An empire of laws, and not men

An empire of laws, and not men

Since government had been tasked with protecting the rights to property of everyone under its jurisdiction, it could not then turn around and violate those property rights itself. After all, the power of government was bestowed by the people’s consent in order to protect their rights. “Hence,” observed Locke, “it is a mistake to think that the supreme legislative power of any commonwealth can do what it will, and dispose of the estates of the subject arbitrarily, or take any part of them at pleasure.” Referring to the natural rights of the citizen before the existence of government, Locke observed that “this is all he doth, or can give up to the commonwealth, and by it to the legislative power, so that the legislative can have no more than this. … It is a power that hath no other end but preservation, and therefore can never have a right to destroy, enslave, or designedly to impoverish the subjects.”

Since government is delegated certain powers by the people, it is, as a trustee, accountable to the people for the manner in which it exercises those powers. Responding to the then-common charge from Europeans that America would never succeed because it did not have a monarch and allowed the people too much liberty, President Jefferson wrote, “Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern them? Let history answer this question.” For Jefferson, and the Founders as a whole, history had proven the exact opposite: the presumption that there was a semi-divine group of people, such as monarchs or dictators, who alone were fit to rule the people without being directly accountable to them had led to the greatest miseries in human history.This naturally limited the extent and manner in which government could exercise power, “for,” as Locke observed, “wherever the power that is put in any hands for the government of the people, and the preservation of their properties is applied to other ends, and made use of to impoverish, harass, or subdue them to the arbitrary and irregular commands of those that have it, there it presently becomes tyranny, whether those that thus use it are one or many.” And since government did not endow rights, but was instead tasked with protecting them, it could by definition not bestow additional rights, except the right of equal justice under law (i.e., civil rights), which gets to the third principle, that government is accountable to the people.

For the Founders, all human governments had been based on some “principle or passion in the minds of the people,” as Adams said: fear, honor, or virtue. Within these three categories could be many forms, but every form was derived from this primary passion of the people. Fear had been “the foundation of most governments,” and was so “sordid and brutal” by nature that “Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it.” The Founders considered all despotic and tyrannical governments as rooted in fear. As an example of a fear-based government, they frequently referred to the Ottoman Empire, “the Turks,” or even to the absolute monarchy in France, in which the king was not controlled by any parliament or other political body. Honor, on the other hand, while “truly sacred,” was not as high a principle as virtue. Honor was what compelled a constitutional monarch, such as a king or queen, to maintain peace, order, and justice in his or her kingdom, not only because they were personally invested in the kingdom’s success (after all, it was “theirs”), but there were some mechanisms by which his or her power could be checked, such as by Parliament in Great Britain (which held the power of the purse and many other important legislative functions). But the highest principle of them all was virtue, which was the foundation of republics.

“Will not every sober man acknowledge it better calculated to promote the general happiness than any other form?” Adams asked. A republic is a form of government in which the people “depute [delegate] power from the many to a few of the most wise and good” for the purpose of making laws for the common good. And because ultimate sovereignty was in the people, not an institution, a king, or a dictator, those laws necessarily applied to everyone. “The very definition of a Republic,” Adams commented, “is ‘an Empire of Laws, and not men.'”

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- https://twitter.com/toptradesmen

https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience

THE TRUE DEFINITION OF 'RIGHTS'

One of my biggest pet peeves among the progressives is their misunderstanding of what a “right” is.

Right now we have social justice warriors all over the country bleating about the “rights” they’re not getting. To hear the leftists tell it, a “right” is anything they want, particularly if it’s free (for them). All Americans should have a “right” to food, water, housing, education, medical care and the use of whatever bathroom they want. Oh, and don’t forget the “right” to abortion, birth control, the Internet, smartphones, a minimum wage of $15/hour and three weeks’ vacation time per year.

It doesn’t matter that they haven’t earned these things. It doesn’t matter if the “right” they want flies in the face of biology, tradition and even reality. And it doesn’t matter if a supposed “right” tramples all over your (legitimate and true) Rights. They just want what they want; therefore they should have them. Naturally these “rights” are provided to them at the point of a gun by you and me, the overburdened taxpayer.

The basis of many of these “rights” is either greed or envy. It’s not fair if someone else lives in a mansion and educates their children privately. It’s not fair someone else earns a huge paycheck and has a corner office. I want those things, too; therefore you should give them to me. It’s my right. I want I want I want.

You’ll notice our wise Founding Fathers did not put such necessities as food, clothing, housing, or education into the Bill of Rights. Was this just an oversight? Were they being cruel or dim-witted? Of course not. These necessities were deliberately excluded for a very good reason. They knew it was no one else’s responsibility to provide those things for people. They knew Rights are from God, not the government. Rights are from our Creator, not the taxpayer. They are the inherent rights of the individual, not the collective. There is no such thing as a collective “right.”

In other words, my “rights” end when I demand that you pay for what I want. And yes, that includes food, housing and abortion.

Now you may wonder what kind of heartless monster I am that denies people the “right” to food, water, housing, or bathroom facilities. In arguably the richest and most powerful nation on earth, how could we deny people these “rights”?

This is where people misunderstand what a Right (notice the capital “R”) is. Remember this clear and easy definition of what constitutes a Right: Rights don’t cost anyone anything. They are not achieved by picking someone else’s pocket. They are not granted by government largesse through entitlement programs.

Manufactured “rights” never end. That’s why true Rights were so carefully delineated in our founding documents. But when someone starts demanding special “rights” from the government, what they’re saying is they can’t or won’t supply those things for themselves, and want someone else to do so.

This is why early American politicians struggled with the notion of government-sponsored charity. The Founding Fathers weren’t heartless; but they recognized the evil inside Pandora’s box once it was opened. Read this article for a comprehensive analysis of assistance for the poor in early America, with particular emphasis on those unable to care for themselves (elderly, disabled, etc.).

The Founding Fathers were justifiably concerned about the slippery slope of providing relief for every misfortune, discomfort, inequity, or unfairness. They understood government involvement would lead to demands for additional entitlements and a reluctance to strive for personal improvement. It’s just human nature. Take away personal drive and incentive through government largesse, and the results are disastrous.

Helping Homeless Veterans  we are people too

https://www.gofundme.com/Giving-Back-vets

PAYPAL 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=5GUPMXQSBD9ZE

But over the past few decades, the government has eagerly embraced “charity” and “rights” (including, critically, education) in every possible guise for one excellent reason: recipients are controllable. They’ll vote for whoever promises continuation of their “rights.” They’ve been bought. Remember, if something costs taxpayers money, it is not a Right. It is an unconstitutional entitlement.

False “rights” work by forcibly removing money and resources from one segment of the population and distributing to another. This enslaves the first segment by not allowing them to keep the rewards of their hard work; and it enslaves the second into eternal dependency.

True Rights derive from God, and those Rights grant us the freedom and liberty to pursue our needs free from government interference and restrictions (within the bounds of the founding documents). False “rights” mean we point guns at people and force them to provide us with food, housing, medical care, education, employment, birth control, abortion, etc., at their expense.

Naturally, this doesn’t mean there won’t be dumb people who do dumb things. Someone will always shoot themselves in the foot (literally). In the past when citizens knew their Rights, our response was “Well, he was an idiot to shoot himself in the foot. Maybe he learned a lesson.” Now we say, “Well, he was an idiot to shoot himself in the foot. We should remove the Right of self-defense for everyone so no one else ever shoots himself in the foot.”

In other words, in an effort to protect citizens from the occasional idiot, we legislate everyone. We allow emotionalism to become policy. The government loves that. It wants to protect us. It wants to grant us the “rights” of food, medical care and education. But make no mistake – the only reason the government is such an enthusiastic provider of “rights” is so it can become our master.

As government ascends in importance, the need for God retreats. We no longer beseech the Almighty for help in achieving our goals. Instead, we turn to Congress to provide us with whatever we don’t want to bother achieving on our own.

Americans have come to believe everything should be “fair” and all playing fields should be level. But of course when government tries to impose fairness on us, it results in a profoundly unfair redistribution of our labor, resources and income. (“Spreading the wealth” is the current term.)

And because we’ve allowed emotionalism to become policy, we’ve become a nation of victims. It’s much easier to whine about our “rights” and claim that others are responsible for providing us with the things we “deserve” than it is to work for those things ourselves.

Remember, if something costs taxpayers money, IT IS NOT A RIGHT. It is an unconstitutional entitlement.

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- https://twitter.com/toptradesmen

https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience

Why are Muslims flocking to land of 'infidels'?

Why are Muslims flocking to land of 'infidels'?

I have questions. In every place Muslims have arrived in large numbers, they begin to establish areas that become known as “no-go zones” – places that are, in effect, small Muslim “countries.” This is not simply an issue to be thrown into yesterday’s news file as, according to a recently leaked secret document, there are estimates that by the end of December 2015, in Germany or Scandinavia, France or the U.K., there were 1.5 million mostly Muslim illegals.

These “non-Muslims-enter-at-your-own-risk” areas are inhabited, controlled, patrolled and dominated by Muslims, with Shariah law (not local ordinances) becoming the law of the land in those areas.

Here are a few of my questions: If Muslims are leaving Islamic-dominated countries for Western civilization, why are they subsequently demanding Islamic Shariah law and customs? If they love their customs so much, why are they flocking to the land of the “infidels”?According to my understanding, as soon as they “escape” Muslim-dominated countries for freedom and economic opportunity, they immediately begin to establish the exact conditions they fled to find “freedom.”

In other words, why are Muslims fleeing Islamic-dominated lands to re-establish Islamic-dominated areas in non-Islamic-dominated regions? Isn’t the rule of thumb, “We are leaving here to find a different place because we don’t like it here”? If Muslims love Shariah law and Islamic customs so much, why are they not flooding into Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran, Iraq and Syria, where these customs abound, instead of France, England, Germany and the United States?

I have often stated in private, and not so private, conversations that a major part of the problem in the West is that we have no idea what life is like in Muslim-dominated countries. I have also on many occasions stated that American children should not graduate at after 12th grade but 13th grade. Grade 13 would subsequently be spent in a Middle Eastern country of their choice (excluding Israel, which is too much like America) at the job and income level of whatever their father or mother does for a living in America.

What do they pay non-professional day laborers in Muslim countries? How do they treat women in these countries? What happens to a girl who gets pregnant out of wedlock? How easy is it to get a wife there? What kind of civil rights are indigenous to citizens in most Muslim societies?

After spending a year there, living at the income level their father’s skill level would generate, and having acquired the knowledge of life under Islamic law versus the law of our American republic, political correctness would vanish into thin air in light of their new-found perspective.

A major part of the problem here is that most Americans have only one standard of measurement: life in America. We talk about poverty in America, and there is a movement to raise minimum wage to $15 per hour. What are the refugees escaping in their Muslim homelands? Here is only one unreported example, the minimum wage.

Saudi Arabia (which takes in hundreds of billions of dollars in oil revenues) has the highest paid workers: $720 per month. Following is how a few others stack up per month: Libya, $327; Jordan, $288; Iran, $215; Iraq, $214; and Morocco pays its agricultural workers $1.50 per day, while Qatar pays $0 minimum wage. You’re on your own, baby.

Do you hear of riots and demonstrations taking place against employers in any of these countries? Can you even begin to imagine what would happen if the minimum wage anywhere in the West, and especially in America, dropped to $1.50 per day ($45 per month)? Let’s be generous: How about a whopping $327 a month? The poorest people in America are rich compared to ordinary citizens in the aforementioned countries.

Ask several European countries about the results of their open-border policies. This from the headlines of several European newspaper articles:

• Muslim raping of women epidemic in refugee camps
• The big list of Muslim sex attacks gets bigger
• Criticize Muslim rapes? “You’re a bigot!”
• Rape jihad shows Germany is no longer German
• Germany sex attack suspects from Syria
• Germany covering up crimes committed by migrants
• Muslim refugee charged with raping 10-year-old girl

Some are actually accusing Americans of being “barbaric” for not allowing this flood of Islamic men of fighting age into our country, so, we open our borders to them? As we can see from the current situations evolving in European and Scandinavian countries, we, like they, would be putting the peace and safety of America at risk. It must be remembered, the ultimate aim of Islam is world domination and the imposition of Shariah law – and you cannot know what that is like until you have been to places dominated by Islam.

As a member of the U.S. armed forces, I spent almost five years in three Muslim-dominated countries – Libya, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. When I landed at McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey after my third assignment in the Middle East – and this was back in the day when segregation was the law of the land in the U.S. – I got off that airplane, knelt down, kissed the ground and said, “God Bless America!”

EUROPE'S MUSLIM RAPE EPIDEMIC

When 850,000 so-called “refugees” – mostly male Muslims – stormed the borders of Europe earlier this year, a looming rape crisis was predictable from the start.

What happened in the microcosm of Rotherham, England, between 1997 and 2013 should have been still fresh in the minds of the public and the officials who resettled the mostly Sunni populations in Germany, France, England, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, Finland and Switzerland – all of which experienced a 2016 New Year’s Eve nightmare of sexual assaults.

Europe obviously did not embrace the lessons of Rotherham.

I commend everyone to read the report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham. It’s not easy reading, but too few obviously did in Europe prior to the so-called “refugee” invasion of 2015.

Helping Homeless Veterans  we are people too

https://www.gofundme.com/Giving-Back-vets

PAYPAL 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=5GUPMXQSBD9ZE

Here are some of the shocking highlights:

• The report found, by what is termed a “conservative estimate,” that 1,400 children were sexually exploited in the 16-year period in the town of about 250,000.

• They were all victims of what were called “Asian” gangs – Pakistani Muslims.

• In more than a third of the cases, children victimized by sexual exploitation were previously known to the city’s child-services program because of child protection and neglect.

• They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators.

How did the city respond?

“Within social care, the scale and seriousness of the problem was underplayed by senior managers,” the report concluded. “At an operational level, the Police gave no priority to CSE, regarding many child victims with contempt and failing to act on their abuse as a crime. Further stark evidence came in 2002, 2003 and 2006 with three reports known to the Police and the Council, which could not have been clearer in their description of the situation in Rotherham. The first of these reports was effectively suppressed because some senior officers disbelieved the data it contained. This had led to suggestions of cover-up. The other two reports set out the links between child sexual exploitation and drugs, guns and criminality in the Borough. These reports were ignored and no action was taken to deal with the issues that were identified in them.”

But it gets worse.

“By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue,” the report continued. “Some councillors seemed to think it was a one-off problem, which they hoped would go away. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.” (Emphasis added.)

Rotherham was hardly the only warning Europe got before New Year’s Eve 2016.

Throughout 2015, the entire world knew the way rape and sexual assaults were used by ISIS in the Middle East as a form of terrorism. In September, Hollywood star Angelina Jolie, a special envoy of the United Nations Commissioner for Refugees, traveled to London to explain how Islamic State was using rape as a “policy” and a weapon of war.

Thousands of women and girls were abducted, raped and sold into sexual slavery by ISIS since it declared a caliphate in territory it holds in Syria and Iraq since last summer, according to the U.N.

“The most aggressive terrorist group in the world today is using rape as a center point of their terror and their way of destroying communities and families,” Jolie told a British parliamentary committee.

ISIS clerics even issued a fatwa explaining when girls and women can be raped with the approval of Allah.

Did anyone listen and learn?

No. Instead officials in Europe watched the New Year’s Eve attacks – and covered them up, swept them under the rug, blamed European women.

It was Rotherham all over again.

Have U.S. officials learned anything from this horror?

No, they haven’t. Barack Obama’s administration continues to justify increasing the number of Sunni Muslim “refugees” it plans to resettle in the U.S. over the next few years. The latest number used by the State Department is 185,000. Don’t expect it to go down. Expect it to continue rising – unless Americans put their collective foot down in a big way.

You’ve been warned – again.

'The world is too small for both Hitler and God'

'The world is too small for both Hitler and God'

Franklin D. Roosevelt warned at Madison Square Garden, Oct. 28, 1940: “We guard against the forces of anti-Christian aggression, which may attack us from without.”

FDR stated at a campaign event in Brooklyn, New York, Nov. 1, 1940: “Those forces hate democracy and Christianity as two phases of the same civilization. They oppose democracy because it is Christian. They oppose Christianity because it preaches democracy.”FDR said in a fireside chat, April 28, 1942: “This great war effort must be carried through. … It shall not be imperiled by the handful of noisy traitors – betrayers of America, betrayers of Christianity itself.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt stated in his Labor Day address, Sept. 1, 1941: “Preservation of these rights is vitally important now, not only to us who enjoy them, but to the whole future of Christian civilization.”

FDR stated July 19, 1940: “We face one of the great choices of history … the continuance of civilization as we know it versus the ultimate destruction of all that we have held dear – religion against godlessness.”

FDR addressed Congress regarding the Yalta Conference, March 1, 1945: “I saw Sevastopol and Yalta! And I know that there is not room enough on earth for both German militarism and Christian decency.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt gave a radio greeting to the Boy Scouts, Feb. 7, 1938: “On this 28th birthday of the Boy Scouts of America we should be especially thankful for a youth movement which seeks merely to preserve such simple fundamentals as physical strength, mental alertness and moral straightness.”

FDR addressed the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America, Dec. 6, 1933: “Early Christians challenged the pagan ethics of Greece and of Rome; We are wholly ready to challenge the pagan ethics … of our boasted modern civilization.”

Helping Homeless Veterans  we are people too

https://www.gofundme.com/Giving-Back-vets

PAYPAL 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=5GUPMXQSBD9ZE

FDR stated May 27, 1941: “The whole world is divided between … pagan brutality and the Christian ideal. We choose human freedom which is the Christian ideal.”

FDR remarked in his state of the union, Jan. 6, 1942: “The world is too small … for both Hitler and God. … Nazis have now announced their plan for enforcing their … pagan religion all over the world – a plan by which the Holy Bible and the Cross of Mercy would be displaced by Mein Kampf and the swastika and the naked sword.”

FDR stated May 27, 1941: “The Nazi world does not recognize any God except Hitler; for Nazis are as ruthless as the Communists in denial of God. … Will our children wander goose-stepping in search of new gods?”

Though Franklin Roosevelt was a liberal in his day, since then both the left and the right have moved further to the left resulting in FDR’s statements appearing conservative by comparison.

In a fireside chat, March 9, 1937, FDR stated: “I hope that you have re-read the Constitution of the United States. … Like the Bible, it ought to be read again and again.”

On Oct. 6, 1935, FDR stated: “We cannot read the history of our rise and development as a nation, without reckoning with the place the Bible has occupied in shaping the advances of the Republic. … Where we have been the truest and most consistent in obeying its precepts, we have attained the greatest measure of contentment and prosperity.”

FDR stated Jan. 6, 1942: “Our enemies are guided by … unholy contempt for the human race. We are inspired by a faith that goes back … to the Book of Genesis: ‘God created man in His own image.'”

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was born Jan. 30, 1882, in Hyde Park, New York. He was elected in 1933 as the 32nd president and was in the office of president longer then any other, over 12 years, serving during the Great Depression and World War II.

FDR stated Nov. 4, 1944: “I can’t talk about my opponent the way I would like to, because I try to think that I am a Christian. I try to think that some day I will go to Heaven, and I don’t believe there is anything to be gained in saying dreadful things about other people.”

FDR told the American Youth Congress, Feb. 10, 1940: “I knew that some day Russia would return to religion for the simple reason that four or five thousand years of recorded history have proven that mankind has always believed in God in spite of the many abortive attempts to exile God.”

FDR stated Oct. 1, 1938: “I doubt if there is any problem in the world … that would not find happy solution if approached in the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount … in conformity with the teaching of Him Who is the Way, the Light and the Truth.”

FDR stated Jan. 4, 1939: “An ordering of society which relegates religion … to the background can find no place within it for the ideals of the Prince of Peace. The United States rejects such an ordering, and retains its ancient faith.”

FDR stated Jan. 31, 1938: “There has been definite progress towards a spiritual reawakening. … I receive evidences of this from all our Protestant Churches; I get it from Catholic priests and from Jewish rabbis as well.”

FDR stated Dec. 6, 1933: “Churches and government … can work hand in hand. … Government guarantees to the churches – Gentile and Jewish – the right to worship God in their own way. … State and Church are rightly united in a common aim.”

In a radio address, Nov. 4, 1940, FDR stated: “Democracy is the birthright of every citizen, the white and the colored; the Protestant, the Catholic, the Jew.”

FDR stated at Madison Square Garden, Oct. 28, 1940: “Your government is working … with representatives of Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths. Without these three, all three of them … things would not be as … easy.”

FDR stated regarding Jewish Refugees, June 12, 1944: “This nation is appalled by the systematic persecution of helpless minority groups by Nazis. … The fury of their insane desire to wipe out the Jewish race in Europe continues undiminished. … Many Christian groups also are being murdered. … Nazis are determined to complete their program of mass extermination.”

FDR stated regarding Justice for War Crimes, March 24, 1944: “In one of the blackest crimes of all history – begun by the Nazis … the wholesale systematic murder of the Jews of Europe. … Hundreds of thousands of Jews … are now threatened with annihilation as Hitler’s forces descend more heavily. … That these innocent people, who have already survived a decade of Hitler’s fury, should perish on the very eve of triumph over the barbarism which their persecution symbolizes, would be a major tragedy.”

FDR wrote to Rabbi Stephen Wise of the United Palestine Appeal, Feb. 6, 1937: “The American people … watched with sympathetic interest the effort of the Jews to renew in Palestine the ties of their ancient homeland and to reestablish Jewish culture in the place where for centuries it flourished and whence it was carried to the far corners of the world. … Two decades have witnessed … the vitality and vision of the Jewish pioneers in Palestine. It should be a source of pride to Jewish citizens of the United States that they, too, have had a share in this great work of revival.”

FDR stated Sept. 11, 1941: “The times call for … inner strength that comes to a free people conscious of their duty and the righteousness of what they do, they will with Divine help and guidance – stand their ground.”

FDR stated Dec. 8, 1941: “With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our people – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God.”

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- https://twitter.com/toptradesmen

https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience

This 5-star general recognized our real enemy

This 5-star general recognized our real enemy

“Our threat is from the insidious forces working from within which have already so drastically altered the character of our free institutions” – General Douglas MacArthur, Lansing, Michigan, May 15, 1952.

Douglas MacArthur was born Jan. 26, 1880. He commanded in France during World War I. He was superintendent of West Point, 1919-20. In 1930, at age 50, Douglas MacArthur became the youngest chief of staff of the U.S. Army. A four-star general, he retired in 1939, but returned in 1941 to defend the Philippines. When Japan invaded, President Roosevelt ordered him to Australia. MacArthur left, but not before promising “I shall return.”

When General MacArthur heard of the 10,000 Filipino and American prisoners who died on the Bataan death march, he stated, April 9, 1942: “To the weeping mothers of its dead, I can only say that the sacrifice and halo of Jesus of Nazareth has descended upon their sons, and that God will take them unto Himself.”

On Oct. 20, 1944, General MacArthur returned with an American army and freed the Philippines, stating: “People of the Philippines: I have returned. By the grace of Almighty God our forces stand again on Philippine soil – soil consecrated in the blood of our two peoples. We have come, dedicated and committed to the task of destroying every vestige of enemy control. … The hour of your redemption is here. … Let the indomitable spirit of Bataan and Corregidor lead on. …”

In a radio speech broadcast from the invasion beach on returning to the Philippines, General Douglas MacArthur stated, Oct. 20, 1944: “Strike at every favorable opportunity. For your homes and hearths, strike! For future generations of your sons and daughters, strike! In the name of your sacred dead, strike! Let no heart be faint. Let every arm be steeled. The guidance of Divine God points the way. Follow in His name to the Holy Grail of righteous victory!”

General Douglas MacArthur stated: “In war, when a commander becomes so bereft of reason and perspective that he fails to understand the dependence of arms on Divine guidance, he no longer deserves victory.”

Promoted to supreme commander of Allied Forces in the Southwest Pacific, he received Japan’s surrender on the USS Missouri in Tokyo Harbor. After the World War II ended, General Douglas MacArthur suggested that Youth for Christ representatives and other missionary groups go to Japan: “(In order to) provide the surest foundation for the firm establishment of democracy.”

Promoted to five-star general, MacArthur was supreme U.N. commander during the beginning of the Korean War, making a daring landing of troops deep behind enemy lines at Inchon and recapturing Seoul.

MacArthur became at odds with President Truman who did not want to confront the Communist Chinese, so Truman made the unpopular decision to remove him.

MacArthur stated: “It is fatal to enter a war without the will to win it,” and “In war there is no substitute for victory.”

On April 19, 1951, following his tour of Korea, General Douglas MacArthur spoke to a joint session of Congress to announce his retirement: “I am closing my fifty-two years of military service. When I joined the Army, even before the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all my boyish hopes and dreams. The world has turned over many times since I took the oath on the Plain at West Point, and the hopes and dreams have all since vanished, but I still remember the refrain of one of the most popular barracks ballads of that day, which proclaimed most proudly that old soldiers never die; they just fade away. And, like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just fade away, an old soldier who has tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to see that duty. Good-bye.”

Helping Homeless Veterans  we are people too

https://www.gofundme.com/Giving-Back-vets

PAYPAL 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=5GUPMXQSBD9ZE

Douglas MacArthur told West Point cadets, May 1962: “The soldier, above all other men, is required to practice the greatest act of religious training – sacrifice. In battle and in the face of danger and death, he discloses those Divine attributes which his Maker gave when He created man in His own image. … No physical courage and no brute instinct can take the place of Divine help which alone can sustain him. However horrible the incidents of war may be, the soldier who is called upon to offer and to give his life for his country is the noblest development of mankind.”

General Douglas MacArthur addressed the Michigan legislature in Lansing, Michigan, May 15, 1952, (“General MacArthur Speeches and Reports 1908-1964” (2000) by Edward T. Imparato, p. 206): “Talk of imminent threat to our national security through … external force is pure nonsense. Our threat is from the insidious forces working from within which have already so drastically altered the character of our free institutions – those institutions we proudly called the American way of life.”

On Jan. 18, 1955, a monument was dedicated to General Douglas MacArthur at the occasion of his 75th birthday, which had inscribed his statement: “Battles are not won by arms alone. There must exist above all else a spiritual impulse – a will to victory. In war there can be no substitute for victory.”

In 1942, General Douglas MacArthur was named Father of the Year. He stated: “By profession I am a soldier and take pride in that fact. But I am prouder – infinitely prouder – to be a father. A soldier destroys in order to build; the father only builds, never destroys. The one has the potentiality of death; the other embodies creation and life. And while the hordes of death are mighty, the battalions of life are mightier still. It is my hope that my son, when I am gone, will remember me not from the battle but in the home repeating with him our simple daily prayer, ‘Our Father Who Art in Heaven.'”

General Douglas MacArthur composed “A Father’s Prayer” in the early days of World War II while in the Pacific: “Build me a son, O Lord, who will be strong enough to know when he is weak, brave enough to face himself when he is afraid, one who will be proud and unbending in honest defeat, and humble and gentle in victory. Build me a son whose wishes will not take the place of deeds; a son who will know Thee – and that to know himself is the foundation stone of knowledge. Lead him, I pray, not in the path of ease and comfort, but under the stress and spur of difficulties and challenge. Here let him learn to stand up in the storm; here let him learn compassion for those who fail. …”

General MacArthur continued: “Build me a son whose heart will be clear, whose goal will be high; a son who will master himself before he seeks to master other men; one who will reach into the future, yet never forget the past. And after all these things are his, add, I pray, enough of sense of humor, so that he may always be serious, yet never take himself too seriously. Give him humility, so that he may always remember the simplicity of true greatness, the open mind of true wisdom, and the meekness of true strength. Then, I, his father, will dare to whisper, ‘I have not lived in vain.'”

General Douglas MacArthur warned in a speech to the Salvation Army, Dec. 12, 1951, stating: “History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”

General Douglas MacArthur addressed Massachusetts State Legislature in Boston, July 25, 1951: “It was the adventurous spirit of Americans which despite risks and hazards carved a great nation from an almost impenetrable wilderness … which built our own almost unbelievable material progress … which raised the standard of living of the American people beyond that ever before known. … This adventurous spirit is now threatened as it was in the days of the Boston Tea Party by an unconscionable burden of taxation.

“This is sapping the initiative and energies of the people and leaves little incentive for the assumption of those risks which are inherent and unescapable in the forging of progress under the system of free enterprise. Worst of all, it is throwing its tentacles around the low income bracket sector of our society, from whom is now exacted the major share of the cost of government. This renders its paper income largely illusory. …”

General Douglas MacArthur continued: “The so-called forgotten man of the early thirties now is indeed no longer forgotten as the government levies upon his income as the main remaining source to defray reckless spendthrift policies. More and more we work not for ourselves but for the state. In time, if permitted to continue, this trend cannot fail to be destructive. For no nation may survive in freedom once its people become servants of the state, a condition to which we are now pointed with dreadful certainty. …”

MacArthur concluded: “Nothing is heard from those in the supreme executive authority concerning the possibility of a reduction or even a limitation upon these mounting costs. No suggestion deals with the restoration of some semblance of a healthy balance. No plan is advanced for easing the crushing burdens already resting upon the people. To the contrary, all that we hear are the plans by which such costs progressively may be increased. New means are constantly being devised for greater call upon the taxable potential as though the resources available were inexhaustable. We compound irresponsibility by seeking to share what liquid wealth we have with others. …”

General Douglas MacArthur also stated in his address to the Massachusetts State Legislature in Boston, July 25, 1951: “Much that I have seen since my return to my native land after an absence of many years has filled my with immeasurable satisfaction and pride. Our material progress has been little short of phenomenal. It has established an eminence in material strength so far in advance of any other nation or combination of nations that talk of an imminent threat to our national security through the application of external force is pure nonsense.

“It is not of any external threat that I concern myself but rather of insidious forces working from within which have already so drastically altered the character of our free institutions – these institutions which formerly we hailed as something beyond question of challenge – those institutions we proudly called the American way of life. Foremost of these forces is that directly, or even more frequently indirectly, allied with the scourge of imperialistic Communism. It has infiltrated into positions of public trust and responsibility – into journalism, the press, the radio and the school.

“It seeks through covert manipulation of the civil power and the media of public information and education to pervert the truth, impair respect for moral values, suppress human freedom and representative government, and in the end destroy our faith in our religious teachings.

“This evil force, with neither spiritual base nor moral standard, rallies the abnormal and subnormal elements among our citizenry and applies internal pressure against all things we hold descent and all things that we hold right – the type of pressure which has caused many Christian nations abroad to fall and and their own cherished freedoms to languish in the shackles of complete suppression.

“As it has happened there it can happen here. Our need for patriotic fervor and religious devotion was never more impelling. There can be no compromise with atheistic Communism, no half way in the preservation of freedom and religion. It must be all or nothing. We must unite in the high purpose that the liberties etched upon the design of our life by our forefathers be unimpaired and that we maintain the moral courage and spiritual leadership to preserve inviolate that mighty bulwark of all freedom, our Christian faith.”

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- https://twitter.com/toptradesmen

https://www.facebook.com/FREEDOMORANARCHYCampaignofConscience