Justplainbill's Weblog

August 29, 2014

Injustice, by Earl, [nc]


Does anyone remember Detective Melvin Santiago? He was a Jersey City
police officer who was shot to death just a month ago, on July 13th. Santiago
was white. His killer, Lawrence Campbell, was black. Does anyone recall
Obama appearing before national television and calling for justice for
Officer Santiago’s family? Does anyone recall Eric Holder rushing to Jersey
City to see that justice was done?

How about Officer Jeffrey Westerfield. He was a Gary, Indiana police
officer who was shot to death last month on July 6th. Westerfield was white.
His killer, Carl LeEllis Blount, Jr. was black. Where was Obama? Where was
Holder?

Or Officer Perry Renn? He was an Indianapolis, Indiana police officer who
was shot to death just last month on July 5th, the day before Officer
Westerfield was killed. Officer Renn was white. His killer, Major Davis, was
black. I don’t recall any mention by Obama about the untimely death of
Officer Renn. And, I doubt that Eric Holder rushed to Indianapolis to make
sure justice was done. Or, maybe I just missed it.

Vermillion Parish Deputy Sheriff Allen Bares was gunned down by two men
just last June 23rd in Louisiana. Deputy Bares was white. His two killers,
Quintlan Richard and Baylon Taylor, were black. Was Obama outraged? Did
Eric Holder rush to Louisiana to make sure that the family of Deputy Bares
found justice?

Right here in our own state, Detective Charles Dinwiddie of the Killeen
Police Department was murdered by Marvin Lewis Guy, a black male. Officer
Dinwiddie was white. This happened on May 11th, just over two months ago. I
don’t even recall seeing anything about that on the news. Certainly,
the white citizens in Killeen didn’t take to the streets to loot and burn
businesses. Again, I don’t recall any mention by Obama or Holder.

Then, there is Officer Kevin Jordan of the Griffin, Georgia Police
Department. He was gunned down just two months ago on May 31st. Officer Jordan was black. His killer, Michael Bowman, was white. This was a white man murdering a black police officer. Where was Jesse Jackson? Where was “The Reverend” Al Sharpton? Was there looting and burning on the streets of
Griffin, Georgia? No. In fact, I don’t recall hearing about this one in the
news, as well. Why? You can draw your own conclusions.

Over the past 60 days, there have been five reported deaths of police
officers by gunshot in the US. Of those, four were white officers who were
murdered by black men. Blacks complain that white officers threaten black men more aggressively on the street.

You can draw your own conclusions on that one, as well.

​WAS IT MENTIONED THAT THE BLACK POPULATION OF THE USA IS 13%????​

August 28, 2014

Stealth Jihad, 2014 ISNA (Islamic Society of N.A.), Detroit, from Thomas More Law Center [nc]

Thomas More Law Center News Alert

Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
Detroit ISNA Conference – Stealth Jihad for The Subjugation of America

ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) will be holding its annual convention in Detroit this weekend beginning Friday, August 29 and ending September 1. ISNA was designated by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case, the largest terrorism financing trial in American history. A 1991 Muslim Brotherhood memorandum introduced in that trial identified ISNA as one of its front organizations. The memorandum further stated the Brotherhood’s “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within … so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

Detroit ISNA Conference – Stealth Jihad for The Subjugation of America

Astonishingly, despite ISNA’s terrorist ties, former President Jimmy Carter will be the convention’s keynote speaker. Carter, also, recently called for the legitimization of Hamas, which is listed by the US government as a terrorist organization. In addition to Carter, several other prominent non-Muslim political leaders will be speaking at the convention.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, about an hour’s drive from Detroit, commented, “The participation of these political leaders is giving the ISNA convention the cover of respectability and as a result is enabling ISNA and other the other Muslim extremists at the convention to achieve their goal of a “Grand Jihad” to subjugate America.”

An integral aspect of ISNA’s plan for the subjugation of America is to portray itself as a peaceful, mainstream charitable institution. It is part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy of “civilization jihad.” While most Americans are focused on violent jihad, civilization jihad is even more dangerous to American security. According to Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, it is “a form of political and psychological warfare that includes multi-layered cultural subversion, the co-opting of senior leaders, influence operations, propaganda and other means of insinuating Shariah gradually into Western societies.”

Erick Stakelbeck, a terrorism expert and author of the book “The Brotherhood: America’s Next Great Enemy,” compared the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy to that of “termites.” “The Muslim Brotherhood in America and really around the world are like termites. They burrow into a host society. They eat away at it until the day comes where they are ready to make their move.”

Siraj Wahhaj, one of the scheduled speakers at the conference, was the first Muslim cleric to deliver opening prayers to Congress. In his prayer he recited from the Koran and asked God to guide America’s leaders “and grant them righteousness and wisdom.” A year later, he told a Muslim audience in New Jersey that, “If only Muslims were more clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.” He was later named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

In one of his sermons, Wahhaj said: “In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing, and the only thing that will remain will be Islam.”

Abdurahman Alamoudi conducted the Muslim Brotherhood’s most successful infiltration of our political and defense establishments. He advised Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush. He penetrated and compromised our military and both the Democrat and Republican national organizations. He established the Muslim Chaplain Program for the Defense Department. He was the certifying authority for Muslim chaplains serving with the U.S. military. He appeared with President Bush at a press conference days after the 9/11 attacks. In 2005, the U.S. Treasury Department publicly admitted that Alamoudi was the top Al-Qaeda fundraiser in the United States. Alamoudi is currently serving a 23-year prison sentence for his terrorist related activities.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi of the Muslim Brotherhood, told a youth conference in Toledo, Ohio in 1998, “We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America.”

August 18, 2014

FYI/ All Hands: Gatestone Institute [nc]

Gatestone Institute

About Us
Events
Experts
Authors
Archives
Gatestone in the Media
Donate

About Gatestone Institute

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;
Human Rights
A free and strong economy
A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world
Energy independence
Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and their possible consequences, and the transparency and accountability of international organizations.

Gatestone Institute is funded by private donors and foundations. We are grateful for your support.
Ambassador John R. Bolton, Chairman
Board of Governors (in formation)

M. Zuhdi Jasser
Lawrence Kadish
Douglas Murray
Naomi Perlman
Ingeborg Rennert
Rebecca Sugar
Christine Williams

Amir Taheri, Chairman, Europe Board of Governors
Board of Governors, Gatestone Europe

Chairman, Amir Taheri
Josef Joffe
Anne-Elisabeth Moutet

Nina Rosenwald, President
Naomi H. Perlman, Vice President
Change text size:
Follow Gatestone:
FacebookTwitterRSS
Subscribe To Mailing List
Subscribe To Mailing List
Latest Articles
Why Jordan Doesn’t Want More Palestinians

by Khaled Abu Toameh

By mistreating the Palestinians and depriving them of their basic rights, Jordan and other Arab countries are driving them into the open arms of extremists, especially Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

Jordan, Lebanon and Syria can continue their practices against Palestinians without having to worry about the responses of the international community or the media. No one is going to take to the streets of European and American cities to condemn Arabs for mistreating Arabs.
Why I Support Israel

by David Draiman

There is no distinction between “anti-Zionists” and anti-Semites. They are chanting, “Death to the Jews.” They are not singling out the Israeli army or government, so let’s just have you take your masks off, shall we?

Hamas, however, always targets civilians — always. What if such a threat were aimed at your family? Your wife? Your son?

“Israel was founded on land stolen from the Palestinian people.” FALSE.
Islamic State: “We Will Take Spain Back”

by Soeren Kern

Calls to reconquer al-Andalus are becoming more frequent and more strident.

“Clearly Spain forms part of the strategic objectives of global jihad. We are not the only ones but we are in their sights.” — Spanish Interior Minister Jorge Fernández Díaz.
Krugerplein, Again

by Martin Bosma

There are people who see Islamic immigration as a positive thing; that it creates “cultural enrichment” and “thriving immigrant neighborhoods.” This is the vision of the liberal elites. There is also the reality.
Britain’s “Murky Anti-Semitic Subculture”

by Samuel Westrop

For Israel to receive any leniency in the Western press, more Jews have to be killed; meanwhile, countless Muslims, it seems, can slaughter each other without eliciting any condemnation on the streets of London or Paris.
Most Shared

Supporting Hamas is Anti-Semitic
by Alan M. Dershowitz
The New Romantics
by Denis MacEoin
Are “Integrated Muslims” Integrated?
by Douglas Murray
The Muslim Colonists: Forgotten Facts about the Arab-Israeli Conflict
by Ezequiel Doiny
Krugerplein, Again
by Martin Bosma

Most Viewed

Islamic State: “We Will Take Spain Back”
by Soeren Kern
Are “Integrated Muslims” Integrated?
by Douglas Murray
Krugerplein, Again
by Martin Bosma
The New Romantics
by Denis MacEoin
The Muslim Colonists: Forgotten Facts about the Arab-Israeli Conflict
by Ezequiel Doiny

Copyright © 2014 Gatestone Institute.
All rights reserved.

The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.

Both reserve the right not to publish replies to articles should they so choose
Gatestone Contacts

Contact: info@gatestoneinstitute.org
Membership: membership@gatestoneinstitute.org
Editorial: editor@gatestoneinstitute.org
Letters: letters@gatestoneinstitute.org

Events: events@gatestoneinstitute.org
Technical: webmaster@gatestoneinstitute.org
Corrections: corrections@gatestoneinstitute.org
Gatestone LINKS

About Us
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Events
Archives

August 14, 2014

Readable Summation of the Q’Ran, by Justplainbill [c]

Appendix C
(of The Albany Plan Re-Visited)

When discussing the current world Islamo-Fascist terrorist Jihad against the infidel, defined as all non-Muslims, you will have something to read and to counter any argument to a person who does not understand the totalitarian despotism of this intolerant and exclusive religion. For over 1,200 years, these people have been attempting to take over the world and its people for their own personal aggrandizement and religious zeal; The Spoils 8 & Repentance 9, on pages 35 and 36 herein are MUST READS, as well as Women 4, on pp 38 and 39, if you don’t believe me.

I originally made these notes while researching various religious societies as an undergraduate. At the time that I made them, I also read The Bible, The Works of Josephus, The Book of Mormon, The Bhagavad-Gita, The I-Ching, Confucius, Plato and a patchwork of essays on pre-Columbian American beliefs including the Plains’ Indians Societies. Because of those circumstances, certain verses are ignored while others are edited to mere shadows of their original prose. With this copy, I’ve edited some things and added or deleted others. I’ve left some of my more immature commentary in place for personal reasons. I reviewed Mohammed 47: and decided to copy it over as well as a few others, in their entireties so that the reader can get the feel of the prose as well as to keep certain concepts in their original context. I picked Mohammed 47 in particular because of its content, which I do not want the reader exposed to out of context which he would be if I had left it in my note form. I have highlighted certain portions in RED. By no means, repeat no means, do my comments herein include all of the vileness inherent in the Q’Ran. For a best view of it, I strongly suggest reading, The Legacy of Jihad; Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Andrew G. Gostom, M.D., Promotheus Books ISBN 1-59102-307-6 © 2005.
My Notes and Commentary:

Citations from the Q’Ran

The Following Citations were taken from The Koran, originally translated by N. J. Dawood, Penguin Classics © 1956, ISBN 0-14-044.052-6. Herewith are from the 4th Revised Edition, 12th reprint 1973. Professor Dawood put his translation into chronological order as best he could. I strongly recommend the reading of this book, and reading the introduction at least twice before entering the work itself. I have placed my personal comments in brackets [ ]. (And, as Prof. Dawood is British educated, I’ve left his spelling and grammar intact as well.)

p.9 “The Koran (the Arabic name means The Recital) is the earliest and by far the finest work of Classical Arabic prose. For Muslims it is the infallible word of God, a transcript of a tablet preserved in heaven, revealed to the Prophet Mohammed by the Angel Gabriel. Except in the opening verses and some few passages in which the Prophet or the Angel speaks in the first person, the speaker throughout is God.”
[From the introduction by Professor Dawood, emphasis is mine.]

[So, unlike both the Old Testament and the New Testament, there is an intermediary for some of the verses. In the Old Testament, The God of Abraham speaks to his people directly and in the New Testament, we have, purportedly, first hand reports of what happened, although, considering the difference, if any, between the pseudo-Pauline and the Pauline, who can tell? Interesting, as this means that not the whole work is the Word of God. Naturally, this leaves open the option of alternative interpretation for every single one of those passages. A point Mohammed makes several times is that no one from the West comes to speak to the Arab peoples, yet if memory serves, the Apostle Thomas went East and was martyred by the Arabs, hmm.]

The Cataclysm 82: … The righteous shall surely dwell in bliss. But the wicked shall burn in Hell-fire upon the Judgement-day: they shall not escape. …

[Not particularly different from orthodox Christianity on quite a few points.]

Man 76: … For the unbelievers We have prepared fetters and chains, and a blazing Fire. But the righteous shall drink of a cup tempered at the Camphor Fountain, a gushing spring at which the servants of Allah will refresh themselves: they who keep their vows and dread the far-spread terrors of Judgement-day; who, though they hold it dear, give sustenance to the poor man, the orphan, and the captive, saying: ‘We feed you for Allah’s sake only; we seek of you neither recompense nor thanks: for we fear from Him a day of anguish and of woe.’

[Man also describes paradise and ends with:]

The unbelievers love this fleeting life too well, and thus prepare for themselves a heavy day of doom. We created them, and endowed their limbs and joints with strength; but if We please We can replace them by other men.
This is indeed an admonition. Let him that will, take the right path to his Lord. Yet you cannot will, except by the will of Allah. Allah is wise and all-knowing.
He is merciful to whom He will: but for the wrongdoers He has prepared a grievous punishment.

[So, one may pose as a believer, yet be an unbeliever in his heart; hypocrites don’t seem to be limited to infidels. Wonder what the oil Sheiks make of this when they pray.]

Noah 71: … And Noah said: ‘Lord, do not leave a single unbeliever in the land. If you spare them they will mislead Your servants and beget none but sinners and unbelievers. Forgive me, Lord, and forgive my parents and every true believer who seeks refuge in my house. Forgive all the faithful, men and women, and hasten the destruction of the wrong-doers.’

[Not at all like from The Pentateuch Genesis 6:1 to 9:15]

The Fig 95: We moulded man into a most noble image and in the end We shall reduce him to the lowest of the low: except the believers who do good works, for theirs shall be a boundless recompense.

[The Fig suggests that one must be both a believer and do good works in order to attain Paradise. In The Old Testament man was required to be righteous, or, to be right with God. One did this by following the laws which included doing good works, certain dietary restrictions, clothing, &c. The New Testament, according to Paul, means that one must accept and follow the word of God, thereby allowing Christianity to become all inclusive as one did not have to follow all of the laws of The Old Testament. Simon, also known as Peter (from the Greek Petros for rock), and James, also known as The Just, disagreed with Paul and declared that one must follow both the laws and the word, stringently, thereby making Christianity exclusively Jewish. Consider this in light of The Proof 98: below.]

Night 92: … It is for Us to give guidance. Ours is the life of this world, Ours the life to come. I warn you, then, of the blazing fire, in which none shall burn save the hardened sinner, who denies the truth and gives no heed. But the good man who purifies himself by almsgiving shall keep away from it: and so shall he that does good works for the sake of the Most High only, not in recompense for a favour. Such men shall be content.

[Oddly enough, Night does not require that one be a believer to have God “smooth the path of salvation;” just that “For him that gives in charity and guards himself against evil and believes in goodness,”; also, that only the hardened sinner will burn in eternity, since elsewhere the hardened sinner includes among them the unbeliever, defined as one who does not accept the Koran as the final Word, then it becomes obvious that non-believers are open game for the believer even though Night suggests otherwise.]

The Declining Day 103: I swear by the declining day that perdition shall be the lot of man, except for those who have faith and do good works and exhort each other to justice and fortitude.

[A quick point: every verse begins with, “In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.” Obviously, I’ve not included that. Also, it seems that throughout, one must have faith AND do good works &c. in order to attain Paradise.]

The Proof 98:
The unbelievers among the People of the Book (Jews and Christians, the Book being the Bible) and the pagans did not desist from unbelief until the Proof was given them: an apostle from Allah reading sanctified pages from eternal scriptures.
Nor did the People of the Book disagree among themselves until the Proof was given them. Yet they were enjoined to serve Allah and to worship none but Him, to attend to their prayers and to pay the alms-tax. That, surely, is the true faith.
The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn for ever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures.
But of all creatures those that embrace the Faith and do good works are the noblest. Allah will reward them with the gardens of Eden, gardens watered by running streams where they shall dwell for ever.
Allah is well pleased with them and they with Him. Thus shall the God-fearing be rewarded.

[This is The Proof in its entirety. Notice the ambiguity as to who will punish the unbeliever, Allah or Muslim. Also, note the recurrence of the necessity to do good works as well as to believe. An interesting point here is that the Proof is referring to itself as the proof that all must believe – a tautological impossibility of validation. Another key point is that the people of the book did not disagree amongst themselves until the Proof was revealed. Considering the hostility between Jews and Christians over the preceding 700 years, that statement seems quite ingenuous.]

The Overwhelming Event 88:
Have you heard of the Event which will overwhelm mankind?
On that day there shall be downcast faces, of men broken and worn out, burnt by a scorching fire, drinking from a seething fountain. Their only food shall be bitter thorns, which will neither sustain them nor satisfy their hunger. …
Therefore give warning. Your duty is only to warn them: you are not their keeper. As for those that turn their backs and disbelieve, Allah will inflict on them the supreme chastisement. To Us they shall return, and We will bring them to account.

[Kind of explicit as to what a believer’s duty is to the unbeliever, isn’t it? Like, the believers’ only duty is TO WARN the unbeliever that Doomsday has been preset and that the infidel had better get his act together.]

The Most High 87: … We shall guide you to the smoothest path. Therefore give warning, if warning will avail them (the unbelievers of Mecca). He that fears Allah will heed it, but the wicked sinner will flout it. He shall be cast into the raging Fire; he shall neither live nor die. Happy shall be the man who purifies himself, who remembers the name of his Lord and prays to Him.
Yet you prefer this life, although the life to come is better and more lasting.
All this is written in earlier scriptures; the scriptures of Abraham and Moses.

Mary 19: [Mary is a long verse which must be read by one in its entirety. It is extremely important and must be contemplated in one’s heart. My personal opinion of it is irrelevant, but to understand that which is Islam, one must read Mary and apply its teachings to the current acts of Islam.]

The Nightly Visitant 86: … They scheme against you: but I, too, have My schemes. Therefore bear with the unbelievers, and let them be awhile.

[This is the last line of verse 86. It clearly states that Allah will deal with the unbelievers and that Islam must, “… bear with the unbelievers, and let them be awhile.”]

Joseph 12: [This history of Joseph and his trials and tribulations in Egypt, needs to be compared with Genesis 37:1 to 50:26.]

The Constellations 85: … Those that persecute believers, men or women, and never repent shall be rewarded with the scourge of Hell, the scourge of the Conflagration. But those that have faith and do good works shall be rewarded with gardens watered by running streams. That is the supreme triumph. …

[Yep, can’t get to Paradise without (i) believing; & (ii) doing good works; interesting considering the extreme lack of charity and abundance of arrogance amongst believers.]

The Rending 84: … Therefore proclaim to all a woeful doom, save those who embrace the true faith and do good works; for theirs is an unfailing recompense.

[Once again, you must be a true believer and do good works to enter paradise, as well as their duty is only to warn the unbeliever.]

The Soul-Snatchers 79: [a very quick Moses & Pharaoh, compare with Exodus 1 through Deuteronomy 34]

… But when the supreme day arrives – the day when man will call to mind his labours – when the Fire is brought in sight of all – those that transgressed and chose this present life will find themselves in Hell; but those that feared to stand before their Lord and curbed their souls’ desires shall dwell in Paradise. …

[Once again, we’re back to transgressions will be punished by Allah, not man. Also, that the last day has already been decided upon, i.e. the last day of Creation has been fixed and, apparently, was at the moment of Creation. Wonder what Dr. Hawkings thinks of that?]

The Tidings 78: … Fixed is the Day of Judgement. On that day the Trumpet shall be sounded and you shall come in multitudes. The gates of heaven shall swing open and the mountains shall pass away and become like vapour.
Hell will lie in ambush, a home for the transgressors. There they shall abide long ages; there they shall taste neither refreshment nor any drink, save boiling water and decaying filth; a fitting recompense.
They disbelieved in Our reckoning and roundly denied Our revelations. But We counted all their doings and wrote them down. We shall say: ‘Taste this: you shall have nothing but mounting torment!’
As for the righteous, they shall surely triumph. Theirs shall be gardens and vineyards, and high-bosomed maidens for companions: a truly overflowing cup.

That day is sure to come. Let him who will, seek a way back to his Lord. We have forewarned you of an imminent scourge: the day when man will look upon his works and the unbeliever cry: ‘Would that I were dust!’

[So much for eternity, looks like Creation has a specific end date. A repeating theme, noted here, is that in Hell one eats shit and drinks boiling water as well as being burned by the scourging conflagration throughout all eternity. This gets boring after awhile; sort of an intellectual numbness from the constant repetition.]

Those that are sent forth 77: [Woe on that day to the misbelievers. A strong verse that says the misbelievers are going to be a very sorry lot on judgement day. I’m taking it that unbelievers and misbelievers are two distinct groups; misbelievers are Jews and Christians, as they have been given prophets and scriptures which they have refused to accept and have ‘disagreed’ over, whereas unbelievers are pagans, heathens and those others who’ve been exposed to the Word by missionaries but have refused to accept the Word as divine revelation and, hence, the truth, in either event, all non-Muslims are going to Hell, so why differentiate?]

The Resurrection 75: [Allah knows everything and can do everything, when judgement day arrives (when sun and moon are brought together) and man confounded, no amount of pleading will save the unbeliever nor the false believer. Wonder how you define, “false believer?”]

The Ladders 70: [The good shall be blessed, the evil punished. Lust is a transgression except when one goes into his wives or his slave girls. A transgressor is one who does not give to the needy, share his wealth unstintingly, keep his word, bear true witness and attend to his prayers. Is this the same as being a false believer? The day of judgement shall be fifty thousand years long, different verse has the last day timed at one thousand years. This particular verse mentions slaves, thus slavery is legal within Islam – how can anyone consider a peaceful existence with a group that looks upon all non-members as slaves and potential slaves?]

The Mantled One 73: [It’s best to meditate at night for the day is for work.] Bear patiently with what they (the unbelievers) say and leave their company without recrimination. Leave to Me those that deny the truth, those that enjoy the comforts of this life; bear with them yet a little while. We have in store for them heavy fetters and a blazing fire, choking food and a harrowing torment. This shall be their lot on the day when the earth shakes with all its mountains, and the mountains crumble into heaps of shifting sand.

[And, unbelievers and transgressors shall go to hell, but, again, Allah will do the judging and punishing.]

The Inevitable 69: [True believers are going to heaven and everyone else is going to hell. Being a true believer means caring for the poor and orphans as well as praying properly.]

… We shall say: ‘Lay hold of him (the evil ones) and bind him. Burn him in the fire of Hell, then fasten him with a chain seventy cubits long. For he did not believe in Allah, the Most High, nor did he care to feed the poor. Today he shall be friendless here; filth shall be his food, the filth which sinners eat.’

Noah 10: [ends:] … Observe what is revealed to you, and have patience till Allah makes known his judgment. He is the best of judges.

[Long dissertation that starts with the good will go to heaven and wrongdoers will be punished in accordance with their evilness. It then goes on referencing Noah and how Noah was treated and ignored, though it doesn’t track completely with the Old Testament – kind of odd since both are attributed to the same source. Seems to be more confirmation that Allah will do all the judging and that He is the only one who knows the truth and that true believers must be patient and await His judgment. Hmm, how do the terrorists and militants reconcile this with their acts?]

Sovereignty 67: … He created life and death that He might put you to the proof and find out which of you acquitted himself best. … We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps, missiles for pelting devils. We have prepared a scourge of flames for these, and the scourge of Hell for unbelievers: an evil fate!
When they are flung into its fire they shall hear it roaring and seething as though bursting with rage. And every time a multitude is thrown therein, its keepers will say to them: ‘Did no one come to warn you?’ ‘Yes,’ they will reply, ‘but we rejected him and said: “Allah has revealed nothing: you are in grave error.” ‘ and they will say: ‘If only we listened and understood, we should not now be among the tenants of Hell.’
Thus they shall confess their sin. Far from Allah’s mercy are the heirs of Hell. …
Whether you speak in secret or aloud, He knows your inmost thoughts. Shall He who has created all things not know them all? He is wise and all-knowing. …

[The purpose of Life is to allow free will so that each soul may choose between good and evil as a ‘proof,’ sort of a final exam maybe? Unbelief is a sin; Allah knows all; many profess belief but He knows all; there is a certain amount of free will implied in the constant references to warnings – if there is a warning then acceptance of the warning is implicit, thus, free will. In context, I’m assuming that the missiles are for the devils to pelt the tenants with, any other reading implies that the tenants will be pelting the devils, which is quite unlikely, but, … . Does this actually mean that one can believe in The Creator, but not Mohammed?]

The Story 28: [Moses and Pharaoh; compare with Exodus and Deuteronomy. It is also clear from the reading that Allah is the God of Moses, and therefore, the Christ, although, back at Proof, it is clear that Jews and Christians have deliberately turned from the path of The Bible, hence both the need for the Koran as well as for the warnings against unbelievers.]

The Ant 27: [Moses and Pharaoh; Solomon and David]

… As for those who sin and then do good instead of evil, I am forgiving and merciful to them. … [Story of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, how Allah is Solomon and David’s God, and how He brought them to victory.] … This Koran declares to the Israelites most of that concerning which they disagree. It is a guide and a blessing to true believers. Your Lord will rightly judge them.

[More on heaven and Hell-Fire, repentance with penance is apparently acceptable, and once again, Allah will be the judge. Kind of odd that as it is designed to straighten out the Jews that it was given in Arabic; for the four thousands years preceding this, when Allah wanted to talk to the Jews he did it either directly, note the burning bush for Moses and the direct voice from the heavens for Noah, or sent a specific Jewish prophet amongst them. The Jews must’ve really pissed off Mohammed somewhere along the line as he is constantly pointing an evil finger at them without being any more explicit about why than that which is in the Proof.]

Cheating 64: … The unbelievers deny the Resurrection. Say: ‘By the Lord, you shall assuredly be raised to life! Then you shall be told of all that you have done. That is easy enough for Allah.’ …
The day on which He will assemble you, the day on which you shall all be gathered – that shall be a day of cheating (when the blessed will ‘cheat’ the damned of their places in Paradise which would have been theirs had they been true believers ‘Al-Beidhawi’). Those that believe in Allah and do what is right shall be forgiven their sins and admitted to gardens watered by running streams, where they shall dwell for ever. That is the supreme triumph. But those that disbelieve Our revelations and deny them shall be the heirs of Hell and shall abide therein for ever. Evil shall be their fate. …

[Seems to be a conflict between predestination and free will, here, also, that he who forgives and pardons wrongdoers will be exalted and forgiven in his own turn; and, since most Jews that I know believe in some form of resurrection, i.e., that something moves on after death, I find Mohammed’s constant anti-Semitism and anti-Christian tirades to be odd and, so far, without basis in fact or even in Myth, for that matter.]

The Hypocrites 63: … (The hypocrites) use their faith as a disguise and debar others from the path of Allah. Evil is what they do.

[Those who have professed belief and then have recanted are evil and Allah will not forgive them. Is this the basis for the death penalty for those who leave ‘the true faith’? What happened to ‘Allah will judge them’? Wonder what Khomeini & bin Laden think when they read this passage, if they ever actually read the Koran, and not just meaninglessly mouth memorized verses?]

The Cave 18: (Mohammed must give warning) of a dire scourge from Him, proclaim to the faithful who do good works that a rich and everlasting reward awaits them, and admonish those who say that Allah has begotten a son. Surely of this they could have no knowledge, neither they nor their fathers: a monstrous blasphemy is that which they utter. They (Jews and Christians) preach nothing but falsehoods. … [The sleepers await in the cave and are brought forth to pronounce the faith] … Therefore, when you dispute about them, adhere only to that which is revealed (herein) and do not ask any Christian concerning them.

[More of Moses and heaven and hell {when the tenants of hell cry out for water, water hotter than boiling brass will be poured on their faces &c.}. Much of this seems to be saying that Christians and Jews have corrupted the Word of God and are misguiding souls to hell, whereas only this Koran is the true word of God. Also, that Jesus was not the begotten Son of God and all that say so blaspheme and are certain of eternity in hell. Does that include Mother Theresa, who did good works and gave unstintingly to the poor, the afflicted and to orphans? And so, here we have his complaint with Christians, that Christians accept Jesus as begotten of Allah, considering the scripture promising that one will be sent, i.e. the messiah, I can see where a certain ambiguity could arise, especially considering that all that I have to go on are translations and that most translators cannot possibly be culturally contextual with what they write when the basis is ungrammatical and pre-contemporary. How many times did I feel confused by Josephus’ style as translated? Too many!]

Abraham 14: [As in certain other verses, there is reiteration of Old Testament stories and parables, except that Yahweh has been changed to Allah, hence the suggestion to compare with the Bible. More of heaven and hell and how one gets to each place as well. Unbelievers and their heresy will be brought to naught and sent to hell.]

Friday, or the Day of Congregation 62: [Friday is the Sabbath and no work shall be done; and, ] …

Those to whom the burden of the Torah was entrusted and yet refused to bear it are like a donkey laden with books. Wretched is the example of those who deny Allah’s revelations. Allah does not guide the wrongdoers.
Say to the Jews: ‘If your claim be true that of all men you alone are Allah’s friends, then you should wish for death!’ But, because of what their hands have done, they will never wish for death. Allah knows the wrongdoers.

[Wrongdoers will be punished, especially those that break the Sabbath (Friday) and Jews are wrong and evildoers simply because they are Jews and the Torah declares them to be the chosen ones!?! Judaism may be exclusionary, consider Sammy Davis, Jr.’s, experience with Israel, but so what? They’re not out raping, murdering and committing terrorism in the name of He Whose Name May Not Be Spoken (I am that I am). I’ve never seen any scholarly dispute over what the Torah proclaims as being the Word of God anywhere, although there are numerous synagogues with differing practices, there still has been only ONE temple and ONE God and ONE book; the issues of Resurrection, Redemption and Judgment are still being debated within the hierarchy as far as I know, still, there are the Jews for Jesus who accept His messiah-hood.]

Battle Array 61: … Allah loves those who fight for His cause in ranks as firm as a mighty edifice. … And of Jesus, who said to the Israelites: ‘I am sent forth to you by Allah to confirm the Torah already revealed and to give news of an apostle that will come after me whose name is Ahmed (Mohammed). … [Heaven and hell and wrongdoers &c.] … When Jesus the son of Mary said to the disciples: ‘Who will come with me to the help of Allah?’ they replied: ‘We are Allah’s helpers.’

[Well, here is Jesus being co-opted as an apostle to foreclaim Mohammed’s coming and that Mohammed’s coming is a fulfillment of scripture. Haven’t yet found anything supporting this in either the Bible or the Apocrypha, and especially nothing in Josephus, although, I’m not the brightest bulb in the lamp. Pretty harsh condemnation of Jews and Christians herein, though, and certainly a complete denial of gnosis and the apocrypha. Completely pulls the rug out from any possibility of ecumenicism. And, is the ‘fight in firm ranks’ the justification for taking punishment into their own hands after so many verses of ‘Allah will judge them’? Considering the fact that Mohammed spent a heckuva lot of time in the saddle killing Jews and burning down towns, is it that in historical context the Muslim is required to bathe himself in the blood of non-believers?]

Iron 57: [Lots of righteous and evil stuff, and an emphasis that to be good one must do charitable works. Rather odd since believers and atheists are statistically the stingiest of people – check the stats on the last few Tsunamis of who pledged what to relief and who actually paid; the same for famine & aids relief as well as plagues, who supports Doctors’ Without Border, The Red Cross & Crescent, &c.? Rhetorical question, actually, Islam and atheists do not support charity to even a moderate extent, although there are one or two who do, they are not representative of mainstream Islam or Socialism. Think of those emails that show the palaces & excessive conspicuous consumption of so many Arabs and then of the squalor of “their beloved people”.]

… We sent forth Noah and Abraham, and bestowed on their offspring prophet-hood and the Scriptures. Some were rightly guided, but many were evil-doers. After them We sent other apostles, and after those Jesus the son of Mary. We gave him the Gospel and put compassion and mercy in the hearts of his followers. As for monasticism, they instituted it themselves (for We had not enjoined it on them), seeking thereby to please Allah; but they did not observe it faithfully. We rewarded only those who were true believers; for many of them were evil-doers.

[Pretty much wipes out any acceptance or tolerance of Judaism or Christianity by a believer. Interesting that there’s a statement declaiming priestly celibacy here, something that I’ve not found real support for in the Bible, ditto anything forbidding ordination of women. This is a long verse whose purpose appears to be to completely remove any validity to Judaism and Christianity as well as to erase any possibility of God-head to Jesus. Wonder what the Gnostics would say to this?]

That Which is Coming 56: [The day of reckoning is coming, the good will go to paradise and be served by houris made virgin and the evil-doers will go to hell and be immensely unhappy for eternity. Apparently The End date was predetermined at Creation.]

The Moon 54: [The End is coming, be warned, We have made the Koran easy to remember, and others before you were warned and heeded it not and suffered and are in hell. I note the specific use of the word remembered and not the use of the word learned.]

The Star 53: … He does not speak out of his own fancy. This is an inspired revelation. He is taught by one who is powerful and mighty. …

[Mohammed is being instructed by the Archangel Gabriel, therefore, how can anyone doubt that this is the true revelation of Allah? Hmm, if it is the true revelation of Allah, why the intermediary or even the need for an intermediary? Remember Moses’ burning bush and Noah’s voice from the heavens? Jesus’ dealing directly with Satan and his conversation directly with Allah in the garden at Gethsemane?]

… (A list of ancient Arab Gods) They are but names which you and your fathers have invented: Allah has vested no authority in them. The unbelievers follow vain conjectures and the whims of their own souls, although the guidance of their Lord has come to them.

[Meaning the Koran is the be all and end all of revelation. More of he who does good deeds goes to heaven and unbelievers go to hell. Those who commit small sins will be shown mercy and a statement that Allah knows all of what will your choices be while you’re in the womb, clearly a statement of predestination, obviously in conflict with the verses intimating free will such as the one following {53:33} where it is declared that each shall be judged by his labours; and a claim of legitimacy by this being more of those scriptures given to Abraham and Moses.]

The Mountain 52: [The Koran is in accord with those scriptures handed down on Mt. Sinai (where God spoke directly to Moses, hmm); the good will {“… recline on couches ranged in rows. To dark eyed houris We shall wed them.
(We shall unite the true believers with those of their descendants who follow them in their faith, and shall not deny them the reward of their good works: each man is the hostage of his own deeds.) … and there shall wait on them young boys of their own as fair as virgin pearls.”} and the evil doers and nonbelievers will burn in hell. Looks like more free will and not predestination; and I haven’t found any rewards for the womenfolk, except that verse that says whole families will be admitted to Paradise on Judgement Day – does that mean a woman must be some man’s property to get into heaven?; so much for the libbers and gay rights activists and pro-choicers.]

The Winds 51: [Good deeds will be rewarded, unbelievers will be punished, and some of Noah, Abraham and Moses; Aad, Thamoud and destruction of unbelievers as recorded in the Old Testament.]

Qaf 50: [Good and evil, paradise and hell, references to Old Testament miracles of destruction to sinners {Thamoud, Aad, Lot, Ar-Raas, and Tobba} and a bit on Judgment:]

Then a voice will cry: ‘Cast into Hell every hardened unbeliever, every opponent of good works, and every doubting transgressor who has set up another god besides Allah. Hurl him into the fierce tormenting flames!’

[This is to be done at the time of judgment and it is clear that this judgment is to be made by Allah. Wonder what Khomeini, bin Laden et al make of this clear statement?]

Mohammed 47: Allah will bring to nothing to the deeds of those who disbelieve and debar others from His path. As for the faithful who do good works and believe in what is revealed to Mohammed – which is the truth from their Lord – He will forgive them their sins and ennoble their state.
This, because the unbelievers follow falsehood, while the faithful follow the truth from their Lord. Thus Allah coins their sayings for mankind.
When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her armour.
Thus shall you do. Had Allah willed, He could Himself have punished them; but He has ordained it thus that He might test you, the one by the other.
As for those who are slain in the cause of Allah, He will not allow their works to perish. He will vouchsafe them guidance and ennoble their state; He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to them.’
Believers, if you help Allah, Allah will help you and make you strong. But the unbelievers shall be consigned to perdition. He will bring their deeds to nothing. Because they have opposed His revelations, He will frustrate their works.
Have they never journeyed through the land and seen what was the end of those who have gone before them? Allah destroyed them utterly. A similar fate awaits the unbelievers, because Allah is the protector of the faithful; because the unbelievers have no protector.
Allah will admit those who embrace the true faith and do good works to gardens watered by running streams. The unbelievers take their fill of pleasure and eat as the beasts: but Hell shall be their home.
How many cities were mightier than your own city, which has cast you (Mohammed) out! We destroyed them all, and there was none to help them.
Can he who follows the guidance of his Lord be compared to him who is led by his appetites and whose foul deeds seem fair to him?
This is the Paradise which the righteous have been promised. There shall flow in it rivers of unpolluted water, and rivers of milk for ever fresh; rivers of delectable wine and rivers of clearest honey. They shall eat therein of every fruit and receive forgiveness from their Lord. Is this like the lot of those who shall abide in Hell for ever and drink scalding water which will tear their bowels?
Some of them indeed listen to you, but no sooner do they leave your presence than they ask those to whom knowledge has been given: ‘What did he say just now?’ Such are the men whose hearts are sealed by Allah and who follow their base desires.
As for those who follow the right path, Allah will increase their guidance and teach them to guard themselves against evil.
Are they waiting for the Hour of Doom to overtake them unawares? Its portents have already come. But how will they be warned when it overtakes them?
Know that there is no god but Allah. Implore Him to forgive your sins and to forgive the true believers, men and women. Allah knows your busy haunts and resting-places.
The faithful say: ‘If only a Chapter were revealed!’ But when a forthright Chapter is revealed and war is mentioned in it, you see the infirm of heart looking towards you as thought they were fainting away for fear of death. Yet obedience and courteous speech would become them more. Indeed, should war be decided upon, it would be better for them to be true to Allah.
If you (the hypocrites) renounced the Faith you would surely do evil the land and violate the ties of blood. Such are those on whom Allah has laid His curse, leaving them bereft of sight and hearing.
Those who return to unbelief after Allah’s guidance has been revealed to them are seduced by Satan and inspired by him. That is because they say to those who abhor the word of Allah: ‘We shall obey you in some matters.’ Allah knows their secret talk.
What will they do when the angels carry away their souls and strike them on their heads and backs?
That is because they follow what has incurred the wrath of Allah and abhor what pleases Him. He will surely bring their works to nothing.
Do the feeble-hearted think that Allah will not reveal their malice? If We pleased, We could point them out to you and you would recognize them promptly by their looks. But you will surely know them from the tenor of their words. Allah has knowledge of all your actions.
We shall put you to the proof until We know the valiant and the resolute among you and test all that is said about you.
The unbelievers who debar others from the path of Allah and disobey the Apostle after they have seen the light shall in no way harm Allah. He will bring their works to nothing.
Believers, obey Allah and His apostle and never let your labours go in vain.
Those that disbelieve and debar others from Allah’s path and in the end die unbelievers shall not be shown forgiveness by Allah. Therefore do not falter or sue for peace when you have gained the upper hand. Allah is on your side and will not grudge you the reward of your labours.
The life of this world is but a sport and a pastime. Allah will reward you if you believe in Him and guard yourselves against evil. He does not ask for all your wealth. If he demanded all and strongly pressed you, you would grow niggardly and this would show your ill-feelings.
You are called upon to give to the cause of Allah. Some of you are ungenerous; yet whoever is ungenerous to the cause is ungenerous to himself. Indeed, Allah does not need you, but you need Him. If you give no heed, He will replace you by others different from you.

[This is Mohammed 47 in its entirety. It is a must read for many reasons, not the least is that it is not Allah who is speaking. By leaving it whole, anyone can get the feel of the prose of The Koran. More of good works are essential to entering Paradise, again, as shown by the paucity of pledges fulfilled by the rich Arabs as well as their excessively ostentatious conspicuous consumption, who’re the true believers? Of special note herein, at the beginning, war is ennobled as Allah has ordained that believers shall be tested on the battlefield; another such point is that the hypocrites shall be known by their looks and by the fact that they will assail their brothers! Note who attacked Jordan, Indonesia, Algeria and Egypt and who goes about killing other believers with car bombs &c., and place that in context to this verse. Back to what can the likes of Khomeini and bin Laden think when they read these verses, if they ever actually do? It appears that the paragraph about those who will die in the cause of Allah will automatically go to paradise is part of the basis for terrorism, however, this verse is not from Allah, and there are quite a few verses specifically attributed to Allah that state that He will be judge and determine one’s fitness for Paradise, based on their labors and charitable works in this life. Mmm, maybe it is attributed to Allah and not Gabriel, gotta go check.]

Al-Ahqaf 46: … ‘I am no prodigy among the apostles; nor do I know what will be done with me or you. I follow only what is revealed to me, and my only duty is to give plain warning.’


[A long passage claiming heritage with the Torah and how so many have been misled. How this has been revealed in Arabic as proof of its validity seems a bit self-serving as well as contra-veritas, reasons given farther in indicate that it’s given because they’ve never had their own apostle nor been warned before – more on that below. More on unbelievers being sent to hell as well as a repeat of the definitive statement that a believer’s only duty is to give plain warning; and, those to be warned, does that mean everybody or only those in Mecca and Damascus? If the Koran is for all, then this warning is for all, only I don’t think that the Ayatollah’s believe that; only that they should be in charge, which doesn’t jive with Imrans 3. And as to not having their own apostles, that’s a historical falsehood of the blatant type.]

Kneeling 45: … We gave the scriptures to the Israelites and bestowed on them wisdom and prophethood. We provided them with good things and exalted them above the nations. We gave them plain commandments: yet it was not till knowledge had been vouchsafed them that they disagreed among themselves from evil motives. On the Day of Resurrection your Lord Himself will judge their differences.
And now We have set you on the right path. Follow it and do not yield to the lust of ignorant men; for they can in no way protect you from the wrath of Allah. The wrong-doers are patrons to each other; but the righteous have Allah Himself for their patron.

[More anti-Semitism and quite a bit of declamation on who’s going to paradise and hell; interesting that here the recital states that Jews hadn’t disagreed amongst themselves until the Proof. There are more sects of Judaism than there are of Christianity as far as I can tell. In Jesus’ time there were Sadducees, Essenes, Pharisees, Philistines, Baptists, &c. Some historians think that Jesus’ life was fully recorded as from the time of his Bar Mitzvah, or when he became an adult, about age 13, he left his family and lived with the Essenes who taught him to read and write as well as scripture. From them he went to John the Baptist for further education and then after meditating, he began his ministry; that the phrase ‘around thirty’ was not a definitive age mark but similar to the contemporary, ‘over twenty-one’, meaning of legal age or of having reached adulthood as opposed to legally of age (13). Other historians are putting forth that it’s a possibility that Jesus went to Tibet and learned Gnostic mysticism from the Hindu gurus. Also, that the fact that he wrote nothing, is meaningless in light of his being an apocalyptic messiah, so that writing anything down was meaningless as His death marked the beginning and the end (the Alpha and Omega – ά and ώ ), more properly the covenant’s final end and a new everlasting covenant’s beginning, in and of itself, thus not requiring explanation or new scripture.]

Houd 11: [Good and evil, those who deny the veracity of the Koran are evil doers, then long on Noah, and Old Testament attachment, ending with a touch of anti-Semitism and that Allah is only temporarily withholding punishment to Jews and others who would lead you astray.]

Thunder 13: … The unbelievers ask: ‘Why has no sign been given him by his Lord?’ But your mission is only to give warning. Every nation has its mentor. …
Allah does not change a people’s lot unless they change what is in their hearts. …
Truly, none will take heed but the wise: those who keep faith with Allah and do not break their pledge; who join together what He has bidden to be united; who fear their Lord and dread the terrors of Judgement-day; who for the sake of Allah endure with fortitude, attend to their prayers, and give alms in private and in public; and who ward off evil with good. These shall have a blissful end. They shall enter the Gardens of Eden, together with the righteous among their fathers, their wives, and their descendants. From every gate the angels will come to them, saying: ‘Peace be to you for all that you have steadfastly endured. Blessed is the reward of Paradise.’

[Who’s going to Paradise and who’s not and a list of things to say to the unbeliever who questions the believer. Free Will is implicit in the statement, “Allah does not change a people’s lot unless they change what is in their hearts.” This is a recurrent theme and device for learning of Allah’s will and for self-justification. This verse includes that wives will enter Paradise, thus granting women souls, but apparently, only if they are someone’s wife. Wonder what the libbers think of this, if any have even read the Koran? Also, that there are many Gardens in Paradise, and I have yet to notice why; when did Dante write his trilogy? Nine circles of Hell, nine of purgatory and nine of Heaven, if memory serves me correctly.]

Smoke 44: [There is but one God and His promise of Resurrection, and that’s the Truth and the belief. A bit on Old Testament retribution to those who held the Israelites in bondage and destruction to Tobba and others.]

[In its entirety:]

Ornaments of Gold 43:
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful
HA min. By the Glorious Book! We have revealed the Koran in the Arabic tongue that you may grasp its meaning. It is a transcript of Our eternal book, sublime, and full of wisdom.
Should We ignore you because you are a sinful nation? Many a prophet did We send forth to the ancients: but they scoffed at each prophet that arose amongst them. We utterly destroyed them, though they were mightier than these (the Meccans).
Such then, is the example of the ancients. Yet, if you ask them (the Meccans) who created the heavens and the earth, they are bound to answer: ‘The Almighty, the All-knowing, created them.’
It is He who has made the earth a resting-place for you and traced out routes upon it that you may find your way; who sends down water from the sky in due measure and thereby quickens the dead land (even thus you shall be raised to life); who has created all living things in pairs and made for you the ships and beasts on which you ride, so that, as you mount upon their backs, you may recall the goodness of your Lord and say: ‘Glory to Him who has subjected these to us. But for Him we could not be their masters. To our Lord we shall all return.’
Yet they assign to Him offspring from among His servants! Surely man is monstrously ungrateful. Would Allah choose daughters for Himself and sons for you?’ (NOTE: The pagan Arabs believed that the angels, and their own goddesses, were daughters of Allah.)
Yet when the birth of a daughter is announced to one of them (NOTE: The pagan Arabs believed that the angels, and their own goddesses, were daughters of Allah.) his face darkens and he is filled with gloom. Would they ascribe to Allah females who adorn themselves with trinkets and are powerless in disputation?
They regard as females the angels who are Allah’s servants. Did they witness their creation? Their claims shall be noted down. They shall be closely questioned.
They say: ‘Had it been Allah’s will, we should never have worshipped them.’ Surely of this they have no knowledge: they are lying.
Have We given them a scripture before this, so that they should hold fast to it?
They say: ‘This was the faith our fathers practiced. We are merely walking in their footsteps.’
Thus, whenever, before you, We sent an apostle to warn a nation, those who lived in comfort said: ‘This was the faith our fathers practiced; we are merely walking in their footsteps.’
Each apostle said: ‘What if I bring you a religion more enlightened than your fathers’?’ But they replied: ‘We deny the message you have brought.’ So We took vengeance on them. Consider the fate of those who disbelieved Our warning.
Tell of Abraham, who said to his father and to his people: ‘I renounce your gods except Him who created me, for He will rightly guide me.’ He made this an abiding precept among his descendants, so that they might turn to none but Allah.
I allowed these men and their fathers to live in comfort until there came to them the truth and an apostle giving them guidance. But now that the truth has come to them, they say: ‘It is witchcraft. We will not believe in it.’ They also say: ‘Why was this Koran not revealed to some mighty man from the two towns? (Mecca and Medina)
Are they the distributors of your Lord’s blessings? It is We who deal out to them their livelihoods in this world, exalting some in rank above others, so that the one may take the other into his service. Better is your Lord’s mercy than all their hoarded treasures.
But for the fear that all mankind might have become one race of unbelievers, We would have given those who deny the Lord of Mercy dwellings with silver roofs, and gates and stairs of silver; silver couches to recline upon and ornaments of gold: for all these are but the fleeting comforts of this life. It is the life to come that Allah reserves for those who fear Him.
He that does not heed the warning of the Merciful shall have a devil for his companion (devils turn men away from the right path, though they may think themselves rightly guided). And when he comes before Us, he shall say (to his companion): ‘Would that we were as far apart as the east is from the west.’ Truly, Satan is an evil companion.
But because you have done wrong, that others will share your punishment will not avail you on that day.
You cannot make the deaf hear, nor can you guide the blind or those who are in gross error. Whether We take you hence or let you live to see Our threats fulfilled, We shall surely take vengeance on them: for We have absolute power over them.
Therefore hold fast to that which is revealed to you: you are on the right path. It is an admonition to you and to your people. You shall be questioned all.
Ask those of Our apostles whom We sent before you if We ever appointed gods to be worshipped besides Allah.
We sent forth Moses with Our signs to Pharaoh and his nobles. He said: ‘I am the apostle of the Lord of the Creation.’ But when he showed them Our signs they laughed at them: yet each fresh sign We revealed to them was mightier than the one that came before it. Therefore We let loose Our scourge upon them, so that they might return to the right path.
‘Magician,’ they said, ‘pray to your Lord for us and invoke the promise He has made you. We accept your guidance.’
But when We had relieved their affliction they broke their pledge.
Pharaoh made a proclamation among his people. ‘My people,’ said he, ‘is the kingdom of Egypt not mine, and are these rivers which flow at my feet not mine also? Can you not see? Am I not mightier than this despicable wretch, who can scarcely make his meaning plain? Why have no bracelets of gold been given him, or angels went down with him?’
Thus he incited his people. They obeyed him, for they were degenerate men. And when they provoked Us, We took vengeance on them and drowned them all, as a lesson and an example to those who succeeded them.
When Mary’s son is cited as an instance, your people laugh and say: ‘Is he better than our own gods”’ They cite him to you merely to provoke you. Truly, they are a contentious nation.
Jesus was no more than a mortal whom We favoured and made an example to the Israelites. Had it been Our will We could have replaced you with angels to succeed you on the earth. He is a portent of the Hour of Doom. Have no doubt about its coming and follow Me. This is the right path: let Satan not mislead you, for he is your sworn enemy.
And when Jesus worked his miracles, he said: ‘I have to give you wisdom and to make plain to you some of the things about which you differ. Fear Allah and follow me. Allah is my Lord and your Lord: therefore serve Him. That is the right path.’
Yet the factions disagreed among themselves. But when the Day of Judgement comes, woe to the wrongdoers, for they shall be sternly punished.
Are they waiting for the Hour of Doom to overtake them unawares, without warning? On that day friends shall become enemies, except the God-fearing.
But you, My servants, who have believed in My revelations and surrendered yourselves, shall on that day have nothing to fear or to regret. Enter Paradise, you and your spouses, in all delight. You shall be served with golden dishes and golden cups. Abiding there for ever, you shall find all that your souls desire and all that your eyes rejoice in.
Such is the Paradise you shall inherit by virtue of your good deeds. Your sustenance shall be abundant fruit.
But the evil-doers shall endure for ever the torment of Hell. Their punishment will never be lightened and they shall be speechless with despair We do not wrong them, but they wrong themselves.
‘Malek,’ (one of the keepers of Hell) they will call out, ‘ let your Lord make an end of us!’ But he will answer: ‘Here you shall remain!’
We have made known to you the truth, but most of you abhor the truth.
If they (the Christians) are resolved to ruin you (Mohammed), We are resolved to ruin them. Do they think We cannot hear their secret talk, and private converse? Yes! Our angels, who are at their side, record it all.
Say (to the Christians): ‘If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I would be the first to worship him.’
Exalted be the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of the Throne, above their falsehoods! Let them blunder, let them play, until they fact the day with which they are threatened.
He is God in heaven and God on earth; He is the Wise One, the All-knowing. Blessed be He to whom belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and all that lies between the! He alone has knowledge of the Hour of Doom. To Him you shall all return.
The gods to whom they pray besides Him have not the power to intercede for them. None can intercede for them save him who knows the truth and testifies to it.
Yet if you ask them who created them, they will promptly reply that it was Allah. How then can they turn away from Him?
The Apostle says: ‘Lord, these men are unbelievers.’
Bear with them and with them peace. They shall before long know their error.

[I’ve edited Ornaments of Gold not at all. My original notes cannot do this passage justice when seen in the light of a treatise for others. The language and prose used here give more flavor and does more justice to the beauty of the Koran while at the same time leaving intact the meaning as best translated by Professor Dawood. I’ve removed all of my color codes from it as well so that the reader may make his own judgments and come to his own conclusions as to the intent of current Muslims towards the rest of us. I have entered Professor Dawood’s footnotes in green at the appropriate junctures for clarity of meaning, only. ‘course, some of the meaning seems pretty obvious to me!]

Counsel 42: [This passage should also be read in its entirety. Within it are points noting (i) that women are given you so that you may multiply; (ii) all creation is Allah’s as well as all before and after; & (iii) resurrection of the dead will occur. Some of what is in here intimates that women are mere broodmares and that Christians and Jews are evil because they are trying to mislead the true believers with lies and misguidance. It also gives the reason for an Arabic Koran as so they may warn the mother city, Mecca, and those who dwell around it, of judgment day. Kind of restrictive, that, why not a Chinese Koran so that the most populace land may be warned, or have several apostles so that all may be warned. In The New Testament the Holy Ghost grants the gift of tongues to Jesus’ disciples so that they may go throughout the lands and spread the Good Word (Gospel means the good word in Greek). Having done that once, why not do it again? And, didn’t several of The Apostles head East to spread the good news? Or is The New Testament to be denied in its entirety by Islam?]

Revelations Well Expounded 41: [Another passage of God is great, benignant, merciful and then more of Old Testament retribution. It’s an Arabic Koran because the apostle is Arab. The Torah was Jewish because it was for the Jews who immediately disagreed about it. When judgment day comes, all will acknowledge Allah, but will deny all of their false idols, whom they had previously worshipped. More of the same.]

The Forgiving One 40: …
There is no god but Him. All shall return to Him. None but the unbelievers dispute the revelations of Allah. Do not be deceived by their prosperous dealings in the land. Long before them the people of Noah denied Our revelations, and so did the factions after them. Every nation strove to kill their apostle, seeking with false arguments to refute the truth; but when I smote them, how stern was My punishment! Thus the word of your Lord shall be fulfilled concerning the unbelievers: they are the heirs of Hell.

But to the unbelievers a voice will cry: ‘Allah’s abhorrence of you is greater than your hatred of yourselves. You were called to the Faith, but you denied it.’

[The End is coming and with it judgment. Believers are believers and will attain Allah’s blessing. Everybody else will be punished. Repeat of Pharaoh and a list of what happened to those who did not believe, who did not listen to their apostles, who altered the meaning of what their apostles gave them at Allah’s command. Some of this reads as, ‘for those who do not study history, they are doomed to repeat it.’ It’s a recurring theme that all those who have denied Allah and His Apostles in the past have come to bad endings. There’s been The Flood, destruction of various cities and peoples, Pharaoh’s disasters on Egypt, &c.]

The Ranks 37: …
You marvel, while they scoff. When they are warned they take no warning. When they are shown a sign they mock at it and say: ‘This is plain magic. What! When we are dead and turned to dust and bones, shall we be raised to life, we and our forefathers?’
Say: ‘Yes. And you shall be held to shame.’
One blast will sound and they shall see the Resurrection. ‘Woe to us!’ they will exclaim. ‘This is the Day of Reckoning. This is the Judgement-day which you denied.’

[Why hate Christianity? Here, as elsewhere, the root of Christianity is the root of Islam: there is one preset judgment day coming and then all will be bodily resurrected and judged. In Christianity, the body will be beatified and there is no reference of that so far. My assumption from this reading is that the Muslim will be given a body reflecting his spirituality as determined by his labors and charity in this life, but I certainly cannot know without an epiphany. Also, those judged for Hell will eat Zaqqum fruit and drink boiling water. Should re-read for meditation.]

Ya Sin 36: …
It is We who will bring back the dead to life. We record the deeds of men and the marks they leave behind: We note all things in a glorious book. …
On that day no soul shall suffer the least injustice. You shall be rewarded according only to your deeds.
On that day the dwellers of Paradise shall think of nothing but their bliss. Together with their wives, they shall recline in shady groves upon soft couches. They shall have fruits and all that they desire.

[More on heaven and hell, but more importantly, there will be a bodily resurrection and all shall be judged on their deeds. Hmm. Also, note how the only way for a women to enter paradise is as someone’s wife!]

The Creator 35: …
The unbelievers shall be sternly punished, but those that accept the true faith and do good works shall be forgiven and richly rewarded. …
Those who recite the Book of Allah and attend to their prayers and give alms in private and in public may hope for imperishable gain. Allah will give them their rewards and enrich them from His won abundance. He is forgiving and bountiful in His rewards.
What We have revealed to you in the Book is the truth confirming previous scriptures. Allah knows and observes His servants.
We have bestowed the Book on those of Our servants whom We have chosen. Some of them sin against their souls, some follow a middle course, and some, by Allah’s leave, vie with each other in charitable works: this is the supreme virtue.
They shall enter the gardens of Eden, where they shall be decked with pearls and bracelets of gold, and arrayed in robes of silk. They shall say: ‘Praise be to Allah who has taken away all our sorrows from us. Our Lord is forgiving and bountiful in His rewards. Through His grace He has admitted us to the Eternal Mansion, where we shall know no toil, no weariness.’
As for the unbelievers, the fire of Hell awaits them. Death shall not deliver them, nor shall its torments be ever lightened for them. Thus shall the thankless be rewarded.

Allah knows the mysteries of heaven and earth. He knows the hidden thoughts of me.

[The end is near, &c. Quite a few of these sections are repeated throughout the Koran and I can’t tell if it’s because Mohammed is addressing different audiences, to whom this would not be redundant, or if he’s trying to beat these points into the same group who can’t seem to get it right. Much of the references to the Old Testament and the New Testament make that point: that over and over again apostles have been sent to man to reveal the truth but man keeps screwing up and some day, a preset day of doom and judgment, every individual will have to answer for his behavior to everyone else and that the only way to Paradise, which appears to be a specific part of heaven or the heavens – wonder if hell is a part of “the heavens”, makes sense, doesn’t it? – is to believe and do good works. There still seems to be a tie between predestination and free will as to which applies, here as well as a stressing of Doom and Resurrection of the Body.]

Sheba 34: … He is the Forgiving One, the Merciful. [The unbelievers say that there is no doomsday nor resurrection, so we’ll retell the tale of David, Solomon and the nation of Sheba and some other stuff not too different from the Old Testament. Then comes:]
Satan had judged them rightly; they followed him all, except for a band of true believers. Yet he had no power over them: Our only aim was to know those who believed in the life to come and those who were in doubt about it. Your Lord takes cognizance of all things.

The unbelievers say: ‘We will never believe in this Koran, nor in the Scriptures which came before it.’

We have sent no apostle to any nation whose message was not denied by those of them that lived in comfort. The unbelievers say: ‘We have been given more wealth and children that the faithful. Surely we shall never be punished.’

Neither your riches nor your children shall bring you a jot nearer to Us. Those that have faith and do what is right shall be doubly rewarded for their deeds: they shall dwell in peace in the pavilions of Paradise. But those that strive to confute our revelations shall be brought for punishment.

[Aside from the recurring evil doers being bound in chains and punished, free will rears its head again as well as a comment that the wealthy and powerful have always denied the apostles that Allah has sent in the past and the Word that they bring. Seems to be quite accurate including the Golden Calf that was raised up when Moses went onto Mt. Sinai. Most of the old prophets in the Old Testament were denied either at the time that they prophesied or shortly thereafter, thus breaking the covenants of the Lord for which they were duly punished, then another covenant another break &c. With the Christian claims of Jesus being the final covenant, does that mean we shift from a communal responsibility to an individual one? From group accountability to individual free will? Then there’s that line that implies that unbelievers are also those that do not believe in the scriptures that came before the Koran, how does THAT fit into current Islamic philosophy? Old Testament retribution was visited upon whole communities, old and young alike. In the Old Testament the sins of the father are passed onto the children for fifty generations; but, the New Testament ends that with the sins of the father shall not be passed on. It’s difficult to accept that new-borns should be cast into hell for the sins of their fathers unless the responsibility was communal, which is what it appears. This would account for the continued covenant, break covenant of the Old Testament and Jesus’ Messiah-hood as being the last covenant because responsibility for one’s behavior shifted from the community to self. The requirement of believing the prior scriptures seems to be irrelevant to current Islamic practice.]

Adoration 32: … It (the Koran) is the truth from your Lord, which He has bestowed upon you so that you may forewarn a nation, whom none has warned before you, and that they may be rightly guided. …
He governs the creation from heaven to earth. And in the end it will ascend to Him in one day, a day whose space is a thousand years by your reckoning. …
Those that have faith and do good works shall be received in the gardens of Paradise, as a reward for that which they have done. But those that do evil shall be cast into the Fire. Whenever they try to get out of Hell they shall be driven back, and a voice will say to them: ‘Taste the torment of Hell-fire, which you have persistently denied.’
But We will inflict on them the lighter punishment of this world before the supreme punishment of the world to come, so that they may return to the right path. And who is more wicked than the man who gives no heed to the revelations of his Lord when he is reminded of them? We will surely take vengeance on the evil-doers.
We gave the Scriptures to Moses (never doubt that you will meet him) and made it a guide for the Israelites. And when they grew steadfast and firmly believed in Our revelations, We appointed leaders from among them who gave guidance at Our bidding. On the Day of Resurrection your Lord will resolve for them their differences.
Do they not know how many generations We have destroyed before the? They walk among their ruined dwellings. Surely in this there are veritable signs. Have they no ears to hear with?
Do they not see how We drive the rain to the parched lands and bring forth crops of which they and their cattle eat? Have they no eyes to see with?

[The evil are going to hell and the righteous to Paradise. Apparently, none of Jesus’ disciples ever got this far East, because this verse opens with ‘no apostle has come to warn you’, which seems to be historically off since we know that not only that they did, but they (this nation) have complete access to both the Old Testament and the New Testament simply because Mohammed keeps referring to it throughout. To be righteous means that you must have faith and do good works. Ok, so far, having faith means accepting Allah, the God of Moses, so Yahweh qualifies, as does God as referenced in the New Testament, His word, which so far means revelation, resurrection, free will (maybe), acceptance of His overlordship and doing good works, meaning charity in all of its forms; so, how do Jews and Christians not qualify for Paradise? Allah is the same God of Jews and Christians according to this and the Creator is referenced in the singular in many religions, Hindi for one (the “sub-gods” are manifestations of the One God, if I’ve read the B-G correctly), good works towards the people within ones’ culture is a requirement in most of them, including the pre-Columbian West, so, why the intense hostility towards Jews and Christians?]

Luqman 31: (Luqman, a sage who, we are told, was a grandson of a sister or an aunt of Job.) [@ 31:15 the Faithful are admonished to, “Be kind to them in this world, and turn to Me with devotion.” them being unbelievers. There’s a lot of how to pray and what Allah has done and will do and to avoid idolatry and the evil will be punished but the faithful will achieve Allah’s promise of Paradise.]

The Greeks 30: [The Greeks got beaten by the Persians in 615 C.E. but will soon be granted the victory, Allah willing. Don’t know why this is referenced herein.] …

They care for the outward show of this life, but of the life to come they are heedless. Have they not considered that Allah created the heavens and the earth and all that lies between them for a worthy end, to last for an appointed term? Yet most men deny that they will ever meet their Lord. …

[More about believers and unbelievers; but more importantly, a continued emphasis on resurrection and it looks like redemption, as well.]

The Spider 29: Do men think that once they say: ‘We are believers’, they will be left alone and not be tried with affliction?
We put to the proof those who have gone before them. Allah knows those who are truthful and those who are lying.
Or do the evil-doers think that they will escape Our punishment? How ill they judge!
He that hopes to meet his Lord must know that Allah’s appointed hour is sure to come. He alone hears all and knows all.
He that fights for Allah’s cause fights for himself. Allah does not need His creatures’ help. As for those that have faith and do good works, We shall cleanse them of their sins and reward them according to their noblest deeds.

[More Abraham and Noah; the people were sinful and We sent the sign, meaning the flood; “… An apostle’s duty is but to give plain warning.” There will be Resurrection and on that day the sinners will be woe-filled; Old Testament retribution (Lot, &c.). Idolatry and unbelief are like the spider’s web, the frailest of all dwellings and when doomsday gets here, and it surely will, y’all will find out that I’m not a joke, nor are Resurrection and Judgement! This book (the Koran) is the sure sign of Allah’s Word and Revelation. Conflicting statement in the line, He that fights for Allah’s cause fights for himself. Allah does not need his creatures’ help. Dontcha think? Justification for violence & conversion by the sword, or are we back to Allah will do all the judging and punishing your job is to warn everyone that judgement is coming and nothing else.]

The Poets 26: [Moses and Pharaoh and the scourge of Egypt; that these were surely signs of Allah’s power and Moses sanctity; Poets are liars and are followed only by erring men.]

Al-Furqan (“The distinction between right and wrong; also one of the names of the Koran.” The word has puzzled Muslim commentators, but, clearly, it is identical with the Aramaic porqan (salvation), in the Jewish Qaddish.) [Apparently a bunch of people claimed that Mohammed is a false prophet because Allah hasn’t given him a garden for sustenance and an angel for support, to which this response says, “no need, I (Allah) have sent him and that is surely enough.” Evil doers will wish that they had walked in the Apostle’s path – maybe this is why the Sayings of Mohammed and the Life of Mohammed are necessary parts of Islam; one must follow in the Apostle’s path to attain Paradise, so, since Mohammed broke promises and treaties &c., this is how the True Believer must behave? Revelation of the Word shall be gradually; more Moses, Aaron, Noah, Thamoud and Aad, unbelievers, &c. and ends with:]


The true servants of the Merciful are those who walk humbly on the earth and say: ‘Peace!’ to the ignorant who accost them; who pass the night standing and on their knees in adoration of their Lord; who say: ‘Lord, ward off from us the punishment of Hell, for its punishment is everlasting: an evil dwelling and an evil resting-place’; who are neither extravagant nor niggardly but keep the golden mean; who invoke no other god besides Allah and do not kill except for a just cause (manslaughter is forbidden by Him); who do not commit adultery (he that does this shall meet with evil: his punishment shall be doubled on the Day of Resurrection and in disgrace he shall abide for ever – unless he repent and believe and do good works, for then Allah will change his sins to good actions: Allah is forgiving and merciful: he that repents and does good works truly returns to Allah); who do not bear false witness and do not lose their dignity when listening to profane abuse; who do not turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the revelations of their Lord when they are reminded of them; who say: ‘Lord give us joy in our wives and children and make us examples to those who fear you.’ These shall be rewarded with Paradise for their fortitude. There they shall bind a welcome and a greeting, and there they shall abide for ever: a blessed dwelling and a blessed resting-place.
Say to the unbelievers: ‘Little cares my Lord if you do not invoke Him. Now that you have denied His revelations His punishment is bound to overtake you.’

[Quite similar to the Ten Commandments, which, given the claims that the earlier scripture is Holy Scripture and from the same source, I think that many of these verses subsume earlier admonitions and laws, or, rather, incorporate by reference those earlier statements, which means that Islam included all or at least those strictures referenced, into itself. So why the Anti-Semitism and Anti-Christian rants? Interesting that adulterers shall get double punishment, wonder if this has anything to do with the scandal surrounding his wife, Aisha; and how do all those Muslims who came to the U.S. to attend college get around the admonition to not enter into idolaters and unbelievers, collectively, “the unclean”, then claim marital rights of them and divorce them while stealing their kids when they flee to Arabia? Can’t get a divorce if you didn’t get married, can you? Or has Islam some special deal not available to others?]

Light 24: We have revealed this Chapter and sanctioned it, proclaiming in it clear revelations, so that you may take heed.
The adulterer and adulteress shall each be given a hundred lashes. Let no pity for them cause you to disobey Allah, if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day; and let their punishment be witnessed by a number of believers.
The adulterer may marry only an adulteress or an idolatress; and the adulteress may marry only an adulterer or an idolater. True believers are forbidden such marriages.
Those that defame honourable women and cannot produce four witnesses shall be given eighty lashes. No testimony of theirs shall be admissible, for they are great transgressors – except those among them that afterwards repent and mend their ways Allah is forgiving and merciful.
If a man accuses his wife but has no witnesses except himself, he shall swear four times by Allah that his charge is true, calling down upon himself the curse of Allah if he is lying. But if his wife swears four times by Allah that his charge is false and calls down His curse upon herself if it be true, she shall receive no punishment.
But for Allah’s grace and mercy, His wisdom and forgiveness, this would never have been revealed to you.
Those who invented that slander (The reference is to the scandal involving Mohammed’s wife Aisha with Safwan ibn-el-Moattel.) were a number of your own people. Do not regard it as a misfortune, for it has proved an advantage. Each one of them shall be punished according to his crime. As for him who had the greater in it, his punishment shall be terrible indeed.
When you heard it, why did the faithful, men and women, not think well of their own people, and say: ‘This is an evident falsehood’? Why did they not produce four witnesses? If they could not produce any witnesses, then they were surely lying in the sight of Allah.’

Those who defame honourable but careless believing women shall be cursed in this world and in the next. Theirs shall be a woeful punishment on the day when their own tongues, hand, and fee will testify to what they did. On that day Allah will justly requite them. They shall know that Allah is the Glorious Truth.
Unclean women are for unclean men, and unclean men for unclean women. But good women are for good men, and good men for good women. These shall be cleared of calumny; they shall be shown forgiveness, and a generous provision shall be made for them.

[Quite a bit more about right and wrong, punishment, repentance &c until the end of 24. Given the number of Arab men who attended college in the U.S. and “married” so many Christian American women, and siring children, it makes one wonder who all those idolatresses are that the Koran keeps referring to. Normally, in context, the idolaters include Christians, but if they are unclean or an idolatress, then they are unfit for marriage to a true believer, yes? And farther in, Light says that if you cannot afford to marry, then you shouldn’t, also some about women should turn their eyes from temptation and avoid wearing trinkets in the open &c.
The reference to Aisha seems to be that she was accused of adultery but that there was never any proof, but a heckuvalota talk. Certain verses, such as this one, appear at precisely the moment in Mohammed’s life when some occurrence and its implication, usually negative, needs either to be deflected or “explained in the light of the will of Allah;” coincidental or truly the will of Allah as written in the “big book” that’s kept in Heaven?]

The Believers 23: Blessed are the believers, who are humble in their prayers; who avoid profane talk, and give alms to the destitute; who restrain their carnal desires (except with their wives and slave-girls, for these are lawful to them) and do not trangress (sic) through lusting after other women; who are true to their trusts and promises and never neglect their prayers. These are the heirs of Paradise; they shall abide in it for ever.

You shall surely die hereafter, and be restored to life on the Day of Resurrection. We have created seven heavens above you; of Our creation We are never heedless.

[Noah, the elders didn’t believe him, so we ‘swept them away like withered leaves.’ More generations of man, Moses and Aaron, we smited Egypt, and gave man the Torah, then Mary’s son ‘as a sign to mankind and gave them a shelter on a peaceful hill-side watered by a fresh spring.’ – Aside from the polygamy and holy acceptance of slavery, this is little different from the Christian promise of Life after Death and an attachment to both the Old Testament and the New Testament as foundations for the Koran.]

Apostles! Eat of that which is wholesome and do good works: I have knowledge of all your actions. Your religion is but one religion, and I am your only Lord: therefore fear Me.
Yet men have divided themselves into different sects, each rejoicing in its own doctrines. Leave them in their error till death overtakes them.

Those who walk in fear of their Lord; who believe in the revelations of their Lord; who worship none besides their Lord; who give alms with their hearts filled with awe, knowing that they will return to their Lord; these vie with each other for salvation and are the first to attain it.

Was anything revealed to them that had not been revealed to their forefathers?

[Ok, sectarianism is bad, everybody knows that, and the prior revelations are all in the Old Testament and the New Testament, but everyone except Mohammed has misinterpreted them except the parts about redemption and bodily resurrection; but then comes the ‘live and let live’ part. “Leave them in their error till death overtakes them.” So far, this is about half way through, I haven’t found but one part allowing for any form of Islamo-Fascism-Jihad. Just that section where the faithful will be tested on the battlefield, which could just as easily be taken metaphorically as literally, i.e. life is the field of conflict and the test is to leave the unbelievers to Allah; to do good works; to pray properly; and the two golden rules: Love thy neighbor as you love thyself {and thy God} & Do unto others as you would have them do unto you! The Believers does two major things that I can see: 1. There is but one God who has sent you many revelations that you have misinterpreted, so this time you’d better get it right; & 2. In order to get it right, you’ve basically got to follow the two golden rules. It says a lot of other things as well, but those two seem to be the hardest hit throughout the Koran so far.]

Ta Ha 20: [Moses, Aaron and Egypt; Adam and Satan; pretty much a recital of the Old Testament stories with little variation from Genesis & Deuteronomy but shrunk down to about 2,400 words with the admonition that unbelievers are really, really going to suffer and that the Q’Ran is the true revelation.]

The Night Journey 17: [Covenants made; covenants broken, ye are Noah’s descendants, &c. as a recital of Hebraic history is being made to show the Allah rewards good works but punishes sinners, but first He warns everyone that they’re sinning so that they have a chance to repent. 17:6 “We said: ‘If you do good, it shall be to your own advantage; but if you do evil, you shall sin against your own souls.’” Certain commandments are laid out, similar to The Ten Commandments given to Moses:]

Serve no other gods besides Allah, lest you incur disgrace and ruin. Your Lord has enjoined you to worship none but Him, and to show kindness to your parents. If either or both of them attain old age in your dwelling, show them no sign of impatience, nor rebuke them; but speak to them kind words. Treat them with humility and tenderness and say: ‘Lord, be merciful to them. They nursed me when I was an infant.’ …
Give to the near of kin their due, and also to the destitute and to the wayfarers. Do not squander your substance wastefully, for the wasteful are Satan’s brothers; and Satan is ever ungrateful to his Lord. But if, while waiting for your Lord’s bounty, you lack the means to assist them, then at least speak to them kindly.
Be neither miserly nor prodigal, for then you should either be reproached or be reduced to penury. …
You shall not kill your children for fear of want (Allusion to the pre-Islamic custom of burying alive unwanted newborn girls). We will provide for them and for you. To kill them is a great sin.
You shall not commit adultery, for it is foul and indecent.
You shall not kill any man whom Allah has forbidden you to kill, except for a just cause. If a man is slain unjustly, his heir is entitled to satisfaction. But let him not carry his vengeance too far, for his victim will in turn be assisted and avenged.
Do not interfere with the property of orphans except with the best of motives, until they reach maturity. Keep your promises; you are accountable for all that you promise.
Give full measure, when you measure, and weigh with even scales. That is fair, and better in the end.
Do not follow what you do not know. Man’s eyes, ears, and heart – each of his senses shall be closely questioned.
Do not walk proudly on the earth. You cannot cleave the earth, nor can you rival the mountains in stature.
All this is evil; odious in the sight of your Lord.

These injunctions are but a part of the wisdom with which your Lord has inspired you (Mohammed). Serve no other god besides Allah, lest you should be cast into Hell, despised and helpless.

We have made plain Our revelations in this Koran so that the unbelievers may take warning. Yet it has only added to their unbelief. Say: ‘If, as you affirm, there were other gods besides Allah, they would surely seek to dethrone Him.’

[More on how to behave, then a section on unbelievers and ‘saint’ worshippers going to hell, Resurrection and Judgement, Unbelievers will try and try and try to sway you from the path of righteousness, &c. The Koran IS the Word of God, Moses & Pharaoh]

We have revealed the Koran with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning.
We have divided the Koran into sections so that you may recite it to the people with deliberation. We have imparted it by gradual revelation.

[Back to: it’s not up to you to chastise the unbeliever. Still, more on how to behave makes me wonder how all those Oil Sheiks can be as they are? Ostentatious living, formicating in Monaco, gambling/ wasteful behavior, not keeping their pledges to disaster relief, and to see the Arab world, it’s obvious that the rich don’t give much to charity – why is it that the United States has the honor to be the most charitable people, yet we’re the most hated? So far, it’s obvious that no one in al-Qaeda can possibly have read this stuff, or if they have, believe it. Blowing up babies in car bombs just to kill other Muslims and the ‘hated Satan’s troops’? Gotta be some answer to this further in. Maybe, this is page 243 of 443.{The answer to this is around pp 35 & 38 in verses 8 and 9.}]

Al-Hijr 15: … We created man from dry clay, from black moulded loam, and before him Satan from smokeless fire. Your Lord said to the angels: ‘I am creating man from dry clay, from black moulded loam. When I have fashioned him and breathed of My spirit into him, kneel down and prostrate yourselves before him.’
All the angels prostrated themselves, except Satan. He refused to prostrate himself.
‘Satan,’ said Allah, ‘why do you not prostrate yourself?’
He replied: ‘I will not bow to a mortal created of dry clay, of black moulded loam.’
‘Begone,’ said Allah, ‘you are accursed. My curse shall be on you till Judgement-day.’
‘Lord,’ said Satan, ‘reprieve me till the Day of Resurrection.’
He answered: ‘You are reprieved till the Appointed Day.’
‘Lord,’ said Satan, ‘since you have led me astray, I will seduce mankind on earth: I will seduce them all, except those that faithfully serve you.’
He replied: ‘This is the right course for Me. You shall have no power over My servants, except the sinners who follow you. They are all destined for Hell. It has seven gates, and through these they shall come in separate bands. But the righteous shall dwell amongst gardens and fountains; in peace and safety they shall enter them. We shall remove all hatred from their hearts, and they shall recline on couches face to face, a band of brothers. Toil shall not weary them, nor shall they ever leave their Paradise.’

[More Old Testament retribution, Lot & Thamoud. Interesting take on how Satan became the hated one. From this I take it that Western Civ is the great corrupter and, therefore, the Great Satan. Hard to get an entire civilization is a corrupter when it’s obvious that Satan is an individual who works on individuals. Curious now as to how the different Islamic sects, Wahabbi, Shi’a & Sunni came about. Will have to get ‘the Prophet’s Life’ and ‘the Sayings of Mohammed.’]

The Heights 7: This book is revealed to you: let your heart not be troubled about it. It is revealed to you that you may thereby warn the unbelievers and admonish the faithful.

[The story of Adam & Eve, then the as they are begging forgiveness, Revelation:]

He said, ‘Go hence, and may your descendants be enemies to each other. The earth will for a while provide your sustenance and dwelling-place. There you shall live and there shall you die, and thence you shall be raised to life.’

[Warnings about sinning and be taken in by Satan.]

Children of Adam, dress well when you attend your mosques. Eat and drink, but avoid excess. He does not love the intemperate.

[More Old Testament retribution, pride is sin, humility is favored, “Pray to your Lord with humility and in secret. He does not love the transgressors.” More Noah, a litany of apostles sent and ignored and the earthquakes and other tribulations heaped upon the unbelievers and ridiculers of them. Moses and the inscribing of the Ten Commandments; the dividing of the People into twelve tribes. Admonishment and separation of the faithful from the unbelievers, however, the Revelation of Resurrection is reinforced but of more interest, in 7:172 he releases the burden of inherited sin! “Your Lord brought forth descendants from the loins of Adam’s children, and made them testify against themselves. He said: ‘Am I not your Lord?’ They replied: ‘We bear witness that you are.’ This He did, lest you (mankind) should say on the Day of Resurrection: ‘We had no knowledge of that,’ or: ‘Our forefathers were, indeed, idolaters; but will You destroy us, their descendants, on account of what the followers of falsehood did?’ In the next paragraph, His response is that with these revelations, they may return to the right path.]

The Elephant 105: Quraysh 106: Fibre 111: [a trio of one and two liners that appear to be warnings to certain opponents, from Christians attacking Mecca in the year of his birth to the opposition presented by his uncle.]

Unity 112: Say: ‘Allah is One, the Eternal God. He begot none, nor was He begotten. None is equal to Him.’

[This is Unity 112 in its entirety, and surely, Hebraic/Christian/Hind Godhead as Creator, so why the anti-Semitism and anti-Christian ranting throughout?]

The Jinn 72: [The Jinn entered Heaven and eavesdropped, apparently with Allah’s knowledge and possibly at His will, and overheard the Revelations, at which point most swore to be His servants and some transgressed. One of the Revelations is that Allah, “has taken no wife, nor has He begotten any children. The Blaspheming One among us has uttered a wanton falsehood against Allah, although we had supposed no man or jinnee could tell of Him what is untrue”’ a Jinn is speaking and being quoted here, the quote saying Jesus was not begotten of Allah. So much for ecumenicism, throughout the rigidity of position coupled with how Christians and Jews are treated and can expect to be treated with a Muslim victory of any kind. Research on dhimmitude is included in The Heartland Plan as part of appendix A. It ain’t pretty!]

She Who is Tested 60: Believers, do not make friends with those who are enemies of Mine and yours. Would you show them kindness when they have denied the truth that has been revealed to you and driven the Apostle and yourselves out of your city because you believe in Allah, your Lord? …
If they gain ascendancy over you, they will plainly show themselves your enemies, and use their hands and tongues to harm you. They long to see you unbelievers.

[A touch of Abraham, and some of how to behave, 60:8 “Allah does not forbid you to be kind and equitable to those who have neither made war on your religion nor driven you from your homes. Allah loves the equitable. But He forbids you to make friends with those who have fought against you on account of your religion and driven you from your homes or abetted others so to do. Those that make friends with them are wrongdoers. Believers, when believing women seek refuge with you, test them. Allah best knows their faith. If you find them true believers do not return them to the infidels; they are not lawful to the infidels, nor are the infidels lawful to them. But hand back to the unbelievers the dowries they gave them. Nor is it an offence for you to marry such women, provided you give them their dowries. Do not hold on to your marriages with unbelieving women: demand the dowries you have given them and let the infidels do the same. Such is the law which Allah lays down among you. Allah is wise and all-knowing.” Somewhere in here, Mohammed made a treaty with a tribe that included a clause saying that runaways would be returned. Mohammed agreed freely to this, but when a ‘believing woman’ ran away to him, he refused to return her, thereby breaking his word. Also, how does this reconcile with the number of Muslims who in the 60’s, 70’s, and into the 80’s, while at college, married non-Muslim women only to desert them and take their children to Arabia? Who’s the transgressor here? Where’s the honor? Or is it that one does not have to have honor with the infidels? And what about, “He forbids you to make friends with t(hem)…”? Isn’t it kind of hard to have a peace with someone whose God has told him that it is forbidden to do so? Where’s our wonderful free press?]

Exile 59: … It was He that drove the unbelievers among the People of the Book out of their dwellings into the first exile (an allusion to Mohammed’s expedition against the Jews of Nadjir in Arabia). …
Had Allah not decreed exile for them He would have surely punished them in this world. But in the world to come they shall be punished in Hell-fire, because they have set themselves against Allah and His apostle; and he that sets himself against Allah should know that Allah is stern in retribution.

[A bit of tough going here, Mohammed led an expedition against the Jews of Nadhir and the Jews of Kanoika, reducing both to rubble, he then distributed the spoils amongst his people including a share to the orphans &c. There’s a jump here from the Lord shall chastise to forays against unbelievers forcing conversion by the sword or death/exile and the taking of spoils. He is also warning about false conversions to save ones worldly goods, apparently.]

She Who Pleaded 58: [If a man divorce his wife in the old pagan way (“Be to me as my mother’s back”) and then retracts, he must do penance before entering her again; then we jump to punishment of conspiring, Allah sees all and knows all, then a bit about those transgressors who do not follow the Apostle of Allah, and: “Do you see those that have befriended a people (the Jews) with whom Allah is angry? They belong neither to you nor to them. They knowingly swear to falsehoods. Allah has prepared for them a grievous scourge. Evil indeed is that which they have done. ¶ They use their faith as a disguise and debar others from the path of Allah. A shameful scourge awaits them.” The she referred to in the title is a woman who protested about being divorced in the pagan way, but why the turn to anti-Semitism here? Mohammed’s bluntly saying that Jews know that the Torah and their beliefs are false? Where’d that come from?]

The Chambers 49: [Don’t raise your voice over that of the Prophet, Allah loves those who do justice:]

If two parties of believers take up arms the one against the other, make peace between them. If either of them commits aggression against the other, fight against the aggressors till they submit to Allah’s Judgement. When they submit make peace between them in equity and justice; Allah loves those who act in justice.
The believers are a band of brothers. Make peace among your brothers and fear Allah, so that you may be shown mercy.

[Don’t spy on each other, don’t gossip, don’t defame each other, don’t use nicknames, avoid immoderate suspicion; and a point about “If you obey Allah and His apostle, He will not deny you the reward of your labours. Allah is forgiving and merciful.” ¶ The true believers are those that have faith in Allah and His apostle and never doubt; and who fight for His cause with their wealth and persons. Such are those whose faith is true.” Well, there’s the hit for war, “fight for His cause with their wealth and persons.” If Dawood’s got this all in chronological order as he claims, there’s got to be an underlying historical reason for this turn to violence or that it’s simply not apparent in the preceding verses OR, that it is so endemic and systemic that the violence is a given, much like the indiscriminate killing of female children, that placed in historical context, the audience doesn’t feel the disengagement that I do. Also, how does this square with all the Muslims in China and India selecting the sex of their children and aborting female fetuses? Where is Islam on the issue of abortion?]

Victory 48: (The taking of Mecca in 630 A.D. or of Khaybar in 629 A.D.) [Apparently war is going on all around and Mohammed is at its center. Some desert Arabs didn’t join in, all the legions of Heaven and Earth are Allah’s, swearing fealty to Mohammed is the same as fealty to the Lord, evil-doers, including those who have foresworn themselves, will be punished, and the good cherished. Mohammed is Allah’s apostle and all who follow him will be rewarded and those who don’t will be punished. A bit self-serving, methinks, as well as showing how violent, war prone and bigoted, the Prophet is.]

The Hordes 39: [Believers and unbelievers, Allah has not begotten a son, the Koran is the true book of revelation, sent specifically to the Arabs, and at the time of judgement, “In hordes the unbelievers shall be led to Hell.” Oh, well, so much for all of us non-believers.]

Sad 38: [A bit that Christianity is not monotheism, “Pay no heed and stand firm in the worship of your gods: it is a binding duty. We have not heard of this (monotheism) in the Christian Faith (the last faith). It is nothing but a false invention (monotheism). Was the word of Allah revealed to him (Mohammed) alone of all our countrymen?” So much for Christianity, too bad that Mohammed didn’t know anything about Jesus, or that both Judaism and Christianity are monotheisms, in fact, both pray to the same God, Allah, as Islam claims to. More Old Testament of Noah, Aad, Pharaoh, Thamoud, David, Solomon, Satan &c. Oh, wait, he DID know, he just chose to ignore it.]

The Confederate Tribes 33: [Now a lot becomes clear; historically, Mohammed spent a lot of time waging war and destroying infidels, meaning women and children, too. This is a bit about sharing the booty, condemning those tribes who haven’t yet been converted and a covert claim to godhead. The giveaway here is, 33:33 “Attend to your prayers, give alms to the poor, and obey Allah and His apostle.” And 33:36 “It is not for true believers – men or women – to take their choice in their affairs if Allah and His apostle decree otherwise. He that disobeys Allah and His apostle strays indeed.” There’s a lot more about being humble, accepting Mohammed’s decision on booty, how women should behave, &c. At this time Mohammed had nine wives and several slaves. He was busy laying plans for military conquest of the area and trying to increase his military might by bringing more tribes into his fold, and therefore, his army. 33:57 “Those who speak ill of Allah and His apostle shall be cursed by Allah in this life and in the life to come. He has prepared for them a shameful punishment.” Guess I’m for the high jump then. 33:73 “Allah will surely punish the hypocrites and the idolaters, both men and women; but to believing men and to believing women He shall show mercy. Allah is forgiving and merciful.” So much for Jews and Catholics, Episcopalians and Hindu, guess that where I’m going to end up is going to be filled with decent people. How can anyone who opposes slavery or equal rights follow this? Got to be for the “booty”.]

The Prophets 21: [In both the Old Testament and the New Testament, prophets, apostles and Jesus performed miracles. This opens with Mohammed reciting that he knows that the unbelievers have been saying that, well now, if Mohammed is from Allah, let him show us a sign, as did those apostles and prophets before him, of Allah’s might. Mohammed’s response is that the tales of Old Testament retribution that he’s recited over and over again, show Allah’s strength, so you’d better accept Mohammed or the retribution will be huge. Mohammed continues with Abraham and reaches into both the Old Testament and New to support his claim of apostle-hood, yet performs no miracle. More pages of Abraham, David, Solomon, Ishmael, Idris (Enoch), &c. Mary and Jesus, (21:91 “And of the woman who kept her chastity. We breathed into her of Our spirit, and made her and her son a sign to all men.”) Now, if Allah breathed His spirit into her, isn’t that a metaphor for conception? Isn’t that exactly how Garry Wills puts it in What the Gospels Meant? How’d Mohammed get that if Allah didn’t conceive Jesus as he claims so many times elsewhere and is this his reason for hating Christianity? And, if Mohammed can recite these things, how can he claim that there’ve been no apostles or knowledge of Moses and Jesus sent from the East for Arabia? 21:107 “We wrote in the Psalms (Psalm xxxvii, 29) after the Torah had been given: ‘The righteous among My servants shall inherit the earth.’ That is an admonition to those who serve Us.’ So, Arabia had been sent apostles from the East!]

The Bee 16: [Righteous and Evil, Allah created everything, and a bit about predestination, 16:37 “We raised an apostle in every nation, saying: ‘Serve Allah and avoid false gods.’ Amongst them were some whom Allah guided, and others destined to go astray. Roam the world and see what was the end of the disbelievers! So, the names of the apostles sent to Hind, Asia and Africa are … ? And, we’re back to free will around 16:65. Still, resurrection, doomsday and judgement are a constant theme, as in The Bible. A bit on atheists, 16:83 “They recognize the favours of Allah, yet they deny them. Truly, most of them are ungrateful.” In context Mohammed’s talking about the wonders of the Earth and Universe, and saying ‘how can anyone see this, and not believe?’ Pretty cogent argument for the 7th Century; my personal take on this deals with the laws of Physics and the Singularity; if the ball was in equilibrium, which is what is hypothesized by the physicists, and Newton’s laws, which pertain to the macro universe, require that things at rest stay at rest and things in motion stay in motion, what, aside from God, unbalanced the ball causing the ‘big bang’? Had to be God, there isn’t anybody else. (And this from me when I was an undergrad – Bill.) Back to predestination, 16:93 “Had Allah pleased, He would have united you into one nation. But He leaves in error whom He will and gives guidance to whom He pleases.” And back to Free Will, 16:94 “Do not take oaths to deceive each other, lest your foot should slip after being rightly guided, and lest evil should befall you for debarring others from the path of Allah: for then indeed you should incur a grievous punishment.” Apparently, Mohammed’s been caught at a ‘bait and switch’; 16:101 “When We change one verse for another (Allah knows best what He reveals), they say: ‘You (Mohammed) are an impostor.’ Indeed most of them are ignorant men.” Ok, we’re back to a claim of “we” and yet when caught in an ambiguity, Mohammed’s response is that only he can tell the what’s what of any verse at any time. Mighty self-serving, that, as is: 16:105 “None invents falsehoods save those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah: they alone are the liars.” And, the pork and canine ban: 16:115 “He has forbidden you carrion, blood, and the flesh of swine; also any flesh consecrated other than in the name of Allah. … “. So much for Kosher and Parvé, and Mohammed references these dietary laws at 16:118 with Judaism. And, we’re back to, 16:125 “If you punish, let your punishment be proportionate to the wrong that has been done you. But it shall be best for you to endure your wrongs with patience.” I can only assume that these kinds of passages have been interpreted as only as between believers, because Islam sure doesn’t apply this rule to the rest of us.]

The Spoils 8: [Warfare and the assumption of Godhead. 8:1 “They ask you about the spoils. Say: ‘The spoils (of the Battle of Badr, 624 A.D.) belong to Allah and the Apostle. Therefore have fear of Allah and end your disputes. Obey Allah and His apostle.’ And 8:5 “Your Lord bade you leave your home to fight for justice, but some of the faithful were reluctant. They argued with you about the truth that had been revealed, as though they were being led to certain death. ¶Allah promised to grant you victory over one of the two bands, but you wished to fight the one that was unarmed. (Mohammed’s plan was to attack an unarmed caravan belonging to the Quraysh of Mecca on its way from Syria to Mecca. An army of Meccans marched to its assistance. Some of the Muslims wished to attack the caravan, others the Meccan army. Mohammed’s forces, only 319 strong, routed the Meccans, who were nearly 1,000 in number.) He sought to fulfil His promise and to annihilate the unbelievers, so that Truth should triumph and falsehood be discomfited, though the wrongdoers wished otherwise.” Should I comment, or leave it for the reader to figure out? Kind of obvious, isn’t it? And

Q’Ran 8:12-15 “Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: ‘I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, maim them in every limb!’
Thus We punished them because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and His apostle shall be sternly punished. We said to them: ‘Feel Our scourge. Hell-fire awaits the unbelievers.’”

[There it is, “Strike off their heads, maim them in every limb!” So much for the peace of Islam; and this is Islam’s promise to every Infidel, meaning me and mine – what about you and yours? Think that this is what they want to do to you, or do you believe Nancy Pelosi, Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton are going to do “something” about this? Bush certainly hasn’t been very successful, has he? (Time for you to go order, The Heartland Plan, isn’t it?) I wonder why the morons in the media never ask about this passage when “interviewing” Islamic spokesmen? Could it be that the idiots in the media have never read the Q’Ran? Since most have never read the U.S. Constitution or The Federalist or The Anti-Federalist or, for that matter, The Bible, why does this supposition bother me? Could it be that those in control of the media are arrogantly ignorant, or are they self-serving egocentrics? Probably both. More religious stuff about guarding oneself against temptation &c. Here’s an interesting point, and probably why Arafat’s estate, considering the guy never had a real job, exceeded $25,000,000,000: 8:40 “Know that to Allah, the Apostle, the Apostle’s kinsfolk, the orphans, the needy, and the wayfarers, shall belong one fifth of your spoils: if you truly believe in Allah and what We revealed to Our servant on the day of victory, the day when the two armies met. Allah has power over all things.” I wonder how much of a cut Mohammed kept in distributing to the orphans and needy. Wonder if Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had this in mind when they insisted that they be the ones to distribute Katrina Hurricane Relief? Same of Pharaoh, &c., ah, militant Islam: 8:64 “Prophet, Allah is your strength and the faithful who follow you. ¶ Prophet, rouse the faithful to arms. If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they shall vanquish two hundred; and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding. …¶A prophet may not take captives until he has fought and triumphed in his land. You (Mohammed’s followers) seek the chance gain of this world, but Allah desires for you the world to come. He is mighty and wise. Had there not been a previous sanction from Allah, you would have been sternly punished for what you have taken. Enjoy, therefore, the good and lawful things which you have gained in war, and fear Allah. He is forgiving and merciful.” And those that haven’t come with their wealth and persons to join Mohammed’s army shall not be his friends. Captives may be open to the Faith, but beware of betrayers among them. So, I guess that when the Marines & Army Infantry kicked their butts in 1991 & 2003, we met an army of unbelievers, because no Arab has yet to show the ability to take on 20 to one and win, except against themselves, interesting, don’t know how suicide bombing of innocents fits in with this, nor bin Laden’s Fatwah against the U.S. and Western Europe. {And, I’ve read, The Legacy of Jihad, … , since, and can now say that it’s a must read.}]

Repentance 9: (This is the only chapter in the Koran which does not begin with the invocation ‘In the Name of Allah, etc.’ Traditional commentators regard it as a continuation of ‘The Spoils’.) [There can be no peace with Islam:]

9:3 Allah and His apostle are free from obligation to the idolaters. … Proclaim a woeful punishment to the unbelievers, except those idolaters who have honoured their treaties with you and aided none against you. With these keep faith, until their treaties have run their term. Allah loves the righteous.
When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and pay the alms-tax, let them go their way. Allah is forgiving and merciful. …
9:8 How can you trust them? If they prevail against you they will respect neither agreements nor ties of kindred. They flatter you with their tongues, but their hearts abhor you. Most of them are evil-doers.
They sell Allah’s revelations for trifling gain and debar others from His path. Evil is what they do. They break faith with the believers and set at nought all ties of kindred. Such are the transgressors.
If they repent and take to prayer and pay the alms-tax, they shall become your brothers in the faith. Thus We make plain Our revelations for men of understanding.
But if, after coming to terms with you, they break their oaths and revile your faith, make war on the leaders of unbelief – for no oaths are binding with them – so that they may desist.
Will you not fight against those who have broken their oaths and conspired to banish the apostle? …
Make war on them: Allah will chastise them through you and humble them. He will grant you victory over them and heal the spirit of the faithful. He will take away all anger from their hearts: He shows mercy to whom He pleases. He is wise and all-knowing.

[Much more, to get the full effect of Spoils 8 and Repentance 9, you’re going to have to get a copy of the Q’Ran and read it for yourself, because you won’t believe what’s in here unless you read it for yourself. Anyone who thinks that the Infidel can make peace with these people is a fool and endangers the rest of us and our future generations if they get into power. You’ve got to get a copy and read these two verses, actually only one, in their entirety because you simply won’t believe it unless you’ve read it for yourself. Islam has no interest in making peace with the rest of the world, none whatsoever.]

The Cow 2:1 “This Book is not to be doubted. It is a guide for the righteous, who have faith in the unseen and are steadfast in prayer; who bestow in charity a part of what We have given them; who trust what has been revealed to you (Mohammed) and to others before you, and firmly believe in the life to come. These are rightly guided by their Lord; these shall surely triumph.
As for the unbelievers, whether you forewarn them or not, they will not have faith. Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and ears; their sight is dimmed and a grievous punishment awaits them. …

[Back to the ambiguity of free will vs. predestination. More importantly from my perspective, is the opening line that one cannot question what is recited herein. The Cow continues in this vein then reaches back, once again, to Moses and the Old Testament for supporting proofs. The cow in the title is the golden calf of Exodus’ infamy. 2:61 is an anomaly of interest: 2/61 “Believers, Jews, Christians, and Sabæens – whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does what is right – shall be rewarded by their Lord; they have nothing to fear or to regret.” More Moses, apostles, scriptures and covenants and some anti-Semitism on a generic level. 2:113 “The Jews say the Christians are misguided, and the Christians say it is the Jews who are misguided. Yet they both read the Scriptures. And the pagans say the same of both. Allah will judge their disputes on the Day of Resurrection.”… 2:117 “They say: ‘Allah has begotten a son.’ Allah Forbid! His is what the heavens and the earth contain; all things are obedient to Him. Creator of the heavens and the earth! When he decrees a thing, He need only say ‘Be,’ and it is.” So much for Jesus’ God-head. More certain proofs of Mohammed’s validity by reaching into Old Testament Scripture for support, Abraham &c. and lots of ‘follow Allah or else’, there are sections of the old scripture being hidden from you, so the need for the Q’Ran and in your tongue and so you have your own apostle, the righteous are going to Paradise, the others not, Revelation, Resurrection and Judgement, plus rules of living, (no gambling, drinking, fornicating [although raping slaves is ok, apparently], &c., 2:233 mothers shall give suck for two whole years if that’s what the father wants, rules for divorce &c.) This is a very long verse, 32 pp in my copy, filled with rules for the righteous on how to live. Considering how divorce and how to treat one’s wife are in here, the libbers really need to see what Islam has in store for them; and pity the ‘sodomists’ amongst us, if this becomes universal. Hillary and O’Donnell need to read this, as well as Ann Coulter and all women.]

Women 4: 4:2 Give orphans the property which belongs to them. Do not exchange their valuables for worthless things or cheat them of their possessions; for this would surely be a great sin. If you fear that you cannot treat orphans (orphan girls) with fairness, then you may marry other women who seem good to you: two, three, or four of them. But if you fear that you cannot maintain equality among them, marry one only or any slave-girls you may own. This will make it easier for you to avoid injustice.

[Basically, how to treat the weak, poor and women; one must be just and fair, but, 4:11 “A male shall inherit twice as much as a female.” It’s a setting forth of laws of inheritance, trust and probate as well as dower rights. Also, 4:34 “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme.” Well, I guess that means that if I “fear disobedience” from them, I can beat them and send them to bed with no supper until I no longer “fear disobedience”; so much for the Bill of Rights and equality in an Islamic world. There’re more rules of behavior and talk of the Last Day and judgement, and these are some of the things that we will be judged on. I don’t see how there can be any separation of religion and state under these rules. 4:76 “The true believers fight for the cause of Allah, but the infidels fight for idols. Fight then against the friends of Satan, Satan’s cunning is weak indeed.”; who in their right mind can think that a long-term peace is possible with these people – only makes the solution to this problem a huge one, doesn’t it? … more rules, Resurrection 4:91 “Others you will find who seek security from you as well as from their own people. Whenever they are called back to idol-worship they plunge into it headlong. If these do not keep their distance from you, if they neither offer you peace nor cease their hostilities against you, lay hold of them and kill them wherever you find them. Over such men We give you absolute authority.”; yet earlier, we’re told that those who would mislead you, meaning all infidels, by their actions and words, are hostile to you, therefore, Islam has been given complete authority over all others and they are charged with killing them wherever we may be. E.g.: 4:100 “It is no offence for you to shorten your prayers when traveling the road if you fear that the unbelievers may attack you. The unbelievers are your sworn enemies.”(emphasis added by me); personally, I don’t remember swearing Islam my enemy, but based on what I’ve taken note of so far, Islam has chosen to be both everyone’s enemy and executioner.; and that section above that refers to ‘keeping their distance’, that’ got to include commerce, so, gee golly, all that oil money is ill-gotten, isn’t it? And doesn’t that also mean that they shouldn’t have any trade with us at all? Hmm. 4:104 “Seek out your enemies relentlessly. If you have suffered, they too have suffered: but you at least hope to receive from Allah what they cannot hope for.” Justification for 9/11 and all the other attacks around the world? 4:115 “He that disobeys the Apostle after Our guidance has been revealed to him and follows a path other than that of the faithful, shall be given what he has chosen. We will cast him into Hell: a dismal end.” ; Mohammed’s in charge or y’all are going to Hell, a dismal end. Hell better be a very big place, because it’s surely going to be overfull based on this work. 4:125 “And who has a nobler religion than the man who surrenders himself to Allah, does what is right, and follows the faith of saintly Abraham, whom Allah Himself chose to be His friend?”; yep, methinks Hell is going to be quite full, based on these guidelines. No tolerance here, is there? Women is another long passage that should properly be read in its entirety and in context, not because the message is unclear, but because unless you read it for yourself, you won’t believe it, and certainly won’t believe me.]

Divorce 65: [Rules for divorce.]

The Table 5: [Rules and the Israelites and Christians are cursed; The Prophet’s in charge; some of Moses, Cain & Abel; 5:33 “Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorders in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country.”; more rules and punishments, 5:38 “As for the man or woman who is guilty of theft, cut off their hands to punish them for their crimes. That is the punishment enjoined by Allah.”; so much for the Bill of Rights and the ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ clause. If Allah decrees it, is it cruel and unusual? Even the Mafia and the Cartels better pay attention if this book becomes law. 5:45 In the Torah We decreed for them a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and a wound for a wound. But if a man charitably forbears from retaliation, his remission shall atone for him. Transgressors are those that do not judge in accordance with Allah’s revelations.”; so much for the U.S. Constitution and that of any other country that doesn’t follow these laws, eh? O’Reilly should like this section, he’d get to condemn every single judge in the country who doesn’t order a child molester to get the same that he dished out, including the multiple rape response. The Table is another long passage that should be read in its entirety, if only to find out what crime gets what punishment.]

The Unbelievers 109: Say: ’Unbelievers, I do not serve what you worship, nor do you serve what I worship. I shall never serve what you worship, nor will you ever serve what I worship. You have your own religion, and I have mine.’

[Unbelievers in its entirety; pretty much precludes conversion and free will, doesn’t it? As well as makes plain that the only good infidel is a dead or enslaved one. Although:]

Help 110: When Allah’s help and victory come, and you see men embrace His faith in multitudes, give glory to your Lord and seek His pardon. He is ever disposed to mercy.

[And, we’re back to free will and honest conversion. How does this jibe with 9/11? Those people weren’t given an opportunity to sincerely convert, how do they justify that?]

Pilgrimage 22: [Good & Evil, &c. 22:16 “We have revealed the Koran in clear verses.” Hmm, not that I can tell and I do believe that there’s a verse up above where Mohammed says that only those whom Allah chooses can understand, somewhere back by Spoils as well as in The Imrans 3 which states 3:5 “It is He who has revealed to you the Koran. Some of its verses are precise in meaning – they are the foundation of the Book – and others ambiguous.” Allah will judge on the Day of Resurrection, &c. at 22:40 war is justified against all those who attack you, drive you from your homes, &c. and back to Noah and scripture for justification.]

The Imrans 3: 3:5 “It is He who has revealed to you the Koran. Some of its verses are precise in meaning – they are the foundation of the Book – and others ambiguous. Those whose hearts are infected with disbelief follow the ambiguous part, so as to create dissension by seeking to explain it. But no one knows its meaning except Allah.”

[So how can anyone follow all these people who claim to
correctly interpret the Koran? By definition, anyone who interprets this book for you, is misguiding you. So much for bin Laden and his ilk! Men are tempted, good and evil, 3:20 “To those who have received the Scriptures and to the Gentiles say: ‘Will you surrender yourselves to Allah?’ If they become Muslims they shall be rightly guided; if they give no heed, then your only duty is to warn them.” Back to free will and the implication that it’s ok to war on a people and then to ask your captives if they will convert – this because when 3:20 is taken in historical context, it is given immediately after the Battle of Badr and in context of what do we do with the prisoners. 3:28 “Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful – he that does this has nothing to hope for from Allah – except in self defence.” So, it’s ok to lie to and deceive an infidel, because it’s being done in self-defense. More Noah, Abraham, Mary & Jesus, and 3:67 “Abraham was neither Jew nor Christian. He was an upright man, one who had surrendered himself to Allah.” Condemnations of People of the Book, Revelation, Resurrection and the wisdom of the Koran over all else. 3:110 “You are the noblest nation that has ever been raised up for mankind. You enjoin justice and forbid evil. You believe in Allah. ¶Had the People of the Book accepted Islam, it would have surely been better for them. Few of them are true believers, and most of them are evil-doers.” This is the relationship back to the definition of evil-doers and how Islam is free to destroy them, behead and have absolute authority over them, if you’ve been paying attention to the earlier passages; more for the literate amongst us: 3:118 “Believers, do not make friends with any men other than your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is clear from what they say, but more violent is the hatred which their breast conceal.” More rules on how to live together, rules on usury &c. 3:140 “If you have suffered a defeat, so did the enemy. We alternate these vicissitudes among mankind so that Allah may know the true believers and choose martyrs from among you (He does not love the evil-doers); and that He may test the faithful and annihilate the infidels.” Does it really get any clearer than this? Peace with these people is not possible. This is another long passage that should be read by the individual in order to get true understanding of this “peaceful” religion. You won’t believe me, read it for yourself.]

Cattle 6: [Another long passage with nothing significantly different than that which has gone before.]

Prohibition 66: [Last verse in my copy. One of Mohammed’s wives told a secret that she knew of him, he found out. One shouldn’t spill secrets and it’s ok to divorce her if she does because you will be rewarded with good, obedient women, both widows and virgins. Believers who sin should repent and turn to Allah for forgiveness, which He may grant.]

*************************************************************

My notes include various conclusions and hypotheses on religion. After editing the above to what it now is, I’ve decided to withhold them; I do not want to influence you toward my biases; I want you to go buy a copy of the Koran and decide for yourself. Feel free to use these notes as you read the appropriate verses. This is NOT a peaceful religion and I can find no place where they will keep their word with us. And, in the end, consider this: All Muslim clerics are co-equal, anyone of them may issue a Fatwah declaring that terrorisim is not an acceptable means for carrying out Jihad, or for that matter condemning much of the Islamic violence directed everywhere including against each other, yet not one has, does, or will even contemplate such an obvious blaspheme against Allah’s Word as revealed by the pedophile, MOHAMMED.

Ain’t no such thing as a moderate MUSLIM!

August 13, 2014

Secession: The Intermediate Argument, by and (c) Justplainbill

Secession: The Intermediate Argument
Posted: 14 August 2014
Introduction:

Fair Warning, this post is a relatively long post of several pages. It is not that I want to bore you. It is that the subject matter is not amenable to much more shortening.

When someone tells you that solving incredibly complex problems is easy or that there IS a quick solution, or they have the answer to all problems “in a nutshell,” and that person is not Jesus the Christ, then the odds are that they want you to buy something or vote them into office and “just trust them”. Think of “Hope and Change” as the mantra, yet not one reasonable suggestion is offered beyond “just trust me”.

For those uninterested in true argument or debate, there is a short post supporting the position of secession. This new post actually gives reasons, answers and the reasoned benefits of secession!

It may take a while for you to get to the end, but it is worth it if you really do want to preserve American Values. Just as an example, in the 1770’s, the supporting arguments for secession were published in pamphlets of scores of pages. As a standard academic ma-neuver, I am incorporating herein, two of the most important, Common Sense and The Rights of Man, both by Thomas Payne, by reference. Truly, y’all who are interested in free-dom, liberty, equality (ya, equality, not affirmative action or some other pseudonym for discrimination, bigotry and legalized theft – read the five virtues post for more), and pri-vate property & personal wealth, regardless of what you may think of these arguments, you should have and read more than once, both of those pamphlets.

With Dan Greenfield and Fred-on-Everything making the obvious points on Execu-tive Branch Scandals and Illegal Aliens Invading; Mark Levin and Sean Hannity professing Originialist Constitutionalism; Taxihack Depressions (on wordpress.com) reporting active black ops; Michael Savage and Glenn Beck talking Survivalism, John Beck, PhD proving visually the profound uselessness of most federal programs, and with nothing reasonable coming from “the ivy covered halls ofacademia”, except appeasement and the surrender of Western Civilization to Transnational Industrial Feudalism, occasionally called Statism, I have decided to enter as “a voice of reason,” even though this will not read as “reason” on the first or even the third reading.

This is not as emotional as you think, the conclusions are both reasonable and rea-soned.

Posted on this blog (www.justplainbill.wordpress.com) is a book list. There have been several good books, including Gasparino’s The Sellout, Jared Diamond’s Collapse, Brion McClanahan’s The Founding Fathers’ Guide to the Constitution, and Pauline Maier’s Ratification, The People Debate the Constitution, 1787 – 1788, published since the last update.

Of immediate interest, and y’all should have this anyway, is the leather-bound pock-et edition of The Constitution of the United States of America with the Declaration of Inde-pendence, FALL RIVER PRESS © 2012, NYC NY ISBN 978-1-4351-4553-5, interestingly enough, printed and bound in China. Common Sense is also available through the same publisher, in a similar leather bound booklet.

Y’all’s reference library should also have Edwin Meese III’s, The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, ISBN 978-1-59698-001-3, if for no other reason than to see how the original intent of The Founders has been corrupted by the United States Supreme Court, almost since the beginning. Y’all should have it anyway as it is a comprehensive and understandable, at least to those with a 10th grade education, guide to what is NOW the law of the land as interpreted by SCOTUS, ignominiously ignored by congress, and implemented by the executive branch. As conflicted as SCOTUS has made it, Professor Maier’s work, Ratification – noted above, offsets the chaos, for those interested; otherwise, we are back to, understandably, secession, moreover, the 1776 kind of secession, too!

Thucydides’ The Peloponnesian Wars, Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, de Tocqueville’s De-mocracy in America, and Freehling’s two works, Nullification, and Secession, (both having disappeared from book shelves during “The Clinton Years”), with Shelby Foote’s The Civil War: a narrative, are still the most important starting places for understanding the back-ground of why The Red States must secede.

This Secession MUST BE before the funded national debt exceeds twenty trillion U.S. dollars, (20T USD or $20,000,000,000,000.00) and the unfunded debt exceeds ninety trillion U.S. dollars (90T USD or $90,000,000,000,000.00). This debt crisis is on a national economy of less than fourteen trillion U.S dollars (14T USD or $14,000,000,000,000.00). I explain this statement later.

This is a debt to asset ratio of worse than 1:6!!!

Dodd-Franks’ asset tests (reserves) and the Basil III tests, used to determine the solvency of banks, would have declared The United States Bankrupt years ago, like Greece, closed it down, and sold off all of its assets and property, at bargain basement prices, probably less than ten cents on the dollar, to cover those debts; which is an absurdity. None-the-less, the standard that these pissant politicians apply to others, they fail to apply to themselves as they garner billions of dollars from the public treasury for themselves and their associates.

A simple glance at the accumulation of money by Nancy Pelosi, Dodd, Franks, the DNC contributor/ owners of Solyndra, and the Reid Family in Nevada, and the methods used, prove this point.

And, because of these things, we are left with Revolution/ Civil War, a Constitutional Convention, economic collapse and bankruptcy with an unemployment rate approaching 50%, delayed social implosion and its resulting anarchy to tyrannical governments, or Secession, my personal option if done before the debt becomes irre-deemable.

Argument:

I

The Preamble to The Constitution of The United States of America is NOT law. It is a statement of purpose. [We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America]. Notice the words emphasized by capitalization, and the sentence structure, notice that the constitution is FOR the United States. Notice that throughout the constitution, the word ‘state’ is capitalized as ‘State,’ thus proving the independence and sovereignty of each State; proving that they are not a subordinate division devised for the purposes of ease of suppression, oppression, and repression.

This is a statement of intent, not law, and not to be construed as law.

The Preamble is one of two looking glasses, through which we should be scrutinizing every activity of the federal government. If any action of the federal government does not further one of these stated interests, it should fail as violating the IXth and Xth Amendments. If those proposing such illegal actions are in federal government, those people should be deemed untrustworthy and unreliable by every citizen, and treated as such.

The second looking glass is that collection of works known as The Anti-Federalist Papers. The Anti-Federalist Papers were those arguments used against the ratification of the original seven articles. The Federalist Papers, predominantly written by Alexander Hamilton, ESQ., with contributions by James Madison, ESQ., and a handful by John Jay, ESQ., later the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, is a set of circular and specious reasoning, often used to justify or explain various clauses of the constitution.

Chronologically, and logically, The Federalist Papers should be ignored as having been displaced by The Bill of Rights. The sequence of events are: failure of The Articles of Confederation, the failed Annapolis Convention, the successful Philadelphia Convention, presentation to the states for ratification, argument where initially the press pushed The Federalist Papers and suppressed The Anti-Federalist Papers, the prospect of ratification failure, and then the acceptance of The Bill of Rights as the cost of ratification. The Federalist Papers are arguments for ratification WITHOUT THE TEN AMENDMENTS of The Bill of Rights. Thus, in order to interpret this constitution, it is The Anti-Federalist Papers which must be first looked to for understanding, and The Federalist Papers to be used ONLY when they are either not in conflict with the Anti-Federalist Papers, or where the AFP’s are silent on the subject.

Thus, more than one-half of all constitutional issues decided by The Supreme Court, by The Congress, and by The Executive, have been founded on the false premises of The Federalist Papers. The methods available to correct this are either that congress review ALL of these decisions and over-rule them by legislation, and thereby face a SCOTUS revolt, this revolt based on decisions such as Holy Trinity Church, (included below), and The Federalist Papers themselves, or SCOTUS, on its own Motion review and over-rule these rulings.

The likelihood of SCOTUS emasculating itself are nil and less than nil, especially giv-en Justice Bader-Ginsburg’s recent sexist ramblings and Justice Kagen’s published igno-rance of American History.

During George Washington’s presidency, The Executive frequently declared legisla-tive bills as unconstitutional. The understanding then was that congress would reconsider what President Washington sent them and either re-write or drop the bill. President Washington frequently took the opportunity to place his Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, and his Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, at odds writing responses to congress, then he would pick the one that suited his point of view, and return the bill to congress with the appropriate response. Hamilton frequently trumped Jefferson, thus, the Jobber High Federalist rutted road was ridden, and not the green pathway of the Yeoman-Farmer.

Congress will do nothing to change this, as members of congress are too intimately involved in accumulating personal wealth and power under this system, I will explain elsewhere how this dysfunction functions. The likes of Jackson, Rangel, Boehner, Pelosi, Reid, &c., will do nothing to jeopardize their own personal positions, even unto total de-struction of the society around them. There is a book, Throw them All Out, which details the dirty but legal transactions involved; consider the recent rash of convictions for corruption amongst the political aristocracy and their families.

Arguments made to have another constitutional convention or add 27+ amend-ments, the amending process as defined in Article V of the constitution, fail for several reasons. The first is, as noted elsewhere on this blog, that the electoral process has failed utterly. It has been corrupted to a point beyond cure. The election of Al Franken and the corruption in Noxubee County MS are the standard and not the exceptions such that fair representation, unbiased national interest, and altruism would be non-existent at this convention. The second major defense is the same as that made in 1860: the regional interests will suppress the national ones. The cliché, “All politics are local”, is too true to be ignored.

Only through the Red States seceding are all of those bad SCOTUS decisions removed from law.

A consideration of historical context and technology intrudes at this point. When originally ratified, the congress was designated to sit for only a few months out of the year, and, that it sit several months after the polling occurs because of primitive transportation technology. In 1788, there was no electricity and the steam engine, “Fulton’s Folly”, still years away. Bluntly, there was NO SUCH THING AS A LAME DUCK SESSION as we now know it, as congress had recessed and would not return until the Spring. Recess appointments were few and far between, but understandable when congress could be months away from sitting. Only through secession will Lame Ducks and Recess Appointments be eliminated! They are too ingrained into the political corruption of both major parties to be done away with in any other fashion.

With electricity, electronics, jet transportation, I-Phones, I-Glasses, internet access, &c., the reasons for lame duck and recess appointments completely disappear. With seces-sion and a new constitution, polling can take place on the 3rd Saturday of the 1st month of each quarter; certification of the election can take place within 5 working days; and a re-striction on laws and appointments during those 5 days included in the constitution, thereby completely eliminating the egregious, self-serving, irresponsibility of passing an unwanted law or giving the wrong person an appointment, when the next government would not do those things, especially if the issues surrounding those laws and appointments are what the election was about. Think about it: John Marshall and his entire line of High Federalist SCOTUS rulings would not exist if this had been the law in 1800!

Secession cures this disease.

I-a

There are seven Articles to the 17 September 1787 Constitution of The United States of America. Before 1866, “These United States” were what we were. A Union of In-dependent Nations with each State having its own constitution, not answerable beyond those restrictions explicit in the constitution, to a Federal Government, but to its citizens, and thus free to organize and live free, unoppressed, with the right to self-realization uninhibited by those living thousands of miles away.

The Federal Government, according to the IXth and Xth Amendments,(enacted as ten of twelve proposed Amendments, currently known as The Bill of Rights, on Wednes-day, 4 March 1789), was to be a junior partner in the triumvirate of, the federal govern-ment, We The People, and The States. [Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. *** Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.]

The ten sections of Article I of the 1787 Constitution establish, define, and restrict the Congress of These United States of America. They create the bicarmel legislature with the “lower” house as the’ house of commons,’ or of “We The People”, and the “upper” house that of THE STATES; not that of an electoral majority of we the people on an extended appointment of exalted, and aristocratic, position.

The XVIIth Amendment effectively eviscerates Article I §3 [The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years, and each Senator shall have one Vote. … .] and clearly violates both the IXth and Xth Amendments. It reduces State Sovereignty to nil, with ONLY Nullification +/or Secession, as a response to an overbearing or out of control federal government. [Shelby Foote has a decent discussion of this in The Civil War: a narrative both in the ante-bellum section and in the section discussing the aftermath of Antietam.] One only need look to the effects of “The Dream Act” and its complete abandonment of the Southern Border and the Governor of Texas having to call up his state’s militia to attempt to protect his citizenry, their lives and their society and private property & wealth.

The discussion of the effect of reducing the senate to little more than a House of Lords, was on partisan lines, with the typical political result: In the short term, it helped the majority party, in the long term it has afflicted the taxpayer with trillions of dollars of unnecessary, unwanted, and unconstitutional burdens, both social and economic. The very effect of having this House of Lords has been constant gridlock, with, for all of the yammering on the subject, little, if any, compromise in the legislative process. The purpose of the senate as put forth in McClanahan’s book was to act as a brake on the impetuousness of the House of Representatives, AND to REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL STATES!

With the senators elected by the general population instead of by the states’ legislatures, the senate no longer represents the States, but is now irrelevant. It reduces to near zero, the political strength of the citizens of the individual states and clumps them into a rural vs urban sewer of issue conflicts, winnable only by that group procreating the most rapidly, and, history shows us, destroying economic efficiency through socialist “safety net” programs, instead of the necessary self-reliance/ self-responsible of the Judeo-Christian Ethos.

This same purpose, protecting the interests of the States, is better served by the process of Nullification. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison saw, and agreed to this, when they wrote and put forth The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Nullification, (there is a post on this blog discussing Nullification more fully), has been used as recently as 2014 by the various states. Three examples are California nullifying federal immigration law by creating sanctuary cities, Colorado nullifying federal illicit drug laws by legalizing the recreational use of Cannabis and the 2010 rejection of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, (aka PPACA or “Obamacare”) by the citizens of Missouri (by a margin of 70% – 30%).

Nullification as currently used, is another argument in favor of secession due to Article IV, [§1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and Judicial Proceedings of every other State. And, the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved and the effects thereof. … .] Nullification is acceptable in California and Colorado, but not Missouri, ever wonder why?

Please note where and under what circumstances nullification is acceptable and not acceptable. In point of fact, legally and morally, SCOTUS should have taken this into account when ruling on various aspects of PPACA. The failure of SCOTUS to perform within the law, in and of itself, should be reason enough for secession. Due to various XVIIIth Century SCOTUS rulings, not only is tenure for life a facet of being a federal judge, but one may be suffering from dementia or extreme alcoholism, yet remain on the bench, AND THAT JUDGE OR JUSTICE’S RULINGS ARE STILL BINDING!

Thus, by their own actions, both SCOTUS and the entire senate have defeated the purpose of the constitution. Secession is the least objectionable response to such irresponsibility, to this assault on personal Faith, private property and personal wealth.

The need for the upper house to be placed, as originally intended by The Founders, back to the citizen-taxpayers of each, and every individual, INDEPENDENT, State, is shown every time a party official prevents national work from being performed. The current institution is nothing more than a millionaires’ club, with its purpose naught more than self-perpetration, and making their bubba’s rich. The “Black Hole” in Boston is an excellent example of this, as is the constant raiding of the Transportation Fund for projects like “light rail”, instead of roads and bridges, which was what the original enabling was for.

Consider further this little tidbit. The money for the Federal Transportation Fund is from a tax on gasoline. The reasoning was that since cars and trucks would be using the roads and bridges, car and truck owners should pay for the bridges and roads. Now, the gasoline tax must be raised so that members of congress can buy construction workers’ votes by spending the money on less effective projects that are more expensive like “light rail”. Interestingly enough, the 9 Aug 14 issue of The Economist, has an article on this very subject.

As to Secession, the Stanford Convention of 1814, where the New England States voted to remain in the Union, provided that The War of 1812 be ended, is only one of several secession conventions. Dr. Freehling’s work is excellent for those who actually want to research the issue. Suffice it to say that, the next secession was when Andrew Jackson and his Democratic Party so controlled the federal government that the South was so heavily taxed for “economic improvement,” (canals & railroads, special loans to industry – think Solyndra), and the benefits of all of these taxes given to the Northern states, that South Carolina did hold a convention and start the secession process. Former president John Q. Adams, then a senator from Massachusetts, intervened, and South Carolina did not secede and Jackson’s Tax Law was repealed! Think Obamacare!

Shortly thereafter, the third party candidate, Abraham Lincoln got elected to the executive, and the seven Deep South states seceded. Lincoln, arguably the worst president this country has ever had, [know anybody else who not only caused a civil war costing as much as The War of 1861 did in both lives and wealth; violate the constitution so many ways through executive decree {instituted an unconstitutional raising of an army, fired on States’ militias, took and hanged innocent hostages as a means of controlling citizens in occupied territories, instituted a draft without an act of congress, created an income tax specifically prohibited by the constitution – not made legal in this country until 3 February 1913 with the questionable ratification of the XVIth Amendment, invaded the Sovereign Commonwealth of Virginia, piratically boarded British commercial vessels and kidnapping private citizens under the protection of The Crown, and on and on} – BTW, Lincoln freed NO slaves, the XIIIth Amendment did that, and the discussion by his own cabinet as to the constitutionality of his Emancipation Proclamation shows it to be unconstitutional as it is not allowed even within the executive’s war powers, AS IT DEALS WITH THE CONFISCATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY W/O DUE PROCESS (!!!), AN ISSUE ALREADY DECIDED BY SCOTUS, Scott vs Sanford, THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS NO SUCH AUTHORITY!!!], in direct violation to the constitution, congress was NOT in session, started to raise a Standing Army and threatened to “cross” Virginia with it in order to put down the legally seceding states.

Virginia and the three border states, then held secession conventions and decided to secede from the union. For the results of Lincoln’s unconstitutional acts, I direct your attention back to Mr. Foote’s excellent work. His discussion of how Missouri did not secede yet Lincoln’s general, Frèmont, invaded anyway, treating Missourians as subjugated serfs, the treatment of occupied territories by such union generals as Butcher Butler in New Orleans and the confiscation of private property sold for personal gain, are enlightening, to say the least.

Point being, secession was and is legal. Further proof, is that in 1854, then Repre-sentative from Illinois, that same A. Lincoln, made a speech on the floor of the House of Representatives declaring so, and that he understood the law to be so. And, consider that although called The American Revolution of 1776, it was, in both fact and law, a secession from the Hanoverian Crown!

A last point on Article I, the “just and proper” enabling clause, is always interpreted through the dark glass of the specious Federalist Papers. Since it has been shown that it should be viewed through both The Preamble and The Anti-Federalist Papers, every case that has supported this clause’s use to over-reach and extend federal authority, should be made null and void. Only through secession can all of those laws and SCOTUS decisions be removed.

I – b

Ok, here’s the simple view and clearly why the federal government must be limited to federal issues ONLY!!

A Congressman from Detroit wants special tax privileges for certain constituents. Lady Speaker wants an extension to an Interstate to go over land to which she and her husband have options to buy. They swap votes, each voting for the other’s special situation. The result:
A special section of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), based on the section of the constitution stating that the congress should be doing things to help commerce and science, is amended to include that any money lost from the start-up of a Hip-Hop/ Rap Record Label, shall be written off the investor’s Gross An-nual Income at 50:1. Thus, for every dollar lost on said record label start-up, the investor can take off $50.00 of income. The result is a boom of record labels in Detroit, creating proprie-tary jobs for in-laws, family, and friends, an economically mis-direction of economic resources, and an incredibly favorable tax break for those specific investors.

Balancing this congressional support for advancing commerce and science, Madame Speaker, knowing months in advance of the public exactly where the unnecessary Interstate extension will go, exercises her options to buy hundreds of acres of land at $180/acre, and then sells it to The Department of Transportation for $1,800/acre.

Both the Congressman from Detroit and the Congresswoman from San Francisco, have personally, AND LEGALLY, profited from these acts of congress. We, the taxpayers, have lost. We have lost in the one case by being over-charged for the land, and in the other in that those “losses” have reduced the “investors’” tax payments.
Is this simple enough for you?

II

Article II establishes, defines, authorizes, and restricts, The Executive Branch.

In a full-blown argument including Article II, discussion of presidential over-reach, appointing of bubba’s, failure to enforce the law, &c., would be gone into. However, with all of the public discussion, or lack thereof, regarding The Obama Administration and its scandals, its appointments of racists and bigots such as Perez and Holder; scandals such as NSA spying on US citizens, the IRS, Benghazi, Hillary & Kerry, the dropping of the New Black Panther Voting Violation law suit, its failure to enforce the Mississippi Federal Court Decision regarding the Sheriff of Noxubee County, the as yet unexhausted abuse of the military, the continuing exercise of executive authority to change passed legislation without returning to the legislature for a re-write, the “Dream Act” executive order, the deaths of Federal Agents by foreigners, &c. I see no such need. The only way to re-write The Executive and get rid of all of the entrenched civil servants like Lois Lerner, is through secession.

Let us be more clear: Obama has appointed over three dozen ACLU and La Raza attorneys to the Justice Department Civil Rights Division, how impartial will they be, when J. Christian Adams’ book Injustice: the Obama Justice Department, already shows how bad things are in the DoJ. The evidence mounts.

And, as to the whole civil service, the over One Million of Them, what shall be done now? How many of them are Lois Lerners?

Bluntly, if even one is a Lois Lerner, the integrity of the whole system fails. Only se-cession cures the cancer of the Obamacratic Bureaucracy. Or, do you really think that Lois Lerner was (she got to retire with full pension and benefits) the only rotten apple in the bureaucracy, or that only the IRS, NSA, CIA, SSA, HUD, OPM, NLRB, ACE, Medicare, and the VA, are the only really bad federal agencies? Mmm, wait a minute, doesn’t that leave ONLY the Military as honest? And, hasn’t Obama fired so many generals and admirals that the only people appointed to flag positions are those with good records on gender, race, and affirmative action, pretty much leaving combat skills out of the promotion equation? Or, did I miss something in the recent speech by The Commandant of The Marine Corps (Barry, the P is silent!) condemning current Executive Policies?

III

The failure of The Supreme Court of the United States, created by Article III, to follow even the most basic of The Rules of Contract and Statutory Construction, that every person who has completed their first year of law school, not only understands the rule but the WHY the rule exists reasoning, is, in and of itself, reason to secede. The failure to follow the most simple of the rules of law, proves beyond any doubt that The Federal Judiciary is incapable of being impartial, of rendering a constitutionally grounded ruling, or even of acting on the surface in a non-partisan, reasoned judgmental manner.

When PPACA was ruled constitutional as a tax and CJ Roberts declared that the duty of SCOTUS is not to make law, but to interpret law in accordance with the intent of congress, he was correct. That he completely ignored the affirmed and boldly broadcast intent of congress, was NOT correct. Madame Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, had declared openly, and had printed in The Congressional Record, the official source and record of congressional intent, that there was not to be a severability clause in PPACA. She said outright that PPACA was an all or nothing bill, and was to be an all or nothing law. When SCOTUS ruled one iota of the law unconstitutional, the will of congress was that then the entire law was to be unconstitutional!

But there is so much more!

The chain of Marshall Cases beginning with Marbury vs Madison, (~1803) all in vio-lation of a clear reading of the constitution, has as its purpose a re-write of the constitution along High Federalist lines, and gives SCOTUS a higher footing than the other two branches, when the original intent was that it be the least of the three branches. The overt end of that line is the following, and it is still law, Shepardize it if you like. It has been “restricted” and “narrowed” but never the less, it is still good law. The covert end of these rulings has not been reached. The gross failure to follow the simplest of the rules of construction, the severability clause, proves SCOTUS is still seeking absolute dominance over government.

Rector, et al, Holy Trinity Church vs United States
143 US 457 (1892)
“(@ 12 SCT 511) It must be conceded that the act of the corporation is within the letter of (the law) … (@ 12 SCT 512) It is a familiar rule that a thing may be within the letter of the statute and yet not within the statute, because not within its spirit nor within the intention of its makers. This has been often as-serted, and the Reports are full of cases illustrating its application. This is not the substitution of the will of the judge for that of the legislator; for frequently words of general meaning are used in a statute, words broad enough to include an act in question, and yet a consideration of the whole legislation, or of the circum-stances surrounding its enactment, or of the absurd results which follow from giving such broad meaning to the words, makes it unreasonable to believe that the legislator intended to include the particular act.”

Emphasis added.

It is important to note the historical context of this decision, especially with the court using the illogical reasoning that it expresses above.
In 1892 there was a Federal Labor law that stated that no enterprise could em-ploy a foreigner for any position whatsoever in these United States if there was an American able and willing to do that job.
Holy Trinity Church is the Episcopal Church located at Wall & Church Streets in New York City. It was originally Anglican a.k.a. Church of England (C of E), but, as did most Anglican Churches in 1776, vote to distance itself from The Crown. Holy Trinity Church is where Alexander Hamilton is buried. It is where the power elite of old families of New York City, and the early Federalists, belonged, worshipped, and congregated. It is where the business people attended. Currently, it owns ALL of the land from Wall Street south and collects all of the rents therefrom. As a church, it pays no taxes but supports various politicians and approved charities.
In 1888, Holy Trinity Church decided to employ a new bell ringer. The Elders de-cided to hire a German to do it. They did in fact know that there were hundreds, if not thousands, of New Yorkers ready, willing and able to do the job. They did not care, and they did in fact know that they were breaking the law, at least according to the syllabus.
And, the Supremes decided to keep John Marshall’s usurpation of power alive and well, the Constitution of the United States notwithstanding.

[page taken from The Albany Plan Re-Visited © 2012 William S. Klocek]

IV

Article IV is one of the most egregiously and violently violated articles of the constitution. [§1 Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Act, Records, and Judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved and the Effect thereof. §2 The Citizens of each State be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. … . §3 New States … . §4 The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of government, and shall protect each of them from Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.]

(I must pause and catch my breath every time that I proofread this essay when I get to this point. Ah-ha, not better, should probably go get a scotch & water, no ice.)

Just a little bit here, as once you read the very few points that I make, y’all will be putting forth many more of your own, and realize that secession is the least bloody way of getting rid of this.

For decades, the only two places an American could get a divorce were Mexico and the State of Nevada. For Nevada, you went to Reno, rented a room for six weeks to establish CITIZENSHIP through meeting the residency requirements, then filed for a “no fault” divorce and it was routinely granted. Ta-da! The divorce became good worldwide!!!

First problem, as SSA and Medicaid became rights, the residency requirement limit-ing access to State Aid, was dissolved by SCOTUS, as residency requirements somehow infringed on a magically implied constitutional right to mobility. This issue as a national issue is still unresolved.

Second problem, now that California and New York have decided to grant Illegal Aliens driver’s licenses, these new license holders may now travel legally everywhere within the federal jurisdiction, regardless of the rights and laws of the other 48 states. Note also the invasion all along our Southern border and how the feds are not protecting our citizens.

Third problem, these NY & CA driver’s licenses are Legal Acts within the meaning of Article IV. THEY ARE NOW USABLE AS GOVERNMENT ISSUED LICENSES, WHICH MAY BE USED TO REGISTER TO VOTE IN ALL 50 STATES!!! Think that I’m joking? Look at how the ACLU and La Raza have prevented the use of photo ID’s to register to vote and as proof of citizenship at voting precincts. Magically, to denote citizenship or lack thereof on these licenses will, by federal court ruling, be discrimination, thus, all driver’s licenses MUST be the same, and thus, automatic amnesty and FULL citizenship!

Now, consider this, if any State pass a law that CA or NY licenses are not valid forms of identification, do you really think that the NAACP, La Raza, or the ACLU, will sit idly by? What federal court won’t declare such a law unconstitutional simply on a clear reading of Article IV???

Do I really need to go into the problems with PPACA, abortion laws, right to work laws, DMV laws, tax laws, landlord-tenant laws, &c.? Or do you think that you can pick up your local paper, or listen to your local talk radio, and see the problems with how Article IV has been interpreted and abused? Hasn’t Breitbart reported more than a dozen illegal alien crimes this week alone, including child molestation and vehicular manslaughter?

V

I’m going to pass on the rest of the articles, except to point out that Article V is the amending article, and the post on this blog regarding how The XIVth Amendment has never been ratified pretty much covers all of that, and Article VI §1 is about debts made before the constitution was ratified, but that Article VI §2 is the so often abused and intentionally misinterpreted “supremacy” clause. As pointed out earlier, this clause should be viewed through the two glasses of the preamble and the AFP, and has not been. Article VII is that this constitution shall go into effect as between them when nine of the 13 STATES ratify it.

VI

I should probably go into the amendments, there are 27 of them, but there are only a few of immediate concern. We are constantly talking about The 1st Amendment, which deals with various freedoms including that of religion and assembly. One point, it applies to rules and laws made by The Federal Government and was put in to specifically prevent the feds from doing things like the PPACA forcing people to pay taxes that violate their religious beliefs. Keep in mind that Massachusetts and Pennsylvania had State religions into the 1840’s. Those states collected taxes that paid for the salaries of preachers and their estates, so much for the supremacy clause and freedom of religion.

The 2nd Amendment as intended by The Founders gives non-felons the right to bear arms. A quick look at the time and how The Minute Men were formed, organized, supplied, and supported, proves this without any doubt. However, for those of you who do not believe this, elsewhere is a complete essay on the federal law that defines the militia. Simply put, ALL healthy males, except for a very limited set of exemptions – primarily the “essential” personnel groups of federally elected officials and certain bureaucrats- between the ages of 16 and 48 (the ages may have changed as I haven’t looked since I wrote the original essay), are The Militia. Ya, and some women, too, but you need to read the law to see who. AND, each and every member of this militia is supposed to know basic drill/ The Landing Party Manual, a basic knowledge of infantry tactics, basic marksmanship, and to have and maintain a RIFLE! Yupper, Federal Law states this! Under this federal law, who among you are un-convicted felons?

And, a quick aside as to a peculiar point of history and The 2nd Amendment: After Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Courthouse, the hatred between the races, as pointed out by Shelby Foote’s book, caused by The Emancipation Proclamation, caused the creation of the KKK, which went about keeping the former slaves in check, mostly through violence, particularly murder. The National Rifle Association was created to buy arms, GIVE THEM to former slaves, and train them in their use, so that they may protect themselves from such terrorism.

Last point in here, the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments are the ‘criminal rights’ amendments. Originally designed to protect ALL citizens from the over-reach of the federal judiciary and congress, they have been misinterpreted to protect only criminals. Think about it, only criminals are granted Due Process. PPACA is a tax that the taxpayer cannot individually challenge. YOU CANNOT challenge the feds when the IRS takes everything away through a mistake. YOU CANNOT challenge the feds when the DEA breaks into your home when they meant to break in next door. YOU CANNOT challenge the EPA when they declare that all standing water is protected by The Clean Air Act, thus they have authority on your driveway even though that puddle will evaporate. Under The Patriot Act, you cannot challenge a warrantless search. And, the list goes on and on.

Epilogue and Conclusion

There are other things to consider, but with all of the above, where else can you go? National Bankruptcy, Civil War, a perverted Constitutional Convention, Anarchy to Tyranny, or Secession, which one is actually reasonable and workable?

But what benefits derive from secession?

1

The first and most urgent benefit from a Red State Secession is that of immediate and complete control over the National Debt.

The Red States will take 1/3rd of the debt, or a projected $6T, leaving the industry heavy and, if allowed to be, completely energy independent blue states with $12T. No real change is apparent at this point. OH! COME LOOK AND SEE!!! The $83T of UNFUNDED DEBT immediately disappears through operation of Contract Law through rescission and novation!!! Simply put, because the legal entity known as The United States of America dis-appears, except for the total national debt, all contracts and promises made by it also dis-appear. Magic! Harry Potter couldn’t do it better. Don’t believe me? Consider how when someone dies, his estate pays off what debt it can, but once unprotected assets are used up, the rest of the debt is simply written off. Here, the new entities, blue and red, accept their proportionate share of that debt, but, as in death, all of the deceased’s promises are vacated as un-executable.

Thus, there is NO MORE unfunded debt. Magic!

2

Next, as noted many times above, all of the laws and court decisions of The Union are no longer applicable to The Red States. And, because of the secession, The Blue States MUST review ALL of those laws and decisions for current applicability to them! Gosh and Golly, two win-win situations in a row, I wonder if there are any more to be had.

3

The Red States will write a new constitution. One applicable to the Times! One that will include electricity, electronics, medicine, &c. in it. This convention would have over 238 years of U.S. AND WORLD HISTORY to guide it. It could start with The Albany Plan, The Virginia Plan, The New York Plan, The Heartland Plan, and The Rhode Island Plan as well as Hagehot’s British Constitution as initial proposals, and then put together a truly workable federal government that would leave local issue to the locals, and make certain that the new federal government dealt ONLY WITH FEDERAL ISSUES. Hmm, three good reasons in a row.

4

By secession, the economic circumstances of North America would change almost instantly for the better. Yupper, Canada, The Red States, The Blue States, Mexico, Central America, and The Caribbean would instantly become the most dynamic economic machine through the forced renegotiation of all trade agreements. The XL Pipeline would immedi-ately be started, Pass Christian MS, Pascagoula MS, Tampa FL, Vera Cruz MX, Hispaniola, and Cuba, could start building new, environmentally safe, refineries. NAFTA would be re-done to require uniform enforcement. Unemployment should drop to 3% average throughout the entire region while labor force involvement should jump to 69%. Nuclear Fusion plants would be planned and built. A standardized rail system from Point Barrow to Panama City Panama would be built. Stabilization of currency would be immediate.

5+

How much more do you want? Taxation would be rationalized and evened out. Education throughout would be standardized and equalized. Private property and wealth would be protected, which could be done now if only the various governments would im-plement the laws currently on the books.

6+

Borders would be closed and protected. An intelligent and uniform foreign policy would be emplaced.

7+

More? How about true freedom of religion? How about being protected against terrorist attacks, like the Boston Marathon, by terrorists, instead of useless assaults on our persons by an ineffective TSA?
Secession, secession, secession, and secession BEFORE THE NATIONAL DEBT GOES PAST $18t AND THE UNFUNDED $83T

Secession!

August 11, 2014

Who lost the Viet Nam War, by Bruce Herschensohn, [nc]

Course Description
Did the United States win or lose the Vietnam War? We are taught that it was a resounding loss for America, one that proves that intervening in the affairs of other nations is usually misguided. The truth is that our military won the war, but our politicians lost it. The Communists in North Vietnam actually signed a peace treaty, effectively surrendering. But the U.S. Congress didn’t hold up its end of the bargain. In just five minutes, learn the truth about who really lost the Vietnam War.
Taught By
Bruce Herschensohn

Login to Receive Credit!

Transcript

Course Quiz

Related Books

Transcript
Decades back, in late 1972, South Vietnam and the United States were winning the Vietnam War decisively by every conceivable measure. That’s not just my view. That was the view of our enemy, the North Vietnamese government officials. Victory was apparent when President Nixon ordered the U.S. Air Force to bomb industrial and military targets in Hanoi, North Viet Nam’s capital city, and in Haiphong, its major port city, and we would stop the bombing if the North Vietnamese would attend the Paris Peace Talks that they had left earlier. The North Vietnamese did go back to the Paris Peace talks, and we did stop the bombing as promised.

On January the 23rd, 1973, President Nixon gave a speech to the nation on primetime television announcing that the Paris Peace Accords had been initialed by the United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam, the Viet Cong, and the Accords would be signed on the 27th. What the United States and South Vietnam received in those accords was victory. At the White House, it was called “VV Day,” “Victory in Vietnam Day.”

The U.S. backed up that victory with a simple pledge within the Paris Peace Accords saying: should the South require any military hardware to defend itself against any North Vietnam aggression we would provide replacement aid to the South on a piece-by-piece, one-to-one replacement, meaning a bullet for a bullet; a helicopter for a helicopter, for all things lost – replacement. The advance of communist tyranny had been halted by those accords.

Then it all came apart. And It happened this way: In August of the following year, 1974, President Nixon resigned his office as a result of what became known as “Watergate.” Three months after his resignation came the November congressional elections and within them the Democrats won a landslide victory for the new Congress and many of the members used their new majority to de-fund the military aid the U.S. had promised, piece for piece, breaking the commitment that we made to the South Vietnamese in Paris to provide whatever military hardware the South Vietnamese needed in case of aggression from the North. Put simply and accurately, a majority of Democrats of the 94th Congress did not keep the word of the United States.

On April the 10th of 1975, President Gerald Ford appealed directly to those members of the congress in an evening Joint Session, televised to the nation. In that speech he literally begged the Congress to keep the word of the United States. But as President Ford delivered his speech, many of the members of the Congress walked out of the chamber. Many of them had an investment in America’s failure in Vietnam. They had participated in demonstrations against the war for many years. They wouldn’t give the aid.

On April the 30th South Vietnam surrendered and Re¬education Camps were constructed, and the phenomenon of the Boat People began. If the South Vietnamese had received the arms that the United States promised them would the result have been different? It already had been different. The North Vietnamese leaders admitted that they were testing the new President, Gerald Ford, and they took one village after another, then cities, then provinces and our only response was to go back on our word. The U.S. did not re-supply the South Vietnamese as we had promised. It was then that the North Vietnamese knew they were on the road to South Vietnam’s capital city, Saigon, that would soon be renamed Ho Chi Minh City.

Former Arkansas Senator William Fulbright, who had been the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee made a public statement about the surrender of South Vietnam. He said this, “I am no more distressed than I would be about Arkansas losing a football game to Texas.” The U.S. knew that North Vietnam would violate the accords and so we planned for it. What we did not know was that our own Congress would violate the accords. And violate them, of all things, on behalf of the North Vietnamese. That’s what happened.

I’m Bruce Herschensohn.

August 8, 2014

Recommended Video/ United Nations and Civil Rights vs Women

Embed: Human rights travesty

cut and paste if necessary, must see video

http://dotsub.com/media/b5ee5ada-5b37-4b0b-9916-e0896337ec4b/embed/eng

August 3, 2014

Current News from France, from John Fasb, [nc]

Our wonderful media SURE DON’T KNOW HOW TO REPORT THE NEWS(Please read and forward):

Subject: FRANCE

Once again, the real news in France is conveniently not
being reported as it should.

To give you an idea of what’s going on in that country where there are now between 5 and 6 million Muslims and about 600,000 Jews, here is an E-mail that came from a Jew
living in France.

Please read! “Will the world say nothing – again – as it did in Hitler’s time?” He writes: “I AM A JEW — therefore I am forwarding this to everyone on all my e-mail lists. I will not sit back and do nothing.

Nowhere have the flames of anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France …

1. In Lyon , a car was rammed into a synagogue and set on fire.

2. In Montpellier , the Jewish religious center was firebombed.

3. so were synagogues in Strasbourg and Marseilles ;

4. so was a Jewish school in Creteil – all recently.

5. A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with Molotov cocktails

6. and on the statue of Alfred Dreyfus, in Paris , the words ‘Dirty Jew’ were painted.

7. In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a Jewish football team with sticks and metal bars.

8. The bus that takes Jewish children to school in Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the last 14 months.

9. According to the Police, metropolitan Paris has seen 10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents PER DAY in the past 30 days.

10. Walls in Jewish neighborhoods have been defaced with slogans proclaiming ‘Jews to the gas chambers’ and ‘Death to the Jews.’

11. A gunman opened fire on a kosher butcher’s shop (and, of course, the butcher) in Toulouse, France

12. A Jewish couple in their 20’s were beaten up by five men in Villeurbanne -France (the woman was pregnant).

13. A Jewish school was broken into and vandalized in Sarcelles , France .. This was just in the past week

So I call on you, whether you are a fellow Jew, a friend, or merely a person with the capacity and desire to distinguish decency from depravity, to do – at least – these three simple things:

First, care enough to stay informed. Don’t ever let yourself become deluded into thinking that this is not your fight.

I remind you of what Pastor Neimollersaid in World War II:

‘First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.’

Second, boycott France and French products. Only the Arab countries are more toxically anti-Semitic and, unlike them, France exports more than just oil and hatred.

So boycott their wines and their perfumes

Boycott their clothes and their foodstuffs.

Boycott their movies.

Definitely boycott their shores.

If we are resolved we can exert amazing pressure and, whatever else we may know about the French, we most certainly know that they are like a cobweb in a hurricane in the face of well-directed pressure.

Third, send this along to your family, your friends, and your co-workers. Think of all of the people of good conscience that you know and let them know that you – and the people that you care – about need their help.

The number one bestselling book in France is…. ‘September 11: The Frightening Fraud’ which argues that no plane ever hit the Pentagon!

PLEASE PASS THIS ON. LETS NOT HISTORY REPEAT ITSELF! THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIM

​​E.

Cu

July 28, 2014

Know Your Military Colonists, by Dan Greenfield [c]

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

Sunday, July 27, 2014
Know Your Military Colonists

Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog 0 Comments

“Military Colonist” is a term that has gone out of fashion in this brave new world of “No Human Being is Illegal” and “Every Refugee Deserves to be Resettled.”

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jReR5RtQmQw/U9VNPPaSzaI/AAAAAAAAOGE/goGc7-W8lTs/s1600/border-crossing-ann-coulter-voter-fraud-620×412.jpgThe university history professor with an office full of fake Indian jewelery and a view of the parking lot will lecture on the military colonies of the Roman period, always careful to emphasize their eventual fate. And he may even get up to the 16th century. But he’ll stay away from the present.

But if you are going to take land or seize power, you will need military colonists to hold it. The military colonist may be an ex-soldier, but he’s more likely to be someone the empire, present or future, doesn’t particularly need or have a use for. The Czars used serfs. The present day military colonist who shows up at JFK or LAX may also be a peasant with even less value to his culture.

Mexico’s military colonists are not military. Often they aren’t even Mexican. But they have managed to take back California without firing a shot. Unless you count the occasional drive by shooting.

While the United States sent tens of thousands of soldiers to try and hold Iraq and Afghanistan only to fail; Mexico took California with a small army of underpaid handymen who claim entire cities and send back some 20 billion dollars a year. As conquests go, it’s not hard to see who did more with less.

In 2009, 417 Mexican migrants died trying to reach America, and 317 American soldiers died in Afghanistan. But Mexico has more to show for it than America does. Every Mexican who settles across the border is a net gain who sends back money and spreads political influence. Meanwhile America is spending trillions on a much smaller army in a country whose land no one actually wants.

In 2009, the year Obama approved a 30,000 man troop surge, 3,195 Afghans received permanent legal status in the United States.

In the decade since the US invaded Afghanistan, 24,710 Afghans successfully invaded the United States and received permanent legal status. That is an occupying force larger than US troop numbers were at any point in time in Afghanistan until the very end of the George W. Bush’s second term.

During this same period there were also 19,000 Afghan non-immigrant admissions. As invasions go, the Afghan invasion of America was far more successful than the American invasion of Afghanistan.

That is even more true when you consider birth rates. Military colonists are not a mere invading army. They are generational footholds.

The American birth rate was at 13.5. The Afghan birth rate was at 37.3 at the time. American soldiers go home when their time is up. Sometimes they come home with a Muslim wife after converting to marry her. Afghan immigrants come with a birth rate that is nearly three times that of the country they are invading.

Across the ocean, the Algerian War is still going strong and France is losing badly. There are fewer bombs and bullets. Only men and women showing up and expecting to be taken care of. An army of millions could not have landed in France and begun pillaging the countryside. Not unless they came as immigrants. If you are going to invade a Socialist country, the best way to do it is as a charity case.

Unfortunately that holds true for us as well.

The military colonists flooding our shores are part of an unacknowledged partnership between their political leaders and ours. Their political leaders are fighting a war to redress the wrongs of centuries or millennia. Our political leaders are looking to shift the voting balances in a ward or a district for the next election. When they resettle the next shipment of Afghans in an otherwise conservative area with a view to tilting the electoral balance, they are using them as military colonists for the short term while their homelands use them as military colonists in the long term.

War is about controlling land, resources and populations. Land just sits there. It’s the populations that cause the trouble. The military colonist makes a more enduring occupation possible by settling the land and giving the conquering power a deeper foothold in the enemy territory.

There was a time when American settlers acted as military colonists holding down lands in Florida and Texas. Today America is being colonized by the settlers of other nations and ideologies. And we will find ourselves in the same position as the Spanish did in Florida and the Mexicans did in Texas.

Mexico invited American settlers to move in to Texas on the understanding that they would learn Spanish and otherwise fit in. Instead language and culture proved to be stronger than land and oaths of citizenship. Many of the Texas settlers might not have had much use for the United States at the time, but creed and culture made them American military colonists whether they knew it or not. The same holds true for the present state of affairs there today.

It’s more than just cultural or ethnic differences that make one a military colonist. It’s a cause. Whether it’s Manifest Destiny or the Reconquista or the Caliphate. Underlying it all is that sense of destiny. The power of an exceptionalism that makes it impossible for the settler to sink in and abandon his roots and beliefs to the tidal pull of a new culture when his grudge against it is more than the mere personal dissatisfaction of the new immigrant or his children caught between two worlds.

Integration is hopeless in the face of that sense of destiny. European nations struggling to defend some notion of secular space misunderstand the problem as one of extremism. Some of the more visible terror attacks may indeed be associated with what can be described as extremism in the sense that its participants are willing to push the envelope harder and further in more violent ways.

But Islamic terrorism is only the foam on the surface. It’s the bubbles at the edge of the pot. A minor symptom of a much bigger problem. Ir’s simply the most violent expression of a widely shared belief that Islamic law is superior to Western law. Most peoples feel that their ways and customs are best. It doesn’t become a problem until they become the majority and won’t take no for an answer.

American liberalism and European republicanism have no answers to Islamic terrorism. Their embrace of the Arab Spring was motivated by the need to believe that the Muslim world was ready to “advance” to the same postmodern level of existence eliminating the need to worry about women in Burkas or Al Qaeda. The same misreading of the power of tribe and religion that led to the foolish belief that Saudi Arabia’s military colonists could safely be turned into Labour voters led to the Arab Spring’s equally misplaced confidence that the Muslim Brotherhood wanted to be just like Europe.

It isn’t only a tiny minority of extremists who believe that Islamic values are superior to Western values and who would like the law to recognize that assumption. It’s a tiny minority of extremists who try to prove their devoutness by jumping the gun and killing people over it before the full demographic impact of the military colonists would make a Burka ban into the next Syrian Civil War.

Think of two armies maneuvering into position. The extremist is the one who fires before the enemy is fully in range ruining the strategic effect of the surprise attack. Trying to understand the extremist not only misses the point, it misses the whole chain of events in motion. The schemes for integrating the disgruntled youth and countering violent extremism is symptom control.

Terrorism is an early warning in the clash of civilizations and all our leaders can think to do is hold a meeting with the heads of the opposing army asking them to get their hotheads to stop shooting at us because it’s bringing our civilizations into conflict. Our civilizations are in conflict and have been as far back as they have both existed. The occasional plane hijacker is the first snowflake of a winter storm. Instead of preparing for a storm, we’re trying to figure out how to stop snowflakes.

The conflict is primal. It isn’t about American foreign policy or War X or Country Y or Cause Z. These are all “arguments” that explain the conflict once it’s already under way. It’s simpler than that. It’s about the incompatibility of cultures, religions, political and economic systems. And it’s about countries with a lot of oil and not much else trying to buy their way to an empire by using their own impoverished brethren as cannon fodder. And finally it’s about what happens when birth rates fall.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-29LVwLQc6Wc/U9VNrDWC8CI/AAAAAAAAOGU/mAnky0NH7NY/s1600/LondonProtest.jpgWestern countries have achieved individual comforts with an unsustainable system.

This unsuistainability is both economic and demographic as budgets and children are both lacking. Meanwhile the countries and cultures that have failed have achieved a perfectly sustainable state of misery. They may not have much income, but they also don’t have much to eat. They may have high infant mortality rates, but they have even higher childbirth rates.

America of 2013 cannot go on being this way indefinitely. It probably can’t even manage another two decades without major changes of some kind. Afghanistan 2013 however can go on being the way it is indefinitely. And that sustainability is what makes its people effective military colonists. Living the Afghan lifestyle in London or Los Angeles is even sustainable because food and housing are free.

That just leaves large packs of nomadic youths roaming the streets, selling drugs and rioting at the slightest provocation until it’s time for them to get married and make more nomadic youths of their own. It’s not that different from Afghanistan. It’s the tribal life transplanted to the West. It’s a culture with no real purpose except to produce young males eager to fight and expand tribal power and a religion with no real purpose except to affirm that as a religious duty.

Islam embodies expansionism. Its directives of male violence and female subjugation have no other end. They protect the tribal imperatives of endogamy and violence, of inbreeding and the feud. It has no ideas except to get bigger and that makes its followers into ideal military colonists.

[I said all of this back in 2007/8, both in the books and on the podcasts. This only possible solution from all of this, is secession, and soon, before all of King Barry’s Dreamers spread their terrorism, and their diseases, throughout the continent.]

July 25, 2014

Jihadis destroy Prophet Jonah’s tomb, ap [c]

Iraq jihadists blow up ‘Jonah’s tomb’ in Mosul: official
AFP
20 hours ago

Storyful
Islamic State destroys the Tomb of Jonah
 Islamic State destroys the Tomb of Jonah

Storyful (OT)

Storyful (OT)

1
Islamic State destroys the Tomb of Jonah

Islamic State destroys the Tomb of Jonah

Palestinians Seek Refuge in Hospital

The new jihadist rulers of Iraq’s northern city of Mosul on Thursday completely levelled one its most well-known shrines, an official and witnesses told AFP.
Related Stories

Islamic State rounds up ex-Baathists to eliminate potential rivals in Iraq’s Mosul Reuters
[$$] Islamist Insurgents in Northern Iraq Threaten Christians The Wall Street Journal
UN says Iraq jihadists order female genital mutilation, experts doubtful AFP
Islamic State claims wave of Baghdad bombings Reuters
Christians flee jihadist ultimatum in Iraq’s Mosul AFP

The Nabi Yunus shrine was built on the reputed burial site of a prophet known in the Koran as Yunus and in the Bible as Jonah.

“Islamic State completely destroyed the shrine of Nabi Yunus after telling local families to stay away and closing the roads to a distance of 500 metres from the shrine,” said the official at the Sunni endowment, which manages Sunni religious affairs in Iraq.

The endowment official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, and Mosul residents told AFP it took the Sunni extremists an hour to rig the shrine with explosives.

“They first stopped people from praying in it, they fixed explosive charges around and inside it and then blew it up in front of a large gathering of people,” said a witness who did not wish to give his name.

The endowment official said the Islamic State jihadist group that overran large swathes of northern and western Iraq last month have now destroyed or damaged 30 shrines, as well as 15 husseiniyas and mosques in and around Mosul.
View gallery
Al-Qaida-inspired insurgents gaining ground in Ira …
This undated file image posted on a militant website on Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2014, which has been verif …

Husseiniyas are Shiite places of worship that are also used as community centres.

The official listed the most notable losses to Muslim heritage as being the shrines of Imam Yahya Ibn al-Qassem, Aoun al-Din and Nabi Danial.

“But the worst destruction was of Nabi Yunus, which has been turned to dust,” he said.

The Islamic State late last month proclaimed a “caliphate” spanning parts of Iraq and Syria.

The group aims to create an approximation of society as it was in the early days of Islam, which was founded in the 7th century, and considers Muslims who do not adhere to its puritanical version of the religion heretics.

[After being elected, Obama said that the United States is a Muslim Country. Chapter 8 verses 12 – 15 are quite clear. Allah tells ALL believers to cut off the heads, hands, and feet of the non-believers. There has been and only is, one Jihad. It is on now, it is everlasting, and will continue to the end of days.

Israel just wants its own little piece of desert. Islam wants to destroy everything and everybody not of their particular sect. Sunni kills Shi’ia kills Wahhabee, kills whoever, and they all kill us.

AWE TV has a 3 part special on Jihad in the US. Its worth the time. OANN is doing ok, but not great.

Secession is the only way that we can get rid of the corrupt bureaucracy, corrupt courts, and corrupt & grossly incompetent congress.

Buy, Read, and Promote, “The Albany Plan Re-Visited.”]

July 24, 2014

Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, on the US Media [nc]

A REMINDER IN HISTORY
General VoNguyen Giap.
General Giap was a brilliant, highly respected leader
of the North Vietnam military. The following quote
is from his memoirs currently found in the
Vietnam war memorial in Hanoi :
‘What we still don’t understand is why you Americans
stopped the bombing of Hanoi . You had us on the
ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder,
just for another day or two, we were ready
to surrender! It was the same at the
battle of TET. You defeated us!
We knew it, and we thought
you knew it.
But we were elated to notice your media was
helping us. They were causing more disruption in
America than we could in the battlefields. We
were ready to surrender. You had won!’
General Giap has published his memoirs and confirmed
what most Americans knew. The Vietnam war was not
lost in Vietnam — it was lost at home. The
same slippery slope, sponsored by the U.S. media,
is currently underway. It exposes the
enormous power of a Biased Media to
cut out the heart and will of
the American public.
A truism worthy of note: . . . Do not fear the enemy,
for they can take only your life.
Fear the media,
for they will distort your grasp of reality and destroy your honor.

July 23, 2014

WalMart Pays High Wages, Not Low Wages, Forbes [nc see earlier Wealth Posts]

WalMart Pays High Wages, Not Low Wages
Comment Now
Follow Comments

It’s a fairly standard condemnation of the business practices of WalMart that it pays low wages to its associates, what in other companies we tend to call employees. It’s certainly true that WalMart pays low wages by the standards of, say, the computing industry, or the joys of government work. But that’s not actually how we should be measuring whether WalMart’s wages are high or low. The correct method would be, well, what would wages be in retail in the absence of WalMart? And there’s an intriguing little paper that looks at this question. Not exactly, as it’s not looking at WalMart as a specific company, rather it’s looking at the effect of big retail on wages in the retail sector. Given that WalMart is very definitely big retail we can take this paper as being a useful proxy for the effect of the firm. And the result is most interesting:

With malls, franchise strips and big-box retailers increasingly dotting the landscape, there is concern that middle-class jobs in manufacturing in the U.S. are being replaced by minimum wage jobs in retail. Retail jobs have spread, while manufacturing jobs have shrunk in number. In this paper, we characterize the wages that have accompanied the growth in retail. We show that wage rates in the retail sector rise markedly with firm size and with establishment size. These increases are halved when we control for worker fixed effects, suggesting that there is sorting of better workers into larger firms. Also, higher ability workers get promoted to the position of manager, which is associated with higher pay. We conclude that the growth in modern retail, characterized by larger chains of larger establishments with more levels of hierarchy, is raising wage rates relative to traditional mom-and-pop retail stores.

Don’t you think that’s an interesting result? That pay at Big Box and chain retail is higher than it is in the Mom and Pop stores that they largely replace?

Agreed, $8.50 an hour, $10 an hour, whatever it is that WalMart does pay in specific locations and at different levels of training, isn’t all that great an amount of money. However, it’s still rather better than the straight minimum wage that many in the smaller players in the retail industry get. Plus, as the authors not, it’s possible to get promoted inside a large corporation (something which WalMart is very proud of itself, they continually note how many store managers started out as hourly paid associates), to have a career path, which is something not generally available in a small store where there’s the workforce and then the owners as the only level of management.

So the workers appear to be better off as a result of the existence of WalMart. They get higher wages than they would have done in the absence of the company and with the older retail landscape of largely Mom and Pop stores. The Waltons have certainly done well out of the arrangement. And what about the consumers? Well, Jason Furman, currently Obama’s chair of the Council of Economic Advisers has had a look at this:

Productivity is the principal driver of economic progress. It is the only force that can
make everyone better off: workers, consumers, and owners of capital. Wal-Mart has
indisputably made a tremendous contribution to productivity. From its sophisticated inventory
systems to its pricing innovations, Wal-Mart has blazed a path that numerous other retailers are
now following, many of them vigorously competing with Wal-Mart. Today, Wal-Mart is the
largest private employer in the country, the largest grocery store in the country, and the third
largest pharmacy. Eight in ten Americans shop at Wal-Mart.

There is little dispute that Wal-Mart’s price reductions have benefited the 120 million
American workers employed outside of the retail sector. Plausible estimates of the magnitude of
the savings from Wal-Mart are enormous – a total of $263 billion in 2004, or $2,329 per
household.

So consumers benefit, and it is consumption that is supposed to be the starting point of any economic investigation according to M. Bastiat, workers benefit, the owners benefit, it all seems like a remarkably good idea really. Which leaves us with just the one final question. Why is there so much rage directed at the company? Why do we have people actively proposing public policy that would prevent these various good things from happening?

My thanks to Paul Walker for the pointer to the first paper.

July 4, 2014

4th of July, Signers of the Declaration of Independence, by BEvans [nc]

HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY!

Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence?

Five signers were captured by the British as traitors and tortured before they died.

Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two sons captured.

Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War.

They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.

What kind of men were they?

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated, but they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if they were captured.

Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags.

Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him and poverty was his reward.

Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.

At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr. noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed and Nelson died bankrupt.

Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife and she died within a few months.

John Hart was driven from his wife’s bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished.

So take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It’s not much to ask for the price they paid.

It’s time we get the word out that patriotism is NOT a sin and the Fourth of July has much more to it than picnics, baseball games, and fireworks.

July 3, 2014

The Reality of “Climate Change”

1. For the 2nd time in the last 2 weeks, scientists have measured and recorded the largest amount of Antarctic ice in history. And “yes”, you read correctly, the record has been achieved/broken 2 times in the last 2 weeks!

2. Last year NOAA, one of the “scientific” groups that expounds the “man made climate change” and “CO2” myths, went on record as saying July 2012 was the hottest July on record (if you recall MO was in a drought). This replaced July 1936 as the hottest July on record (July 1936 being smack dab in the middle if the dust bowl). Well over the last 2 weeks NOAA has very “quietly adjusted” the findings and surprise, July 1936 is once again the hottest July on record. Apparently NOAA’s pronouncement in 2013 that July 2012 was the hottest July was based completely on computer modeling and not real data. I gathered from the story that I heard that really the only reason they went back and “re-modeled” the data and “adjusted” the findings is due to a couple of very serious and vigilant watch dog groups. These groups are dedicated to ensuring there is accuracy and transparency w/ respect to the data, findings and stated causation impacts when it comes to the “man made climate change” debate. So they called NOAA out in several articles w/ respect to how they reached their conclusion and NOAA “quietly” “adjusted” the findings.

3. And, again, for those of us who watch “Deadliest Catch”, this is all true as confirmed by the men, and now woman (Mandy Hansen), who fish for crab in The Bering Sea.

July 2, 2014

Precis of SCOTUS NLRB Ruling, read carefully, [c]

U.S. Supreme Court Finds President Obama Lacked the Power to Make Three Recess Appointments to the National Labor Relations Board

This Hot Topic was prepared by the ABA Section of Labor and Employment Law, Practice and Procedure Under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) Committee, with the assistance of Brian R. Garrison of Faegre Baker Daniels LLP in Indianapolis, Indiana, representing employers in labor and employment matters, and Lisa C. Demidovich of United Nurses Associations of California/Union of Health Care Professionals in San Dimas, California, representing the Union and its represented employees.

On June 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court decided NLRB v. Noel Canning, holding that President Obama lacked the power to make three of his recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”). 573 U.S. ___ (2014). Notably, this is the first time the Supreme Court has interpreted the U.S. Constitution’s Recess Appointments Clause, Art. II, §2, cl. 3. See Slip Op. at 9.
Background

The NLRB is composed of five members and cannot issue decisions or take other actions in the absence of a valid three-member quorum. Over the course of 2011, President Obama nominated three people–Sharon Block, Terence Flynn, and Richard Griffin–to serve as members of the NLRB. Their nominations required Senate confirmation and remained pending through 2011. On December 17, 2011, the Senate adopted a resolution stating that it would take a series of brief recesses beginning the following day. Under that resolution, the Senate held pro forma sessions every Tuesday and Friday until it returned for ordinary business on January 23, 2012. During each pro forma session, the Senate would be gaveled to order and then immediately adjourned without conducting any actual business.

The Senate held one such pro forma session on January 3, 2012, which was the same day that NLRB Member Craig Becker’s term expired. This left the NLRB with only two confirmed members–Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and Member Brian Hayes. The next day, President Obama appointed Block, Griffin, and Flynn to the NLRB, using his authority under the Recess Appointments Clause in Article II, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. This clause provides that the President has the power “to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.” The President took the position that the Senate was in “recess” on January 4 within the meaning of the Recess Appointments Clause, so he had the authority to fill the three NLRB vacancies.

On February 8, 2012, after an administrative trial and an appeal to the NLRB, a three-member panel consisting of Members Hayes, Flynn, and Block found that Noel Canning–a bottler and distributor of Pepsi-Cola products based in Washington State–had violated the NLRA by refusing to reduce to writing and execute a collective-bargaining agreement with Teamsters Local 760. The NLRB ordered Noel Canning to execute the agreement and make employees whole for any loss.

Noel Canning petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to review the NLRB’s decision. It argued that the NLRB’s order was invalid and unenforceable because the President’s January 4, 2012, appointments were unconstitutional, as they were made during a period when the Senate was not in recess. As a result, Noel Canning submitted that the NLRB did not have a valid quorum of three members when it issued its order. In response, the NLRB argued that the President’s recess appointment power is not so limited as to prevent him from making recess appointments during a recess that is a “break in the Senate’s business when it is otherwise in a continuing session.” Therefore, the NLRB argued that the President’s appointment of the NLRB members was constitutionally valid and the NLRB’s order should be enforced.
The D.C. Circuit’s Decision

On January 25, 2013, a three-member panel of the D.C. Circuit agreed with Noel Canning that the President’s recess appointments were unconstitutional. Writing for the court, Chief Judge David Sentelle found that the appointments fell outside the scope of the Recess Appointments Clause for two reasons. First, the D.C. Circuit unanimously found that the phrase “the Recess of the Senate” does not include “intra-session” recesses–those that occur within a formal session of Congress–and applies only to “inter-session” recesses–those that occur between such sessions when a return date is not set. Therefore, as the Senate was holding pro forma sessions at the time of the President’s January 4, 2012, NLRB appointments, they were not made during an inter-session recess. Second, the D.C. Circuit found, by a 2-1 vote, that the vacancies filled by the President’s recess appointments did not “happen” during “the Recess” as required by the Recess Appointments Clause. As the NLRB vacancies existed at the time the “recess” began and did not arise during the Senate’s recess, the majority concluded that they did not “happen” during the “recess” so could not be filled pursuant to the Recess Appointments Clause. Consequently, the D.C. Circuit concluded that the NLRB lacked a quorum of validly appointed members when it issued its order in the Noel Canning case, so that order was invalid and unenforceable.
Supreme Court Proceedings

On April 25, 2013, the NLRB petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. Noel Canning did not oppose certiorari. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on June 24, 2013, and heard oral arguments on January 13, 2014.

The Supreme Court’s Ruling

Justice Breyer delivered the Court’s decision unanimously affirming the D.C. Circuit’s decision that the Recess Appointments Clause does not give the President authority to make the three challenged appointments to the NLRB. NLRB v. Noel Canning, No. 12-1281, Slip Op. at 1 & 41 (U.S. June 26, 2014). The majority opinion, joined by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan, rejected the reasoning of the lower court in its “first time in more than 200 years” call to interpret the Recess Appointments Clause. Id. at 9 & 41. With three of the five NLRB members’ appointments invalidated, the Court found the Board lacked a quorum and set aside its order. Id. at 2-5 & 41. Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas and Alito, filed a concurring opinion.

The Opinion, rich in historical references, recognized that the issue of first impression has been extensively considered by the Executive Branch as “Presidents have made recess appointments since the beginning of the Republic.” Id. at 8.

The first aspect of the Recess Appointments Clause the Court examined was whether it applied to intra-session recesses in addition to undisputed inter-session recesses and concluded–contrary to the D.C. Circuit–that the Clause applies to both kinds of recess so long as the intra-session recess was for more than ten days. Id. at 1 & 9-21. Historically, “Presidents have made thousands of intra-session recess appointments,” likely because “opinions of Presidential legal advisers . . . are nearly unanimous in determining that the Clause authorizes these [intra-session] appointments.” Id. at 12. While all Justices agreed the President may make recess appointments during any break–“no matter how short”–between sessions, compare id. at 19 with Concurrence Slip Op. at 15 n.4, the majority found that an intra-session recess “of more than 3 days but less than 10 days is presumptively too short to fall within the Clause,” except for “a national catastrophe,” preventing the Senate from reconvening to approve the President’s needed recess appointments to address the emergent situation. Slip Op. at 21.

The Court next examined whether the Clause covered “vacancies that arise prior to a recess but continue to exist during the recess” or whether the power was limited to “vacancies that first come into existence during a recess,” and concluded–again contrary to the D.C. Circuit–that the Clause applies to both kinds of vacancy. Id. at 1-2 & 21-33. Again, relying on history, the Court noted that Presidents, dating back to at least President James Madison and including “every President since James Buchanan,” have made recess appointments to pre-recess vacancies. Id. at 26-29. The Court noted Presidents would not likely abuse this power because of limitations on recess appointments, such as they serve “a limited term” and they may have more difficulty tackling controversial issues without the credibility commensurate with Senate approval. Id. at 25.

The Court’s final consideration was whether pro forma sessions where no business was transacted could be excluded when calculating the length of the recess. It concluded that the pro forma sessions could not be ignored and break up a recess where the Senate “retain[ed] the capacity to transact Senate business,” “received a message from the President,” and actually “passed a bill by unanimous consent during the second pro forma session after its [initial] adjournment.” Slip Op. at 2 & 33-40. Because of the pro forma session every Tuesday and Friday during the recess at issue here, the President’s three NLRB recess appointments occurred during a three-day recess, which is “too short a time to bring a recess within the scope of the Clause.” Id. at 2.

The Concurrence

Concurring in “judgment only,” Justice Scalia criticized the majority opinion for “transform[ing] the recess-appointment power from a tool carefully designed to fill a narrow and specific need into a weapon to be wielded by future Presidents against future Senates.” Concurring Op. at 2. Instead, Justice Scalia, just as the D.C. Circuit held, would have limited the Recess Appointments Clause to inter-session recesses and to “offices that become vacant during the intermission.” Id. at 1-2. Justice Scalia concludes his opinion by offering alternative speculations of the import of the majority’s opinion: Either the Senate may seek to “avoid triggering the President’s now-vast recess-appointment power by the odd contrivance of never adjourning for more than three days without holding a pro forma session at which it is understood that no business will be conducted” or “[m]embers of the President’s party in Congress may be able to prevent the senate from holding pro forma sessions with the necessary frequency, and if the House and Senate disagree, the President may be able to adjourn both ‘to such Time as he shall think proper.'” Id. at 62 (quoting U.S. Const., Art. II, §3).
Implications

Management Perspective

The Noel Canning decision calls into question every official action taken by the NLRB during the terms of its unconstitutionally appointed Members. This means all the NLRB’s actions between January 4, 2012 and August 2, 2013–which includes issuing over 700 decisions and appointing several Regional Directors–are likely invalid. The NLRB now must revisit and reconsider all the invalid decisions that return to it. It is likely that the parties to many of these cases have already complied with the NLRB’s order or otherwise resolved their disputes, which may render the underlying issues moot. For those cases that have not been resolved and return to the NLRB, the NLRB will have to review each of these cases as new decisions and reissue decisions after this review, just as it did after the Supreme Court’s 2010 New Process Steel decision. As happened after New Process Steel, the NLRB will likely reconsider and reaffirm its decision in most, if not all, of these cases. But that may take substantial time, as many of the invalidated decisions were high-profile cases in which the decisions departed from NLRB precedent and had significant implications for employers. They are much different from the decisions invalidated by New Process Steel, which were issued in cases where a two-member NLRB, with one Democratic Member and one Republican Member, could find consensus. So, while it is unclear what will happen in the decisions invalidated by Noel Canning and in current cases the General Counsel’s office is prosecuting based on those decisions, employers are wise to take guidance from them. On the other hand, the likely invalidation of the NLRB’s Regional Director appointments poses a thornier issue, as its consequences may extend beyond the need to merely revisit cases and reissue decisions. Employers may challenge as invalid a variety of decisions made and actions taken by those Regional Directors since their appointments, such as those related to determining the appropriate bargaining unit, ruling on election objections, and certifying election results in union representation cases.

In conclusion, due to the time necessary for the NLRB to revisit the invalid decisions, Noel Canning will likely bog down the NLRB and inhibit its ability to proceed as planned on the other cases and issues currently before it. This means it will likely take some time before the NLRB takes action on two fronts of significant concern for employers: finalizing new rules to expedite representation election procedures and issuing decisions in cases in which the NLRB has invited amicus briefs (such as Purple Communications, Inc., which addresses employees’ right to use an employer’s email system for activity unrelated to the employee’s business purposes, and Browning-Ferris Industries, which addresses the NLRB’s joint employer standard). Due to Noel Canning and the NLRB’s obligation to continue addressing other pending cases, it may not get around to these two significant issues until after December 16, 2014, when Member Nancy Schiffer’s term ends. That would mean that instead of a Democratic majority, the NLRB would have two Democratic and two Republican members. While lawfully able to operate, the lack of Democratic control would mean uncertainty for the cases and issues pending before the NLRB at that time. And depending on the results of the November 2014 elections, a Republican-controlled Senate may significantly limit the President’s ability to make a recess appointment upon Member Schiffer’s departure. At bottom, during the period while the uncertainty caused by Noel Canning is resolved, employers should work closely with labor counsel when making strategic decisions on how to proceed before the NLRB.

Union Perspective

Subsequent events–namely the Senate rules change to allow for the President’s Executive Branch appointments to be confirmed by a Senate majority and the Senate’s confirmation of the NLRB General Counsel and five board members–have circumscribed the continuing impact and scope of the Court’s holding on NLRB decisions. The greatest effect of the Court’s ruling on labor will be the decisions that were decided by former Members Block, Flynn, and Griffin where the unsuccessful party sought review on the basis that their appointments were invalid, but unions are optimistic that the NLRB–having experience with reconsideration after the Court’s 2010 invalidation of the Agency’s delegation of power to a two-member board in New Process Steel v. NLRB, 560 U.S. 674 (2010)–will handle those pending cases expeditiously and effectively to ensure the NLRA’s purposes are effectuated.

[This is from the ABA LEL section, of which I am a member. Read this carefully, noting the arbitrary 10 rule, and that there are several different opinions involved. Different opinions means that although they all agree on the outcome, they all DISAGREE on WHY. In future rulings, courts and lawyers will point to different opinions, claiming that they were unanimous, which they obviously are NOT. Everyone needs to read this carefully because of the potential impact this case will have in the future. Good outcome, very bad decision making.]

June 24, 2014

What you don’t know about Social Security – but should, from The Wall Street Journal [c]

What you don’t know about Social Security—but should
A look at claiming strategies, tax angles and more to help you make sense of a complicated program.
The Wall Street Journal
By Glenn Ruffenach 22 hours ago

Questions
.

View gallery

.
.

Imagine that you’re about to accept a new job, and it’s time to talk salary. You sit down with your boss, who begins as follows:
Related Stories

Social Security closes offices as demand soars Associated Press
Social Security’s continuing assault on its own customer service Los Angeles Times
Social Security: 1 Simple Chart Shows How Working Before 66 Can Affect Your Benefits Motley Fool
Why you shouldn’t trust Social Security’s lowball estimate Forbes
Social Security Closes Offices As More Seniors Need Services The Fiscal Times

“Actually, our payroll system is impossibly complicated. You can pick from dozens of different ways to be paid and hundreds of different start dates, and each will produce a different salary. We offer some guidance, but we’re short-handed. As such, deciding when and how to collect a paycheck is essentially up to you.

“So…what would you like to do?”

Welcome to Social Security.

Each day, thousands of Americans apply for the first time for Social Security benefits. And each day—if questions from our readers and the stories we hear from financial advisers are any indication—many applicants have no idea what they’re getting into. They know little or nothing about the program’s complexity, the myriad ways to collect benefits and the Social Security Administration’s staffing and service problems.

As such, they’re putting their retirement—and, in many cases, their spouses’ future—at risk.

“People spend more time planning a vacation than they do planning for 20 or 30 years of Social Security benefits,” says Barry Kaplan, chief investment officer for Cambridge Wealth Counsel in Atlanta. Those benefits, he notes, are insurance against market downturns, hyperinflation and living longer than you anticipate. But would-be beneficiaries, he says, typically “go into this without a clue.”

If you and/or your spouse are weighing your options about Social Security, here’s a look at some of the biggest issues—involving both the agency and the benefits program—that could shape your retirement for better or worse.

The Social Security Administration isn’t your financial adviser.

A fair amount of the mail we receive from readers with questions or complaints about Social Security goes something like this: “My Social Security office never told me about….” About a particular strategy for claiming benefits. About a little-known rule. About the consequences of starting one’s payouts at a particular point in time.

No, the Social Security Administration isn’t perfect. (More about this in a moment.)

But its primary job is delivering a service, paying 59 million beneficiaries, and not financial planning. The agency provides loads of information about benefits on its website and does its best to answer the public’s questions in its field offices and by telephone. But a comprehensive talk about the nuances of Social Security and your financial future? That’s not going to happen.

Indeed, the Social Security Administration doesn’t know about—and it isn’t the agency’s job to know about—your household budget, your health, your savings, life insurance, plans you might have to work in retirement. In short, all the variables that should go into a decision about filing for benefits, says Mr. Kaplan in Atlanta.

So, the onus is on you to learn about, or find help in deciphering, the basics: how benefits work, claiming strategies, possible pitfalls. And if you’re hellbent, for instance, on grabbing a payout at age 62 (the earliest possible date for most people) and locking yourself—and perhaps your spouse—into a permanent reduction in benefits, the agency isn’t going to stop you.

The Social Security Administration is stretched increasingly thin at the worst possible time.

In March, Carolyn Colvin, the agency’s acting commissioner, didn’t mince words in a report tied to President Barack Obama’s request for additional funding for the Social Security Administration.

“Our service and stewardship efforts [have] deteriorated,” she said. “In fiscal year 2013, the public had to wait longer for a decision on their disability claim, to talk to a representative on our national 800 number, and to schedule an appointment in our field offices.”
View gallery
On Overload
WSJ

The agency, in short, is overextended. In the past three years, it has lost 11,000 employees, or about 12% of its workforce; by 2022, about 60% of its supervisors will be eligible to retire. Meanwhile, budget cuts have resulted in the consolidation of 44 field offices, the closing of 503 contact stations (mobile service facilities) and a delay in plans to open eight hearing offices (where appeals about agency decisions involving retirement and disability benefits are heard) and one call center.

And that 800 number? According to a report in December from the agency’s inspector general, wait times in 2013 exceeded 10 minutes, an increase of more than five minutes from 2012.

The point: The Social Security Administration is grappling with its own problems just as the baby-boom generation, with about 75 million members, is moving full speed into retirement. (The oldest boomers are turning 68 this year.) The demands on the agency mean that you might not be able to find, or find in a timely fashion, the information or help you need. That said…

More services outside Social Security are offering more help.

The Social Security Administration is the first to acknowledge that benefits are complicated. The opening paragraphs of the agency’s “Social Security Handbook,” a guide to the benefits program, state plainly: “The Social Security programs are so complex it is impossible to include information [in the handbook] about every topic.”

Fortunately, a growing number of tools and services—some free, others for a cost—are available to help people navigate these waters.

In recent years, AARP, the Washington-based advocacy group for older Americans, and T. Rowe Price Group Inc., the Baltimore-based mutual-fund company, have introduced sophisticated online calculators that help users determine how and when to claim benefits. Both are free. (The Social Security Administration has several calculators, also free, that can help determine the size of your benefits, but not necessarily when to claim them for maximum effect.)

Among the services that charge a fee: MaximizeMySocialSecurity.com, from Economic Security Planning Inc.; SocialSecurityChoices.com, from SocSec Analytics LLC; and SocialSecuritySolutions.com, all started by academics. Our review of several Social Security tools last fall singled out Social Security Solutions for its ease of use and Maximize My Social Security for its flexibility.

Finally, check out weekly columns at the Public Broadcasting Service website from Laurence Kotlikoff, an economics professor at Boston University and the developer of Maximize My Social Security. The articles, published each Monday, address a wide range of issues about Social Security (including numerous “secrets” and “gotchas”) and answer questions about benefits. In short, invaluable reading.

The earnings test deters people from working in retirement—and shouldn’t.

Social Security’s earnings test, in which benefits are reduced if a person is collecting benefits and income at the same time, generates numerous questions and much confusion. But the apparent penalties aren’t what they seem.

If you are under your full retirement age when you first receive Social Security benefits and if you have earned income, $1 in benefits will be deducted for each $2 you earn above an annual limit. In 2014, that limit is $15,480. In the year you reach your full retirement age, the penalty shrinks; after you reach full retirement age, the deductions end completely.

The good news: Money lost to the earnings test isn’t really lost. Once you reach full retirement age, Social Security recalculates—and increases—your future benefits to account for any dollars withheld.

Most beneficiaries, though, aren’t aware of that; as such, they typically “work up to the [annual] limit—and stop,” says Andrew Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and former deputy commissioner at the Social Security Administration.

The earnings test, Mr. Biggs says, “should not be a disincentive to work.” Rather, “think of the test as delaying benefits until later in retirement,” he says. “Over your lifetime, your total benefits will come out the same.”

Spouses, at a minimum, should be aware of three claiming strategies.
Overlooked Social Security Investment Strategies Play Video
Overlooked Social Security Investment Strategies

Couples have a tremendous amount of flexibility in how they can claim benefits.

But the options can quickly become overwhelming, which prompts many spouses to default to the easiest choice: grabbing a payout at age 62.

Before you do that, consider these three claiming strategies. Many couples aren’t aware of these options or don’t think they can benefit from them. Do yourself a favor: Run the numbers. (Fidelity Investments recently did a nice job of explaining these and other claiming strategies.)

Maximize survivor benefits: If you claim benefits before your full retirement age, you could be locking your spouse into a low survivor benefit when you die. The longer you wait to claim, the larger the survivor benefits.

Claim and suspend: Once you reach full retirement age, you can claim your benefit and then suspend it. (In other words, you stop payments before they begin.) This allows for two things: Your spouse, if he or she is 62 or older, can begin collecting spousal benefits from Social Security. (This assumes that the spousal benefit is larger than the spouse’s own retirement benefit. More on this in a moment.) Second, your own benefit, when you eventually claim it, will have increased in size. (Thanks to “delayed retirement credits.”)

Claim a spousal benefit, then later claim your own benefit: At full retirement age—if you are eligible for a spousal benefit and your own retirement benefit—you have the option of claiming just the spousal benefit. At a future point in time, you can then jump to your own benefit, which will have increased in size.

And speaking of spousal benefits…

“Deemed filing” can box you in.

It’s a frequent question: A husband who is already collecting Social Security (or weighing the claim-and-suspend strategy) asks if his wife can take just a spousal benefit at age 62—and then switch to a (presumably larger) benefit based on her earnings record in the future.

The answer: Nope.

If the wife, in this case, applies for benefits before her full retirement age, she is “deemed”—in the eyes of the Social Security Administration—to have filed for both benefits: the benefit based on her work record and a spousal benefit.

She will receive the higher of the two figures, but she will be locked into that reduced benefit going forward. (Reduced because she is claiming benefits before full retirement age.)

Again, as discussed above, if the wife waits until her full retirement age to file for benefits, she would have a choice: She could apply for just a spousal benefit. Then, a few years down the road, she could switch to a payout based on her earnings history.

William Meyer, founder of SocialSecuritySolutions.com, says the “deemed filing” rule trips up innumerable applicants. “We hear about it all the time,” he says.

The lesson is clear and critical: Claim benefits before full retirement age, and your options are limited; claim benefits after full retirement age, and you have more flexibility—and bigger payouts.

Divorced spouses and survivors don’t know what they don’t know.

Ask almost any financial adviser about Social Security slip-ups, and stories about ex-spouses, widows and widowers come tumbling out.

Mr. Kaplan in Atlanta recalls a woman—age 67, divorced and still working—who walked into his office and simply had no idea that she could have been collecting benefits for the previous five years based on her former husband’s earnings.

Prof. Kotlikoff at Boston University tells the story of a friend who had lost his wife and was convinced that he couldn’t claim Social Security checks as a survivor.

“He told me, ‘I made more [money] than she did,’ ” Prof. Kotlikoff says. “And based on that, he thought, incorrectly, that he wasn’t eligible for a survivor benefit. People just don’t know about this stuff.”

The point: Always err on the side of telling Social Security about your family circumstances and/or a change in those circumstances.

“Tell them about ex-spouses, tell them if you’ve lost a spouse, tell them if you have kids,” Prof. Kotlikoff says. (A surviving spouse with children could be eligible for additional benefits.)

“If you don’t tell them, they won’t know. It’s that simple.”

Delaying Social Security doesn’t just result in a bigger benefit; it also can make good tax sense.

You may have heard the advice countless times: Minimize (or avoid) withdrawals from your nest egg (401(k), individual retirement accounts, etc.) for as long as possible to take advantage of tax-deferred growth. Many investors who follow that advice grab Social Security benefits, typically at age 62, to help pay the bills.

But that advice ignores the possible tax benefits associated with following the opposite course: accelerating withdrawals from savings early in retirement so that you can hold off on claiming Social Security.

The thinking here is tied to the fact that Social Security benefits are taxable. As much as 85% of a married couple’s benefits are subject to tax when their income exceeds $44,000 ($34,000 for individuals); as much as 50% of benefits are taxable at lower income levels.

If you delay claiming Social Security and, as a result, end up with larger benefits, future withdrawals from savings will likely be smaller—a recipe for lower levels of taxable income. (For a detailed discussion of these tax issues, see “Innovative Strategies to Help Maximize Social Security Benefits,” from James Mahaney, vice president at Prudential Financial Inc.)

“Many retirees don’t consider the impact of their withdrawal strategy on how their Social Security is taxed,” says Mr. Meyer, the SocialSecuritySolutions.com founder. “Missteps in tapping the wrong account and investments to generate income can significantly increase your taxes.”

Mr. Ruffenach is a reporter and editor in The Wall Street Journal’s Atlanta bureau and the editor of Encore. He can be reached at encore@wsj.com.

[Other things that you should know about SS.

The first thing that you should know about SS is that there is no money in any of the trust funds. LBJ took it out to start Medicare. He replaced it, with congress’ approval, with non-transferable Congressional IOU’s. Literally, they cannot be sold or transferred, and can be defaulted on by a simple act of congress, not requiring bankruptcy. Second, it is not an entitlement, it is a benefit. This means that congress can alter it at any time, for any reason or no reason at all. Third, it is a Ponzi Scheme. This means that its income is simply taking from those working and transferring it to those receiving it. It has no basis in any economy. It has no basis in any assets. It has no basis in any commercial venture at all. The value of the payouts is completely dependent upon Federal Reserve Monetary Policies.

It was originally created by Mussolini in the 1930’s as an Italian Socialist Pension Plan. FDR simply copied it over. At the original time of establishment, it was anticipated that those receiving SS would receive it for an average of 2.5 years, and then die.

See the earlier post about no allies in gov’t part 2.

AARP is worthless, go to AMAC if you want value.

And, to my mind, worst of all is that it is 100% unconstitutional. There is no provision in the constitution that allows the federal government to take money from one citizen simply to give it to another. None whatsoever!]

April 23, 2014

the other shoe just dropped, by Simon Black, no comment

The Next Shoe Just Dropped: Court Denies Attorney-Client Privilege
Tyler Durden’s picture
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/19/2014 22:14 -0400

None

inShare21

Submitted by Simon Black via Sovereign Man blog,

In the Land of the Free, people grow up hearing a lot of things about their freedom.

You’re told that you live in the freest country on the planet. You’re told that other nations ‘hate you’ for your freedom.

And you’re told that you have the most open and fair justice system in the world.

This justice system is supposedly founded on bedrock principles– things like a defendant being presumed innocent until proven guilty. The right to due process and an impartial hearing. The right to counsel and attorney-client privilege.

Yet each of these core pillars has been systematically dismantled over the years:

1. So that it can operate with impunity outside of the law, the federal government has set up its own secret FISA courts to rubber stamp NSA surveillance.

According to data obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, of the nearly 34,000 surveillance requests made to FISA courts in the last 35-years, only ELEVEN have been rejected.

Unsurprising given that FISA courts only hear the case from the government’s perspective. It is literally a one-sided argument in FISA courts. Hardly an impartial hearing, no?

2. The concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ may officially exist in courts, but administratively it was thrown out long ago.

These days there are hundreds of local, state, and federal agencies that can confiscate your assets, levy your bank account, and freeze you out of your life’s savings. None of this requires a court order.

By the time a case goes to court, you have been deprived of the resources you need to defend yourself. You might technically be presumed innocent, but you have been treated and punished like a criminal from day one.

3. Attorney-Client privilege is a long-standing legal concept which ensures that communication between an attorney and his/her client is completely private.

In Upjohn vs. the United States, the Supreme Court itself upheld attorney-client privilege as necessary “to encourage full and frank communication between attorneys and their clients and thereby promote broader public interests in the observance of law. . .”

It doesn’t matter what you’re accused of– theft. treason. triple homicide. With very limited exceptions, an attorney cannot be compelled to testify against a client, nor can their communications be subpoenaed for evidence.

Yet in a United States Tax Court decision announced on Wednesday, the court dismissed attorney client privilege, stating that:

“When a person puts into issue his subjective intent in deciding how to comply with the law, he may forfeit the privilege afforded attorney-client communications.”

In other words, if a person works with legal counsel within the confines of the tax code to legitimately minimize the amount of taxes owed, that communication is no longer protected by attorney-client privilege.

Furthermore, the ruling states that if the individuals do not submit attorney-client documentation as required, then the court would prohibit them from introducing any evidence to demonstrate their innocence.

Unbelievable.

While it’s true that attorney-client privilege has long been assailed in numerous court cases (especially with regards to tax matters), this decision sets the most dangerous precedent yet.

With this ruling, government now has carte blanche to set aside long-standing legal protections and even deny a human being even the chance to defend himself.

Naturally, you won’t hear a word about this in the mainstream media.

But it certainly begs the question, what’s the point of even having a trial? Or a constitution?

When every right and protection you have can be disregarded in their sole discretion, one really has to wonder how anyone can call it a ‘free country’ any more.

April 18, 2014

S.Ct. Justice Stevens & the 2nd Amendment, from ABA Journal my notes[]

Justice Stevens & the 2nd Amendment, from the ABA Journal, my notes in []

Posted: 18 April 2014

[Another reason for secession. This article is from this week’s, 18 April 2014, ABA Journal.

Notice Justice Stevens wants the legislature to change the 2nd Amendment. Note how the liberal justices ALWAYS ignore Article V. Article V is the article which explains how amendments are to be made. Stevens, and the others, all want amendments to go through the legislature. A legislature controlled by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Keep in mind that Pelosi’s net worth before she became a “public servant”, was a negative value – she owed more than she was worth. Since becoming a “public servant”, her net worth is over $25,000,000.00. Yupper, that’s 25 million U.S. Dollars. As to Reid, go to the Youtube address posted as the first line after [ ] in the Bundy Farm Fact Check post, posted yesterday.

As noted in “The Albany Plan Re-Visited”, Justice Stevens has not got a clue as to who the militia is. Federal Statute defines the militia of the United States. Last time that I looked, that was every able bodied male between the ages of 16 and 54, the only exceptions being first responders and, get this, elected officials. Women were excluded. Now, it has been many years since I looked, but I doubt that the definition has changed extensively, if at all.

Secession, pure and simple, secession.]





• Home
• News
• Retired Justice Stevens proposes this fix for the Second Amendment
Constitutional Law
Retired Justice Stevens proposes this fix for the Second Amendment
Posted Apr 14, 2014 6:25 AM CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
• Email
• Print
• Reprints

Retired U.S. Supreme Court
Justice John Paul Stevens.
Rena Schild / Shutterstock.com
Legislators rather than federal judges should be allowed to decide what kind of guns can be carried by private citizens, as well as when and how those weapons can be used, according to retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
Toward that end, Stevens is proposing a change to the Second Amendment to clarify that it applies only to citizens’ right to keep and bear arms in state militias. He offers his suggestion in a Washington Post essay taken from his new book, Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution.
Stevens thinks the court misinterpreted the amendment in recent opinions finding a right to own a handgun at home for self-defense. The amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Stevens would add five words to the amendment, so that it reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

July 10, 2013

Trending: Secession

Back in 2006 I started research for a book on Public Sector Organizational Theory which resulted in The Heartland Plan; federal government by, for and of, the taxpayer. When Obama started running for prez in 2008, I started research on constitutional law and construction resulting in The Albany Plan Re-Visited, now available at http://www.bn.com/ebooks for download. The Albany Plan Re-Visited includes a complete section on nullification and an expanded one on secession with a complete outline for a new federal government, one responsive to the needs of THE TAXPAYER, and not various special interest groups. Below is what I forecast back in 2008.

Buy, read, and promote: The Albany Plan Re-Visited.

http://coloradoindependent.com/4448/one-in-five-americans-are-whistling-dixie-on-state-secession

 

One-in-five Americans are whistling Dixie on state secession

By Wendy Norris 
Monday, July 28, 2008 at 10:37 am

 

The People’s Republic of Colorado may not be a pipe dream after all for right-wing states’ rights zealots and left-wing peaceniks. 

 

A new Zobgy/Middlebury Institute poll reports that 22 percent of respondents believe that states have the right to peaceably secede from the United States. The figures go up considerably among liberals, Latinos, blacks, young people and Southern residents.

From the press release:

The level of support for the right of secession was consistent in every region in the country, though the percentage was slightly higher in the South (26%) and the East (24%).  The figures were also consistent for every age group, but backing was strongest among younger adults, as 40% among those age 18 to 24 and 24% among those age 25 to 34 agreed states and regions have secession rights.

Broken down by race, the highest percentage agreeing with the right to secede was among Hispanics (43%) and African-Americans (40%). Among white respondents, 17% said states or regions should have the right to peaceably secede.

Politically, liberal thinkers were much more likely to favor the right to secession for states and regions, as 32% of mainline liberals agreed with the concept. Among the very liberal the support was only slightly less enthusiastic – 28% said they favored such a right. Meanwhile, just 17% of mainline conservatives thought it should exist as an option for states or regions of the nation.

Asked whether they would support a secessionist movement in their own state, 18% said they would, with those in the South most likely to say they would back such an effort. In the South, 24% said they would support such an effort, while 15% in the West and Midwest said the same. Here, too, younger adults were more likely than older adults to be supportive – 35% of those under age 30 would support secession in their state, compared to just 17% of those over age 65. Among African Americans, 33% said they would support secession, compared to just 15% of white adults. The more education a respondent had, the less likely they were to support secession – as 38% of those with less than a high school diploma would support it, compared to just 10% of those with a college degree.

To gauge the extent to which support for secession comes from a sense that the nation’s current system is not working, a separate question was asked about agreement that “the United States’ system is broken and cannot be fixed by traditional two-party politics and elections.” Nearly half of respondents agreed with this statement, with 27% who somewhat agree and 18% who strongly agree. [Emphasis mine]

The telephone poll, conducted by Zogby International, included 1,209 American adult respondents. It was conducted July 9-13, 2008, and carries a margin of error of +/- 2.9 per cent.

 

« Newer Posts

Blog at WordPress.com.