The Tangled Threads of Our Times

George Rebane

Given the 25jun15 SCOTUS ruling on ACA, I had to rush off a post on it since RR's readership will not sit idly by and let an occasion like this pass without extensive discussion and debate.  And this happening may even fit into these thoughts that I’ll try to weave together on equally impactive geo-political goings on.

William Galston, left-leaning observer and columnist picks up on RR’s ‘beyond the tipping point’ assertion in his ‘Modern Autocrats Are on the March’.  Therein he cites David Clark of UK’s Henry Jackson Society who argues that “the great wave of global democratic change that began in the mid-1970s—doubling the number of electoral democracies in the space of three decades—has come to an end. Instead, we are now confronted with a powerful authoritarian backlash that is reversing some of these gains and encouraging a resurgence of anti-democratic ideas.”

This according to many of us, including Galston, who have observed geo-political maneuverings over the last decade or so makes clear that while “the rise of violent Islamism has transfixed the world, another, graver threat—21st-century autocracy—is gathering strength. In the long run, it is sophisticated autocrats, not bearded zealots, who pose the greater menace to democracy.”  By this is meant that these sophisticated autocrats are not some conservative or progressive knuckle-draggers wanting to return to yesteryear, but instead are elites who take into account globalization, rising prosperity and digital communications, and, according to Clark, they have developed “new techniques of control and new justifications for monopolizing power that enable autocratic leaders to resist pressure for democratic change.”

As we know, democracy is not a naturally occurring form of governance, and pure democracy is now the established tool of would be tyrants as the enthusiastically swallowed preamble to tyranny.  Today these elites “adeptly manipulate the façade of democratic procedures” to “co-opt their countries’ rising middle-classes.”  This is most evident in the Asian autocracies that preach to their citizens their cultural exceptionalism in the expression and practice of their ‘Asian values’.  And I agree with Clark that “the rise of the new authoritarianism shows that democracy is not the inevitable outgrowth of modernization and economic development.”  To confirm this we need look no further than our own shores.

Columbia University’s Alexander Cooley puts a bow around the entire new authoritarian movement, observing the use of “post 9/11 counter-terrorism norms to suppress domestic dissent.”   An effective means toward this future is in their creation of “a network of pseudo-NGOs including false election monitors.”  And the more the west withdraws from its awareness, its investigation and reporting of these happenings, the more certainly its own countries (of the EU, North America, New Zealand, Australia, …) will be the inevitable targets of such enlarging authoritarian orders.  And most of those who are paying attention know that we are already well on our way (again consider how our government has transformed toward the authoritarian model).

A contributing socio-economic factor that will enable these autocrats is the public’s increasing awareness of the rise of systemic unemployment.  Popular outlets like The Atlantic are now publishing comprehensive reports and analyses with titles like ‘A World Without Work’.  These articles are full of numbers that tell the tale of fewer and fewer workers at companies with huge market valuations bringing in revenues that dwarfed the manufactories and service bureaus of yesterday with ten times as many employees.  And they cite well-known officials, executives, and economists who some years back thought that warnings of machines reducing the net jobs available to humans were a “Luddite fallacy”; they are now changing their minds in droves.

Nevertheless, what we can bet the ranch on is that masses of un/der-employed will be extremely receptive to political demogauges of the autocratic bent who promise them a new order in which everyone will work, and everyone will once more be relevant.   And again, we see it happening today, right here in River City.

The final goad to trading everything for security comes from Islam and its radical elements making progress – especially in the face of now obvious lies from the Obama administration – in the goal to set up its much awaited caliphate starting in the Middle East and Africa.  For the rest of us who prefer western civilization, the question has been and remains ‘what are the sentiments of the millions of Muslims who already legally live among us?’  The record of their acts, actions, and speech have not been a comfort, and their aired promises through the internet and from their state sponsors do not portend well – it will still be ‘Accept Allah, or die!’

So what are the sentiments of, say, American Muslims?  This question is polled and studied only at its margins, even by reputed polling companies like Pew Research Center.  These attitudes are highly in flux with the continuous stream of news about the latest bombings, beheadings, mass executions, and territorial gains by ISIS and the Taliban.  But for such an important and ongoing inter-civilizational conflict, the polling is surprisingly sparse and conducted with softball questionnaires that substantially miss the mark.  However, one not too well known right-leaning think tank, Center for Security Policy, has dared to step into that breech and ask at least some of the right questions that concern the rest of us.

The CSP poll conducted by The Polling Company should raise more than eyebrows in America.  You can read the entire report and also the poll’s questionnaire here.  A summary of the main findings of America’s Muslim sentiments and attitudes include –  

• a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”

• More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

• nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.” • Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

Pew Research reports that there are three million Muslims in the US, or almost 1% of our population.  Even if the above poll results are even approximately on the mark, these findings reveal that there are hundreds of thousands of Muslims in our midst with values and mores that are radically different from our own.  And as we have seen, here and elsewhere in the world, Islam is not a religion of peace, never has been, and today according to its leading thinkers and theologians, Islam demands a harsh allegiance of all followers of Allah.

The violence perpetrated by the spontaneous radicalization of one or two Muslims in a larger population is well known here and around the world.  But the most worrisome absence is that there is no visible hew and cry from the so-called moderate Muslims in America to continually denounce the violence and civil variances of their zealous brethren.  All is quiet on the western front, until … .  Meanwhile, our leadership in Washington tells us a steady stream of fairy tales about Islam’s nature, objectives, and reach.

So to bring it full circle, what happens when the next jihadist attack again kills thousands of Americans?  We have in place the legal machinery to move the country firmly into an authoritarian form of governance from which exits, even if they exist, are unknown.  And to make sure that no indigenous protest by Americans will be successful, I invite you to monitor Jade Helm (q.v.) which starts in about two weeks.

 

Comments

[Account Deleted]

I'm sure quite a few of our readers have seen this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/hadrian-the-robot-bricklayer-can-build-a-whole-house-in-two-days-10347229.html
Bernie Sanders et al, have no answer for this other than to want more govt controls to increase the costs of labor, which in turn, hasten the development of more automation.
One other major drum beat that will increase in volume and tempo is the disarming of the American citizen. When a community can't protect it's self from the mobs or whatever, it must fall in line with what ever armed authority exists, even if it's totalitarian. The largest blind spot the left (and many 'moderates') have is how quickly this country's social order can and will dissolve into mayhem and chaos.
Once the disorder sets in, the chimera of protection provided by the good intentions and perceived higher moral authority of the left will evaporate. Suddenly, the Koch bros won't be the left's biggest fear.

[George Rebane]

ScottO 853am - good catch Scott. Another reader just emailed me the piece on Hadrian the robot - yes, it's a'comin', just as sure as the sunrise tomorrow morning.

Now that more and more outlets are becoming aware of systemic unemployment fostered by pre-Singularity developments, I wonder when Washington will announce their awareness of it. They most certainly must know, else there is no need for the massive build-up of paramilitary constabularies and government agencies, and the surreptitious launch of the annual Jade Helm joint force exercises to suppress broad based armed resistance in America. Strange things are happening, while the Left's chorus admonishes us to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[Russ Steele]

Interesting times ahead. The LGBT community, at 3.8% of the population, has wrought major cultural changes on the US population. What happens when the Muslim population in the US reaches 3+% and they use the same tactics as the LGBT community to change our culture, forcing the adoption of sharia law in the US. It gets even more interesting when one considers that sharia law does not make any room for the existence of an LGBT population. More cultural clashes and blood in the streets. This will be a challenge for the left as they now support both the LGBT and Muslim communities, while actively encouraging Muslim immigration. Interesting time ahead.

[Jon]

Russ,
Your connecting some imaginery dots between the human rights gained by the LGBT community all the way to the future imposition of Sharia Law in the USA is why we shake our heads at the right and marvel at the irrational paranoia. Come on now.

[Todd Juvinall]

We on the right hake our heads in disbelief that libs like Jonnie can't connect the dots. Sad.

[Jon]

Yeah, but look on the bright side Todd. You guys won't be around when I start bowing to Mecca. Hey, maybe it will be OK after all.

[Todd Juvinall]

I have been discussing elsewher the SCOTUS decision and I just shake my head in disbelief in the ignorance of these people. They think there is a "exemption" in the decision for religions that don't abide. I said not that I can find and if I am incorrect straighten me out. Well here is what I found.

"Pages 32033 says this
Respect for sincere religious conviction has led voters and legislators in every State that has adopted same-sex marriage democratically to include accommodations for religious practice. The majority’s decision imposing same-sex marriage cannot, of course, create any such accommo-dations. The majority graciously suggests that religious believers may continue to “advocate” and “teach” their views of marriage. Ante, at 27. The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to “
exercise” religion.Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses."

[Todd Juvinall]

Pages 32 and 33

[Joe Koyote]

"What happens when the Muslim population in the US reaches 3+% and they use the same tactics as the LGBT community to change our culture, forcing the adoption of sharia law in the US."--

It is called acculturation and has occurred since the beginning of time.

ACCULTURATION. 1. : cultural modification of an individual, group, or people by adapting to or borrowing traits from another culture; also : a merging of cultures as a result of prolonged contact. Acculturation is also used to describe the results of contact between two or more different cultures; a new, composite culture emerges, in which some existing cultural features are combined, some are lost, and new features are generated. It is part of human social evolution.

Russ' assertion is using the propaganda ploy "slippery slope" or "snowball effect". Once the snowball starts to roll there will be no stopping it as it gets bigger and bigger. A type of fear tactic that has no basis in logic or truth and functions to try and persuade based on emotion rather than critical thought.
I guess the assumption is that if the US allows those evil Muslims to migrate here they will take over and force our women to wear burkas; total crap. A more likely scenario is that the Muslims will come here, open a 7-11 and become part of the middle class of small business owners and become way more Americanized than America will become Sharia. What is the point of such nonsensical rhetoric anyway other than to foment discontent?

[George Rebane]

By corroborating coincidence, yesterday's widely separated mass murders on three continents by ISIS celebrating the anniversary of declaring their caliphate underlines the Obama administration's lies about how we have the ragheads on the run. It reminds me of 1944-5 and Goebbel's nightly propaganda broadcasts in Nazi Germany in which he told us of the glorious Wehrmacht victories on both fronts. My dad explained the lie to me by pointing out on the map that the successive victories were ever closer to Germany. Here's a summary of yesterday's victories against ISIS.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/terror-on-three-continents-1435356187

Jon 1016am - Bingo! that's the spirit Jon that I (and others here) have been talking about - bowing to Mecca will probably be no worse and accepted with similar sanguinity as did the Germans bowing to Hitler in the 1930s. Given how widely spread is your sentiment, perhaps old age during these years really is a blessing.

[Todd Juvinall]

We saw the demise f the USSR almost overnight. We saw the demise of the Confederate Flag almost overnight. We see the demise of freedom of religion and speech this week. And we see the 2% squeaky wheel of homosexuals greased over the 98%. Anything can happen and it can happen quickly. Why do the liberals become the people in charge of the historical documents? So they can change them to suit their emotional needs and political agendas..

[Account Deleted]

from Joe the K:
"What is the point of such nonsensical rhetoric anyway other than to foment discontent?"
Yeah, what Joe says - clearly, those paranoid fools in Boston are just a bunch of scaredy-cats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Marathon_bombing
We're not talking hypothetical, Joe. We're reacting to reality. Not all Islamists are murderers, but as more and more come here we see a very large percentage are not acculturating. Did you read George's post? If that many don't think we should have equality under the law, then they are obviously not acculturating. Many of the mosques are collecting money for jihadists and sending out folks to recruit and talk up the need for Sharia law.

[Todd Juvinall]

Maybe JoeK should take his wife and move to Dearborn, Michigan. He could experience forst hand all those things he says we are paranoid about. His wife might not like it either. Ask the fellow whose head is on the fence pike in France JoeK. Just living his life, just like you here.

[Gregory]

Perhaps Koyoteman can point to a country where Sharia has been modified by acculturation. Peaceful coexistence with Presbylutheranism or Judaism as an equal, not one that requires submission.

Regarding the evolution of marriage, one might wonder what will happen to the laws regarding marriage between family members, 1st cousins or better, laws that evolved for traditional marriage due to the dangers of inbreeding:
http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-laws-regarding-marriages-between-first-cousi.aspx

Will 1st cousins who are gay be allowed to marry in that bastion of liberalism, Illinois, while leaving it illegal for traditional couples? What about marriage between siblings, whether genetic or legal? Or closer? Granddad and that hot granddaughter or grandson? Yes, farfetched, but limits will be tested.

One interesting unintended side effect of the gay marriage ruling; some companies that had domestic partner benefits available to employees are dropping the offer; want benefits? Get married.

[Todd Juvinall]

I just finished Ann Coulter's book called "Adios America" and it sure is something. The book has almost as many pages in the bibliography/refernces as the book itself. Anyway, she makes some interesting points that will be debated many times. The liberals are already calling her a racist of course, but she keeps on trucking.

Overall, her points are really being shown and proven by the incidents in the last week or so. I was surprised by her analysis of H1_B's and how Microsoft and the rest bring in people who end up not such good "citizens". The AG visa scam was also very enlightening.

I suggest everyone who is concerned about our culture and the importation of 1/4 of the total Mexican population (along with Central and South American millions), please read it and make your own conclusions. The parts where Mexican illegals murder and get away with it under Obama's policies is quite the eye opener. As are the Muslim's who like little girls and make slaves of their women along with "honor killings". Yep, Obama is bringing in the cream of the crop to destabilize America and its American culture. Hooray for diversity! NOT!

[George Rebane]

ToddJ 632pm - Thanks for the report Todd. One of our daughters texted me on the book yesterday, apparently she had just finished it and wanted to know whether I wanted to read it. I declined because of the similar messages I'm getting from people like Murray, Cowan, et al. But according to your report, maybe it's not all that similar in that she seems to be upping the ante on disclosures from the administration of our first post-American president.

I'd ask you to see if you can discover how much traction this book is getting among the Right, and then let us know. A nice piece on Dragon's Breath would be good.

[Todd Juvinall]

The book is number nine on the NYT bestseller's list. Her book is well documented and the policies of Obama and the left are exposed and easy to see.

[Jon]

Hey guys, is it going to be Sharia Law, or a nation dominated by Mexicans in the future? Very confused. But am quite sure a blonde TV personality has it covered in her book.

[Paul Emery]

Golly George, was it Obama who can be quoted as heralding "Mission Accomplished" ?

[George Rebane]

Jon 959pm - "a blonde TV personality" Oh my, my; are we pushing the envelope here?

PaulE 1017pm - I do think that Obama has given new definition to his 'Mission Accomplished' such that other such claims pale in comparison.

[Bill Tozer]

Did somebody say something about raising a flag? Perhaps macroeconomics is better suited for the GNP post, but if I say something briefly about microeconomics, the price of Conferate memorabilia just shot up.

A blond TV personality? What in the tarnation is going on here?? Old Mother Leary's Holy Cow. First Paul and now we have Jon stuck in his time machine going in reverse. Barbara Eden was blond and was a Jeanie. Oh, Master!!! Or perhaps Jon got his jollies off watching Charlie's Angels. Not too many blond male newscasters made it to the top. Hmmm. Oh, Jon from the john, how could you. Drooling over the young hot and stacked Barbara WaWa. I know, Daisy Duck was your first love. Or was that Daisy Duke from Hazzard County with the good ole General Lee outrunnin' Kooter.
Next stop, a visit to the Spiro T Agnew Vice Presidental library where all the juicy stuff on The Republican Capitalists Corporate System lies awaiting to reveal its dark secrets.

[Todd Juvinall]

Today's Bee has a article on the drought. There is a debate on immigration within the article. Should we slow the illegals or stop development for those that actually can buy a house? We are losing our minds.

[Bill Tozer]

Speaking of the unnatural state of democracy as a form of governance, you got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.

http://www.vox.com/2015/6/27/8856297/greece-referendum-euro

[Bill Tozer]

And speaking of the tangled thread of our times with 3% ragheads and the 2 point barely something vocal homosexual community, imagine what power these tiny minorities could yield if they joined forces. The possibilities are stunning.

http://www.vox.com/2015/6/28/8857415/cnn-isis-dildo-gay-pride-flag

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Bill Tozer | 28 June 2015 at 07:01 AM

OK I have to admit it Bill, this may be the funniest story of the day.

[George Rebane]

Re BillT's 701am - Given Islam's formal view of and existential reactions to anything homosexual, does that community now stand targeted for retributive attacks - bombings of gay parades and clubs come to mind? Given recent polls, I have no doubt that in the US alone there are thousands, if not tens of thousands, of our Muslims who are contemplating vengeance. And yet none here would deny gays their First Amendment right to express extremely disdainful thoughts about Islam, especially of the murderous raghead kind. Another multi-cultural thread that will tangle others.

[Todd Juvinall]

We already know that homosexuality is a death sentence under "Sharia" law. Adultery is also a death sentence. If "Sharia" is enforced in America there will be no one left! Well except the purely religious head choppers. LOL!

[Jon]

So, amidst all the unhealthy paranoia, any solutions guys? Interview all American Muslims and deport the ones that don't pass your test?
Or maybe recruit all the tens of thousands of Dylan Roof type racists holed up and armed all over America and use them to counter Muslims?

What is the solution guys?

[Bill Tozer]

The solution, Jon, is to lock them all up in a room filled with 72 fat, ugly, hairy palmed pimply faced homosexual male virgins. That will change their tune.

[Bill Tozer]

Jon may be on to something. Since the election of our first post-America post-racial President, it's cool to stone women and be a Muslim....just like in the old days.

https://www.facebook.com/Protectingourconstitution/photos/a.142565562564914.31832.123123377842466/425700560918078/?type=3&theater

I purposely omitted calling Obama our first Black President. That title was taken by Bill Clinton years ago. Judging by Bill's unsatisified needs, Hillary may just be our first Lesbian President. Interesting times, bra.

[Bill Tozer]

Jon @ 0921. Jon, finally and at last you are talking some good stuff. We need to turn those gun totting good ole white boys loose onthe Members of The Religion of Peace here in the Homeland. Use 'em for target practice. No need to kill 'em. In fact that would be counter productive if they were sent directly to the 72 fine young lesbo maidens. No, just wing them to make 'em more agreeable to interrogation. Maybe threaten to send them to an Egpytian jail to enjoy enhanced interrogation techniques. Ah, phooey. Just wing 'em and send them off to the cheery confines of the Eyptian holding cells just for fun. Eliminate the threat part. I know them bush rats prefer to have nothing to do with pork, but I for one love it when they squeal like a pig. Music to my ears.
If a stray bullet accidentally hits one in the rear, then no harm no foul. Consider it a Get Out Of Jail Free card. Give them a pass. Heck, VP shot a lawyer in the ass and it enchanted his credibility and made him a hero. Guess when there are no Dems, Libs, Pinkos, Socialists, Ragheads, or media personnel around, shoot a lawyer in the buttocks. And Dick proved his bi-partisanship by shooting a Republican lawyer in the cheeks at that.
Rock and Roll and Rodeo are synonymous. Less talk, more action is what we lack here.

[Steven Frisch]

The solution is to treat all people, of all races and religions, all national origins and ethnicities, all sexes and sexual preferences, purple, green and blue, the same under the law.

That is, enforce the Constitution as it is and has been amended, specifically in this case the equal protection clause.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

If someone stones someone to death they have committed murder, if they shoot someone because of their ethnicity they have committed murder. if they discriminate against someone because of their religion, be it Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, or lack of religion, it is the same.

All people live under the rule of law and the people can change the law through due process.

[Gregory]

"Or maybe recruit all the tens of thousands of Dylan Roof type racists holed up and armed all over America"

The hard left seems to have a pathological need to believe such things.

[Todd Juvinall]

Looks to me like the only losers in America are the white middle class. Those family oriented people working two jobs and trying to live their lives without all the interference from people like jonnie and Frisch. Alas, they are forced to swallow the liberal pablum and told to take it. Won't last too long.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 11:18 AM

First Todd, let's agree to be the first to lead by the 'new rules' George has intimated and agree to not personalize this discussion.

Second, I am wondering how you think the 'white middle class' (as opposed to any other segment of the middle class) is damaged by application of the equal protection clause, or by freedom of religion, or by the SCOTUS decision on marriage.

I believe it may be possible to make a cogent case based on economics that the 'middle class' is damaged by the Affordable care Act, although I could cite data that shows it has been a huge net economic benefit for the middle class as a whole, but on the other elects of this weeks groundbreaking decisions I don;t see it.

On the feared implementation of Sharia in the United States I can't see it either, because many elements of Sharia would be contrary to American jurisprudence.

[Todd Juvinall]

SBC will probably be the first non-profit to adopt Sharia Law in Truckee and the eastern Sierra. What a hoot! And you will be a Iman! LOL!

[George Rebane]

Re the 'radical Muslim' question, I would ask readers to consider FDR's decision concerning Americans of Japanese descent during WW2. I think that SteveF's 1109am counsel is the correct one to follow from the gitgo (even though we already pay extra-constitutional deference to Muslims), and that's the easy answer. The hard part comes if/when America begins to suffer incidents of magnitude and frequency such as in Africa and the Middle East. I will return to this in a future post.

[Todd Juvinall]

I think maybe the sci-fi movie, "Alien Nation" from the late 80's might just come true. Aliens came and were accepted into he culture and then things started to change. Pretty soon you could not recognize the place as the previous residents tried to get them assimilated but failed. Maybe there are people's on the planet that are not a good fit here? If the immigration system was on moratorium for say twenty years, maybe we could save the American culture and values from this influx pf "diversity"?

George W. Bush wanted to bring western style democratic government to the Middle East and it has been rejected. Why would we want to accept a lot of those people who rejected that?

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 28 June 2015 at 11:09 AM

Thank you George....nice modeling.

I believe that if the United States began to see an uptick in Islamic fundamentalist terror from within it would be perfectly appropriate to increase the law enforcement response including domestic surveillance, special units designed to root out terrorism and prosecute criminals, and pre-emptive responses, such as hardening certain facilities where acts of terrorism could severely disrupt our economy or put significant number of people at risk.

Such a response should be supported by corresponding increases in court capacity to consider and process requests and all the other trappings of due process. Due process protects us all. It is even more important that due process be followed when the source of the terror is domestic.

I would not afford all of the same due process considerations to foreign initiated acts of terror. For example, FISA courts for acts by identified terror organizations initiating action from outside the US but attacking targets inside the US are warranted.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 11:45 AM

In the interest of modeling on this thread I am just going to ignore that and I hope everyone else will too.

[Gregory]

Steve, yes, feel free to ignore Todd's Sharia snark.

Pyramiding, diverting money withheld for payroll taxes into your pockets is a fraudulent practice... yes or no?

Did you pay back every penny or did the IRS cut you a break? Yes, this is an obnoxious question but since you've used an implied 'no' as justification to call me names which are not complimentary, here we are.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Gregory | 28 June 2015 at 01:26 PM

So, I paid back every single solitary red cent of principle, including all interest and penalties accrued before beginning my payment plan, and this is the last time I will answer this question. There is nothing I can or will do to convince or prove this to you. It is none of your business at this point. It was all over and done with years ago.

Now, for some housekeeping.....George do you want these people to infect this thread with the same nonsense that has occurred on every other thread or do you want to draw the line for discussing issues in a rational format? What do you want for your blog?

How about all the other dear readers? What do you think?

[Gregory]

Bad cut and paste... a redo...

Pyramiding, diverting money withheld for payroll taxes into your pockets is a fraudulent practice... yes or no?

Yes, this is an obnoxious question but since you've used an implied 'no' as justification to call me names which are not complimentary, here we are.

Second, did you pay back every penny or did the IRS cut you a break?

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Gregory | 28 June 2015 at 01:38 PM

See response above....in honor of George's rules, end of subject.

[Todd Juvinall]

Uh oh, the libs want to makes the rules here.

Regarding Sharia. Since the SCOTUS makes up new laws and regulations to suit themselves, undermining our trust in the law and the legal system and truth we had once had. I say, what is the problem tossing the Muslims into concentration camps like FDR did. We are at war with them are we not? It was good enough for FDR, the revered wartime President of Americas, why isn't it good enough now?

Immigration should be stopped for twenty years or more while the ones here can assimilate, speak English and live and work within our American system (rule of law and capitalism). Of course, now that the SCOTUS has become our real "Congress", I am unclear what they would create for a law about this. Probably make it a "right" to sneak in. Nothing would surprise me.

[Todd Juvinall]

Regarding the "packback". Don't believe you. Produce the documents.

[Gregory]

That's spelled "principal", Steve.

Got it... no interest incurred after you signed the deal. A much better deal than our young get on student loans made by the feds but I'm sure it was an effective motivation to sign.

Now, back to the main question... a fraudulent practice according to the IRS... yes or no?

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 01:46 PM

Here is your chance George.......took all of 4 minutes.

[George Rebane]

***************************************
***************************************
OK, the comment rules posted here -

http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2015/06/administrivia-a-requiem-for-mudballs.html

are now in effect. Play nice.
***************************************
***************************************

[Todd Juvinall]

Post the documents at my blog. You just posted my comments from there on Pelline's so I know you come and read it. Just copy or scan and send them to my blog. Simple. Then nothing more needs to be said here.

I also got that lib nuance in the claim for payment. Total BS.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 01:45 PM

"We are at war with them are we not?"

We are at war with who? Afghanistan? Iraq? Syria? Libya?

Are we at war with a religion without a specific state? Only certain portions of that religion or all of that religion?

Did we declare war under either the power of Congress or the War Powers Act of 1973? If so whom did we declare war on?

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Gregory | 28 June 2015 at 01:49 PM

here is your second chance George....7 minutes.

[Todd Juvinall]

I seem to recall Al Queda declared war on us and now Islamic State.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 01:53 PM

Third chance George...11 minutes.

[George Rebane]

SteveF 1242pm - Not sure I understand your use of "modeling".

Re Greg's 149pm and my 151pm; I believe that 149pm < 151pm.

Gregory 202pm - what has that got to do with this post's topic? Please take this to the sandbox, and make sure people know who is being asked the question. Not everyone follows your exchanges in detail.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 01:55 PM

But Al Queda and the Islamic State are not nations. Can we declare war on a movement?

[Gregory]

Reading the excellent new policy I believe the following question meets and exceeds the new reality:

Pyramiding, diverting money withheld for payroll taxes into your pockets is a fraudulent practice according to the IRS... yes or no?

[George Rebane]

StevenF 200pm - I believe we can. We declared war on Communism, and probably other -isms which we proactively attacked, assaulted, prohibited, and generally attempted to diminish their effect on us.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: George Rebane | 28 June 2015 at 01:55 PM

Re: the 'model' question:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/model
"5. One serving as an example to be imitated or compared: a model of decorum. See Synonyms at ideal."

Re: your 1:49pm < 1:51 pm, I was counting from when you posted the rules as a new post, but in the interest of comity let's just call it 1:51 pm :)

[Gregory]

Sorry George, with the small tablet I'm using i thought this was the sandbox.

[Todd Juvinall]

Red China's communists are a small percentage of the total population but they are in charge. They sent hundreds of thousands of their own citizens into North Korea to attack the Americans and UN forces in the early fifties. Now since most of those fighters China conscripted were not communists but just peasants that makes the issue of war with a state kind of problematic (a good lib term).

Al Queda and Islamic State are infecting many countries and we now see Tunisia and France attacked this week. The Islamic states that harbor the head choppers are subject to the Bush Doctrine. So yes, we can go getum. And their immigrants to America would be placed under the same scrutiny as FDR did to the Japanese.

Regarding this new term "modeling". Seems to me to be another phony baloney use of a good word for liberal shenanigans. I like modeling by attractive women mtself.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 28 June 2015 at 02:31 PM

It never even occurred to me that the fact that some words in the English language have multiple meanings and that analysis of the context might be required to understand which meaning was intended would pose a problem.

[George Rebane]

StevenF 357pm - I plead a little calcification on my part when you used modelING to mean creating a reusable template of rules - a perfectly correct use with the ING appendage. 'Model' itself would not have confused me as a label for a template (physical, verbal, mathematical), but for me modeling had always meant either creating math/computer models, or people showing off new attire to potential buyers. Silly me.

But on another soapbox, I am a devoted advocate of extending the language and minimizing the use of multi-meaning words. In technical fields we have done so for years with great profit.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: George Rebane | 28 June 2015 at 02:03 PM

George, we have declared war on drugs and poverty as well, but metaphorical 'wars' seem to be outside the intent of the Congressional powers or the War Powers Act on 1973.

I think the declaration of the War on Terror immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks poses some serious questions of international and national law.

George W. Bush declared the "War on Terror" on September 20, 2001. At that time, according to both Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, we did not know who had perpetrated the 9-11 attacks, we had strong suspicion but not enough proof to definitively prove, nor did President Bush announce who had perpetrated the attacks. President declared that the "War on Terror" will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."

Does this really mean "every terrorist group"? Does this include the Shining Path and other groups outside of the Middle East? Does it include the Aryan Nation in the United States? Does it authorize the use of military force within the United States to achieve its ends? Clearly Bush did not mean groups outside of the coterie of Islamic terrorist groups that perpetrated the 9-11 attacks, but his declaration was so vague it could have included violation of the posse comitatus act. Clearly he did not mean that either, but the question is is such a vague declaration legal?

By the way, the main argument against allowing declarations of war or armed conflict against entities less than a state, is that in such a 'war' enemy combatants can be almost anyone and reside almost anywhere. Thus if the powers granted the Executive included the power to wage war forever, as the Bush declaration implies, and against such a wide range of opponents, if an American citizen contributed money to Al Qaeda, and they lived in Penn Valley, under current law they could be secretly declared a combatant and shot on the street.

I find it hard to believe that you would be concerned about Jade Helm and allow such a broad declaration at the same time.

[George Rebane]

StevenF 454pm - For years I have excoriated the notion of "Declaring war on terror" and will not repeat my voluminous arguments about the wrongheadedness and futility of declaring war on a tactic - e.g. WW2 was a war on the mechanized division - butt stupid construction and wrong. I have long maintained, and now many authors and writers have joined me, that we are engaged in a centuries long civilizational war that saw its last battle in Vienna in 1683. For a number of reasons (another topic) the war has now resumed, and the only and perfectly suited weapon that Islam has against the highly structured liberal west is ad hoc terror not sourced from any single sovereign nation-state.

We are fighting a trans-national autocratic belief system very similar in its form and function to communism. We should understand, fear, and respect that belief system; its adherents have no historical betters in their willingness to sacrifice themselves for their god and paradise - they believe themselves to be agents of ultimate good on Earth. They are also 'end timers', and as such are impossible to negotiate with, especially when you consider their constant, lavish, and visible use of takyah when dealing with the west.

Liberal nations of the Westphalian persuasion are not structured ideologically or in their governance to successfully prosecute such a conflict. And more so if they contain a 'fifth column' dedicated to weaken/overthrow the only weapon which can disintegrate fundamentalist Islam - cultural capitalistic wealth generation. But then, I've circled this barn early and often. Now others are agreeing. Will and Ariel Durant educated us to all that over 50 years ago - how soon we forget.

[Steven Frisch]

Posted by: George Rebane | 28 June 2015 at 06:23 PM

You might find it surprising George that in many ways I agree with you. I do not believe we can declare war on a tactic either. I believe we should be fighting radical Islamic terrorists, and rooting them out where they take hold. I also agree that nation state like Afghanistan that allowed the terrorists to operate at will within their borders need to be brought to heel.

I also agree with you that in the end the strategy that will work will be the spread of capitalism.

I think our difference of opinion would be over how we spread capitalism and what brand of capitalism it is. For example, I would posit that the beast way to spread capitalism in Iran is to get them to agree to never produce a nuclear weapon then bury them in western influenced capitalism to the point that their people will never agin countenance a government that is a state sponsor of terrorism.

I also think we might differ on how deeply embedded in the Islamic religious movement the apocalyptic vision of terrorism really is; I would contend that it is a radical minority fundamentalist movement that is not widely held by most Muslims. Our greatest allies against this sect would be the very Muslim people's and governments that they also threaten.

I think we also might differ on who constitutes a 'fifth column' in this discussion.

[George Rebane]

StevenF 657pm - Well said Steve. These are all points that we can sort out in depth and at a dignified pace. The only thing I see that will get our mutual adrenalin pumps going is the advent of Nov 2016. I think we both have strong feelings about the contending natures of a desirable outcome.

The only item that pulls a quick response from me is your assertion of the sequence of 1) first to "get them to agree to never produce a nuclear weapon 2) THEN bury them in western influenced capitalism ". That seems to be a backward (impossible?) approach to me. Their populations longing for western riches and accoutrements need to be persuaded first on a different vision of the good life before they will agree to strategically weaken themselves. I hold with George Friedman's analysis that the mid-east's major near term struggle will be between Turkey and Iran as to who will become the Islamic hegemon - Iran sees its path through zealous faith, Turkey, until recently, saw their path through secular governance and capitalism.

[Steven Frisch]

The more I type the more I realize I need a new laptop.

[Gregory]

Costco online is the best bet for notebook computers. Don't buy elsewhere without a firm promise they will take it back if there are any bad pixels.

Costco will issue refund for the asking within 90 days for any reason whatsoever.