Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

How Much Longer Will War Profiteers Be Allowed To Do This To American Families?

Submitted by GBAmerica on Fri, 10/05/2012 - 21:51
Video, TV & Movies

How Much Long Will War Profiteers Be Allowed To Do This To American Families!



How Much Longer Will War Profiteers Be Allowed To Do This To American Families? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

Enter At Your Own Risk: Police Union Says ‘War-Like’ Detroit Is Unsafe For Visitors

Submitted by emalvini on Sat, 10/06/2012 - 12:30

Current Events
Michigan

DETROIT (WWJ) – The men and women of the Detroit Police Department believe the city is too dangerous to enter, and they want citizens to know it.

Detroit Police Officer Association (DPOA) Attorney Donato Iorio said officers are holding the “Enter At Your Own Risk” rally at 3:30 p.m. Saturday in front of Comerica Park to remind the public that the officers are overworked, understaffed, and at times, fearful for their lives.

“Detroit is America’s most violent city, its homicide rate is the highest in the country and yet the Detroit Police Department is grossly understaffed,” Iorio told WWJ’s Kathryn Larson. “The DPOA believes that there is a war in Detroit, but there should be a war on crime, not a war on its officers.”

Read more: http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/10/06/enter-at-your-own-ris...

Enter At Your Own Risk: Police Union Says

Glenn Greenwald: The US presidential debates' illusion of political choice

Submitted by P.Au.L on Sat, 10/06/2012 - 18:22
Election 2012

The issue is not what separates Romney and Obama, but how much they agree. This hidden consensus has to be exposed

The Guardian: Wednesday night's debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney underscored a core truth about America's presidential election season: the vast majority of the most consequential policy questions are completely excluded from the process. This fact is squarely at odds with a primary claim made about the two parties – that they represent radically different political philosophies – and illustrates how narrow the range of acceptable mainstream political debate is in the country.

In part this is because presidential elections are now conducted almost entirely like a tawdry TV reality show. Personality quirks and trivialities about the candidates dominate coverage, and voter choices, leaving little room for substantive debates.

But in larger part, this exclusion is due to the fact that, despite frequent complaints that America is plagued by a lack of bipartisanship, the two major party candidates are in full-scale agreement on many of the nation's most pressing political issues. As a result these are virtually ignored, drowned out by a handful of disputes that the parties relentlessly exploit to galvanise their support base and heighten fear of the other side.

Continue at The Guardian:

Glenn Greenwald: The US presidential debates' illusion of political choice | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

The Top Ten: It’s time for Ron Paul supporters to back Romney, Paul Ryan says

Submitted by DeMolay on Sat, 10/06/2012 - 22:50
Daily Paul Liberty Forum
Texas

Each week, Texas on the Potomac gives you a second glimpse at the most popular posts on our site. Here are your ten favorite posts for the week of Sept. 23 to Sept. 29:

1. Latina to Mitt Romney: We are not laughing at your Mexican joke. In a leaked video, the Republican nominee jokes that he would have a better chance of winning the election if his father had been born to Mexican parents rather than Mormon colonists in Mexico. But in a new commercial co-produced by the liberal group MoveOn and PresentePac+, one Latina says, “We are not laughing.” Alex Yap reports >>

2. The List:Which presidential polls were most accurate? The Pew Research Center and Rasmussen Reports were the most accurate in predicting the results of the 2008 election, according to a new analysis by Fordham University political scientist Costas Panagopoulos. The Fordham analysis ranks 23 survey research organizations on their final, national pre-election polls, as reported on pollster.com. Rick Dunham reports >>

3. Paul Ryan urges Ron Paul supporters to fall into line – ‘Do you want Barack Obama to be re-elected?’ Remember when Al Gore “invented the internet”? According to Paul Ryan, Romney-Ryan ticket is a good alternative as they see “eye to eye” on many different issues with the Texas Rep. Ron Paul. “There are many things that Ron has championed that I am a big believer in, especially liberty and sound money,” he said. Jana Kasperkevic reports >>

More: http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2012/10/the-top-ten-its-time...

The Top Ten: It

Not a Snow Ball's Chance in HELL

Ron Paul: “What I Fear The Most Is a False Flag – Something Happening Where One of Our Ships Goes Down, Or … a Plane Goes Down, And of Course It HAD To Be The Iranians, You Know, For Sure, For Certain”

Posted on October 6, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog

Will a False Flag Be the Start of An Iran War?

Ron Paul said recently (at 28:00):

What I fear the most is a false flag – something happening where one of our ships goes down, or there’s a plane that goes down, and of course it HAD to be the Iranians, you know, for sure, for certain.

(Paul previously warned of a “Gulf of Tonkin type incident” in Iran.)

Paul joins numerous other high-level government officials who have warned that a false flag may be launched against Iran to start a war:

• Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski (who helped to create Al Qaeda to fight the soviets in Afghanistan) told the Senate that a terrorist act might be carried out in the U.S. and falsely blamed on Iran to justify war against that nation.

• Daniel Ellsberg – the famous Pentagon Papers whistleblower – said “if there is another terror attack, “I believe the president will get what he wants”, which includes war with Iran

• Robert David Steele – a 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former CIA clandestine services case officer – says that elements within the U.S. government are trying to carry out a false flag operation and blame it on Iran

• Former high-level CIA officer Michael Scheuer – who was the head of the CIA unit tasked with capturing Bin Laden – says that Israel or Saudi Arabia could be setting up Iran as a way to foment war ³

• Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh says many ideas have been proposed for provoking a war, including building boats that look like Iranian boats, and then putting Navy Seals on them to “start a shoot-up”

• The highly influential Brookings Institution wrote a report in 2009 called “Which Path to Persia?” which states (pages 84-85):

It would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be.Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.)

• A member of the British Parliament stated that “there is a very real danger” that the American government will stage a false flag terror attack in order to justify war against Iran

• A number of very high-level former intelligence officers – including several that personally briefed presidents every day on matters of national security – stated that better communications between the U.S. and Iran were needed to “reduce the danger of … covert, false-flag attack”

• One of America’s top constitutional and military law experts – Jonathan Turley – writes:

Many critics have argued that there is a concerted effort to push the United States into a war with Iran by supporters of Israel. Patrick Clawson, director of research for the highly influential pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) think tank, seemed intent to prove those rumors true this week in comments as a luncheon on “How to Build US-Israeli Coordination on Preventing an Iranian Nuclear Breakout.” Clawson casually discusses how to create a false flag operation to push the U.S. into war to overcome any reluctance by the public. We have been discussing how many leaders like Senator Joe Lieberman had begun to use the same rhetoric that led to the last two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how the suggest timing of an attack has been tied to the presidential election.
In his remarks, Clawson helpfully lists a series of historical events used to push the country into war like the Gulf of Tonkin incident that gave us the Vietnam War. Clawson expressed his frustration in acknowledging that it is “[v]ery hard for me to see how the United States President can get us to war with Iran.” However, there is hope. Clawson explains that the “traditional way” to get the country into a war is through false flags or manufactured incidents where Americans are killed. Thus, he observes, “we are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians, we could get nastier about it. So, if in fact the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war.”
The fact that one of the leading analysis for the WINEP would feel comfortable in making such comments is itself quite chilling. It indicates that such discussions have become sufficiently regular that it has creeped into public discussion. It is a measure of the secret pressure building to push this country into a third major war despite our crippling economic conditions and losses in military personnel. The assumption in Washington is that neither Romney nor Obama could oppose such a war. Even if Obama does not publicly support Israel, the assumption is that political allies of Israel in Washington can guarantee that we would offer extensive military loans and intelligence. Even if there is a delay in such military loans and support, the assumption is that Israel can go to war with the understanding that the United States will cover a significant portion of the costs. Moreover, in his remarkably candid remarks, Clawson shows how the U.S. can easily be forced into direct combat by pushing Iran to simply kill some Americans or sink a few of our ships. Then members would be clamoring for revenge. Notably, the Israelis have been ratcheting up the war rhetoric in pushing Iran, which predictably has now reserved the right to engage in a preemptive strike not just against Israeli but U.S. interests. We would then, again, find ourselves in a war without any public debate or collective decision.
While Clawson adds a passing caveat that he is not advocating such an approach, his remarks are clearly designed to show how the group can get the United States into a war for Israel if only we can get Iran to kill some of our citizens or soldiers. Those people are of course expendable props in Clawson’s realpolitik.
By the way, Clawson has been enlisted to give his insightful analysis at the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. He is also a member of the National Defense University’s Institute for National Strategic Studies. The World Bank connection is particularly interesting given the history with Paul Wolfowitz who pushed the U.S. into two disastrous wars in the Bush Administration and was rewarded with being made the head of the World Bank.
It is the callous disconnect that is most chilling in these remarks. Thousands of U.S. soldiers have died or have been crippled for life in these wars that have left the country near bankruptcy (and increasingly hostile “allies” in Afghanistan and Iraq). Those casualties and costs, however, appear immaterial in the discussion of supporting Israel in a war against Iran.



And false flags have long been planned against Syria.

Ron Paul: “What I Fear The Most Is a False Flag – Something Happening Where One of Our Ships Goes Down, Or … a Plane Goes Down, And of Course It HAD To Be The Iranians, You Know, For Sure, For Certain” - Washington's Blog

A Real Victory: Cop gets five years for kicking in the door when he didn't have a warrant

Submitted by doctor011 on Sun, 10/07/2012 - 10:36
A St. Charles County sheriff's deputy was sentenced Friday to five years in prison for breaking the law while he and other officers were at a Middletown, Mo., home to apprehend a wanted meth cook.

In August, a jury found Christopher E. Hunt, 38, guilty of felony burglary and misdemeanor assault and property damage after a three-day trial that pitted police officer against police officer. (Thanks wrh.com)


Read more http://www.stltoday.com/search/?l=25&skin=/&sd=desc&s=start_...

Have people had enough? It's a start, fan the flames of freedom my friends.

A Real Victory: Cop gets five years for kicking in the door when he didn't have a warrant | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

A refresher on Ron Pauls's stance on illegal immigration.

Ron Paul on Illegal Immigration

I'll not vote for ANYONE but Ron Paul... thank you for posting that

Judge Napolitano: Romney and Obama - Two Failures

The Failures of Obama and Romney

President Obama is a failure as a president, and Gov. Romney is a failure as a candidate.

Andrew Napolitano | October 4, 2012

President Obama is a failure as a president, and Gov. Romney is a failure as a candidate.

When he took office, Obama told the press that if he couldn't cure the economic mess he inherited from President George W. Bush in four years, he wouldn't deserve a second term. I guess he didn't anticipate making the mess worse.

When he took office, the federal government owed $11 trillion to its creditors; today it owes $16 trillion. When he took office, gasoline was running about $1.85 a gallon and today costs about $3.85 a gallon. This is price inflation that he directly caused by flooding the markets with cash, and that directly harms the middle class and the poor.

Unemployment has remained north of 8 percent throughout his presidency for those still looking for a job, and about 16 percent if you count all able-bodied out-of-work adults, half of whom have stopped looking for work on his watch.

He supported radical fanatics in their takeovers of the governments of Libya and Egypt, even going so far as to help them kill Col. Gadhafi, the former Libyan strongman who was once our ally. In the process, they opened jails in Libya, and out came some of the same folks the U.S. government has been fighting against in the Middle East since 2001. Obama pushed from power Hosni Mubarak, the strongman in Cairo, and he was replaced by the head of a criminal organization that Obama's own State Department has prohibited Americans from engaging with. (Query: If the government derives its powers from the consent of the governed, how can the government help a foreign group and at the same time prohibit Americans from doing the same?)

In his lust to build a new world order in the Middle East, a goal for which he roundly criticized President George W. Bush, Obama has unilaterally, unconstitutionally and unlawfully killed Americans there. He killed Osama bin Laden when he could have captured him, and he let a mob kill our ambassador to Libya when he could have protected him -- all to justify a value-free foreign policy that has no lasting friends or enemies, just fleeting interests. And he has killed thousands in foreign lands in secret, using drones that will soon find their way here and come back to haunt him.
Perhaps the next month will prove me wrong on Romney, but so far he is putting the electorate to sleep. I believe him when he claims to favor free market approaches to the nation's economic ills, but I don't believe him when he rails against big government and central economic planning, because his record belies his words. He is, of course, the father of the individual mandate -- a totalitarian giant leap forward for the welfare state. And he has stated that if elected and re-elected, he will borrow money every year he is in office until the last.

When he was interviewed with the president on "60 Minutes" last week, I purposely did not watch or listen to the show. The next morning, I read the transcript of the interview and thought many of Romney's answers were articulate and rational. Then I watched the same interview on tape and was bored nearly to death. Romney cannot put a fire in people's bellies. The only reason he gives for voting for him is that he is not Obama -- a reason that appeals to just under half the country, but is not enough to seal the deal. He needs to recognize that his audience for victory is not his former neighbors in Boston, but Joe Sixpack in the heartland.

He supports all of Obama's killings in the Middle East, but claims he wants to control events there with a more muscular foreign policy. He cannot justify that view, along with the fact that it has failed and put us close to bankruptcy, to an electorate weary of wars. He rips into Obama's borrowing, but overlooks his running mate's voting record in Congress, which authorized all of it. At first he vowed to repeal Obamacare saying it is unconstitutional, and then he said he wants to keep the parts he likes, even if they are unconstitutional.

Can anyone get excited about Romney? Aside from a capitalistic attitude about the economy -- as opposed to the president's love of central economic planning -- does anyone know what views he will embrace on Inauguration Day? Do you know anyone just aching to vote for him, the way conservatives were for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and progressives were for Obama in 2008? I do not know of such a person.

What do we do? The president's failures are legion and have made all of us the worse for them. Gov. Romney's failures are obvious and will give us four more years of Obama. Who says the system is not fixed?

The Failures of Obama and Romney - Reason.com

Swiss Gearing Up for Major Unrest Throughout Europe

Submitted by P.Au.L on Mon, 10/08/2012 - 09:43
Economy
Quicklink

The XX Committee: Do the Swiss know something the rest of us don’t?

Ueli Maurer, the Swiss defense minister, has been making coy statements about the European crisis getting ugly – as in really ugly, like needing armed troops to deal with it. This sounds more like Greece, where the rioting is regular and increasingly scary, than anything in Central Europe, but where the whole EU furball is headed does seem less than clear of late.

The Swiss are famous for preparing for everything and having an absolutely huge army, relative to their population, to deal with any eventuality. They maintain their special military system, based on training for nearly the whole male population but a very small active duty cadre (plus a few, tiny UN peacekeeping-type missions abroad, since the Swiss have an actually defensive defense force): the Swiss can call up over 200,000 trained troops, which is but one-third of what was on-call twenty years ago – like everyone, they have downsized as the threat has receded since the fall of the Soviet bloc – but that’s still pretty huge in Swiss terms. In America, that would mean a mobilization strength of nearly 8,000,000 for the U.S. military (it’s a hair under three million, in case you were wondering).

Minister Maurer, accompanied by whispers from the top uniformed leadership in Switzerland, is trying to raise awareness that Europe’s massive fiscal-cum-political crisis could get very unpleasant. Swiss military exercises in September, called STABILO DUE, were based on EU instability getting out of hand. The Swiss have stayed out of the EU – one more thing the very prosperous Swiss are gloating about these days – and they certainly don’t want EU problems spilling over into their peaceful little country. That the Swiss military is adding four new military police battalions to the army, to be spread around the country, indicates that the threat they have in mind is more disorder and chaos than actual invasion.

Swiss Gearing Up for Major Unrest Throughout Europe | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution