MICHAEL HOFFMAN – REVISIONISTS AS BIBLICAL AMALEK -Bitchute

There are few men I admire and trust in the world today, of which I am aware.
Don’t mean there are not a hell of lot more good men and women out there, than everyone thinks.

Just most don’t know where the others are, and the MSM & WASHINGTON DC, sure as hell are not going to help you wind each other.

But the English Author David Irvin has my respect.

If he introduces this man in this matter, I have no doubt of this mans’s truth and honor, as David Irvin would not recommend him so highly, if he were not a true warrior on the side of the Light.

If you are new to some of the teachings of the so called Judaic religion, well, it has a whole lot of real evil nasty shit in them, the “Jews”, (Non Semitic Kharzarian) cult members believe that are entitled to do to any but another cult member.

According to their religion, want to rape a goy child, women, man, rob them, murder them, it is no sin, they are cattle, to be farmed and slaughtered.
Raping their own cult children is fine, as long as it is not done past three years and one day.

Now, there are a whole lot of people out there, think of themselves as “Jews”, because they were born into it, don’t know shit from shenola about the real teachings, never read the books.

Same with a lot of “christians”, born into it, goes to churchy, sings Holy-HJoly_holy, hopes they don’t go to hell for all those sins they keep lying about doing, never read the Bible through.

SO give it a listen.

If you are a zionist christian, these soul-less Khazarian animals mean you no good, they are not Hebrews, God is not going to judge America if it do not kiss Israhell’s ass.

But God bis going to Judge America if the do not find some balls, and Kick Israhell’s Ass!

John C Carleton

https://www.bitchute.com/video/TqqMtTIKCZfk/

DNA Testing Shows 1/3 Of “Asylum” Seekers Faked Being Family of Children To Claim “Asylum”

DNA testing found that 30 per cent of those tested had lied about family ties.

Central Americans who cross the border illegally with children can claim asylum and avoid any lengthy detention in most cases.

ICE ran the pilot for a few days this month in El Paso and McAllen, Texas

About 30% of migrants tested with rapid DNA were lying about familial relations

Migrants with children can claim asylum and avoid detention in most cases 

If you have not figured it out yet, just because the Pope tells these people to breed like rabbits, so he has more church members, don’t mean  The  Occopied Republic of Texas, or the other occupied North American States, can take all these Anti American, hands out, American hating gentuza.

Send them to Washington DC and the Vatican.

Get them the hell out of Texas!

Get them the hell out of North America.

They are not our problem.

Washington DC on the other hand,  is our problem.

It is the USA, the Occupying by military force of the Occupied Republic of Texas, which is forcing these Anti-American hands out, “and oh yes we hate you”, third world people on the Occupied Republic of Texas, and the Occupied States.

For you slower ones, USA/Washington DC, is trying to make the Occupied Republic of Texas, and the Occupied North American States, third world Shit Holes!

About time to stop this evil Anti-American shit by USA/WASHINGTON DC.

Oh yes, San Antonio folks, remember, mayor PendejoBerg and his  Merry band of Hairless  chihuahuas on “San Antonio city council”, are in favor of flooding San Antonio with these thieving, child molesting, murdering gentuza.

Crime has gone out of sight in San Antonio because of “city hall’s” criminal actions against Texicans.

John C Carleton

Occupied Republic of Texas yankee Occupation “government” “School Board” Considers Introducing Sex Education For Kindergartners

Grooming Children for Pedophillia perhaps?

Grooming For Pedophillia Perhaps?

John C Carleton

————————————–

The Texas State Board of Education is considering new policies that would begin sex education during kindergarten.

Texas Education Board Commissioner Mike Morath made recommendations in his health care review that include lessons about healthy relationships and reproduction.

Brae’Lee Stewart is six years old and just finished kindergarten a few months ago.

Her mother Brae’Lynn said the idea of her daughter learning anything about sex at her age makes her cringe.

More:

https://www.sott.net/article/415815-Texas-school-board-considers-introducing-sex-education-to-kindergartners

 

A Colt 45 Peacemaker Educates a Zionist Yankee Professor

In 1882, my grandfather was sixteen years old. His father, my great grandfather, was medical doctor, a Methodist circuit riding minister, and a Confederate veteran, living in occupied Texas.

A lot damn carpet bagger zionist, (Puritan back then), came to the Southern occupied States to see what they could steal, opportunities to run it over the conquered Southerners.

One such was a very large man, not fat, tall and muscular, who came to Texas, and set up a school. Things were tough in Texas during reconstruction, and schools were few and far between.

To show all the kids he was boss, the coward picked out a girl who’s father was dead, accused her of some small infraction of the rules, took her to the front and was beating her unmercifully. My grandfather was sixteen, the second oldest and largest boy in the school. He and the older boy both stood up and called the Professor as he called himself, down. Told him that was enough.

The professor, being a cowardly yankee, held a grudge. Professor had a teachers pet. The teaches pet and my grandfather were outside during noon one day, teachers pet started some trouble, so they started fighting. Here comes the professor yelling, “Will Carleton, I’m going to whip you. So my grandfather told him he did not believe so, and quit school.

About a week later, he was running an errand for his dad, driving a one horse hack. About a block from the school, kids saw him, the teachers pet came down, grandfather stopped the hack, got down started to finish the fight.

Professor sees this, come running down there yelling, “Will Carleton, i’m going to whip you”. Grandfather climbs back in the hack, the professor started climbing up after him. Grandfather reached under the seat, pulled out the Colt 45 Peacemaker that was kept there, put the end of the barrel up the teachers nose, eared the hammer back and said, “I don’t think so”.

The professor ran back to his school so fast his own heels was kicking him in his own ass.

Grandfather said nothing about it, but about a week later, someone told my great grandfather. He called my grandfather in, asked him what happened. Grandfather told him. He said, “Stay away from that school”.

Great grandfather went to have a talk with the Professor. Told him that his being unfair, had caused my grandfather to leave the school, that if he ever tried to mess with the boy again, he would be messing with the old man, he asked if the professor understood. The professor understood perfectly. There was never any more trouble with the professor getting out of line.

It seems to me, the only thing keeps a zionist in line, is a double barreled shotgun or a good 45 pointed at them, seems they CAN control that zionist virus when they want to. Seems a good weapon pointed at their ass makes them want to behave.

Amazing!

Time to educate yourselves Mr. and Mrs. America.

Time to get a Peacemaker.

time to get er done.

John C Carleton

A 12 Gauge Double Barrled Shotgun Trumps a Zionist Virus Infected Yankee

My grandfather Carleton, was born under a military dictatorship. Born in Texas under occupation military “government”.

When he was nine years old, still under Zionist Yankee “reconstruction” occupation, a lot of carpet baggers were coming South to see what they could steal from the Southern people.

My great-grandfather was Methodist Circuit riding Minister, and a medical doctor. He was gone a lot. Seems the reason Carletons had so many boys, was so the boys could work the farm, while the father, could travel around the country.

At nine, my grandfather was living on the family farm out side Llano, Texas. There was a wagon road came within distance to the house so that travel could be heard. Two wagon tracks ran out to the wagon road, which took a curve around the property. Wagons did not move that fast, so one took the wagon path heading in the direction on the road, one was going to travel.

One day, my grandfather heard travel on the road, so he and his bulldog walked down to see who was moving.

Around the bend comes several wagons. In the lead wagon was a self-rightious, smart ass, thieving zionist yankee. At that time they called themselves “Puritans”. He stopped his wagon and called my grandfathers dog over and tied him to his wagon. My grandfather said, Hey Mister, thats my dog”. Damn zionist yankee said, “he’s my dog now”.

People in the rearward wagons, told the ass, “Don’t take the boys dog”.

He Just laughed and said, “I told you I was going to get a good dog before we got there”. Climbed in his wagon and drove off.

My grandfather ran all the way back to his home, grabbed the 12 gauge double barrel, and ran all the way out the other track. When the wagons came around the curve, my grandfather was standing in the middle of the road pointing the business end of the shotgun at the yankee scum. He eared bothe hammers back. So mad he was crying, he told the thieving yankee, “mister, if you don’t turn my dog loose, i am going to kill you”!

The Zionist, very carefully got down and turned my grandfather’s dog loose. The wagons drove off.

Now, i do not know if he got a dog or not, but i do know he did not get my grandfathers.

The moral to this story is that a good twelve gauge shotgun trumps Zionism every time!

Time to educate yourselves Mr. and Mrs. America.

Time to Get a good 12 gauge double barrel.

Time to get er done.

John C Carleton

The Interesting Court Case of Texas v. White

Salmon P. Chase

How secession was finally declared illegal.

In a legal examination of the right of secession no case has been thrown in our faces as Texas v. White. With this case the Supreme Court of the United States declared secession was not constitutional. The case concerned some government bonds owned by the State of Texas. By Texas law they could only be sold with the governor’s approval and signature. After secession, the State of Texas needed money to continue its war effort. The Texas legislature voided the requirement of the governor’s signature and sold the bonds. After the War, the Reconstruction government of Texas sued to reclaim the bonds on the grounds that the sale was illegal.

The only way that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction was if the suit was between “a State and Citizens of another State” (US Constitution, art. III, sec. 2, para. 1) and Texas had purported to secede from the Union. In order to write Radical Republican doctrine into the Constitution, Chief Justice Chase found it necessary to hold that secession was unconstitutional (Texas never left the Union), but that the Reconstruction government of Texas (a government created by the U.S. Congress) had standing before the Court. He did so in a single paragraph: The Articles of Confederation had declared the Union “perpetual”. The preamble to the 1789 Constitution had declared that the Union was even “more perfect”. “What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect is not?” This doctrine of the perpetual Union made more perfect would be reaffirmed in White v. Hart where the Court declared that the State of Georgia had never left the Union. In making his ruling Chase ignored many of the legal arguments that had bearing on this case.

First, the Articles of Confederation had been superseded by the Constitution. The ratification of the Constitution had dissolved the “perpetual Union”. Chase also ignored the larger problem that the ratification of the Constitution initiated a secession from the government created by the Articles. Even though only nine States needed to ratify the Constitution for it to become part of “the supreme law of the land”, the Articles could only be altered by the approval of all thirteen States! Thus, when nine States had ratified the Constitution and put aside the Articles in favor of the Constitution this was an act of secession.

Second, it had never been assumed that the preamble was legally binding, but simply a statement of the intent of the Constitution. Thus, the preamble recognized that the Constitution was an attempt to form a more perfect union, but it did not legislate that “more perfect Union” as law.

Third, Chase stated that the seceding states had forfeited their rights, but not their obligations. He never addressed the question of how this could be if, as he contended, the States had never left the Union in the first place. If the Confederate States had never left the United States they would still retain all their obligations (White v. Hart) and all their constitutional rights. The doctrine of lost rights with retained obligations was a concept of the Radical Republicans created by them to reconstruct the South in their own image.

Fourth, Chase never addressed the fact that earlier Supreme Court decisions had declared Confederate State governments de facto governments (Thorington v. Smith, Delmas v. Insurance Co., and Mauran v. Insurance Co.) in all acts that did not further the aims of the rebellion. While he could have argued that acts supporting the secession could be punishable as treason (art. III, sec. 3) he never did. Interestingly, while these acts might have been considered treasonable, that did not in and of itself prove them to be unconstitutional (Yet another can of worms that Chase chose to ignore). Also, even though States were forbidden to “engage in War”, the Constitution contains an exception in the cases of actual or threatened invasion (art. I, sec. 3). While Chase could have argued that the invasion clause did not apply to federal troops seeking “to enforce constitutional law” he did not.

Fifth, Chase never addressed the constitutional question of the legality of secession, just declared it illegal. An interesting argument in favor of the right of secession can be found in “A View of the Constitution of the United States”, by William Rawle.

Chase basically ignored all previous case law and the supremacy clause, and accepted without supporting argument the standard Radical view of a one-sided secession: The Southern states had lost their rights, but not their obligations. Although Texas had not left the Union, it had forfeited its right to sue. This was a pretty shaky thesis; if Texas was still a State, article III give it the right to sue. Justice Grier, the lone dissenter, protested, saying that if Texas had not left the Union, it had the power to repeal its own laws. Chase and company couldn’t accept that line of reasoning without destroying the Reconstruction Act.

Charles Fairman in “History of the Supreme Court of the United States, vol. VI, Reconstruction and Reunion 1864-88, part I”, says that the objective of this particular decision was to promote Chase’s firm belief that suffrage should not be limited by the laws of the past. He wanted a new start in who would govern the state, and required that the new citizens created by the fourteenth amendment participate in making the new start. Most of the Southern States had now completed that course of restoration (reconstruction). However, Texas was not of that number. Texas remained subject to the declaration of the Reconstruction Act. Its government was not “legal” but “provisional only”. “It suffices to say,” the Chief Justice concluded, “that the terms of the Acts necessarily imply recognition of existing governments; and that in point of fact, the governments thus recognized, in some important respects, still exist.” The conclusion was that the suit was properly brought and was within the original jurisdiction of the Court. This ruling also legitimized and “constitutionalized” the Reconstruction governments created by the Radical Republicans.

Professor David P. Currie, University of Chicago Law School, in, “The Constitution in the Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years,1789-1888” says, “In Texas v. White the Court went out of its way to embrace the Radical position that secession and all acts that served it were illegal, that the seceding states had nevertheless forfeited their rights, and that Congress could determine under the guarantee clause how they were to be governed. It did so essentially by fiat, without serious consideration of the opposing arguments … In Texas v. White, Chase finally succeeded in writing most of the Radical philosophy of Reconstruction into the Constitution.”

Courtesy of Mike Purdy
Confederate Memorial Camp #1432
Sons of Confederate Veterans
Stone Mountain, Georgia

Carpet-Baggers

Carpetbagger was the pejorative term applied to Northerners who moved to the South after the Civil War, specifically those who joined state Republican parties formed in 1867 and who were elected as Republicans to public office. Southern Democrats immediately saw that the newcomers were corrupt and dishonest adventurers, whose property consisted only of what they could carry in their carpetbags (suitcases made of carpeting), who seized political power and plundered the helpless people of the South. This assessment of the carpetbagger became standard in late-nineteenth-century histories and retains its currency among some historians today. Since the 1950s, however, revisionist historians have challenged the validity of the traditional view and assessed the carpetbaggers more favorably. [Ed. note: It is a well-known maxim of war that ‘to the victor go the spoils.’ The victor in the War for Southern Independence has claimed, as part of his spoils, the right to record and enforce his point of view as the official and accepted history of the war.]

The Reconstruction Act of 1867 placed Southern governments under military rule. The South was divided into five military districts, each run by a general in the U.S. Army. The five districts were (1) Virginia; (2) North and South Carolina; (3) Georgia, Alabama, and Florida; (4) Mississippi and Arkansas; and (5) Texas and Louisiana. Tennessee was the only prior Confederate state that was not placed under military rule. Around 200,000 troops were placed in the South to enforce military rule.

Thousands of government officials were removed from office in the South and replaced with military commanders. Different commanders ruled in different ways. Some were very good at their jobs, and some were not. They had very few restrictions. They could be cruel and unfair and get away with it. It was a very harsh time for the population in the South.

One thing all military commanders did because they were told to do so by Congress was to place former slaves in positions in government. These former slaves knew nothing about government or money. They were not trained for their jobs. Nearly all were puppets under the control of army officials. The reaction was the KKK.

Military rule in the South lasted for 10 years, until 1877, when the Republican party agreed to return Southern states to home rule in exchange for their support of the Republican candidate for president, Rutherford B. Hayes.