Ron Paul suggests 'agenda' to expand terror war, attack American liberty

reply to post by whoshotJR
I agree with you 100%. I don't fly, although I have done so in the past. If I can't drive, then I won't go. If I decide to visit Europe or Asia, I'll take a boat. If I can't take a boat, then I just guess I'll have to stay at home. Am I afraid of terrorists? Nope! I'm afraid of a government who wants to look at my naked body (they will run from the screen screaming, holding their heads, and yelling "NO! NO! It can't be!" And I refuse to allow my wife to be seen naked by a stranger.

Originally posted by Polynomial C
Ron Paul is using people's FEAR and PARANOIA of BIG BROTHER to achieve his own dirty agenda ..

and all of you sheep are falling for it ..

Your post made me laugh so hard I almost broke a rib

Because it is so totally beggardly absurd. It is quite amusing that you would believe that someone who was pointing out only the facts of what is currently happening everywhere based on the fear of threat from terrorists would be taken by you to be untrue only because of your obvious dislike of someone who is against the liberal and progressive agenda currently underway. Because of this you forego all common sense about issues presented just because the messenger is not of your political party of choice, even if it makes good sense and is the truth... This is the sad part..
I've seen a lot of good truthful posts about current political happenings lately here on ATS and when I see your responses they look like a brown thing floating in a swimming pool of clean water, there is actually that much contrast in what you are saying as opposed to the rest of the threads, and you think everyone else is the sheep being brainwashed?
Hopefully one day you might wake up from your delusion because regardless of what you might think, we are all in this together and people care about you as much as the people who already know what is really going on right now.

And to clarify who is actually fearmongering, it is people who want you to overly fear terrorists so that you will gladly give up your civil liberties even more, and more, and more......and like RP said, it is you and me that will suffer for this, not the terrorists as proven by them being able to still get through screenings and security and start a fire on an airplane

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
It's not so conspiratorial, it's just an idiotic knee jerk reaction...nothing more.

It's the "idiotic knee jerk reaction" that you mention is the reason why we've been loosing our freedoms...Look at how the Patriot Act got passed. Bush fear-mongered Congress into passing it without even reading the damn thing.

Whoops! Did I just infer that Bush is a terrorist for using fear-mongering tactics on Congress? Well, consider that one of the best definitions of terrorism includes the use of terror-inducing tactics in order to bring a change in government operations, then yes, that does make Bush fit the description of a terrorist. So right now, I'll do more than merely infer it...Bush was the single most dangerous terrorist existent in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks!

Ok, so there it is...Yet, as the Chief Executive Officer charged with the Oath-bound duty to "faithfully execute the Laws" in America, what has Obama done about Bush? Well, by the Law, Obama should be removed from office for failure to arrest Bush. Just as Osama bin Laden got away from Bush (& Bush eventually gave up, even after having vowed to never rest until bin Laden was caught), it looks like Osama Barrack isn't even going to pursue Bush at all (even after his campaign "promises" to conduct investigation on Bush) & even more, Obama is progressing with Bush's initial crimes against the People. Doesn't the Law have a name for the crime of "aiding & abetting" other criminals? In the Constitution, it's called Treason!

Instead of our government setting up "knee jerk reactions" for people to follow, how about We the People actually call for our government to do their jobs & nothing else, as specified by the Constitution they've sworn/affirmed an Oath of Office for? Instead of twitching our knees in an idiotic reaction, we should be flexing our brains to follow up with the arrests for the real criminals...As in, with handcuffs in-hand, "flicking our wrists" to snap those handcuffs on the criminals in Office; especially in need of arrest are those "powers behind the scenes," the "advisors," the "committees" & the "think tanks" that influence government power without being bound by the same Oath of Office.

The biggest repurcussion of such knee jerk reactions stems from the fact that more people will now be willing to trade "liberty for security" when it's an illusion in the first place. TBTB cannot "secure" us anyway, they never could & they know it already. They use our tendencies towards knee jerk reactions against us, with forethought & malice. I've recently posted over in a thread that discusses (primarily) the Christmas Day failed plane bombing...My post over there applies equally well here too, because it addresses the real core behind our continual losses of our Rights, at the hands of our employee government. That, in fact & in Law, no Law Enforcement Officer has any lawful obligation to protect anyone from harm...Their job is to "pick up the pieces" after the crime & to arrest the perpetrators.

Even the US Founding Forefathers were aware that the government does not have the capability to protect us from anything other than foreign invasion. In the Constitution Preamble, the overall purposes for establishing the American Government are stated in general terms, with the remaining Constitution describing the specifics on how they must achieve those purposes. In the Preamble, there is described a five-fold goal:

...establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity...

The specifics in the Constitution do not allow for the "trading off" of any goal in favor of another...In short, there can be no trade-off of liberty for security, especially since the "security" the government imposes upon us is all illusionary in the first place. Ron Paul has referred to government sanctions against Civil Rights as a "placebo" & he's right on that count.

Originally posted by LiveForever8
If only he was twenty years younger, where is the next Ron Paul going to come from?

Sad to say, but after more than 30 years fighting such corruption in the halls of power, Ron Paul ain't no spring chicken anymore & no human being can expect him to keep going forever...He ain't the "energizer bunny," ya' know. The good news is that he's going to stick with it as long as he can & Dr. Paul has even made sure that the fight can still continue after he's gone...Besides the grass-roots support he's generated so far (& let's face it, the battle vs. corrupt government can only be fought by grass-root support), he's making sure that We the People won't be left out in the cold; check this out.

Originally posted by Polynomial C
He doesn't want freaking airport security ??

For god sake .. if you don't have security check ups people may/and WILL --

Smuggle drugs
Bring Guns/and weapons to the plane..
And the million other stuff criminals can do WITHOUT airport security ..
----------------------
Ron Paul .. the biggest Idiot in dc

It's not as extreme as you're making it sound...but there definitely is a line between "reasonable security measures" & "violating Civil Rights." Wake up, brother...The government's been crossing that line for over 100 years & they aren't going to stop unless We the People (the employers) stop the government (the employees)! I would think that, before calling someone else an idiot, that one would exercise knowledge & reason for themselves. That & a healthy dose of study in history might help to make a valid case for those who proclaim others as idiots...

Whatever the problem is, expanding the government is not the answer, as our Founding Forefathers well knew!

Thomas Jefferson
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.

George Washington
My observation is that whenever one person is found adequate to the discharge of a duty... it is worse executed by two persons, and scarcely done at all if three or more are employed therein.

George Washington
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

This is why We the People cannot allow the government to grow like a brushfire, beyond control. American government was designed to be strictly limited in scope, power & size...Emotional knee jerk reactions are only adding fuel to that fire, while we must learn that rational, calmed minds throw water on it instead. There are lots of good reasons to keep government small in size & no good reason whatsoever to let it grow big.

Even other noted personages have shown the ability to see truth when it stands up...For one example out of a multitude:

Douglas Adams
It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

I've got a similar philosophy towards "service" in the corrupted government of today...As I posted in this thread:

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
IMHO, Government Office of any kind should be considered as a Civil Service job (or a Public Duty), rather than a "self-service" job. So anyone who wants the job must either be greedy beyond all ethics or must be insane...Both conditions should serve as automatic disqualification.

IMO, it is right that "separation of church & state" is good, as no requirements for Office can be based upon any religious test...However, there should be a test to determine intelligence & knowledge of the Constitution for which the Oath of Office is sworn/affirmed. So far, the extent of our government officers' knowledge of the Constitution seem to be centered around the concept of "how best to violate it."

Originally posted by OpTiMuS_PrImE
#3 Your a dis-info tard

Heh! I prefer using the term "re-tard," as in "do it again, tard" or "think again, tard."

Originally posted by OpTiMuS_PrImE
Cry and say what else you like its the truth and you cannot defeat it.

That's right along with what Thomas Jefferson said (& I agree):

It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.

It sorta makes one wonder about the Big Corporations & Special Interest Groups that spend so much time, money & effort to lobby (bribe) the government into propping up their own ideas as being above the Law...

----------Continued Below------------

-----------Concluded From Above---------------------

Originally posted by niteboy82
Not to mention, walking down the street is not a civil liberty, nor is going to the mall. However it doesn't mean that your civil rights end when you do either.

Actually, you're right in a way..."walking down the street" & "going to the mall" aren't technically "civil liberties." They're Civil Rights. They come under the Right to Travel Freely (very different from the "privilege to drive"), just as the 1st Amendment Rights to Free Speech/Press/Religion/Assembly have been expanded into "Freedom of Expression."

The Bill of Rights is not the end-all & be-all list of our Rights...Recall the 9th Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Bill of Rights was derived from the Common Law &, as such, the Constitution establishes Common Law as the Supreme Law of the Land. Most of our actual Rights are still listed in the Common Law...Which our government officers are charged with upholding as much as the Bill of Rights & the Constitution as a whole, by lawfully-binding Oath of Office.

Originally posted by byteshertz
You may be big and powerful but you are still one country and you are about to become the new Germany, the countries that currently continue to play your game will eventually grow tired of your arrogance and will put you in your place, which will just end up in more bloodshed.

IMO, that particular coincidence is not coincidence at all. Just a look at Hitler's history during the time he began his rise to Power shows many parallel events in America's recent (past couple of decades) history. Why do I think it's no coincidence? Look up Project Paperclip...Go on, go ahead...I'll still be here when you get back.

When Hitler got "elected" into the position of dictator, what was Germany like? In a nutshell, a bankrupt Democracy; I know not only from studying history, but from my Grandfather who came over from Germany before WW2 & I was only knee-high to a knee at the time he told me about it. So, what's America like today?
All of the organization & infrastructure is already in place to turn America into the Fourth Reich, police state & all. We already even have a "holier-than-thou" attitude President in Office right now.

Stop, think & realize that America was not founded as a democracy & was never intended to become a democracy. Under Oath of Office, our government officers are lawfully obligated to guarantee a Constitutional Republic...So why are they all so gung-ho about the "spread of democracy" anyway? Because the "powers behind the throne" know that democracies never work...Democracies will always collapse. In short, "they" want America to collapse!

Before the establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank, America was the richest, most prosperous & productive nation, with the highest standards of living. It only took the Fed Res (an illegal counterfeiting & loansharking organization, no less) 20 years to engineer our first Depression. Now this country is under insolvable debt, if not literally in bankruptcy already.

Coincidence that we're paralleling Post-WW1 Germany? Coincidence that were devolving into another Nazi Germany? Geee, who'd have thought that, after WW2 & Hitler's depredations were brought to light & the whole world yelled, "Never Again!" that in truth...It is happening again!

Originally posted by David9176
Because of our terrible foreign policy and occupation in other countries, it is further damaging our national security.

...A problem also exasperated by the Executive Branch refusing to "faithfully execute the (Immigration) Laws" & leaving our borders so porous. Recognize it or not, our borders have been porous for over 30 years now. We're under an actual invasion already...A "civilian" invasion, but still no less of an invasion.

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
The people have begun to AWAKEN to this disgusting scheming,

Yep, it seems more & more people daily are choosing the red pill, DD.
IMO, we have the internet to thank for that. All throughout human history, TPTB have relied on the control of information (& who can have access to it) to keep people under enforced ignorance...But all that changed when the internet got into public hands without their censorships already in place. That's why (I've said this before & I'll probably say it again) -- Praise the Lord & Free the Internet!

Originally posted by whoshotJR
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

I also didn't realize that being able to ride a plane was a civil liberty.

I have always found this statement troublesome. It is frequently employed by
TSA to justify their actions with respect to this method of travel. I suggest it is an infringement on Americans right to travel, unhindered by government interference.
Flying is frequently not by convenience but required by time constraints and destination. It has also morphed into other venues. Travel by ship, bus and even ones private automobile IE Border Stops ten miles inside the actual borders. This is without doubt a VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE !

The Right To Travel

As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
SOURCE www.usconstitution.net...

[edit on 08.15.09 by Advancedboy]

Originally posted by 22-250

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

 

Another excellent comment by Ron Paul, Man to bad we slept on this guy in 08, he could be the President.

They would have never let him become President.

They wouldn't have a choice if enough people support him

I didn't read through this entire thread, so if this has been been mentioned I apologize in advance.

Someone on page one asked where the next Ron Paul will come from. I believe I can supply a probable answer to that question. Dr. Paul's son, Dr. Rand Paul, is running for the GOP nomination to replace Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning.

S & F!

There is still hope if Ron Paul gets enough momentum from the Audit the Fed Bill passing in the Senate and signed into law (wishful thinking) that he may become the next POTUS.

His credibillity is through the roof now and it's going to be a lot harder for the MSM to convince the American people that he is a nut ball.

Thank God he has the discernment to question every action our Government takes to limit our Liberty and freedom. Plus, he has the right tone and disposition to appeal to many different people....

Go Ron Paul!

America's Grandpappy. We all need bent over his knee and spanked.


[edit on 31-12-2009 by peponastick]

Originally posted by Polynomial C
This guy wants to take AIRPORT SECURITY AND check UPS .. one of the most ridiculous things i have heard this guy spit our of his mouth ..


Ron Paul is trying to appeal to the "NEW LIBERTARIAN" crowd that are afraid of a few security measures .. he is preying on your fears of big brother .. Just another Dirty Politician trying to get some votes ..

His Cult keeps on growing .. thank GOD he will never be president ( or relevant)

I dont see it that way. I see this guy wanting the airlines to be solely responsible, as they should be for their services or lack there of.
I see this guy wanting you or I to have our eyes open enough to make our own choices and control our own lives. I also see this guy wanting to address the true reasons that create our internal and external problems.
NCTS was supposed to mock/emulate interpol type functions within our functioning intel. Instead its become a swirling money drain.
The CIA-FBI-NSA-DHLS-NTSB-USFM networking is non existent.
An excellent place to start would be actually reading the constitution and the bill of rights and comparing it to ALL of Mr Pauls speeches and his voting record. Then do as thorough as you can background check on him.
I dont believe your allegations will match the facts whatsoever.
Your passion is obvious, your concerns are no doubt genuine.
I would suspect as an activist for personal liberty and freedoms your involvement in research and application has you making great advances and impact in the cause to keep your country free and its citizens whole.

Originally posted by LiveForever8
I like Ron Paul. Something about him that makes me actually want to listen to what he has to say, and its usually sound, logical conclusions.

If only he was twenty years younger, where is the next Ron Paul going to come from?

Watch this guy. He's still young, but he's plenty tough. I don't know where he stands on all the issues but if I was an American, I would certainly be on a long term Tim Ryan watch.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective
It seems to be obvious that Ron Paul has his finger on the pulse of America. I wish more people knew this, we need a doctor like him, now more than ever. Star and flag!

reply to post by Polynomial C


You are so far outta touch dude! Unless you're secretly Rudi Juliani posting here on ATS, than you have NO IDEA what you're talking about. Ron Paul is a REAL American who stands by his beliefs and does not waiver. He is unafrade of TPTB and is on OUR side in all this. For anyone to say anything bad about RP means they know NOTHING about him.

The point with security is its getting excessive. If you know anything about the event that day than you would know that the bomber was pretty much helped on the plane. It wasnt the security that missed him, he was "let" on the plane. The new scanners were ordered before the bombing attempt, soooooo..........................

yeah

Originally posted by WatchRider

Originally posted by 22-250

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

 

Another excellent comment by Ron Paul, Man to bad we slept on this guy in 08, he could be the President.

They would have never let him become President.

They wouldn't have a choice if enough people support him

If enough people supported him, I think TPTB would make sure that he wasn't able to take the oath of office if you know what I mean.

Originally posted by WatchRider

Originally posted by 22-250

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

 

Another excellent comment by Ron Paul, Man to bad we slept on this guy in 08, he could be the President.

They would have never let him become President.

They wouldn't have a choice if enough people support him

Actually, they would. They would just rig the elections like they have before. Peoples votes in this country only play a small part in the elections. The poster is right, "they" will NEVER let Ron Paul be president. No way no how!

reply to post by dazbog


Good to see someone else actually studies our right to travel. There are so many people here who don't get it, that is, the cat and mouse game the Elite are playing with us. They set-up the "event" with the help of the CIA and other stooges and then when it goes down, good or bad, the government "claims" they need to do more. It is a joke, and why these people here don't see it is beyond me.

They do one thing with the right hand and then react with the left. What is so hard to see. It is the oldest trick in the world, when you want something, do underhanded things and then offer the solutions. Problem, reaction, solution. Simple. DUH.

What gets me is people don't see it or believe it? Oh the government wouldn't do that.......just like assassinations of presidents, war, 9/11 and so on. Let's be real here.

Ron Paul is correct. But what everyone doesn't understand is that these laws do not apply to you and me. We don't need police and we don't need security if we all use our common sense and obey the one true law. For those who don't abide, there's a bullet in the chamber. I think the consequences would deter crime.

Thou shalt NEVER infringe upon anothers rights, life, liberty or propery EVER. Done, simple.

I like Ron Paul, but when is he going to stop hinting or alluding. Granted, it's easy for me, a person who's never held any public office to say this, but he might as well speak plainly.

Could this be the reason behind all this fuss:

150 more full-body scanners to go in U.S. airports

Washington (CNN) -- One hundred and fifty new full-body scanning machines are set to be placed in airports across the United States as federal authorities work to close security loopholes exposed by the attempted Christmas Day bombing of a U.S.-bound airliner.

The Transportation Security Administration ordered the scanners before the bombing attempt for up to $170,000 apiece. Plans are also in place to purchase an additional 300 units by 2012, TSA officials said.

www.cnn.com...

Originally posted by Polynomial C
This guy is a complete idiot ..

He doesn't want freaking airport security ??

[edit on 30-12-2009 by Polynomial C]

He never said that, he said airport security should be the airports responsibility. Even using the example of how efficient armored cars are at security, since they are responsible and not the government, they take their security seriously and end up being very secure.

The government seems to drop the ball quite frequently as it's juggling way to many balls and is trying to add more.

Isn't the point to discourage people from traveling?