Congressman Ron Paul: One Worlders Will Fall

Congressman Ron Paul, icon to liberty lovers the world over, sent a stark message this week to ruling elite “internationalists” attempting to expand globalism via the Western military industrial complex – you will fail.

Speaking on the nationally syndicated Alex Jones Show, Paul expressed his concern that a deeply malign form of globalism is being promoted and expanded on the back of international crises, namely the political upheaval in the middle east and north Africa, coupled with ongoing financial meltdown.

“The new world order people see it as an opportunity to move one step forward.” Paul stated, alluding to an infamous description of the current US led international coalition of powers.

“Bush senior bragged about that, remember he didn’t want to go to Congress, he came and got a token approval in 1990/91 for the Persian Gulf war, but he got his orders from the UN, he didn’t need to go to Congress… That was the first time I heard a president use the words ‘new world order’, anyone who used that had to be a conspiracy nut, but Bush was saying this is what we need to do for the ‘new world order’.” Paul explained.

“They go to war under NATO and the UN, not by the Congress,” Paul added. “But ultimately the big one is to control the money, so they are making their plans to have a world wide fiat currency through the IMF/World Bank operations.”

As reported in the Financial Times and elsewhere recently, the IMF strongly advocates the eventual introduction of a global currency, called the “bancor”, based on its own synthetic paper currency special drawing rights (SDRs), claiming it would “stabilise” the international monetary system.

“The new world order is certainly looking at this monetary crisis, we want the Constitution, sound money, gold and silver, but at the same time the internationalists are planning for their international fiat currency.” Congressman Paul stated.

Paul, also a member of the Joint Economic Committee, the Committee on Financial Services and the Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy, believes that sound monetary policy will eventually be recognized as the solution to the financial crisis, rather than a system of global regulation and global currency being pushed by such unaccountable global bodies as the IMF and World Bank.

“They have a long way to go because what they advocate is still fake money and they have to defy the market place.” Paul said. “They may make the attempt and they may be able to cause a lot of harm in the meantime, but ultimately sound money wins out. Hopefully we do our job and liberty wins out over the tyrants.”

“The bankruptcy will bring us to our knees, but lets just hope we can put it back together in a lot better shape than we have it now.” the Congressman added.

Paul, who is also a serving member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is adamant too that despite the recent military activity in Libya and elsewhere, ultimately, the move to expand the ‘new world order’ brand of globalism by force is destined to fail.

“It’s not going to work for them, no matter how hard they try and how many temporary military victories they have, it’s going to be a failed system.” he said.

“It will serve its purpose in many ways by bringing us to our knees and some of them like the opportunity, they don’t let emergencies go to waste, they take advantage of it and that’s why they think they can advance a new world order and one world government under these conditions.” the Congressman added.

“I think our message is spreading and I hope we are going to be very good competitors with these one worlders.” Paul concluded.

During the interview Paul also gave the strongest indication yet that he will announce a presidential run for 2012 within the next few weeks.

“We’re getting awfully close,” Paul explained, “and there are just a few other things I have to iron out personally to make my final decision.”

Though I am a fan of Ron, I fear that all this talk will only, yet again fall on deaf ears. Yes the people of the US are waking up, but I think its a little to late...I still have hope...but not much.

www.infowars.com...

Star and Flag OP I hope he is right, I hate to say it but now will they kill him or could he be one of them? Is there any truth of him and Jesse V. running anyone know?

reply to post by Whereweheaded


You got a linky-poo for us?

reply to post by Cuervo


yes i do sorry I didnt implement it at the time.....i posted it above and yet again here

www.infowars.com...



I know I know..infowars....but it was also on drudge.

Originally posted by FarBeyondDriven69
Star and Flag OP I hope he is right, I hate to say it but now will they kill him or could he be one of them? Is there any truth of him and Jesse V. running anyone know?

Ventura stated he would be Paul's running mate one condition: that Paul change from Republican to Independent.

i do not want either of those two dudes running

for all you supporters of them answer me these:

lets say paul and ventura get elected and close the foreign military bases then what with hundreds of thousands of troops stationed over there where are they going to work?

how many civilians are going to be put of of work? then what about the lost taxes revenues how is that going to be replaced? what about all those people who will lose their homes etc.

i have bigger problems with ventura who lies when he says all the money we spend on nuclear weapons when there hasnt been any new ones built since reagan and then what about that thing called nuclear medicine that has saved millions of cancer survivors or the medicines such as iosat and whatnot.

the ex seal should be grateful the amount of money we spent on the military the weapons and the billions on training that saves millions of americans lives.

the the whackjobs tv shows nah i dont want ventura

paul has ran twice and has been rejected does paul have all the answers no noone does doesnt matter who you elect its the system that is the problem.

Originally posted by neo96


lets say paul and ventura get elected and close the foreign military bases then what with hundreds of thousands of troops stationed over there where are they going to work?

That question alone illustrates America's reliance on war for our economy. If the first question people ask is "what are we gonna do for money if we don't throw tanks at people"... then that means we are more screwed than we thought.

The question should be "Why do we rely on war to employ people?"

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by neo96


lets say paul and ventura get elected and close the foreign military bases then what with hundreds of thousands of troops stationed over there where are they going to work?

That question alone illustrates America's reliance on war for our economy. If the first question people ask is "what are we gonna do for money if we don't throw tanks at people"... then that means we are more screwed than we thought.

The question should be "Why do we rely on war to employ people?"

A lot of the troops are highly trained in technology, construction, medical sector, etc .. let them work at home in projects to build the nation and better our conditions .. and believe me .. there will be a HELL OF A LOT OF MONEY available for that ...and then some ... closing the bases and ending these useless wars will save enough money to fix America 100x over in every department .. and still have enough left over to remove the deficit completely ... jobs will be created on a scale you can't even imagine ... America would once again become the shining star of the American deram that everyone will want to achieve ...

reply to post by Cuervo


we dont rely on war and just how many people are employed that it takes to support those men and women over seas.

how much of the so called military industrial complex is made in europe and china and taiwan.

for those people who think you are going to save billions on defense well think about how many billions are lost when those people arent working and arent paying taxes and those people who they are buying their homes and food etc and those people who make their living of those other people and so on and so forth.

you people want to cut defense do it but think of the consquences afterwards.

then you stop or cut military spending what about the evolution of technology what about that aspect of it? where do you think 90 % of the modern world comes from?

when paul has an answer to that maybe i will listen to what he has to say

reply to post by Whereweheaded


Two potentials exist. Paul/Kucinich, or Paul/Ventura. A Paul/Kucinich will probably be attacked by both left and right but will be given creditability. A Paul/Ventura ticket would be ignored by media, although would be very popular amongst average people.

I personally think Paul/Ventura ticket might be the best option, as the elites would fear Ventura being President if anything happened to Paul. Although, I would support either ticket. Our country needs to come together for mutual change that benefits the people first. Having a strict conservative and strict socialite together with the same focus of reducing spending and returning money to the people for greater prosperity a happy balance could be achieved.

Originally posted by neo96

for those people who think you are going to save billions on defense well think about how many billions are lost when those people arent working and arent paying taxes and those people who they are buying their homes and food etc and those people who make their living of those other people and so on and so forth.

We should use that money to employ doctors and nurses for Americans here at home

The reason why the One World Currency will not work is because all corporations will go to countries were you get more slave labor for less money... although this is starting to happen now, it will cause every gov't in the world to bend over backward to these bankers!!! God this is a sad future!!!

GODDAMN. Well said.

reply to post by neo96


Since the military seem to be the only government body who take their oaths to the Constitution seriously, doesn't it stand to reason that would be our best defense against the NWO?

To answer your question, Neo, our military should be here- *defending* the US as the Constitution says they will do. Do you think if we had military bases on the southern border that we would have the influx of illegals and drugs that we have? I don't. It *is*, for all intents and purposes, a war zone in places.
Military bases mean economic growth and development to support the soldiers and their families. They have stable income and they spend money. That would certainly strengthen our local economies; which lead to increased tax revenues across the board.
Further, we should disband DHS (it would have been redundant had our troops not been sent to the ME). I trust our military 100% more to defend our borders, our ports, and our airports than I do a bunch of hotdogs from Wackenhut (federally trained and employed or not, same difference). Isn't this how Israel handles their security?

The money we'd save on maintaining unnecessary bases overseas, let alone war hardware, etc would more than cover recommissioning old bases and building new ones- *responsibly* (meaning no inflated prices and overruns as a matter of course), probably with much left over. There has been a huge amount of waste there in the past. It could be tightened up.

Our infrastructure is crumbling- ie the bridge in Minneapolis that collapsed, the gas lines that exploded in California (and there's a part of either Hwy 90 or IH10 that goes through the swamps WEST (not east) of New Orleans that was said to be dangerously in need of repair several years ago. I doubt that's been remediated). Would you rather have your tax dollars paying 2 guys to stand around while every one guy is working or have it done right? (read between the lines here, will you please?)
They are reinspecting freeway here right now because of cracks in bridges that aren't even 5 years old (and this is no seismic zone). Look at the levees that collapsed in Katrina and the periodic flooding that happens on the Mississippi upriver. The federal government isn't taking care of our country.

IF it's true that we're EVER at risk of foreign troops on US soil, I want people here that I can trust. Our military can't help us much if they're several 1000 miles away, spread thin like paper, and the ones that *are* here are trying to recover from their third and fourth deployments and exhausted.
A well armed citizenry is fine- Thank God! but if TSHTF, nothing beats the pros as far as I'm concerned.

reply to post by neo96


You make it sound like advancement in military technology is analogous with "progress". Progress would be more aptly defined as a societal independence from a reliance on armed conflict to make advancements.

The fact that it would cause so much damage is exactly why we got to cut it off. Your argument mirrors my argument when I quit drugs: "But if I quit drugs, who's gonna supply my dealers with income?"

I like RP partially

However he is also a dickhead in some regards

He is against the global elite, yet he is unwilling to to impede the current scheme they have acting as if
there is a FREE MARKET. He speaks one way, but advocates policies that the global elite use to their advantage.
If they can figure out a way to do it, Paul will stay out of the way, it's written in his bible, the elites pray upon this passivity.

reply to post by Cuervo


no that wasn't my argument you people want to hate the military fine so be it you want to cut defense fine even thought it is bound by the constitution hell national defense is one of the few programs that is suppose to be guaranteed.

fine you people cut it and you will kill american lives sure why not when its not your life that hangs in the wind or is it.

all of you isolationists you know your history how well did that work out? world war 1? world war 2? hell even after clintons 8 years of cutting defense 9-11 happened.


when it comes to military tech cheaping out which is what you people want and some just want to end the military outright are cutting your own throats which is what it amounts to.

with idiots banning stockpiles and all the idiocy so far that has led to weapons systems such as the 50 year old m-16 and to the 40 year old tomahawks which the left is so dependent on when they want to act tough and the hundreds of other decades old technology we have because noone on the left believes in having the best that money can buy.

when you send americans to fight and you give them "Walmart" weapons to do it you people are doing nothing but signing the death warrants for those men and women.

and when it comes to that technology making something and sitting on it for decades isn't how that works other people in the world continue to make better weapons of death except us.

but like i said since your not military or ever will be whats it matter just as long as you people have all your roads and doctors and hospitals and whatever else you know none of that matters when people fly planes into them or blows them up.


you people will never get it and never will does the constitution mean nothing to you people

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Cuervo

 

when you send americans to fight and you give them "Walmart" weapons to do it you people are doing nothing but signing the death warrants for those men and women.

and when it comes to that technology making something and sitting on it for decades isn't how that works other people in the world continue to make better weapons of death except us.

but like i said since your not military or ever will be whats it matter just as long as you people have all your roads and doctors and hospitals and whatever else you know none of that matters when people fly planes into them or blows them up.


you people will never get it and never will does the constitution mean nothing to you people

First of all, you are speaking with the assumptions that a foreign enemy committed the acts on 9/11. I don't think I've seen any proof of that. Second of all, the people sending our brave men and women to foreign soil to fight in illegal wars are the ones signing death warrants, not the people who want to bring them home. The constitution says nothing about the sort of conflicts we are involved in right now. The constitution speaks about home defense... not foreign invasion with nifty operation nicknames.

I don't even know what to say about this thread other than I'm looking for a candidate who is going to move to Silver, repeal hemp/cannabis from the Drug Schedule, mandatorize hemp/cannabis production, and shrink our war force.
Really, we should have known this by now.
We don't need war any more, it's obsolete. Bring our boys and girls home now.

reply to post by neo96

lets say paul and ventura get elected and close the foreign military bases then what with hundreds of thousands of troops stationed over there where are they going to work?

There is plenty of borders that need to be secured right here on the US soil. I would be more than happy to see my tax dollars spent shutting down the southern border, and then migrating to the northern border.