Today’s Gallery







Published in: on April 14, 2019 at 11:42 pm  Leave a Comment  

The Struggle to Thrive Versus Jewish Degeneracy


The Jews are a race of exploiters: middle-men, merchants, lawyers, usurers, petty bureaucrats, and of course rabbinical religious con-men. As befits a parasitic people, they excel in any of the parasitic professions, and particularly those that profit from the  impoverishment, and degeneracy of others. Puerile entertainment, the pseudo-education that has replaced true academic learning, pharmaceuticals that treat but don’t cure, advocacy and “social services” supporting non-White immigration, gambling, booze, debt-slavery, pornography, prostitution: Jews are heavily represented in each of these fields, if they aren’t in positions of outright dominance over them. From these Jewish-controlled positions of degeneration , tainted Kosher morality spreads like an infecting fungus through our societies, tenaciously taking root and leaching out our vitality, while allowing corruption and perversions to proliferate with increasing ease. Absent a morality that uplifts the race and inspires it toward improvement, the foundations of the nation become compromised, buckle, then collapse.

One indication of a Jewish corruption of morality can be found in the example provided by the manifold JUDEO-Christian organizations. There is an unquestioning acceptance of undeserved guilt, followed quickly by ersatz absolution if only we flood our homelands with ungrateful, grasping hybrid races from the Central American sewer or Africans from the Continent of Nightmares. The cuckolded JUDEO-Christian conception of morality involves a flock of human sheep bleating their approval when an unrepentant pederast advocates for the invasion of White countries with sullen, violent, and wholly incompatible genetic aliens from the very worst corners of the earth. We are told that these moronic and hostile races are coming here for a better life; we are carefully not told that their better life will be at the expense of our safety, prosperity, and eventually our very future. This abhorrent situation is only possible because an ethic of laziness has prevailed; an ethic promoted at every possible opportunity by the Jews. Loving and honoring our White heritage and our race means we must defend them against all other heritages and races, both intellectually and on our soil. This is hard, dangerous work that often entails personal sacrifice – and it is work that is impossible if a morality of surrender and  egalitarianism pervade the racial community.

A second common manifestation of a morality debased by malignant Jewish influence is a conception of “freedom” reduced to nothing more than a shallow, nihilistic notion, encompassing a complete lack of responsibility, a society permeated with unnatural perversions that are celebrated instead of reviled, and shortsightedly chasing after instant gratification. This is not truly freedom, but instead it is a reckless abdication of the duty to participate in the necessary struggle to ensure the continued existence of our prosperity and the perpetuation of our unique and extraordinarily valuable racial inheritance.

It is no coincidence that the Jews, conniving to profit from the destruction of White nations, so consistently promote these degrading and ultimately fatal moralities from every avenue of influence they control. The Talmudic  toxins crippling our morality robs us of the drive and discipline that are necessary if we are to strive for the improvement of ourselves and our posterity. Instead of inuring ourselves to hardship, foregoing comfort in service of higher accomplishments, and taking pride in overcoming problems whether they be formidable or mundane instead of shying away from them; the saturation of our morality with Jewish poison has left us cowardly and emasculated at a time when we are confronted with a struggle against our implacable racial enemies for our very survival. We must stand against the Jewish nation-wreckers who wish to see our race irretrievably mongrelized with the vast hordes of brown-skinned simpletons; and to do so requires that we find a collective sense of indissoluble racial courage and pride that can only arise from purging the Jewish pathogens from our morality. Start by turning off your Talmudvision and instead use that time to hone yourself physically, mentally, and spiritually. As you do, whether you actively engage against the Jewish menace to our race or not, you will become an example to the other members of our race – and inspire others to reject the repugnant, crippling Jewish morality that is insidiously destroying our homelands and our race. We must restore our racial morality, regain a widespread racial confidence and pride, and stop the Jewish-orchestrated White genocide.


The following is from The Struggle As Life Law, originally published in 1944 by the National Socialist Leadership Staff of the High Command of the Armed Forces, translated by Third Reich Books, 2008:

The voice of the blood, the racial substance, the history of our folk, the rule of nature reveal to us: All life is struggle – Struggle is the father of all things. Whoever does not affirm this law of nature, surrenders himself.

We encounter struggle everywhere in life and in nature. The young and strong acquire space for itself through it. The stronger defeats the weaker, the higher developed rules the primitive. The inferior is ruthlessly expelled. The victor must always be prepared for new struggle. Whoever wants to survive this struggle, must adapt to its laws: what does not possess the capacity for that, must perish. So struggle leads to a natural order.

Every life community has emerged through struggle. In nature, the forest provides the best example. With its plants, trees and animals, it is a natural life community. Nonetheless, the forest as a whole is dependent on the life struggle of its individual members. It would have to perish, if these members no longer survive their own struggle. Struggle produces a continuous selection. From the example of the animal kingdom, we see that the less capable portion is, by instinct or by force, prevented from procreation. Whoever has proven itself vibrant, again and again seeks community with the healthy and strong partner. Man only selects the strong in nature for his symbols.

Man cannot remove himself from this eternally valid law of struggle. Already his birth is the mother’s victory in the struggle for the existence of mankind. In his life, man must daily wrestle anew from nature every prerequisite for his existence, especially his clothing and nutrition. Man must replace nature’s difficult struggle for life with selection of the capable. It is a trait of racially healthy folks that they have the most difficult conditions for this selection…

The acceptance of struggle also [serves as] the prerequisite for character building. The real greatness of the human soul is only stamped by it. It constitutes the nobility of man, that he does not have to wage struggle due to natural bond, rather he can also wage it by his own decision. Struggle thereby becomes the expression of an attitude and thus of a spiritual occurrence. Only the idea gives man’s struggle a moral value.

Any struggle is degrading, if it is not born and waged from the decision to help a real idea triumph. Where a person fights for ignoble purposes, he supports what is hostile to life, he destroys culture, he sins against the life laws. We have examples of this from the working of Jewry, from the working of communism and from the doctrines of many denominational views.

From the struggle for genuine ideas, however, emerges the community of the like-minded, of the heroes. Whether the struggle is waged intellectually or with weapons, it demands the whole personality of man. Hence only the personality can be a perfect fighter. Only it will have the self-confidence and fearlessness that enable man to again and again master even the most disagreeable blows of fate. Here we see, aside from other examples from the history of our folk, the special example of the NSDAP and our worldview. The personality with firm character does not avoid struggle, regardless of whatever form it takes. Struggle imprints it with a genuine affirmation of life.

Published in: on April 14, 2019 at 11:22 pm  Leave a Comment  

Diplomatic and Military Chronology of the Third Reich 1934 – 1942

"Neues Europa"

By Reichsleiter Philipp Bouhler

January26, 1934

German-Polish treaty concluded on Adolf Hitler’s and Pilsudski’s initiative.

September13, 1934

Announcement of the execution of the minority system by Poland.

June18, 1935

German-English fleet treaty.

November5, 1937

Declaration of agreement by the German and Polish government over the protection of minorities by both sides.

March12, 1938

Austria’s unification with the German Reich.

September29, 1938

Munich Agreement about the integration of the Sudeten-German regions into the German Reich.

October24, 1938

First conference of Reich Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop with the Polish Ambassador Lipski in Berchtesgaden about the German proposal for an amiable solution to the Danzig and corridor question.

January5, 1939

Conference of the Führer with the Polish Foreign Minister Beck in Berchtesgaden about the German proposal for a peaceful solution of the Danzig and corridor question.

March15, 1939

Creation of the autonomous Reich protectorate…

View original post 9,120 more words

Published in: on April 14, 2019 at 4:32 am  Leave a Comment  

Today’s Gallery







Published in: on April 5, 2019 at 8:40 am  Leave a Comment  

Vindictive Jews


photo-search display of former SS members at Karlburg.

It’s not enough that every Jew who had lived in Europe during WW2 receives reparations, or that their allied henchmen destroyed German cities, killed  millions of civilians, and spent the last 75 years terrorizing the western world with their Holocaust Hoax. No, they need to hunt down every last German soldier , and Waffen SS volunteer. If they are deceased then it is fair game to go after the elderly widows. That is what is happening as the Jewish vindictive revenge lust continues force itself  on Germany and the European Union.

Jewish council president Josef Schuster told the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung newspaper (NOZ) Monday that German authorities had a responsibility toward Holocaust victims to trace remaining ex-Nazi pension recipients and take “conclusive” steps.

It was an “unbearable situation,” said Schuster(((Oy Vey))), referring to a recent German government statement that more than 2,000 elderly, including deceased soldiers’s widows, still benefited from Germany’s Federal Pension Act (Bundesversorgungsgesetz).

Responding in February to a Left party question in the Bundestag parliament, the German government argued that it was difficult to identify war criminals, since pension documents did not include information on what the pensioners did or did not do during the war.

Since 1998, the act’s Article 1a proscribes intensive checks and denial of payment if the would-be beneficiary’s or widowed partner’s conduct had “violated the principles of humanity or the rule of law,” .You need to ask yourself  , who’s principles and who’s laws?

For a discussion on this story, presented by Sven Longshanks and Carolyn Yeager, turn on the radio.


Published in: on April 5, 2019 at 8:37 am  Leave a Comment  

Today’s Gallery








Published in: on March 30, 2019 at 11:01 pm  Leave a Comment  

Be Anti-Semitic Or Die


No surprise that the recent  annual Policy Conference organized by AIPAC included lot’s of high profile politicians making the claim that antisemitism is unAmerican, when in fact it is the most patriotic stance one can take. Founded by Christians and nature deists with the mission of creating a new sovereign in each individual European man, America depends upon those willing to depose tyrants and defend truth with the highest ideals of fairness and justice.

Though edgy animation is not usually the kind of content regular readers are used to finding on ANS, I believe the new 3 part series “ZOAR” is at the zenith of the recent creative wake up of REAL Americans and well worth the time it takes to watch. Though on the surface produced to intrigue and interest   the edgy youth gamer culture, it doubles down in the heavy esoteric , and quite clearly explains the Jewish Problem.

Published in: on March 30, 2019 at 10:53 pm  Leave a Comment  

Hidden Government

hidden government

The author of this book was a regular soldier who served with distinction in the South African War and in the First World War. When he retired from the Army due to wounds received on active service, he settled down in an English country village and began to study politics and economics. He wanted to know

-Why honest Tommy Atkins had been compelled to fight peaceful Boer farmers and enable an International Diamond Syndicate to gain control of the South African mines?

—Why ten million men should have been slaughtered in the First World War (described as “a war to end wars”) when the subsequent Peace Treaty so obviously sowed the seeds for a second and more terrible conflict?

—Why the Banks of the world create money lavishly out of nothing to finance these wars and yet for peace, credit is immediately restricted?

—Why when the Second World War came “to defend the rights of small nations” these small nations were sold by their allies into a slavery worse than death?

Soon he came to realise what Disraeli had shown in one of his novels —”that the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.”

In the early stages of his investigation he was bewildered and worried that great men whom he admired would make perhaps one brief reference continued on back to the “personages behind the scenes” and then forever hold their peace.

For nearly twenty years, Lt.-Col. Creagh Scott has been following up clues left by prominent men, for he has become convinced, as was Field-Marshall Smuts, that “there is some hidden pressure behind all the worries of Europe, Asia and America.”

The results of this investigation are given here in simple language so that the man in the street may come to his own conclusions.

Lest anyone should think that the title of the book suggests the realm of fiction let them ponder the words of the statesman Disraeli :—”Governments do not govern, but merely control the machinery of government, being themselves controlled by the hidden hand.”

The author shows how the hidden hand controls the governments of both Capitalist and Communist countries.

“Jock” Creagh Scott was one of the founding members of our journal Candour, and the League of Empire Loyalists. Originally published in 1954.


You can purchase the 2017 fully authorized fifth edition from Candour here,

Published in: on March 27, 2019 at 8:11 am  Leave a Comment  

Today’s Gallery



Great Room in the Berghof before any furniture or carpets where placed inside. Photo by Eva Braun.









Published in: on March 21, 2019 at 7:59 am  Leave a Comment  

The Brussels Documents And Heresy Of Woodrow Wilson

By Carolyn Yeager

British Foreign Minister Edward Grey (left) and French Foreign Minister Théophile Delcassé (right) schemed to “inspire hostile feelings against Germany” from 1905 to 1914.

Two extraordinary articles from The Fatherland, by two extraordinary writers, make up this post, along with a shocking report on the US postal service further caving in to English demands.

First, we discover the World War I version of the famous “Potocki Papers” of WWII. Jerzy Potocki was the Polish ambassador to Washington from 1936 to 1940, whose dispatches to his government in Warsaw were discovered by the Wehrmacht after their victory in the 1939 German-Polish war. These documents proved the involvement of Franklin Roosevelt’s “neutral” government with both Poland and England to incite war in Europe.

In likewise fashion, as Frederic Schrader informs us in the important article below, diplomatic documents were discovered in Brussels by the victorious German Army which revealed the machinations carried on by Great Britain beginning already in 1905 “to inspire hostile feelings against Germany.” Sir Edward Grey, Britain’s foreign minister, and his French counterpart Théophile Delcassé schemed secretly to set the stage for a realignment of European powers. -cy

vol. 3 no. 16   November 24, 1915   Page 8


Record of Anglo-French Conspiracy Against Germany by Five Unprejudiced Witnesses

By Frederic Franklin Schrader

IT is a deplorable fact in relation to the European war that the average American begins his discussion of the events with the outbreak of hostilities, whereas the real history of the war began ten years before August 4, 1914. It is to be regretted, furthermore, that the German Government lacked the foresight to establish relations with one of the leading newspapers in New York—to buy it outright and control its policy with regard to the manner of presenting the news—in order to counteract the venomous influence which for more than a decade was exercised by England through the New York press upon the public mind of America. Though fifteen months have passed since the outbreak of the war, this press continues uninterruptedly to present but one side of the problems arising in connection with the great tragedy, and though the American people are doubtless by a considerable majority devoted to the motto, “America before England,” and inclined to study both sides impartially, they have never been permitted to get a glimpse of the diplomatic events which preceded the war save through the polluted channels of the London press as disseminated by its New York allies.

Now at last an impartial history of the diplomatic machinations by which Germany was forced into the war against her will has been made accessible to the public—and to anticipate any possible suspicion that it is the history of a German partisan, the reader is informed that it was written with no intention of finding its way into public print by the Belgian ministers to London, Paris and Berlin.

Among the documents found in Brussels by the victorious German troops was not only the tell-tale military convention between representatives of Great Britain and Belgium by which Belgium bartered away her neutrality—these papers have been discussed in a previous issue—but the complete reports made by Count de Lalaing, Belgian minister to London; Baron Greindl, Belgian minister to Berlin, and M.A. Leghait, Belgian minister to Paris, the series running from February 7, 1905, to April 26, 1912, after which the reports are rendered by Baron Beyens at Berlin and Baron Guillaume at Paris, concluding July 2, 1915.

Here is the complete history of every important diplomatic move made at the three principal capitals as recorded by trained observers reporting confidentially to their government. We see the Moroccan conspiracy between England and France showing its ugly face, we read these ministers boldly commenting on the sinister influences at work in London and Paris to inspire hostile feelings against Germany, sharp rebuffs of England’s petty jealousy of Germany’s prosperity, contempt for the snaky press organs beginning their campaign of vilification, notations on King Edward’s scheme of isolating Germany, the scheming of Delcassé , etc. No partisan of Germany could possibly present the events preceding the war with a heartier sense of espousal of the justice of her cause than these Belgian diplomats writing under the seal of secrecy to their own government in order to advise it of what is going on behind the scenes. With this feeling doubtless, the German Government has issued the whole correspondence in pamphlet form under the title of “European Politics During the Decade Before the War as Described by Belgian Diplomats.” (25 cents; for sale by THE FATHERLAND. Ten cents extra for postage.) [I can’t find this online -cy]

It consists of 144 pages and contains sundry fac simile reprints of the original documents, and the correspondence in the original French and in parallel columns the English translation. One of its best features is a carefully written introduction in which the correspondence is skilfully epitomized in a running review of editorial comments, so that the salient parts of the correspondence may be grasped and estimated in their true relationship.

The whole makes the impression of a world-wide criminal conspiracyengineered by Lord Lansdowne, [Edward] Grey, Delcassé, Poincare and Edward VII. Seeing France bleeding to death, there seems something like prophecy in M. Leghait’s conjecture, written from Paris June 17, 1907: “England is preparing her ground admirably, but has France, who is joining her in her policy, all the necessary guarantees that she will not be the victim of this policy some day?” Seven years before the day which he prophesied would break in sorrow over France, Leghait wrote (same dispatch): “France is contracting a debt of gratitude which will seem heavy to her on the day when England will reveal the purpose for which she wants to use the influences which she had grouped around her.”

Baron Greindl in Berlin was so simple (according to those who represent Germany as the arch schemer) that in June 22, 1907, after England’s alliance with Japan and her entente with France and Russia were followed by the understanding of Italy with France and England on the Mediterranean question, and by the agreement over Egypt and Morocco, etc., he wrote his government: “Japan is strong enough to guarantee the integrity of China alone until the day when it will suit her to violate it herself. It would be hard to admit that England needs Spain’s assistance in order to defend her position in Egypt, Cyprus, Malta and Gibraltar. Who is thinking of attacking it and who, moreover, would have the material means to do so? France is no less secure in Algiers and Tunis. The danger could only come from one of the signatory powers, if the friendship existing between them at present were to break. If they do not contain any secret clause, they seem to have been concluded only for the pleasure of leaving Germany outside once more during the regulation of the interests of the world.”

Assuredly, this compact was designed to isolate Germany and arraign a horde of selfish enemies against her. Seven months later we find Baron Greindl writing (January 27, 1908): “The policy directed by King Edward VII [First cousin to Kaiser William, both grandsons of Queen Victoria with William being the elder -cy] under the pretext of guarding Europe from the imaginary German peril, has created a French danger which is only too real, and which is a menace above all to us.” And here occurs a significant passage (same report) which we recommend to the editors of the pro-Allied press in this country:

“Where did M. Delcassé see that Germany was endeavoring to impose her supremacy on other nations? We are her close neighbors, but for twenty years I have never observed in the Imperial Government the slightest desire to abuse its strength and our weakness. I wish that all the other great powers had used the same consideration toward us.”

On February 2, 1908, the Belgian minister at Berlin summarizes his view of English and Germany rivalry: “no one here ever cherished the absurd and impracticable idea of an attack against England; but everybody fears an English attack.” In the middle of 1908 Sir Frank Lascelles was removed against his will from the position of the British Ambassador at Berlin—why? Because, in the words of the Belgian diplomat: “If the British Government deprives itself of the services of a diplomat of such merit, it is only because Sir Frank Lascelles worked for fifteen years, without permitting himself to be discouraged by numerous checks, to bring about a rapprochementbetween Germany and England. The zeal which he displayed in order to dissipate the misunderstanding which he considered absurd and detrimental does not correspond with the views of his sovereign.”

Count de Lalaing, Belgian Minister to London, had no high opinion of the estimate on truth prevailing in the House of Lords, for he writes under date of November 30, 1911: “Lord Courtney of Penrith, a Liberal and a friend of Germany, attacked the policy of the Government (the Entente) because it had been aiming at the isolation of Germany (it is rare to hear that truth expressed in the British Parliament) and because it had not upheld the Act of Algeciras.” The minister adds: “These disagreeable truths were not to the liking of the House of Lords.”

It is impossible within this limited space to follow even remotely the remarkable story of British and French intrigue which the correspondence lays bare, and in almost every page of which the consensus of the Belgian diplomats is remarkable for the frank concession that Germany has no desire for a quarrel and is attending strictly to her own affairs. Baron Beyens, for instance, writes from Berlin November 30, 1912: “There is no doubt that the (German) Emperor, the Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs are passionately pacific.”

But little more space is available for additional citations, of which not even the most interesting or important have been more than casually referred to. In conclusion the writer will cite a report of Baron Beyens to his government, dated April 24, 1914, three months before the war, in which he comments on the official visit of the King and Queen of England to Paris and the then-prevailing relations between France and England:

“For us the most interesting point in connection with the visit of the sovereigns of Great Britain is to know whether the British Government would be as inclined today as three years ago to range itself by the side of France in case of a conflict of the latter with Germany. We have had the proof that a co-operation of the British army and the dispatching of an expeditionary corps to the continent have been considered by the military authorities of the two governments (England and France). Would it be the same today and would we still have to fear the entry of British soldiers into Belgium in order to help us to defend our neutrality by first compromising it?”

These are not the words of German apologists. This intensely interesting correspondence registers the conviction of five professional students of contemporary international history, living in the three chief capitals of Europe with the advantage of being detached and unprejudiced with regard to the facts. And their convictions are identical. ~


A shocker …

vol. 3 no. 17   December 1, 1915   Page 12



THE Post Office has surrendered the last shred of the dignity of the United States by suspending the parcel post service to Germany and Austria-Hungary. The ostensible reason for this shameful act is the unwillingness of the Holland-American Lines to offend Great Britain by carrying articles of food to Germany in the teeth of the British blockade, even under the seal of the United States. Be it remembered that officially the United States refuses to “recognize” this blockade, no matter how cravenly we submit to British blackmail in practice. If we had a strong man in the White House, an American battleship would carry the mail through the War Zone. Mr. Wilson, however, suspends the entire service. One effect of the decision will be to keep American Christmas gifts from the children of Germany. It will also keep the supply of American condensed milk from thousands of suffering babies. BUT IT WILL CARRY OUT THE STARVATION POLICY OF GREAT BRITAIN.

The seal of our Government on the parcel post, as the New York Evening Mail points out in a vigorous editorial, has heretofore been taken to mean that the power of the government is back of its safe delivery.

“If the present ruling stands, the seal of our government will lose that assurance, and the convenience of the Steamship company will be supreme. Our government’s attitude will be: We will send it—if there is no objection from any source …

“ ‘The service is suspended’—such is the official word from Washington.

“Why should it be suspended? Why should it be possible for ships to sail from here loaded down with ammunition for one country, while other ships are permitted to tell our Post office department that we cannot dispatch parcels of foodstuffs to those far removed from battle lines?

Why does not this government say to these steamship owners: ‘You have cut off the United States mails because you want your ships to touch at English ports, and do not care to risk the delay caused by English search. We say to you that you cannot use American ports unless you carry American mails without discrimination. You must handle our Post Office department that we cannot dispatch parcels one without the other; you cannot use our ports only to the extent of your own interests. This government insists that its mail shall go unquestioned to the point of destination, wherever that may be.’

“Why do we, as a sovereign nation, not say to England: ‘Stop interfering with our mails.’

“Throughout our own land, as the incident on woman’s suffrage day so aptly demonstrated, the letters ‘U.S. Mail’ have a real meaning. The power and protection of the nation is back of them. Our people gladly give way under all conditions to the ‘U.S. Mail.’ It carries the hopes and fears, the words of cheer and good-will, the parcels of help and comfort, to our millions of families. We have girdled the world with it, and have a nation’s pride in its efficiency.

“Yet at the moment of crisis, when its power and protection are needed for humanity’s sake, we are stunned and humiliated by the message from Washington: ‘Service Suspended.’” ~


The always wonderful Edmund von Mach has exceeded himself in the following essay explaining what being an American means. It does not mean what the ‘England First’ dual loyalists & monarchists want to believe it means, or the Pilgrim Society members we were introduced to in my last post. As a German who immigrated to the United States at the age of 21 years, Von Mach quickly grasped what it meant go be an American. At the time of this writing, he was 45 years old. Very impressive understanding of his adopted country. -cy

Page 13


By Dr. Edmund von Mach, author of “Germany’s Point of View”

IN his well-considered speech before the Manhattan Club in New York on November 4th last Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States, spoke as follows:

“The only thing within our own borders that has given us concern in recent months has been that voices have been raised in America professing to be the voices of Americans which were not indeed and in truth American, but which spoke alien sympathies, which came from men who loved other countries better than they loved America, men who were partisans of other causes than that of America and had forgotten that their chief and only allegiance was to the great government under which they live.”

Mr. Wilson is a man of learning, not given to hasty speech, and the above statement must be understood as deliberately voicing his convictions. During the past months, while Congress enjoyed a recess, the President represented the national government of the United States. He now solemnly claims that American citizens owe their “chief and only allegiance to the great government under which they live.”

Does the President really not know the American oath of allegiance? It reads:

“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion: So help me God.”

Ours is a government of laws and not of men—or at least so it should be. The people are sovereign in their own right, owing allegiance to no man, or group of men. The “government,” composed of men to whom the people entrust the management of their affairs from time to time, does not represent a sovereign to whom the people owe allegiance, as Mr. Wilson wishes to have the country believe. On the contrary, the American Government remains at all times the servant of the sovereign American people.

Mr. Wilson’s deliberate statement does not square with the facts, is at variance with the Constitution, and represents a falsification of the American oath of allegiance.

If Mr. Wilson erred from ignorance, and none of his official advisers set him right, it implies a serious state of affairs, because it gives an insight into Mr. Wilson’s un-American turn of mind. The lode star of every American should be the freedom and sovereignty of the people owing allegiance to none except the Constitution and the principles on which this nation was founded.

Nobody owes allegiance to Mr. Wilson, and if Mr. Wilson errs in his conduct of our affairs, or if a citizen believes Mr. Wilson errs, it is the bounden duty of such a citizen to raise his voice in protest. This is most especially true if Mr. Wilson expounds doctrines and claims rights and privileges for his government which run counter to the Constitution. If a citizen, realizing this, fails to protest, he breaks his oath of allegiance which forces him “to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

And in all seriousness the question must be asked whether greater danger can threaten the Constitution than from a chief executive, who in contravention of the Constitution and the principles on which the nation was founded, and in defiance of explicit pronouncement by the United States Supreme Court, preaches the doctrine that his fellow-citizens owe allegiance to him and his government.

“For as the sovereignty resides in the people,” says the United States Supreme Court (14 How. 38, 49), “every citizen is a portion of it.” In England and Canada men, women and children are subjects of King George, to whom they owe allegiance. In the United States nobody is anybody’s subject, for the people are sovereign. A sovereign cannot owe allegiance to any one, while he may give his allegiance to principles and ideals, and to the instrument which is drawn to protect them.

If all this is true, assuming only an error on Mr. Wilson’s part, how much more imperative becomes vigorous action against him, if it should appear that he claimed allegiance for himself and his government not in error, but in knowing defiance of the Constitution and the lawfully established American Oath of Allegiance.

It may be assumed, without the shadow of a doubt, that Mr. Wilson is familiar with the Constitution, and Article II governing the Executive Department. Section II discusses the Powers of the President, Section III the Duties of the President, and Section IV his Impeachment. Neither in the section on his powers nor in that of his duties is any sentence written which could even remotely be construed as suggesting that his fellow citizens owed the President or his government “chief and only allegiance.”

Nor is it conceivable that Woodrow Wilson should have been unfamiliar with the American Oath of Allegiance. It is printed on every application blank for a passport. The Secretary of State doubtless knows this oath by heart, and yet the President, without protest from his official family, dared to utter the heresy that the American people owe “Chief and only allegiance to the great government under which they live.”

If he should resolve to stand by this doctrine he would properly be “removed from office on impeachment,” as specified in Article II, Section IV, of the Constitution.

Hiding his own partisan conduct of our international relations with the English and the Teutonic allies, respectively, behind an attack on those who want justice and not personal bias, humanity and not financial interest in our intercourse with foreign nations; and basking in the support of a press which for purely materialistic reasons has espoused the cause of England, Woodrow Wilson has at last shown how extremely un-American the trend of his spirit is.

By his Manhattan Club speech Woodrow Wilson hoped to squelch the opponents of his Morgan-dictated foreign policy. Grant God that he did more, that he aroused every American citizen to a realization of the danger threatening the liberties and principles of the American people so long as Woodrow Wilson resides in the White House. For Woodrow Wilson, either in error or in wilful defiance of the Constitution, is claiming for himself and his government the allegiance of a sovereign people! ~

Published in: on March 21, 2019 at 7:53 am  Leave a Comment