Biblical Discussion

Tonight we continue mourning the death of our long-time friend and fellow-worker, Clifton Emahiser, who passed on Wednesday afternoon. I did my best to explain how that happened in a few words at the beginning of last night’s program, but I have not yet posted that recording. I will do that soon. Initially, I did not plan on writing a separate introduction for this evening, and have since changed my mind.

Last night, I asked for suggestions as to what to play today, and a dear friend and someone who has followed our work since 2009 made a request which would not have otherwise crossed my mind. He wanted me to replay a January, 2011 program that Clifton had done with me, which put the final nail in the coffin of my relationship with the fraud, the great impersonator, Eli James.

William Finck talks to Clifton Emahiser about Covenant Theology vs. Replacement Theology, and Clifton's experiences debating with members over his own family over his Christian Identity beliefs.

As probably all of our listeners know, Clifton Emahiser had suffered a bad fall in his home last August, so we moved him here to Florida to stay with us. Just before his accident, Clifton had sent me a few short essays to proofread, and finally, after ten months, I have been getting around to it. We posted two of those essays on his website this morning. The first, we presented in a discussion here a few weeks ago, which was Pitfalls Found in Biblical Research Materials, Part 1. I labelled that as “Part 1”, and not Clifton, hoping to encourage him to write a sequel, because it is a topic about which I am certain he has a lot more to say. Now we have Clifton here with us once again to discuss the second of those essays, which I also posted to his website this morning.

Sadly, this turned out to be Clifton's last podcast. We miss him dearly.

Pitfalls Found in Biblical Research Materials, Part 1 with Clifton Emahiser

Last August Clifton Emahiser, being 90 years old at the time, had taken a bad fall in his home. At that time he realized that he really could not live alone safely any longer, and we brought him here to Florida to stay with us. In the meantime, just before his accident Clifton had sent me three new short essays to proofread, which I never got to until now. So we will begin trying to make that up to him with this evening’s presentation. Here we have Clifton Emahiser with us once again, to present and discuss one of those short essays, which he had titled The Pitfalls Found In Biblical Commentaries, Lexicons & Dictionaries.

It seems to me that Clifton may have planned for this to be another multi-part series, since while the title is broad in scope, here he mainly focuses on the rather recently-developed denominational doctrines of Futurism and Preterism, and how they have affected modern Christian thinking which is reflected in their inclusion in certain popular Study Bibles and Commentaries. While Clifton has treated this topic in the past, here it is presented in a somewhat different context, and he goes further to show how recent these and other ideas about Scripture have been developed by certain denominations.

So now we shall present Clifton’s essay, along with our own comments and discussion:

The Pitfalls Found In Biblical Commentaries, Lexicons & Dictionaries, by Clifton Emahiser

While some of these Biblical helps are better than others, even the best have some serious errors! For instance some Bible cross-references can lead one astray, so let’s consider some of the better center-references found in a few Bibles:

If you have a King James Version Bible with the proper center reference, you can very readily prove Two Seedline teaching with it, for it will take you from one supporting verse of Scripture to another almost endlessly on the subject. (Not that the King James Version is an especially advisable Bible to use for study, as it is alleged to contain approximately 27,000 translation mistakes.)

Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 6, Israel in the New Testament, by Bertrand Comparet, with Commentary

Here we are going to present, critique, and hopefully elaborate on Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Israel in the New Testament. These programs are intended to both honor and elaborate on the works of Bertrand Comparet, and to offer any corrections which are necessary, because all men are prone to making errors, and no man can avoid that fate. We are doing this as part of our series on Christianity in the Old Testament because the two subjects are actually a single subject. Comparet himself referred to this sermon in his original presentation of Christianity in the Old Testament. Regardless of the propaganda which is spewed by the denominational churches, both the Old and New Testaments represent racially-based covenants made with the same group of people. One may pick-and-choose passages in the New Testament in order to attempt to dispute that, but those passages are being taken out-of-context when such interpretations can be clearly shown to conflict with many plain statements made in either Testament which refute the validity of any universalist interpretation.

To the sincere Christian, Judaism should have no standing or consideration whatsoever. The promise of a future new covenant was made explicitly in both Jeremiah and Ezekiel. The condemnation revoking the old covenant was spelled out explicitly in both Hosea and Zechariah. The Jews as a people have never fulfilled any of the many promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob concerning the children of Israel. They will never fulfill them, because the Old Testament is a Christian book. With all certainty, it can be shown in history that the Keltic and Germanic peoples have their origins in ancient Israel and Mesopotamia, and that they did indeed fulfill all of those promises. They also accepted the new covenant that was explicitly promised for Israel, and they accepted Yahshua Christ the Messiah of Israel, who came “to confirm the promises made unto the fathers”, as Paul of Tarsus attests. This is the basic premise of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, it is a true premise, and now we shall commence to hear it from him:

Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 5, Concluding Bertrand Comparet's Sermon, with Commentary

Here we shall finally conclude our presentation and commentary on Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Christianity in the Old Testament.

After Comparet had presented a lengthy survey of Christian professions made in the Psalms and how they were interpreted as being Christian in nature by the apostles of Christ, Comparet returned to one of his earlier themes, to correctly assess the nature of the Old Testament feasts in relation to the phases of the ministry and the expected return of the Christ. So Comparet appropriately explained that the Spring feasts of the Old Testament calendar were related to the First Advent of the Messiah, and that the fall feasts relate to the expected Second Advent.

From there, and in relation to a name which is present in the Old Testament but which is obscured in the English translations, Comparet’s sermon necessarily goes on to describe what Satan truly is in Scripture, in relation to the name Azazel which is found in the Hebrew of Leviticus chapter 16, but which is translated only as scapegoat in our King James Version. To properly understand the significance of the Day of Atonement in the fall feast schedule, Comparet rather adeptly finds it necessary to explain the significance of Azazel, and that also requires a proper understanding of the meaning of the term Satan....

Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 4, a continuing presentation of Bertrand Comparet's Sermon, with our own Commentary

In the first part of this series, we described the meaning and the use of the word catholic by early Christian writers, and we demonstrated that originally the term described the reception and acceptance of the Christian faith, as coming from the Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments, the Scriptures which were handed down by the apostles of Christ. In that original sense, we then asserted that Identity Christians are the true catholics, since of all of the modern Christian denominations, only we understand that both testaments, and both covenants, apply exclusively to ourselves. And of course, saying Identity Christians we include only White Europeans, the only people for whom the apostles intended the Gospel.

Then in parts two and three, we began a presentation and critique of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon on the Christian nature of the Old Testament. Doing this, we hoped to expand somewhat on Comparet’s original sermon, while adding our own opinions and outlining the reasons for our differences wherever we may disagree with him.

 Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 3, a continuing presentation of Bertrand Comparet's Sermon, with our own Commentary

In the portions of this sermon which we have already presented, Bertrand Comparet addressed some of the logical fallacies which are held by those who somehow think that the Old Testament and the New are separate books addressed to different groups of people. Then he presented some of the prophecies which should prove beyond doubt that the New Covenant was to be made with the same people who were at one time subject to the Old Covenant. In this context, he then discussed Genesis 3:15, Genesis 4:1, and the sacrifices of Cain and Abel described subsequently in Genesis chapter 4. From there he cited the Book of Job, and a Christian profession made by Job himself concerning his resurrection after death and his Redeemer, an obvious reference to Yahshua Christ. While we could not agree with some of Comparet’s assertions concerning the meaning of Genesis 4:1 or the age of the Book of Job, his elucidation of the Christian promises in these passages are certainly correct.

 Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 2, a presentation of Bertrand Comparet's Sermon, with our own Commentary

In the first part of this series, we had a long introduction of our own which asked the question What is a Catholic? Doing that, first we gave a brief exhibition from history and the prophets in order to help explain why it matters. Then we endeavored to provide a definitive answer from both the Greek meaning of the word καθολικός and from the earliest Christian writers. From there, we provided much evidence that originally, the word was applied to the origination and the acceptance of the Christian faith, and not to its application. A true and original Catholic accepts both Old and New Testaments in relation to himself and his people, and understands that both testaments are Christian testaments. At the same time, we would assert that a true Catholic can only accept both testaments if he or she is one of those people with whom were made those “catholic covenants”, as Irenaeus called them. In order to substantiate our arguments, we mentioned the Book of Odes from the Codex Alexandrinus. We had provided a commentary on that book here three months ago. Then we cited the early Christian writers Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Lactantius. And then, to establish what it was that the ancients saw as the world, we cited both Irenaeus and Martin Luther.

Lastly, we made a brief exhibition showing ancient attitudes towards the negro, citing two historical sources: the first century BC historian Diodorus Siculus, and the first century AD Christian work titled The Shepherd of Hermas. There we quoted a passage from the 9th Similitude of the 3rd Book, which was subtitled “Building of the Militant and Triumphant Church”, and which explains that blacks are an unredeemable and lawless race. Therefore it should not be a stretch to imagine that a truly militant, and ultimately triumphant Christian is one who stands against race-mixing, the likes of which we see all around us this very day. In the first centuries of Christianity, blacks were excluded from the “world”, and they must continue to be excluded. However knowing the Scriptures we must also exclude all other races, which were not a part of the “world” from the time of Christ to the time of Luther. So, we said that: Christianity is only for White Europeans, and Niggers certainly are unredeemable. And any of our White brethren who do not repent, and who have not yet been blasphemers or traitors, had certainly better repent soon or they are going to end up in the Lake of Fire along with the Niggers. All blasphemers and traitors to our race and our God are already headed in that very direction.

If any of our friends have not noticed, last Saturday’s program, which was titled Christian Identity: What Difference Does it Make? and the program we have just recorded for last night, which is part of a series and which is titled Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 1, an Introduction: What is a Catholic? are designed to answer some of the recent critics of Christian Identity. Tonight we continue those answers. We really must have rankled the Jewish pretenders in the so-called Alt-Right, because they cannot keep our names off of their lips, and they have begun to criticize us directly. Recently, a few of them said on a podcast that they would give me some attention if I could only show them Two-Seedline in the early so-called Church Fathers. These fools are too stupid to know first, that long ago I have elucidated Two-Seedline teaching in the early Church Fathers, and second, that I don’t want their attention. They cling to so-called Traditional Christianity, they call themselves “trad Christians”, and they are also too stupid to know that traditional or orthodox Christianity, which is not real Christianity, represents all of the errors that have gotten our White race into the trouble it is in now. Why would we want to go back to something which has assisted in our destruction?

So tonight we thought we would present what for us is old information, in a new light, and this is:

Early Two-Seedline Reiterated

We have titled this program in such a manner, because most of the things we are about to present here, we have presented before. We reiterate them now, and hope to elaborate upon them somewhat further, in light of recent criticisms we have suffered from certain individuals who have apparently not even actually read our material, but only scoff at the general idea of Christian Identity. In reality, they have no accurate concept of what they criticize, because it is demonstrable that they criticize our work without having actually studied it.

 Christianity in the Old Testament, Part 1, an Introduction: What is a Catholic?

Here we are going to discuss Christianity in the Old Testament, and this evening’s program is going to serve as an introduction to the subject. As we commence with subsequent parts of the series, we shall present a critical review of Bertrand Comparet’s sermon, Christianity in the Old Testament. Because of its length, which is comparatively extraordinary for Comparet, the review will take at least a couple of presentations to complete, depending on how many of our own comments we choose to interject. But a lengthy introduction is necessary, because even before we begin, there are a couple of related subjects that I feel there is urgent need to discuss, and as I discuss these things, I am going to prove one bold assertion: that Identity Christians are the original and true catholics, even though what we call Christian Identity as we know is only about a hundred and eighty years old, counting it from the time that it began to develop with British exploration and archaeological discovery within the British empire. The discoveries which the British and others made in that era led to Christian Identity.

So many people are convinced for so many years that the Old Testament and the New Testament are different books, representing different covenants, and with different peoples. Nothing could be further from the truth, and as we have said in the past, this belief is absolutely contrary to the words of the books themselves. We shall soon see that the earliest Christian writers, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Lactantius, all agree with us in this regard.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 24

Here we bring our presentation of Clifton Emahiser’s series of Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline to its conclusion. So far as my records indicate, this twenty-fourth and final notice was completed by Clifton on February 6th, 2003. As we have seen in his earlier portions of this series, Clifton did not really plan on writing so much on the subject, and on the other hand sometimes he thought he would write much more. Instead, he went on in his ministry to do other things, but all of them ultimately relate back to this same subject. There is no subject more important if a Christian really wants to understand not only the Bible, but also the forces which govern the world around us today.

As we proceed this evening, we shall hear Clifton make the assertion that “It is paramount we fathom that Yahweh came in the flesh; dwelt among us in the flesh; was bruised in the flesh; died in the flesh; was resurrected after three days in the flesh; ascended to heaven in the flesh, and will return again to us in the flesh.” Of course, there is no one verse of Scripture which informs us of this, however there are many verses which inform us of one aspect or the other, so Clifton is offering a compilation. For instance, we read in Hebrews chapter 2 that Christ “took on … the seed of Abraham”, and in Romans chapter 9 that Christ “was made of the seed of David according to the flesh”, so Clifton may indeed assert that Yahweh “came in the flesh”. Likewise we read in John chapter 1 that “14 … the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…” so Clifton says here that Yahweh “dwelt among us in the flesh”.

The Book of Odes is a collection of passages from Scripture which were once employed as a Christian Liturgy in the Eastern Orthodox Church. They are known to us only from the Codex Alexandrinus. Here William Finck presents the Odes and demonstrates that their teachings parallel our assertions of Christian Identity. The conclusion is that the Book of Odes is a Christian  Identity Liturgy, and that Christian Identity is the original (small 'c') catholic faith.

Christian Identity Liturgy in the Book of Odes

The Book of Odes is known to us mostly from Alfred Ralfs’ publication of the Septuagint, and it consists of a collection of songs or poems which were found placed at the end of the Book of Psalms in the Codex Alexandrinus. Sir Francis Brenton did not include them in his Septuagint translation, ostensibly because that work was based primarily upon the slightly older Codex Vaticanus, where the collection is not found. The Odes are only pericopes which were extracted from other portions of Scripture, so by themselves they are not an actual Biblical book. However to us they are interesting, because of the nature of the pericopes themselves.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 23

It was 9 years ago today that I was released from a halfway house in Binghamton, NY, to home confinement in Norwich, after just about 12 full years in prison. The last three months I spent in home confinement, during which I used most of my time to build several Christogenea websites. Five days after my release, on December 13th, I did my first podcast on Talkshoe with someone whom I will not now mention here. That was over 1,100 podcasts ago, and maybe closer to 1,200.

Now according to our DNS provider, Christogenea had over 120,000 unique visitors to the website during the month of November, and around 200,000 total visits. Website traffic has been up over 20 percent each of the last two years. It has been a long, slow climb to get to this point and of course there is no guarantee that we will continue doing so well. As we can prove through documentation, our website traffic is lied about by the companies that profit from publishing such figures, and Google and other search engines actively suppress many of our pages in their search results. But for what we have been able to do, we praise Yahweh for that, and we pray that we continue to grow in spite of our opposition. Ever since I was released from prison, my only endeavor has been to place our Christian Identity truth on as solid a footing as I am capable of elucidating, and to get our message to as many people as possible.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 22

As we make our presentation this evening, we shall see Clifton offer a defense of Bertrand L. Comparet, Wesley A. Swift, William P. Gale and Nord Davis. While we can defend these men for their profession of what we call Two-Seedline, we do not have to agree with everything which they taught or said. Rather, we must understand that they were merely men, and that while their studies have helped us tremendously, they were also imperfect, and it is our duty to improve upon their teachings where they themselves fell short. As Paul had said, we all sin – or make mistakes – and therefore we all fall short of the glory of God. But that is not an excuse to be slothful in our scholarship, or to cleave to errors for the sake of men.

I have told this story in various ways in the past, but now I am going to summarize it again: When I became acquainted with Christian Identity in 1997, for about a year I read and appreciated Swift, Comparet, and a host of other Identity writers to whom I am indebted. But when I decided to study it seriously, I wanted to prove it for myself. So by the end of 1998 I set aside all of the Christian Identity materials so that I could concentrate solely on Scripture, language and historical studies that would either prove or destroy what I had read from those other writers. While I did continue to purchase some Identity books and pamphlets after that time, it was mostly only so that I could give them to others who wanted to learn.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 21

Last week our program was prerecorded, and I must apologize that a file error prevented it from playing on our first stream. But we have four streams on which we play our live programs, and according to our logs the recording had played fine on the other three streams. So I apologize to the people who complained that they listened to the introductory music and never heard the podcast, but I wish they had tried switching to another stream because they would have heard it, and that is one reason why we have four streams, just in case one of them happens to fail. As much as we do this, on a tight budget and a staff of one, there are bound to be some failures.

So my wife Melissa and I were at Shelbyville, Tennessee for the #WhiteLivesMatter rally last weekend, and I hope to discuss that at length here tomorrow evening. But for now I will explain just one of the things that happened to us last Friday evening, but I cannot promise that I won’t repeat it tomorrow when I discuss the rally itself. I may indeed repeat myself.

I prerecorded last Friday’s podcast so that I could take the time in the evening to go out to the facility that had been rented by the League of the South for members attending the event. Not only were League members staying there, but also some of the people from the Traditional Worker’s Party – Matthew Heimbach’s group – and other so-called “Hard Right” groups that attended the rally.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 20

There are generally good Christian Identity brethren in our social circles, both near and remote, who are what we may consider to be old-time Identity Christians. This is true even if they have only been aware of Identity relatively recently, and has nothing to do with how long they have been involved with it. Many of them are Aryan Nations members. While we know them from Social Media, they frequently seem to stay away from our work here at Christogenea because we upset some of their traditions, and especially things such as the 6th & 8th Day Creation theory which was espoused by Wesley Swift and Bertrand Comparet. They also sometimes seem reluctant to embrace us into their fellowship, and they are even much more reluctant to listen to our messages, for that same reason. But these things which they cling to, these things which frequently preclude them from studying our work, are the traditions of men, and they are not necessarily what is taught by Scripture. Tonight, with Clifton's presentation, we are going to see an example and an indirect admission of this very thing which had once come from the mouth of Pete Peters.

Without an understanding of what we call Two-Seedline, and what we also think should be called Two-Treeline, and the way that we teach it at Christogenea, there is no possibly complete understanding of the true importance of the issue of race in Scripture. You cannot imagine that there are other races of so-called “people” among the creations of Yahweh our God if in the parables of Christ we are told that there are not. For example, in the net of the Kingdom of Heaven there are only Israelites which are called good fish and all others are only bad fish, which are destined to be destroyed, however nothing which Yahweh created in Genesis was designated for that particular purpose. Then these other supposed people are described elsewhere as the goat nations which shall ultimately share the same fate as “the devil and his angels”, as Christ Himself had professed in Matthew chapters 13 and 25 and as He had also illustrated differently in other parables elsewhere. So if your Genesis interpretation is not consistent with the Parables and the Revelation of Christ and the prophets of Yahweh, then you had better rethink your interpretation.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 19

Yahshua Christ informed us in His Gospel that He came to reveal things kept secret from the foundation of the world. He uttered those words while giving us the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, and informing us that the tares – which are evidently wicked people who cannot ever be reformed – were planted by the devil. Shortly after saying those things, Yahshua Christ declared that “Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” Then much later, in Revelation chapter 12, we learn from Yahshua Christ that there was a rebellion against Yahweh God at some time in the past, as the description of that rebellion uses language that is explicitly in the past tense. So we learn that a third of the host of heaven were cast down to earth and that their place was found no more in heaven. The leader of that host was identified with labels such as the great dragon, that old serpent, the Devil, and Satan.

Perhaps 1,500 years before Yahshua Christ had revealed those things to us in both prophecy and parable, the Genesis account was recorded by Moses under the inspiration of Yahweh. We know that Genesis was written by Moses, because Christ Himself attributed it to Moses. That account also contains both prophecy and parable, as well as historical chronicles. In Genesis we see an entity that was already present in the Garden of Eden when Adam was first placed there, and which is identified as a serpent. This serpent of Genesis chapter 3 must be “that old serpent” of Revelation chapter 12, as the language insists upon identifying for us a particular serpent, “that old serpent”, and there is no other “old serpent” in Scripture which may be identified in such a manner.

  Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 18

Melissa and I have spent the past week at the home of Clifton Emahiser, and with the help of many friends, packing his library and computers in order to move him to Florida, and going through all of his papers in order to determine what items of import should be preserved. We hope to leave Ohio on Tuesday morning, and it will probably take three days to drive home as we do not want to subject Clifton to too many hours on the highway at one time. Clifton has had countless correspondences and unfortunately it is not feasible to save most of them. He also has countless books and pamphlets, and we are packing the greater portion of them. If I had to guess, we will be transporting a literal ton of books, which are already packed into many dozens of large cartons. At first I thought we could move only the essential materials with a single 6'x12' trailer, and now we have also rented a 15' truck. Of course, Clifton is well and we have his help with this endeavor even if he cannot pack the boxes himself.

One night earlier this week, going through some of the cartons of old ministry-related letters and papers which we brought up from Clifton's basement, I found a letter which Clifton had written to Ted Weiland in June of 1997. I somehow doubt that it is the first letter which Clifton had written to Weiland, and there were a couple of others, but this is the earliest letter which we found. Here, because it is related to this topic of two-seedline, and because Clifton has been addressing Weiland throughout this series, we are going to read Clifton's 1997 letter:

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 17

As I wrote many years ago in a paper titled The Race of Genesis 10, We are only going to travel the history of this planet once. There are no second chances. Therefore it is our obligation to correctly identify the parties mentioned in our Scriptures, and to correctly determine the roles that the races and families which we may call men are fulfilling as history unfolds. We can only properly fulfill our Christian duty by meeting this obligation. There are Wheat and there are Tares. There are Sheep and there are Goats. There are Caterpillars, Cankerworms, Palmerworms and Locusts and we are told that they would all devour the children of Yahweh in the last days. But Christians are nevertheless warned to “come out from among them”, and “touch not the unclean”, to be a “chosen race... a holy nation, [and] a peculiar people”.

If we understand the identity of the Sheep, how can we fulfill our obligations if we do not understand the identities of the Goats, the Tares, the Caterpillars, the Cankerworms, the Palmerworms and the Locusts? And what are all of these aliens which have been brought in among us in the last fifty or sixty years, if they are not the Caterpillars, the Cankerworms, the Palmerworms and the Locusts? What are they, if they are not the flood from the mouth of the Genesis chapter 3 and Revelation chapter 12 serpent? Having visited most of the eastern United States these last three months, it certainly seems as though we have been flooded in such a manner. As we have said here in recent weeks, we are caught up in a war against our race, resulting from the enmity of Genesis 3:15, and there is no middle ground in this war.

Special Notices to All Who Deny Two-Seedline, Part 16

Melissa and I leave for Ohio in the morning, hoping to see Clifton Emahiser complete his physical therapy so that we may relocate him to Florida. Clifton seems to be in good spirits and is looking forward to the move and to having our company.

Here in our Bible studies I would not normally offer a summary of things I have said in a Saturday program which mostly concerns recent political and social issues. But on this occasion, to begin with such a summary may be appropriate.

Last week, presenting our recent program In the Wake of Charlottesville, I began with a discussion of the historic basis in America for what is now called White Nationalism. Now let me state that when I use the term nationalism I am referring to a strictly ethnic nationalism and not any false so-called civic nationalism. Ethnic nationalism is the only valid form of nationalism, and civic nationalism is entirely artificial, unnatural, and can only be enforced by tyranny. It is empiricism and not nationalism at all.

So I began by explaining that the American Union was first founded for the benefit of a particular group of White and Christian men and for their posterity, meaning their descendants. That fact alone demonstrates that this Union was originally intended to benefit one particular race of people exclusive of all others. Then I explained that when that element of the Union was undermined following the War of Northern Aggression, even some of the Yankee states had refused to ratify the constitutional amendments which facilitated such a treachery. Later, speaking of more recent events, I showed that even within the last decade modern international courts and treaties recognized the rights of a people to self-determination based upon “traditions and culture, ethnicity, historical ties and heritage, and a sense of identity or kinship”, among other things.