It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Something i thought about: Ron Paul

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
Wouldn't Ron Paul's Policies be the perfect stepping stone for the Illuminati to inact Marshall Law?

Hear me out. Im not saying Ron Paul is part of them. But, if he got elected, i feel that his policies are actually going to benefit them.

Here's why:

#1 Bring all the Troops home.

This is one of his biggest premises.
But wait...

Now all these troops are at home, and for what purpose? We had troops all over the world for reconnaissance, information gathering and training.
Now ALL these troops are coming home... ?
Hmm.. that's interesting.

#2 Ron Paul's Policies will cause MANY people to be angry.

Lets face it. I agree with him, as do most people. We need to cut and its gonna hurt. But how many ignorant people rely on the system? All of these people will find out that they no longer have their benefits:
unemployment, medicare and medicaid to name a few.

People will take to the streets and riot. Even though Ron Paul's goal and message is for the best interest of the american people, the people themselves wont see it that way. WE want it NOW. There's already people outthere who dont care about freedom or ideology, they simply rely on that welfare check every month.. You take that away and they wont know what to do next.


Ok, so now we have two deadly combinations:

#1 All the troops are home.

#2 People are angry and rioting.

** Remember: People riot over sports. You take away their social security/medicare/medicaid etc. and now what do you think will happen?**


So combine those together and we have the perfect recipe for...

You guessed it...

Marshall Law.


Just a thought.

I support Ron Paul, but i thought this over and realized the implications.
edit on 17-8-2011 by demonseed because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
OR...

We divert the pentagon's trillions of wasted funds to rebuilding infrastructure in the U.S.....bridges, roads, interstate highways, water supplies, power plants...

~putting all of those soldiers to work, as well as our welfare state.

Just an idea.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
OR...

We divert the pentagon's trillions of wasted funds to rebuilding infrastructure in the U.S.....bridges, roads, interstate highways, water supplies, power plants...

~putting all of those soldiers to work, as well as our welfare state.

Just an idea.


In the long run, yes.

But im not talking about the long run. Im talking about the short run.

"Hey guys, im president. No more medicare and social security. You gotta earn a living."


People are going to get angry. Ron Paul isn't America's daddy. Its not like the people are just gonna accept things the way they are. People are going to get angry and riot, especially poorer communities that are enjoying the welfare state.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:31 PM
link   
I would honestly love to see the military used against rogue police departments/corrupt city councils and court members.

They've put countless people in horrible situations, I think they can go through one detainment/background and history check/sentencing...

They can replace the non-violent drug offenders that make up most of our prisons. And their vast assets (which would be seized, just like all that they've taken 'legally') can go a long way towards a real health care reform and such things as treatment facilities for the people with drug problems...

And then once our military has jailed all the criminal banksters and boss hogs, and some infrastructure has had time to change, they can all move on to ron pauls other initiatives and begin farming hemp to reclaim the economy...
edit on 17-8-2011 by 1825114 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by demonseed
 


With Money in the Common Man's Pocket again , Ron Paul would Not IMO be Chastized for his Stance on the Issues you mentioned . Americans want to SUPPORT Themselves Again without the Goverment Alms...........



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
I'd rather suffer working in the right direction, than suffer working in the wrong direction.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   
And to add to my previous post...

Paul at least wants to change the direction we're heading in; peacefully.

We humans have been around a few years. We're not the first generation to exist.

Our Founding Father's used examples of human history (trial and error) to draw up a nice game plan to live under, and if we just stick to it, it can work - better than what we're living with, at least. We've allowed too many changes to our country's game plan, and now it's time we take action and get things back the way they should be, or continue treading water until the boat eventually sinks.


We could just have a Revolution, and re-write a new Constitution to live under.

But that is not going to be fun for everyone. Let me tell you.


So let's face it, the government, for the most part, is out of control, bought out and influenced by special interests, and they are the one's who are making the rules everyone must live under. And people are under the impression that this is normal...

News Flash: That's not the way things are supposed to be in this country.

And our Founder's kindly reminded us of this threat, because they've seen it happen before:

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson

The sooner people understand, and act, on the situation we're currently in, the more likely we are to have a peaceful revolution.

All it takes is a little bit of action, by making a vote. And you don't have to be a superhero to vote.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
I think you guys took what i was saying a bit wrong.

I support Ron Paul myself(i voted for him in the ATS straw poll and will vote for him in the elections).

The point im trying to make is:

If the powers that be do exist(which i think they do), then its unlikely one man will change everything for the better.

This hidden cabal knows the way in which people behave. They know how to incite riots and cause homegrown terror. They can easily create a situation that would force marshall law.

Im just saying, be aware of what they are capable of. Its important to know that simply electing an official to solve all of this corruption wont guarantee it will go away.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Well ya, he's not going to just walk into office and flip the government on it's back. On his own, he wouldn't stand a chance against this corruption. His firm Constitutional ideology is completely against the agenda of the elites and the power hungry politicians, and those people want their secrets to remain just that, secrets, and Paul is trying to uncover this, so he's not working in their best interest, but The People's best interest.

What many people fail to realize about those who support Paul, is that he's a messenger. He is spreading a message that no one else is spreading, which is reintroducing the concept of independence, liberty, and freedom that seems to have been forgotten or is now misunderstood.

This message is different because those who get the message, are then personally inspired to spread this message to others. As more and more people get this message, it will become an unstoppable force.

What's interesting, coincidentally, is that his message is very similar to that of Anonymous. And you see how fast that message is spreading...


And yes, anything can happen. Don't bother trying to think ahead of a think-tank made of of millions of corrupt, highly intelligent, resourced people. If they have bad intentions, it's going to happen. How you respond is what matters.

For instance, they tried to use the tactic of a media blackout on Ron Paul, and we responded. Just one example of the shady things this corruption is capable of.

And corruption will always exist, to a certain extent. We just want to exterminate the corruption that is leading this country down the toilet. A little here and there is expected, but what we're currently dealing with is flat out pie-in-the-face.
edit on 8/18/2011 by BeyondPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by BeyondPerception
I'd rather suffer working in the right direction, than suffer working in the wrong direction.

You will! Starred.


This is why I'm interested in seeing RP as the president. But he seems to be losing steam already, he just doesn't have enough support nationally.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by demonseed
 
Perhaps you should refer to Paul's own thoughts on this? He's said many times that he would use money saved from our overseas militarism to SHORE UP entitlement programs so they remain viable, and putting the military to work shoring up our border security (I'm sure ending the running war with the drug cartels on our southern border would likely take priority as well).

Then as someone else mentioned, no need to add them to the ranks of the unemployed - we've got a LOT of infrastructure to rework.

Anyhow, here's what Paul said on the entitlement programs in his article My Plan for a Freedom President:

Of course, just as the welfare-warfare state was not constructed in 100 days, it could not be dismantled in the first 100 days of any presidency. While our goal is to reduce the size of the state as quickly as possible, we should always make sure our immediate proposals minimize social disruption and human suffering. Thus, we should not seek to abolish the social safety net overnight because that would harm those who have grown dependent on government-provided welfare. Instead, we would want to give individuals who have come to rely on the state time to prepare for the day when responsibility for providing aide is returned to those organizations best able to administer compassionate and effective help—churches and private charities...

Obviously, a president concerned with restoring constitutional government and fiscal responsibility would need to address the unstable entitlement situation, possibly the one area of government activity even more difficult to address than education. Yet it is simply unfair to continue to force young people to participate in a compulsory retirement program when they could do a much better job of preparing for their own retirements. What is more, the government cannot afford the long-term expenses of entitlements, even if we were to reduce all other unconstitutional foreign and domestic programs.

As I mentioned in the introduction to this article, it would be wrong simply to cut these programs and throw those who are dependent on them “into the streets.” After all, the current recipients of these programs have come to rely on them, and many are in a situation where they cannot provide for themselves without government assistance. The thought of people losing the ability to obtain necessities for them because they were misled into depending on a government safety net that has been yanked away from them should trouble all of us. However, the simple fact is that if the government does not stop spending money on welfare and warfare, America may soon face an economic crisis that could lead to people being thrown into the street.

Therefore, a transition away from the existing entitlement scheme is needed. This is why a constitutionalist president should propose devoting half of the savings from the cuts in wars and other foreign spending, corporate welfare, and unnecessary and unconstitutional bureaucracies to shoring up Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and providing enough money to finance government’s obligations to those who are already stuck in the system and cannot make alternative provisions. This re-routing of spending would allow payroll taxes to be slashed. The eventual goal would be to move to a completely voluntary system where people only pay payroll taxes into Social Security and Medicare if they choose to participate in those programs. Americans who do not want to participate would be free not to do so, but they would forgo any claim to Social Security or Medicare benefits after retirement.

Some people raise concerns that talk of transitions is an excuse for indefinitely putting off the end of the welfare state. I understand those concerns, which is why a transition plan must lay out a clear timetable for paying down the debt, eliminating unconstitutional bureaucracies, and setting a firm date for when young people can at last opt out of the entitlement programs.


No one cut off the bat, and you'll notice he ends with people being able to OPT-OUT of the system - I'd imagine to let it atrophy and fade away, instead of him just ending it and calling the game there.

Paul also realizes that on some of these issues, he'd have to work very much with congress as well as directly with the people. I think his plans would be a lot less disruptive than some people think, as they're nothing that americans did not all that long ago handle for themselves anyway. He's well aware that the welfare of the people is something to consider and is definitely interested in transition programs/phases.

Take care.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join