE THAN TWELVE YEARS AGO the
issue of the "citizenship" qualification for
high office in the United States got kicked
around ad nauseam in regard to
Barack Obama, who was argued by some
(Hillary Clinton campaign people, to begin
with, it would seem) to be unqualified due
to having purportedly been born in Kenya,
the country of his father. That issue in
Obama's case was always murky, at best,
since his mother was, after all, a
native-born American and Obama's claim of
having been born in Hawaii was never
dispositively disputed despite Herculean
efforts by some of his political opponents.
I mention the murky and
quirky "citizenship" attack on Obama from
way back when in order to clear the air
before getting to the crystal-clear
citizenship problem of Kamala Harris. In a
perfectly natural reflex, anyone seeing the
issue of citizenship qualification for
office raised will assume that a mere rerun
of the Obama attack is being fielded, and
isn't likely to read on. But in fact, the
two cases are as different as night and day,
and the matter of qualification for office
is very serious, so don't turn away, please.
Read the legal analysis
through (reproduced, combined and slightly
updated below from its original appearance
on these pages
here and
here). If then you wish to deem the matter
not worthy of further attention, so be it,
but not before gaining an understanding of
the argument, please.
The Issue
Of Kamala Harris's Eligibility For Office
"No Person
except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen
of the United States, at the time of the
Adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the Office of President..."
Article II, Section
I, Clause V of the United States
Constitution
I'VE RECENTLY SEEN CLAIMS that
Kamala Harris, while born in the USA, is the
child of non-citizens in America merely on
student visas. If so, then she is not
qualified to be vice-president, or even
senator, for that matter.
We'll begin with an analysis of
the "birthright citizenship" notion itself.
Then we'll apply what has been shown to the
specifics of Kamala Harris' birth
circumstances.
A CHILD OF NON-CITIZEN PARENTS
does not acquire citizenship simply by being
born on American soil-- myths about
so-called "birthright citizenship"
notwithstanding. The law on this is
perfectly clear and unambiguous,
and the pretense to the contrary relies
entirely upon the glossing-over of
inconvenient and contradictory words in the
Fourteenth Amendment.
In this case, the phrase "or
naturalized" is the one conveniently
disregarded, as though its presence has no
impact on the meaning of the citizenship
clause. But that phrase-- which translates
as, "or granted citizenship"-- is actually
the key to the meaning of the clause (or, at
least, the key to untangling
misrepresentation or misunderstanding of the
clause).
Here is the complete language
of the amendment, in relevant part:
"Section 1. All
persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States
and of the state wherein they reside."
So, let's insert the
translation of "naturalized", which will
make immediately obvious that this amendment
clause is not intended to grant citizenship
to anyone in any normal sense of the term:
"All persons born or granted
citizenship in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States and of the
state wherein they reside."
Obviously this language
contemplates and concerns persons already
possessed of citizenship by normal
procedures-- either through birth to citizen
parents, or having been granted it through
naturalization.
As this more complete rendering
of the language helps clarify, the purpose
of the provision is not the granting
of United States citizenship. Instead its
purpose is the granting of state
citizenship to those who are already
United States citizens.
A LOOK AT THE 14th AMENDMENT'S
CONTEXT AND HISTORY makes this yet more
clear, revealing that those for whom this
clause was designed are the persons
naturalized by the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
That group consists of former slaves, all of
whom, if having been born in the United
States, are granted United States
citizenship thereby:
Be it enacted by the
Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress
assembled, That all persons born in the
United States and not subject to any foreign
power, excluding Indians not taxed,
are hereby declared to be citizens of the
United States; and such citizens,
of every race and color, without regard to
any previous condition of slavery or
involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted, shall have the
same right, in every State and Territory in
the United States, to make and enforce
contracts, to sue, be parties, and give
evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell,
hold, and convey real and personal property,
and to full and equal benefit of all laws
and proceedings for the security of person
and property, as is enjoyed by white
citizens, and shall be subject to like
punishment, pains, and penalties, and to
none other, any law, statute, ordinance,
regulation, or custom, to the contrary
notwithstanding.
Sec. 2. And be it further
enacted, That any person who, under color of
any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or
custom, shall subject, or cause to be
subjected, any inhabitant of any State or
Territory to the deprivation of any right
secured or protected by this act, or to
different punishment, pains, or penalties on
account of such person having at any time
been held in a condition of slavery or
involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted, or by reason of
his color or race, than is prescribed for
the punishment of white persons, shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on
conviction, shall be punished by fine not
exceeding one thousand dollars, or
imprisonment not exceeding one year, or
both, in the discretion of the court.
Note that the overall language
of the enactment plainly has as its object
only those persons born into slavery, and
now freed. Harmoniously, the specific
language refers to all persons born in the
United States-- while making no reference or
provisions regarding persons who shall
be born in the United States (none of whom
could then be born into slavery, the
institution having at that point been
abolished).
Further, expressly EXCLUDED
from the group with which the act is
concerned is anyone "subject to any foreign
power". This includes anyone born with
allegiance to any other country by virtue of
his or her parents' foreign citizenship--
such as every baby that is the object of
today's "birthright citizenship"
misunderstanding.
("Subject to the jurisdiction
thereof" is the 14th Amendment's restatement
by other words of the Civil Rights Act's
earlier phrase, "not subject to any foreign
power". It was perhaps restated thusly in
order to pre-empt exceptions based on a
claimant's argument that his parents are
somehow not foreign allegiant. Per the new
version of the language in the 14th
Amendment, that negative, even if true,
wouldn't be good enough to allow a slip
under the wire.)
THE REASON FOR THE 14th
AMENDMENT "CITIZENSHIP" PROVISION, very
briefly, is that after the slave population
was emancipated following the War to
Suppress Southern Independence, many states
(North and South) refused to treat freed
slaves as citizens. The refusal found
expression particularly in the denial of
voting rights.
This denial of voting rights to
the freed slaves created a conundrum for the
North. The Northern state bloc faced the
prospect of increased Southern strength in
Congress due to the entire former slave
population now being counted in full (rather
than at 3/5 each) for purposes of
determining the number of representatives in
each state's delegation. But with the freed
slaves unable to vote, the interests
represented by the stronger Southern
delegations would likely remain just as
hostile to the Northern agenda as ever they
had been, simply with more power in their
hands.
The solution was the 14th
Amendment, compelling every state to treat
all United States citizens living within
their borders as citizens of the states, as
well. The expectation was that this
compelled citizenship would convey
unabridged voting rights.
Even so, the optimistic
expectation of proper state behavior was
back-stopped. Recognizing that even state
citizenship might not be enough to safeguard
the Northern purpose against the acts of
what are, after all, sovereign states (and
were still thought of in that way, at that
point), the following fail-safe language--
which nicely underscores the real and
limited purpose of the "citizenship clause"
in Section 1-- was also included in the
amendment:
Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among
the several States according to their
respective numbers, counting the whole
number of persons in each State, excluding
Indians not taxed. But when the right to
vote at any election for the choice of
electors for President and Vice President of
the United States, Representatives in
Congress, the Executive and Judicial
officers of a State, or the members of the
Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the
male inhabitants of such State, being
twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the
United States, or in any way abridged,
except for participation in rebellion, or
other crime, the basis of representation
therein shall be reduced in the proportion
which the number of such male citizens shall
bear to the whole number of male citizens
twenty-one years of age in such State.
A GREAT DEAL MORE COULD BE SAID
about the 14th Amendment overall. If I ever
am able to be done with my advocacy for
truth regarding the income tax and can
move on to finishing the analysis of the
Constitution with which I have been noodling
for a number of years now, I'll say it.
For now, though, suffice it to
say that Section 1 of the amendment in no
way mandates the granting of citizenship--
either union-state or United States-- to any
child of foreign parents who happens to be
born on American soil.
Even the construction of the
amendment's "citizenship" clause by the US
Supreme Court in United States v. Wong
Kim Ark (169 US 649, 1898), which did
(mistakenly) find its way to affirming a
14th Amendment-based citizenship-by-birth
claim of a man born to Chinese national
parents who were long-time legal United
States residents
(a key legal term, the often-misunderstood
meaning and relevance of which will be laid
out below), does not avail
advocates of "birthright citizenship" for
the children of non-resident (or illegal)
aliens. In fact, Wong defeats the
advocates' argument.
In that case, the court only
found for Wong because of the status of
those parents as being in the United States
by permission, and under terms by which they
were allegiant to the United States during
their time in the country. It was during
that period of allegiance and jurisdictional
submission that their son was born.
The Wong majority, as
part of the exhaustive explanation of its
opinion, quotes Justice Joseph Story in
Inglis v. Sailors' Snug Harbor (1833), 3
Pet. 99. There, Justice Story, referring to
Calvin's Case, Blackstone's
Commentaries, and Doe v. Jones,
explains the basic principle from which the
Wong court proceeds in finding that a
child of legal
residents can acquire citizenship by
birth:
"Nothing is better settled at
the common law than the doctrine that the
children, even of aliens, born in a country
while the parents are resident there
under the protection of the government and
owing a temporary allegiance thereto,
are subjects by birth." 3 Pet. 164.
(Emphasis added.)
The Wong court
subsequently extends the legal residence
distinction directly to its case at hand:
Chinese persons, born out of
the United States, remaining subjects of the
Emperor of China, and not having become
citizens of the United States, are entitled
to the protection of, and owe allegiance to,
the United States so long as they are
permitted by the United States to reside
here, and are [thus] "subject to the
jurisdiction thereof" in the same sense as
all other aliens residing in the United
States. Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886), 118 U.S.
356; Law Ow Bew v. United States 144 U.S.
47, 61, 62; Fong Yue Ting v. United States
(1893), 149 U.S. 698, 724; Lem Moon Sing v.
United States (1893), 158 U.S. 538, 547;
Wong Wing v. United States (1896), 163 U.S.
228, 238. (Emphasis added.)
In the end this distinction is
directly rested upon in the narrow ruling of
the Wong court:
The evident intention, and
the necessary effect, of the submission of
this case to the decision of the court upon
the facts agreed by the parties were to
present for determination the single
question stated at the beginning of this
opinion, namely, whether a child born in the
United States, of parent of Chinese descent,
who, at the time of his birth, are subjects
of the Emperor of China, but have a
permanent domicil and residence in the
United States, and are there carrying on
business, and are not employed in any
diplomatic or official capacity under the
Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his
birth a citizen of the United States. For
the reasons above stated, this court is of
opinion that the question must be answered
in the affirmative.
United States v. Wong Kim
Ark (169 US 649, 1898) (Emphasis added.)
Plainly, the children born to
non-resident aliens are in no way
beneficiaries of even the Wong
court's expansive and mistaken construction
of the 14th Amendment's "citizenship
clause". Indeed, the express resort by the
court to the legal residence of the parents
in finding for Wong is the exclusion of all
those not enjoying the same distinction of
circumstance, and thus a left-handed ruling
by the Supreme Court to the effect that the
children of non-residents are not entitled
to any such "birthright citizenship".
(It is also worth observing--
for the sake of good scholarship-- that
while much in common and ancient law might
have once weighed on the side of "birthright
citizenship" on grounds outside the
provisions of the 14th Amendment, the very
adoption of that amendment with its explicit
purposes and provisions on the subject has
arguably now settled the question in the
negative.)
AS NOTED IN THE PRECEDING
ANALYSIS, the Wong Kim Ark ruling
by the Supreme Court in 1898 which is
relied-upon by advocates of the mistaken
"birthright citizenship" as supporting their
notions, is wrongly decided. The court in
that case failed to recognize the
distinction between United States and state
citizenship that is the heart of the 14th
Amendment provision in question-- perhaps
due to poor briefing by the litigants in the
case.
But even if Wong were
soundly decided, it would not avail Harris
in her claim, if indeed her parents were
merely in America on student visas at the
time of Harris' birth.
The Wong court reached
its conclusions in Wong's favor based solely
on the legal residency of Wong's parents,
who were found by the court to have been
"permitted by the United States to reside
here" and to, in fact, have "permanent
domicil and residence in the United States".
The court reasoned that in seeking and
establishing legal residency Wong's parents
had affirmatively and deliberately
relinquished their former allegiances and
become allegiant to the USA, thus-- and only
thus-- bringing them under the relevant
provisions of the 14th Amendment.
If Harris's parents were in the
country merely on visas at the time of her
birth,
as I understand to be the case, this
would not meet the standard laid down by the
Wong court.
As noted above, "resident" is a condition of
specific legal meaning, as stated here, in Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856
(Washington's official legal dictionary at
the time of the enactments involved in this
discussion):
RESIDENT, persons. A person
coming into a place with intention to
establish his domicil or permanent
residence, and who in consequence actually
remains there. Time is not so essential as
the intent, executed by making or beginning
an actual establishment, though it be
abandoned in a longer, or shorter period.
See 6 Hall's Law Journ. 68; 3 Hagg. Eccl. R.
373; 20 John. 211 2 Pet. Ad. R. 450; 2 Scamm.
R. 377.
Obtaining or being in the
country by virtue of a student visa is
merely visiting on a deliberately and
declared temporary basis, and not for
purposes of, or with permission to,
establish permanent residency. Entry into a
country on a student visa involves no
relinquishment of prior national allegiance
and replacement of it with allegiance to the
USA either affirmatively and deliberately or
even casually and by accident, and being
here on such a visa does not constitute
legal residence.
In fact, particular legal steps
must be taken by student visa holders in
order to convert their status to one with
the potential for lawful residence of the
sort on which the Wong court rested
its decision.
See this for some professional discussion of
the subject.
In sum, even if it were correct overall in its finding of a
"birthright citizenship" right on behalf of
Wong Kim Ark (as it is), on its terms the
Wong ruling offers nothing on
behalf of Kamala Harris' claims. If the
student visas thing is sound, Harris should
be removed from office (and I suppose
consideration should be given to examining
Senate votes during the time she had been
seated in that body against the possibility
that the outcomes of some of the squeakers
should be reversed...).
***
BONUS ITEM-- Here is a little
something everyone might want to encourage
as a new law for the state in which they
live (with appropriate addition on penalty,
and so forth), for reasons that will be
obvious to some:
ANY PERSON OR PERSONS HOLDING A
POSITION of trust and honor found to have
knowingly withheld, suppressed or obscured
information from the public for lack of
which an untimely death or disability
results shall be guilty of a felony.
THIS VIDEO PROJECTS THE PROGRESS of a nuclear exchange between Russia and
the United States. It's frightening, as it should
be, as well as sobering and instructive. My only
criticisms are, first of all, that it fails to
account for the imbalance that will now be present
in any such exchange due to
the new Russian
hypersonic weapons.
Secondly, the video fails to account
for China's contribution to the exchange against the
US, which is a virtual certainty. China knows that
if Russia goes, and the US survives, it goes soon
after. So, that will not be allowed to happen.
Geisel's work is not racist--
the idea is a deliberate lie. In fact,
Geisel's work is powerfully anti-racist. But
it is also powerfully anti-socialist,
anti-military-industrial-complex,
anti-conformist and pro-liberty.
LAST WEEK WE WERE TREATED to
the latest (or one of the many latest)
examples of apparent "woke" insanity with
the announcement that
Dr. Seuss (Ted Geisel) was being chucked
down the memory hole. It seems the good
doctor has been found to have larded his
children's books with racism.
Who would've ever imagined
that!
Hugely popular during the formative
years of those born in the Western World
from 1940 or so onward, Seuss's work--
whatever its message-- was plainly
influential. Those influenced thereby
marched and politicked on behalf of the
civil rights movements of the 1960s and
beyond (and intermarried at ever-increasing
rates, and welcomed increasing diversity in
entertainment and neighborhoods and
displayed the opposite of racism in every
other possible way).
You'd have thought that if
Seuss were communicating racism the exact
opposite would have happened...
THE FACT IS, THE DR.
SEUSS CATALOG has been one of the most
influential ANTI-racist forces in recent
history. But it is also one of the most
influential anti-bullshit forces in recent
history. For example, Seuss's book The
Sneetches is powerfully anti-racist.
But it is also powerfully
anti-racism-hustle, and THAT'S why the
"woke" community and its managers don't like
it.
Seuss's other books draw fire
for the same reasons. Leaving aside the
content-free Hop on Pop,Red Fish,
Blue Fish and 'The Cat in the Hat
introduction-to-reading fare, Seuss delivers
trenchant analyses and debunks of socialism,
militarism, and authoritarianism through his
books, with a concision of wit and wisdom
second to none.
Again, being oriented toward,
and accessible by, a very young audience
(and being initially presented to that young
audience by loving parents in what is, for
every child, among the very best times of
each day), Seuss's valuable lessons have
more traction and durability than most any
other ideological offering. Even the best
efforts of government school teachers to
push social justice claptrap into the mind
of a kid who cut his or her teeth on Thidwick,
the Big-Hearted Moose are going to
find it a tough slog.
Likewise, the national-security
state pretexts relied upon by the
war-mongers and their armament clients will
always lose in a voter well-versed in The
Butter Battle Book. Officious authoritah stands naked in the town square
to eyes that have soaked up Bartholomew
Cubbins and the Oobleck (or many other
titles); and pressures
to conform are trampled flat beneath the
heavy feet of Who-hearing
Horton.
I PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH
IS on this subject, so to speak: the
afore-mentioned Seuss titles have been on my
homeschool
recommended reading list since its
inception. That alone should tell you that
the "woke" fear of these books has nothing
to do with racism and rests squarely on that
cults blind hatred and fear of reason and
the individual liberty to which
well-instructed and unfettered reason
inevitably leads.
So, uncancel Dr. Seuss.
Swamp his publisher in orders
for his books. Get them for yourself if you
don't already have them, and for gifting to
every parent of young children that you
know, and for bookshelf in every venue in
which young readers might be found.
That project alone will do more
to advance the cause of liberty than all the
rallying and voting and phone calls to
congresscritters than you will ever do in
your lifetime, combined.
"Those who can make you believe
absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
CAN YOU EVEN IMAGINE how abysmally
stupid someone would have to be to continue to doubt
or deny that
CtC has revealed the actual, complete and insurmountable
truth about the income tax in light of the overwhelming
mountain of
historical,legal,
practical and
logical evidence to the contrary? (Not to mention
the
outright lies and even
ludicrous hoaxes the executive and some corrupt
members of the judiciary have been caught at in desperate
efforts to conceal the truth...)
Plainly any such denier must either be
abysmally stupid or be an abysmally corrupt government
official or other person who sees him or herself as
benefitting from the lies about the tax by which America
has suffered for 75 years now.
Isn't this true?
"A slave is one who waits
for someone to come and free him."
-Ezra Pound
*****
Did you know…
…The US may be
the only country in the world where people working
in the non-federal private sector must commit
perjury in order to owe and pay ‘God’s things
to Caesar’?
If you work in the
private sector, stop falsely swearing that your
private-sector earnings are federal “income”1.
Perjury is a crime. Exercise the law’s
provision for protecting your private-sector
earnings from the 154-year-old2 indirect
excise known as the federal income tax.
Rebut fraudulent allegations made by your payers
regarding the legal nature of your work and
the earnings derived therefrom, so that you
pay only your fair share. Join the hundreds
of thousands of honest, law-abiding Americans
who have been doing so for more than a decade.
Learn how for free at losthorizons.com.
1--“We must reject…
…the broad contention submitted in behalf of
the government that all receipts—everything
that comes in—are income…”.
United States Supreme
Court, So. Pacific v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330, (1918)
2—The income tax in
the United States was first instituted into
law on July 1, 1862, during Lincoln’s presidency
under the excise laws of the United States.
The preamble to the 1939 Internal Revenue Code
traces its roots to this original income tax
law.
Important guest observations
and commentary with an important afterword
by Yours Truly
The
Decline of the West: American Education Surrenders
to 'Equity'
by Philip Giraldi
Public education in
the United States, if measured by results,
has been producing graduates that are less
competent in language skills and
dramatically less well taught in the
sciences and mathematics since 1964, when
Scholastic Aptitude Test scores peaked. The
decline in science and math skills has
accelerated in the past decade according to
rankings of American students compared
to their peers overseas. A recent
assessment, from 2015, placed the U.S.
at 38th out of 71 countries in math and
24th in science. Among the 35 members of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development OECD), the United States came in
at 30th in math and 19th in science. Those
poor results must be placed in a context of
American taxpayers spending more money per
student than any other country in the world,
so the availability of resources is not
necessarily a factor in most school
districts.
Much of the decline
is due to technical advances that level the
playing field for teachers worldwide, but
one must also consider changing perceptions
of the role of education in a social
context. In the United States in particular,
political and cultural unrest certainly have
been relevant factors. But all of that said
and considered, the U.S. is now confronting
a reassessment of values that will likely
alter forever traditional education and will
also make American students even more
non-competitive with their foreign peers.
Many schools in the
United States have ceased issuing grades
that have any meaning, or they have dropped
grading altogether, which means there is no
way to judge progress or achievement.
National test scores for evaluating possible
college entry are on the way out almost
everywhere as they are increasingly being
condemned as “racist” in terms of how they
assess learning based solely on the fact
that blacks do less well on them than Asians
and whites. This has all been part of an
agenda that is being pushed that will search
for and eliminate any taint of racism in the
public space. It has also meant the
destruction or removal of numerous historic
monuments and an avoidance of any honest
discussion of American history. San
Francisco schools are, for example,
notoriously spending more than $1 million
to change the names of 44 schools that
honor individuals who have been examined
under the “racism and oppression” microscope
and found wanting. They include George
Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham
Lincoln, and Paul Revere.
The new world order
for education is built around the concept of
“equity,” sometimes described as using the
public education system to “ensure equitable
outcomes.” But the concept itself is deeply
flawed as the pursuit of equity means
treating all American unequally to guarantee
that everyone that comes out of the schools
is the same and has learned the same things.
That is, of course, ridiculous and it
penalizes the good student to make sure that
the bad student is somehow pushed through
the system and winds up with the same piece
of paper.
And the quality
overall of public education will sharply
decline. One might reasonably observe that
imposition of a totalitarian style “equity”
regime based on race will inevitably drive
many of the academically better prepared
students out of the system. Many of the
better teachers will also move to the
private academies that will spring up due to
parental and student demand. Others will
stop teaching altogether when confronted by
political correctness at a level that prior
to 2020 would have seemed unimaginable. The
actual quality of education will suffer for
everyone involved.
All of that has
been bad enough, but the clincher is that
this transformation is taking place all over
the United States with the encouragement of
federal, state and local governments and
once the new regime is established it will
be difficult or even impossible to go back
to a system where learning is actually a
discipline that sometimes requires hard work
and dedication. In many school districts,
the actual process of change is also being
put on the back of the taxpayer. In one
Virginia county the local school board
spent $422,500 on a consultant to apply
so-called Critical Race Theory (CRT) to a
new program of instruction that will be
mandatory for all employees and will serve
as the framework for teaching the students.
When schools eventually reopen, all
kindergarteners, for example, will be taught
“social justice” in a
course designed by the controversial
Southern Poverty Law Center and “diversity
training” will be integrated in all other
grade levels. Teaching reading, writing and
arithmetic will take a back seat to “social
justice.”
GIRALDI POINTS OUR ATTENTION to a truly
pernicious dynamic at work in places throughout
America that is not only fraught with danger for the
overall well-being of our nation, but imposes a
tragic injustice on our children. Where it has been
understood in every schoolhouse and in the dreams of
every budding scientist or athlete that hard work
and focus generate accomplishments and accolades,
the socialist dementia of "equity" teaches that hard
work is for suckers.
This trend of "equity"
considerations (which is to say, this
assault on meritocracy) is part of an
overall effort to destroy Western
civilization by those to whose agendas its
underlying principles of individual
sovereignty and
the rule of law are a hindrance. It
should be opposed strenuously-- which means
you and I must be at every school board
meeting voicing opposition, and taking
positions within the structures if need be.
A PARELLEL (AND MORE POWERFUL)
DEFENSE against the erosion of our
civilization by way of the schools is to
remove children from those schools. This can
be done easily by the simple expedient of
spreading and acting on
the truth about the income tax.
That truth frees parents from
the need for both to be in the workforce in
order to bring in enough to support the
household, freeing one to become the
educator of the children.
See this for a bit more.
Take charge, people, or someone
else will take charge of you.
I HAVE DONE MY BEST to lead this country
to liberty from the mis-applied income tax. I have labored
hard. I've shed a lot of sweat, a fair bit of blood
and more than a few tears. But I seem to be pretty poor
at that kind of work.
When I have asked all of you for what I
firmly believe is a necessary resource to move the ball
downfield and give all of us the best chance at justice
and an end to the assault on the rule of law-- simple
testimonial videos requiring nothing from any of you
but the phone in your pocket and three minutes of speaking
from the heart-- I have had only a handful of people
answer my call.
I CAN'T KEEP GOING THIS WAY. I have to
be able to turn my attention away from writing new persuasive
or skepticism-addressing articles week after week, and
toward research, analysis and educational presentations
that will benefit everyone already in this community.
I need time to do some suing, and to bring together
the resources and talent toward that end.
As said, it is my firm belief that your
testimonial videos are the resource that I need to make
big things happen, and they are unquestionably the thing
I need to allow me to turn my attention away from trying
to get horses to drink at the waterhole to which I have
led them. Your words, in your great numbers and all
in your own different ways, will do that better than
anything I write possibly could.
And yet, you are not providing them. This,
despite my having been asking you for them for many
years now.
Therefore, with enormous reluctance, I
am making portions of this website restricted access
only. People have been urging me to do this for years
now, telling me I should impose a charge to access my
work-product, so as to enable me to keep producing.
I have never been inclined to charge fees
for access. I ask for donations, and will continue to
do that, and if they do not come, then I will conclude
that my work is of no value to anyone, and I will close
shop.
But I now WILL charge a special
something for access to some key portions of that
work.
Opening selected pages on
LHC comprising higher level legal
resources now requires the submission of qualifying testimonial
videos, as discussed, described and demonstrated
here.
The videos must be accompanied by scans of a recent
educated filing along with responsive documents from
the IRS, whether in the form of a check, a notice
identifying and reflecting the filed return, or
"return" and "account" transcripts for the year for
which the return was filed. Names must be shown in
full.
Similarly, if
an email comes my way asking for guidance or assistance,
I had better already have your video posted.
I HATE TO PLAY IT THIS WAY. But I want
to win.
I'll tell you a story from when I was coaching
my kids in soccer. Both of my kids at a certain age
in their careers had run into a wall common to all but
the very exceptional. They had gotten to be pretty good,
and they wanted to enjoy the benefits of their hard
work. But the arrival of this interest coincided with
a new self-consciousness which made them reluctant to
risk failing and looking foolish. So, they were hanging
back from seizing the main chance when it appeared,
and driving for the goal.
My solution was to post on the wall of
our dining room a couple of simple points about self-discipline,
the chief of which is this: You can't score a goal if
you don't take a shot.
That's how it is here, too. If you don't
stand up, you are laying down, and you'll never score
that goal.
Here is what my kids live by now, in their
own version of that lesson. I hear it from them all
the time as they excel (accompanied by the sound of
a father's breast swelling with pride): Go hard,
or go home.
You, too. Go hard, or go home.
Send those videos.
Do I ask for a lot? I want your victories
to post, your financial support, your efforts at spreading
the word, and your beautiful faces and inspiring words,
too. It IS a lot.
But it's not too much. I'll let Thomas Paine explain:
"Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;
yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder
the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we
obtain too cheaply, we esteem too lightly. Heaven knows
how to put a proper price on its goods; and it would
be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as freedom
should not be highly rated.”
We each have our reasons, and our story.
It's time, and it's needed, for you to share yours with
the world.
P.S. READ EVERYTHING THAT
FOLLOWS, CAREFULLY AND THOROUGHLY!!
"The day we see truth and do not speak
is the day we begin to die."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.
What does it for you?
Is it simply because no moral and upstanding
person has any choice when it comes to telling the truth
over his or her signature, whether on tax forms or anywhere
else?
Is it recognition of the critical importance
of the rule of law, and the knowledge that if everybody
leaves its caretaking to someone else, it will soon
be lost to us completely?
Is it the money?
Maybe it's just simple respect for your
own rights as a human being, who is not and cannot be
not involuntarily subordinated to others?
Maybe it's just simple respect for your
general civic responsibility to be the grown-up and
enforce frugality and restraint on a big, powerful creature
of our own devising which otherwise is like a badly-raised
teenage boy given whiskey and car keys and let loose
on the road to wreak havoc?
Or is it, perhaps, a more acute anxiety
that if our bonfire of a state isn't damped, and quickly,
it'll soon burn down the house around us all?
What IS it that firms up your jaw and stiffens
your resolve?
It's time to take off the bushel and
share your light!
I would like you to think about what it
is that motivates you for a few moments (or all day,
if you like), and then send me your thoughts. I want
to put YOUR reasons to work inspiring folks who don't
yet understand what this is all about.
In this day and age, the most effective
way for you to share your thinking for the benefit of
others is to video-record yourself talking about how
you feel, and explaining what inspires and motivates
YOU.
All you need is a webcam or cell-phone
equipped with a camera. If you don't have, or know how
to use, one of these, have a friend help. (And if
you use a cell-phone, please have the orientation
horizontal, not vertical-- that is, so that the
screen of the phone on which you are watching
yourself while taping looks like a TV or movie
screen.)
If needed, write a little script for yourself.
Better, though, to just speak extemporaneously, after
spending a little time sorting out your thoughts and
getting down into your heart. Perhaps make it a video
of someone in your family, or a close friend, interviewing
you.
Dress "business casual". Be well-groomed.
Keep yourself to no more than 2 or 3 minutes,
and keep in mind that the purpose is
not to educate,
but to INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE and ENERGIZE. Your video will
be one of many to be shared. If you need to go
longer to really say your piece, go for it (but long
or short I may edit if something strikes me as
wandering or off-key or unacceptable).
You needn't feel any obligation to be profound,
and you shouldn't try to explain anything about the
law, other than to say that you have read it and you
know it's on your side. You just need to be sincere,
and uplifting. Your object is to make your audience
want to have what you have, and to be where you are
in your heart.
Don't talk to ME, or to others in the
CtC-educated community. Make remarks that are suited
to the NON-CtC-educated community, and at the same
time, be mindful that you're speaking to an
audience that doesn't yet know ANYTHING about the subject,
and whose first reaction is, "This must be illegal;
this must be dangerous; this is too good to be true."
You want to pull that audience right past such things,
and straight to a focus on truth, morality, and our
American heritage of liberty and the rule of law.
Remember: INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE, ENERGIZE.
Speak about rights. Speak about morality,
and the obligation of a grown-up and responsible person
to speak the truth and to enforce the Constitution.
Speak about everyone's duty
to give to God what is God's, always, and to Caesar
only what is really Caesar's. Speak of your obligation
to respect yourself, and to look out for the current
and future well-being of your children and your fellow
citizens. Speak of
CtC, and what its information has done for your
understanding and resolve. Show the book.
If you have had victories, describe them.
Better still, show them, if possible.
Be clear about just what you accomplished:
EVERYTHING back-- Social Security, Medicare and all;
a "notice of deficiency" closing notice; an on-paper
agreement or acknowledgment that your earnings weren't
subject to the tax and everything withheld or paid-in
was an "overpayment"; a transcript showing all $0s;
or whatever happened.
When you speak of state victories, name
the state. If you had to overcome balkiness from a tax
agency before winning any victory, describe that, too!
If you're in a battle now, speak of your
resolve to uphold the law, come what may--
why you're not discouraged, and why you are not
standing down, not slinking back into the barn, and
not choosing to endorse the lies. Don't get
into details-- your audience is going to have no
idea what a "LTR3176" is, and you will NOT be
capable of explaining it adequately. This is an
subject area concerning which you should speak from
the heart, not the head.
If you haven't
yet begun to act, share the reasons for your decision to do so, and
your plans.
Remember, your purpose is to INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE
and ENERGIZE.
Watch your own video after you
record it and ask yourself: Putting yourself
in the place of someone completely immersed
in "the matrix"-- oblivious to any notions
that you might have been a victim of an
"ignorance tax", and comfortable with the
status quo-- would the video you just made
encourage you to push aside your comforting
illusions and learn the liberating truth? If
not, try again.
Identify yourself. Anonymity is for criminals and self-doubters, not
CtC
warriors. Naming yourself is a requirement, and your
name will appear as a subtitle on the video when I
prepare it for posting, in any event.
Mention what you do for a living, whether
you're a doctor, homemaker, lawyer, trucker, IT guy
or gal, retiree or student. Help people understand
that the company of grown-up activist Americans they
are being invited to join cuts across all demographics
and all interests-- with the common denominator being
respect for the law and love of the principles on which
this great country was founded.
This is your chance to get a LOT accomplished.
We've all had frustrating occasions of
trying to explain all this to a friend, neighbor, family
member or co-worker, only to pile up against the wall
of a mind not yet ready to listen and learn. Here is
your chance to address a self-selected audience of folks
who have themselves decided that it's time for them
to begin paying attention, and have clicked on your
testimonial for exactly that reason.
Further, think about this: You want judges,
bureaucrats, CPAs, lawyers, the HR people where you
work, your pastors, your neighbors and everyone else
to acknowledge the truth about the tax openly and straightforwardly.
How and why would these folks do this if YOU won't?
You want these folks to learn the truth.
Why would they even recognize that there is a truth
to be learned if you won't attest to having learned
it yourself? You've got to stand up, face forward and
chin up and tell these folks that you have studied and
checked and verified and seen the evidence and seen
the government evasions and you know that the tax is
not the capitation that the beneficiary government wants
everyone to think it is but a benign, strictly limited
thing, and that they need to study and learn that, too.
Again, if you have victories to show, that's
nice, and powerful, too. But you don't have to have
victories to display in order to declare your knowledge
of what the law says. I've never flown around the world,
but I've seen the evidence and considered the arguments,
and I'm not hesitant to declare it a sphere...
Even those of you who haven't yet studied
CtC have surely read
this short document, and have verified everything
in it for yourself. You should therefore be declaring
its veracity and its message, loud and proud. Again,
if you won't say it, how can you hope that others will
ever even bother to look at the facts?
Be the change you want to see in the world,
or there won't be any change.
So, please make and send those videos
right away! You can share them with me via a cloud-based
drive space like DropBox, OneDrive.Live.com or GoogleDrive
(if you do GoogleDrive you MUST give access permission to stategroups@losthorizons.com), or
mail DVDs to me at 232 Oriole St., Commerce Twp., Michigan
48382, or even email to me if each file is no more than
20 megs (and you can break a video up if need be-- I
can reassemble them). Render as .mpg or mp4, if possible;
if not, send them how you have them and I'll make them
work.
BTW: An encouraging and inspiring
video will earn you access to the restricted pages
on losthorizons.com and membership in the National
Forum if you have also sent me a recent educated
federal filing and IRS response (or relevant
"return" or "account" transcript). I will be the
judge of whether your submissions qualify
for access, but if you do your best you should do
fine.
Remember, the restoration of institutional
respect for individual rights and the rule of law depends
on enough individuals insisting upon it. Do your part
to let those starting to rub the sleep from their eyes
know that there is a community already waiting for their
fellowship with open arms and open hearts and shining
spirits.
See how some of your fellow warriors for
the truth have done their parts in videos sent over
the years, many of which are posted
here.
"It does not take a majority to prevail...
but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting
brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
Getting Free Of The "Income" Tax Scheme Is As Easy As
Falling Off A Bike
To get an idea of how today's "income" tax scheme works,
try this little exercise:
Think of the federal government as a guy named Bob,
who lives down the street from you in a town that is
really big on bicycles. Bikes get used for commuting,
deliveries, shopping, etc.. In fact, other than walking,
bicycles are the exclusive form of transportation in
your town.
Your neighbor Bob has a by-the-mile bicycle-renting
business-- "Bob's Bicycles". Bob's Bicycles is far and
away the biggest business in town.
Part of Bob’s success is because he does a lot of contract
business. However, Bob doesn't just get paid by riders
who have signed an agreement with him, or even just
those using Bob's bikes. Bob gets something every time
anybody in town does any riding at all, through an odd
combination of circumstances that took many years to
come together.
Here's how it happened...
Bob's Bicycles was launched long ago by the great grandfather
of the present Bob (Bob IV). Great Grandpa Bob started
out not only with a main location for his contract business--
he also had the bright idea of setting up spots around
town where he parked some of his bikes for use by the
more occasional rider, on an "honor system". Anyone
could take and use one of these bikes, but they were
expected to keep track of their mileage, and send Bob
a "1040 Mileage Ridden/Rent Due Form" (and the appropriate
rent), periodically. The initial design of the form
was like this:
I, ______________,
rode a Bob's Bicycle a total of _____ miles
this year.
At Bob's rental
rate of $.15 per mile, I owe Bob $______
I said that Great Grandpa Bob planned to deal with these
occasional riders on the "honor system", and that's
true. But he liked his money, too, and didn't want to
miss anything that was due him. So, after setting up
the "self-serve" locations, Great Grandpa Bob went around
handing out "W-2, 1099 or K-1 Rider Reporting Forms"
to every other business in town. The forms-- accompanied
by notices that if Bob didn't get his rent from someone
riding a bicycle in connection with any business, he
would sue the company involved-- said:
You Can’t Fight Well When You Don’t Know
What You’re Fighting About
If you are having an argument
with the IRS or any other tax agency,
You are NOT being presumed to have made “corporate
profit”.
You are NOT being alleged to have received “foreign
income”.
You are NOT entangled in an invisible “adhesion
contract”.
You are NOT being obligated by a law whose subject
is never identified.
You are being targeted because REAL EVIDENCE exists
that YOU PERSONALLY HAD “INCOME” to which the revenue laws apply--
even though that evidence is almost certainly incorrect,
and CAN be corrected.
*****
Do You Know What Happens When
YOU Decide To "Let Someone Else Do It"?
NOTHING.
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can
do something. What I can do, I should do and, with the help of God,
I will do."
-Everett
Hale
(...and
every other person who ever really deserved liberty)
"God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always
ready to guard and defend it."
-Daniel
Webster
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."
-Edward
R. Murrow
*****
Doing A Little High-Payoff Math
IF EACH PERSON receiving this newsletter each week distributed as
few as 100 of any of
the great outreach tools featured here to co-workers, friends,
neighbors and family members (or just strangers on the street, in
the mall, etc...), we could have SEVERAL MILLION new Americans
suddenly introduced to the liberating truth about the tax!
Just like that! In one week!
C'mon, people, let's roll on this!
“Most of the important things in the
world have been accomplished by people who have kept on trying when
there seemed to be no hope at all.”
When directed to a page by topic or link, read everything.
I know that this can mean the investment of a lot of time, attention
and effort, but although some may imagine otherwise, I don't write
as much as I do because I can't think of any other way to spend
my time...
Furthermore, when you encounter a hyperlink within, or associated
with, the text you are reading, follow it!
It is pretty common these days for web-based material to be littered
with hyperlinks. Sometimes the purpose is to provide definitions
or examples, in order to ensure that folks reading the original
material aren't presented with a word or reference which they don't
understand. Sometimes the links lead to illustrations pertinent
to the original text.
It is common-- and perfectly understandable-- for folks who are
confident that they are familiar with language or references within
the main text they are reading to get in the habit of skipping over
included links. I do it all the time, myself!
However, I very rarely include links for definitional or explanatory
purposes; and when I DO make a link out of text in one page it is
generally to another self-contained page, rather than merely illustrative
material. These other pages contain material the clear understanding
of which I deem highly important for the proper and complete understanding
of the original page. (Links to
CtC, the
Victories pages,
CtC Warriors and so on are obvious exceptions to this general
rule. On the other hand, a link to the victory
Highlights or 'Every
Which Way But Loose' pages, which might seem like such exceptions,
are not. The special selection of victories on those pages, and
the filed docs and tax-agency correspondences included therewith,
themselves constitute highly instructive material which merits careful
attention. Thus care needs to be taken in all cases.)
Please make a habit of clicking on all provided links and at least
looking briefly to ensure that the linked page is one with which
you are completely familiar from another study session.
Finally, please keep in mind that, annoying though it may seem at
first blush (but not, I trust, upon reflection), I constantly tweak
material already posted. Obviously this doesn't mean that every
page is in flux at all times, but it does mean that if you are directed
to a page that IS familiar, it's worthwhile to read it through again
if it's been a while since your last having done so.
March 8- In 1775, Thomas Paine publishes his article 'African
Slavery In America', calling for the emancipation of all slaves and the
abolition of the abominable institution. In 1817, the New York Stock Exchange
is founded. In 1924, 172 coal miners are killed in an accident near Castle
Gate, Utah. In 1978, the first radio episode of 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the
Galaxy' broadcasts. In 1979, the Compact Disc debuts. In 1980, the Soviet
Union enjoys its first rock music festival.
Anniversaries of interest for
each day of this week will be found throughout the newsletter mid-edition update
below.
Btw, a copy of
CtC from anywhere except the link above
may not be a current edition. CHECK. It
matters. Also, there ARE no e-book, Kindle
or .pdf versions of
CtC. Don't get taken in by efforts to
sell you-- or even give you for free-- any
such thing.
Want to get these Lost Horizons
newsletters delivered to your inbox?
Click here and subscribe to the group. Leave all
options at their default settings. Done!
*****
Illuminating anniversaries of this week:
March 9- In 1776, Adam Smith publishes 'The Wealth of
Nations'. In 1841, the United States Supreme Court rules in the Amistad
case that the enslavement of the Africans who had gained control of the
ship on which they were being transported was illegal. In 1916, Mexican
General Pancho Villa attacks a detachment of the 13th United States
Cavalry Regiment in Columbus, New Mexico. In 1933, FDR sends an
"Emergency Banking Act" (largely drafted by the Hoover administration)
to Congress, which is passed and signed into law that same day.
Disturbingly similar to the current "bailout" programs, it set the stage
for the prolongation (and deepening) of the Great Depression for another
12 years (when a hands-off approach and the restoration of sound,
precious-metal-backed currency would have seen the economy recovering on
its own within 18 months to two years). In 1945, the Allies begin
fire-bombing Tokyo in a campaign that kills 100,000-- the vast majority
of whom are civilians. In 1959, "Barbie" hits the toy shelves.
*****
A Wise Warrior With An
Uplifting Message
DON LA VIGNE, a long-time warrior
and real American grown-up, shares a nice and inspiring
testimonial on what
CtC has done for him for over nine years now:
"Like a muddied stream or a polluted fountain
is the righteous man who gives way before the wicked."
-Proverbs 25:26
"A nation of sheep begets a government
of wolves."
-Edward R. Murrow
*****
Illuminating anniversaries of this week:
March 10- In 1804, France formally
transfers ownership of the Louisiana Territory to the United States. In 1831,
the French Foreign Legion is established. In 1876, Alexander Graham Bell tells
Mr. Watson he needs him. In 1880, the Salvation Army arrives in America and
begins its good work. In 1906, a coal-dust explosion kills 1099 miners in
northern France. In 1922, Mahatma Gandhi is arrested by British Indian
occupation forces for "sedition" and is tried, convicted, and sentenced to six
years imprisonment. In 2000, the NASDAQ index peaks at 5132.52. In 2017, South
Korea's Constitutional Court unanimously upholds the impeachment of President
Park Geun-hye, ending her presidency. In 2020, the "World Health Organization"
declares the "COVID-19" outbreak to be a pandemic.
An old joke, but in regard to this deceiver,
not a laughing matter at all.
*****
Illuminating anniversaries of this week:
March 11- In 1708, Queen Anne of Great
Britain vetoes the "Scottish Militia Bill" for fear the militia thus authorized
would be unreliable in its subservience to the crown. It is the last time that
a British monarch has exercised the veto power against an act of Parliament. In
1918, the first confirmed cases of the "Spanish Flu" pandemic are observed in
Queens, New York. Over the next two years, somewhere between 20 million and 100
million will die from the disease worldwide-- mostly young adults, due to an
idiosyncrasy of the strain's effect on its host. In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev
assumes power in the Soviet Union. In 1990, Patricio Aylwin is sworn in as the
first democratically-elected president of Chile since 1970. In 1993, Janet
Reno, who rose to prosecutorial prominence by imprisoning lots of people in
Florida on manifestly fictitious child-molestation charges, and later went on to
slaughter children and their parents in Waco, Texas, is confirmed as United
States Attorney General by the U.S. Senate.
*****
“When principles that run against your
deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle
is your calling, and peace has become sin; you must,
at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions
bare before friend and enemy, with all the fire of your
faith."
"Power concedes nothing without a demand.
It never did and it never will. Find out just what any
people will quietly submit to and you have the exact
measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed
on them, and these will continue till they have been
resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The
limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of
those whom they suppress."
March 12- In 1912, the American Girl
Guides organization (later "Girl Scouts of the USA") is founded. In 1930,
Gandhi begins leading marchers on a 200-mile trek to the sea to begin making
salt from seawater in defiance of a British revenue-generating legal monopoly on
the substance. In 1947, President Harry Truman proclaims his "containment of
communism" doctrine to Congress, a major step into the Cold War. In 1993, North
Korea announces its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In
2011, a reactor at the Fukishima Daiikai Nuclear Power Plant in Japan melts and
explodes.
March 13- In 1881, Tsar Alexander II of
Russia is assassinated with a thrown bomb. In 1900, France imposes a limit of
11 hours of work per day on women and children. In 1933, FDR's "bank holiday"
ends. In 1954, the Viet Minh attack the French at Dien Bien Phu, In 1962,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Lemnitzer delivers the plans for
'Operation Northwoods' to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. The plan calls
for a series of staged terrorist attacks in American cities false-flagged as
Cuban, in order to drum up American public acquiescence to a United States
attack on the Castro regime. In 1986, Microsoft offers its stock for public
purchase. In 2008, gold sells on the New York Mercantile Exchange for $1,000.00
per ounce for the first time. In 2013, Pope Francis is elected to succeed the
abdicating Benedict XVI by a papal conclave whose proceedings were spied on by
the United States National Security Agency.
CtC WARRIOR SanDiegoScott has put together
a great little 20-question quiz to test your knowledge of the law
regarding the United States "income" tax. Test yourself, test your
friends and family! Test your accountant and tax attorney, and help
them learn the liberating truth!!
"Never must thou take up a false cry, or join hands
with the guilty by giving false witness in their favor. Never must
thou follow with the crowd in doing wrong, or be swayed by many
voices so as to give false judgment; even pity for the poor must
not sway thee when judgment is to be given."
-Ex-Exodus 23:1-3
*****
Illuminating anniversaries of this week:
March 14- In 1794, Eli Whitney is
granted the patent for the cotton gin. In 1889, Ferdinand von Zeppelin patents
a "navigable balloon". In 1900, the Gold Standard Act restores gold as the sole
precious metal by which paper currency must be redeemed (prior to the
restoration, issuers of paper currency could legally redeem it with silver, as
well). In 1942, penicillin is successfully used in treatment for the first
time. In 1964, a jury finds Jack Ruby guilty of killing Lee Harvey Oswald. In
1994, Linux version 1.0.0 is released to the public.
*****
"Those who will not reason, are bigots; those who cannot,
are fools; and those who dare not, are slaves."
