Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.
Ron Paul 2004
Registered Ron Paul supporter # 2202
It's all about Freedom
FP Report Confirms: USA Helped Iraq Use Sarin and Mustard Gas on Iran
While your observations and citations seem factual, your generalizations seem incorrect. Heroshima and Nagasaki horrors in two populated cities did not take place in 8th century exactly even though most of your observations have merit.
For those suggesting that the fired worker above with Jesus Christ's tatoo on his chest and who engaged in a brutal violent crime being the new leading poster boy of violent ideologies that we should fear, a simple question.
A below has engaged in more horrific violence or B?
Alleged Violent Criminal A
Alleged Violent Criminal B
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
Except that it was a blatant abuse of the power to draft (rendering it legally invalid and unconstitutional), meanwhile, never did Congress sanction any Declaration of War to support any such necessity to draft... Moreover, the Gulf of Tonkin incident that paved the justification for America’s committing genocide against the Vietnamese (merely a poor under developed puppet nation of first Japan and then France), under the properly named “American War” was completely faked, involving McNamara in a traitorous conspiracy and war crimes and crimes against humanity by the soiled mouth of the felonious Henry Kissinger.
Last edited by Weston White; 09-27-2014 at 11:41 PM.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius
“They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020
Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber
You are falling for it now with regards to this unimaginable Islamic threat.
Not that I can particularly down the choice you made. I had family who was drafted and affected by that war. I won't be going anywhere until they roll up on the shores of the Carolinas. I don't care who votes to draft me for what.
To justify the rollout of a nationalized police force with virtually limitless powers and equip it with advancing tech-gadgetry; to establish acceptable excuses for eliminating constitutional constraints; to merge federal agencies, including U.S. Military personnel, with local state agencies in regional crime prevention operations; to implement a new “civilian” arm of government that possesses law enforcement and arrest powers, under the authority of the DHS; to program local law enforcement to operate within a strict militant mindset; to provide a catalyst for the creation of brand new industry, 24-hour news networks/channels, and ensure they retain a steady viewership; to preoccupy, inundate, and overwhelm the “civilian” masses with so much bad news, unfolding events, “BREAKING NEWS”, “ALERTS”, and nonsensical drama that they fail to grasp the simply concept that all the while their own nation is printing fiat currency at such an astounding rate that within the coming decade or two they will certainly wakeup finding themselves to have been conquered and left both penniless and homeless in the very nation that their forefathers had at once conquered; and of course to garner undying support for what may only be properly described as being blatantly racist, anti-nation, and anti-religion, using a modernized form of witch-hunting, Christian Crusade, and Spanish Inquisition roll-your-own tactics dubbed the one-hundred-year “war on terror”.
Last edited by Weston White; 09-28-2014 at 11:30 AM.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius
“They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020
Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber
I am at times crass and can be easily annoyed but regardless my heart is in the right place. I simply have lost tolerance for a lot of the stupid things being repeated day in and day out. I understand everyone has their own perception of things but regardless déjà vu being used as a descriptor would be an understatement. And as they say of those who do not study history...
I apologize it took me so long to respond. It's been a crazy couple of weeks.
Some Christians more-so than others. There are going to be "strict" interpretations as well as "loose" interpretations. There are going to be different sects viewing the gospel one way or another, tradition and ceremonies are going to vary. While most Christians in this country could be established as non-violent followers of that particular faith, there are those, who self-identify as Christians though who else wise might be ostracized by certain Christians (though they often aren't) that commit evil acts. It is perceived around the world in these various regions affected much the way I imagine Christians perceive it, in the opposite regard, here. That is that there is a war being waged on their religion and that it is not immoral, or could even be called upon by God, to combat said war. Whether that war be on Christians or Muslims and whether such claims have any validity being largely irrelevant to the conversation.Yes, somewhat my argument. Here is the difference between the "peculiar" teachings in the Bible, and the "peculiar" teachings of the Koran. Christians understand that the "peculiar" teachings are more of a "record of history" rather than anything that should be followed today.
Before we travel down this road I'll just make it perfectly clear that I am not a student of theology. I am familiar with the Bible simply by having been brought up as a Christian. I would concede that I am not the best person to speak to with regards to theological or religious debates. Hence, I never travel to the Religion Subforum and don't particularly care to discuss religion outside of narrow terms.And as a matter of fact, Jesus even taught so. I will give you an example.
The Bible's history included stonings, but Jesus stated... "you who are without sin throw the first stone". So Jesus doesn't want anyone stoning anyone. Jesus stated that his followers are to "love their enemies".
What do you mean by "historic element?"The Koran teaches to kill your enemies and defines "enemies" as unbelievers. The Koran does not have a "historic element" to it. All of those "peculiar" teachings are for today, not just a record of history. The Hadiths are records of Mohammed's history, and they are vicious and violent and to be followed today.
This would fall under the previous mentioning of mine that various sects, regions, etc. are going to interpret things various ways. Most Muslims are honest, God fearing types who simply wish to live their lives in peace and disassociate themselves from these radical jihadists.
There have been people to bastardize the word of god to serve their purposes or to fit their worldview since time immemorial. Probably at least since text was utilized or even as agrarian means of commerce (and thus communication) were established.
I'm outside of my comfort zone on the discussion regarding the various religious texts. Hopefully this somewhat addresses this quotation.
There are various reasons for intervention and I'd say that practically, if not exclusively, they all have their roots in gaining wealth/power. So while it is accurate to say that not all intervention has its roots in money (and I'd possibly even contend that point depending on what precisely you are speaking of) we cannot ignore the evidence of all of the ones that were based with the intention to extract wealth or to plunder. War being the health of the state, further bringing a hodgepodge of people holding various interests and concerns into a rather homogeneous glob certainly cannot be overlooked. Geopolitics, etc. being another reason the United States is sucked into war. Of course there is that off chance that a war is fought defensively. Certainly none in my lifetime have been such endeavors and absent arguing the case for WWII, not even any of the last 200 years. And when you look at the interventions of the last two hundred years, a pattern certainly is evident. One thing anyone paying attention will notice is that certain folks or industries profit greatly. Another thing that is evident (even if the result of the intervention strays from the intended desires) is the maintenance of a geopolitical power structure. This is especially evident since the time of Teddy Roosevelt.I completely agree. I am NOT for intervention. I absolutely agree that the interventions have created the problems. But, ... here is my point that is lost on most. The reason for the interventions is not ALL because of money.
I'd [possibly] contest all of this Muslim Brotherhood water holding talk (outside of a narrow sense). The relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia is mutually "beneficial" (for a few). Saudi Arabia receives US funding to build power plants, water treatment facilities, establish sanitation services, etc. with the stipulation that the money is to be expended on American corporations. In return the Saudis agree not to question the dollar's value as the world reserve currency and agree to accept them exclusively for oil. They are also armed heavily to have the ability to quell any disturbance or protest in that country. This of course is through the recycled dollars (which often never even leave the United States) being given to various corporations. It isn't that the United States is holding water for the Saudis, though they are, it is that they are both holding water for each other. The dollars created out of nothing and given away like candy doesn't simply debase this currency. It incentivizes corruption in political elections. Corporations have a major stake in the hiring of lobbyists, etc. and the control of politicians.Oh I am not going to disagree that it plays a part in it. And it definitely motivates participants to engage as well. But..... the reasons that we have had so many "radical creating" interventions is because for decades the leaders have been carrying water for / doing the will of / and probably part of The Muslim Brotherhood organization and Saudi, and now Turkey as well.
Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins is a good read on some of that subject matter.
If you looked at the intervention of Syria in 1949, the intervention in Iran in 1953, the intervention in Indonesia throughout the '50s and '60s, the intervention in Iraq in '63 in Egypt in... in Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. etc. the record shows that it wasn't simply the last thirty years. They've been over there meddling for quite some time. Their continued support of Israel being a large radicalizing factor as well.ALL of the interventions since Reagan's days have done nothing but to radicalize. Clinton was no different than Bush or Obama. Hitlery did the same as Sec of State. Does they "why" matter? YES!! The why matters. Because as long as we are carrying that water / doing the will of / and have leaders that are affiliated with the MB - the interventions WILL NOT STOP. You will be lied to and told that they will...... just like Obama has done.
If you look into the SAVAK, for instance, the Iranian intelligence service trained and aligned with the CIA when the Shah was placed into power, I mean, you can see a reason some have grievances. The same goes for any one of those countries.
You are off on your analysis. While they may be enemies of the people and squander great amounts of wealth, they are not as connected as I believe [?] you are inferring them to be. Furthermore, the relationship is symbiotic and isn't as cut and dry as the United States holding water for the Muslim Brotherhood. There are other factors at play.It doesn't matter what it would cost if the enemy is entrenched in the leadership of the country.
To invade this country on a scale not regarded as their pity would cost such an insurmountable amount that it is simply unfeasible. To transport, feed, fuel, arm, and pay these soldiers.... no country is up to that task. Three million dollars a day is a joke (that is about two Cruise missiles without the platform to launch them). Qatar and Turkey's entire economies could be diverted to a legitimate invasion and I doubt I'd much take it seriously (though I admittedly haven't looked at the figures). If the United States wanted to, those countries would be glass. And who are the Qataris or the Turks to slaughter the golden goose?Ok, let's pretend that you don't believe me on that. Cost would not be an issue with ISIS selling 3 million dollars worth of oil a day and with the backing of Qatar and Turkey. Either way cost of invasion is a non issue.
Indeed.I have no disagreement with you here. My entire point is NOT invasion. I am actually totally against invasion. Any type of military action right now with the "rebel backers" and "al qaeda" funders we have in office is just STUPID. The whole point is not to attack ISIS, it is to overthrow Assad. Why? Because Assad wants a secular country and keeps the radicalization in check.
I'd be content with them being tried as war criminals.Again, in order to stop the interventions - we need to follow in Egypt's footsteps and recognize the terrorists leading our country and get them the hell out!! Egypt has outlawed and declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. That is exactly what we need to do! We need to have a wake up call and understand that there is more than just money fueling these interventions or we will never stop it.
Yes they are.I agree, I am not advocating for Intervention, I am actually totally against it. We do however, need to get this country's leadership cleaned out of these traitors that are working for the benefit and also terrorization of other countries.
With regards to Egypt, they also accept quite a bit of money. It's not over, there. With regards to Assad, the United States has him on their sights as they did Hussein or Qaddafi. Assad laughed when Qaddafi stated as much but rest assured no matter what the propaganda campaign costs, they will get Assad. People are forgetful, naïve and easily frightened creatures. They will get Assad. And the people who protested it will cheer. Or they won't. But what does it really matter to them so long as they do not drop the balancing pole on their tightrope circus act?Also, understand, I am not totally anti muslim. Nor do I think we need to have a war on Islam. But we do need to recognize what these values do to our leadership and be much more discerning of who we allow in our leadership. Listen, Assad and El-Sisi are Muslims. They at least understand the concept of which organizations are terroristic in nature and which ones are not.
I'll take a look at them. Thanks.Here is a thread I started a couple of weeks ago. Please, please, please, understand that I am NOT FOR INTERVENTION. Just cleaning house!!!!!
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ama-s-ISIS-war
T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato
We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me
Originally Posted by Philhelm
Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.
~ George Washington
Now, ME. on the hand, I was in favor of droning you guys, ender! At least a couple of times I was, like when you were decapitating and burying innocent children for instance.
Ender is not a Muslim, for one, for two, he is not in the Middle East, and for three, he does not have anything to do with any violence occurring over there. Lest you were inferring with "guys" that I am a Muslim, am in the Middle East, or that I have anything to do with the violence occurring there?
Your post is rather pathetic.
If you'd like to see dismembered children I can show you a dozen of them. All at the hands of drones too. But the difference, most probably, in your mind, is that those children had to die. Far from the innocent title you emotionally used, these children were around [alleged] bad men (absent an errant strike). They shouldn't have been there, FOX News has offered me.
And you like your bud like to color other peoples posts with your own brand of BS don't you? Like taking my comments about favoring the droning of ISIS troops in the open desert as wanting to see "dead children". By the way, are you collecting pictures of dead kids? Now that is truly pathetic...please keep them to yourself.
My comments, incidentally, were directed to someone other than your self, unless you are maintaining a dual persona in here, which really wouldn't surprise me. If not, then it is none of your business.
You are speaking about what, to be frank, would result in the murder of children as a solution to the beheading of children. The irony is lost on you.
I am bringing up that point that children are [arguably] more gruesomely murdered by drone strikes than the manner in which ISIS is [allegedly] murdering them.
"I was in favor of drone striking you guys"..... tsk. tsk. And people wonder why I cannot be humble and not use ad hominem. Things people say are so $#@!ing stupid I cannot help but call the spade a spade.
I have pictures of murdered children specifically for a discussion such as this. Not to mention I take particular care to know what my extorted tax dollars are going towards.By the way, are you collecting pictures of dead kids? Now that is truly pathetic...please keep them to yourself.
I have picture of anencephalic babies as well.. but you, you obviously know what I am speaking of. It's odd with that being the case considering you brag about being in favor of drone strikes. You're quite the tough guy.
Again, considering you came to Miss Annie's side to comments that weren't necessarily directed towards her with your lap dog response, I can only imagine () how the irony is lost on you.My comments, incidentally, were directed to someone other than your self, unless you are maintaining a dual persona in here, which really wouldn't surprise me. If not, then it is none of your business.
You specifically addressed Ender, someone who openly talks about his teaching of the Bible, etc. with fallacious nonsense. This is just a joke, right?
Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 09-29-2014 at 05:04 PM.
There you go again with your absurd comparisons of the slaughter of children. You really do have a difficulty in comprehension don't you? Are you so blinded by hate and anger that you just don't understand what is being said because you aren't hearing it, or are you just stupid? I am tired of casting hints to you like "open desert" (i.e. NO CHILDREN ONLY ISIS TROOPS! DUH) and you just rant on and throw out your insults.
Your diatribe is boring and your over use of the word irony is as annoying as it is inappropriate.
I am a Scottish Cherokee living in the US of A. I am also a Minister under a Vow of Poverty. AND I am familiar with scripture: Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish
I am amazed at your hate and sense of revenge for things you know nothing about; perhaps you should get yourself over to the ME and then you can tell us all about it, first hand.
There is no spoon.
And so it goes with the banding together of the Chamberlains of the 21st century...
You cannot stand in the shallow end of this discussion. Your dribble is rather unneeded and rather than ever responding you'd do yourself a favor to simply read the responses and take in the conversation. That or pick up a damn book.
Your posts in general are bad jokes. When it comes to this topic I find you apologizing after babbling on in response to something not even directed to you, in a way that doesn't even begin to address the substance of the post you were responding to (I am reminded of your out of the blue response and subsequent apology to Green73).
Am I blinded by hate and anger? I am blinded by other's ignorance. Daily. I mean, really.... the information is all available.
Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 09-29-2014 at 05:10 PM.
How about some REAL history:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2009/04/p...ave-to-happen/March Madness, 1939
By Patrick J. Buchanan
April 8, 2009
On Sept. 1, 1939, Hitler’s panzers smashed into Poland. Two days later, an anguished Neville Chamberlain declared war, the most awful war in all of history.
Was the war inevitable? No. No war is inevitable until it has begun. Was it a necessary war? Hearken to Churchill:
“One day, President Roosevelt told me that he was asking publicly for suggestions about what the war should be called. I said at once, ‘The Unnecessary War.’ There never was a war more easy to stop than that which has just wrecked what was left of the world … .”
But if the war need not have happened, what caused it?
Let us go back to Munich.
On Sept. 30, 1938, at Munich, Chamberlain signed away the Sudetenland rather than fight to keep 3.5 million Germans under a Czech rule imposed upon them at the Paris peace conference in violation of Wilson’s principle of self-determination.
Why did Britain not fight?
Because Britain had no alliance with Prague and Chamberlain did not “give two hoots” who ruled the Sudetenland. Also, Britain had no draft, no divisions to send to France, no Spitfires, no support from America or her dominions, no ally save France, who had been told that, if war came, the United States would not deliver the planes France had purchased.
U.S. neutrality laws forbade it.
In his meetings with Chamberlain, Hitler had warned that Poland and Hungary would also be entering claims for ancestral lands ceded to the Czechs at Paris in 1919.
Thus, after Munich, Warsaw had seized coal-rich Teschen, which held tens of thousands of Poles. Hungary, in the “Vienna Award” of Nov. 2, 1938, got back lands in Slovakia and Ruthenia where Hungarians were the majority and Budapest had ruled before 1919.
Neither Britain nor France resisted these border revisions.
Came then March 1939, when Czechoslovakia began to crumble.
On March 10, to crush a Slovakian push for independence, Czech President Emil Hacha ousted Slovak Prime Minister Father Tiso, occupied Bratislava and installed a pro-Prague regime.
On March 11, Tiso fled to Vienna and appealed to Berlin.
On March 13, Tiso met Hitler, who told him that if he did not declare independence immediately, Germany would not interfere with Hungary’s re-annexation of Slovakia. Budapest was moving troops to the border.
On March 14, Slovakia declared independence. Ruthenia followed, dissolving what was left of Czechoslovakia.
Adm. Horthy, told by Hitler he could re-annex Ruthenia but must keep his hands off Slovakia, occupied Ruthenia.
Hacha now asked to meet with Hitler to get the same guarantee of independence Slovakia had gotten. But Hitler bullied Hacha into making the Czech remnant a protectorate of Germany.
Thus, six months after Munich, the Germans of Czechoslovakia were where they wished to be, under German rule. The Poles were under Polish rule. The Hungarians were under Hungarian rule. And the Slovaks were under Slovak rule in their new nation.
But 500,000 Ruthenians were back under Budapest, and 7 million Czechs were back under German rule — this time Berlin, not Vienna.
Ethnonationalism had torn Czechoslovakia apart as it had the parent Hapsburg Empire. Yet, no vital British interest was imperiled.
And though Hitler had used brutal Bismarckian diplomacy, not force, Chamberlain was humiliated. The altarpiece of his career, the Munich accord, was now an object of mockery.
Made a fool of by Hitler, baited by his backbenchers, goaded by Lord Halifax, facing a vote of no confidence, on March 31, 1939, Chamberlain made the greatest blunder in British diplomatic history. He handed an unsolicited war guarantee to the Polish colonels who had just bitten off a chunk of Czechoslovakia.
Lunacy, raged Lloyd George, who was echoed by British leaders and almost every historian since.
With the British Empire behind it, Warsaw now refused even to discuss a return of Danzig, the Baltic town, 95 percent German, which even Chamberlain thought should be returned.
Hitler did not want a war with Poland. Had he wanted war, he would have demanded the return of the entire Polish Corridor taken from Germany in 1919. He wanted Danzig back and Poland as an ally in his anti-Comintern Pact. Nor did he want war with a Britain he admired and always saw as a natural ally.
Nor did he want war with France, or he would have demanded the return of Alsace.
But Hitler was out on a limb with Danzig and could not crawl back.
Repeatedly, Hitler tried to negotiate Danzig. Repeatedly, the Poles rebuffed him. Seeing the Allies courting Josef Stalin, Hitler decided to cut his own deal with the detested Bolsheviks and settle the Polish issue by force.
Though Britain had no plans to aid Poland, no intention of aiding Poland and would do nothing to aid Poland — Churchill would cede half that nation to Stalin and the other half to Stalin’s stooges — Britain declared war for Poland.
The most awful war in all of history followed, which would bankrupt Britain, bring down her empire and bring Stalin’s Red Army into Prague, Berlin and Vienna. But Hitler was dead and Germany in ashes.
Cost: 50 million lives. “But ’twas a famous victory.”
There is no spoon.
They were just discussing this on CNN (Erin Burnett). She was asking the "expert" (Phil Mudd) why Islamic Facebook posts that seem threatening aren't all investigated (by the FBI and Facebook itself). He said the volume was too high, too many threats on the internet. And then he said something to the effect that "you never know when the light will come on and an Islamic radical will do violence. It's the same as the white supremacists, you never know when they might act." The "expert" must be connected to the SPLC, or at least he drank a whole lot of their kool-aid.
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
Connect With Us