SMYRNA - March 1995

SMYRNA

E-MAIL: JereM541@aol.com

MARCH 1995



TABLE OF CONTENTS:

o "Why God Lost"
o Another Waco-Type Burning?
o How the Property Was Disposed of
o Other Factors in the Case
o Persecution of the Religious Right
o But the Worst Stigma of All Is - . . .
o Are the "Extremists" Pure & Innocent?
o The Liberal Mind
o A Theological & Moral Dilemma
o Accessibility
o The "Gospel" According to Alan Dershowitz & Co.
o Their Activists Are Everywhere
o Liberty & Patrick Henry
o Mr. Newt Hires Former AIPAC
o U.S. Grants to Israel in FY 1993
o Official Government Definition of a "Cultist?!"


"WHY GOD LOST"

In last month's SMYRNA, under the headline "Watch for the Outcome" , we reported that two rabbis were vying for leadership of the Jewish Reform movement. We reported that according to the Jewish newspaper Forward, the rabbis were Peter Knobel of Chicago and Eric Yoffie of New York. The Forward stated that if Knobel won, Reform Judaism would embrace a more religious emphasis, but if Yoffie won there would be a liberal social action agenda.

Well, Yoffie won, so the Forward of Feb. 10th carried this headline: "Social Activism Edges Out God..." This angered many of their readers so they published an editorial on Feb. 17th entitled "Why God Lost". It was pointed out that this was the newspaper's way of implying that Yoffie's win meant that more social activism would be the agenda of Reform Judaism.

The Forward had also stated that a win by Yoffie would mean, among other things, a stepped up attack on the religious right. Now that he has won, we know that the majority of Reform Jews wish to continue liberal-leftist social action, which often means "socialist-communist" action. This is extremely important information because it tells us where the root of many problems lies.

The threat of stepped-up attacks on the religious right should be taken seriously by Americans. Reform Jewry is extremely powerful in government circles, so its agenda against the religious right means that all Americans will be affected in one way or another, especially those Americans whose religious beliefs center around Jesus Christ. However, many Christians have their heads in the sand and will not know what hit them until it's too late.

We need to connect the Jewish agenda to the definition of cultists attributed to Janet Reno [see end section] in order to understand what happened at Waco and Ruby Ridge, and recently in Tigerton, Wisconsin. On Jan. 13, 1995, about 50 SWAT team officers descended on property in Shawano County in Wisconsin that had belonged to people calling themselves the Life Science Church. The officers were in full battle gear including face masks. The property occupants had been driven out and now their buildings were burned. This was done under color of law by the county for non-payment of property taxes.


Return to Table of Contents

ANOTHER WACO-TYPE BURNING?

The Life Science Church, whose pastor is Thomas Stockheimer (now in jail on what he claims were trumped-up charges), formed a church some years ago whose meeting place was located on part of 580 acres about a mile from the little town of Tigerton. According to Willa Griesbach the church's property consisted of a portion of the 580 acres, or just 29.5 acres, for which they claimed tax exemption. They also formed a Posse Comitatus organization.

This writer's conversation with Thomas Stockheimer from his jail cell in Shawano County also revealed that the group considers itself to be "Identity", a growing group of Americans most of whom believe that the Anglo Saxon race descended from the "lost ten tribes" of Israel. This is the third factor that would mark them as "cultists" and "extremists". Law enforcement agencies consider such groups dangerous because, in the words of former Wisconsin Asst. Atty. Gen. Michael Zaleski, " 'It was a growing movement and a challenge to authority...We have totally broken the back of the Posse in the state.' "(1) Note the "challenge to authority" phrase.

(1) Milwaukee Journal, 10/5/86.

It seems that this Wisconsin event fits into the same general category with the Waco and Ruby Ridge tragedies, even though the details are different. All three cases are tied to the common denominator of what government agencies interpret as cults. All three involved gun charges, and all three contained the ingredients of religion, alleged anti-Semitism(2) and racism. In other words, all three groups were destroyed by the government because the government is in the business of deciding whose religion is bona fide, who can own guns, and of annihilating all whom it interprets as being anti-Semitic and racist. The pattern is clear whether or not the government denies it. No illegal weapons were found at Waco or Tigerton, Wisconsin, and the sawed-off shotgun charge against Weaver in Idaho was a subterfuge.

(2) The Milwaukee Journal stated that former Sheriff James Knope had expressed his "dislike for [the group's] anti-Semitic policies."

Why do government bodies violate the First Amendment rights of some by deciding whose religion is legitimate? Their primary purpose is to prevent challenges to big government and its taxing powers, and of course Christians are slated for annihilation if possible. A federal judge in Wisconsin decided that the people near Tigerton did not have a church, that it was a sham. This elevates him to the de facto status of Almighty God. While this isn't new in history - dictators have often acted as God - it certainly is unacceptable in the United States. SMYRNA does not agree with some of the tenets of the "Identity" movement, and we think some of them have exercised too little wisdom in their tactics, but they have the same right under the Constitution to be a church as anyone else because their beliefs are held sincerely. The government allows every religion from Buddhism to Satanism to snake handlers to you name it, tax exempt status recognition, but it doesn't allow those who question their authority the same recognition. Why? Because the "religious right" poses a threat to bureaucratic hegemony, and it is targeted for destruction by organized Jewish leaders. As for home schoolers, the government feels threatened for obvious reasons (the Wisconsin people maintained a school on their property). Home schooled children will not be brainwashed by government schools. They will not become robots that spout all the cliches and embrace all the programs liberals-leftists (socialists-communists). They won't fit into the New World Order. When we understand these things, the reasons for the government agenda to wipe independent-thinking are no longer a mystery.

As for the issue of "anti-Semitism", that too is clear. Jewish leaders, with the ADL as their point, hate anyone who disagrees with their pro-Israel policies. They do not intend to let anyone or anything stand in their way to rule the world. The naive, of course, will scoff at our explanation.

The authorities in Wisconsin tell us that they took all of the necessary legal steps to insure that the people on the property were notified many times to vacate before the swat team descended on Jan. 13, 1993. They probably did follow what to them was legal, but "legal" often is different from Lawful.


Return to Table of Contents

HOW THE PROPERTY WAS DISPOSED OF

The 380 acres in question are now in the hands of Tigerton Village, an incorporated town of about 800 plus people, having been deeded by Quit Claim Deed signed by the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors, Herbert Tauchen, and the County Clerk, Rosemary Bohm, for the sum of $104,933.38. This is more than $123,000 lower than the assessed value of $228,200. The deed was executed on May 26, 1993. The County of Shawano obtained a Judgment of Foreclosure from Judge Earl W. Schmidt prior to the execution of the Quit Claim Deed. The property was not offered for sale to the public by bid. This procedure, although offensive to fair minded people, is nevertheless legal in Wisconsin, as it is in California. However, it is interesting that the Board of Supervisors has the power to decide whether property will be bid out or simply disposed of by negotiated sale. Thus, the Board is all powerful, and this on its face is tyranny.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the village of Tigerton, according to former owners Donald and Sally Minniecheske, have wanted their property since the early 1960s, but they would not sell. It had been in the family for generations. Tigerton and the DNR now plan to turn it into an ATV (All Terrain Vehicles) park to attract tourism. The Tigerton Board of Directors has applied for funds from the DNR (guess whose money it is) to develop it. A few years ago the Minniecheskes ran afoul of the DNR when they hauled in sand and placed it on the river bank for an artificial beach. The DNR claimed the sand would destroy the habitat of certain animal life in the river. The Minniecheskes believed that the sand would enhance such life.


Return to Table of Contents

OTHER FACTORS IN THE CASE

According to Sally Minniecheske and her daughter Judy, the county eventually assessed taxes on their property at an unusually high figure of $13,000, which did improve the strained relations between the two parties. It appears that at this or some other juncture in the deteriorating situation, Donald Minniecheske became personally interested in religion. He deeded a portion of his property to the Life Science Church and a group began to meet for services. The property was declared tax exempt because of its use for religious purposes, just as all churches are tax exempt entities. Minniecheske and others such as Jim Wickstrom and later Thomas Stockheimer, also formed a Posse Comitatus organization. Posses Comitatus became increasingly popular among conservative constitutionalists in the mid-1970s. These patriotic people believed that our country was being compromised by socialist types in government who were trampling the Constitution and its protective rights for "we the people"

"Posse Comitatus" is Latin for "power of the county". It denotes all the people within a county who fall within the age qualifications that may be summoned by a county sheriff to assist in maintaining law and order. Many patriots in the mid-70's felt that existing authorities were not adhering to constitutional requirements and were depriving us of some of our Rights. They felt that one of the ways to overcome this was to form posses that could go to the sheriff and say in effect, "Here we are; we're here to assist, but you must abide by the supreme laws of the land." Naturally, local law enforcement people, right or wrong, didn't take too kindly to "outsiders" horning in. Posses all over the country became wild-eyed "extremists" to the establishment. And the only way that established law enforcement knew how to react was to "put them down". Instead of Americans assisting Americans for constitutional preservation, Americans began fighting Americans over misunderstood principles. Because each side was committed to what it perceived as right principles, and each side was stubborn, a clash was inevitable. And the clash finally came when Gordon Kahl was accused of killing a federal Marshal in North Dakota. He was hunted down, cornered in an Arkansas cabin and killed. His hands were cut off for reasons known only to those who killed him - FBI and local officers. The Gordon Kahl episode was understood differently by both sides. Detailed stories claimed that he was ambushed by Marshals and that he was not the one who killed the Marshal in the gun fight. However, once a law enforcement officer is struck down, reasons don't matter anymore; the apprehension of the "cop killer" becomes number one priority. This is what happened at Waco. THE BATF ACTED UNLAWFULLY initially which triggered the subsequent chain of events. Once the four agents were killed it didn't matter who killed them or why; the Branch Davidians had to go.

At Ruby Ridge in Idaho, law enforcement officers began the whole scenario by entrapping Randy Weaver, and a warrant was issued for the wrong date for a court appearance. When Weaver didn't show, he and his family became prime targets for the Feds. Once a Marshal was dead, the final outcome was predictable: the government wouldn't rest until the Weavers were forced out or destroyed. It didn't matter who or why; just "get the cop killer", and in this case, take out his wife first if possible. [Which they did by MURDERING her in cold blood as she stood holding her little baby girl...This was after the feds MURDERED her only son, shooting him (finally) in the back while he was trying to run to safety. --BeWISE]

The broad picture that we are developing is one that has its roots in government-gone-bad, but not just the BATF, CIA and FBI, it is primarily their bosses. Twenty years after the Posse Comitatus groups first formed, it is now apparent that a majority of Americans know that something is rotten in the government. They may not acknowledge that the "extremists" were basically right all along, but they nevertheless embrace the principals of conservatism - the principles of constitutionalism and common law. But the liberals-leftists never give up. Because they control the mass media, they have succceded in stigmatizing the "right wingers" beyond hope of redemption. True, the "right wing" has some hotheads. True, many of its adherents don't understand how to oppose government-out-of-control. But it is even more true that law enforcement agencies don't understand who their real bosses are.

Let us return now to the event in Tigerton, Wisconsin. The "Identity" religious members, and the Posse Comitatus members learned the truth about the international bankers and how we have been bilked out of trillions of dollars by that clique. They learned that the mass media are under management of the internationalists. They learned that local authorities simply play follow-the-leader and do the bidding of the Feds. Thus, when the Feds concoct psychological profiles of "right wing extremists" and these are handed out to all cops, most cops go on yellow alert when "extremists" show up in their neighborhoods. And when confronted by the few hotheads in the movement, they go on red alert and judge all of the others accordingly.

Parenthetically, it is amazing that "Identity" groups and friends are labeled as paramilitary organizations, gun nuts, and white supremacists, while the Jewish Defense League is seldom mentioned as extremist or dangerous. Yet their members are far more dedicated to destroying "anti-Semites" and Israel critics than the "right wingers" are for the preservation of the Republic. In Alabama recently, a radio talk show host was fired by the station because a local Jewish businessman, backed up by the Jewish Defense League and the ADL, threatened to blow up the station and assassinate the talk show host. Do we see the BATF and FBI going on red alert? There is little wonder that the Minniecheskes and friends in Wisconsin are embittered when this kind of favoritism is displayed by government at all levels.

As this writer conveys this story - very imperfectly - his mind keeps thinking of how humans act when they discover a rats' nest. What usually happens is that the rats are killed or dispersed, and their nest is destroyed, preferably by setting fire to it. Apparently, the Wisconsin authorities thought of the Life Science Church as consisting of a bunch of rats, and their buildings as an infested nest. One of the law enforcement officers, according to Thomas Stockheimer, told him: "You've got the truth, but we have the guns!" That seems to be a contradiction, however, because those same authorities accused these people of stockpiling weapons - although, as usual, they did not find any illegal firearms.


Return to Table of Contents

PERSECUTION OF THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT

Let's return full circle now to the statement by the Jewish Forward newspaper that the victory of the social activists in the Reform movement of Jewry would see increased attacks on the "religious right". Let's connect that to the ideology of Janet Reno, radical Attorney General who took the blame for burning to death 87 children, women, and men at Waco. The accusation that Ms. Reno is a homosexual may not be totally irrelevant to this overall picture of hatred for certain Americans. But one of the galling aspects is that millions of "Christians" in this country also hate the "fringe nuts". We're reminded of the hatred and warfare between the Heretics, Protestants and Catholics during and after the so-called Middle Ages. And the common denominator of the whole was the clandestine activities of Jews.

It is not without foundation that we see the connection between Jewish activism and the persecution of the religious right by federal, state and local authorities in contemporary America. The State Church, so to speak, is composed of the liberal church organizations that talk a good line against discrimination but in reality are part of the leftist thrust. The evangelical and fundamentalist churches, although implacable "enemies", possess the common characteristic of supporting the Jewish-Zionist agenda. Forced to the fringes of main stream religion in America, the "heretics" are stigmatized, disenfranchised, and finally murdered by popular assent. It is incredible that conservatives in this country don't rise up and demand the resignation of Bill Clinton and his Janet Reno, along with the rest of that unholy clique.

At this moment, Pastor Thomas Stockheimer (not acknowledged by the "in" churches as a legitimate pastor), is in jail for who knows how long, possibly 30 years, on trumped-up charges. He is in the slammer primarily because he is a leader of the "rats", and in order to disperse the "rats" they must separate their leaders. And the uninformed preachers and congregations all shout, "Hallelujah!" or "Those extremists had it coming!" or "Let's not rock the boat or we'll lose our tax exemption!" or "Personal libery is not as important as the ecumenical romance!" or "Those people are losers!" or "The Constitution is outdated!" or "We must progress with the times!" or... [or how about: "well, we're Christians, and we can't involved in any of the "affairs of state" because this isn't our country and we won't be here that much longer anyhow because of the "Rapture". etc - add nauseum - --BeWISE]


Return to Table of Contents

BUT THE WORST STIGMA OF ALL IS -

"Those extremists are anti-Semitic!" or "They are racists!" to which we reply: Anti-Semitism is necessary for Jewish leaders; without it they could not maintain a tight grip on their people. And they couldn't have their holocaust museums nor the billions of dollars in reparations, nor the gifts to "Israel" extracted from the pseudoguilt-ridden or political cowards.

Racism is similar and it's big business. It's necessary in order to cause or continue hatred among the races. Without it the money wouldn't flow into the coffers of the profiteers. Without racism the social engineers couldn't achieve their goals. In short, if the liberals and leffists didn't capitalize on racism it might not be as big a problem as they lead us to believe. Most of the people who are accused of being white supremacists are merely separatists and have no animosity toward blacks. The same is true of separatist blacks. However, the goal of world Talmudism/Zionism is to erase all differences among races and religions except their own. They reserve the right to be different because God made them different. Thus, it is their destiny to rule over the rest of us.

In this writer's book Strong Delusion he revealed what Rabbi Michael Higger's summation of Jewish literature over the centuries has been regarding the Jewish Utopia. In one place Higger stated:

"The people of Israel will thus conquer, spiritually, the nations of the earth, so that Israel will be made high above all nations in praise, in name, and in glory."
Is this a picture of humility and egalitarianism? We don't think so. We believe it means they will do whatever is necessary to achieve their objective, and one of their objectives is to eliminate independent-minded individuals and groups. We know that the "Identity" movement is a target because of the dossier created by the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL). The Weavers, Branch Davidians, and now the Universal Life Church near Tigerton,Wisconsin have all been nearly wiped out, two of them by fire. In the Milwaukee Journal of Oct. 5, 1986, it was revealed that one of the things Sheriff James Knope disliked intensely was their "anti-Semitic policies," and Wisconsin Asst. Atty. Gen. Michael Zaleski expressed his fears: " 'It was a growing movement and a challenge to authority.' " Smyrna believes that the English overlords in early America undoubtedly said the same thing in describing the Colonists who were growing bitter about the heavy handed policies and taxation of King George. It seems incredible that millions of Christians in America are as silent as lambs before the slaughter.
Return to Table of Contents

ARE THE "EXTREMISTS" PURE AND INNOCENT?

The so-called "fringe right" has its own faults. It isn't pure. Some of its adherents are bull headed and intractable. They project the image of hissing snakes even though most of them just want to be let alone. They have done so much research into the Law and Constitutional government that today's compromised lawyers and law enforcement agencies think they're wild eyed anarchists. They are a threat to unlawful authority by virtue of their fierce independence. They also wake others up to the reality of the growing octopus. It appears that every charge that was brought against the church group in Wisconsin was created because those people chose to be different and independent. They harmed no one. They only disobeyed what they believed to be unlawful coercion.

Now, it might be argued that if everyone disobeyed what they believe to be unlawiul coercion, Law and order would break down entirely. But that's not necessarily true. The only people who are lawless are those who harm others because they have no personal restraints and no foundational beliefs in morality, ethics, or accountability. Our founding fathers were looked upon by the British as renegades - as lawless subjects deserving of severe punishment, even though they possessed the highest sense of morality and personal responsibility. Even some of their religious beliefs were forbidden just as so-called "anti-Semitism" today is forbidden. If our founding fathers could see how we have acquiesced to that beast called the Fed - and if they could see the spineless cowardice of those who support the anti-Christ system, they would cringe with a sense of futility, with the realization that they died for nothing.

The anti-Christ system is now in control of our government and good has become evil, as evil has become good. Thus, the 'lunatics" and "fringies" are castigated, cast Out, and even burned alive!


Return to Table of Contents

THE LIBERAL MIND

According to A.I.N. (Box 44534, Boise, ID 83711), which cited the Insider Report,Joseph Sobran stated: "Notice,by the way, the prescribed liberal position that homosexuality is genetically inherent, but intelligence is not."

(And they wonder why we think they've gone mad!)


Return to Table of Contents

A Theological & Moral DILEMMA

Inherent in the responsibilities of being a Christian in contemporary culture is the sometimes heanrending decision of whether to pursue all truth or just "preach the Gospel" in a simple, naive manner. Not that the Gospel promotes naiveté, but that it is only the core of righteousness. One cannot be consistent if one communicates the Gospel of Jesus Christ and simultaneously cares little for justice. Yet this dichotomy flourishes today, and many Christian ministers are at its center. There is even the difference of opinion as to what constitutes justice.

Justice is synonymous with righteousness (rightness) in the Bible. And let it be said from the outset that justice is impossible without truth. Do we want justice to permeate our society? If so then everyone must hold truth in awesome respect. Important truth must never be compromised, even when it is destructive of our personal ambitions. This is why the lack of integrity among government leaders is so unacceptable. Justice can never be realized in society if leaders are corrupt. However, let the pot not call the kettle unclean, for integrity must begin at home. How can we discern that our leaders are untrue if we are also untrue?

With this short introduction to a concept of justice, let us proceed to some of its more noticeable ramifications.

On March 3 Billy Graham briefly appeared on the Larry King Live TV show to talk about his upcoming crusade to reach a billion people in the world via sophisticated satellite communication from Puerto Rico. Following him on the show was F. Lee Bailey, one of O.J. Simpson's defense lawyers. As Billy was leaving the show, and because he knew that Bailey was to follow, he told King that he prays for O.J. Simpson every day. He was asked why. He said that he prays for the will of God in Simpson's case. And since it is known that Graham telephoned O.J. soon after his incarceration,(3) King asked him what they talked about. Billy said he was not at liberty to tell. Then he told King to give his friend F. Lee Bailey his best regards. When Bailey appeared he acknowledged Graham as a friend and said Graham is a very wise person.

(3) Simpson was booked on June 17, 1994 (LA. County PR source), and Billy Graham telephoned him on June 20, 1994 (Mary Becker, B.G. organization).

The rest of the show was filled with F. Lee Bailey's glowing praise of his colleagues Shapiro, Cochran, Dershowitz and Douglas, and his absolute confidence that Simpson will be acquitted because he is innocent of the murders. He said that Nicole's and Ron's brutal slayings were drug related; that someone killed them and framed O.J. He even extolled the virtues of Rosa Lopez and defended her obvious inconsistencies, calling attention to her son having been a helicopter pilot who was killed in El Salvador, and he (Bailey) was a fighter pilot in the Korean war, thus he felt a kinship.

This writer has watched a great deal of the Simpson trial and the testimony of Lopez. Frankly, we wonder if Bailey was referring to the sarne trial we have observed, because his account is so different from our observations.

But here is the point: The trial concluded that Friday afternoon (3/3/95) with the defense team in a very bad light. Cochran and Douglas had been fined nearly a thousand dollars for violating California laws, and Rosa Lopez had been shown to remember very little except the time she allegedly saw Simpson's Bronco. The national feeling, we gathered, was that Simpson's stock was plummeting. Therefore, the appearance of F. Lee Bailey on international TV appeared to us as a master tactical maneuver in support of Simpson's innocence. And Billy Graham's role fit hand-in-glove with the scheme. The timing was perfect.

Now we're getting close to the hub of this article on theology and morality.

How dare Smyrna insinuate that Billy Graham would lend his enormous prestige and squeaky clean reputation to such a propaganda ploy. And what's wrong with his praying for O.J.? Nothing is wrong with his praying for Simpson, but it was the slant he gave to it, and more importantly the timing of the thing that suggests a CNN/Larry King "plot" to counter the disrepute into which the defense team had plunged, and of course to bolster Simpson's case. Everyone knows that he and the lawyers are being tried in the court of international opinion, and we believe that the jury is in reality a figure in the long run. But let us return to Billy Graham.

Why did he telephone O.J. Simpson long distance just after his arrest? Did he also telephone the Browns and the Goldmans? As a minister he should have, whether or not he knew them equally well. What did O.J. tell him during their telephone visit? Remember, at that time his appearance and demeanor were different. He had written a "suicide" note in which he called himself a "lost person". It wasn't until much later, after Robert Shapiro got hold of him, that he pleaded "absolutely 100% not guilty!" What did he tell Graham?

Should information given to a minister, priest, rabbi, psychologist, psychiatrist, et el., by a person charged with a heinous crime, for example, a bloody murder, be privileged? Suppose the accused confesses to the horrible crime and the confessor refuses to divulge the confession. Suppose, too, that the jury finds the accused not guilty. Suppose, finally, that the person commits another murder after being freed. Is the blood of the victims also on the hands of the confessors? Should the confessors be morally/lawfully obligated to reveal a murderer's admission of guilt? What's the difference between harboring a fugitive and refusing to reveal their confession of the crime? Could ministers or other professionals hartor a criminal in their homes without being accomplices after the fact? These are thorny questions.

Just how much are we supposed to get involved in the practical, cultural aspects of life? Our former question about naiveté is more involved than a superficial inspection allows. If Billy Graham thinks he should preach the simple Gospel only (as he often says), why does he lend his influence to causes not directly related to the Gospel? In past years he has made statements supportive of Communists, both in the U.S.S.R and China. He has recently done the same regarding Nelson Mandela in South Africa. He has supported immoral Presidents (Nixon,Bush and Clinton), and many other powertul people. Is he a personal minister to influential people only? He "preaches the simple Gospel" to the masses, refuses to get involved in their practical problems, but alternately intertwines himself in the temporal affairs of the rich, famous and powerful.


Return to Table of Contents

ACCESSIBILITY

Once upon a time church groups could enter county jails and conduct religious services for the inmates. That is no longer permitted in thickly populated areas. Counties usually permit only a cleric from the chaplain's staff, or only the actual pastors, priests, rabbis, et el., of individual inmates to visit as a religious confidant, and only after they have been cleared. Chaplain Don Dickinson says that in L.A. County this requires about 10 days. How did Billy Graham get through to O.J. Simpson? According to Fidel Gonzales of the L.A. County Sheriff's office, if Mr.Graham asked to speak to Mr. Simpson, they would first ask Simpson if he wanted to talk to Graham. Simpson would have to call him back. Is that what actually happened or did they receive preferential treatment?

Life has become so complex in our highly mobile, technologically sophisticated society that simple answers to basic questions no longer seem possible. But that's all the more reason why we need to pare everything down to basics. The question at hand is: Should a minister, priest or rabbi divulge a confession murder from an accused person?

Everyone has a right to a fair trial. Further, everyone is innocent until proved guilty. Let's stop here for the moment. Theoretically, a fair trial on whether the accused committed the crime is to protect the innocent. That right was designed to preclude the railroading of one who actually did not commit the crime. On the other hand, those who commit a crime are not entitled to the same protection IF it is known that they actually did it. A fair trial for them should be held to determine the degree of guilt, i.e., were their actions premeditated or emotionally spontaneous? In our opinion, fair trials to determine guilt or innocence were not designed to protect the guilty.

Therefore, if O.J. Simpson (or anyone) admits guilt privately, they are not entitled to a trial to determine guilt or innocence - only to determine the cause and degree of guilt for mitigated sentences. As we have stated before, Mr. Simpson came very close to a confession when he wrote in his "suicide" note that he was a "lost person". He further demonstrated his probable guilt by running down the freeway with a gun to his head. These two acts either strongly suggest his guilt, or his mental and emotional instability, in which case he was capable of the crime. If he admitted his guilt to his lawyer Weisman (sp?) who withdrew from the case early on, or if he admitted guilt to Billy Graham or Rosy Greer, he is not entitled to a trial to attempt to walk free, he is entitled to a trial only to determine the severity of his sentence.

If a person commits a crime and never admits it to anyone, they obviously must be tried to determine guilt or innocence because we have no control over that situation. But in the present case of O.J., how do we know whether or not the lawyers are hiding his guilt in order to receive huge fees, or they have been erroneously taught that even the guilty are entitled to a sham trial.

Lawyers are best suited to rationalize anything because of their training that everything is arguable. What will they do when they face God? Will Alan Dershowitz, F. Lee Bailey or Johnnie Cochran accuse God of rushing to judgment?


Return to Table of Contents

The "Gospel" According to Alan Dershowitz & Company

Alan M. Dershowitz is a professor of law at Harvard University and writes a syndicated column. He is occasionally seen on TV as a guest on some talk show or what have you. Because of his prestigious position at Harvard and his seeming "genius" at law, he is touted as one of the brightest lawyers in the country. Smyrna does not doubt his ability. But intelligence, education and ability do not guarantee integrity and wisdom. We are reminded of what the Apostle Paul penned in I Cor. 1:18-20a:
"For the word of the cross to those perishing is foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is [the] power of God. For it has been written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the understanding of the understanding ones I will set aside. Where is the wise? Where the scribe? Where [is] the disputer of this age?"
Paul quoted from Isaiah 29:14 regarding the so-called wise of this world and under inspiration added that the cross (the Gospel of Jesus Christ) is foolishness to those who are perishing. The cross is foolishness to Alan Dershowitz; yea, it is bigotry to him.

In an article in the Los Angeles Times of 3/4/95, Dershowitz used the words "bigot" and "bigotry" seven times in a tirade against conservatives, particularly Pat Buchanan. He called Buchanan a "gay-hating, Jew-baiting, black-bashing, woman-degrading" candidate for President in the next election. He described Buchanan's speech at the last Republican convention as a "bigoted diatribe", and, of course, Buchanan is sometimes "anti-Semitic". Furthermore, Buchanan "has been the mainstream spokesman for the lunatic fringe Jew-haters of the right."

Dershowitz winds up his vitriolic piece by stating that it is the responsibility of all "decent" people to condemn anti-Semitism. "But there is a special responsibility on the shoulders of those Jews, blacks, women and gays who share a conservative bed with right-wing bigots" to do so.

Note that Dershowitz lumps Jews, blacks, women and gays as having an urgent common interest to condemn "anti-Semitism". This gives us a clue as to why we are experiencing such a formidable front in the media that supports these groups. For years Smyrna has been pointing out that Talmudic-Cabalistic Zionists are the brains and purse strings for most of the present-day liberal issues. They have a vested interest in keeping "anti-Semitism" and "racism" alive.


Return to Table of Contents

Their Activists Are Everywhere

The photo at right [in original "hard copy" --BeWISE] is of Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750), German organist and composer of the baroque era, one of the greatest and most productive geniuses in the history of Western music. He dedicated practically all of his pieces to God and the Church (he was a Lutheran).

But now the ugly heads of his detractors are being reared at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania. Swarthmore has a 100 voice chorus which plans to perform St. John's Passion, one of Bach's great works, a companion to St. Matthew's Passion. These are based on the account of the crucifixion of Christ. However, a Jewish student at Swarthmore, Vanessa Silberman, quit the chorus in protest against the selection because she says it is "anti-Semitic". She claims that the piece was used by Hitler to educate the German people during World War II. Chorus Director John Alston claims that the work has historical importance and spiritual value.

Swarthmore College was begun in 1864 by Quakers, but is no longer strictly affiliated with any denomination. It is incredible that Jews enter Christian schools of their own volition but then endeavor to change them. Smyrna reported on another Christian educational institution, Westminster Schools in Atlanta, in our May 1992 issue under the title, Anatomy of a Jewish Strategy, at which perhaps one Jewish activist was able to upset the entire school. Why do Christian institutions allow themselves to be placed in such a position? Prirnarily it is because they embody the very essence of Caspar Milquetoast. They have abandoned the truth of the Scriptures to such an extent that their enemies dictate their responses. It is well known by all except the deliberately naive that Jewish leaders have mounted a broad attack on the New Testament, but more particularly on the Gospel According to the Apostle John, for that Gospel recorded a most pointed denunciation of the Jews by Jesus. Isn't it interesting that John's Gospel of love is also the one that points up most strongly the anti-Christ attitudes of those who were instnimental in causing the Savior's crucifixion. There is little wonder that they wish to discredit it, and this latest attack at Swarthmore is typical of their efforts.

Why do these schools not refund the Jewish students' tuition when they cause trouble and say, "We're sorry you didn't like us - bye, bye." They're either brainwashed or afraid. This reminds us of the Old Testament passage in the Book of Esther: "...for the fear of the Jews fell upon them." (Esther 8:17)


Return to Table of Contents

Liberty & Patrick Henry

The great patriot Patrick Henry was one of the stalwarts who brought about the rebellion against King George, and in his speech before a Virginia delegation that made him famous he shouted, "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give death!" He was accused of treason by which he replied, "If this be treason, make the most of it!" And by the way, where was he when he made this famous speech? He was in St. John's Episcopal Church. Try that in the churches today!
Return to Table of Contents

MR. NEWT HIRES FORMER AIPAC MAN

Arne Christenson, former AIPAC (Jewish lobby) legislative director, has been hired by Newt Gingrich, the new Republican Speaker of the House. Mr. Christenson said he is 100% sure of Gingrich's pro-Israel commitment.

(The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. March 1995, page 45.)


Return to Table of Contents

U.S. Grants to Israel in FY 1993 - (in billions)

$3.000
From FY '93 foreign aid budget

$1.271
Total 1993 grants

$4,271
Total 1993 grants

$.050
Interest paid by U.S. on money borrowed for 1993
grants to Israel (paid during first month of fiscal year
rather than on a quarterly basis as with all other
foreign aid recipients)

$2.000
U.S. Loan guarantees for Israel for FY 1993

$6.321
Total 1993 grants, interest, & loan guarantees to "Israel"

(Above statistics from the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 1995.)

All this money comes from taxpayers whose First Amendment rights are being violated, and whose religions are trashed by Jewish leaders. But this is O.K., because Jews are God's chosen, and they have a right to rule the world.


Return to Table of Contents

We need your help . . .

The following quotation has been published in many conservative-patriotic newsletters in recent months and has been attributed to Attorney General Janet Reno:
"A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the second coming of Christ; who frequently attends Bible studies; who has a high level of financial giving to Christian causes; who home schools his children; who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belief in the 2nd Amendment; and who distrusts big government."
Smyrna has spent considerable time and money trying to document its source but we have been unsuccessful. CBS's 60 Minutes denies any knowledge of it. Reno's office denies it, although Congressman James Hansen of Utah is awaiting a written reply from her.

If anyone can furnish a primary source for it, we would be very grateful for the information. Otherwise, we will refuse to publish it as truth, and we hope that all other publications will terminate their use of it unless they can nail it down. The conservative-patriotic movement MUST become more credible! We must not pass on unsubstantiated rumors. Citing another source is not good enough unless that source has the origin. We hope someone can lay the above quote to rest, one way or another.


Return to Top
o Back to Apostasy
o Go to April 1995


Courtesy and care of: Be Wise As Serpents BBS
International Christian Educational Services
bewise@pixi.com