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.

 

Establishment in attack mode

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Disgusting as their new attacks are we should have expected nothing less. It was the late Mohandas Ghandi who explained decades ago how the whole song and dance occurs: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win”. Now we can only hope that stage four comes next.

Now they have found their new attack on Ron Paul… he made wise investments. For years he has told people to invest in gold because this gravy train is coming to a disastrous end. The establishment ignored him, often they mocked or laughed at him, but now that he seems formidable it is time for war. Contrary to what they have been telling us in the media, he is a first tier candidate with a good possibility of winning, they are showing us that right now by beginning to enter attack mode just a little over 4 months from the first Iowa Caucus.

Candidate of Doom and Gloom - Note to voters: Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul's multi-million investment portfolio is a big bet against the U.S. economy.
Ron Paul Owns Millions in Gold Interests

It looks like they now have something to run on. Of course anyone who has a well functioned brain can tell you that while he does invest in gold it is only because he believes that fiat currency will collapse bringing our entire financial house of cards down with it. But for those people who are snooping around for a single hint of anything suspicious this will be like Christmas come early.

FOX News Headline: “Ron Paul owns stocks in gold; conflict of interest?” So the talking heads and the elite who control them or work alongside them will be taking this issue to the extreme before the primary cycle begins. I suspect this is for two reasons; 1) try and show him as betting against the entire US economy so as to get rich, and 2) they are angry that they did not listen to him years ago.




edit on 8/29/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


I bet they're going to keep finding tiny little insignificant details to blow out of proportion and try to get people to oppose him or change their minds about him all the way up until election day.

So far they've thrown out the ideas that "Ron Paul is a racist because he wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights Act", "Ron Paul supports white supremacists because he accepted a donation from one", "he's too old to be president", and now they're taking the "Ron Paul is anti-economy because he invested in gold" route.

I wonder what other tricks they have up their sleeves....
edit on 29-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: to edit my post



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by Misoir
 


I wonder what other tricks they have up their sleeves....


Like Alex Jones said their next attacks will probably be something like... "Ron Paul assassinated Lincoln" "he blew up the RMS Lucitania" and "Paul crucified Christ"



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 



Like Alex Jones said their next attacks will probably be something like... "Ron Paul assassinated Lincoln" "he blew up the RMS Lucitania" and "Paul crucified Christ"
That's good stuff. I didn't get around to watching those yet, but I'll check them out because Alex Jones tells it like it is.



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


After reading these articles my guess is they will be pushing into an investigation of mis-conduct or some such thing. While Obama gives guns for trade of drugs to the cartels and thousands of mexicans are getting killed . As the American people are literally being robbed blind by his banker friends they will drive this right over the edge. They have shown what they are capable of around the world. Does anyone think they would act any different at home?



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 09:47 PM
link   


News is supposed to be objective and provide a factual, complete account of events without injecting subjective opinion. The only agenda news is supposed to further is the dissemination of the truth so that people are informed of the facts and are free form their own opinions. PERIOD.

99% of all "news" today is a comercial for someone's hidden or quasi hidden agenda. People who watch national television "news" are the most poorly informed people on this planet. Most disturbing and destructive is the fact that people believe that they are informed. Why in heck do people believe that what the television "news" people say is true? If you fail to accept "the most trusted name in news" or "news that is fair and balaced", then you are labeled a "conspiracy theorist".

But the "news" as "reported" is the furthest thing from trustworthy or fair or balanced. What a bunch of LIARS.

Thank God for the internet and alternative news sources. While not perfect, at least a greater amount of information and a variety of views on most subjects are available with minimal effort. (kudos for ATS, trolls included).

We really should rename the MSM as the mainstream trolls or the mainstream monsters.

But their lying would not be a problem if so many people did not automotically believe everything that comes out of their mouths. We need to shout from the rooftops, "YOU ARE BEING LIED TO!"

I stopped being so trusting after being severly burned a few times. How burned are Americans going to ned to be before they stop trusting these monsters? I fear it may never happen because it is a painful, disorienting, humiliating experience coming to grips with deception.

It makes me so mad that the most decent men that I have ever come across in public life is the target of these leches. How about they report that he doesn't participate in the congessional pension plan. HE ACTUALLY RETURNS THE MONEY TO THE TREASURY. Why don't they report that Ron Paul does not benefit from the congress's cadillac healthcare plan and that he has never voted in favor a congressional pay raise. Took me about 10 seconds on google to find the facts.

If you guys pray, please pray for Ron Paul. I personally believe this is a spiritual battle.


edit on 29-8-2011 by robyn because: speling



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I saw a video last week of Peter Schiff breaking down that Barrons article.

First of all this is a stockmarket newsletter, and Ron Paul's stocks (in miners) have shown huge gains in the 8-10 years he's owned them. He asks "Where are the accolades?". Any investor to pick stocks so wisely would be extremely lucky yet he gets no credit.

Secondly the article indicates that he votes in favour of his portfolio yet the opposite is true. As an advocate of sound money and sound fiscal policy he is voting AGAINST his own interests. If the US implemented sound fiscal policies his portfolio would go up in flames as gold would plummet. He just understands politics, and economics. The world could do a lot worse than have Ron Paul in the White House. Unfortunately it won't happen as ATS is not a accurate microcosm of society. 90% of the population are still mesmerised by FOX, CNN and MSMBC and the whole 2-party dictatorship that exists throughout the modern world.



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I saw a video last week of Peter Schiff breaking down that Barrons article.

First of all this is a stockmarket newsletter, and Ron Paul's stocks (in miners) have shown huge gains in the 8-10 years he's owned them. He asks "Where are the accolades?". Any investor to pick stocks so wisely would be extremely lucky yet he gets no credit.

Secondly the article indicates that he votes in favour of his portfolio yet the opposite is true. As an advocate of sound money and sound fiscal policy he is voting AGAINST his own interests. If the US implemented sound fiscal policies his portfolio would go up in flames as gold would plummet. He just understands politics, and economics. The world could do a lot worse than have Ron Paul in the White House. Unfortunately it won't happen as ATS is not a accurate microcosm of society. 90% of the population are still mesmerised by FOX, CNN and MSMBC and the whole 2-party dictatorship that exists throughout the modern world.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Watching the first video right now. The dude says that the media's lack of coverage/negative coverage of Ron Paul makes a lot of people research for themselves why they are treating him that way and consider that maybe they have an agenda, but to be honest I think lots of people are too brainwashed or stupid to even consider that and just take what they hear as the unbiased truth.

They talk a bit about the young people that support him, and I always wonder why that is. Why do the younger people understand lots of the problems with the government and see that we need to restore the Constitution? Shouldn't the older and "wiser" Americans be the ones that know about the Constitution, how the government used to operate, how we've been fighting wars for decades, and so on?


4:13 - "Only Ron Paul is telling us the truth", I need to get that on a bumper sticker.

5:45 - "Nobody trusts the MSM", then why the hell do so many people watch it?

8:10 - "Well they're undoubtedly political hacks, I mean they're just complete political fake creatures who constantly flip flop", damn I love listening to Alex Jones talk.

10:40 - That was pure gold when Alex Jones says that a private corporation looking out for themselves isn't treasonous, but Congress allowing this to happen is the treasonous thing. Same with when he talks about Rick Perry trying to "shapeshift" into Ron Paul by stealing his position on powerful issues.

edit on 30-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: to edit my post



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:29 AM
link   
All the republicans are being attacked. Heck hardball devoted half their show trying to discredit Perry but that's to be expected. I find it funny that people keep claiming he's being ignored yet always have some new video of negative remarks about him.

Kind of hard to keep producing new video of him if he is being ignored so much.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


So the guy who's been telling everyone that will listen for 30 years that the paper currency we use is useless unless it is backed by Gold, has bought Gold???

What a frekkin shock..


You'd think they'd call him stupid if he DIDN'T buy Gold.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Just wait tell he tells them that we do not need a military.
That all we need to do is hijack a few planes, fly them into infrastructure,
collapse their economy and bring them to their knees.
7500 sorties over Libya when a few hijacked planes could have brought Libya down.
He is right we don't learn from our enemy's, and continue to waste trillions on war.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
I think there is a clear and cut case of conflict of interest for Paul. Not because I dislike him,
he is my favorite candidate, but because it is unreasonable to expect president Paul to
destroy his own portfolio. The opposite is also true; Paul would benefit TREMENDOUSLY
from a complete crash of the dollar, his family would probably benefit greatly too. It is a
very legitimate thing to question IMO, it is an unfortunate bind to be in. If Paul's position wins
the day, the consequential truth is that hundreds of millions of Americans could very well
be destroyed in the natural resulting process. Could we not assume that Paul's inclination
would be too facilitate bettering his personal financial position?

If not, I wanna understand your perspective.

Mis', do you think Paul could make decisions that could potentially wipe out his and families positions?

AND

Do you think Paul would be immured from the desire to facilitate the "event" he claims is inevitable?



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


So you think he is wrong simply because he has acted on his own constant beliefs over 30 years??

Is it not fair to say that he also gave 30 years of FAIR WARNING???

I can't believe this is even a debatable topic.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Janky Red
 


So you think he is wrong simply because he has acted on his own constant beliefs over 30 years??

Is it not fair to say that he also gave 30 years of FAIR WARNING???

I can't believe this is even a debatable topic.



You are over simplifying this discussion to the point of absurdity IMO

I don't think he is wrong for his investment strategy...

I am simply stating that Paul "wins" if I am wiped out, my family is wiped out, my friends are wiped out.

On the other hand, Paul loses if my position and the current paradigm is re-fortified.

Contrary to your proclamation, I think this is a very important topic to debate.

It would be like hiring a man as bank president, knowing that he is invested heavily in a short position
in regards to the very bank he is entrusted in over seeing. A private company WOULD NOT hire on
a man with such a position, the notion is that absurd.

It is a tough spot



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 



All the republicans are being attacked. Heck hardball devoted half their show trying to discredit Perry but that's to be expected. I find it funny that people keep claiming he's being ignored yet always have some new video of negative remarks about him.

Kind of hard to keep producing new video of him if he is being ignored so much.
Kro, we've been over this before. Do I need to post the proof that he's being ignored again? Here.

PEJ also looked specifically at the network morning andevening news programs, primetime cable news programs and Sunday morning shows on August 14 and 15. The results?

According to that analysis, Paul was mentioned just 29 times. By comparison, Perry was mentioned 371 times, Bachmann was mentioned 274 times, and Romney was mentioned 183 times.


Now that was done two weeks ago, so I'm sure his coverage has increased slightly, but the media has a clear bias against him and if you can't see that......you do too.

And they don't just ignore him, but when he's mentioned they often have some negative remark like "Oh, he's unelectable!" or something like that.
edit on 30-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: to edit my post



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
If Congressman Paul is the type of libertarian he claims, then it is entirely logical for him to own large amounts of gold.

Do your research, peeps. Before the banksters came in with the gold recall and the Fed to screw you all over, the mark of a free man in America was that he owned gold. Fiat currency wasn't anywhere near as big of a deal back then as it is now; and we're all paying for it.

This is one area where Ron is dead right, regardless of the rest. Get your gold and silver, while there's still some left to get. Before too long, the paper stuff isn't going to cut it any more, and you will need metals (gold, silver, copper) to keep you in food and the various other substances that make life enjoyable.

It's a better system; a system with integrity. It's the way things are supposed to be. The future is going to be good...it's just taking a little while to get there, is all.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Just wait til they find pics of Condo Rice in his lair full of gold



 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Hey Misoir, I haven't heard back from you here.

If you think I am completely off base I will be happy to hear about, maybe I am
missing an important component.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red
I think there is a clear and cut case of conflict of interest for Paul. Not because I dislike him,
he is my favorite candidate, but because it is unreasonable to expect president Paul to
destroy his own portfolio.


No person would intentionally destroy their own portfolio, agreed, the problem that arises here which takes the discussion away from if this had been a more mainstream candidate is the fact that he has been advocating these issues as a solution. It is not that he bought all this up and goes around preaching gold as a currency; he has told people to invest in it themselves for security. And yes, it does appear as a conflict of interest, but if you understand the Austrian School of Economics, as he does, and has been preaching by making himself wealthier from those investments it would also make all people wealthier.

I would call into question his honesty had he not invested in gold, etc… because that would mean that his preaching gold will go up and dollar would go down could be a lie. But he put his money where his mouth is. While you could see this as betting against the United States it is not, at least in my opinion, because if he is wrong his portfolio will take a hit. Betting against the US? I would call into question those who are devaluing the dollar and buying up land in Latin America not the man who has told us the dollar will die (as it is) and invested in the same safe spot he has been preaching for decades.


The opposite is also true; Paul would benefit TREMENDOUSLY
from a complete crash of the dollar, his family would probably benefit greatly too. It is a
very legitimate thing to question IMO, it is an unfortunate bind to be in. If Paul's position wins
the day, the consequential truth is that hundreds of millions of Americans could very well
be destroyed in the natural resulting process. Could we not assume that Paul's inclination
would be too facilitate bettering his personal financial position?


If I was in the exact same situation as Paul I would have invested in the same things as well. Of course I will get wealthy from the further devaluing and destruction of the dollar but if I was trying to make myself extremely wealthy rather than investing in a smart and wise place I would not be out there preaching ‘end the fed’ or anything like that because in the end, that would not make me richer. I just think so many people are angry that they did not their money in a safe place years ago, as he said, so now they want to question his loyalty and try to show a conflict of interest.


Mis', do you think Paul could make decisions that could potentially wipe out his and families positions?


The decisions such as ‘ending the fed’ and ‘putting US on gold standard’ would not exactly wipe out his portfolio.


Do you think Paul would be immured from the desire to facilitate the "event" he claims is inevitable?


Ron Paul is not the one devaluing the dollar, he is not the one lowering interest rates, he is not the one spending us into a higher deficit, all of these things are done by the people he is railing against. So what if he gets rich because people refuse to wake up to the reality of their own demise? In the end, everyone looks out for number 1. But to suggest he is betting against the US when he keeps telling us what the problem is and how to fix it (which definitely would not make him rich) I think that shows a lot about his character.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join