Wars and rumours of wars. Part 1

This series of posts revolves around the liberal leftist socialist progressives and the wars they wage in and against this Republic.

First up is the war on religion, the more correct term would be the war on(against)Christianity. This war has been going on for quite some time and continues today.

They use the same old tired argument, separation of Church and State. They do love to bring up the Constitution when it fits in with their agenda. They are either totally ignorant or they count on the citizens to be totally ignorant, I suspect the latter. The only separation between Church and State is laid out in the first Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Kicking God out of the Schools. 1962, it was the opinion of the court that prayer in school violated the establishment clause of the Constitution.

It continued and continues with kicking God out of public places, removing religious symbols. The latest is the demand the removal of the Peace Cross, a World War 1 memorial. It is the opinion of the court that the Cross is unconstitutional because it excessively entangles the government in religion because the Cross is the core symbol of Christianity.

So was this Republic founded on secularism or religion? Well lets take a look at some of the founding documents. You will find these words, terms and phrases. Found at greatamericandocuments.com, there are other sources as well.

The Declaration of Arms July 6, 1775. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms.
…that the divine Author of our existence…
…But a reverence for our Creator…
…Divine favor towards us…that his Providence would not…
…before God and the world…
…which our beneficent Creator hath graciously…
The Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
…Laws of Nature and Nature’s God…
…their Creator with…
…the Supreme Judge of the World…
…protection of Divine Providence…
Articles of Confederation November 15, 1777; ratified and in force March 1, 1781
…the Great Governor of the World…
Treaty of Paris signed in Paris September 3, 1783; ratified by Congress January 14, 1784; ratified by Great Britain April 9, 1784
In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity
… the Divine Providence…
…by the grace of God…

Obviously this Republic had its founding on Religion and not secularism. God is mentioned in the above founding Documents. You will notice that the Constitution is not on the list. Intentional, I assure you.

Is this Republic founded on Christianity or secularism? Again we turn to the founding documents.

The Articles of Confederation
This is found in the Preamble.
…the fifteenth day of November in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy seven…
This is found in the Signatories
… the ninth day of July in the year of our Lord one Thousand seven Hundred and Seventy-eight…
The Treaty of Paris
This is found in the signatories
…this third day of September in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three.
The Constitution.
This is found in the signatories
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven.

Obviously this Republic was founded on Christianity and therefore is a Christian nation, or at least it is supposed to be. The date of the historical documents reflect the date A.D. The year of our Lord. With that being said this is a Christian nation not a nation of Christians, there is no national religion and congress has made no law creating one. The citizens of the several States that comprise this Republic are free to worship as they please. Now we wait to see if the Courts have a differing opinion.

Church and State are separate, or are they? Government(state)has gotten itself unnecessarily and exceedingly entangled in religion. How you ask? IRS tax codes. Why? I believe for the simple reason of getting politics out and away from the Church. When was the last time you heard a sermon on politics, not necessarily supporting or opposing a particular candidate, but what effects politics and therefore government has had on the Church and Christianity? If a Church were to have sermons based on politics would they lose their favor with the IRS(government)?

Government has in itself become a religion, of sorts. Government has replaced God in people’s lives, government has become god. There was a time when people Prayed to God in times of difficulty. Now people pray that government(god)will come to their aid in times of difficulty.

If this was still a Christian Republic, based on Christian principles I doubt very seriously that we would have abortion on demand? But then again you have to ask yourself, why is there such a demand for abortion? Is it because we have devolved into a secular nation?

The right to an abortion is based on a court opinion. The right of same-sex marriage is based on a court opinion. Much of what we are forced to contend with are based on court opinions.(More on opinion becoming law in a later post)

We in this Republic can stop thinking that politicians and jurists can save this Republic. They are the reasons this Republic is in such a mess. The only thing that can save this Republic is by returning to the religious foundations this Republic was founded under. The first thing to do is to remember that our rights come from God and are not bestowed on and to us by government(politicians and jurists).

Now my brothers and sisters in Christ let me say this I do not care the color of your skin, we as Christians must stop dividing ourselves and me must stop letting others divide us. We are easily conquered when we are divided.

Ephesians tells us what we must do. I prefer the King James Version, it is what I am most familiar with. I am not a Biblical Scholar, Theologian or any thing of the sort. Some call me a back-sliding Christian. I call my self a work in progress. To reinforce this I use a King James Study Bible, and seek help from my Personal Savior, Jesus Christ.

Ephesians Chapter 6
6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
6:11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil
6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
6:13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
6:14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness.
6:15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
6:16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
6:18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
6:19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
6:20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.

That is it my friends we must regain our Republic. To do this we must wake up and follow the Scriptures. If we do as instructed we win the war on(against)Christianity. If we remain asleep and continue to ignore the Scriptures we will lose this war to the powers of darkness. The task ahead of us is not as great as the power behind us.

The time has come for another Crusade, a Great Crusade to restore this Republic. A spiritual awakening, revival and redemption.

DEO VINDICE

Advertisements

Oh, my word

Now we have “toxic masculinity”, good grief really. The Florida Democratic Party chairman has resigned(no date as of yet)because he “feels” like he is “creepy”, making women nervous in his presence. Creating a hostile and creepy work environment. So another male has jumped onto the “sword”, a self-sacrifice. Perhaps a better term would be self-castration. One female had said that he has a lot of “boob stuff” in his office, including “breast shaped” stress balls on his desk.

Given the fact that he is, soon to be was, a party official and many people, both men and women, may visit his office he should have exercised more or at least some discretion. Tacky to say the least. An office with public access should reflect a great amount of professionalism, the same amount of professionalism that one should display and act on in their public life. It would appear that many in politics fail to understand they have no private life, so they must be on their best behavior at all times. Sadly many in politics, both male and female think the rules, ethics and morality, do not apply to them. They are above all of that.

How one decorates his or her own personal office is their own business. If one chooses to decorate his or her own personal office in a bawdy manner do remember where you are when you get the urge to take a selfie. Under no circumstances should one ever take a selfie in their drawers, or in a negligee.

The rest of this post deals with the absurdity of this so-called “toxic masculinity”.

First off masculinity is not toxic to men or society as a whole. This world would be in a terrible state if it were not for masculinity.
Masculinity is defined as; 1a Male 1b having qualities appropriate to or usually associated with a man.
Toxic is defined as; 1 containing or being poisonous material especially when capable of causing death or serious debilitation.
Therefore if masculinity was toxic there would be no males.

If the following offends you, you need to get a grip and grow up.

I very seriously doubt that any female has ever screamed “toxic masculinity” when a Man(capital M)stepped to her aid to defend her or her honor. I used a capital M because sadly there are some males in our society that are men(little m). But then I am Southern bred and Southern raised. Masculine but not toxic Good manners and all.

A male looking at a female is not visual rape. Women, most but not all, go to great lengths to look their best. The ones that do they wear clothes that compliment their figure. Us men call the clothes they wear, “Look at me clothes”. Do I look? Hell yea. Will I apologize for looking? Hell naw. Will I gouge my eyes out for looking to prevent me from doing it again or taking a second look? Again, Hell naw.

Before I forget, we have something in the South called GRITS. No not grits, but GRITS, an acronym for Girls Raised In The South. Some drive trucks, some drive what some of us call; Look at me trucks”. They have look at me clothes and look at me trucks, you should see them. Do we look? Hell yea. Will we apologize for looking? Hell naw. Will we gouge our eyes out for looking to prevent us from doing it again or taking a second look? Again, Hell naw.

Now I ask you girls this. If you get all gussied up and no man(big M or little m)looks would you be offended. Keep this up and soon no one will look, no matter how loud you or your attire screams “Look At Me”.

Masculinity is not toxic. Wussification is toxic. The wussification of males will cause the death of manhood, it is a debilitating condition is left untreated.

No Damsel in distress was ever, nor will she ever be, rescued by a wuss.

DEO VINDICE
God Bless Florida

They judge themselves

Now what are they going to do? A sitting democrat Senator has had his behavior exposed, inappropriate to say the least. A sitting democrat Senator taking advantage of a female, at the time, co-worker. I would venture to say that this so-called comedian at that time, now a sitting democrat Senator was the first name on the marquis, the head-liner. If he was the senior member of the cast, he may have assumed what he did was his “right”. I dont know much about this former so-called comedian, I dont know if he a had a wife at the time or not. If he did, we had a term for this type of individual while I was in the Army. We called these types of individuals “Geographical Bachelors”, meaning that if he and his wife were in different zip codes he was a bachelor. Some people took that same stance if they and their spouse were in different area codes, sometimes in different buildings, or rooms within the same building. The clown had the attitude that all that was in his sight and everything within his grasp was his for the taking, he may still have the same attitude.

One would think that with all of the “righteous indignation” the establishment politicians have expressed over the allegations against the republican nominee in the Alabama senate race, demanding that he step aside they would take the same approach with this “clown”. But no, they will take a different approach. They do protect their own. They are going to refer the Senator to the Ethics Committee. They, other senators will decide if the clown’s behavior was ethical or not, he apparently cant. If he is found unethical in this they will name his punishment. Patrick Henry was right about this too. There really is no accountability in congress.

Speaking of Ethics Committees, how many of you need a committee to tell you if you have acted ethically or not? Most of us know the difference between ethical and unethical conduct without the benefit of a committee. Apparently this clown thought his behavior was acceptable.

Seems to me this clown was loud while condemning the actions of a Hollywood mogul. Bit dogs do holler first, and the loudest.

Now we have this, a congresswoman has come out under the hashtag me too. What she said in her testimony was to say the least startling. I believe she referred to congress as a “breeding ground” of sexual misconduct. I would say that they have the morals of an alley cat, but I would not want to condemn alley cats.

This kind of behavior did not just start yesterday. As a side note saying I am sorry or apologizing does not make it right. Using your position to make advances to take advantage of another is just bad manners, there is no excuse for bad manners. Now let me address your morals for just a minute, your morals are low. Just how low you ask? Your morals are lower than whale feces, and whale feces is on the bottom of the ocean.

So is this a failure of the individual to control him/her self or of congressional leadership? Well the answer is both, but it is the individuals responsibility to control him/her self. The reason I said both is because the current leaders were not always leaders they were at one time followers. But the leaders of today had to have seen what was going on then. Some of the members of congress have been around for years and years, some for decades.

So as a Senator says, “this is the first shoe to drop, more shoes will drop”. This I fear is going to grow and grow, the clown is not the only one, just the first one to be named.

So what is the answer? We the voters need to clean house. Repeal the 17th Amendment, let the States once again send their Senators.

DEO VINDICE

Where can this go wrong?

Perhaps a better question would be; How many ways can this go wrong? Has the Army lost its ever-loving mind?

USA Today and other outlets report that the Army lifts ban on recruits with mental health history. As reported according to documents obtained by USA Today, people with a history of “self-mutilation”(cutters), bipolar disorder, depression and drug and alcohol abuse can now seek waivers to join the Army under an unannounced policy enacted in August. Why was it unannounced and have any waivers been granted for these mental health issues? The fiscal year has long passed.

It appears that once again the Army is having a hard time meeting its recruiting goals. It seems that fewer and fewer qualified applicants are not volunteering to serve. So to counter that the Army is willing to accept sub-standard applicants. Lowering the standards to meet the objective, good freaking grief. Perhaps the focus should be on retention rather than recruiting.

I mean look at the list above that the Army is willing to give a waiver for, those are some pretty serious issues. The closer it gets to the end of the fiscal year the easier it will become to obtain those waivers, to meet recruiting goals. What effect will those mental health issues have on unit readiness? Units scheduled for deployment will take to the field under-strength, possibly severely under-strength while some of their members are receiving treatment. It would be difficult if not impossible to be undergoing counseling while performing ones duties. How about the medications required to offset the mental health issues?

On a side note, again looking at the list of mental health issues, how many of them would result in failing a background check when attempting to purchase a personal firearm?

So the Army is willing to accept sub-standard recruits. Sub-standard recruits will yield sub-standard soldiers. You reap what you sow. Was the murderous savage in Texas a sub-standard recruit? How about all of the other former members of the military who committed mass murders(Florida and D.C. come to mind), were they sub-standard recruits? Was the deserter who got at least 6 killed and several more severely wounded while looking for his sorry-ass, was he a sub-standard recruit? He certainly was a sub-standard soldier, if he could have even been called a soldier.

If these waivers are granted and as times go on we may find our military being led by sub-standard leaders, who were once sub-standard recruits. You reap what you sow. Decisions being made by leaders who require medication just to cope. What happens if they come off their medications? What about the one who must be gone for a minute to relieve tension?

Lets visit drug abuse for just a minute. Lets discuss the use of marijuana, illegal according to federal law, legalized in some states for recreational use. We have now come to an unintended consequence of recreational pot. It bars people from military service.

Now lets just say that waivers are granted and the individual enters the Army. He or she will be trained in the use of weapons, up to and including machine guns. Everybody in the Army is a “grunt”, not matter your military occupational specialty(MOS)you are a rifleman. Keep in mind most of these issues would be grounds to be denied the purchase of a personal firearm. Keep in mind also that the mental capacity of each murderous savage is the first thing questioned. If the individual has a history of mental health problems the question of the day becomes; How was this person able to buy firearms?

So I ask you this, why would the Army train persons who not only pose a possible menace to themselves but pose a possible menace to others? Our military members face enough danger already are they supposed to be subjected to even more. Who gets the blame when a member of our military “goes off the rails” while in combat, training or just hanging out back in garrison? What would be the outcome of an “unhinged” person “losing control”? A really well trained person?

So I leave you with this. The local and state law-enforcement agencies are facing shortages of qualified applicants just like the military. Will they too be forced to lower their standards just to meet recruiting goals? Think about it. The standard for tattoos is what now?

DEO VINDICE

Some do, some dont

Some get it, some dont and probably never will.

The latest mass killing(murdering)occurred in a Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. This was not the only shooting(murdering)that has occurred in a Christian House of Worship. Before the one in Texas there was one in Tennessee. Before the one in Tennessee there was one in South Carolina.

The one in Tennessee and the one in Texas have one thing in common. A concerned citizen brought the carnage to a halt. If I recall correctly the murdering at the Antioch Baptist Church was stopped by an Usher who wrestled the attacker to the ground. Again if I recall correctly the attacker(murderous savage)was shot in the leg. The murdering at the First Baptist Church was also brought to a halt by a concerned citizen. In this attack the concerned citizen exchanged fire with the attacker, as reported the attacker(again a murderous savage)was shot during the exchange. In the one in South Carolina the attacker(and again a murderous savage)was able to flee the scene, only to be captured a short time later. The murderous savage in Texas was not only shot, but when he attempted to flee was subsequently chased down by two townsfolk, including the one who had exchanged fire with and wounded the murderous savage.

This needs to be said and understood by all. In each of these instances the murderous savage knew he would face little if any resistance. They basically had the upper hand, the advantage if you will. They are brave when they have the advantage, not so much when they encounter resistance. None of the three murderous savages had planned on any meeting any real resistance.

I would like to point this out about society in this Republic today. The concerned citizen in Texas who grabbed his rifle and brought the savagery to an end is more the exception than the rule. Most in our society would have chosen not to get involved, if they did get involved it would have only been to the extent of grabbing their cellphone and making a video. This man chose to get involved, he grabbed his rifle(not a cellphone)and placing himself in great danger engaged the threat. He placed himself in great peril to defend the defenseless. To me that is the definition of a true Hero. This man exemplifies the meaning of the American Spirit, heroic and decisive action in the face of great peril. The other man, the driver of the truck also chose to get involved. This man also demonstrated great courage during the chase, determined to not let the murderous savage escape. Both of these men are exemplary and courageous in deed and character.

Now lets move on to those who dont get it and probably never will. This would be the gun control crowd, actually it should be called the “cult of gun control”. I call it a cult because to them it is a religion, but it is a cult. It is a false religion based on a false premise. It is based on the premise that what they call “gun crime” can be eliminated by placing further restrictions on law-abiding citizens. Passing laws and even more laws have no effect on those that choose to ignore or break the laws. If the rights of the citizens are infringed the only effect that would have would to be to provide even more victims of those who use a gun to commit a crime. I call the gun control a cult for another reason, they have Profits, false Profits. They follow a Profit who calls for more gun control while at the same time they are surrounded by armed security. They have guns to protect them while they seek to disarm others. The false “religion” of gun control headed by a false Profit, that makes it a cult.

Now we have a republican Senator from Texas siding with and reaching out to the democrats on gun control. This is a democrat windfall. It sounds as simple as writing legislation to enforce and strengthen laws on the books, but it is not that simple. It will not stop with legislation to fix existing legislation, it will lead to “comprehensive reform”. Currently the Air Force is being blamed for the failure on its part in reporting the conviction of the murderous savage in Texas. To me it is just another example of the government being above the law. When the government makes a mistake they just say “oops”. What happens to the rest of us if we make a similar mistake?

Now let’s go to those that get it. Once again a bad guy with a gun was stopped by a good guy with a gun. We have a sheriff here in Florida that has come out to say, “if you have a permit and a gun take your gun with you”. He gets it and so should you. I agree with what he has said.

You are your own “first line of defense”. Everyone who owns a gun should be proficient, range time and holster drills. I would like to say this, carrying a firearm comes with great responsibility. If you are not willing to accept that responsibility them for God’s sake do not carry. Let me point this out, the gun in your holster is not a “good luck charm”. Just because you have a concealed weapon and a permit is no guarantee that nothing bad will ever happen. Be proficient. If you want to carry a “good luck charm” get a rabbit’s foot, but then ask yourself what happen to the rest of the rabbit?

Now this is going to bring us to the subject of guns in Church. This is a subject that most congregations are unwilling to discuss. But it must be discussed. Before beginning with this I would like to point out this. We should be walking about this Republic everyday without a care in the world. We should be safe in our schools, offices, parks and everywhere we go, but things are different now.

There are many places that one would believe they were absolutely safe, but for today I will address only two. We should feel absolute safety in these two places, the sanctuary of the womb and the Sanctuary of the Church. Taking a little side road for just a minute. Let me go back to the “cult of gun control” for just a minute. The same people who favor gun control are the same people who favor abortion on demand. I find this to be more than ironic, they are perfectly willing to support abortion, which is not a Constitutional Right but oppose the private ownership of guns which is a Constitutional Right. Since 1973 it has been estimated that over 53 million babies have been murdered in the mother’s womb. The pro-choice “abortion cult” has their false Profits, the same as the “gun control cult”. The ones who push abortion have children and grand children. Those that support abortion only do so because their mothers chose life.

Now let’s go back to guns in the Church. This is going to cause angst in some Churches. I am of the opinion that every Church in this Republic have some sort of Church Protection Plan. I am also of the opinion that every male in the congregation carry his own personal firearm, that is, if he is trained, proficient and holds a permit if required and most importantly will to take on that responsibility. Some Pastors are going to be against guns in the Church. Some of the Congregation like is going to be opposed to guns in the Church. But I remind you of this you are your own and best first line of defense. As I have said before when a wolf comes it is best to have some wolf repellant.

There are those who claim that a handgun is not match for a rifle. Well that is true, but something is better than nothing. For a handgun to be effective against a rifle, the distance must be closed, either by the defender or the murderous savage. I am not for turning every Church in this Republic into a bristling fortress, but Churches like all “soft” targets must be “hardened”. We want people to come to Church and come to Jesus. We could lock our doors, but locks only keep honest people honest.

Above when I said “This man exemplifies the meaning of the American Spirit heroic and decisive”, that was and is true but it exemplified more than just the American Spirit. He exemplified the Christian Spirit. Willing to lay down his life for a friend. The Christian American Spirit.

DEO VINDICE

It is high time ….

It is high time to put things in their proper context. Thing needs to be placed in proper context, and if there is blame to assign proper context will make it clear as to who or what is at fault. This is the second part of a series.

What I am referring to is the latest terrorist attack, the one in New York. Good grief, in news story after news story the headline was “Terrorist truck attack”, this crap makes it appear that the truck was the terrorist and committed this heinous act. The truck was not the terrorist, and a truck being an inanimate object is not capable of committing an act of terrorism.

It seems that the selection of words and their placement were/are an attempt at “blame-shifting”. The rented truck was merely the tool of choice, the weapon, in this terrorist attack. The man behind the wheel was the terrorist. The man behind the wheel was a Muslim, a follower of Islam. Those that were killed and those that were injured we his victims, his intended victims. The Islamic terrorist drove the rented truck onto a bicycle/pedestrian path, intentionally. The Islamic terrorist then proceeded to run down/over as many people as possible, again intentionally.

Had the Islamic terrorist used a knife in his dastardly act, the headlines would have been a “terrorist knife attack”. The knife would have played a key role in terrorism the same as the truck did this time, at least in the minds of the apologists. They seem to confuse the what for the who.

A more fitting headline would have been “Islamic terrorist kills 8 and injures many more in New York City”. Time to quit candy-coating, blame-shifting and most of all get off the wagon, the politically correct wagon. Call it for what/who it is.

Now the politicians will try to come up with ways to stop these kinds of attacks. They will suggest some type of barriers to prevent motor vehicles from entering pedestrian/bicycle areas. They will come up with plans that cost millions. Let’s say they erect barricades between the sidewalks/paths and the streets, but what happens when an Islamic terrorist enters the sidewalk/path on foot or bicycle with a knife or axe and does what Islamic terrorists do? Now what? The answer is much simpler that erecting barricades and is free. No terrorists no terrorism.

Unfortunately there are already many terrorists already in this republic, thanks to many previous administrations. The latest terrorist attack was carried out by an Islamic terrorist who has lived among us for years. It has been reported that he has been here since 2010, and just now decided to wage Jihad. How many more are there? Are they just waiting for the right time to strike?

What is the answer? I dont know, but somebody better come up with something fast, and I mean something better than barricades. If not this Republic will soon find itself in the same sorry state as Europe. If something dont change Americans can soon resign themselves to the fact that terrorism is just part and parcel to life in the big city. Are you ready for that? Just waiting for the next attack.

Law enforcement will spent many hours searching for a motive as to why this attack was carried out. Maybe we as citizens should be searching for the motive as to why our lawmakers democrat and republican, are so lax in their immigration laws and policies. Why are they so much into diversification and multi-culturalism.

DEO VINDICE

Since when….?

This is the first part of a series.

Since when did doing the right thing become based on diminished public interest? What I am referring to here is reports of the current AG saying that he would not pursue based on diminished public interest referring to the Clinton e-mails and all that was associated with them. It is not just the e-mails but all of the wrongdoing in the previous administration.

While it may be true that public interest has diminished somewhat. It does not mean that the public is no longer interested in the matters the AG made reference to. Nor does it mean the level of frustration has lessened at the apparent incompetence with the AG and the DOJ, in this administration or the last. What the diminished public interest means is that people have passed away patiently waiting for someone to come along who would do the right thing and pursue the corrupt in government even if it went or goes all the way to the top. Not just pursue but prosecute.

It would appear that the current AG has taken a new view of polling, public opinion is based on polling. It seems that he believes the results of polling. If the majority says on thing then it must be true. The poll must be right. I remind him of the polls just last year that had HRC up by several points and in some cases by double digits. If the polling data was correct up until last November’s election HRC would be sitting in the White House and his ass would still be sitting in the Senate.

Doing the right thing should be a matter of conscience not at matter of public interest(polling), whether it has diminished or not. Right is right and wrong is wrong.

It seems that your reluctance to pursue these matters indicates that there is something to hide. We as citizens of this Republic have a right to know the truth about those in our government. You, Sir have an obligation to the citizens of this Republic.

Now is the time to embark on a Great Crusade, a crusade for truth.

DEO VINDICE