The Preamble to the Constitution for the United States declares the intent and purpose thereof. It is as follows:

"WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Preamble of the United States Constitution, 1787.

The words "We the People" identify by whom the Constitution was ordained and established. The words "to ourselves and our posterity" declare to whom the benefits and protections embodied therein were to apply. These words further serve to confirm by whom and for whom, the government thus established, was to be administered.

The Preamble and the Constitution of the United States did not commence its operation until the first Wednesday in March, 1789. After this date the Preamble and the Constitution became the supreme law of the land.

The Preamble and the Constitution replaced the government under the Articles of Confederation; both governments could not exist at the same time. The new government did not commence until the old government expired. The people of the United States had approved of a new government which was to replace the old. It was to be Christian and Republican in both form and substance with expressly written limitations. The powers granted to that government were specifically stated in writing with the intent that it claimed none beyond or in addition to those declared. When the Articles of Confederation were thus replaced by the Constitution of the United States, the same people who were the ruling body sovereign under the former became the ruling body sovereign under the latter.

At the time of the adoption of the Preamble, the phrase 'WE The People' was known and understood to mean the people of the white race and none other. The Preamble emanated from and for the people so designated by the words "to ourselves and our posterity" (Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. [60 US] 393, 406-07, 410- 11), and it is known that the men that framed the Preamble and the Constitution were all of the white race and the Christian faith. The people fully understood that those words secured the intent of all that followed for that one people (the white race), and them alone. The government would proceed directly from the people, and they "ordained and established" this form of government for their own people to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to themselves and their posterity.

Let's briefly consider the meaning of the key words used in the Preamble:

"POSTERITY -- 1. Descendants; children, children's children, &c. indefinitely; the race that proceeds from the progenitor... -- 2. In a general sense, succeeding generations; opposed to ancestors." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

"ORDAIN -- 1. Properly, to set; to establish in a particular office or order; . . . -- 2. To appoint; to decree. -- 3. To set; to establish; to insti tute; to constitute. -- 4. To set apart for an office; to appoint. -- 5. To appoint; to prepare." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

"ESTABLISH -- 1. To set and fix unalterably; to settle permanently. -- 2. To found permanently; to erect and fix or settle; . . . . -- 3. To enact or decree by authority and for permanence; to ordain; to appoint; as, to establish laws, . . . . -- 4. To settle or fix; to confirm; . . . . -- 5. To make firm; to confirm; to ratify what has not been previously set or made. -- 6. To settle or fix what is wavering, doubtful or weak; to confirm. -- 7. To confirm; to fulfill; to make good. -- 8. To set up in the place of another and confirm." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

From these definitions then it is obvious that the people ordained and established the Preamble and the Constitution to only men and women of their own kind. They established it to promote Christian laws with Christian principles. Like after like, kind after kind.

The inclusion of any other race in the political community embraced by the Constitution is in violation of the whole intent and purpose of that Constitution and a trespass upon the Preamble. Numerous judicial and legislative authorities have commented upon the utterly destructive consequences of such violations of the organic law.

In discussing trespassing the Preamble by altering the posterity of free whites, the Honorable R. Toombs said in 1856;

"- - - Therefore, so far from being a necessary and proper means of executing granted powers, it is arbitrary and despotic usurpation, against the letter, the spirit, and the declared purpose of the Constitution; for its altering the Preamble exercise neither 'promotes a more perfect union, nor establishes justice, nor insures domestic tranquility, nor provides for the common defence, nor promotes the general welfare, nor secures the blessings of liberty to ourselves or our posterity,' but, on the contrary, puts in jeopardy all these inestimable blessings. It loosens the bonds of union, seeks to establish injustice, disturbs domestic tranquility, weakens the common defence, and endangers the general welfare by sowing hatreds and discords among our people, and puts in eminent peril the liberties of the white race, by whom and for whom the Constitution was made - - -"

There is nothing evil or unfair about these sentiments for separation of races is a fundamental tenant of Biblical law (Deut 7:3-4; Num 25:6-8; Ex 34:12-16; Neh 13:25; Lev 20:24; Ezra 9:12; Ex 33:16; Neh 13:3; and, Is 13:14), and is essential to self preservation. To insure that the posterity would never be destroyed through miscegenation, the citizenship was restricted to "free white" only.

Consider, if any other race or nation adopted our Preamble and Constitution just as it was originally framed without additional amendments, would not the sovereigns be those who framed it? Would not the nations that adopted it be governed by Christian law and Christian principles?

As the total embodiment of God's law, the Preamble and the Constitution were to be the example to the nations of the world how to bring the nations (particularly the white nations) of the world under Christian law and Christian principles. These principles, once put into effect, will utterly destroy the Babylonian political, economic, and religious system (that is the Talmudic system) of slavery which is predicated upon debt, usury, and surety (limited liability), all of which are forbidden and condemned by the law of our God.

It's no wonder this Constitution, a divinely inspired document, has been under attack from its first conception.

The Preamble and the Constitution were ordained and established by the white people of the United States for themselves, for their own racial government and it was done without the consent of the legislators of the several States, or the world at large.

Just exactly as in the Bible, the government established by the Constitution is founded upon the existence of a racial family composed of Clan, Sept, Kith and Kin. The States represented the family or tribal clans whom were of the same posterity referred to in the Preamble. Before the advent of "Democracy," the officers of the State governments and those elected to representation in the U.S. government were always members of those same families and groups of families that elected them. Thus, there was a direct line of responsibility, back to one's own State and the Clans, Septs, Kith, and Kin comprising that State. The deep love of the home soil was nurtured by the constant association of that soil with the continued existence of the families that occupied it and drew their sustenance from it.

"Thou shall in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose, one from among thy brethren shall thou set king over thee, thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother." Deuteronomy 17:15

"And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them; and I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me; for who is this that engaged his heart to approach unto me? saith the LORD." Jeremiah 30:21

The principle here established was that of family and soil. As you or I would not allow others to enter our own personal families and dictate our family matters, the founders and framers of our Constitution were not going to let others enter the family, as a whole nation, and dictate the affairs of the white race and thereby rob that race of its life sustaining ownership of the soil. This is why those that founded the United States are endeared by the terms "founding fathers, forefathers, and the fathers of our nation." No one is a son unless he be of the blood of the father; all else is adulteration of posterity. Adulteration of the blood is forbidden by the Seventh Commandment. These were the reasons for making land titles allodial and citizenship "free white" only. Any other course would have immediately rendered the blood shed for liberty and the foundation of a government to protect that liberty and that blood moot and an exercise in futility. The term "bastard" used in Deut 23:2 means a mongrel or person of mixed race; such shall not be included in the nation nor the alien of another race. It brings confusion and destruction of the blood.

Thus, we have the people acting as sovereigns of the whole country; and in the language of sovereignty, establishing a Constitution governed by a Preamble which established themselves as the principles. The State governments were bound, and made to conform to their will as stated in Article VI section two clause three, "... and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Not only were the Judges bound to the Preamble but the States were bound also (9th and 10th Articles of the Bill of Rights).

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Art 9, Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution, 1791.

"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." Art 10, Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution, 1791.

The ninth article in amendment to the United States Constitution insures the natural rights (birthright) of the sovereign body (white race); the tenth is a direct command to the State governments to enforce those natural rights. These two articles are the enforcement of what was said by "We the People" in the Preamble, which is why you do not see the court(s) mentioning these two articles very often.

This means that if only white people are protected by the Constitution, in accord with the intent declared by the Preamble, then it is readily under stood why the courts do not take your constitutional pleas into consideration. The court has stated many times, "Plaintiff's petition is denied on the ground that he failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."

If you do not establish your citizenship as a free white natural born citizen of the State, or a white naturalized citizen, (one of the Posterity), how can the court allow you to claim rights reserved only to that class of citizens? Remember, a Judge cannot make a decision on what he knows, but only upon what evidence is placed before him; therefore, if you don't state the status (free white citizen of the State), you waive those natural rights that you could otherwise claim. If you fail to evidence to the court what race and class of citizen you are, you waive your natural rights as guaranteed (perpetually) to the posterity stated in the Preamble and in the Bill of Rights (specifically the 9th and 10th Articles). Hereafter, you will be denied your natural rights since you did not establish, as fact, that you are of the class of citizen contemplated by the Framers and Adopters of the Constitution as one capable of claiming those rights. By this, the court will be performing what is termed "Reverse Interpretation" of the United States Constitution. Under this reverse interpretation, the rule of citizenship is reversed for white citizens.

"Prior to the adoption of this amendment [14th], strictly speaking, there were no citizens of the United States, but only some one of them. Congress had the power to make a naturalized alien a citizen of any State. But the States generally provided that such persons might, on sufficient residence therein, become citizens thereof, and then the courts held, ab convenienti, rather than otherwise, that they became ipso facto citizens of the United States. But the amendment declares the law positively on the subject, and reverses this order of procedure, by making citizenship of a State consequent on citizenship of the United States; for, having declared what persons are citizens of the United States, it does not stop there, and leave it in the power of a State to exclude any such person who may reside therein from its citizenship, but adds, 'and such persons shall also be citizens of the State wherein they reside.'" Sharon v. Hill, 26 F 337, 343 (1885).

You can plainly see that the sole purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to reverse the rule of citizenship set by the Framers in the Preamble and espoused upon in the Dred Scott decision. Elk v. Wilkins, 112 US 94, 101 (1884).

However, the Fourteenth Amendment did not destroy or overthrow the common law citizenship of "free white." Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal 43, 47 (1872). It merely purports to create a second statutory and limited citizenship, in the nature of a franchise, and subject to regulation and taxation by Congress. This never was and is not so as regards the free white sovereignty and their natural common law status. This is made quite clear in the Dred Scott case:

"But in considering the question before us, it must be borne in mind that there is no law of nations standing between the people of the United States and their Government, and interfering with their relation to each other." Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How 393, 451 (1857).

What the federal government attempts to do with the Fourteenth Amendment is to recognize the longstanding law of nations relationship between those who are not of the white race and the government formed by the white race for their own mutual protection and benefit. But since there is no law of nations relationship between the free white citizen and their government, the Fourteenth Amendment cannot lawfully apply to these members of the sovereign body.

Some have said that the Fourteenth Amendment overruled the Dred Scott decision, but to those who understand separation of powers of the three branches of government (Articles I, II and III) know that this theory is impossible. The Supreme Court cannot overrule an Amendment to the Constitution and, likewise, Congress cannot overrule a Supreme Court decision; otherwise there would be no separation of powers and they would both be in violation of the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment is violative of the Preamble because it legislates to the disbenefit of the white race (sovereignty). Since its adoption, the Supreme Court has subjected the white citizens to its provisions through various stipulated devices (the chief of which is the Social Security Act of 1935).

By first creating economic conditions which drove the people to desperation and then offering "security" in the form of a government handout, the Feds in conjunction with the Federal Reserve induced our people to trade in their inheritance for a mess of pottage. A nice sleight-of-the-hand con-game straight from the Talmud.

The Preamble of the State Constitutions would, likewise, have to conform to the intent of the Framers and Adopters of the United States Constitution in the Preamble. If they didn't, the State Constitutions would have to be rejected as not within the provisions ordained by the people of the United States of America.

Once you understand the intent of the Preamble you have a better understanding of the rest of the Constitution.

Congress has the power under the original Constitution to legislate only for the common defense, domestic tranquility, and the general welfare of the white race (sovereigns) and never for their disbenefit.

When the Framers drafted the Preamble, they restricted the sovereignty and principle of the government to only one class of people in the United States of America, which was a restatement of the sovereignty and principle within the State governments.

When you understand this, you soon see that there was never a two party system intended to exist in this country. In war, we are one people. In peace, we are one people. In all commercial regulation or non-regulations we are one and the same people.

"With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people - a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established their general liberty and independence." The Federalist Paper's No 2 Jay p.38 Rossiter Edition.

The original Pledge of Allegiance reflected these fundamental truths:

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."

Even the author of our pledge of allegiance knew the true meaning of the Preamble. The "for all" meant all who are a part of the "one nation" - not for all the world.

Let's look up the definitions of the words; one, nation and indivisible.

"ONE -- 1. Single in number; individual; . . . . -- 2. Indefinitely, some or any. -- 8. Single by union; undivided; the same. -- 9. Single in kind; the same." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

"NATION -- 1. A body of people inhabiting the same country, or united under the same sovereign or government; - - -. Nation, as its etymology imports, originally denoted a family or race of men, - - -." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

"INDIVISIBLE -- That cannot be divided, separated or broken; not separable into parts. - - -." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

As you can plainly see, the pledge is in complete compliance with the Preamble to the United States Constitution. We seldom try to understand the meaning of words, we just seem to mouth them and hold them dearly, but seldom attempt to investigate their substantive implications and precise meanings. How easily we are put to sleep by our eyes, even when we are awake.

In this nation today, the Preamble is neither understood nor obeyed. We have violated the entire intent of the Founding Fathers and our ancestors who, through blood and toil, established our race to govern America. We have violated the law of God by placing those not of our own race (strangers) in positions of authority over us (Deut 17:15). We have allowed the African and Asiatic colored's and Jews especially (who are the anti-Christ) to run for elective offices. Whenever placed in positions of authority they have worked night and day to destroy our Christian laws and wreck our Constitution. The primary example is, of course, the Fourteenth Amendment which allows the colored's and Jews to masquerade as citizens in utter violation of the Preamble. We quote from several authorities on these points.

"Under our Constitution, the colored races could be a subject but could never be a United States Citizen." Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How 393, 404-05 (1857).

"Citizens are natives or naturalized. All persons born in the United States are not citizens; the exceptions are, first, children of foreign ambassadors; secondly, Indians; and thirdly, in general, persons of color." (1st Bouv. Inst. pp. 16, 64; Amy v. Smith, 1 Litt. Ky. R. 334.)

"Negroes or other slaves born within and under the allegiance of the United States are natural born subjects, not citizens. Citizens under our constitution mean free inhabitants born within the United States, or naturalized under the law of Congress." (2 Kent's Com. p. 258, note b.) Free blacks are not citizens within the provisions of the constitution, art. 4, sec. 2. So held by Dagget, Ch. J., in Connecticut. (See note Kent's Com. supra.) And by the Supreme Court of Tennes see, in The State v. Claibourne, 1 Meigs. 331. (See the official opinion of Attorney General Wirt, November 7th, 1821.--Opinions of the Attorney Gen eral, vol. 1, page 382, edition 1841, and vol. 1, page 506, Hall's edition of 1852. See also "An Inquiry into the political grade of the Free Colored Population under the Constitution of the United States," by John F. Denny, Esq.)

As subjects, their participation in the State would be limited to be sure that they could not run for elected office. All this may be hard for some people to accept, but the truth is always hard to accept. While thinking about this, let me ask you a question: would you let someone interfere with the governing of your own family telling your wife, husband or children what to do? I think not and that is precisely what our heavenly Father commanded us not to do. We were not to allow those not of our own kind to even enter the land, much less stay here, own property, hold office, or rule over us.

Since the time when Satan entered the Earth after his defeat in the heavens (Rev 12:7-9; Luke 10:18), there have been two seed lines (two posterities) waging war for dominion over the Earth (Gen 3:15). These seed lines may be identified by their espoused doctrines; the one being Christian (Israelite), and the other being anti-Christian (socialist christian):

1. Jesus Christ came only for one people (race of Adam - the lost sheep of the House of Israel [Matt 10:6; 15:24]); (a) Savior and redeemer of chosen people (white race); 2. Jesus Christ is our heavenly Father manifested in the flesh; 3. The virgin Mary was of the race of Adam (white); 4. Only the race of Adam was given the law and responsible to obey it; 5. Jesus Christ held to separation of the races as prescribed in the Old Testament; 6. Jesus Christ condemned and despised the tradition of the elders [Matt 15:2-3] (jewish babylonian talmud) and all its abominable practices of slavery, murder, and theft; 7. Jesus Christ forbade Christians to submit to slavery [Gal 5:1] or to participate in debt [Deut 15:6, 28:12; Prov 22:7; Rom 13:8], usury [Deut 23:19-20; Lev 25:36; Prov 28:8; Ez 18:8,13,17; Ps 15:5; Neh 5:4-13], or surety (insurance, limited liability [Prov 11:15]). These are the three pillars of the Jew Babylonian system and the three chains of slavery.

1. Jesus Christ came for all races, colors and creeds; (a) The Internationalist, equalitarian, and universalist Christ; 2. Jesus Christ is a Jew (blasphemy); 3. The virgin Mary was a Jew (blasphemy); 4. That the law was entrusted to all races to uphold; (a) If this be true, then why do they constantly violate it?; 5. Promotion of absolute mixing of the races; 6. Forced participation in usury, debt, and surety through economic coercion.

Take into consideration, when you sit in the Church of your choice and sing about the faith of our Forefathers, do you really know what that faith is? You can certainly establish through the Christian doctrine of the Preamble the true intentions of their faith under Christian doctrine.

These men knew who they were and where they were. They framed the Preamble and the Constitution to conform to their Christian beliefs. It stands today as it stood then. People say we can't go back to 1776, which is true, but we don't have to. When the Framers placed the word "posterity" in the Preamble, it came through the years with us. All we have to do is claim it, fight for it, and be true to it as the people designated therein.

"- - - If any of its provisions are deemed unjust, there is a mode prescribed in the instrument itself by which it may be amended; but while it remains unaltered, it must be construed as it was under stood at the time of its adoption. It is not only the same in words, but the same in meaning, and delegates the same powers to the Government, and reserves and secures the same rights and privileges to the citizen; and as long as it continues to exist in its present form, it speaks not only in the same words, but with the meaning and intent with which it spoke when it came from the hands of its framers, and was voted on and adopted by the people of the United States. Any other rule of construction would abrogate the judicial character of this court, and make it the mere reflex of popular opinion or passion of the day. This court was not created by the Constitution for such purposes. Higher and graver trusts have been confided to it, and it must not falter in the path of duty."

"What the construction was at that time, we think can hardly admit of doubt. We have the language of the Declaration of Independence and of the Articles of Confederation, in addition to the plain words of the Constitution itself; we have the legislation of the different States, before, about the time, and since, the Constitution was adopted; we have the legislation of Congress, from the time of its adoption to a recent period; and we have the constant and uniform action of the Executive Department, all concurring together, and leading to the same result. And if anything in relation to the construction of the Constitution can be regarded as settled, it is that which we now give to the word 'citizen' and the word 'people.'" Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 US (19 How) 393, 426 (1857).

The people of the white Christian nation will be divided on these two doctrines on how this nation was formed. Those who believe in an international Jesus Christ will defend and support the citizenship of the Fourteenth Amendment; and, those who believe in the true Christ will defend the Preamble of one nation and one people.

We are near the jaws of the anti-Christ domination of this nation, and it is time to choose and to count and see if this nation will stand for Christian law, Christian principles, or go further into unchristian law and unchristian principles.

Symbolism is a powerful thing, and in this Christian nation we have allowed Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny to share the conscience of our children's minds with Jesus the Christ. The same type of symbolism is applied to the Preamble to deceive the people into believing that America is the melting pot for all races, colors and creeds. The symbol used in this deception is the Statue of Liberty (referred to by some commercial airline pilots as "the Hudson River Whore"). Consider the following words of our Heavenly Father:

EXODUS

20:3 - Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 20:4 - Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

Most Americans accept it as the symbol of liberty without receiving the liberty that this idol is supposed to represent. These same people actually humble themselves to this idol. Which brings to mind the television commercial pleading for funds to renovate the idol, making it appear as if the idol were speaking, "IF YOU BELIEVE IN ME," send a donation. Anyone who sends a donation to renovate this idol, because they "believe in it," is worshiping it.

LEVITICUS

19:4 - Turn ye not unto idols, nor make to yourselves molten gods; I am the Lord your God. 26:1 - Ye shall make no idols nor graven image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it; for I am the Lord your God.

To the best of our recollection, President Reagan made a television appearance in which he stated that the idol of liberty was hand crafted by a French Jew, and that its face was modeled after his mother's (a Jewess). In another program on the local public television station in Portland, it was stated that the man who made the idol was a French Jew. Most Christian people don't know it but the God of the Talmud and of the Jews is a female. The Jews worship a female deity. The Jews uses the female side of their linage to trace their heritage.

As for the tablet in the idol's hands, what else would a Jewish idol carry but the Talmud; this is the only alternative that makes any sense, taking into account a statement on the aforesaid program on public television that the Masonic Lodge was very instrumental in this portion of the idol.

DEUTERONOMY

4:16 - Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of any male or female,

The idol of liberty was placed on Bedloe's Island about 1883 and completed in the year 1886. Now, if you count the generations of our people, you will find that we today are of the third and fourth generations of the fathers that allowed this idol to become a part of American history. Also, this idol did not become the symbol of immigration in this country until after the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment (1868), which made immigrants of all races eligible to become citizens of the United States (in contradistinction to the Preamble of the United States Constitution; Dred Scott v. Sandford, [1857] 19 How 393, 406-10).

DEUTERONOMY

5:8 - Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth: 5:9 - Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, 5:10 - And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.

The inscription on the idol of liberty was authorized by Israel Zangwill (an anti-Christ Jew) and it states, in part, "Give me your poor, your tired, and your hungry..." In essence, this is saying, "give me your bums that won't work." The Naturalization Act of April 14th, 1802, set forth the prerequisites for a person to become a Citizen of the United States (prior to the Fourteenth Amendment and the idol). Under this act, and many others like it, the person seeking naturalization had to: (1) Be a free white person; (2) declare, before a court of competent jurisdiction, his intention to do so at least three years prior to his admission; (3) declare before one of the courts aforesaid that he will support the Constitution of the United States, and absolutely renounce all allegiance to every foreign sovereignty whatsoever; and, (4) satisfy one of the courts aforesaid that he has been a resident in the United States at least five years, and that it shall appear to the court that during that time, he has behaved as a man of good moral character attached to the principles of the United States Constitution.

The punishment we will receive for having this idol in our land is not going to be pleasant. Therefore, we feel that having anything to do with, or using it will bring on retribution and a curse. What does it take to wake our people up to their iniquities? A portion of these people (those who "believe") have purchased scraps of this idol that were removed from the decaying structure prior to its renovation. They keep them close to their hearts as historical memorabilia.

DEUTERONOMY

7:25 - The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire; thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein: for it is an abomination to the Lord thy God. 7:26 - Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing.

We hope this has shed some light on the subject of symbolism and pray that you will make the correct decision according to the dictates of your conscience and the will of our Almighty God.

HOSEA

14:1 - O ISRAEL, return unto the Lord thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. 14:2 - Take with you words, and turn to the Lord: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips. 14:9 - Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? prudent, and he shall know them? for the ways of the Lord are right, and the just shall walk in them: but the transgressors shall fall therein.

It is time to raise the banner of the white race or see the complete destruction of the white race in America. Don't you find it strange that a black man can promote his race in America, and everyone says that he is a good man and they respect him? A Jew can promote his anti-christ doctrine in America, and everyone says that he is a good man and they respect him. But let a white man promote his race, his heritage, his Christian believes and everybody says that he is a racist, a bigot a no good SOB. This is nonsense, for how can a man be a racist when he only speaks of his own race (house)? Is a man evil for speaking well of his own family?

"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." 1 Timothy 5:8

Furthermore, for a white man not to defend his own race is called corruption of blood, which is treason (Art. III, sec. 3 U.S. Const.). There are those today who want our people to put out forms charging government officials and employees with treason. It should be understood that only white government officials and employees can be charged with treason, as the charge will not lay against anyone of the colored race(s). Remember, whites elected these people, so whites can un-elect them. If white America is going to continue to elect non-white persons and Jews, what Christian laws and principles are these people going to pass? They certainly are not going to pass any laws in compliance with the Preamble, as this would be to their disadvantage. These elected officials will follow the anti-Christ doctrine of the Fourteenth Amendment and etc., which is to their advantage. The record shows this is exactly what they have done since the passage of it and the Fifteenth Amendment.

The Sixteenth Amendment was passed to tax these newly created "federal" citizens for the privilege of citizenship (personal income tax). Check the definition of the word "person," as the word is used in the Fourteenth Amendment under Title 42 USC 301, et seq.:

"Section 1101. (a) When used in this Act-- "(3) The term "person" means an individual, a trust or estate, a partnership, or a corporation." Social Security Act, 49 STAT 620 at 647 (1935)

Here you see the definition of person as per the Fourteenth Amendment. Check the definition of person in 26 USC 7701(1); in 18 USC 224, 841, 921. They are all alike and describe the same like status of a Fourteenth Amendment "person" as codified in Title 42. The identity of white persons under the Preamble is set forth in the Dred Scott decision:

"The brief preamble sets forth by whom it was framed, for what purposes, and for whose benefit and protection. It declares that it is formed by the people of the United States; and its great objective is declared to be to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. It speaks in general terms of the people of the United States, and of citizens of the several States, when it is providing for the exercise of the powers granted or the privileges secured to the citizen. It does not define what description of persons are intended to be included under these terms, or who shall be as a citizen and one of the people. It uses them as terms so well understood, that no further description or definition was necessary." Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How 393, 410-11 (1857).

When white people accepted Social Security they also accepted its definition of person, and they too, then, are taxed for the privilege of citizenship (national) through the personal income tax. The white people of the United States received this because they violated the Preamble and the Laws of God. They allowed the Constitution to be altered outside the bounds of the Preamble (Amendments 13-26) and fell victim to government over man instead of man over government.

If we are to save our race and our nation, we must return to our Father's Law and to the original doctrine of the Preamble or our nation will fall to anti-Christ doctrine and the white citizen, and his posterity, will be disfranchised in their own nation and ultimately destroyed.

In this nation we have erred and fallen away from our Father's Law and Ordinances. We must return and soon, or all will fall to the anti-Christ.

In the name of Jesus the Christ our Lord and Savior,

So those are the things I believe in and those are the things I support with all my heart and soul. I'm no milk toasted judeo-christian whatsoever. I'm a very staunch Isrealite. They are as different as day and night. I do beleive that America is the regathering place for the lost Tribes of the House of Israel (white) as mentioned through out Scripture (2 Samuel 7:10; 1 Chronicles 17:9; Psalm 2:8; Ezekiel 11:15; 34:13; 34:29) as our inhertance from our Heavenly Father. A inhertance I'm not willing to give up.

"This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence..." The Federalist Papers, Jay, No. 2, p. 38, Clinton Rossiter Ed.

Reprints of this article and other articles of Behold! Newsletter are available from Jerry.