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.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
Let me guess. I am at the local watering hole close to my cabin up north. I over hear an Injuns talking as one compliments his neighbor on the nice motor he recently got for his boat. He says in reply, I just "picked it up." "Good find" says the other Injun.
suspiciously it looks just like the one that was taken off of my property recently.
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
It is YOU who have refused to discuss my answers and when I repost them it is YOU who calls names. You have been calling me a Muslim for a year now while you continually deny it. You have now gone too far calling a good man like @AZJoe names and I am calling you on it.
YOU are the perfect example of your name-calling #8 and are a HYP.O.CRITE.
There is no spoon.
I have repeatedly and it always goes as I describe below.
No reasonable individual would discuss this issue in this manner unless they are a Muslim political activist. Therefore I asked if you are Muslim and since you never denied the claim or this list it became a belief. So referring to you and AZJoe as Muslims is not an attack but rather a belief.Posting pattern of RPF Muslim activists:
1. They always focus on blaming US intervention 100% of the time as the cause of Islamic terrorism without recognizing or room for recognizing the following issues below.
2. No recognition that the past cannot be undone and for risk management based on what they believe are past wrongs the US has committed. They always re-direct the conversation back to #1.
3. Absolutely no concern for radical Islam and jihadist immigration or retribution from what they believe from #1. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
4. No mention or concern for US victims or potential US victims. When it is brought up they always go right back to #1 and/or the victims of #1.
5. No concern over a statist authoritarian belief system masquerading as a religion and in some cases they make a moral equivalence to modern Christianity for which there is no Christian terrorism on the scale of radical Islam. Conversation is redirected back to #1.
6. Little to no concern of growing the welfare state due to immigration. Conversation is refocused back to #1.
7. No recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
8. If someone points out that #1 is not entirely the issue and raises issues 2 to 7, they are immediately slammed as full of "hate", fearful, a Trump supporter as an epithet , called a Neocon, a Nazi or anti-semite, a hypocrite, demeaned in some manner, or some other personal attack or falsely accused of a personal attack and are hit with negative reps.
9. When confronted with this list they claim to have addressed these points when they have not and then they redirect the conversation back to #8 or #1. They even post their own fake number list that does not reflect these points made above which is all about foreign intervention, #1 again. While again, never addressing the list above.
You are on #8 and #9 right now.
btw - thx for the name calling update, I added "hypocrite" to #8.
Last edited by kahless; 11-08-2017 at 01:47 AM.
And there you have it. Resorting to feeble minded logical fallacy of the ad hominem (false and delusional based no less) is the last refuge of weak minded when their position has no substance.
It is akin to WaPo accusing Dr. Paul, and anyone else, of being a "Russian agent" if they don't agree with lies and propaganda.
So in the mind of Kahless, one who rejects the collectivist mindset and instead responds with facts and logic and consistently promotes peace and prosperity, individualism, individual rights, anti-tax, anti-statist, pro-liberty, pro-free market, freedom of choice, freedom of association, self-ownership, property rights, individual self defense, non-aggression principal, must be Muslim.
This is not reason. Such comments are irrational, illogical, dishonest, suggesting emotional based form of psychosis.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul. "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you are standing alone." - Sophie Magdalena Scholl
"War is the health of the State." - Randolph Bourne "Freedom is the answer. ... Now, what's the question?" - Ernie Hancock.
If we lived in the 1880s with no entrenched bureaucracy tentacles in play, I'd probably reconsider my muslim ban perspective. But it comes down to a 'don't feed the animals' moral hazard that Dr. Paul has extensively discussed.
The goofy films contradict Thor. The very first film repeatedly establishes that the problem are a very small subset of Muslim people, and that there are myriad sects of Islam with far varying beliefs. The clip however fails to identify that the subset is Wahhabism/Salafism sponsored by Saudi Arabia as well as Washington. Thus the very clip Thor relies upon directly negates the universal collectivist mindset of Muslims that Thor promotes.
Further, for every clip depicting Muslim imbeciles or gang one can can easily find or make hundreds of clips depicting people of Muslim faith that are the direct opposite - peaceful, charitable, tolerant, productive, intelligent, benign, etc.
What the clips actually establish is that certain nations have horrible to no vetting process for immigrants, refugees, and visitors. As if we did not know. What do you expect when certain nations accept hundreds of thousands to millions of refugees that are not and cannot be vetted due to the war-torn destruction of reliable records and process, and come from areas where there are widespread defeated Wahhabi factions (Washington's Al Qaeda, ISIS, FSA, etc.) that have embedded themselves into the refugees to escape destruction. Well Duh. With such a process, of course you are going to end up with thousands of bad and violent individuals. It simply confirms what we already knew about certain nations' vetting process - they have none of any practical effect.
There is no Ah-ha revelation in these goofy clips.
Nor do the clips establish any universal trait inherent in all of nearly 2 billion individuals of the world's population.
It does the opposite. It merely reveals the obvious - that not only are there varying Muslim beliefs, but also that all people, including Muslims, are individuals and have different beliefs. Some are bad and when a nation has no vetting process for millions of refugees they will end up with thousands of bad people that form criminal gangs. When that nation(s) further fails to enforce its own laws against aggressive initiation of violence by those individuals, it promotes those criminals.
The clips do not prove the validity of the collectivist mindset; Rather the clips prove a failure of bad government vetting and policies. It shows that these governments have their own collectivist mindset by their refusing to properly vet these refugees the governments fail to recognize that all refugees are not uniformly alike, that they are individuals, and that many of the refugees will be criminals or violent and/or former Al Qaeda/ISIS/FSA Wahhabis.
Last edited by AZJoe; 11-08-2017 at 08:41 AM.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul. "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you are standing alone." - Sophie Magdalena Scholl
"War is the health of the State." - Randolph Bourne "Freedom is the answer. ... Now, what's the question?" - Ernie Hancock.
If you believe that somebody is guilty of conspiring to commit a crime and want to punish them for that by violating what would be their natural rights if they were not criminals, then you have to follow due process and prove them guilty of that crime before doing that.
It's immoral to support some kind of pre-crime enforcement against people because you believe they are more likely to be future criminals because of some label they apply to themselves.
This has to be done on an individual basis, one person at a time.
I honestly did not mean that as an attack but rather an observation from your posting history. It is not about what you describe but rather I cannot get my head around why you ignore #2 - #7, and respond only with #1 and #8, below. Well, if you take such offense to it I suppose you are not?
You see I want to live consistently in a region that "promotes peace and prosperity, individualism, individual rights, anti-tax, anti-statist, pro-liberty, pro-free market, freedom of choice, freedom of association, self-ownership, property rights, individual self defense and non-aggression principal". Your support of policies make this impossible in my lifetime short and long term is why I came to the conclusion that I did.
Not once did I attack anyone here but I cannot say the same for you and Ender for my disagreeing with your love for bringing people here that want to deny me life and liberty.
Thinking about this list more I could probably add more like, "being made a foreigner in my own land with a language and culture I do not understand is unfair to do to people living here". But we have not gotten that far in the thread yet for you and Ender to deny it is a problem for people living here?
1. They always focus on blaming US intervention 100% of the time as the cause of Islamic terrorism without recognizing or room for recognizing the following issues below.
2. No recognition that the past cannot be undone and for risk management based on what they believe are past wrongs the US has committed. They always re-direct the conversation back to #1.
3. Absolutely no concern for radical Islam and jihadist immigration or retribution from what they believe from #1. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
4. No mention or concern for US victims or potential US victims. When it is brought up they always go right back to #1 and/or the victims of #1.
5. No concern over a statist authoritarian belief system masquerading as a religion and in some cases they make a moral equivalence to modern Christianity for which there is no Christian terrorism on the scale of radical Islam. Conversation is redirected back to #1.
6. Little to no concern of growing the welfare state due to immigration. Conversation is refocused back to #1.
7. No recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
8. If someone points out that #1 is not entirely the issue and raises issues 2 to 7, they are immediately slammed as full of "hate", fearful, a Trump supporter as an epithet , called a Neocon, a Nazi or anti-semite, a hypocrite, demeaned in some manner, or some other personal attack or falsely accused of a personal attack and are hit with negative reps.
9. When confronted with this list they claim to have addressed these points when they have not and then they redirect the conversation back to #8 or #1. They even post their own fake number list that does not reflect these points made above which is all about foreign intervention, #1 again. While again, never addressing the list above.
Last edited by kahless; 11-08-2017 at 10:10 AM.
That is nonsense.
Nobody would interfere with your right to speak whatever language you want to whomever else wants to speak it with you and live according to whatever culture you want. The fact that other people in your vicinity choose to exercise that very same right to speak some other language with one another and live according to a different culture is none of your business, not unfair to you in any way, and not something you or anyone else have any right to impede.
Really, nonsense? Like the US is made up solely of wealthy people that can simply pickup and move when the culture or language changes in their community to some rural homestead to live among their own? How many times do you expect people to have the ability to keep doing this in their lifetime?
Just stick your head in the sand and completely deny the millions of middle class and poor people in cities and suburbia that are being outnumbered by immigration and wake up one day to culture and language shock.
The community which I was raised went from 90% European English speaking white to 20%. It is not easy especially for senior citizens to adapt to the culture shock, discrimination and languages issues in their community. This is taking place all over the US in cities and surburbia. People that promote open borders are effectively promoting abuse of the native population.
Care to address #2 - #7?
1. They always focus on blaming US intervention 100% of the time as the cause of Islamic terrorism without recognizing or room for recognizing the following issues below.
2. No recognition that the past cannot be undone and for risk management based on what they believe are past wrongs the US has committed. They always re-direct the conversation back to #1.
3. Absolutely no concern for radical Islam and jihadist immigration or retribution from what they believe from #1. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
4. No mention or concern for US victims or potential US victims. When it is brought up they always go right back to #1 and/or the victims of #1.
5. No concern over a statist authoritarian belief system masquerading as a religion and in some cases they make a moral equivalence to modern Christianity for which there is no Christian terrorism on the scale of radical Islam. Conversation is redirected back to #1.
6. Little to no concern of growing the welfare state due to immigration. Conversation is refocused back to #1.
7. No recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
8. If someone points out that #1 is not entirely the issue and raises issues 2 to 7, they are immediately slammed as full of "hate", fearful, a Trump supporter as an epithet , called a Neocon, a Nazi or anti-semite, a hypocrite, demeaned in some manner, or some other personal attack or falsely accused of a personal attack and are hit with negative reps.
9. When confronted with this list they claim to have addressed these points when they have not and then they redirect the conversation back to #8 or #1. They even post their own fake number list that does not reflect these points made above which is all about foreign intervention, #1 again. While again, never addressing the list above.
No. But just what are you calling "their community"? As if the culture and language their neighbors speak and live in the privacy of their own homes, or in communication between one another, is any of their business. If you want to keep speaking English, and living according to whatever cultural norms you want, and demand that your children marry other likeminded people and raise their kids that way, go right ahead. Your language and culture will last for as long as they have people who share your views and want to preserve them. Leave your neighbors alone. They don't have to participate along with you if they don't want to.
And we certainly can't tolerate a government that arrogates to itself the authority to legislate for all of us what cultural practices we need to follow and avoid, and what vocabulary and grammar we need to use, so as to conform to some official American language and culture.
Last edited by Superfluous Man; 11-08-2017 at 10:30 AM.
UGH. REALLY?
Your concerns are completely garbled. You throw terms around like they themselves are an argument, without considering what those terms mean, or imply. Any attempt to debate actual content with you is diverted to previous, unsubstantiated, concerns.
You are simply xenophobic. You whine like a SJW, wringing your hands about being a victim. You try to conceal this by speaking of "risk management", and government-doled "libertarianism".
All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
-Albert Camus
Added #8. thx
1. They always focus on blaming US intervention 100% of the time as the cause of Islamic terrorism without recognizing or room for recognizing the following issues below.
2. No recognition that the past cannot be undone and for risk management based on what they believe are past wrongs the US has committed. They always re-direct the conversation back to #1.
3. Absolutely no concern for radical Islam and jihadist immigration or retribution from what they believe from #1. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
4. No mention or concern for US victims or potential US victims. When it is brought up they always go right back to #1 and/or the victims of #1.
5. No concern over a statist authoritarian belief system masquerading as a religion and in some cases they make a moral equivalence to modern Christianity for which there is no Christian terrorism on the scale of radical Islam. Conversation is redirected back to #1.
6. Little to no concern of growing the welfare state due to immigration. Conversation is refocused back to #1.
7. No recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time. They refocus the conversation back on #1.
8. No recognition of displacement of native population and the resulting discrimination, culture and language issues it presents for them. Failure to recognize balkanizing any region historically has resulted in civil unrest - ethnic strife.
9. If someone points out that #1 is not entirely the issue and raises issues 2 to 7, they are immediately slammed as full of "hate", fearful, a Trump supporter as an epithet , called a Neocon, a Nazi or anti-semite, a hypocrite, demeaned in some manner, or some other personal attack or falsely accused of a personal attack and are hit with negative reps.
10. When confronted with this list they claim to have addressed these points when they have not and then they redirect the conversation back to #8 or #1. They even post their own fake number list that does not reflect these points made above which is all about foreign intervention, #1 again. While again, never addressing the list above.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
I can't fathom what kind of logical contortions must go through your mind to be able to call other people being non-European and speaking a language other than English with one another a form of abuse committed against anyone.
If the racist elderly people you're talking about want to confine their interactions to people just like themselves, that's their right, whether those people make up 20% of some larger population or 90% of it. But interfering with the rights of other people to be different from them is not their right.
So what you and @otherone are saying is:
1. You believe US intervention 100% is responsible for Islamic terrorism without any recognition of the inherent problems with Islam or the following issues:
2. No risk management based recognition what you believe are past wrongs the US has committed.
3. Have no concern of radical Islam and jihadist immigration or retribution.
4. Have no concern for US victims or potential US victims.
5. No concern over a statist authoritarian belief system masquerading as a religion.
6. Little to no concern of growing the welfare state due to immigration.
7. No recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time.
8. No recognition of displacement of native population and the resulting discrimination, culture and language issues it presents for them. Failure to recognize balkanizing any region historically has resulted in civil unrest - ethnic strife.
???
Last edited by kahless; 11-08-2017 at 10:51 AM.
I cleaned it up specifically for you after your complaint that it was garbled. Which ones do not reflect your viewpoint?
1. You believe US intervention 100% is responsible for Islamic terrorism without any recognition of the inherent problems with Islam or the following issues:
2. No risk management on what you believe are past wrongs the US has committed.
3. Have no concern of radical Islam and jihadist immigration or retribution.
4. Have no concern for US victims or potential US victims.
5. No concern over a statist authoritarian belief system masquerading as a religion.
6. Little to no concern of growing the welfare state due to immigration.
7. No recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time.
8. No recognition of displacement of native population and the resulting discrimination, culture and language issues it presents for them. Failure to recognize balkanizing any region historically has resulted in civil unrest - ethnic strife.
???
Last edited by kahless; 11-08-2017 at 11:08 AM.
I'll play, but your strawmen terms are silly...
1. Please show me where I said that - otherwise, please acknowledge that you're making $#@! up.
2. Risk management??!!! Holy Shyte! Perhaps a little context of the risk level compared to the wealth and liberty given up to mitigate those "risks"!
3. I certainly have concerns. They just don't make me irrational. I can still see good individuals among the bad ones.
4. Same concern I have for any victims of senseless violence - not sure why we're bringing the thought-crimes into this. (Does is matter to you why a crazy kills?)
5. I have more concern about the authoritarian methods you would use, to be honest...
6. I have issues with the welfare state. Period. This is the real problem. End that and the other problems go away. But you don't solve a government-created problem with MOAR government. That's the statist fantasy.
7. I don't worry about mass immigration for that reason - I'm already swarmed in a nation of people that make a libertarian society impossible - you included. Should I collectivize all those people, too, and call for MOAR government to oust them, maybe???
8. This is only a problem when you have governments with too much power. Take away their power and restore minority rights (you know... the smallest minority - individual rights) and that problem ceases to exist. You certainly don't want to give governments MOAR power!
9. Treat each person as an individual with inherent individual rights. Act on it. Believe it. And live it. Otherwise, you're just as big a problem as anyone else who ignores those things - regardless of their religion or ideology.
Last edited by CaptUSA; 11-08-2017 at 11:12 AM.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
You are against minimizing the risk by having some form of immigration controls such as a ban on Muslims from regions with activist terror cells.
So again you have no issue with immigration of peoples that support and will implement an authoritarian belief system that we will be subject to.
By importing people that use and believe in the welfare state they will eventually vote for MOAR government. Not only have you surrendered your beliefs to statism you are now advocating for statism using immigration as a tool to achieve the means.
Does not change native population being made culturally and through language a stranger in their own lands. Failure to recognize balkanizing any region historically has resulted in civil unrest - ethnic strife.
By supporting mass immigration of peoples that believe otherwise you are directly working against this belief.
Last edited by kahless; 11-08-2017 at 11:28 AM.
Connect With Us