Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 36

Thread: Mises Caucus Coup D’Etat

  1. #1

    Mises Caucus Coup D’Etat

    There’s rumblings about a takeover of the L.P. by the Mises Caucus/Ron Paul types. Many of the people with large followings and influence are talking about starting up the Ron Paul Revolution 2.0.

    They seem to be tired of the LP pandering to the left and trying to win influence by adapting to the current system. They’re all about purging the so called “left libertarians” and restoring an idealistic plank. They haven’t said exactly what the plan is but have mentioned that something big is in the works.

    End the lockdowns
    End the Fed
    End all corporate Welfare
    End the warfare state etc

    Dave Smith is in,
    Pete Quinones
    Eric July
    Angela McArdle

    I’m guessing Tom Woods and Jeff Diest are advising as well?

    If anybody has more info on who or what is going on please clue us in and I’ll add the info to this post.
    Last edited by The Northbreather; 12-23-2020 at 08:11 AM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by The Northbreather View Post
    There’s rumblings about a takeover of the L.P. by the Mises Caucus/Ron Paul types. Many of the people with large followings and influence are talking about starting up the Ron Paul Revolution 2.0.

    They seem to be tired of the LP pandering to the left and trying to win influence by adapting to the current system. They’re all about purging the so called “left libertarians” and restoring an idealistic plank. They haven’t said exactly what the plan is but have mentioned that something big is in the works.

    End the lockdowns
    End the Fed
    End all corporate Welfare etc

    Dave Smith is in,
    Pete Quinones
    Eric July

    I’m guessing Tom Woods is advising as well.

    If anybody has more info on who or what is going on please clue us in and I’ll add the info to this post.
    If this is a fight between thick and thin libertarians, then viva la thin libertarians.

    But, if this is just a fight between different kinds of thick libertarians, left and right....



    Wake me when they get their heads out of their asses.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If this is a fight between thick and thin libertarians, then viva la thin libertarians.

    But, if this is just a fight between different kinds of thick libertarians, left and right....



    Wake me when they get their heads out of their asses.
    I’ve listened to thousands of conversations and interviews with these people and they are aligned at least with my philosophy.

    They may be considered radical by many who claim to be libertarian because they actually believe in and promote liberty..

    Like myself they’ve been avoiding the LP for some time now because it’s been such a letdown and embarrassment.
    Last edited by The Northbreather; 12-22-2020 at 12:38 PM.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If this is a fight between thick and thin libertarians, then viva la thin libertarians.

    But, if this is just a fight between different kinds of thick libertarians, left and right....



    Wake me when they get their heads out of their asses.
    What is a "thick" or "thin" libertarian?
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by The Northbreather View Post
    There’s rumblings about a takeover of the L.P. by the Mises Caucus/Ron Paul types. Many of the people with large followings and influence are talking about starting up the Ron Paul Revolution 2.0.

    They seem to be tired of the LP pandering to the left and trying to win influence by adapting to the current system. They’re all about purging the so called “left libertarians” and restoring an idealistic plank. They haven’t said exactly what the plan is but have mentioned that something big is in the works.

    End the lockdowns
    End the Fed
    End all corporate Welfare etc

    Dave Smith is in,
    Pete Quinones
    Eric July

    I’m guessing Tom Woods is advising as well.

    If anybody has more info on who or what is going on please clue us in and I’ll add the info to this post.
    Post 2008 the rallying cry was "take over the GOP." Now post 2020 it's "take over the LP." Sights lowered much?
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Post 2008 the rallying cry was "take over the GOP." Now post 2020 it's "take over the LP." Sights lowered much?
    Yeah, the phrase coup d'etat loses a lot of its punch when the etat in question is just the LP.

    This is probably on a similar level with getting Ron Paul to win a straw poll, and not the Iowa one, a lesser one.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    Yeah, the phrase coup d'etat loses a lot of its punch when the etat in question is just the LP.

    This is probably on a similar level with getting Ron Paul to win a straw poll, and not the Iowa one, a lesser one.
    Like Ron Paul winning the CPAC straw poll is 2011?

    https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/u...cs/13cpac.html
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  9. #8
    I just had a phone conversation on Friday with a well-known LP activist who told me about the plan for 2024. He did ask that I not breathe a word of what I was told and I will honor that. In the past couple of weeks I have bought memberships in both the national and state LP as well as joined and donated to the Mises Caucus. I would recommend that anyone interested in libertarianism do the same.
    Please consider donating to the Mises Caucus today. We are TAKING OVER the LP.

    We have big plans including creating a program to bring libertarians like Maj Toure and Tom Woods to college campuses.

    We have several LP Mises Caucus Members who won elected office in 2020 including multiple City Council seats.

    Your recurring donation is what helps us to set these ideas into motion.

    Donate today at www.TakeHumanAction.com



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Post 2008 the rallying cry was "take over the GOP." Now post 2020 it's "take over the LP." Sights lowered much?
    No.

    Talking about reclaiming the name and philosophy and party.

    Bringing back hard dissent and ideas the will be considered seditious by the status quo.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    What is a "thick" or "thin" libertarian?
    A "thin" libertarian is one who thinks that libertarian theory should be kept as minimal (and hence, as "thin") as possible. This is to be done by restricting the body of libertarian theory itself to the most basic and fewest necessary axioms, along with the "theorems" (such as the Non-Aggression Principle) which can be derived from that minimal set of basic axioms.

    A "thick" libertarian, on the other hand, is one who thinks that libertarian theory should be expanded (and hence, "thickened") to formally include things like opposition to racism and support for "equality" (whatever that might mean).

    For example, a "thin" libertarian may hate and denounce racism and will, of course, oppose racist policies that violate the NAP. But as a libertarian, he will oppose such racist policies as "unlibertarian" because they violate the NAP - not because they are racist. He might also oppose racist policies that do not violate the NAP because they are racist, but he will consider his opposition to them to be separate from his identity as a libertarian. He is willing to consider NAP-supporting racists to be libertarians, despite the fact that they are racists.

    A "thick" libertarian, on the other hand, will insist that in order to be libertarian one must always hate and denounce racism and racist ideas and attitudes. As a libertarian, he will oppose any and all racist policies as "unlibertarian" regardless of whether they violate the NAP - because they are racist. He will consider his opposition to them to be part of his identity as a libertarian. He is not willing to consider NAP-supporting racists to be libertarians, because of the fact that they are racists.

    "Thick" libertarians tend to be of the leftist variety, and some of them even support things like "universal basic income" in the name of "equality."
    https://i.imgur.com/BwU46s8.png

    Libertarian Party Mises Caucus
    "The libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party."

    Platform · Our Actions

    Mises PAC
    (Libertarian Party membership not required)

    #TakeHumanAction · Donate · Merchandise


    HOME · Facebook · Twitter · YouTube

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If this is a fight between thick and thin libertarians, then viva la thin libertarians.

    But, if this is just a fight between different kinds of thick libertarians, left and right....



    Wake me when they get their heads out of their asses.
    I don't know to what extent the "thin" vs. "thick" angle plays into this, but my impression is that the "insurgents" (the Mises Caucus, Dave Smith, Tom Woods, et al.) are motivated by impatience with the LP's attempts to win acceptance from the Cathedral (and the dubious "respectability" that comes with that acceptance). They want more of no-holds-barred, fire-breathing opposition to lockdowns, the police state, wars & foreign aid/entanglements, etc. - and less of simping milquetoastery, bland and inoffensive appeals to lowest common denominators, and the playing of footsie with things like identity politics. (Given the latter, "thick" libertarians don't seem likely to be enthused by their program, for whatever that might be worth.)

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Northbreather
    Like myself they’ve been avoiding the LP for some time now because it’s been such a letdown and embarrassment.
    Edit: I am completely disgusted by the libertarian party. They are worse than dems and repubs. I just get so angry when I think about them. My head is hurting from clicking on this thread.
    Last edited by Working Poor; 12-23-2020 at 06:42 AM.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Working Poor View Post
    Edit: I am completely disgusted by the libertarian party. They are worse than dems and repubs. I just get so angry when I think about them. My head is hurting from clicking on this thread.
    Wow. That's a strong statement. What makes them even worse then the Democrats and Republicans?

    It seems to me that the scarcity of Libertarian Party members in elected offices alone makes them less bad than the Democrats and Republicans.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    What is a "thick" or "thin" libertarian?
    thick are leftarians . Similar to the national leadership , closet commies.. Thin would be like an Indiana libertarian.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    thick are leftarians . Similar to the national leadership , closet commies.. Thin would be like an Indiana libertarian.
    These words are easy to equivocate though. My impression is that among the current anti-libertarian majority of this forum's membership, the label "leftarian" is used for thin libertarians, and for that matter any actual libertarians.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    These words are easy to equivocate though. My impression is that among the current anti-libertarian majority of this forum's membership, the label "leftarian" is used for thin libertarians, and for that matter any actual libertarians.
    there are very few actual libertarians still active here that i notice which is probably why ordinary conservatives have found the more prevalent leftarians distasteful but i'm only guessing .I am more of an old school big tent guy , i want everyone on board who isnt a leftist because that already eliminates so many people . as far as the national libertarian party goes I think the
    time has come and gone and they missed it but who knows . Where I am its at least as strong as ever .



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    there are very few actual libertarians still active here that i notice which is probably why ordinary conservatives have found the more prevalent leftarians distasteful but i'm only guessing .I am more of an old school big tent guy , i want everyone on board who isnt a leftist because that already eliminates so many people . as far as the national libertarian party goes I think the
    time has come and gone and they missed it but who knows . Where I am its at least as strong as ever .

    Are there any leftarians, in the sense of thick libertarians, defined the way Occam's Banana did above, posting here? If there are, I haven't noticed.

  21. #18
    Lol. It's like 2008 again when the Stormfronters flooded the forum and feigned innocence with, "I am not a racist. I don't see any neonazis."

    Now the biggest leftarians are saying, "I am not a leftarian. I don't see any."

    If you are going to be something, own it. Be honest with others and yourself. If you have to come to this forum and pretend you are not what you truly are, that's just sad.

    On the other hand, there are some so indoctrinated by the SJW propaganda in academia, they may actually be clueless.
    ...

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    Lol. It's like 2008 again when the Stormfronters flooded the forum and feigned innocence with, "I am not a racist. I don't see any neonazis."

    Now the biggest leftarians are saying, "I am not a leftarian. I don't see any."

    If you are going to be something, own it. Be honest with others and yourself. If you have to come to this forum and pretend you are not what you truly are, that's just sad.

    On the other hand, there are some so indoctrinated by the SJW propaganda in academia, they may actually be clueless.

    I'm definitely the furthest thing from a leftarian, at least within libertarian circles.

    What is it that you think constitutes a "leftarian"? I wonder if your answer may prove the point I made above.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    Wow. That's a strong statement. What makes them even worse then the Democrats and Republicans?

    It seems to me that the scarcity of Libertarian Party members in elected offices alone makes them less bad than the Democrats and Republicans.
    Well if they weren't screwing off they would be in office countering theses !@#$ers

  24. #21

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    What is a "thick" or "thin" libertarian?
    A thin libertarian is a person for whom libertarianism is simply the theory of individual liberty.

    A thick libertarian is someone who tries to append some other content (generally relating to cultural preferences) to that theory.

    For instance, when thick libertarians get excited about gay marriage, from whichever perspective, thin libertarians roll their eyes.

    N.B. This is not to say that thin libertarians have no cultural preferences; they just refrain from incorporating them into the theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    A "thin" libertarian is one who thinks that libertarian theory should be kept as minimal (and hence, as "thin") as possible. This is to be done by restricting the body of libertarian theory itself to the most basic and fewest necessary axioms, along with the "theorems" (such as the Non-Aggression Principle) which can be derived from that minimal set of basic axioms.

    A "thick" libertarian, on the other hand, is one who thinks that libertarian theory should be expanded (and hence, "thickened") to formally include things like opposition to racism and support for "equality" (whatever that might mean).

    For example, a "thin" libertarian may hate and denounce racism and will, of course, oppose racist policies that violate the NAP. But as a libertarian, he will oppose such racist policies as "unlibertarian" because they violate the NAP - not because they are racist. He might also oppose racist policies that do not violate the NAP because they are racist, but he will consider his opposition to them to be separate from his identity as a libertarian. He is willing to consider NAP-supporting racists to be libertarians, despite the fact that they are racists.

    A "thick" libertarian, on the other hand, will insist that in order to be libertarian one must always hate and denounce racism and racist ideas and attitudes. As a libertarian, he will oppose any and all racist policies as "unlibertarian" regardless of whether they violate the NAP - because they are racist. He will consider his opposition to them to be part of his identity as a libertarian. He is not willing to consider NAP-supporting racists to be libertarians, because of the fact that they are racists.

    "Thick" libertarians tend to be of the leftist variety, and some of them even support things like "universal basic income" in the name of "equality."
    Well said

    However, I'd argue that culture-right thinking has become dominant among today's thick libertarians.

    Pre-Trump, they leaned more heavily to the cultural-left.

    Then again, this may better describe the universe of libertarian-ish people than LP members proper.

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    I don't know to what extent the "thin" vs. "thick" angle plays into this, but my impression is that the "insurgents" (the Mises Caucus, Dave Smith, Tom Woods, et al.) are motivated by impatience with the LP's attempts to win acceptance from the Cathedral (and the dubious "respectability" that comes with that acceptance). They want more of no-holds-barred, fire-breathing opposition to lockdowns, the police state, wars & foreign aid/entanglements, etc. - and less of simping milquetoastery, bland and inoffensive appeals to lowest common denominators, and the playing of footsie with things like identity politics. (Given the latter, "thick" libertarians don't seem likely to be enthused by their program, for whatever that might be worth.)
    Since Tom has been one of the most prominent thick (and culture-right) libertarians of recent years, color me skeptical about that.

    Are they really upset about the LP playing footsie with identity politics, or do they just want to shift attention from left to right foot?

  26. #23

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by trey4sports View Post
    I just had a phone conversation on Friday with a well-known LP activist who told me about the plan for 2024. He did ask that I not breathe a word of what I was told and I will honor that. In the past couple of weeks I have bought memberships in both the national and state LP as well as joined and donated to the Mises Caucus. I would recommend that anyone interested in libertarianism do the same.
    Any hints then...?



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    I'm definitely the furthest thing from a leftarian, at least within libertarian circles.

    What is it that you think constitutes a "leftarian"? I wonder if your answer may prove the point I made above.
    I am not ignoring you. I am going to start a thread in the next day or two and approach it more respectfully than I did in my post that you quoted. It will be more from a philosophical perspective than accusatory.

    Overall I think the divide on this forum comes down to those who want to be left alone at any cost vs those who stick to principles at any cost.
    ...

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by The Northbreather View Post
    Any hints then...?
    Well, there is nothing that crazy about the plan. If you really want to know what the 2024 plan is join the LPMC group on Facebook and ask leadership. I don't know exactly how much strategic information I should divulge but we are going to take over the party from the Loser Brigade and restart the Ron Paul Revolution.
    Please consider donating to the Mises Caucus today. We are TAKING OVER the LP.

    We have big plans including creating a program to bring libertarians like Maj Toure and Tom Woods to college campuses.

    We have several LP Mises Caucus Members who won elected office in 2020 including multiple City Council seats.

    Your recurring donation is what helps us to set these ideas into motion.

    Donate today at www.TakeHumanAction.com

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    I am not ignoring you. I am going to start a thread in the next day or two and approach it more respectfully than I did in my post that you quoted. It will be more from a philosophical perspective than accusatory.

    Overall I think the divide on this forum comes down to those who want to be left alone at any cost vs those who stick to principles at any cost.
    Consider me pre-subscribed.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    Overall I think the divide on this forum comes down to those who want to be left alone at any cost vs those who stick to principles at any cost.
    And folks like me who want both.
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    An Agorist Primer

  33. #29
    If anyone is still having issues figuring out what some posters are meaning "thick" vs "thin" libertarians, I'll hearken back to how we used to detail the big "L" libertarians vs. the small "l" libertarians. It's easy to grasp when considering the big L types were very much "party first" and willing to play the games. Many within that sphere weren't exactly trusted by the rest of us (majority) small "l" types who put liberty and principles over everything.

    I think there may be some learning both sides can offer each other. But that comes after purging leftists out of the libertarian spheres. We are at that point, people. It's time to accept it. Marxists have been corrupting everything for decades and their fruits are beginning to show: mass laziness, ignorance, obedience, envy etc.

    We don't have time now (never had it to begin with) nor the resources to try and convert or "work with" leftists. Their intent is to destroy everything an rebuild it all in their sick and warped images. We need a vision, we need people to drive it. You either get on board or get out of our way.

    Conservatives and Constitutionalists will be the occasional allies as they always have been, but I don't know even after 2020 if there can be a permanent alliance between us and those two factions. I do think it's important that our ties with those groups bond stronger than ever before so we can fight against the common enemy.



    Long story short, I'm ready to double down but I need to know there's a plan. Sitting on the sidelines did us nothing. I'm willing to fight even if it's too late. At least it'll give me some additional purpose in life. There needs to be a Fellowship convened within all appropriate levels. If Dave Smith and/or Tom Woods want to start driving, I'll support them but they need to figure it out and get things going if they think they have a plan the rest of us can get behind.
    Last edited by Okie RP fan; 12-30-2020 at 02:19 PM.
    Welcome to the R3VOLUTION!

    Join the Mises Caucus and let's get this train rolling: https://lpmisescaucus.com/

  34. #30
    At risk of repeating myself, the root divide in the LP and in the liberty movement is the same divide that goes right through America. It's globalism vs. anti-globalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    I don't know to what extent the "thin" vs. "thick" angle plays into this, but my impression is that the "insurgents" (the Mises Caucus, Dave Smith, Tom Woods, et al.) are motivated by impatience with the LP's attempts to win acceptance from the Cathedral (and the dubious "respectability" that comes with that acceptance). They want more of no-holds-barred, fire-breathing opposition to lockdowns, the police state, wars & foreign aid/entanglements, etc. ...
    And there we have a key indicator. The anti-globalists will stubbornly stick to the non-intervention, anti-war, anti-foreign aid principles. The globalists see many exceptions to that "principle".

    - and less of simping milquetoastery, bland and inoffensive appeals to lowest common denominators, and the playing of footsie with things like identity politics. (Given the latter, "thick" libertarians don't seem likely to be enthused by their program, for whatever that might be worth.)
    Here, a globalist sees the world as a single entity, "we are the world", and despises any "tribes" (with the usual exception of what they consider their own tribe). Any tribalism, groupings or nations is a threat to globalism. "Playing footsie" with identity politics is an attempt at erasing all boundaries, and supporting globalism. A noble cause (principle) in a theoretical vacuum. But it means aligning with people who are very tribal, and their identity politics are about viciously battling other tribes (and implementing Marxism to boot).

    An anti-globalist sees many exceptions to the "we are the world" principle.

    For example, a "thin" libertarian may hate and denounce racism and will, of course, oppose racist policies that violate the NAP. But as a libertarian, he will oppose such racist policies as "unlibertarian" because they violate the NAP - not because they are racist. He might also oppose racist policies that do not violate the NAP because they are racist, but he will consider his opposition to them to be separate from his identity as a libertarian. He is willing to consider NAP-supporting racists to be libertarians, despite the fact that they are racists.

    A "thick" libertarian, on the other hand, will insist that in order to be libertarian one must always hate and denounce racism and racist ideas and attitudes. As a libertarian, he will oppose any and all racist policies as "unlibertarian" regardless of whether they violate the NAP - because they are racist. He will consider his opposition to them to be part of his identity as a libertarian. He is not willing to consider NAP-supporting racists to be libertarians, because of the fact that they are racists.

    "Thick" libertarians tend to be of the leftist variety, and some of them even support things like "universal basic income" in the name of "equality."
    Racism is a terribly charged subject, and is a subset of the bigger picture. It is boiled down to "you are a racist" if you do not agree with every last agenda item of someone else, usually a left activist. Now it has been perverted to the point that "you were a racist when you were born, and you can never not be a racist". It's simply a smear tactic at this point.

    It is the common charge against anti-globalists. You are a racist if you are not a globalist. An apple vs. orange false dichotomy. While a globalist or anti-globalist may be racist, it has no more bearing on the subject of globalism (or any specific elements of globalism), than whether a person eats carrots or refuses to eat carrots.

    Globalism vs. anti-globalism. Everything else is derivative or a distraction.
    "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-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.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Coup d'Etat in Turkey Breaking?
    By goldenequity in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 07-16-2016, 09:11 PM
  2. Former MI5 Officer: Ukraine was Coup D'état by the CIA
    By green73 in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-08-2014, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •