Add our site to your favorites!
The Thailand Connection
to U of Tenn.
The Very BEST independent, coeducational, residential, Liberal Arts
College in the World
An Irish Tune
Just What is a
FACISM / SOCIALISM
Truth, Fact, &
- National Weekly Edition
"Duke" Waynes' MOTTO
What is to be said about the Irish?
-Villa Rica, Ga
Bill of Rights
The Legend of EL GATO
Songs of the
BUT is there a
...which party and candidate do they
The definition of a
"Yellow Dog" Democrat
A Short Article
Of AK47's, "Hunting," and
RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY"
Questions of the Day?
What about the
Is it time for a
SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION?
A Thai "Block
Partee!" - (Home
CLICK ON IT!
Go to the Dentist!
Rawai Beach area on Phuket Isand in Thailand
Who is the
Henry" insisted that we include this in our Website:
Bill of Rights
By and large, the first 10 amendments to our United
States Constitution are sweeping prohibitions against governmental abridgement
or destruction of individual fundamental rights. The tenth amendment,
reserving to the states, or to the people, powers not delegated or prohibited to
the Federal government, established a basis for subsequent judicial
interpretations of the Constitution limiting the power of the Federal
These 10 Amendments
to our U. S.
Constitution are as follows:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom
of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the
security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall
not be infringed.
No Soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any
house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to
be prescribed by law.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall
not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched,
and the persons or things to be seized.
No persons shall be held to answer for a capital or
otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,
except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in
actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject
for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life and limb; nor shall be
compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private
property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy
the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and
district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have
been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have
compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the
Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy
shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and
no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the
United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive
fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people.
ARE A FEW
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION:
* "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God."
-- Thomas Jefferson's motto
* "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be
to allow the subjected people to carry arms. History shows that all conquerors
who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own
downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the underdog is a
sine qua non ["something essential" lit. "without which not"] for the overthrow
of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or police."
--Adolph Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938
* "This year will go down in history. For the first time
a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our
police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future."
-- A. Hitler 1935
* "Government is not reason. It is not
eloquence. It is a force, like fire; a dangerous servant and a terrible
master." ...George Washington, First President of the
* "The Bill of Rights is a born rebel. It reeks
with sedition. In every clause it shakes its fist in the face of
constituted authority.... It is the one guarantee of human freedom to the
...Frank Cobb - (Editor, New York World, 1920)
* "It is not the function of our government to keep the
citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep
the government from falling into error."
...Justice Robert H. Jackson
* "The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of
necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea."
-- John Adams - Constitution of Massachusetts: Declaration of Rights (1780)
* "A government big enough to give you everything you want
is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
...President Gerald Ford - (1976)
* "There is nothing the government can "GIVE" to anyone or to
any "group" that it has not already been TAKEN from them, or from the "group" it has
placed them in."
...Emil T. Miller - (just plain common sense)
* "The supposed quietude of a good man allures the
Ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the
invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as
property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute
of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay
them aside.... Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world
deprived the use of them..."
...John Adams, 2nd President of the United States
UNCLE HENRY also asked us to include this
* ► PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT AT ALL TIMES;
Under the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution
of the United States and its' Bill of Rights, the Articles of Confederation of
the Confederate States of America, the Civil
Rights Act, and the Miranda Decision; I waive NONE of my rights, and demand ALL
of them at all times. I do not wish to answer any questions. I do not consent to
any searches of my person, or property. I demand probable cause, a Fourth
Amendment warrant, counsel of my choice, and a trial by a jury of my peers!
NOTE: For a page of
links to Self-reliance, Plain Living, Organizations in support of our 2nd
Amendment and Sources for the means to implement and enjoy them -
please click this
The myth of:
of Church and
There are NO SUCH WORDS OR PHRASEOLOGY in our U. S.
* "Our system
of Justice is based on English Common Law, and English Common Law is based on
the Ten Commandments. This is the verifiable, historical fact. There is no
conceivable way Christianity (Church) can be wholly independent of Justice, Law,
or the Constitution of the United States of America (the State) - unless by
usurpation by the Godless tyranny of 'Liberalism' (Socialism)."
...Emil T. Miller, American Citizen
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS of GOD
1.) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2.) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.
3.) Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
4.) Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
5.) Honor thy father and thy mother.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7.) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8.) Thou shalt not steal.
9.) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10.) Thou shalt not covet.
Our Constitution is clear.
The Government is not to tamper with,
restrict, or in any way keep the people from the exercise of their Christian
religion in whatever ways they desire, AND LIKEWISE, no religion is to hold any
power over the Government. The Constitution
DOES NOT STATE
that there is to be no intermingling or mixing of, or between the two.
Indeed such total integration is exactly what our Founding Fathers intended, and
our system of justice and our Constitution is entirely unworkable without such
Their every quote and pronouncement makes clear that this nation was founded
upon Christianity and should have Christianity running through every facet of
American life both public and private, while not excluding and protecting non-belief
equally as well.
contrived "issue" of "separation of church and state" is a
FABRICATION of the Liberal Socialists
mostly in the Democrat party (Atheists by definition), their
Yellow Dog Democrat dupes and their Democrat appointed activist Liberal judges all of who now control that Party, and
which "issue" has been taken up and thrust upon Americans by them and the Leftist TV
News Media, Academia, and the Hollywood Establishment; all while timid, head-in-the-sand,
don't-rock-the-boat Christians have stood
silently by and allowed them to foist this travesty upon us. If we
continue to do so we will get what we deserve; the LOSS of our constitutional
guarantee of the freedom to freely worship and to govern the country according to
The Ten Commandments of God... resulting in
...Emil T. Miller (Tony)
► Click here to let us know what you think of
the above article:
The definition of "Socialism":
Socialism >n. a
political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the
means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by
the community as a whole. - >(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state
between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism. DERIVATIVES: socialist >n. & >adj. socialistic >adj. socialistically >adv.
The definition of a "Socialist Democracy":
(the agenda of the "Liberals"):
Social Democracy >n. a socialist system of government
achieved by democratic means. - DERIVATIVES: social democrat
These first and following articles are reprinted with
permission from Volume 12, Number 11 of WHISTLEBLOWER MAGAZINE, a monthly
publication of WORLDNETDAILY.COM - author
by Joseph Farah
the U. S. Constitution mandate "Separation of church and state"? That's
the question dealt with in this special issue of Whistleblower Magazine.
And the answer is
actually quite simple. No.
This should not even be a
matter of debate. The U. S. Constitution was written in simple language
for all to understand. There was never a thought that such straightforward
principles as laid out by the founders would be the subject of endless debates
does not call for the separation of church and state. There is no
provision like that in the founding documents. The closest it comes is the
First Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of an official state
The reality, of
course, is that the Founders went so far as to allocate federal money for the
publishing and distribution of Bibles. They believed the system of
self-government they established would not work unless the citizens were a
devout and moral group. They set aside national days of prayer and
fasting. In fact, they established our entire system of law on the
foundation laid by the Bible, especially the Book of Deuteronomy. Walk up
to the U. S. Supreme Court building today and you will see a sculpture of Moses
delivering the Ten Commandments.
So, not for a
moment do I believe there is any impregnable wall separating church and state,
as some claim or as some would like. That's not what the Founders had in
However, they did
believe that the state should not interfere in the church's affairs.
What are the
church's affairs? Feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, nursing the
exceeded its constitutional authority and largely usurped this vital role from
the church. That's neither to the church's credit nor to the government's.
The debate over
separation of church and state hit a peak this year when Alabama Supreme Court
Chief Justice Roy Moore displayed a monument of the Ten Commandments in his
courthouse. A federal judge, Myron Thompson, ordered it removed.
In doing so, the
federal judge said the government could not even acknowledge the existence of
The First Amendment
protects the free exercise of religion and prohibits the state from imposing an
official church. The Ten Commandments represent the very basis of Western
Civilization. They are revered equally by believing Jews, Christians and
even some Muslims. It is a unifying document, not a divisive one. If
our society cannot agree that the very basis of all our laws should be read,
honored and obeyed, then our society will not last much longer. It won't
deserve to last much longer.
I wonder how long
it will take the ACLU to sue the U. S. Supreme Court for its own displays of the
Ten Commandments? I wonder how long it will take Judge Thompson or another
like-minded activist to threaten Chief Justice William Rehnquist with a court
(order) demanding the removal of at least two such images - one on the inside
and one on the outside of the building? I wonder what defenses will be
invoked to protect our national spiritual heritage then?
issue (as noted above) will offer some insight, answers, and alternatives to our
modern, secularist jihad against all expressions of faith in the public
Until next time,
► Click here to let us know what you think of
the above article:
- (click to enlarge)
HOW COURTS INVENTED
'WALL OF SEPARATION'
After 150 years of honoring Founders' intent, activist judges took radical new
...By David Barton, ©
"The separation of church and state" - a phrase found nowhere in the
Constitution or any other founding document - is a modern legal doctrine, an
invention of 20th century courts based on a quote from a letter written by
David Barton, whose WallBuilders organization has
exhaustively documented the Christian history of the Untied States, explains the
origin to the "separation of church and state" in America.
first amendment was never intended to separate Christian principles from
government. Yet today, Americans constantly hear the First Amendment
coupled with the phrase "separation of church and state."
The First Amendment simply states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion or prohibiting the free exercise there of."
Obviously, the words
"separation," "church," or "state" are not found in the First Amendment, nor in
any other founding document.
Before the Founders
approved the final wording, the First Amendment went through nearly a dozen
different iterations and extensive discussions. Those discussions -
recorded in the Congressional Record from June 7 through September 25 of 1789 -
make clear their intent for the First Amendment. By it, the founders were
saying, essentially: We do not want in America what we
had in Great Britain. We don't want one denomination running the nation.
We will not all be Catholics, or Anglicans, or any other single denomination.
We do want God's principles, but we don't want one denomination running the
This intent was well
understood, as evidenced by court rulings after the First Amendment. For
example, a 1799 court declared: "By our forms of government, the Christian
religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of
Christians are placed on the same equal footing."
Thomas Jefferson, to whom
the now-popular phrase "separation of church and state" is attributed, also
believed, as did the other Founders, that the First Amendment simply prevented
the federal establishment of a single denomination - a fact he had made clear in
a letter to Benjamin Rush. In that letter, Jefferson committed himself as
president to not allowing the Episcopalians, the Congregationalists or any
other denomination to achieve what Jefferson called the "establishment of a
particular form of Christianity." So what is the source of Jefferson's now
On Nov. 7, 1801, the
Baptists of Danbury, Conn., wrote Jefferson (the actual letter can be seen on
page 6 of above referenced magazine), concerned that the guarantee of the
"free exercise of religion" appeared in the First Amendment. To
them, this suggested that the right to religious exercise was a
government-granted rather than a God-granted right, thus implying that someday
the government might try to regulate religious expression. They believed
that the freedom of religion was a God-granted, unalienable right; and that the
government should be powerless to restrict religious activities unless, as the
Baptists explained, those activities caused someone to "work ill to his
Jefferson understood their
concern. In his response (see actual letter on page 7 of referenced
magazine), he assured them that the free exercise of religion was indeed an
unalienable right and would not be meddled with by the government.
Jefferson pointed out to them that there was a "wall of separation between
church and state" to ensure that the government would never interfere with
Today, all that is heard
of Jefferson's letter is the phrase, "a wall of separation between church and
state," without either the context or the explanation given in the letter, or
its application by earlier courts.
The clear understanding of
the First Amendment for a century-and-a-half was that it prohibited the
establishment of a single national denomination. National policies and
rulings in that century-and-half always reflected that interpretation.
For example, in 1853, a
group petitioned Congress to separate Christian principles from government.
They desired a so-called "separation of church and state" with chaplains being
turned out of the Congress, the military, and other parts of government.
Their petition was referred to the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees,
which investigated for almost a year to see if it would be possible to separate
Christian principles from government.
Both the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees returned with their reports. The following are
excerpts from the House report delivered on March 27, 1854 (the Senate report
was very similar):
"Had the people (the Founding Fathers). during
the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, the
Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle. At the time of the
adoption of the Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was
that Christianity should be encouraged, but not any one sect (denomination). ...
In this age, there is no substitute for Christianity. ... That was the religion
of the founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of
Two months later, the Judiciary committee made this strong declaration:
"The great, vital, and conservative element in
our system (the thing that holds our system together) is the belief of our
people in the pure doctrines and divine truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
The committees explained that they would not
separate these principles, for it was these principles and activities which had
made America so successful - they had been the nation's foundation, its basis.
During the 1870's, 1880's,
and the 1890's, yet another group that challenged specific Christian principles
in government arrived before the Supreme Court. Jefferson's letter had
remained unused for years, for as time had progressed after its use in 1802 -
and after no national denomination had been established - his letter had fallen
into obscurity. But now - 75 years later - in the case Reynolds v. United
States, the plaintiffs resurrected Jefferson's letter, hoping to use it to their
advantage. In that case, the Court printed a lengthy segment of
Jefferson's letter and then used his letter on "separation of church and state"
to again prove that it was permissible to maintain Christian values, principles
and practices in official policy.
For the next 15 years
during that legal controversy, the Supreme Court utilized Jefferson's letter to
ensure that Christian principles remained a part of government.
Following this controversy, Jefferson's letter again
fell into disuse. It then remained silent for the next 70 years until
1947, when, in Everson v. Board of Education, the court, for the first time, did
not cite Jefferson's entire letter, but selected only eight words from it.
The court now announced:
The First Amendment has erected "a wall of separation between church and
state" That wall must be kept high and impregnable.
This was a new
philosophy for the court. Why would the court take Jefferson's letter
completely out of context and cite only eight of its words? Dr. William
James, the "father of modern psychology" - and a strong opponent of religious
principles in government and education - perhaps explained the court's new
strategy when he stated: "There is nothing so absurd but if you repeat it often
enough people will believe it."
This statement precisely
describes the tack utilized by the court in the years following its 1947
announcement. The court began regularly to speak of a "separation of
church and state" as if to say: This is what the Founders wanted - separation
of church and state; this is their great intent.
The court failed to
quote the Founders; it just generically asserted that this is what the Founders
The courts continued on
this tack so steadily that, in 1958, in a case called Baer v. Kolmorgen, one of
the judges was tired of hearing the phrase and wrote a dissent warning that if
the court did not stop talking about the "separation of church and state,"
people were going to start thinking it was part of the Constitution!
Nevertheless, the court
continued to talk about separation until June 25, 1962, when in the case Engle
v. Vitale, the court delivered its first ever ruling that completely separated
Christian principles from education; the case struck down school prayer.
Even the World Book
Encyclopedia's 1963 Yearbook noted that this case was the first time there had
been a separation of church and state in education. In that 1962 case, the
court redefined the meaning and application of a single word: "church".
For 170 years prior to
that case, the word "church" - as used in the phrase "separation of church and
state" - was defined to mean "a federally established denomination."
However, in 1962 the court explained that the word "church" would now mean "a
religious activity in public."
This was the turning point
in the interpretation of the First Amendment.
Understand what the court had just
announced: No longer would the First Amendment simply prohibit the establishment
of a federal denomination; it now would prohibit religious activities in public
settings. This current doctrine of separation is a brand new
doctrine; it is not something from the Founding Fathers, and it is not in any
Even outside observers
recognize this policy is a recent one. Yet notice how much has been
relinquished in recent years under this new doctrine.
School prayer was the
first casualty of the redefinition of the First Amendment in the 1962 Engel
case. School prayer had never before been challenged; for, clearly, school
prayer had never established a national denomination and therefore had always
been acceptable, But under the new definition, school prayer definitely
was a religious activity in public and was therefore now deemed to be
That 1962 case that first
redefined the First Amendment and then removed school prayer was notable in a
number of aspects. Recall that the 1892 Supreme Court case offered 87
precedents to maintain the inclusion of Christian principles in our laws and
institutions. This 1962 case which removed school prayer was just the
opposite; it was the first case in court history to use zero precedents - the
court quoted zero previous legal cases.
Without any historical or
legal base, the court simply made an announcement: We'll not have prayers in
schools anymore; that violates the Constitution.
A brand new
direction was taken in America.
Within a 12 month period
of time, in two more cases in 1963, the court had removed not only prayer, but
also Bible reading, religious classes and religious instruction. This was
a radical reversal.
The preceding was excerpted with permission from David Barton's "America's
Godly Heritage." The video and booklet are available from WorldNetDaily's
online store, ShopNetDaily. See ad on page 45. David Barton is the founder
of WallBuilders, on the Web at
► Click here to let us know what you think of
the above article:
HERE ARE A
FEW MORE QUOTES FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION:
* "Our constitution was made only for a moral and
religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
...John Adams, 2nd
President of the United states
* "There never has been a period of history, in which the
Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying at its foundation." ...Joseph Story (1727-1795), founder of Rhode
Island College and president of Yale University
* "While just government protects all in their religious
rights, true religion affords to government its surest support."
...First U. S. President George Washington
"When even one American - who has done nothing wrong -
is forced by fear to shut his mind and close his mouth, then all Americans are
...Harry S. Truman
great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself
from within. The essential cause of Rome's decline lay in her
people, her morals, her class struggle, her failing trade, her bureaucratic
despotism, her stifling taxes, her consuming wars..."
...Will Durant, (American Historian, 1944)
* "Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long
...Edmond Burke, British Statesman -1756
* "We have this day restored the Sovereign to whom all
men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven from the rising to the
setting of the sun, let His kingdom come."
...Samuel Adams so declared immediately after all the delegates had
signed the Declaration of Independence from England."
* "If we ever forget that we are one nation under God,
then we will be a nation gone under. ...President Ronald Reagan
I urge you to consider what I believe
the very best newspaper in the country:
This excellent newspaper, published in Washington, D.C., is
arguably the nation's foremost newspaper of record. Their
National Weekly Edition costs little more than a
dollar a week - only $59.95 for a full year. Coming
in the mail once a week, it is a compendium of all the major World, National,
and State news and articles which have appeared that week in their daily papers.
The paper is editorially Conservative, but its articles are straightforward,
without bias or slant and is non-selective. It gives ALL the news ALL the
time, without agenda, and it keeps people up to date and completely informed.
When I was introduced to this paper some years ago, I cancelled 5 magazine
subscriptions as well as my local and Nashville newspapers because I received
far more true and unbiased information in it than all the rest of the
left-leaning, agenda-driven publications combined. Unaltered truth and
facts are what I require, and I highly recommend this
For a "must read" article, more about the grievous situation facing Americans today, click on
this page link:
FEATURED ARTICLE for this edition.
Back to Top of Page
Website was Designed and Created by
~ Shamrock Creations ~
"Nice websites at sensible
© All Copyrights, Emil T. Miller
All rights reserved.
No part of these books or articles may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the author, unless otherwise indicated here, or, upon availability, when purchased as an E-Book and used accordingly.
PLEASE NOTE: To our knowledge, none of the other material on this site infringes on the rights of others, and exists in the public domain. Should any be found otherwise it is not intentional, and will promptly be removed upon notification and request.