Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Jack Graham: Entertaining Legalese

Expand Messages
  • ummyakoub
    From Jack Graham To Steve Myers, Editor of Exegesis, Greeting: -- We have agreed that the Abrahamic covenants in the 12th, 13th, 17th, and 22nd chapters of
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 4, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      From Jack Graham

      To Steve Myers, Editor of Exegesis, Greeting: -- We have agreed that
      the Abrahamic covenants in the 12th, 13th, 17th, and 22nd chapters of
      Genesis, as they appear in the English of the King James Bible at any
      rate, are expressed in the language of a conveyance in fee simple.
      The language corresponds perfectly to the language in Coke and
      Litteton on tenures. The King James Bible is probably the most
      venerable translation into English. And I can compare other
      translations, Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish. In taking these
      precautions, I still end up with the same sense that God promised
      Abraham and his heirs a large tract of land, actually somewhat
      larger than what later become the Byzantine province, the Ottaman
      province, and the British mandate of Palestine, because it included
      land on both sides of the River Jordan. And this land was given to
      the twelve or thirteen tribes of Israel. It is often said that there
      were only twelve tribes, but I think historically there were actually
      thirteen tribes, if we count the tribe of Menasseh. In any event,
      the conveyance in fee simple was made and accomplished as an
      historical fact. That was a fulfillment of the promise made by God.

      The question remains whether the fee simple was subject to
      divestiture. In the civil law and under the common law, and in every
      civilized system of law, including the law given by Moses, and under
      the law of nations as it has existed from time immemorial, every
      estate in land, including land granted absolutely and forever, can
      and frequently is divested by conveyance, by mortgage foreclosure of
      the equivalent, by escheat of the equivalent, by adverse possession,
      or overthrow of the sovereign power on which title depends as by
      conquest, by treaty, etc. There is no such thing in law as an
      indefeasible estate in land, and never has been, nor does a fee
      simple satisfy that description. Until Zionism perverted Judaism, and
      convinced some Jews to take land inhabited by Arabs for centuries,
      nobody ever claimed that fee simple or the equivalent was an estate
      in land would or might of necessity last forever. Everybody has
      understood absolute title to mean title which will last forever
      unless lawfully divested. The promises of God to Abraham were to
      give to his descendants -- and by the way, the Jews of our time are
      not the only descendants of Abraham, and include many who are not
      descendants of Abraham -- the territory later occupied by the twelve
      or thirteen tribes absolutely and forever, i. e., in fee simple, and
      thus they were given full title to last until they were divested of
      it according to law. The Old Testament, if I may use that term,
      includes the prophecies of Jeremiah, Isaiah, and others, and these
      prophecies contain many warnings that, if the people of ancient
      Israel did not obey God's law, they would suffer consequences,
      including divestiture of their lands, as occurred when the Assyrians
      carried away the so-called "ten lost tribes" in about 721 B. C.,
      leaving Judah which was destroyed by the Babylonians about 538 B. C.
      The fact that these divestitures took place, following prophetic
      warnings, proves conclusively that the language of the Abrahamic
      covanants in Genesis was not meant in some mystical sense to be the
      promise of an indefeasible estate, for it was an estate that was
      divested following divine warnings which were articulated by holy
      prophets.

      One reason why Zionism is such a detestable perversion of Judaism is
      that it rests on a deliberately twisted meaning of ancient scripture
      to justify selfish taking of land belonging to others. It is not the
      only perversion of holy religion. The so-called "evangelical
      Christian" fanatics who want to rebuild the temple of the Jews
      so "Jesus can come again" are an equally repulsive perversion of
      Christianity, and so also there are disgusting perversions of Islam,
      otherwise a magnificently philosophical religion, that take shape in
      Hamas, Al Qaeda, etc., which are truly enemies of all mankind.

      Present-day Zionism depends upon a wild and false misinterpretation
      of the Abrahamic covenants in Genesis. Zionism, in any event, has no
      basis in international law. The Balfour Declaration of 1917
      concerned only Palestine as distinguished from Jordan, as can be
      easily demonstrated from historical context. Nor did the British
      Empire have authority under international law to promise the Jews of
      the world that they could drive out the Arabs then occupying
      Palestine, for such a promise, if it had been made, would have been
      prohibited by international law as it then stood in in the form of
      establishrf custom and finds expression in our own time in the
      second and fifty-first articles of the United Nations Charter.
      Moreover, such an interpretation would violate other equally binding
      promises made by the British Empire through Sir Henry McMahon to the
      sherif of Mecca in 1915. In order to read the Balfour Declaration of
      1917 in keeping with international law and British promises to Arabs,
      one must deny the extravagant claims of Zionists, and accept the
      British White Paper of 1939. The British mandate, which could have
      provided a peaceful solution but would have prevented immigration
      pressure upon Palestine which has since created the impossible
      conflict between Arabs and Jews, was willfully destroyed by Jewish
      terrorists as vicious and inhuman as the worst perversions of Islam
      we see today, -- I refer to the Abraham Stern's Gang and Menachem
      Begin's Irgun Zvai Leumi, who blew up the King David Hotel to prevent
      impementation of the British White Paper of 1939.

      Since the destruction of the British mandate over Palestine and the
      rise of the state of Israel in 1948, which was the will of
      international outlaws, not the will of God, the Israel Lobby has
      bribed and compromised Congress, and the United States, contrary to
      our enlightened national interests, in consequence of which Congress
      has invested, directly or indirectly three trillion dollars in the
      Jewish supremacist state of Israel, adjusted to 2002 values. The
      state of Israel has stolen our military secrets, bombed our navy,
      misled us with "cooked" intelligence, bilked us of foreign aid, and
      embarrassed us internationally. The Israel Lobby pushed the country
      into an unnecessary war in Iraq, a war based on fake Mossad
      intelligence of weapons of mass destruction, peddled by Likudniks in
      the Bush administration with divided loyalties, including David
      Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, and Douglas Feith, who betrayed
      the United States in order to support the Zionist government of
      Israel. The reason why I stand with Bush, despite his imperfections,
      is that he has at least tried to do right at Aqaba, and the Israel
      Lobby has bought both Democrats and Republicans with the same
      ruthless disregard for the well-being of the United States. Now we
      are in Iraq, we cannot withdraw, and we must settle the country as
      best we can. We are there, more than anything else because of the
      systematic corruption of the government of the United States by
      Zionists.

      Many of us resent it deeply as we witness the thinly disguised
      bribery of Congress by the Israel Lobby, as by giving Tom Harkin of
      Iowa $520,000, and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey $434,000, in
      exchange for their servility. We cannot terminate this wholesale
      buying and selling of public officers at the moment, but someday it
      will come to an end, and then there will be ugly consequences.

      American Jews must decide whether they favor Israel first, or the
      United States first. There is no doubt in my mind that many Jews
      enjoy all the benefits of American citizenship, yet betray our
      country every day to support Israel against our enlightened national
      interests. They cheated the American people out of vast assets to
      promote injustice against Arabs in Palestine. There are many
      American Jews who oppose this kind of disloyalty to the United
      States. There have been Jews of national and international
      standing who have spoken out, including such characters as Martin
      Buber, I. F. Stone, Alfred Lillienthal, and Israel Shamir.

      These remarks are not anti-Jewish hatred, as the Israel Lobby always
      claims whenever its outrages are protested, but factual realities
      about which all loyal Americans, including many good Jews, have
      expressed grave concern. Increasingly the American people are aware
      of the illicit influence which Zionism has gained by deceitful and
      disloyal methods within the government of the United States. You may
      have noticed recently a CNN poll in which 66% voted to cut off all
      American aid to Israel unless Ariel Sharon complies with Bush's
      demand not to build a wall or fence on the West Bank. That shows
      that Americans are waking up. I have Jewish friends who will receive
      my protection, whatever it is worth, if that backlash arrives, as I
      fear is becoming increasingly likely. I have Jewish friends who been
      good Americans, always loyal first to the United States, and opposed
      to the religious fanaticism of Zionism. There are a number of rabbis
      who have protested against Zionism as a selfish, materialistic
      perversion of all that is good in Judaism, which, any objective
      measure, is certainly is.

      John Remington Graham
      of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)

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

      NEWS AND VIEWS DISTRIBUTED HERE ARE THE AUTHOR'S RESPONSIBILITY
      AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OPINION OF WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE

      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
      vwns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      NEWS ARCHIVE IS OPEN TO PUBLIC VIEW
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vwns/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.