*********************************************PAGE ON VIETNAM AND DEMOCRATS .******************************************

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

The Divine Basis of the Fifth Amendment

One evening my wife and I had a bad argument while on our way home from a dinner, and feeling so unfairly treated, I let her know it in terms for which my sense of shame compelled me to apologize when we got home.  What had really gotten me angry was her comment that my silence to questions (that were of the "begging the question" type for the most part) was indicative of my negativity or "hatred" of her and she proceeded to insinuate all sorts of negativity in the past, in the present, etc. that were proved by my silence.  

But after apologizing, the thought formed in my mind that my silence simply was an expression of the pain I felt from being treated so negatively and my fear of saying unkind and unfair things as a means of "defending" myself through rage and shouting.

After thinking this I became aware of the use of silence, as a means of defending against verbal attacks, was much more than simple self defense and the user of such defense can remain confidently assured of such silence being morally, legally and philosophically correct.  

My first thought in coming to this conclusion was recalling a comment made by the character Thomas More in the movie A Man For All Seasons.  In defending his use of silence as a response to false accusations leveled by his accusers he stated that Law provides the accused the protection of silence which must imply innocence and not guilt.  It was then that the realization came to mind that our American Constitution provides this very protection through the Fifth Amendment expressed as an admonishment to the judicial system that an accused not be forced to abandon his silence and make statements that could be used to proclaim him guilty.  
Jesus Christ affirmed that silence meant innocence and not guilt when facing His accusers, as Pilate found out when Jesus admonished him for claiming the authority to crucify Him when Jesus had remained silent to Pilate's questioning.  Jesus asserted that Pilate's authority to judge came from God which implied that God's Justice never would allow condemnation of the innocent.  The additional comment of Jesus that the condemnation to death by His accusers, who had judged Jesus, not out of ignorance, but jealousy, was a far greater injustice than His ultimate unjust condemnation by Pilate, who condemned Jesus out of fear and weakness.
Ultimately then, the protection of an accused through silence as a response to accusations from judicial prosecution, in particular as expressed through the fifth amendment of our constitution, is based upon God's Divine Law.

If the American Left is successful, in the coming U.S. National Election in November, in strengthening their hold on government,  their attack on and abandonment of the American Constitution, especially the Bill of rights, of which the Fifth Amendment is part, will continue until their "constitution", not being based upon Divine Law, will assure the rights and privileges of those governing rather than the rights, liberty and freedoms of the people.  

In this new constitution there will be no "pleading the fifth".   The accused will be expected to provide their "confessions of guilt" where the guilt is assigned by their masters.  This is the way all tyrannies have operated through more than 6,000 years of recorded history.

Tuesday, May 1, 2012


Are we on the verge of experiencing Martial Law?  So warns William Greene, President of  
Below are selections from his posting (selections edited only to remove emboldened and underlined words and phrases used for emphasis) in an email from dated May 1, 2012:

Just take a look at this report from Sean Hannity on FoxNews: 

According to press reports, "A White House order updating federal emergency powers has raised alarm among some conservative commentators, and U.S. Rep. Sandy Adams, that President Barack Obama is attempting to grab unconstitutional powers."

A columnist with The Washington Times declared the mid-March order -- an update of a 60-year-old document outlining the president's authority in a national emergency -- "stunning in its audacity and a flagrant violation of the Constitution." The conservative Drudge Report website linked to it with the headline, "Martial Law?"

And Adams, R-Orlando, said it "leaves the door open for the president to give himself control over American resources during both times of peace, and national crisis.
It's almost unbelievable what Barack Hussein Obama is trying to do --  According to a bombshell article in the Washington Times, "President Obama has given himself the powers to declare martial law -- especially in the event of a war with Iran. It is a sweeping power grab that should worry every American."
On March 16, the White House released an executive order, "National Defense Resources Preparedness." The document is stunning in its audacity and a flagrant violation of the Constitution. It states that, in case of a war or national emergency, the federal government has the authority to take over almost every aspect of American society. Food, livestock, farming equipment, manufacturing, industry, energy, transportation, hospitals, health care facilities, water resources, defense and construction -- all of it could fall under the full control of Mr. Obama. The order empowers the president to dispense these vast resources as he sees fit during a national crisis.
In short, according to the Times, the order gives Barack Obama the ability to IMPOSE MARTIAL LAW:  "He now possesses the potential powers of a dictator. The order is a direct assault on individual liberties, private property rights and the rule of law. It is blatantly unconstitutional. The executive branch is arrogating responsibilities precluded by the Constitution without even asking the permission of Congress. The order gives Mr. Obama a blank check to erect a centralized authoritarian state."
"Obama may be ready to launch devastating airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. If that should happen, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has promised massive retaliation. American troops will be targeted by Iranian proxies in Iraq and Afghanistan. American embassies will be struck across the Middle East and North Africa. Most ominously, Iranian-backed Hezbollah cells could launch devastating terrorist attacks in major U.S. cities, killing numerous citizens. The war may well come home, triggering domestic chaos. These are the very real risks of a major conflict with Iran."
As columnist Jeffrey Kuhner notes, "The president does not - and should not - have the authority to subordinate the entire private economy to the government, especially without the consent of Congress and the American people. It is national socialism masquerading as military security. This is why conservatives -- those who are serious about defending our constitutional republic - should demand that the executive order be repealed immediately." 

Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) has introduced H. Con. Res. 110 in response to President Obama's blatant attempt to go around the Constitution and institute martial law if HE thinks it's "necessary." 

In introducing her bill, Rep. Adams stated, "President Obama issued a National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order on March 16, 2012 that raises some serious concerns in its wording and intent. The order has historically been based on the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.). However, unlike previous presidents, President Obama's executive order broadens the definition of 'national defense.' This leaves the door open for the president to give himself control over American resources during both times of peace, and national crisis. In response to the order, I have introduced a resolution to make it clear the president cannot use this as an excuse to abuse his executive power." 

Rep. Adams' bill presently has 37 co-sponsors -- but she needs a lot more to get the bill to the floor. 


Hatred is conquered by the love of Martyrs

Is this the "change" that some want in America, where our constitution guarantees free speech and the freedom of religion and religious thought?  There are those who claim that only those on the political Right are promoting violence.  This video shows many Catholic young people who are demonstrating their faith in God and supporting traditional Marriage between one man and one woman.  They do not curse or condemn those who do not agree with their support for Traditional Marriage.  But those who attack them "for no reason at all" are unaware, in their ignorance, that they are making martyrs of those who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.  And it is the blood of martyrs that proves the everlasting victory of the kingdom of God over the forces of evil in the world, through the redemption of Jesus Christ, His Son, martyred on the Cross.