Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Geology Disproves a Global Flood 5200 Years Ago and a Young Earth -- Part 1

Geology Disproves a Global Flood 5200 Years Ago and a Young Earth -- Part 1
Thomas Allen

    The most popular creationist theory maintains that God created the earth and universe about 6000 to 12000 years ago. This theory is commonly called the young-earth or young-earth-global-flood theory. Also, this theory claims that a global flood, the Noachian Flood, occurred about 2100 to 8000 B.C.[1] with an average of about 3200 B.C. According to this theory, all, or at least most, fossil-bearing sedimentary rock resulted from this Flood.
    Below some geological evidence is examined to see if it is compatible with the young-earth-global-flood theory.
    Coral Reefs.[2] Coral reefs argue against a global flood. Coral reefs are structures that are built up slowly. Slow growth rates would be incompatible with reef formation during a brief period of the Flood year. Reefs generally grow only a few centimeters per year under ideal conditions.
    Advocates of a global flood claim that the fossil reefs were antediluvian reefs that were eroded and redeposited during the Flood. They claim that enough time has elapsed since the Flood to allow the formation of the currently existing reefs. However, this position is untenable.
    Could a reef that is almost 1000 feet thick and several miles in diameter be a redeposited antediluvian reef? Could any kind of flood dislodge and transport such a large structure without smashing it to pieces? Hardly. Yet the cataclysmic global-flood theory demands such action, for all ancient fossil-containing rock is, according to this theory, the result of a global flood.
    Furthermore, in the Midwest these gigantic reefs lie on top of other carbonate rocks, which in turn lie on top of sandstone that is 300 feet thick. These reefs would have had either to remain suspended while the carbonate rocks and sandstone were deposited, or else to be transported to and deposited on top of these rocks by a force powerful enough to move these gigantic reefs, but gentle enough not to disturb the sediment, which would not have had enough time to solidify within a few weeks or months of continuous violent rushing water. A flood powerful enough to move these reefs would certainly have disturbed the sediment. Moreover, could a flood violent enough to keep such a gigantic reef suspended allow material that was of a much finer grain and of a lower density to be deposited under it? Floods generally deposit larger objects before they deposit smaller ones. Smaller objects tend to remain suspended longer.
    Another piece of evidence that these reefs were not redeposited is that none are upside down. If a violent flood had transported these reefs, surely at least one of them would have been deposited upside down. All the evidence shows that these reefs grew in place over an already deposited carbonate sediment.
    Reefs grow only in lightly agitated warm water. They do not grow under turbulent conditions such as floods. Violent conditions, such as hurricanes, destroy them. The flood described by advocates of a cataclysmic global flood would have been much more violent than any hurricane and would have utterly destroyed these reefs.
    Furthermore, cemented coral reefs grow only a few millimeters per year. Coral atolls, e.g., Eniwetok atoll, and barrier reefs, e.g., the fossil Rainbow Lake reef in western Canada, formed from cemented coral and require tens of thousands of years to reach their present size. Conventional geologists estimate that the Rainbow Lake reef required 160,000 years to grow to its present size.
    Evaporite Deposits.[3] Evaporite deposits argue against a global flood that occurred a few thousand years ago. Evaporite deposits contain minerals that are soluble in water, such as halite (sodium chloride or table salt), sylvite (potassium chloride), calcite (calcium carbonate), limestone (calcium carbonate), gypsum (hydrated calcium sulfate), potash (potassium carbonate), borax (sodium tetracarbonate) and Epsom salt (magnesium sulfate). According to the generally accepted theory, these deposits are formed slowly by gradual and repeated evaporation of salt water. Such deposits can occur when an arm of a sea is cut off from the ocean.  The water evaporates, and then the depression refills with water from the ocean. This cycle is repeated several times.  The typical deposit of evaporites requires the evaporation of thousands cubic miles of sea water.
    Some examples of evaporite deposits that required thousands of years to form are the Castilian evaporites (8000 sq. mi.) in Texas, the Zectstein evaporites in Schleswig-Holstein, Germany, and the Gulf of Mexico evaporites. According to conventional geology, the Castilian and Zectstein required hundreds of thousands of years to form. For the Castilian evaporites to form during the year of the Flood would have required the varves of calcite and anhydride to be deposited 260.000 times in one year. Most likely, about 260,000 years were needed to form the Castilian evaporates.
    Another example of a large evaporite is the Mediterranean basin. In the distant past (six to eight million years ago, according to conventional geology), the Mediterranean dried up several times. As it dried, it formed evaporites — calcite at the rim and rock salt at the deepest points. Successive drying produced evaporite deposits a thousand feet or more thick. Sediment now covers much of the evaporites. However, the weight of the sediment has forced the evaporites up in places to form salt domes. Some of these domes are a few miles across and thousands of feet deep. A global flood a few thousand years ago cannot account for this phenomenon.    
    If a violent global flood happened, it most likely would have dissolved these most soluble salts. A turbulent flood should have mixed these soluble minerals with clastic sediments. Unfortunately for the young-earth-global-flood theory, clastic minerals are usually not found in evaporites. Further, pieces of evaporites are not found in clastic sedimentary deposits above or below evaporite deposits. If the global-flood theory were valid, evaporite fragments should be found in these sedimentary layers.
    Moreover, evaporite deposits could not have been formed as a result of the flood waters evaporating and leaving behind a precipitate of salts. Evaporites are found buried under thick clastic sediments not on the surface. Evaporites simply cannot be accounted for by a rapid, one-year process. The great thicknesses involved suggest slow deposition over considerable time.
    Sedimentary Rock.[4] The sedimentary rock record argues against a global flood. Although many examples of sedimentary rock formations show evidence of having been formed by moving water, many examples of deposits also show that they could not have formed at all in surging flood waters.  These include sedimentary deposits that were evidently formed in lacustrine (lake) and desert environments.
    Moreover, the volume of fossil-bearing sedimentary rock argues against a recent global flood. According to the young-earth-global-flood theory, all or nearly all fossil-bearing rock resulted from the Noachian Flood. The volume of fossil-bearing rock is 157 cubic miles as compared with 336 cubic miles of water on earth. Such a mixture would result in a thick, creamy mixture of mud in which no fish could survive.
    An example of a sedimentary rock formation that could not have formed during the Noachian Flood is the Raymond Formation. It is less than a mile thick, but it contains more than 30,000 alternating layers of sandstone and shale. (Shale is formed from clay, and sandstone, from sand.) Turbulent flood waters keep clay suspended, yet it had to deposit clay during the Flood to form this formation. (Clay only settles in very calm water.) During the Flood, alternating layers of sand and clay had to be deposited within minutes. This process had to be repeated 15,000 times. Such action is an impossibility under the conditions of the Noachian Flood.
    Limestone.[5] Limestone argues against a young earth and a recent global flood. Limestone is made of the skeletons of microscopic sea animals. About 1.5 pentagrams (1.7 billion tons) of limestone are deposited annually in the oceans. If ten times this amount were deposited for 5000 years, it would account for less than 0.02 percent of the limestone deposits.
    Chalk Beds.[6] Chalk beds like the 1329 feet of chalk at the cliffs of Dover, England, argue against the young-earth-global-flood theory. Chalk is a calcium carbonate formed from residues of amorphous shell deposited from ocean oozes. It is a soft powdery limestone consisting mostly of fossil shells of Foraminifera.
    Conventional geologists claim that millions of years are needed for the formation of deep chalk beds like the one at Dover. However, according to some geologists, chalk deposits generally form at a rate of one to ten centimeters per year. Thus, at least 4050 to 40,500 years are needed to form the Dover chalk bed. Even at this rate, much more time than the 371 days of the Noachian Flood is needed. Using the most rapid formation calculations and assumptions, young earth creationists have lowered this time to 75 years — still more than 371 days.
    Whatever the time required for chalk beds to form, they could not form during the Noachian Flood. According to the young earth creationists, the flood current ranged between 89 and 179 miles per hour. Chalk forms in calm, shallow water. It cannot form under flood conditions. The particles are too small to settle at the speeds estimated for the Noachian Flood and would remain suspended and would eventually dissolve. Thus, if the young-earth-global-flood theory is correct, chalk beds should not exist.
    For example the Niobrara Chalk of North America contains more than 100 bentonite beds. Thus, 100 periods of deposition during calm periods are needed to form these beds. Such calm periods could not have occurred under the catastrophic conditions of the Noachian Flood.
    Conglomerates.[7] Conglomerates argue against a global flood a few thousand years ago. Conglomerate is a sedimentary rock containing rounded pebbles of various sizes up to the size of boulders cemented with fine-grain rocks like sand.
    Large deposits of conglomerate are found on top of sandstone and other fine-grain sedimentary rock of thicknesses up to several miles. An example of such a conglomerate is the sea cliffs near Marseilles, which contain boulders more than a foot in diameter. Under flood conditions, conglomerates are deposited before sand and other fine-grain material.
    Moreover, a sharp boundary is often found between a conglomerate and the underlying sandstone. Thus, the sand must have hardened into sandstone before the conglomerate deposited on top of it. How could a flood deposit both layers in quick succession?
    Lacustrine Deposits.[8] Supporters of a global flood claim that lacustrine deposits occurred during the waning stage of the Flood. Gradual upheaval of the surrounding terrain formed vast sedimentary basins. Shallow turbidity currents carried soft sediment and organic slime into basins to form the laminated sediments. This explanation may explain some lacustrine deposits, but not all. Some lacustrine deposits are covered by thick unconsolidated sediments, which would suggest that the Flood was still active in these areas long after it ceased to be active in others.
    An example of a lacustrine deposit is the Green River Formation at Flaming Gorge, Utah. A million thin layers of varves make up this formation. Deposits from several different contemporary lakes make up the Green River Formation. If the varves at Green River formed at the same rate as that of the Swiss lake example used by young earth creationists, 1.2 million years are needed to form the Green River Formation.
    Fossilized Eolian Deserts.[9] Fossilized eolian deserts argue against a recent global flood. Eolian deserts are the sand dune deserts. They are composed predominately of quartz sand. The sand is well rounded with a frosted surface. Clay and mica are usually absent. A good deal of time is required to erode bedrock to sand and to blow it into dunes. Moreover, desert deposits require dry land to form. Thus, the Flood could not have formed them.
    Examples of ancient fossilized deserts are the Old Red Sandstone that stretches from the British Isle to White Sea in Russia and parts of the Grand Canyon (the Coconino Sandstone, see below). These sandy deserts could not have formed during a global flood. Also, some of these sites contain evaporites.
    A fossil desert in southern Utah, the Navajo Sandstone, which is between 1600 and 2000 feet thick, was formed from windblown sand. It is not mixed with the mud that lies beneath it. Thus, the Flood could not have formed it; a desert could not have formed in the middle of a global flood.
    Furthermore, the Navajo Sandstone and the strata above it contain fossils. According to young earth creationists, the Navajo Sandstone formed during the middle of the Noachian Flood. Unfortunately for them, dinosaur footprints have been found in the sandstone — at a time when all dinosaurs and all other land animals that were not on the ark should have been drowned.
    Also, above the Navajo Sandstone are the Entrada Sandstone, which contains desert dune sandstone, and the Dewey Bridge Member, which is a marine deposit about 200 feet deep. Next comes the thin Summerville Formation, a siltstone formed in a lake or lagoon environment. Then comes the Morrison Formation followed by the Dakota Sandstone, which resulted from a beach environment, and the Mancoa, which formed from a shallow marine environment. As all these deposits are above the Navajo Sandstone, they were deposited after the Navajo. Moreover, the Navajo Sandstone is above all the layers of the Grand Canyon.
    The Morrison Formation is known for its dinosaur fossils and footprints. This formation sits above 11,000 feet of sediment laid down by the Flood according to the young-earth-global-flood theory. That is, it is 11,000 feet above the first horizontal layer of the Grand Canyon, which according to the young earth creationists, was the first layer laid down by the Flood. At the time that this formation was formed, no dinosaurs should have been alive according to young earth creationists.
    Another desert-created sandstone is the Coconino Sandstone of the Grand Canyon. The Coconino is 315 feet thick and was created in a desert environment from wind-blown sand dunes. This sandstone contains fossils. According to the young earth theory, the Noachian Flood formed the Coconino Sandstone. Above the Coconino Sandstone are two fossil-bearing rock layers, the Toroweap Limestone and Kaibab Limestone.
    For these three strata to occur according to the young-earth-global-flood theory, the waters would have had to recede to form the sandstone. Then it would have had to return to form the layers of limestone. However, according to the Biblical account, the waters rose and then receded. The account does not suggest cycles of water rising and then receding. The desert formation of the Coconino Sandstone argues against its formation during a flood and against a young earth.
    In Mongolia, dinosaur fossils are found in eolian sandstone. Thus, those dinosaurs died in a sandstorm instead of drowning in a flood. The young-earth-global-flood theory would predict them to have died of drowning.

Endnotes
1. Thomas Coley Allen, Adam to Abraham: The Early History of Man (Franlinton, N.C.: TC Allen Co., 1988), pp. 171-174.

2. Christopher Gregory Weber, “The Fatal Flaws of Rood Geology," Creation Evolution Journal, 1, no. 1 (1980) http://ncse.eom/cej/l/l/fatal-flaws-flood-geology, Dec. 18, 2015. Davis A. Young, Christianity & the Age of the Earth (Thousand Oaks, California: Artisan Sales, 1988), pp. 84-86.

3. Richard Burky, “Are Geologic Strata the Result of the Biblical Flood?” Grace Communion International, 1990, https://www.gci.org/science/burkyl, Dec. 18, 2016. Mark Isaak, “Problems with a Global Flood” (2nd ed., 1998), http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html#georecord, Dec. 18, 2015. Weber. Young, Christianity, pp. 86-87.

4. Alan Hayward, “Flood Geology and Related Fallacies,” https://www.gci.org/science/hayward8, Dec. 18, 2015. Isaak. John Pye Smith, The Relation Between the Holy Scriptures and Some Parts of Geological Science (London: Henry G. Bolin, 1854), p. 77. Young, Christianity, pp. 87.

5.  Isaak.

6. Isaac. Greg Neyman “Creation Science Rebuttals – Can Noah’s Flood Make Any Chalk Beds?,” Jan. 28, 2003, http://www.oldearth.org/nochalk.htm. Dec. 18, 2015. Phil Senter, “The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology: The Ironic Demonstration That There Is No Trace of the Genesis Flood in the Geologic Record,” Reports of the National Center for Science Education, 31.3 (May-June 2011), 1.1-1.14.

7. Hayward.

8.  Greg Neyman, “Creation Science Exposed – Stratigraphy and the Young Earth Global Flood Model – Part 5,” Jan. 2003, Feb. 2006, http://www.oldearth.org/stratigraphy5.htm, Dec. 18, 2015. Senter. Young, Christianity, p. 88-89.

9. Burky. Greg Neyman, “Creation Science Exposed – The Desert Problem,” Feb. 2, 2003  http://www.oldearth.org/desertproblem.htm, Dec. 18, 2015. Greg Neyman, “Creation Science Rebuttals Technical Journal (TJ) – The Navajo Sandstone,” Dec. 29, 2005,    http://www.oldearth.org/rebuttal/magazines/TJ/vl8/TJ18_navajo_san..., Dec. 18, 2015. Greg Neyman, “Creation Science Exposed – Stratigraphy and the Young Earth Global Flood Model – Part 3,” Jan. 2003, Feb. 2006, http://www.oldearth.org/stratigraphy3.htm, Dec. 18, 2015. Greg Neyman, “Creation Science Exposed – Stratigraphy and the Young Earth Global Flood Model – Part 4,” Jan. 2003, Feb. 2006, http://www.oldearth.org/stratigraphy4.htm, Dec. 18, 2015. Senter. Weber. Young, Christianity, p. 91.

Copyright © 2016 by Thomas Coley Allen.

Part 2

More religious articles

Sunday, November 20, 2016

You Cannot Eat Gold

You Cannot Eat Gold
Thomas Allen

    Perhaps the most absurd and stupidest argument offered by the antigold crowd against using gold as money is that gold has no value because one cannot eat it, wear it, or live in it. This claim can be made of paper money and especially electronic money, which is most of today’s money. It can be said of most things that people use.
    Gold is eatable. When consumed, gold has anticancer properties, aids in repairing damaged arthritic joints, reduces various emotional problems, and helps blood circulation. It is used in medicines and alternative remedies. It is used to decorate expensive high-society cakes.
    Gold can be used to make clothes. Traditionally, crowns of monarchs have been made of gold alloy. Ancient, and not so ancient, priests wore gold laden garments. Most wedding rings are gold alloy. A large quantity of gold is used for jewelry.
    Gold can be used to build structures. A house can be built using gold bricks. Such a house would be extremely expensive and highly energy inefficient. Gold foil or sheet can be used to veneer siding or to cover roofs of buildings.
    One can use the same argument about paper money: it cannot be eaten or worn or used as a building material. Like gold, it can be eaten and worn. Nevertheless, paper money has little or no nutritional value. Depending on the composition of the paper and ink, it could be hazardous if eaten. Also, like gold one can build a house with it. When paper money becomes worthless, it has been used as wallpaper.
    However, how does one eat, wear, or build with electronic money, which make up the bulk of today’s money, flowing through some unknown computer at some unknown location? If one wants to use the cannot-be-eaten-or-worn argument against a type of money, they should hurled it against today’s electronic money and not against gold.
    The argument that one cannot eat, wear, or build with gold is often used as an attempt to show that gold has no value in-and-of itself. The antigold crowd often claims that if it were not for gold’s monetary use, which it has not had since 1971, at least not formally, gold would be useless with little or no value. What is left unmentioned is its growing use in a growing electronic device market. If gold has no value beyond its monetary use, why did it not become cheaper than gravel when its monetary use ended? This argument against gold is stupid and is intended to deceive.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More money articles.

Thursday, November 10, 2016

Freedom

Freedom
Thomas Allen

    At Memorial Day and Veteran Day ceremonies, politicians and others like to praise soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen who have fought in the country’s wars, police actions, and kinetic military actions. These orators bombast that if it were not for the sacrifices that these men in uniform made, we would have no freedoms. Many gave their lives for the rest of us to be free. They seldom list these freedoms. If they do, they mention freedoms that we lost a long time ago.
    A short, and highly incomplete, list of freedoms that we have today follows. Here are some of the freedoms for which America’s finest have fought and died:

1.      The freedom to have unalienable rights converted to governmentally granted privileges.
2.      The freedom to have a government to treat veterans like trash.
3.      The freedom to have a government to use soldiers as experimental animals.
4.      The freedom to have a government that considers soldiers as stupid, expandable grunts to carry out the globalist-new-world-order-destroy-America foreign policy.
5.      The freedom to pay the county and city annual rent (or extortion) to keep them from taking our house.
6.      The freedom to pay governments half our income to keep them from strong-arming us with the IRS and other tax collectors (historically, slaves consume about 90 percent of their production; we are so free that we are allowed to consume half).
7.      The freedom to have taxes used to control us instead of raising revenue for governmental operations.
8.      The freedom not to erect a shed on our property unless some bureaucrat approves it.
9.      The freedom to have the government deny us the use of our land.
10.    The freedom to have the government tell us what we may or may not do with our property.
11.    The freedom not to build a house unless some governmental bureaucrat approves it.
12.    The freedom to live where the government can forcibly take our land and sell it to a developer at below market value.
13.    The freedom to have the government to keep us from buying and selling raw milk.
14.    The freedom to have the government to keep effective and inexpensive cures for cancer off the market so that big pharmaceutical companies can make a fortune selling excessively priced and ineffective, but highly dangerous, drugs and so that those who run cancer “charities” can pay themselves exorbitant salaries.
15.    The freedom to have a drug company to patent a common vitamin and require us to get a prescription for it and pay an exorbitant price where previously we could have bought it cheaply at many stores without a prescription.
16.    The freedom to allow food companies to obfuscate labeling their food products as containing genetically modified organisms.
17.    The freedom to have the government declare foods, herbs, vitamins, and minerals to have no health benefits; only drugs that it approves have any health benefits.
18.    The freedom to be bombarded with advertisements about the virtues of drugs solving problems while sending people to prisons for taking drugs to solve problems.
19.    The freedom to have public drinking water drugged and poisoned to stupefy and sterilize us.
20.    The freedom to be considered mentally ill for questioning the government.
21.    The freedom to encourage agricultural and food processing practices that destroy the nutritional value of our food while discouraging practices that preserve and enhance their nutritional value.
22.    The freedom to have the child protection service to kidnap our children in the name of protecting them from us and turning them over to pedophiles.
23.    The freedom to have and pay for our children’s indoctrination with secular humanism, statism, homosexualism, and other alien ideologies, doctrines, and philosophies in government churches, commonly called public schools.
24.    The freedom to have our children protected from childhood.
25.    The freedom to have schools where students are treated like prisoners.
26.    The freedom to have Christianity, the Bible, and Christian prayer and witnessing banned from schools while all other religions are allowed, accommodated, and often promoted.
27.    The freedom to have hospitals taking blood samples from newborn babies under false pretenses and giving the samples to the Pentagon.
28.    The freedom to hear and watch daily governmentally acceptable propaganda issued by the news media as news.
29.    The freedom to get permission from the government to protest its action.
30.    The freedom to have anything critically written or said about Jews, Israel, or homosexuals and other sexual perverts treated as hate crimes.
31.    The freedom to live where all religions are equally acceptable except Christianity, which must be expunged from society.
32.    The freedom to have one of the greatest communist, globalist movements, the civil rights movement, of the twentieth century declared to be the greatest freedom movement of the twentieth century, if not of all history.
33.    The freedom to have a person of the despicable race, the White race, who commits a crime against a person of the protected race, a colored race, receive a much stiffer prison sentence than that received by a person of the protected race against a person of the despicable race. An exception is if the victim of the despicable race is a sexual pervert.
34.    The freedom to honor with a national holiday a womanizing scoundrel and communist sympathizer who created turmoil and left a trail of destruction everywhere he went.
35.    The freedom not to drive without the approval of some governmental bureaucrat.
36.    The freedom to be groped and sexually molested and exposed to deadly x-rays so that we can fly on a commercial airliner.
37.    The freedom to be watched everywhere we go.
38.    The freedom not to start a business unless some bureaucrat approves it.
39.    The freedom to have government bureaucrats to manage and second guess everything that our business does without assuming any risk.
40,    The freedom not to work for someone at a wage less than the government fixes even if we find the wage acceptable.
41.    The freedom to have the government encourage and subsidize companies to transfer high paying jobs to foreign countries.
42.    The freedom to pay the megabanks trillions of dollars to cover their gambling losses.
43.    The freedom to have the purchasing power of our money deliberately destroyed.
44.    The freedom to subside and give special privileges to the megabanks and multinational corporations.
45.    The freedom to buy whatever light bulbs or toilets that the government tells us to buy.
46.    The freedom to have Wall Street and bankers loot the public treasury with impunity.
47.    The freedom to have the police break into our house in the middle of the night and kill us with impunity although we have committed no known crime.
48.    The freedom to have the police stop us on the street and take our money without ever charging us with a crime as a method to collect revenue for the government.
49.    The freedom to have the police to search our house and effects for any reason or for no reason and without a warrant.
50,    The freedom to have the government listen to and read all our electronic communications without a warrant.
51.    The freedom to spy on our neighbors and to have our neighbors spy on us to keep the land safe for big brother.
52.    The freedom to live where a citizen can be held in jail indefinitely without charges or being brought to trial.
53.    The freedom to have torture as an acceptable interrogation technique.
54.    The freedom to be live where males can use restrooms and locker rooms designated for females and vice versa and where marriage has been so corrupted that homosexuals can “marry.”
55.    The freedom to have the largest population of prisoners in the world to serve as slave labor.
56.    The freedom to enjoy the privilege of living in a police state.
57.    The freedom to have the police to take blood samples at checkpoints without warrants.
58.    The freedom to be considered a terrorist because we are a veteran or believe that the U.S. government should be restricted by the Constitution.
59.    The freedom to be assumed guilty of political crimes until we prove our self innocent, which is impossible for anyone who is not among the ruling elite.
60.    The freedom to live where the government terrorized us.
61.    The freedom to live where it is a crime for us to lie to the government, but it is acceptable for governmental officials and bureaucrats to lie to us.
62.    The freedom to have the government keep the borders open so that the cultural and racial makeup of the country can be destroyed.
63.    The freedom to vote for pre-approved candidates whom those who really control the government own.
64.    The freedom to vote where the lackeys of the ruling elite count the votes to ensure that the right candidate wins the election.
65.    The freedom to have the government to kill thousands of Americans so that it can have an excuse to fight illegal and unlawful wars.
66.    The freedom to have the government to lie to us continuously.
67.    The freedom to live in a fascist country.
68.    The freedom to have a President who is not qualified for the office.
69.    The freedom to have a President who is above the law and who is accountable to no one even after he leaves office.
70.    The freedom to obey secret laws, regulations, and policies.
71.    The freedom to have the government, which is supposed to be the servant of the people, to keep secrets from the people, who are suppose to be the masters, while forbidding the people from keeping secrets from the government. (Whatever happened to a government by, for, and of the people? If the people were the masters and the government, the servant, then the people, the masters, could keep secrets from the government, but the government, the servant, could not keep anything it knows from the people.)
72.    The freedom to live where the people fear their government instead of the government fearing the people.
73.    The freedom to be dependent on government so that the government can more easily control us.
74.    The freedom to live under a government that is run by sadistic psychotic lying sociopaths.
75.    The freedom to live where the largest drug smuggler is the government itself.
76.    The freedom to have our political office holders violate their oaths of office with impunity.
77.    The freedom to have the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto almost completely implemented.
78.    The freedom to have a president who is a figurehead to serve the interest of the plutocrats who rule the country.
79.    The freedom to be governed by traitors.
80.    The freedom to have the government borrow and spend the country into prosperity.

    Most who voluntarily put on the uniform did so to defend the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the Ten Commandments. Unfortunately, they believed the lies that their government told them. In reality, they have not fought for these ideals, but to transfer more wealth and power to the rich and powerful, who control the U.S. government.
    Wars are detrimental to liberty, especially for the winning side. Wars lead to a growth in the power of government. The power of government grows at the expense of freedom. As the power of government grows, freedom dies.
    If these men and women in uniform really wanted to fight for the freedom of America, they would march on Washington, Wall Street, the international fanciers, the heads of academia, labor leaders, the major foundations, the leaders of the major churches and religious organizations, the Zionists, most think tanks, lobbies who lobby for more government, etc.


Copyright © 2016 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political arguments.

Sunday, October 30, 2016

THE SOLDIER

[Editor’s note: This poem was written by my mother.]

THE SOLDIER
Josephine Armstrong

A soldier now is he,
The time has come for him to cross the sea, and fight for his country.
In the hammock at midnight he lay,
Not knowing what weariness he would face the next day,

Through the porthole the moon beams shone,
As the soldier lay there wishing; for the break of dawn.
But soon he was awaken,
Take your place on deck came a shout!
This was all the soldier could hear day in and day out.

The winds would whisper and the waves would roll,
And in the wild blustering of bullets and bombs
He could hear them call for his soul.
But brave was the soldier both day and night,
For he wanted to win his fight,

At last, he had reached the foreign land,
And there he stood just off deck upon the sand,
He lifted his right hand upon his forehead and said:
He would fight for his country until he was dead.

The soldier marched on with his body in pain,
He was not ready to give up in vain.
His heart was breaking for a word from love ones back home,
But his address to them was unknown.

The soldier marched forward through blood, toil, cloud, and fire,
Never knowing when he would be able to retire.
While down in the sod, the soldier often lifted his head to heaven above and prayed to God,
For the soldier knew that it is He who is God of the Country and could give men their freedom and liberty.

The soldier marched far,
Still trying the war to bar,
Suddenly he was struck down by a bullet so powerful and strong,
That even the strings of his heart were stung,
He closes his eyes for no more can he see,
And he utters a Whisper, “My country I have done the best I could for Thee.”

Josephine Ann Armstrong
Written ”Year, 1939”

Copyright © 1939 by Josephine Ann Armstrong

More poems

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Review of The Deep South Says “Never” -- Part 2

Review of The Deep South Says “Never”
-- Part 2
Thomas Allen

    In Chapter 3, Martin describes the reaction of the Border States to the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision. They quickly surrendered unconditionally. [Such surrender did not lessen the frequency and intensity of racial strife and riots. If anything, surrendered encouraged them. During the 1950s most of the racial strife was Whites assailing Blacks. However, defeat after defeat eventually demoralized and cowed Whites while victory after victory emboldened Blacks. After Congress formerly joined the Communist integrationist movement in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act, Blacks began pushing and rioting in earnest. Thus, from the early 1960s to today most racial strife has been Blacks assailing Whites.] He focuses on Maryland, Missouri, and Kentucky and concludes with a discussion of Tennessee.
    To comply with the desegregation decree, Baltimore decided to allow “any child [to] attend any school in the city” (p. 80). [Later, courts would object to such a solution because allowing freedom of choice did not integrate schools as fully as judges desired.]
    St. Louis’ approach to desegregation was to redraw the boundaries of the school districts (pp. 84-85). [Later, federal judges would not accept this approach unless the borders of the school district were drawn to integrate schools sufficiently to satisfy the judges’ integrationist lust.]
    Martin quotes Philip Hickey, superintendent of the St. Louis school system: “We think we’re through it. It’s working even better than we expected” (p. 85). [Could Hickey have really been this naive or ignorant? They were only beginning. The worse was yet to come. Apparently, he did not realize that the long-run goal of desegregation was to bring down the White race, even if it also destroyed the Black race, and by that, bring down the United States, Western Civilization, and Christianity.]
    Kentucky offered more resistance than Maryland or Missouri. However, it also surrendered [to federal tyranny] (pp. 85-87).
    Martin presents some of the discussions between segregationists and desegregationists in some Kentucky towns. Some people argued that the Supreme Court had made a decision and the people should obey it (87ff). [The same thing has happened with the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize homosexual “marriages” and other pervert agendas. Obeying tyrannical rulings of the Supreme Court has brought the country to the edge of destruction. One or two more such rulings will push it into the abyss of no return.] The more religious integrationists declared that desegregation, integration, was God’s will (pp. 87ff). [It may be the will of their god, but it is not the will of the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible is a Segregationist. His prophets and even His Son preached segregation from beginning to end. (V.  Integration Is Genocide, False Biblical Teachings on the Races and Interracial Marriages, People of the Flood, “Review of Segregation and Desegregation,” “A Review of The South and Christian Ethics,” “The Bible, Segregation, and Miscegenation,” and “Is Integration a Moral Law?” all by Thomas Allen.)]
    Martin cites Omar Carmichael’s, the superintendent of the Louisville school system, promotion of desegregation. Part of his promotion included “Negro and white school interchanged assembly program. At one a Negro choir sang The Battle Hymn of the Republic while a white choir simultaneously recited the Gettysburg Address” (p. 95). [Both of them are highly anti-South. The Battle Hymn of the Republic advocates stomping out the South. The Gettysburg Address is nothing but pure political hypocrisy (v. H.L. Mencken’s comments on it in “The War”)]
    Louisville’s desegregation scheme was redrawing school district boundaries without regard to race and then allowing students to transfer to schools in other districts if they so desired. Not unsurprisingly, the NAACP objected to Louisville’s approach (p. 97). [Like all other school desegregation schemes if some federal judge decided that people did not voluntarily integrate themselves to the satisfaction of the judge, he would reject the plan — and often impose his own plan.]
    [In his description of the Border States desegregating, Martin identifies no White leader who was pushing school desegregation voluntarily sending his children to Black schools. Thus, they were and still are all hypocrites. {Some Whites have been so brainwashed and are so full of self-hate and probably subconsciously hatred for Blacks that they go out of their way to send their children to predominantly Black schools.}]
    In Chapter 4, Martin discusses some school segregationists. They include:
    –    Sam Engelhardt, leader of the Citizens’ Councils of Alabama and chairman of the Citizens’ Councils of America (pp. 105ff);
    –    Asa (Ace) Carter, a Citizens’ Councils leader in Alabama and rival of Engelhardt (pp. 107ff);
    –    John Kasper, a segregation activist and Citizens’ Councils leader from Tennessee (pp. 119ff)
    –    Robert Patterson, founder of the Citizens’ Councils movement, head of the Association of Citizens’ Councils of Mississippi, executive secretary of the Citizens’ Councils of America (pp. 123ff);
    –    J.P. Coleman, Governor of Mississippi (he was a moderate [i.e., weak] segregationists) (pp. 134ff) [Coleman seemed more of a scalawag and a quisling although not as openly as Governor Folsom of Alabama];
    –    W.J. Simmons, editor of the Citizens’ Council (pp. 137-140);
    –    John U. Barr, retired rope manufacturer from Louisiana, former vice president of the Southern States Industrial Council, and organizer of the Federation of Constitutional Government (pp. 140-141);
    –    Leander Perez, corporate lawyer and district attorney (pp. 140-142);
    –    James Eastland, U.S. Senator from Mississippi (pp. 140-142);
    –    Herman Talmadge, U.S. Senator from Georgia (p. 140).
    Carter lost his job as a radio broadcaster because:
In the broadcast, made during Brotherhood Week, Carter compared the National Conference of Christians and Jews to the Communist Party and said it favored desegregation, the Genocide Treaty, “race mongrelization,” and “dictatorial federal law to enforce integration” (p. 108).
[Carter was right — at least in the sense that the National Conference of Christians and Jews (now called  the National Conference for Community and Justice) was promoting the same agenda that the Communist Party promoted. Both fostered desegregation, i.e., integration, a policy that leads to mongrelization. Both supported the Genocide Treaty, which prohibited the eradication of a race because of its race but allowed the eradication of a race for political reason.  {Ironically, integration, especially governmentally forced integration, is contrary to the Genocide Treaty (v. Integration Is Genocide by Thomas Allen)} The Supreme Court’s desegregation ruling did lead to “dictatorial federal laws to enforce integration,” of which most proponents of that ruling support.]
    Engelhardt urged Southerners in general and Alabamians in particular to “‘talk white, think white, hire white, buy white, and remain white’” (p. 110). [For the most part, Whites have failed to heed Engelhardt’s words of wisdom. As a result, they are on the verge of losing their country, culture, and civilization. Blacks have done a much better job of talking Black, thinking Black, hiring Black, etc. Unfortunately, they have failed at keeping themselves Black as they strive to breed themselves out of existence.]
    Engelhardt offered some more sage advice: “We can’t give one inch. If we let a crack in the door, that’s it” (pp. 111-112). [The South cracked the door. Now they are on the verge of losing everything: their race, homes, religion, country, culture, and civilization. They have already lost their liberty, but most do not realize this loss.]
    Martin summarizes a speech that Congressman Grant gave at a Citizens’ Council meeting:
Announcing that he had “no apology for being here” and that he was a “friend of the Negro race,” he reviewed the legal history of the Court’s school desegregation decision. He attacked the “authorities” on whose testimony the Court had based its decision as men who belonged to Communist or Communist-dominated organizations. (Senator Eastland of Mississippi made a full dress Senate speech on this subject; it has been widely distributed by Citizens’ Councils.) He praised American greatness. He accused the State Department of trying to change American social customs in order to persuade other countries to accept “billions” that America was “giving away overseas” to thwart Russia. He said the NAACP wanted to wipe out all segregation, not only in schools and buses. This brought him to miscegenation, and he quoted prominent Negroes at length as favoring it. He said even “some white people right here in the state of Alabama in the teaching profession” believe in miscegenation. A Senate filibuster was the only hope against current “vindictive” and “punitive” civil rights legislation (pp 113-114).
[Grant spoke truthfully, but most ignored him. Thus, it was “the night they drove old Dixie down.”]
    Commenting on changes taking place in the school system prior to desegregation, Carter asks, “Is the system of education preparing our children for a competitive, free America, where there are naturally frustrations, or is it preparing them for a non-competitive, integrated, communistic slave-state?” (pp. 118-119). [With 60 years of hindsight, we now know the answer. The educational system was changed to prepare children “for a non-competitive, integrated, communistic slave-state.”] He states that a school superintendent told him that the changes were being made to “remove the competitive system and prevent frustrations” (p. 118). [Apparently, people involved in setting educational policies, including people in the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, were convinced that Blacks were intellectually inferior to Whites. Therefore, the curricula had to be dumbed down to prevent Black frustration.]
    Patterson said, “If there’s no Nigras, integration’s beautiful. A fine thing. Everybody’s for integration — for the other fellow. Resistance to integration is directly proportionate to the Nigra population” (p.126). [Polls at that time supported Patterson’s claim. Whites tended to favor integration in proportion to the lack of Blacks in their area. That is, Whites in areas with few or no Blacks favored integration much more than Whites in areas with a large Negro population compared with the White population.]
    [Patterson points out the hypocrisy of Yankees.] Senators Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota and Wayne Morse of Oregon were the strongest advocates of integration. Yet their states hardly had any Negroes with whom to integrate. Minnesota had 14,000, and Oregon had 11,000. Patterson declared:
If the North really wants to be objective, let all the Northern states bring themselves up to the national average — let each state import enough Nigras to bring its Nigra population up to 10 per cent, the national average. Minnesota needs 284,000 Nigras to bring it up to the national average. We don’t want to postpone this problem. Why doesn’t Hubert Humphrey go to his people and say, “I want you to work to provide  284,000 accommodations — schools, houses and churches — for 284,000 more Nigras that I’m goin’ to  bring in  here.”  We  realize  Senator Humphrey wants to help us or he wouldn’t be making all this racket. We’re in a better position to tell him how to help us than anyone else is. And we’re not going to tell them how to handle those Nigras. We’re not going to advocate civil rights legislation. We’re just going to share the problem since they are so willing to share the solution (p. 126).
[Of coarse, the North would never entertain such a solution. Deep down, Yankees despised Blacks; they just love them in the abstract. They did not and most still do not want to be around Blacks. To them Blacks were and are an abstraction, and not a concrete reality as they were and are in the South. Thus, they enacted the civil rights laws and related laws to encourage Blacks to stay in their place, i.e., to stay in the South. The plan worked for a few years until some renegade federal judges began enforcing the civil rights laws in the North.]
    Patterson adds, “Hubert Humphrey says we should integrate because of Russia and the cold war and the opinion of the Asiatics. So I’m to destroy my children here in Sunflower County in order to impress the Asiatics” (pp. 126-127). [That’s right! Actually, Patterson was to offer his children to bring down the Southerner. Humphrey was not going to do anything to harm the Soviet Union. He always sought to appease the Soviet Union and Communists. He was about as close as one can be to being a Communist without becoming a card-carrying member of the Communist Party. Moreover, he was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (v. “Council on Foreign Relations” by Thomas Allen) and a founder and vice president of the socialist American for Democratic Action. Humphrey promoted the New World Order with its one world government (Francis X. Gannon, Biographical Dictionary of the Left, I (1969), p. 374). {Also see, That Man from Minnesota by Joyce Press.}]
    Patterson notes that many people in the North believe in segregation. His proof is that they live in segregated neighborhoods. He adds, “It’s a pitiful thing in this nation when a man is not allowed to speak out for what he believes” (p. 127). [Such oppression has only gotten worse over the last 60 years. People have lost their jobs for speaking out.]
    Patterson remarks that changes in agriculture and the economy is making the Negro unwanted. Mechanization of agriculture and the conversion of cotton fields to pastures for cattle are driving the Negro from the land. Industrialization has not helped the Negro much. Manufacturers want skilled labor, not unskilled former farmhands. Moreover, desegregation is also making the Negro unwanted. As a result, Negroes are migrating northward. [Thus, the scheme of Yankeedom to keep the Negro in his place — in the South — has backfired.]
    About the Indians in Mississippi, Patterson says, “The Indians don’t want niggers in their schools. They’re proud their race” (p. 132).
    He remarks that the White schools that his children attend is not nearly as good as the Black school. Thus, he is a victim of prejudice (p. 132).
    Patterson thought that segregation would prevail and eventually spread to the Northern states. [Patterson was wrong. Within a few years all the schools throughout the South would be integrated. A few years after that, those in the North would be integrated. Integration did not stop with schools; it invaded every aspect of life.]
    In Chapter 5, Martin discusses how desegregation has worked in the Border States. [In short, the Border States surrendered completely and unconditionally with hardly any resistance to federal tyranny.] He discusses some problems that teachers and pupils, especially Black pupils, have had. The problems that Black pupils had were learning to behave and trying to perform at the same level as White pupils. Martin fills this chapter with praises for Black pupils and parents.
    The excuse offered by school officials and other integrationists for the lower achievement of Blacks is social and economic conditions and “inferior teaching in  the old all-Negro schools” (p. 148). [This excuse means that Black teachers are inferior to White teachers, and is, therefore, an insult to Black teachers.] For segregationists, the lack of Black achievement resulted from “inherent Negro inferiority” (p. 148). [This is the old environment verses genetics argument. The segregationists were right.  As many scientific studies show, genetics is a far more important determinant of intelligence than is environment. Genetics accounts for about 75 percent of intelligence. {V. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, The Inheritance of Mental Ability by Cyrll Bur, Man’s Racial Nature and Race and Politics: the Racial Controversy by H.B. Isherwood, Race Difference in Intelligence by John C. Loehlin, Major Findings from Twin Studies of Ability, Personality, and Interests by Robert C. Nichols, Racial Difference in Mental Growth and School Achievements by R. Travis Osborne. Race, Intelligence and Bias in Academe by Roger Pearson, Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective by J. Philippe Rushton, A Question of Intelligence: The IQ Debate in America by Daniel Seligman, and Integration Is Genocide by Thomas Coley Allen}
    Martin writes “[E]veryone except dedicated segregationists expect that in a few years Negroes will do as well as Whites” (p. 148). [Everyone except the dedicated segregationists were wrong. After sixty years of integration and dummying down the educational system for the benefit of Blacks, Blacks on average still lag behind Whites intellectually. Rigging the system for their benefit and to the detriment of Whites has not helped Blacks. However, it has hurt Whites and the country — thus harming Blacks.]
    Martin quotes a teacher saying, “I haven’t heard one say we’d been unfair” (p. 151). [How things have changed!]
    Martin notes how integrated sports teams destroyed resistance to integration (p. 151). [That goes to show that most people place sports above the preservation of their race.]
    In Chapter 6, Martin discusses the resistance to desegregation in the Deep South. He continues his discussion of the work of the Citizens’ Councils to prevent desegregation, the future of the Citizens’ Council, and opposition to the Citizens’ Councils. He remarks that “the Councils are essentially a middle-class movement, with a sprinkling of the top of society” (p. 155). Also, he discusses the rise of the Klan and the progress made to desegregate. Then he identifies three by-products of opposing desegregation: the rise of anti-Semitism, trouble in the labor movement, and abridgement of free speech.
    Martin writes, “Some Southerners, weary of being caricatured as a bunch of Claghorns and Kluxers and haters, wish the agitation would stop” (p. 155). [These Southerners invert the motto of North Carolina, which is “To Be Rather Than To Seem,” to “To Seem Rather Than To Be.” Their self-esteem is so low that it depends on what people whom they have never met and will never meet think of them. However, they are conceited enough to believe that these strangers will think about them. Moreover, they fail to realize that there are three types of people in this world. First are those who go with the flow, which is the majority, and do not matter. Then there are those who just want to be left alone and those who are determined not to leave them alone. As long as anyone in these two groups live, peace and harmony cannot exist.]
    Martin states, “Jews, themselves a religious minority, have traditionally tended to view sympathetically the plight of any minority” (p. 159). [One minority whom Jews do not view sympathetically and whom they have sought to destroy is the Southerner. {Many Jews in the South opposed integration and did not seek to destroy the South}Furthermore, Jews controlled the NAACP and many were Communists. Thus, segregationists gave the appearance of being “anti-Semites.” So many integrationists were Jews and so many Jews were integrationists that to oppose integrationists gave the appearance of opposing Jews per se. Furthermore, Martin errors when he refers to Jews as a religious group. They are not. They are an ethnic group, a nationality. Most Jews, probably a majority, are atheists, agnostics, or nonreligious {v. Zionism: A Brief History 1800-1949 by Thomas Allen}].
    Martin writes, “A third by-product is the abridgment of free speech. Preachers who opposed segregation lost their pulpits. Books were banned, professors fired.” [Any preacher who preaches against the clear teachings of the Bible ought to lose his pulpit. Moreover, proponents of integration, miscegenation, and amalgamation of the races have been far more effective at banning books and firing professors. Most people live in such fear of them that they always have to watch what they say so as not to offend easily and highly offended integrationists, miscegenationists, and amalgamators.]
    Martin quotes Roy Wilkins of the NAACP saying, “I didn’t expect murders, nor the petty, cruel persecution of ordinary Negroes who signed school petitions. This is the Hitler pattern, the Soviet Russia pattern” (p. 168). [Wilkins has it backwards. In Hitler’s Germany and Soviet Russia, the central government imposed tyrannical, despotic decrees on the people. In the South, the people were trying to protect themselves from a tyrannical, despotic central government imposing its decrees on them. Thus, the exact opposite was occurring in the South as occurred in Hitler’s Germany and Soviet Russia. Unfortunately, they failed, and the country is being destroyed by an ever-growing tyrannical, despotic government that is becoming more and more like Nazi Germany. Furthermore, Martin fails to mention that Wilkins was affiliated with at least seven communist organizations, and therefore, pro-Soviet Russia organizations. Thus, Wilkins was a front man for Communism and the Soviet Union {v. “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen}.]
    Martin writes, “An expert, asked when he thought the Deep South would desegregate, replied, "Never. . . . Most Southerners agree” (p. 168). [Either Southerners then had a short time span for “never,” or they were extremely naive, or they were deliberately fooling themselves. Within a few years, all school systems would be fully interrogated. By the end of the Centennial in 1965, the South had been as thoroughly defeated as it was in 1865. Within a decade, the rest of the country would have been as abjectly defeated as the South.]
    Martin notes that Southerners were aware the possibility of the U.S. government using troops to enforce desegregation. Many expected that if it did, a civil war, or something close to it would happen. Simmons of the Citizens’ Council said, “To me it is inconceivable that the rest of the country would stand for the South to be put to the sword” (p. 170). [The U.S. government did use troops in Alabama and Arkansas. Not only did the rest of the country stand by and do nothing, parts of it cheered the tyrant on. To the detriment of the country, the South submitted and surrendered unconditionally to despotism and tyranny. Now the country is enjoying the fruits of the South’s defeat.]
    Martin asks, “How high a price is the South willing to pay to maintain its peculiar institution? And how high a price is the North willing to exact to destroy the institution?” (p. 172). [To the detriment of the country, the White race, Western Civilization, and Christendom, the North was willing to extract a higher price than the South was willing to pay. Thus, the North brought down the country, the White race, Western Civilization, and Christendom. Nearly all the problems of today can be traced back to the Supreme Court’s disregard for and destruction of the Constitution with its desegregation ruling of 1954.]


Copyright © 2016 by Thomas Coley Allen 

Part 1 

More articles on social issues

Monday, October 10, 2016

Review of The Deep South Says “Never” -- Part 1

Review of The Deep South Says “Never”
-- Part 1
Thomas Allen

    This article is a review of The Deep South Says “Never” by John Barlow Martin (New York: Ballantine Books, 1957). My comments are enclosed in brackets. I have provided references to pages in his book and have enclosed them in parentheses.
    Martin favors desegregation, but is more sympathetic toward the segregationists than are most integrationists. Most of his book is a discussion of the struggle to desegregate schools in the South, especially the Deep South between 1954 and 1957. Most of his discussion is presented through the eyes of the Citizens Councils and its supporters and opponents. The Citizens’ Councils fought to keep schools segregated.
    In Chapter 1, Martin discusses the origins and expansion of the Citizens’ Councils. These Councils were formed to support the status quo of segregation and  to oppose the Communist organized and led desegregation-integration movement. (V. “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen.) [Desegregation, which implies choice, is a euphemism for integration, which is force.]
    Robert Paterson was a founding member of and driving force behind the Citizens’ Councils (pp. 1-3). He declared:
We just felt like integration would utterly destroy everything that we valued. We don’t consider ourselves hate-mongers and racists and bigots. . . .  We were faced with integration in a town where there are twenty-one hundred Negro students and seven hundred white. We didn’t feel the Supreme Court had the right to come into the state and forcibly cause the schools which were supported by the taxpayers of Mississippi to be integrated and therefore destroyed (p. 3).
[His prophecy proved to be much more accurate than the proponents of desegregation (v. “A Review of The South and Christian Ethics,” “A Review of the Negro Revolution in America,” and “Review of Segregation and Desegregation” all by Thomas Allen). School integration did lead to the destruction of what most Southerners valued. Integration led to the flooding the country with non-White immigrants and aliens, both legal and illegal. Whites will soon be a minority in their own country. It led to the war on poverty, war on drugs, war on terrorism, among other wars, and the civil rights movement. These lead to the welfare-warfare state and the police state where the movements and communications of every inhabitant are tracked. Integration has led to the Supreme Court, President, and Congress making the Constitution irrelevant.]
    [However, Martin was a poor prophet.] He writes, “Today [1957] it seems unlikely that desegregation will be accomplished in the Deep South in the foreseeable future” (p. 4). [He does not define “foreseeable future.” If he meant a decade, he was wrong. Within 10 years of his writing not only did school integration rule the South, so did integration of just about everything else. With the exception of small, scattered, irrelevant pockets of resistance, the South had surrendered unconditionally to the Communist led civil rights movement. With the fall of Lester Maddox in 1964 nearly all resistance ceased. Even Maddox had  mostly surrendered by the time he became governor in 1967.]
    Martin shows that the civil rights movement trumped the Constitution: “And in West Virginia when mothers picketed a desegregated school a judge said if they didn’t stop: “I’ll fill the jail until their feet are sticking out of the windows” (p. 5). [This example shows the utter contempt that this judge has for the First Amendment. In matters of race, most federal judges have the same attitude toward Whites.]
    Martin notes that most schools in the Border States desegregated in 1955 and 1956 without court orders and without incident (p. 5). [Later, the courts would order many of these school districts to integrate because not enough Blacks chose to attend White schools and almost no Whites chose to attend Black schools.]
    He also notes that many of the Black pupils in White schools sat in segregated classrooms (p. 5). [Courts would soon intervene and order classrooms to be integrated.]
    Martin remarks that although schools in Northern cities were desegregated de jure, they were segregated de facto (p. 6). [In most areas in the North, school districts were drawn along neighborhood lines. As Blacks and Whites lived in different neighborhoods, they attended neighborhood schools, which were segregated. Courts ended this practice by ordering forced busing. As a result, protests by Whites in the North were often as violent, if not more so, than what had occurred earlier in the South.]
    As Martin points out, many Southerners saw the Supreme Court’s decision to desegregate schools as destroying the Southern way of life. It went far beyond schools and entered every aspect of life. Martin gives this description:
To Southerners the Court’s decision seemed to do far more than break down segregation in the schools; it rent the seamless garment of apartness. Apartness of the races is a black and white thread woven into the fabric of Southern life — its social, political, sexual, cultural, economic life. Apartness is like a vine which, rooted in slavery, never uprooted but merely twisted by the Civil War, flourished and by now entangles everyone and everything in a suffocating net from which no one, white or black, knows how to extricate himself. Its manifestations have an infinite richness and complexity (p. 7).
    He adds that in the South Blacks and Whites segregate mostly because of custom. Very few laws prescribed segregation (p. 7).
    Martin describes some of the actions taken by some Southern States in response to the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision. They included denying funds to desegregated schools, tuition grants to children to attend private schools, and empowering school boards to assign Blacks and Whites to different schools but not based on race. The South sought to fight the Supreme Court through lawful resistance (pp. 7-8). [Such an attempt was doomed to fail. Long ago the States, in disregard of the Constitution, had acceded to the Supreme Court the ultimate authority to decide what was lawful. Only the most naive would expect the Supreme Court to decide against itself. This resistance only delayed the inevitable.]
    Martin describes the Citizens’ Councils as follows:
From the outset, the Citizens’ Council movement forswore violence. It proposed to prevent desegregation by legal means. It sought the leadership in every town of only the most respected citizens. It avoided entanglement with former Klan leaders. It eschewed secrecy; its meetings were held in downtown public buildings and were open to the public (though policy was likely to be made at smaller private meetings in the leaders’ homes). Thus the Councils sought to enlist the support of professional men, clergymen, politicians, business leaders and the middle class (pp. 13-14).
[In short, Citizens’ Councils were not nefarious. They sought to counterbalance organizations like the NAACP to protect the White man’s interest — something most Whites have no desire to do today.]
    Martin discusses the spread of the Councils and some of the key members and their thoughts. He gives a synopsis of Judge Brady’s Black Monday, which reflects the thoughts and positions of the Councils (pp. 16ff). Judge Brady identifies the amalgamation of the races as the ultimate goal of desegregation. Brady declares, “The Negro proposes to breed up his inferior intellect and whiten his skin and ‘blow out the light’ in the white man’s brain and muddy his skin” (p. 19). [Marriage statistics support Brady’s claim of Blacks lusting to interbreed with Whites. Interracial White marriages increased 1518 percent between 1960 and 2010 while interracial Black marriages increased 1353 percent during that time. In 2010, 3 percent of White marriages were interracial compared with 0.14 percent in 1960. In 2010 14 percent of Black marriages were interracial compared with 1.65 percent in 1960. (V. “Interracial Marriages” by Thomas Allen.)] Martin continues his discussion of Black Monday by giving some of Brady’s solutions (p. 20). These solutions included:
    1.    creating a state to which all American Negroes could be shipped [American Negroes should be given an independent country so that they can be free of the White man’s rule and to thwart the White man’s self-destruction.];
    2.    adopting constitutional amendments to strengthen states’ rights [This is one of his best recommendations.];
    3.    electing Supreme Court justices and the attorney general by popular vote;
    4.    establishing qualifications for Supreme Court justices;
    5.    abolishing public schools if all else fails and refunding taxes to White parents to finance private education while letting Blacks educate themselves [Public education ought to be abolished in any event. The primary purpose of public schooling is to indoctrinate children to become obedient servants of the ruling elite. Why should anyone be forced to have his children, or anyone else’s children, taught doctrines and dogmas with which he disagrees?];
    6.    employing economic boycotts by Whites ceasing hiring Blacks and shipping the resulting destitute Blacks to the North [If all Blacks in the South were shipped to the North and put in the neighborhoods of the ruling elite, the Supreme Court would quickly rule that not only is school segregation required by the Constitution, but geographical segregation is also required.].
    Martin continues describing the growth and objectives of the Citizens’ Councils (pp. 21ff). He quotes from a leaflet titled The Citizens’ Council by Patterson. In it Patterson writes:
Maybe your community has had no racial problems! This may be true; however, you may not have a fire, yet you maintain a fire department. You can depend on one thing: The NAACP, aided by alien influences, bloc-vote-seeking politicians and left-wing do-gooders, will see that you have a problem in the near future. The Citizens’ Council is the South's answer to the mongrelizers. We will not be integrated (p. 22)!
[Patterson was both right and wrong. He was wrong in that the mongrelizers did force the South to integrate. He was right about the NAACP and its allies bringing the integration-Negro-“civil rights” problem to the North. Within a decade Blacks were rioting, looting, and burning throughout the North and in the West.]
    Moreover, “Patterson wrote: ‘If we are bigoted, prejudiced, un-American, etc., so were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and our other illustrious forebears who believed in segregation’” (p. 22). [Because Washington and Jefferson were segregationists and, worse, slave owners, Blacks and self-hating Whites are trying to eradicate their names from the country. Buildings and streets named after them, and other segregationists and slave owners, are being renamed. Soon the name of a state and the capital of the country may be changed because they are named after the slave owning Washington.]
    In his leaflet, Patterson writes, “If we submit to this unconstitutional, judge-made integration law, the malignant powers of atheism, communism and mongrelization will surely follow . . .” (p. 22). [Again, Patterson proves to be a much greater prophet than the integrationists. The United States have been de-Christianized. The ten planks of the Communist Manifesto have been mostly implemented. Mongrelization is accelerating.]
    Patterson stated that if Southerners stood united against the integrationists they could defeat them. [Southerners did not stand. Too many followed the quisling and scalawag political, business, academic, and religious leaders who betrayed the South and the White race to the Communist led civil rights movement. (V. “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen.)] To this unconditional surrender and integration-is-inevitable-and-we-can-do-nothing-about-it attitude, Patterson retorted:
Our Southland by every material line of reasoning should already be a land of mulattoes. Eighty years ago our unconquerable ancestors were beaten, in poverty and degradation, unable to vote and under the heel of Negro occupation troops. . . . Are we less than they? We are the same blood; white blood that was kept pure for you for 6,000 years by white men (p. 24).
[A major handicap that Whites face is that they are unable to unite like Blacks. Blacks are effective at uniting and acting en masse with voting, boycotts, etc. Whites seem completely unable to unite even save their race or country from mongrelization. The White ruling elite, who place the acquisition of wealth and power and serving Lucifer above all else, manipulate Blacks to act en masse to advance the causes of the ruling elite while they keep Whites divided. Thus, they are destroying the White race so that they can bring down America, Western Civilization, and Christianity.]
    Besides the Citizens’ Councils, Martin identifies several other pro-Southern organizations: the American States’ Rights Association, the National Association for the Advancement of White People, the National Association for the Preservation of the White Race, the Southerners, the Heritage Crusade, and the Southern Gentlemen (p. 26).
    Martin describes some of the tactics used by the Citizens’s Councils to forestall integration. Exposure was chief among them. Another was economic boycotts (pp 28ff). [Blacks would later use economic boycotts much more effectively than Whites ever did in the South.]
    [Just as President Obama’s rhetoric increase gun sales,] so did the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision increased the membership of the Ku Klux Khan (p. 32).
    Martin identifies some criticism levied against the Citizens’ Councils. They included displacing lawful authority of the courts, silencing their critics in churches, denying credit to their opponents, using economic boycotts, and driving people who disagreed with them out of the State (p. 32). [When Blacks organizations use the same or similar tactics to advance their cause, which are often nefarious, they are heralded as heroes overcoming oppression. When Southerners used them to overcome the oppression of despotic, tyrannical government, they were condemned.]
    Martin presents Governor Folsom of Alabama as a scalawag. [Most likely, he does so unintentionally.] Folsom sided with the despotic, tyrannical U.S. government in its war against the South and against the Whites of Alabama. He sided with the NAACP and against the Citizens’ Councils (pp. 37-38). [Martin does not state that Folsom acted so bluntly or overtly.  Nevertheless, this is the essence of what Folsom did. Perhaps Folsom’s appeasing action was behind the Communists and the NAACP and other Black organizations choosing Montgomery for their bus boycott (v. “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen). Moreover, they could foment riots by enticing the police to batter protesting Blacks to gain sympathy and support — especially from reconstructionist Yankees who wanted to destroy the South and rebuild it in their own image (v.  “The First Reconstruction” and “The Second Reconstruction” by Thomas Allen). They got the riots.]
    Martin discusses the incident of a federal court ordering the University of Alabama to admit Autherine Lucy, a Negro, and how it greatly increased the membership of the Citizens’ Council (pp. 38-39).
    In Chapter 2, Martin discusses the poor Black farming communities of Clarendon County, South Carolina. He contrasts these Negro communities with the small town of Summerton, which is inhabited mostly by Whites. However, Negroes also live in this town where they own and operate their business (pp. 43-45). Then he discusses the involvement of Negroes of this county in a lawsuit that lead to the Supreme Court’s desegregation decisions of 1954 and 1955 (v. next paragraph) and some of the court’s proceedings and its decision. Next he describes Clarendon County, life there, and the schools. The three Black schools are newer than the one White school (pp. 52-62). Finally he discusses the reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision, which was to resist it. He also describes the response of Blacks and their attempt to overcome the economic boycott. The desegregation decision greatly strained race relation (pp. 61-77).
    This lawsuit was combined with several other similar lawsuits and brought before the Supreme Court. Thurgood Marshall of the NAACP represented the Negro plaintiffs (p. 48). [However, Martin fails to mention Marshall’s Communist leanings and his hatred of Whites (v. “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen).] Martin notes that in parts of the South the desegregation decision would force many White children to attend Black schools (p. 50). [This situation contrasts sharply with the common perception and propaganda of the integrationists of that time that only a few Blacks would attend White schools. Integrationists seldom mentioned Whites being forced to attend Black schools. To his credit Martin is one of the few who does.]
    Martin quotes federal Judge John Parker as saying:
Whatever may have been the views of this court as to the law when the case was originally before us, it is our duty now to accept the law as declared by the Supreme Court. Having said this, it is important that we point out exactly what the Supreme Court has decided and what it has not decided in this case. It has not decided that the federal courts are to take over or regulate the public schools of the states. It has not decided that the states must mix persons of different races in the schools or must require them to attend schools or must deprive them of the right of choosing the schools they attend. What it has decided, and all that it has decided, is that a state may not deny any person on account of race the right to attend any school that it maintains. The Constitution, in other words, does not require integration. It does not forbid such segregation as occurs as the result of voluntary action. It merely forbids the use of governmental power to enforce segregation (pp. 53-54).
[One wonders what kind of drug this judge was on when he made this absurd statement. The Supreme Court would make clear within a few years that Parker was wrong. Federal courts would soon “take over and regulate” public schools, even to the point of levying local taxes and appropriating local funds. Moreover, federal courts would soon decree “that the states must mix persons of different races in the schools.” The Constitution may not require integrating, but federal courts certainly did. By 1865 the Constitution had ceased being the law of the land. Edicts, whims, of the U.S. government, primarily through the Supreme Court, had become the supreme law of the land. When parents did not voluntarily choose to integrate in sufficient numbers to satisfy some federal judge, the judge with the backing of the Supreme Court forced integration. To the surprise of and against the wishes of many Northerners, federal courts even forced integration of Northern schools. At least some poetic justice came out of the integration movement. Most Northerners were only too happy to impose integration in the South. However, when the monster that they had fed and encouraged turned to devour them, they strongly objected.]
    Martin notes that most Blacks in Clarendon County earned their living in agriculture, mostly working in cotton fields. However, mechanization eliminated many of these jobs. Moreover, the federal farm program that drastically reduced the acreage used for growing cotton cost many Blacks their jobs — probably more than mechanization (pp. 58-59).
    In a small gathering of Whites and Blacks, Reverend Henry Rankin said, “. . . about the fallacy of trying to get your rights by going to court. That’s not the way to get your social rights. It always leaves a bad taste in the mouth, no matter who wins” (p. 65). [Unfortunately, too few Negroes heeded his wise words.]
    Martin reveals the naiveness of far too many Southerners during this era (p. 72) [a naiveness that unfortunately still exists]. [They actually thought that federal judges would listen to reason and not impose integration. They failed to realize that the ruling elite wanted integration. Whites were going to integrate regardless. If Whites did not voluntarily integrate, the courts would force them to integrate, and the courts did. Whatever Whites or even Blacks thought about this matter was irrelevant.]
    Martin quotes Reverend Richburg, a Black minister. Richburg believed that White opposition to integration based on mongrelization was just an excuse. He said, “They pretend we’re just like a lion, going to jump on a white girl and rape her. Or going to marry her. It wouldn’t happen” (p. 77). [Unfortunately for Richburg, crime statistics (v. “The Dirty War: America’s Race War” by Thomas Allen) and marriage statistics (v. “Interracial Marriages” by Thomas Allen) prove him wrong.] [Like most Blacks,] Richburg accused Whites of prejudice (p. 77). [Prejudice as defined by pro-integrationist T.B. Matson means “a prejudgment, or judgment not based on knowledge or experience. It implies an opinion based on insufficient or irrelevant data.” This is a good definition. Having lived, worked, and associated with Negroes for more than 400 years, no group knows the Negro better than the Southerner. He has more than 400 years of experience with and knowledge of the Negro. Whatever caused Southerners to adopt segregation, it was not racial prejudice as Richburg surmise. However, racial prejudice may in part explain why sanctimonious Northerners, who are much less familiar with the Negro, segregated racially by custom.]
    Richburg was right about one thing: Whites in the South would not abolish public schools. If they did, it would be short-lived (p. 76). [In spite of all the bombast to the contrary, Southerners would choose the public school (public indoctrination) system over freeing themselves from governmental indoctrination. They chose to have their children indoctrinated with the “virtues” of integration and mongrelization among other perversions like the homosexual agenda. They chose to have their children taught a new religion instead of Christianity. Their children would now be taught to worship Martin Luther King and the Negro race. (In Islamic terms, the Negro is God and King is his prophet.) Moreover, they chose to suppress freedom of speech for the sake of political correctness (v. http://tcallenco.weebly.com)]

Copyright © 2016 by Thomas Coley Allen 

Part 2 

More articles on social issues 

Friday, September 30, 2016

Constitutional Money

Constitutional Money
Thomas Allen

    The April issue of The Gold Standard had an article about the governor of Arizona vetoing a bill that would have treated gold as money. When the governor vetoed this bill, he violated his oath of office to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. Likewise, all State and federal officeholders who stand in the way of gold being money have violated their oath of office. The Constitution recognizes only two things as money: gold and silver.
    Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of the Constitution prohibits the States from making anything except gold and silver a tender for payment of debt. Therefore, States cannot constitutionally make federal reserve notes legal payment for debt. That any State has to consider making gold money is absurd and ridiculous and shows how far that the United States have degenerated.
    Moreover, for Congress to declare federal reserve notes to be legal tender money is also unconstitutional. In spite of what judges who base their rulings on political expediency instead of the Constitution may declare, Congress has no authority to issue paper money. Moreover, Congress has no authority declare anything legal tender; it can only declare what it will accept in payment of taxes. Under the Constitution, only States may declare an item to be legal tender. Thus, as the States may only make gold and silver legal tender, only gold and silver can be legal tender.
    Furthermore, Congress may not constitutionally delegate powers that it does not have. Thus, it may not authorize the federal reserve banks to issue legal tender notes. (Also, the Constitution grants Congress no power to create a bank. Therefore, it has no constitutional authority to create the Federal Reserve System.)
    The original draft of the Constitution contained a clause that allowed Congress to emit bills of credit (to issue paper money). The Constitutional Convention removed this clause and it was not part of the Constitution adopted by the States. When the Convention removed this clause, it was convinced that it had denied Congress the power to issue paper money and making paper money legal tender.
    Some argue that the prohibition against States making anything except gold and silver legal tender does not apply to the U.S. government. However, based on a Supreme Court ruling involving the Fourteenth Amendment, the restrictions that the Constitution places on the States are also placed on the U.S. government.[1] Therefore, since the Constitution prohibits the States from making anything  gold and silver a tender for payment of debt, it also prohibits the U.S. government for making anything but gold and silver a tender for payment of debt.
    The Constitution mentions three units of measure: the dollar, mile, and year. Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 grants Congress the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. When the Constitution was adopted, people understood that the dollar meant the weight of silver in a Spanish milled dollar. Thus, when Congress regulates the value of money, it finds the weight of silver in a Spanish milled dollar and declares the U.S. dollar to be a monetary unit that contains this weight of silver. If Congress may change the well-understood definition of the dollar on a whim, it may likewise change the well-understood definition of a year from being one revolution around the sun to be 100 revolutions — and in effect give its members life terms.
    From the adoption of the Constitution until President Roosevelt suspended the gold standard, bank notes, which is what Federal Reserve notes are, were never legal tender. Only after the gold standard was abandoned did Federal Reserve notes become legal tender. The 1934 series of Federal Reserve notes was made legal tender for all debts, but it promised redemption in lawful money. The previous series, the 1928 series, was not legal tender and promised redemption in gold. The 1963 series declared itself to be legal tender with no promise of redemption in anything.
    Whenever a State considers anything, including Federal Reserve notes, other than gold or silver to be legal tender for the payment of debt, it is acting unconstitutionally. (A more detailed argument on the unconstitutionality of paper legal tender money is found in Reconstruction of America’s Monetary and Banking System: A Return to Constitutional Money by Thomas Allen.)

Endnote
Martin A. Larson, The Federal Reserve and Our Manipulated Dollar, p. 269. Paul Bakewell, 13 Curious Errors About Money, pp. 92-93.


Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money