The extreme violent left is expanding their desire to overthrow essentially everything and are now attacking a monument in Baltimore to Christopher Columbus, which was believed to be the first one erected to the Italian explorer in America. Italians were discriminated against and seen as all criminals connected to the Mafia. This monument was a milestone for Italians. So what is next? The extreme left will attack Italians celebrating Columbus Day? The same white supremacists of the 18th century did not consider Italians “white” nor Greeks or Spanish.

The tape begins saying:

“Christopher Columbus symbolizes the initial invasion of European Capitalism into the Western Hemisphere. Columbus initiated a centuries old wave of terrorism murder genocide rape slavery economic degradation and capitalist exploitation of labor in America. That Colombian wave of destruction continues on the back of indigenous African American and brown people…”

They do not dare say that Columbus initiated the slave trade. Did Columbus’ men take their women etc, yes, that also seems to have been historically standard during those days. There was a whole argument that the indigenous people of the America’s could NOT be made salves because the right to sell people into slavery was limited historically to the loser in a war. The Catholic Church blocked turning the American Indians who were neither white, yellow (Asian) nor black but the fourth race known as red. There were no such thing as  indigenous black people in America. The blacks were being sold by blacks to the Dutch on the pretense that they were the spoils of war and that made the slave trade acceptable from a historical precedent. Thus, the blacks from Africa could be sold as slaves but not the of the indigenous people Americas.

If this new Marxist uprising from the left calling everything racist and capitalists, then to correct history black should return to Africa, Italians to etc. and the USA should be turned back to the American Indians who were the ONLY  indigenous people.

The left now calls Christopher Columbus a “genocidal terrorist.” This is the same as the Taliban who were blowing up ancient statutes claiming they were false gods. The Christians also destroyed ancient statues beheading most and here they even carved a cross into the forehead of Germanicus, which was probably from the Temple of the Julio-Claudian Family expanded by Augustus but originally established for Julius Caesar by Cleopatra.

Here too we see the famous black bust of Julius Caesar commissioned by Cleopatra was also vandalized by the Christians. This attack upon historical monuments has typically bee carried out always by extremists who would justify killing anyone with the same rhetoric.

The monument, which features a two-story-tall obelisk atop a base, was still standing on Monday morning, but there was a gaping hole in the front and chunks of stone were scattered in the grass. The signs seen in the video were lying on the ground.

Confederate statues have been removed overnight in many places. In Annapolis, state officials followed suit and removed a statue of the Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, who authored the 1857 Dred Scott decision that upheld slavery. The statues of the Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, the Confederate Women’s monument, the Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument were all targeted. Here, Columbus had nothing to do with the Civil War. The lettering on the front of the monument — “Sacred to the memory of Chris. Columbus, Octob. XII, MDCCVIIIC” — was rendered unreadable. In Boston, a Columbus statue was painted red and a protest was held at a statue in Detroit.

In London, shall we also begin tearing down monuments because today’s political correctness differs from what was consider politically correct during the 16th to 19th centuries? The Guardian writes about the English monuments to William Wilberforce and Admiral Horatio Nelson. It was Nelson who defended slavery on the historical precedent. So should his statue be torn down today? Some are now demanding that Trafalgar Square be altered and Nelson’s statue and column be removed.

The political correctness within society changes with time. It was not until August 18, 1920, when the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution granted American women the right to vote—a right known as woman suffrage. Andrew Jackson was a slave owner and he started the Democratic Party to defend slavery. So the Democratic Party should be terminated and Jackson’s portrait should be removed from the $20 bill?

How about Alexander Hamilton, he was probably a slave owner and he was definite involved in transacting deals for the purchase, sale, and transfer of slaves is documented. The  play Hamilton should be shut down and the minorities who lectured the Vice President when he attended should reflect on themselves. So anyone who goes to see that play are supporting racism?

Thomas Jefferson had black slaves and after his wife died he had six children with a black slave “Sally” Hemings who was of mixed race owned by President Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was the father of her six children, born after the death of his wife, Martha Jefferson. She traveled to Paris with him and he took very good care of her even hiring an English physician in Nov. 1787 for inoculating Sally against smallpox. He bought her the finest clothing. Sally also raised his daughters since his wife had six children, but only two daughters survived to adulthood, and only one past the age of 25. Weakened by childbirth, Martha Jefferson died several months after the birth of her last child, two decades before her husband became the third President of the United States.  Sally cared for Jefferson until he died. They were together for decades. There goes the Declaration of Independence and the $2 bill.

Next we have George Washing and obviously the $1 bill must go since when he was eleven years old, he inherited ten slaves; by the time of his death, 317 slaves lived at Mount Vernon, including 123 owned, 40 he leased from a neighbor, and an additional 153 “dower slaves” from marriage.

Ben Franklin himself was an indentured servant to his brother James. Benjamin Franklin was bound to be his brother’s apprentice and servant until the age of twenty-one.  In his autobiography, Franklin described his brother’s “harsh and tyrannical treatment” which was so harsh, he ran away. Franklin, was able to set up his own printing shop.  Franklin printed ads in his Pennsylvania Gazette about runaway slaves and the slaves “for sale” ads, but he also printed added for the anti-slavery position. Franklin did own household slaves in his middle-age around 1740’s. So you must be a racist to use $100 bills.

Nevertheless, it is important to take into account that slavery was a norm of the eighteenth century. So we condemn everyone in history for something that was seen at that time as the “norm” which differs from views today? Should we eradicate history of all those who supported or believed in slavery? What we see today as fair will one day be seen as uncivilized. Where do we draw the line between what is past and the present? Are we the new Taliban?

ISIS is also blowing up ancient history because they too believe these were all pagan symbols. They too are attempting to eradicate history.

The greatest constitutional scam that the Judiciary and the Department of Justice have been doing for decades,  is they constantly rule against people claiming that they waived their rights under the Constitution. What judges have done is turned the Constitution on its head changing it from a restraint upon government to a positive right you can waive and thus the government has no restraint whatsoever. You might as well waive your right to life under the way courts accept waiving rights. This is completely ILLEGAL and you cannot possibly waive any right whatsoever for that is handing you the power to change the Constitution amounting to a constructive amendment for each and every case. That means the Constitution really no longer exists in the hands of judges for a defendant has the same power as James Madison and can change the constritution granting powers to the government that were expressly denied.

One of the most respected legal minds in the nation, Judge Posner, explained clearly that the Constitution “is a charter of negative rather than positive liberties. . . . The men who wrote the Bill of Rights were not concerned that Government might do too little for the people but that it might do too much to them. The Fourteenth Amendment, adopted in 1868 at the height of laissez-faire thinking, sought to protect Americans from oppression by state government, not to secure them basic governmental services.” Jackson v. City of Joliet, 715 F.2d 1200, 1203 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1049 (1983).  Thus the city had no constitutional duty to help the accident victims, and thus its failure to act deprived them of neither liberty nor life. /Id. at 12061

The Supreme Court has continually rejected that the Constitution is Positive and thus creates rights that the government must provide; see i.e. Harris v. McRae, 448 US 297 (1980); United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 62-70 (1936) et al. Since the Constitution is NEGATIVE and not POSITIVE, then it is impossible to waive any right whatsoever for that amounts to constructively amending the Constitution.

If the Constitution can be amended differently by waivers for every individual case, then there can be no rule of law whatsoever and all negative restraints upon the government are lifted if they can threaten citizens to surrender all rights. If the Constitution is positive, then they must pay for any right you came from medical care to abortions.

You cannot have it both ways. If the Constitution is NEGATIVE, then you cannot waive any right whatsoever and the police, prosecutors, and judges, are in fact restrained to the law and cannot escape it by claiming you waived it so now they have dictatorial or authoritarian powers.