Watchman Willie Martin Archive

Many of us, Israel Christians, get so sick of hearing that Christians are not supposed to defend themselves. Than Christianity is a religion of self destruction of the White Race, and other such drivel; from otherwise intelligent men. Because of the false teachings of the Judeo-Christian traitors in America�s pulpits; on television, radio; and in the movies they never learn that CHRISTIANITY IS NOT A PACIFIST RELIGION AS SOME WOULD SUPPOSE FROM WATCHING THE COWARDLY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN CLERGY, AS THEY KOWTOW TO THE ANTICHRIST JEWS AND GOVERNMENT AGENTS. (As the Judeo-Christian preachers in the Indiana Baptist Church are doing today; there is no doubt that they are cowards and do not actually believe in God, nor obey His commands). THAT SOME OF THE MOST COURAGEOUS MIGHTY MEN OF WAR OF ALL TIME WERE WHITE CHRISTIANS.

An example would be the story of David wishing for a drink from the well in Bethlehem:

�And David was then in an hold, and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem. And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate! And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the LORD.� (2 Samuel 23:14-16) (KJV)

SUCH COWARDLY TEACHING IS NOT SCRIPTURAL; IT IS THE TEACHINGS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED IN COUNTRIES WHERE THE OWNERSHIP OF GUNS (weapons) HAS BEEN CONDEMNED FOR MANY YEARS; and those people have been taught that no one is to own a gun except someone who lives in the country or is a police officer or soldier: IT IS ALSO THE TEACHING OF COWARDS AND TRAITORS TO ALMIGHTY GOD AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. It is my firm belief that if a man/woman will not fight for family, or Jesus Christ in this world, then they will certainly not fight for Christ when He returns to rid, the Kingdom of God, of the evil ones and the results of their evil among His Chosen.

�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)

Reference has been many by many: �believe it is important to understand what Jesus meant because he plainly taught that His Kingdom was not to be set up by force prior to His Second Coming.� But I have been unable to find Christ telling us this.

What I do find about the Kingdom and force is: �And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.� (Matt 11:12)

We further find Christ telling us: �Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I CAME NOT TO SEND PEACE, BUT A SWORD.� (Matt 10:34)

Christ went even further and told us: �Then said he unto them, But now, HE THAT HATH A PURSE, LET HIM TAKE IT, AND LIKEWISE HIS SCRIPT AND HE THAT HATH NO SWORD, LET HIM SEEL HIS GARMENT, AND BUY ONE. (In that day and time a sword was what a gun is today, a weapon for self-defense) For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, LORD, BEHOLD, HERE ARE TWO SWORDS. AND HE SAID UNTO THEM, IT IS ENOUGH.� (Luke 22:36‑38)

They will also come up with that old song; �Then said Jesus unto him, PUT UP AGAIN THY SWORD INTO HIS PLACE: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.� (Matthew 26:52) Meaning that if He, Christ, should live by the sword against these men; that He would eventually die by the sword and that was not what God wanted or intended that He should do. He had to obey and follow what had been prophesied of Him. But notice: Christ did not tell Peter to get rid of the sword because it was evil, but simply to put into his place, meaning that the sword is not an evil thing, but that His capture by the Jews and His crucifixion had to be, and that He could and would do nothing to prevent God�s will.

�Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world (the Roman world): if my kingdom were of this world, THEN WOULD MY SERVANTS FIGHT, THAT I SHOULD NOT BE DELIVERED TO THE JEWS: but now is my kingdom not from hence.� (John 18:36) (KJV)

For He said immediately after: �Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?� (Matt 26:53)

We also find the following in Luke 22:49‑51: �When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword? And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. And Jesus answered and said, suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.� Now we can see clearly here that Christ did not tell His apostles and those who were following Him not to fight, but to suffer His being captured at this particular time and place.

Christ also told Peter in John 18:11: �Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: The cup which my father hath given me, shall I not drink it?� Here we can see Christ telling His disciples and those who were following Him that it was God�s Will that He be taken and crucified. That they should not fight to defend Him at that time. He did not tell them not to fight to deliver His Kingdom from the enemy.

Jesus told Pilate: �Jesus answered, my kingdom is not of this world (Christ is saying that His kingdom was not of that Roman and Jewish world): If my kingdom were of this world (Here again He is using the word �this� meaning that His kingdom was not of the Roman and Jewish world, but was someplace else; but if they were in His Kingdom then His Servants would fight), then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.� (John 18:36)

There is nothing in the Word of God which even suggests that His people simply lay down and let the antichrists and the evil ones walk over them. For He gave us warning that the unGodly would �Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.� (John 15:20)

Christ also related �Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute.� (Luke 11:49)

Christ condemns the man who will not defend 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)

So we must fight, not only to defend the faith, but to defend our home, our family and our country and the Kingdom of God, which is the United States of America. Which is why God would not allow the South to separate from the North as He did in ancient Israel.

If it were not for men who owned guns and willing to use them, these self-righteous men and women would not have the country and all the material goods that surrounds them. They are indeed ungrateful.

It is like those who say that God�s Laws have been done away with; for if there is no law then there is no sin, and if there is no sin then Christ died in vain. For without law there is no trespass and without a trespass of the law there is no sin; for sin is the transgression of the law.

�Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.� (I John 3:4)

Now make no mistake I believe that these people sincerely believe in Christ; they believe in God, and they can do marvelous things because they can tap into God�s awesome power through their faith. Just as the Canaanite woman when she asked Christ to heal her daughter and in Matthew 15:28 He said: �Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.� (And in Mark 7:28)

So you see Christ did not heal her daughter but her faith did! For Christ said; �O woman, great is thy faith; be it unto thee even as thou wilt.�

Now these people mentioned above have such faith and will say to the Lord in that day: �Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?� (Matthew 7:22) So we see here that there are people who can prophesy; cast out devils; and have and will do many wonderful works, but Christ will say to them: �And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (lawlessness, do not obey God�s laws, statutes and judgments).� (Matthew 7:23)

No one has any objection to the Blacks defending themselves; nor for the Jews to teach to every Jew a 22. But let a Christian defend him/herself that brings on all kinds of outcries from those who profess themselves to be such great Christians that they can reprimand their brothers and sisters, when in fact, they are nothing of the sort and don't know what being a Christian is.

Almost immediately after an attack on a Christian criticism is leveled at that person who dares to defend him/herself. Many times the police will admit that without such defense the person could have been mugged, raped or worse, but the attack was cut short by the prompt action of the man or woman who fought back. Yet our so‑called religious leaders, and other so‑called Christians will take it upon themselves to condemn that act of defense.

It is of course inconsistent to condemn violence and then to condemn those who resist violence. One cannot weigh the defender in the same scales as the aggressor. The innocent have a right to protect themselves from the guilty! The Law of God states: "If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed." (Exodus 22:2)

If killing a thief is acceptable to God then how much more would be the act of the brave young man or woman who shot back at the attacker and cut short their attack on them. "Be not ye afraid of them: remember the Lord, which is great and terrible, and fight for your brethren, your sons, and your daughters, your wives, and your houses." (Nehemiah 4:14).

Make no mistake about it, God is not a pacifist (Ezekiel 14:21; Deuteronomy 32:39‑43); neither is Jesus a pacifist (Matthew 21:12‑13; Luke 22:36; Revevelation 14:19‑20; 19:11‑16) nor is the Bible a pacifist document (Numbers 1:2‑3; Judges 3:2; Psalm 144;1‑2). That is the teachings of the cowardly and traitorous Judeo-Christian Clergy.

There are 6 different words for "kill" in the Hebrew. The Bible clearly distinguishes between premeditated murder (which is what the 6th Commandment forbids: "You shall do no murder"), accidental manslaughter, killing an enemy in the heat of battle, the killing of animals, execution of criminals for capital offenses and self defense.

Pacifist Christians are inconsistent Christians; they are double minded, and the Scriptures state: "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. Pacifism is an un‑Biblical position. God's Word commands that murderers be executed (Genesis 9:6; Exodus 21:12‑16; Leviticus 24:17‑22; Number 35:33). Civil government is appointed to "Bear the sword...He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." (Romans 13:4)

While the band played the sirens song Americans lost their country while they sing; It cant happen here but it has.

It was clear that all the government had to do was wait. The multitudes of demonstrators in the immense government square had shrunk to a few thousand, and more were drifting away every day. But the hardliners {rulers} were determined that the demonstrators shouldn't escape unscathed; such protests could lead to open rebellion and violent revolution {so they said; to justify their actions}, like the one {the Civil War} that had created the present government.

With the heads of government divided and wavering, the Army {secretly acting under the orders of the President} decided {we are told} to act. Obeying the orders of the president, the commanding general of the army lined up his forces facing the demonstrators and ordered them to disperse. The demonstrators didn't think the Army would attack.

It did. Tanks rolled into and across the demonstrators' ramshackle huts. marching soldiers with fixed bayonets and assault rifles and tear gas followed the tanks, clubbing, bayoneting and shooting those assembled. The Army later said the demonstrators rioted; the generals claimed armed soldiers were attacked. {But the results were that} Many of the demonstrators were wounded; the number who died will never be known; the government claimed it was only one.

The commanding general declared that the demonstrators were driven by "the essence of revolution," and that it was "beyond the shadow of a doubt" that the demonstrators had been about to seize control of the government.

The commander was Douglas MacArthur.

The Place was Washington, D.C., not Beijing or some other foreign country.

The date was 1932, not 1989.

The "assault rifles" were bolt‑action Springfield Model 1903, not an AK‑47.

The peaceful demonstrators weren't students in Tiananmen Square demanding then equivalent of our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and the right to petition the government for grievances.

The demonstrators on the Washington Mall and nearby Anacostia already had those rights; their problem was that they used them. They were Americans; World War I Veterans, thrown out of work by the great depression {Caused by the Jewish owned and controlled Federal Reserve}, lobbying for government to immediately pay their promised Veteran's Bonus.

No, the attack on the Bonus Marchers, bad as it was, wasn't the brutal mass murder unleashed upon the students in Beijing. The American people wouldn't have tolerated it; and had the means to stop it. What happened at Tiananmen Square was the kind of ruthless tyranny that has occurred in other lands through out history, and is precisely what the Founding Fathers feared might be done by the powerful central government they were creating under the United States Constitution.

That's why the people refused to ratify that Constitution until it was amended to guarantee certain individual freedoms known today as the Bill of Rights. That's why the First Amendment guarantees of {free} speech {Which today applies as long as the government approves of what is being said or written}, assembly {As long as it serves the purposes of the one‑worlders} and petitioning the government {as long as it is Jews demanding money so they can continue murdering young children in the Mid‑east} were backed up by the Second Amendment guarantee that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was not to be infringed. And when, during debate on the amendment, some senators attempted to limit the right to apply only to "the common defense;" which is what some people today say it is, the Senate rejected it. That piece of "legislative history" clearly shows that the Second Amendment was intended to be an individual right, not merely a "collective right" of states to have militia.

��� Most of the world's constitutions, even the Constitution of Soviet Russia, contain beautiful words promising freedoms that only U.S. citizens enjoy. The reason, as unintentionally acknowledged by the anti‑gun {anti‑Christ, anti‑American} crowd, is that only in the United States {have} do individual citizens have such relatively free and unfettered access to firearms. But instead of glorying in that unique freedom, and the freedoms it guarantees, some {our enemies; the Jews and their bootlicks} in the establishment are attempting to eliminate it, with too much success.

This nation existed for 150 years without any federal gun laws. The National Firearms Act, attempting to tax out of existence machine guns and short‑barreled shotguns {the bill originally included handguns} was enacted in 1934. Don't kid yourself that the reason was not Thompson‑toting hoodlums like Pretty Boy Floyd, John Dillinger or Bonnie and Clyde. The reason was the fear put into the Establishment by those Bonus marchers, and the March 7, 1932 march on the Ford plant in Dearborn, Michigan, where police killed four and wounded 50.

The government's fear was summed up by one of the co‑sponsors of a bill to ban private possession of "military weapons whose only purpose is to kill people." During the hearings he blurted it out: "What scares me is the thought of those veterans going against police; Vietnam veterans know how to use those guns." {What's new about that? All military personnel know how to use guns!}.

The legislator was testifying in Maryland hearings earlier this year {1989} on a California‑type bill banning the possession of AK‑47 rifles and other military‑style semi‑automatics. I was there; I heard him say it. {The only reason a government would fear its citizens owning weapons is because that government has turned outlaw ‑‑ for only outlaws fear honest men with weapons!}.

New Jersey State Police Col. Clinton Pagano, a determined advocate for prohibitive gun laws, has said many times that "Gun control is people control." He is exactly correct. That objective never changes, only the excuses used to promote it.

The first major gun control push in this country wasn't "to control crime," it was to control freed slaves. The first Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment, U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), so proudly cited by anti‑gun "liberals," held that the "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by the Congress, that the Second Amendment did not prohibit the Ku Klux Klan from conspiring with local officials to prevent freed slaves from possessing guns and attending political meetings.

The next major wave of "gun control" was supposedly to deny guns to "anarchists;" which was a code name for immigrants, during the waves of immigration around the turn of the century. For the first time the criminal element began actively using and promoting "gun control" As a means of disarming potential victims.

Immigrant shopkeepers, accustomed to being bullied by thugs, corrupt police and government in Europe, had willingly paid "protection money"

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge..." (Hosea 4:6)

We can see clearly by their actions that the legislatures of the various states and the Congress of the Federal Government care nothing at all about the Constitution, but only about what their handlers want.

Because all State and Federal Legislators: such as Senator, Representative and even the President of the United States, in accordance with the Constitution of the United States: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support the Constitution..." (United States Constitution Article VI, par. 3)

The oath or affirmation, to support the Constitution is as follows: "I (Whatever the persons names is) solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of Senator of the State of, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States."

Now one must assume that anyone, man or woman, who attains the favor of the people of the State, so as to be given the privilege of serving in the office of Senator, must be a person of honor and honesty. That being the case; you have no other alternative, if you are to be true to the oath of office (Senator or Representative) and to your constitutes than to oppose any and all bills, plans, designs, etc. to subvert, distort or destroy the Second Amendment of the Constitution of The United States of America.

It is my belief that if a State or Federal Senator cannot, in good conscience be true to their oath of office, then that individual should resign his/her office to someone who can and will uphold their oath of office. It is as simple as that! But if you need further argument I respectfully submit the following for your consideration.

What freedom will our enemies in government seize next? Today Our Guns!!! ‑‑ Tomorrow Our Liberty???

Because of the present gun‑control; gun grab, controversy once again sweeping the country and its critical ramifications, we have decided to briefly address the subject of "Gun Control."

If our fuzzy‑thinking theologians and so‑called Christian leaders across the land were proclaiming God's Law regarding capital crimes and punishment to the nation like they should be, there would not be the present controversy regarding the banning of certain types of weapons; because there would be few, if any, crimes to provoke such controversy. The strict enforcement of God's Law would strike fear in the hearts of would‑be murderers, rapists, kidnappers, drug traffickers, etc., as they would know they would be facing swift and certain death or appropriate punishment for their heinous acts; Gods way, not man's way, that is, "Life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth," etc.

����������������������������������������������� The Militia

Before commenting on the present controversy we should, perhaps, look at the subject of "the armed citizenry" from a historical perspective, as set forth in the publication, "The Gospel Truth" [Southwest Radio Church, P.O. Box 1144, Oklahoma City, Okla. 73101] by Bill Uselton, we will offer a few quotes.

"The militia is mentioned more often in the Constitution than any other branch of service. We are told today that the national Guard is a militia. However, the Guard is a product of this century; its origin has a date of January 21, 1903. What were the founders of our country talking about then, in 1789? The subject was so important that it was clarified in the Second Amendment to the Constitution: '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'...Thus, the word "militia," when used in a constitutional context, means the whole people [According to the Federalist Papers ‑‑ all men 17 years of age and over]..."

Don�t overlook that statement: �necessary to the security of a free state.� Which means just exactly what it says, that if you don�t or can�t own weapons to defend yourself then we can not have a free state. And if we don�t have a free state? What is left? A totalitarian state!

��������������������������������������� Biblical Background

"There does not appear to be any basis in Scripture, either in the Old Testament or the New, for the concept of a 'good' God who enjoins pacifism on His followers...Pacifism was not tolerated in Ancient Israel. One could be excused from military duty (Deut. 20:5‑7), but refusing to fight was cause for a death sentence...

An often misunderstood and mis‑quoted statement of our Lord while He was in the Garden of Gethsemane is: �'Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.� (Matthew 26:52)

Never were truer words spoken, for those that take the sword and to live by it do die by the sword. Who takes the sword? Robbers, mercenaries, thieves, and cut‑throats. If you live by the sword, i.e. violence, you do tend to die by it..."

Christ never meant that we should not defend ourselves. His commandment to us was: "Then said he [Christ] unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his script: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36)

Jesus told His disciples this because He knew that Christians: "For we [Christians] wrestle [fight] not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." (Ephesians 6:12)

Therefore, Christians are to: "...take unto you [Christians] the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day..." (Ephesians 6:13)

So Christ is clearly showing us that we Christians are to fight against the wickedness of the world, and not to simply lay down and die like spineless wimps!

�������������������������������������� Historical Background

Throughout history, tyrants have tried to restrict the right of the individual to bear arms. Every communist country sees to it that ONLY the armed forces, police, and party officials have firearms. Could they do what they did in Russia and the Ukraine if the people were armed? Could the slaughters in China have occurred? What about the killing fields of Cambodia?

Make no mistake about it, it was private ownership of weapons which spelled defeat for the Russians in Afghanistan, and is currently spelling defeat to the Russians in Checkneia.

The Militia Act of 1792, drafted by the Second Continental Congress required that all able‑bodied men between 17 and 44 years of age keep a firearm and at least sixty rounds of ammunition. That is the Constitutional meaning of the word "militia." It was this armed citizen who won the American Revolution. Not a bunch of wimpy Judeo‑Christians!!!!

Noah Webster, author of the Webster's Dictionary and friend and contemporary of the founders wrote: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed...The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed..."

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself." This statement by President George Washington himself should make his position apparent. What Washington said directly after that is even more clear: "They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence...From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable...The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference ‑‑ they deserve a place of honor with all that's good..."

The government of Switzerland feels the same way our founders did about bearing arms. Every able‑bodied man in Switzerland is a member of the militia, and has a machine gun or a sniper rifle in his home with ammunition. Not only that bot Switzerland also has the lowest crime rate in Europe.

We believe author Bill Uselton establishes the crux of the matter in this statement: "We were, as a nation, endowed with certain rights as citizens. We have the Second Amendment, not so that we can protect our homes from criminals, though we do; not so that we can fight off invading armies, though we can and would; we have this precise right [The right to bear arms] so that we can fight off a tyranny of our own government [If it ever becomes necessary]."

Thus we must ask the question: How can the citizenry carry out this vital mission without access to the same caliber weapons that the tyrants control? Mr. Uselton must have read the writings of Thomas Jefferson, who in a letter to Colonel Smith about Shay's rebellion, wrote: "...God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion...What country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be freshened from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants..."

There is no evidence that states with stricter firearm restrictions have statistically significantly lower rates of homicides, robberies, or aggravated assaults than states with looser or no control. In fact, the opposite is the rule!

"It is pleasant," the article concludes, "to dream about solving age‑old problems of crime and human violence with a simplistic approach like gun control. But it remains a delusory dream."

Many years ago Congress prohibited the ownership of automatic weapons, today gun control advocates seek the ban of what is called "assault" rifles, tomorrow they will seek to ban the hunting rifle, and in the future they will ban all guns.

You say: We do not wish to ban all guns, only "assault guns." If that is true, then why is it that every time a bill is introduced in the various state and federal legislatures; they always, always name several different types of fire arms and several types of shotguns?" So this proves the statement "We do not wish to ban all guns." to be a lie or at the very least a mis‑representation. And I believe that in your heart you know what we are saying is true. That being; The government does intend to disarm the American people as soon as it possibly can!

Look at the evidence, every time a gun control bill comes up for vote and if there is any danger of it not passing; suddenly there is someone like those two in Littleton, Colorado who will kill several people with various weapons, and then kill themselves. It has happened numerous times in the past but it seems that Americans are incapable of seeing past the end of their nose, and cannot seem to learn anything.

Bob Hallstrom, of America's Promise, in his pamphlet entitled "The Guns of God," wrote: "To oppose the right to keep and bear arms on ideological grounds is one thing, even though it indicates a clear lack of historical perspective and a denial of the natural, absolute inalienable right to defend one's life, family, property, and freedom. However, to oppose that right by denying that the Second Amendment means what it says or that it does not pertain to the rights of the people, is at best a demonstration of ignorance, and in most instances a maneuver of deception and intellectual dishonesty."

We should not have to remind everyone that the right of self‑protection lies with every individual. Of the right of self‑ protection, Chief Davis of the Los Angeles Police Department has stated: "The primary responsibility of protecting yourself and your family is still yours, and nobody else's."

Many of you may not have guns and perhaps, care little about gun control measures. But, keep in mind that these are perilous times. Conditions could arise whereby your life or safety could depend upon your neighbor who is armed. It is the duty of ALL AMERICANS to oppose all gun control legislation thereby supporting the Constitutionally declared "Right of the people to keep and bear arms." (Second Amendment to the Constitution)

Whether used by the local police or one's self, guns have become the primary means of protection of one's life, liberty, property, and family. Even the Word of God advises us to be fully armed: "When a strong man [fully] armed keepeth his palace [homestead], his goods are in peace [safe]: But when a stronger than he [government] come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils." (Luke 21:21‑22)

When a government begins to limit the ownership and use of some guns, it can and will eventually limit the ownership and use of ALL guns. When that time comes Christian and non‑Christian patriots will be unable to be "fully armed," and a man will not be able to "guard his own home or country" nor see to it that "his possessions are undisturbed."

Make no mistake about it; If anyone, anyone, advocates the right of the government to take your guns he/she is an enemy of both you and America!!! It matters not who the advocate is; if they advocate gun control, non-ownership of guns: then they are your enemy as well as every citizen of the United States!!!

������������������������������������������� We The People

������������������������������������ An Endangered Species

Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons, and gendarmes at the service of the thieves, and treats the victim ‑‑ when he defends himself ‑‑ as a criminal...But how is this legal theft to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

In recognition of the last annual event observed by a large segment of the population who, by some stretch of the imagination have determined they are "taxpayers" and thereby "required to file." They have dutifully calculated [or have had it done for them] their annual extortion payment to the eight banks that own America. Which many believe to be: (1) Rothschild banks of London and Berlin, (2) Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris, (3) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy, (4) Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam, (5) Lehman Brothers Bank of New York, (6) Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York, (7) Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, and (8)� Goldman, Sachs Bank of New York.

To ease the pain they are reassured that any financial hardship incurred is more than compensated by the patriotism and pride that will lift their souls by knowing they are "paying their fair share" to keep America and democracy strong and free. This notion, which, incredibly is still believed by a goodly number of tax‑payers.

To help bring into sharp focus the nightmarish realization that the species known as Free, White, American Citizens, i.e. "We the People," in their present role as supine pawns of the godless predators of International Finance, are now listed among the endangered species of the earth; along with the grizzly bear, the bald eagle and the California condor. In fact, the White Race may have already passed these critters in their headlong rush to extinction.

Tragically, as this once Noble Race passes from the American scene, together with the America we once knew, they will still be singing, robot fashion, as they shuffle along in their chains, "My country 'tis of Thee, sweet land of Liberty..." and chanting " nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and justice for all" right up to the bitter end.

Because of the gutless Judeo-Christian Clergy of America, with their sickening, spineless, and cowardly whimper "You must obey Caesar." Something that the Apostles never did. They have reduced and castrated our American Men with their sickening cry of "Love, love, love," and not with the fire of true Christianity. They have bowed down to Baal and preach his doctrines, the doctrines of the Tradition of the Elders, which our Lord Jesus Christ denounced so strongly during His stay on earth.

������������������������������������������� Free or Freer?

The following by C. Ellen Shaffer is slightly abridged. Under the title, Free Or Freer? She writes: "My status as a slave does not depend on the kind of master I have. My status of slave arises out of my belief that I am under the absolute power of another.

Today most Americans are so brain dead that they would run out and buy a walking license if some government agent demanded it. If their masters demanded they purchase a permit to mow their lawn, most of them would comply. This belief that they are under the absolute power of someone else makes them a slave. It matters not that the masters have not� yet demanded such license or permit. What matters is the fact that the slaves would comply if ordered to do so.

There is no doubt, this slavery of the American people has been self‑imposed; for rape is not rape if one does not struggle. I can assure you; that Americans did not struggle. They went meekly into chains while murmuring render unto Caesar.' It was quite a feat to turn the posterity of Freedom loving men of courage into [gutless, castrated] sniveling cowards who welcomed servitude over the animating contest of liberty and responsibility for themselves.

The posterity of Freemen now proclaim themselves to be 'freer' and will continue to do so even when they must shout it from the confines of a concentration camp [which are being built even as this is being written]. They will be so sure that somewhere someone is more in bondage than they...If we are only free to exercise and enjoy messiah's privileges, then we're not free in any sense of the word."

The events of our day leaves an observant Christian American that America is presently experiencing the incessant, insidious disarming that has happened elsewhere in the world by a process the Communists call "Creeping Gradualism." This process was described by Jan Kosek, a member of the Secretariat of the Communist Party in Czechoslovakia, in his book "Not A Shot Was Fired." It was with this process the Communists took control of Czechoslovakia.

It has been compared to boiling a frog alive in a pan of water. A process that is not hard to do if one begins with room‑temperature water and then gradually turns the heat up only a degree at a time.

So, in America men and women first forbid automatic weapons, then concealed weapons, sawed‑off shotguns, then they begin to work on so‑called Saturday‑night specials [hand guns] and now, it's semi‑automatic assault rifles. Not satisfied with that they pass laws to sign forms before purchasing and have so‑called "cooling‑off" waiting periods. City councils pass gun laws, city mayor groups cry out for more gun control, certain elected officials with bleeding liberal hearts decry gun deaths and the water gets hotter.

Lenin, leader of the Bolsheviks in Russia, said: A system of licensing and registration, is the perfect device to deny gun ownership tot he bourgeoises [The Middle‑Class]."

In 1968 the Director of the National Task Force for the Control of Firearms was asked why the Americans were suspicious of gun control. He replied: "Because they know we are coming to get their guns."

All who advocate "gun‑control" are in the company of a very famous group of men.

Lenin: the murdering Communist attributed with the establishment of the world's first Communist Dictatorship in Russia, voted for gun control. He said: "One of the basic conditions for the victory of socialism is the arming of the workers [the communists] and the disarming of the bourgeoisie [The middle class]."

Trotsky: A Communist contemporary of Lenin, also believed in gun control and said to insure a communist totalitarian state there, "...arises the necessity of disarming the bourgeoisie and arming the workers, of creating a communist army."

Josef Stalin: another Communist Butcher who championed the destruction of freedom and Christianity, showed how well he favored gun control when he said: "If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."

Mao-tse-Tung: the Communist often called the greatest mass murderer in all history, favored gun control. While the hypocrite cited the communist slogan of "power to the people," he took away their power by disarming them. He said: "Power comes out of the barrel of a gun."

And of course today's communists such as Gorbachev and Castro also vote in favor of gun control.

Americans need to recall these names, these champions of government oppression, human slavery, and murder when their own leaders advocate gun control.

They should know also that it is their enemy who wants and advocates gun control!!! We must repeat ourselves; He or she who favors gun control may masquerade as a republican, democrat, Christian, Communist, Peacenik or whatever but Jesus Christ has identified such a person as an enemy. Americans must learn to realize that only an enemy objects to them exercising self- defense or owning the means of self-defense.

Our American government has turned into an outlaw government

The following works of John Locke describe perfectly what our beloved American Government has become: "And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another Man into his absolute power, does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being understood as a declaration of a design upon his life. For I have reason to conclude, that he who would get me into his power without my consent, would use me as he pleased, when he had got me there, and destroy me too, when he had a fancy to it; for no body can desire to have me in his absolute power, unless it be to compel me by force to that, which is against the right of my freedom, i.e., make me a slave. To be free from such force is the only security to my preservation; and reason bids me look on him, as an enemy to my preservation, and who would take away that Freedom, which is the fence to it; so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me, thereby puts himself into a state of war with me...And one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason, that he may kill a wolf or a lion; because such men are not under the ties of the Common Law of Reason, have no other rule but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as beasts of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures, that will be sure to destroy him, whenever he falls into their power."

The words of Locke on slavery seem to match the Scriptures in Galatians as we paraphrase it. "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery." (Galatians 5:1)

Now let us consider the words of Jesus Christ which teach a valuable principle every American should know. "When a strong man [fully] armed keepeth his palace [homestead], his goods are in peace [undisturbed]: But when a stronger [government] than he [attacks] shall come upon him, and overcome [overpowers] him, he taketh from him all his armour [takes away his weapons and armor upon which he had relied to protect him] wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils." (Luke 21:21‑22)

Notice from this teaching how peace and safety existed in and with the household of the man who was fully armed. The first thing his enemy did was overpower him and disarm him. Isn't it interesting the more power obtained by certain city councils, state legislators, and elected officials, the more desirous these people become of disarming the people? Remember power is not authority. For instance, city councils and state legislatures may have the police power at their disposal to confiscate or outlaw certain firearms but they do not have the authority.

The principle of first disarming the people before full scale oppression of the people was seen first hand by Reverend Wesley Millen who, as a missionary, witnessed the communist take‑over of China. In his lectures he would explain how in the first 90 days the communists were so benevolent, humanitarian and helpful and at the same time labored vigorously to confiscate all weapons. The people were told peace had arrived and they would no longer have need of weapons. Then once the people were DISARMED Reverend Millen said: "Then at the end of ninety days we learned the difference between theoretical communism and Bolshevik terror."

Americans should be told that history supports the teaching of Luke 11:21‑22. For example, prior to the communist enslavement of Hungary and Czechoslovakia firearms were taken into police custody to "protect" the people. On the other hand, consider Afghanistan, a country full of armed citizens. That country is a modern historical example of this point. The Communists have never been successful in taking over a country without first disarming the citizens!

���������������������� Know The Peace Movement For What It Is

The American people have been inundated with the so‑called peace movement and Christians have been made to feel such a movement and its pacifism is equivalent to Christianity. The goal has always been disarmament and, of course, no one seems to understand that the Zionist Communist idea of peace is when they have all the guns and the rest have none ‑‑ as exists in the state known as Israel today.

Whenever you view or hear of a so‑called "peace demonstration" think of the following: Radio Moscow commenting on the Easter peace protests in Britain and throughout Western Europe said: "The fighters for peace...are united with the peoples of the Soviet Union in mankind's desire for peace."

In 1922 the Bolshevik dictator Lenin told his Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Yuriy Chicherin: "We Communists have our program...we consider it our duty to support pacifists in the bourgeois demoralize the enemy."

Georgi Dimitrov who became the head of the Comintern said: "The struggle for peace is the struggle for the victory of Socialism throughout the world...One peace sympathizer is worth more than a dozen militant Communist."

Janosez, Head of the International Department of the Hungarian Communist Central Committee said: "The political campaign against the bomb was one of the most significant and most successful since World War II...for strengthening anti‑imperialist unity."

Victor Zagladin, a top strategist in the Soviet Affairs Dept., stated: "There are now 1 � million peace protestors at work on our behalf in the U.S.A. and Western Europe...the majority of recruits come from the universities, the clergy and the world of journalism."

Americans should know they need their guns to protect themselves against government

Should it ever become a de facto, out‑of‑control, un‑Godly, law perverting, oppressive system. The bigger issue is� not hunter's rights or defense against criminals but against Government itself. To our brainwashed apathetic people this statement may sound bizarre, even frightening, but the writings and teachings of our forefathers show it is nothing new.

George Washington said: "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! It is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

Noah Webster wrote: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops..."

�������������������������������������������� Think About It

Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. Each of us has a natural right; from God, to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two...Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force, for the same reason, cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.

The law in the United States is becoming perverted! And the police powers of the state are being perverted along with it! The law has not only turned from its proper purpose but has been made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law has become the weapon of every kind of greed. Instead of checking crime, the law itself has become guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish. Now if this supposition is true, and it is, then it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me, even though it may cost me my life, to call the attention of my fellow‑citizens to it. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted theft into a right in order to protect the thief. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.

This combined with the fatal tendency that exists in the heart of man to satisfy his wants with the least possible effort, explains the almost universal perversion of the law in the United States today. It is easy to understand why the law is used by the legislator to destroy in varying degrees among the rest of the people, their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppression, and their property by robbery [and calling it an income tax and telling people they are being patriotic in paying it]. This is done for the benefit of the person who makes the law, and in proportion to the power that he holds. For when theft is abetted by the law, it does not fear the courts, the police or the prisons.

Rather, it may call upon them for help.� Sometimes the law places the entire justice system at the service of the thieves, and, who then treats the victim;� when he defends himself, as a criminal. In short, all too many of our state and federal legislatures have made theft by government legal. But how can this be clearly seen? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime!!!

How far should Americans let the gun confiscators go?

Many are beginning to face the question of "How far do we let the gun control go before doing something?" Well, it is too late to resist if we are only armed with axes and hammers. In 1968 Russia invaded and put down an anti‑communist revolt in Czechoslovakia and when an escaped citizen was later asked: "Why didn't you resist?" He replied with tears in his eyes, "They had all the guns."

A great patriot of our day who has actively been fighting gun control wrote the following to a friend concerning how far should we, as Americans, let it go. "I received your letter in which you asked the all important question �What do we do when those in power declare marshal law? Do we turn in our guns, do we bury them in the ground, or what do we do?� I have addressed that question many times over the past twenty years, and my position now is the same as it has always been. Even though we have now some laws restricting the ownership and use of firearms; and we constantly have attempts at all levels of government to increase the regulations, ordinances and laws dealing with our personal weapons and our God given right to use them in our own defense; and we win a few and lose a few in the over all legislative battle; nevertheless, we still have our guns and to a great extent are still able to use them ‑‑ at least in most states outside the major cities. I believe that as long as this situation does not get worse, then we must obey the law so as not to bring a great burden on us in regard to our time, resources, reputations, business, etc. There is no need NOW to make martyrs of ourselves. We should fight the encroachment in every way possible, but do it in as legal a manner as possible.

However, if a law is ever passed that requires that our guns be registered, or inventoried, or confiscated � then it will do no good to hide them or bury them because then they will not be available to us, or of any use to us; and, in fact, the ownership and possession of those guns will make us "Criminals" and permit us to be prosecuted and imprisoned.

Consequently, at that point, there will be only one thing left to do, that is to use your guns against any individual or group, who comes to confiscate them. That will be our last chance at freedom and at that point we should act with determination and force, And make every shot count. If enough American citizens would take that action, that would be the end of tyranny and our freedom would be re‑established.

It should be clear to any intelligent, informed, freedom loving American that confiscation of our firearms will be

the final step in eradicating our rights and will be the necessary prelude to imposing totalitarian rule over us.

One last comment we would like to present concerning government abuse, our forefathers said in the Declaration of Independence: "...prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light or transient reasons; accordingly, all experience shows that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they have become accustomed. BUT, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such a government and provide new safeguards for their future security."

Reference Materials