Now on Rumble
I wanted to comment on January 6th from a perspective that I have heard but a very, very few others say anything about. There is much to do in calling January 6th an ‘insurrection.’ Yet words have meanings and the word usage does not match what history tells us about the real attacks on the federal capital. Nor does the narrative of the day properly use the word ‘insurrection’ where it should be respecting the events of the last few years or the incitements of radical professors leading ‘insurrections’ on campuses and local communities.
The truth of all that is being yapped about concerning ‘insurrection’ is rooted in that first action when Lucifer made his play to take the throne room. (Isaiah 14:12 and 14) With that and the Fall of Adam and Eve, well, mankind are set to follow the example of Lucifer to see power and take it, hold it and use all methods to do both. The purpose of good Constitutional governance is to keep our natural human sinful natures in check. Sadly, the Christian Church/denominations in these United States allowed the 140 year insurrection here to come to the point we are with the political and bureaucratic imbedded insurrectionists actively accomplishing their intent. Oh, and please consider what I mentioned a couple of weeks ago about the ideological and mental make up of these folks as noted in Isaiah 66:4.
Who Are the Insurrectionists?
By definition, we can clearly identify these insurrectionists. Some we can call by name but most are easier lumped into groups or organizations. Here are just a few that should grab you attention from the past and present:
BLM, Weathermen Underground, Antifa, The Bonus Army, Facebook, All female far-left American terrorist group M19, Twitter, left owned media, Progressive Congressional Caucus, former Harvard University German language professor, Puerto Rican nationalists indiscriminately opened fire on the House floor from the visitors’ gallery, Resistance Conspiracy, and others acting in the Gramsci means of warfare.
I discuss this more during the program while asking you to fully consider that those who do not understand the sovereignty of God and do not function within His rule for mankind are the true insurrectionists no matter how they define themselves.
What About History Proving January 6th Is Not A True Insurrection?
I take you through the historical list of various activities that have happened at the federal capitol as well comment on that which happened on campuses of higher-education. As I read this definition of ‘insurrection’ on the program, I want you to have the 1828 definition here:
‘1. A rising against civil or political authority; the open and active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of a law in a city or state. It is equivalent to sedition, except that sedition expresses a less extensive rising of citizens. It differs from rebellion, for the latter expresses a revolt, or an attempt to overthrow the government, to establish a different one or to place the country under another jurisdiction. It differs from mutiny, as it respects the civil or political government; whereas a mutiny is an open opposition to law in the army or navy. insurrection is however used with such latitude as to comprehend either sedition or rebellion.
It is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have been made therein. Ezra 4:19.’ – Webster 1828 Dictionary
Now in my studied opinion, there were idiots, I am giving some low level of intellect to the so named, who did flow into open doors and windows. There were some who cast a plan but my review of information indicates entrapment and purposeful lack of preparation by the existing political, ideological and God hatting insurgents. To that, yes, a crowd without moral leadership acts without sensibility. But the criminals are not the ones locked in a federal jail, the criminals are those afore mentioned groups and the bureaucrat/political class that use a system devoid of actual foundational constitutionalism.
A Lot to Talk About
I could say that Lot in his going to Sodom would be a lot to talk about since we now have large pockets of Sodom in the U. S. On this program I am keeping my ‘lot to talk about’ to the context of January 6th 2021.
Sam Adams Wisdom
THE CONVENTION OF MASSACHUSETTS TOWNS TO DENNYS DE BERDT.1 [Boston Gazette, October 10, 1768.]
THE inhabitants of a number of towns within this province, having, at their several Town meetings legally called, taken under their most mature consideration, the great and prevailing uneasiness among the people of the province in general : arising from an apprehension that their charter and constitutional rights and liberties are infringed by the late acts of parliament for the raising a revenue in America with out their consent ; and also from the immediate prospect of a standing army to enforce the execution of these acts, at this time, when they may reasonably hope the late dutiful and loyal supplications of their Representatives, for a redress of the grievance, is under the consideration of our gracious Sovereign, from whose wisdom & clemency they expect relief : And being deprived of the benefit of a general assembly, his excellency the Governor having dissolved the same at an unusual season, and in an unusual manner, declaring that he does not think himself at liberty to call a new one, till he shall receive further orders from his Majesty. The said towns have severally made choice of Committees to meet together, consult and advise to such measures as may tend to promote the peace and good order of his Majesty’s subjects in this province, at so alarming and distressing a crisis.
The people in consequence complain d of these acts as being abridgments of such constitutional Rights as are laid deep in the foundation of nature : But these complaints have been represented as arising from a spirit of faction, disloyalty and rebellion. Their most dutiful and loyal petitions to his Majesty, they have been inform’d by the last advice from London, had not reached the royal presence : Nay, his Majesty, as they are told, has been assured that his subjects of this province have even attempted to excite the same spirit among his other colonies, by a circular letter, the only purport of which was to acquaint them of their having petitioned for relief from the common grievance, with hopes of success from the royal clemency.
On the 18th of March last, being the anniversary of the repeal of the Stamp-Act, and observed as a day of rejoicing, a few disorderly persons mostly boys, assembled in the evening, paraded some of the streets, and finally repaired to the House of John Williams, Esq., the inspector-general. Whether their design was to do him an injury or not, by his address and soft treatment of them, together with the inter position of some of the neighbouring householders, they soon retir’d & dispers’d, without doing any mis chief at all…
There was indeed on the loth of June following, something that had rather more of the appearance of riot, but it was only of a few hours existence, and with very little mischief. But as we are informed, hat the town of Boston have already given you a full account of this affair, supported by affidavits, we shall not give you the further trouble of reciting it, but refer you to their letter.2 It is however to be observed, that if the inhabitants of that town had been dispos’d to give the least countenance to this riot, so exasperated were the people at the extraordi nary and unusual exertion of the naval power, when there could be no apprehension that the King’s offi cers would be in the least measure molested in the due execution of lawful power ; as well as the haughty behavior of the commissioners of the customs, that the least countenance would have been sufficient to have led them on to extremities but they sooth’d them and the people soon dispers’d after having broke a few panes of glass, not to the value of five pounds. We cannot help taking notice here, of a notorious instance of the inveterate temper of our enemies, in a representation made in a certain letter, of this riotous assembly’s having burnt a beautiful barge belonging to the collector of the customs, bef fore Mr. Hancock’s door. As this worthy gentleman sustains a public character, and is one of the principal inhabitants in the province, it is apparent that the malice of the writer of that letter was not confin’d to a single gentleman, but extended to the public. The truth is, the barge was burnt on a common,3 sur rounded with gentlemen’s seats ; and the scene could not be said to be before Mr. Hancock’s door, any more than before the doors of divers other gentle men in the neighbourhood. The mean insinuation that was done under the influence of Mr. Hancock, is so far from the least shadow of truth, that it is no torious here, that the tumult was finally dispers’d, principally by his exertions, animated by his known regard to peace and good order. His Majesty’s Council afterwards gave a just account of the occasion of that riot, and repeatedly desired that the Governor would order the same to be made public, but without success.
Care was taken, however, by those, who, to spea k in the softest terms, are unfriendly to us, to transmit this affair to the nation in so aggravated a light, as to incense to a high degree. And we cannot indeed wonder, that when such false representations are made by persons, as we have reason to believe, of rank and figure here, our mother country should for a while give credit to them, and under an apprehension of a general insurrection, should send a military force to subdue a people, if we may be allowed to say it, at least as orderly and well-affected, as sensible of their just rights, and yet as patient under oppression, till they can be constitutionally relieved, as any in his Majesty’s empire.
From an ARTICLE SIGNED “Shippen” [Boston Gazette, January 30, 1769.]
‘…For it is certainly beyond human art and sophistry to prove that British subjects, to whom the privilege of possess ing arms is expressly recognized by the Bill of Rights, and, who live in a province where the law requires them to be equip’d with arms, &c. are guilty of an illegal act, in calling upon one another to be provided with them, as the law directs. But if some are bold and base enough, where the interest of a whole country is at stake, to penetrate into the secrets of the human breast, to search for crimes, and to impute the worst of motives to actions strictly legal, whatever may be thought of their expediency, it is easy to re criminate in the same way ; and one man has as good reason to affirm, that a few, in calling for a military force under pretence of supporting civil authority, secretly intended to introduce a general massacre, as another has to assert, that a number of loyal subjects, by calling upon one another to be provided with arms, according to law, intended to bring on an insurrection.
It will be equally difficult to prove it illegal, for a number of British subjects, to invite as many of their fellow-subjects as they please, to convene and consult together, on the most prudent and constitutional measures for the redress of their grievances ; or that such an assembly had actually assumed the powers of government, when they actually disclaimed all such powers, and united in recognizing their subjection to government, by humble petitions and remonstrances, and by encouraging their fellow-subjects in their loyalty and good Order.’
1. 1915 Bombing in the Capitol Building picture
2. Bomb Rocks Capitol, July 2, 1915 – U. S. Senate Archives
2. When the Left Attacked the Capitol – Politico Magazine online,
3. Bomb Explodes in Capitol, November 7, 1983 – U. S. Senate Archives
4. Bomb explodes in Capitol building, This Day In History: 1971
5. The U.S. Capitol’s turbulent history of bombings, assassination attempts, and violence – National Geographic
7. Bonus Expeditionary Forces March on Washington – National Parks Service
8. The Bonus March – U. S. History
9. Law and Liberty, R. J. Rushdoony
12. All female US terror group: May 19th Communist Organization
1The convention which authorized this letter met in Boston, September 22d, 1768, as a result of the action on September I3th of the Boston town meeting. According to Wells, not only this letter but also the petition to the King, were written by Adams. W. V. Wells, Life of Samuel Adams, vol. i., p. 217. Adams was clerk of the convention, and, with Otis, Hancock, and Cushing, represented Boston. Boston Record Commissioners Report, vol. xvi., pp. 263, 264.
2Cf. Boston Record Commissioners Report, vol. xvi., p. 257.
3T. Hutchinson, History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, vol. iii., p. 191, confirms this.