Such a Petty, Mean-Spirited Lawsuit
By Jerry A. Kane
Bend your ears boys and girls for another of Baron von Münch-Kane’s once-spun yarns and twice-told tales.
“Krebs went to the war from a Methodist college in Kansas,” and now the highest court in the land has taken up the case of an 8-foot white cross atop Sunrise Rock memorializing U.S. soldiers who fought in that war.
After World War I, several veterans moved to the Californian desert as a respite for their emotional and physical wounds. In 1934, they erected the white cross memorial to honor their fallen comrades who paid the ultimate sacrifice for their country.
They chose the memorial site because the sun casts a shadow on Sunrise Rock at a certain time of day that resembles a WWI doughboy. The memorial stood serene for more than 75 years until the Park Service was asked and refused to build a Buddhist sanctuary nearby.
That’s when Frank Buono, a retired National Park Service employee and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) board member, got his knickers in a knot and decided the government had violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause by favoring one religion over another.
Having firmly affixed his Catholic faith to his sleeve, the PEER zealot smartly marched over to the ACLU (American Communist Lawyer’s Union), and they joined together in a lawsuit to tear down the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial.
After the U.S. Government acquired the land on which the memorial sits as part of the Mojave Desert Federal Preserve, Congress designated Sunrise Rock a national memorial and barred its dismantling. A year later, Congress voted to trade the acre of land containing the memorial to the veterans, who had maintained it for decades, for five acres.
Even though public military memorials and cemeteries have been adorned for decades with crosses and religious symbols and the one-for-five acre deal satisfied both the government and the veterans, the ire of the Park Service pantywaist and surrogate remained. They declared the deal intolerable, and persisted in filing motions to tear down the memorial and overturn the land transfer.
In 2000, the Southern California ACLU announced the cross would be down within the next few months, but Congress voted not to allocate federal funds to remove it, an action that drew a lawsuit from the ACLU.
In 2002, a federal district court ruled that the memorial violated the “wall of separation” that the Constitution maintains between church and state; consequently, Congress attempted to transfer the land underneath the cross to a local chapter of the Veterans of Foreign Wars by using a clause in the Department of Defense budget, but the district court ruled against it.
In 2004, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court’s ruling to remove the cross in spite of numerous appeals from the U.S. Justice Department.
As if to commemorate an ACLU victory, a federal judge ordered the cross covered and hidden from view while the case is on appeal. A curious-looking plywood box, resembling a condemned building, now sits atop a desolate rock symbolizing the triumph of one man’s intolerance over the sacrifices of those who inspired the memorial.
Currently, the Supreme Court’s nine justices are divided on the issue along progressive and conservative lines. Progressive justices view the Constitution as a living, breathing document emanating meanings from ethereal penumbras of the actual text, which often contradict the plain understanding of the words themselves; and conservative justices focus on a strict interpretation of the text of the Constitution based on the originally intended meaning of the text.
When it comes to the Establishment Clause, progressive justices have interpreted the emanations from the clause to mean government hostility toward religion in general and Christianity in particular; whereas conservative justices have interpreted the clause to mean government neutrality toward religion and accommodation for Christianity in particular.
However, the final battle won’t be won until the Supreme Court decides on the constitutionality of Ninth Circuit’s ruling, and that could take weeks. It’s also quite possible the high court will ignore the broader question of whether the presence of the cross on a federal preserve establishes a religion, and will address the narrower question of whether Congress was right to transfer the land on which the cross sits to private ownership.
Clearly, the PEER gent and the ACLU know the military’s long history of using a cross as marker for the war dead of all faiths and as a symbol to represent honor, courage, and sacrifice. They have not employed such a Herculean effort for nearly ten years just to tear down an unadorned cross in some remote area of the Mojave Desert; theirs is a sinister purpose, to put an end to the principles of religious liberty as grounded in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.”
Voltaire’s words combined with those of the Preamble to the California Constitution, “We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom,” serve as a sad reminder for the cosmic irony in this a petty, mean-spirited lawsuit.
THE MILLSTONE DIARIES 
AMERICA UNDER SIEGE: “How” vs “Why”
Posted in Guest Commentary, tagged 11.OBAMACARE, 2nd AMENDMENT, 8.MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, 9.SYRIAN RED LINE, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, BENGHAZI, BERGDAHL, Bill Ayers, Cloward–Piven strategy, Declaration of Independence, Democracy Alliance, Democrat Party, Divine Providence, FALLUJAH, FAST & FURIOUS, Frank Marshall Davis, George Soros, HERNDON ALLIANCE, Institute For Policy Studies, IRS TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS, ISLAMIC TERRORISTS, Jeremiah Wright, Judeo-Christian heritage, Karl Marx, Lloyd Blankfein, Mainstream Media, Masters of Audacity and Deceit, MOSUL, Muslim Brotherhood, NSA INTRUSION, Progressive, RAMADI, Saul Alinsky on August 7, 2014| 1 Comment »
AMERICA UNDER SIEGE: “How” vs “Why”
By Bill Been
As an American who values our country second only to God and family, it is difficult to understand why the vast majority of the leaders and spokesmen for our country consistently voice a lack of understanding as to why Barack Obama either does or does not do certain actions that would be viewed as adding value or preserving America. Whether it be elected officials, political experts, talk-radio, or fair and balanced discussions, it seems that the typical responses when asked “Why?” are “I don’t know” or “It is incompetency” or “Obama is inexperienced” or “Obama is just a community organizer” or “inept” or “does not have the will” while ignoring the fact that Barack Obama told America exactly what he was going to do and he is closely following his stated direction.
The purpose of this document is not only to demonstrate that the answer to the “Why?” question is very straightforward, but to also demonstrate that the wrong question is being asked further masking the anti-American agenda of Barack Hussein Obama.
My book, Masters of Audacity and Deceit, clearly describes why Barack Obama is acting in a fashion that is opposing America and the fundamental principles upon which America was founded. At the time the book was written, the concerns that are reality today were presented as threats created or supported by the National Democrat Party that need to be understood and confronted by all citizens. These same threats provide the explanation for Barack Obama’s apparent “incompetence” and can be summarized in one statement as follows:
Barack Obama is simply carrying out his transformation objectives and direction that he promised five days prior to his election to the presidency in 2008 by following the ideology and teachings of Cloward & Piven, Karl Marx, Saul Alinsky, and Jeremiah Wright as interpreted by a host of communists including his mother, Frank Marshall Davis, and the admitted small ’c’ communist Bill Ayers, and far left groups epitomized by the Institute For Policy Studies while drawing financial and ideological support from wealthy liberals led by George Soros and the Soros Democracy Alliance group, the anti-American Progressive groups, and Wall Street executives such as Lloyd Blankfein under the protective cover of a totally compromised Mainstream Media and the corrupted modern day Democrat Party that is populated by leaders who lie, cheat, distort, and politicize events for their self-serving objectives without regard for either America or the American people.
That Barack Obama has succeeded in reaching his objectives is evident from the following list of his “accomplishments” during his first six years:
One special accomplishment that is an active work in process of Obama and his administration is to establish that “America is not a Christian nation” while declaring that Islam was instrumental in the establishment of America. This fallacious and false representation of American history was clearly debunked in a recent Fourth of July sermon that spoke to the charters of the Original Thirteen Colonies and why these people had left their homelands for the freedoms available in the New World. These charters tell the real American story and the success in downplaying this Judeo-Christian heritage is the most repulsive and scandalous accomplishment of Barack Hussein Obama. These charters are presented with the hope being that some people will awaken and come to the rescue of America before Barack Obama and his anti-American allies complete their destruction of the greatest country on earth. Quotes from the charters follow:
Virginia – to help in “propagating of Christian religion…”
Plymouth – “…to advance the enlargement of the Christian religion to the glory of God Almighty.”
Delaware – one purpose is “…the further propagation of the Holy Gospel.”
Maryland – first settlers motivated by “…pious zeal for extending the Christian religion.”
Massachusetts – bring “the knowledge and obedience of the only true God and Savior of mankind.”
Rhode Island – “Commits its people to the true Christian faith and worship of God.”
Connecticut – “to help preserve the liberty and purity of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.”
New Hampshire – “…do in the name of Christ and in the sight of God…”
In addition, when the Declaration of Independence was written, the last words were “…under the protection of the Divine Providence.” This was followed some years later by George Washington, after his first inauguration, leading the members of the House and Senate to St. Paul’s Church in New York to seek guidance and to commit America to God.
In conclusion, the answer to the “Why?” question is very simply stated above if one understands the various transformation objectives that Barack Obama has clearly articulated throughout his lifetime. If this is understood, the need for the “Why?” question no longer exists, and the correct question can then be asked which is: “How do current events and crises fit into the Barack Obama transformation objectives and direction.?” Without this question being asked and answered, the American people will continue going to the next election never understanding why our great country is being diminished at home and abroad!!!!
July 31, 2014
Email Bill at webeen@zoominternet.net or webpatrioticservices.com
Get his book at http://www.tatepublishing.com/bookstore/book.php?w=978-1-61346-370-3 or
http://www.amazon.com/Masters-Audacity-Deceit-William-Been/dp/1613463707/ref=sr_1_1_title_1_pp?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1318642270&sr=1-1
Read Full Post »