Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

$5,124,487.05 Contributed So Far TOWARDS FREEDOM!!!!!

https://secure.ronpaul2012.com/?sr=29-1226

The Next Step

by Eric Peters

Are we there yet?

No, but we are getting very close.

We are now at the point, I suspect, that our colonial ancestors were in the early 1770s. They were still British subjects, but had begun to question the relationship – the supposed right of the British sovereign to rule them. Within a very short time, they would reject the relationship in toto – on principle – and would become Americans.

I believe we are in roughly the same spot as those soon-to-be-Americans of the early 1770s.

An awakening is taking place. Millions of people are wising up to the fraud that is contained in the sentence, “consent of the governed.” Are learning to reflexively cringe for their soon-to-shorn freedoms whenever a politician utters the word. Have come to understand that the sprawling beast in Washington no more represents them – let alone has the slightest interest in protecting them (let alone respecting their rights) than the ossified oligarchs of parliament represented the colonists or had any interest in protecting anything other than their power and the sacks of loot that always accompany its exercise.

We – millions of Americans – now understand the nature of the relationship: Master – and slave. That due process itself has been taken away from us. That we are now to be denied even the elemental decency of being informed of the charges against us before we are taken away into the night, to be “indefinitely detained,” on the mere say-so of men with guns and badges. That when we are “asked” to “contribute” it means guns will be shoved under our chins. That we no longer have a single right that’s not conditional at best – if not entirely defunct.

Submit. Obey.

We have become aware that almost no aspect of our lives is left unmolested. We cannot eat, work or even sleep in our own beds without government supervision – and that very soon, even our recreations and private habits will likely fall under the “commerce clause” since these may be said to affect “health care” and thus, are of “interest” to the government.

We – that is, almost half the population – also knows the futility of voting.

Tweedledee replaces Tweedledum – and the machine rolls on.

We see, in the immortal language of Thomas Jefferson, “… a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object.” One that “… evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism.” The parallels are clear – and ominous.

It begs the question: What shall we do?

Some advocate violent resistance – and that day may yet come. It is as natural – and as right – to fight back against an evil government as it is to fight back against evil individuals. But it is the response of last resort, when every other effort at a peaceful resolution has failed – and when the only alternative is abject submission and the formal acceptance of the master-slave relationship.

We are not there yet.

We may still speak, and write – and within certain bounds, are still free to act. In particular, we are free to not act.

We can decline to participate in (and thereby, help to legitimize) things we know in our hearts – and minds – to be dangerous and wrong.

We can decline to vote, if voting means voting for “the lesser of two evils.” Rather than sanction evil, we can withhold our consent and force evil to operate without it. Consider what the result would be if, next year, we are presented with the false choice of Obama or Gingrich (or Romney) and, rather than hold our noses and vote for one or the other in the desperate hope that it makes a difference, millions upon millions of us just stayed home instead. Enough of us such that the “winner” could claim no mandate – no consent of the governed. He would be forced to be what the current Dear Leader is – but openly. No more gauzy talk of “democracy.”

Just: Submit and Obey.

It could not go on for long. Open tyranny never does. But give the masses the illusion of consent; let them believe they have “democracy” – and tyranny can be open-ended. Endless.

It is within our power to end this sham. If only we will refuse to act, when acting amounts to endorsing the sham.

If Ron Paul is not on the ticket, stay home. Withhold your consent. Force the system to bare its fangs and reveal itself for what is.

And:

Decline to fly.

Or rather, decline to submit to outrageous violations of your dignity as a human being, to loathsome assaults on your rights as a human being. For the moment – perhaps a brief one – we have the opportunity to stop Gate Rape and much worse to come besides. If only a few million of us simply announced that we will not enter an airport terminal (or attend a sports event) until we can do so without being subjected to warrantless, probable cause-free searches, it is a sure bet that warrantless, probable cause-free searches would end. The TSA does not care about your rights but the airlines most emphatically care about your money. If even 20 percent of current flyers openly declared that they will not fly again until the TSA is abolished – or at least, that only individuals who have given some specific cause for suspicion be subjected to searches – then group gropes of children, women, the elderly – and most important of all, the innocent traveler – would end.

The system depends on your voluntary cooperation. Withhold it now, while you still can.

And so on.

Force authoritarian thugs to state openly what they advocate – what they are – by calling them on their euphemisms. Ask your local board of supervisors official precisely what he means when he “asks” that county residents “contribute” for the betterment of the local school system – or some such. Ask him how he feels about sending men with guns to the homes of peaceable people who might say “no, thank you” and decline to “contribute.” Make him – make them – say it: We are going to force you to hand over money by threatening you with violence. If you resist in any way, we will do you violence. Not “public” schools. Government schools.

Maybe opt-out of government mandates that have made new cars absurdly complicated and expensive – by buying (or keeping) an older car. And tell the automakers why you’re boycotting their current products.

If stopped at a “checkpoint” by a cop, ask him – politely – how he feels about subjecting his fellow citizens to random, probable cause-free searches.

Etc.

Let’s get it all out in the open.

Perhaps enough people will recoil from the edge of the abyss before it is too late to step back from it. Reason and appeals to the human conscience are always preferable to the alternative.

I hope there’s still time.

December 30, 2011
Reprinted with permission from EricPetersAutos.com.
Eric Peters [send him mail] is an automotive columnist and author of Automotive Atrocities and Road Hogs (2011). Visit his website.

Copyright © 2011 Eric Peters

http://lewrockwell.com/peters-e/peters-e130.html

Ron Paul Draws Big Crowds on Final of Three-Day Visit to Iowa

Western Iowa events in LeMars, Sioux Center and Sioux City all yield impressive turnout

ANKENY, Iowa – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul attracted big crowds in three Western Iowa town hall meetings tonight, continuing a pattern of packing venues with supporters and undecided voters.

More than 220 people attended Paul’s Plymouth County Town Hall Meeting in LeMars, where the 12-term Congressman from Texas spoke about how there could be no liberty without valuing life, and how no constitutional government could exist in the absence of a moral people. More than 175 people—a full-capacity crowd stacked up against the doorways—attended his Sioux County Town Hall Meeting held in Sioux Center where he spoke about economics and family. And a remarkable 275 people attended his Sioux City Town Hall Meeting to hear Paul’s views concerning a strong national defense, private property, and lasting prosperity.

Ron Paul speaks to 220 voters in LeMars at his Plymouth County Town Hall Meeting.



Ron Paul greets 175 voters in Sioux Center at his Sioux County Town Hall Meeting.



Ron Paul takes the podium to the applause of 275 voters at his Sioux City event.


http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/12/3...visit-to-iowa/

Ron Paul is the Most Conservative Presidential Candidate

My response to Dick Morris at The Daily Caller:

On Wednesday, Dick Morris said Ron Paul is “the most liberal, radical, left-wing person to run for president in the United States in the last 50 years.” Actually, Ron Paul is the most conservative person to run for president in the last 50 years. Understanding this first requires at least a minimal understanding of traditional American conservatism.

Morris made his case for Paul’s “left-wing radicalism” on “The O’Reilly Factor”:

Nobody else wants to dismantle the military, including Obama, but he does. Even Obama doesn’t want to repeal the Patriot Act. But he does. Even Obama doesn’t say that we caused 9/11 and brought it on ourselves. But Ron Paul does. Even Obama doesn’t want to legalize heroin and cocaine, but Ron Paul does. This guy is no conservative. This guy is an ultra, ultra-left-wing radical.

Paul’s Pentagon cuts, which aren’t much different from what Sen. Tom Coburn has suggested, are necessary to streamline our military and tackle our debt problem. Coburn has allies besides Paul in this fight, or as National Review’s Jamie Fly writes:

FreedomWorks, a Washington-based group that purports to speak for the Tea Party movement, issued its own “Tea Party Budget” containing the recommendations of its debt commission. They suggested enacting defense-spending reforms previously proposed by Sen. Tom Coburn that would result in almost $1 trillion in savings over ten years.

There’s a reason that Paul is the only presidential candidate who has been able to offer $1 trillion in cuts. He is the only candidate willing to address the black hole that is Pentagon spending. After entitlements, “defense” spending is the largest part of our budget. Still, Paul allows for a military budget four times the size of China’s and larger than President Bush’s 2005 military budget.

This is what Morris calls “dismantling the military.”

As a constitutional conservative in reality and not just rhetoric, Ron Paul also believes the Fourth Amendment is as important to protect as any other. He opposes the Patriot Act on these constitutional grounds. His son Sen. Rand Paul along with Sen. Mike Lee valiantly fought against the Patriot Act’s renewal in November on the same premise.

Does Morris believe tea party Republicans Paul and Lee are also “radical left-wingers”?

Ron Paul has suggested that constant American sanctions and military interventions in the Middle East contributed to hostility toward the U.S. which created a more potent environment for 9/11. Who else says this? The CIA and the 9/11 Commission Report.

But since we’re discussing conservatism, let’s take a look at what Russell Kirk had to say about this subject. For those unfamiliar with Kirk (pay attention here, Morris), Bill Buckley once said: “It is inconceivable even to imagine, let alone hope for, a dominant conservative movement in America without [Kirk’s] labor.” Kirk is the person most credited with popularizing the term “conservative” with his groundbreaking 1953 book The Conservative Mind. In a speech before The Heritage Foundation in 1991, Kirk had this to say about President George H.W. Bush and the possible future consequences of the Persian Gulf War:

We must expect to suffer during a very long period of widespread hostility toward the United States — even, or perhaps especially, from the people of certain states that America bribed or bullied into combining against Iraq. In Egypt, in Syria, in Pakistan, in Algeria, in Morocco, in all of the world of Islam, the masses now regard the United States as their arrogant adversary …

“Expect to suffer”? Is Russell Kirk “blaming America” here? Or was Kirk predicting 9/11? Either way, Kirk was making a basic conservative observation about human nature (his forte). Conservatives generally agree that any government intervention — taxes, regulations, abusive TSA agents — affect human behavior in multiple ways. But the most intense action any government can take — the decision to wage war — produces no similar human reaction?

The CIA disagrees. So did Russell Kirk.

Morris criticizes Paul for wanting to end the federal war on drugs. Bill Buckley and Milton Friedman also wanted to end the federal war on drugs. Are Buckley and Friedman “radical left-wingers” too?

For basically every position Morris calls “liberal” or “radically left-wing” you can find some of the most prominent and respected names in American conservatism agreeing with Paul.

Morris’s mistake is definitional. What Morris calls “conservatism” is simply the current conventional Republicanism. One does not necessarily equal the other. Ask Barry Goldwater. Ask Ronald Reagan.

Ask Ron Paul.

Read the entire column

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/12/3...ial-candidate/

Tragedy Of The Euro: The book has been generously released on pdf by The Mises Institute:
BagusToE

Why is this important to Ron Paul: Paul Preaches the Austrian school of Economics and has written several books on the subject. Ron Paul also speaks at the Mises Institute on a regular basis. The video is informative



The realization that the European debacle is much more an issue of political harmonization and Empire-building than one of pure economic band-aid provision should be clear to any- and every-one who has followed the words and deeds of the various European factions for the past year or two. Yesterday, we discussed the dithering and competing camps but what is really critical is to understand how we got here and what the underlying social and political wills are among all of the players. There is no better summation of the formation, driving forces, and tensions among European leaders and central bankers than Phillip Bagus' 'Tragedy Of The Euro'. From the simple divergence of the dual visions of Europe with northern libertarians and southern socialists to the Bundesbank's fearsome reputation for showing up weak governments, Bagus offers a clear perspective on why the EMU is a 'self-destroying' and 'conflict-aggregating' system but counters that with some views on what the outcome will be and how French governmental pressure remains the cornerstone of the establishment of a European Empire for better or more likely for worse.

More Rival Staffers Join Ron Paul Campaign

Bachmann maintains Paul bribed former campaign chairman

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
December 30, 2011


Yet more staffers formerly working for a GOP rival of Ron Paul have endorsed the Texas Congressman’s campaign this week.

Concord Patch reports that five former New Hampshire staffers of former Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson announced Friday that they are now endorsing Ron Paul for president.

“Like many political observers, we see clear and compelling differences between Congressman Ron Paul and the other candidates who will garner significant support in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary,” the five former staffers said in a statement.

The five, including Johnson’s former state coordinator and former communications director, left in October citing “frustration with the national campaign.”

Johnson announced earlier this week that he was quitting the Republican race and would be running as a Libertarian.

Noting that Paul and Johnson share some “very similar ideas”, Johnson’s former communications director Matt Simon said “It’s something we’d talked about, and we discussed the timing, and certainly his announcement Wednesday made it easier to go ahead with this,”

“There are two like-minded candidates in this race,” Simon said. “At this point it comes down to ideas, and the vast differences between Ron Paul and the other candidates we’ve seen play out in the last couple weeks.”

The announcement comes on the back of that of former Michelle Bachmann campaign chairman in Iowa, Kent Sorenson, who “defected” To the Paul campaign on live TV yesterday.

Bachmann is charging that the Paul campaign bribed Sorenson, a claim that both Sorenson and the Paul campaign have strenuously denied.

“I was never offered money from the Ron Paul campaign or anyone associated with them and certainly would never accept any,” Sorenson said in a statement via the Paul campaign.

Calling the allegation “ridiculous”, the Paul campaign also cited a statement by Wes Enos, Bachmann’s Iowa political director, also denying the bribery charge.

“I can say unequivocally that Kent Sorenson’s decision was, in no way financially motivated,” Enos said in his statement. “While I personally disagree with Kent’s decision, and plan to stay with Michele Bachmann because I truly believe in her, I cannot, in good conscience watch a good man like Kent Sorenson be attacked as a ‘sell-out.’”

Enos has now “quit” the campaign, Bachmann herself revealed in an interview with CNN today. It remains to be seen whether he too will join the Ron Paul campaign.

http://www.infowars.com/more-rival-s...paul-campaign/

Singer Kelly Clarkson Sees 192% Increase in Album Sales After Tweeting Support of Ron Paul

Posted on December 30, 2011 at 2:36pm
by Jonathon M. Seidl
Comments (243)



Singer Kelly Clarkson performs at Madison Square Garden. (Photo: AP)

Enlarged Photo: http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/u...1209133995.jpg

Pop singer Kelly Clarkson, the first contestant to win “American Idol,” took a lot of heat this week after she sent a message on Twitter saying she supported Ron Paul and would vote for him if he got the GOP nomination. She was skewered for those remarks. But now she may have the last laugh as one site reports sales of one her albums are skyrocketing since the endorsement.
First, a little background from HuffPo:

“I love Ron Paul. I liked him a lot during the last republican nomination and no one gave him a chance,” Kelly Clarkson wrote on Twitter and WhoSay on Wednesday. “If he wins the nomination for the Republican party in 2012 he’s got my vote. Too bad he probably won’t.”
[...]
Addressing the criticism, Clarkson later tweeted:
“I am really sorry if I have offended anyone. Obviously that was not my intent. I do not support racism. I support gay rights, straight rights, women’s rights, men’s rights, white/black/purple/orange rights. I like Ron Paul because he believes in less government and letting the people (all of us) make the decisions and mold our country. That is all. Out of all of the Republican nominees, he’s my favorite.”
Clarkson later told an angry Twitter follower that “I have never heard that he’s a racist? I definitely don’t agree with racism, that’s ignorant.” She told another that, “I love all people and could care less if you like men or women. I have never heard that Ron Paul is a racist or homophobe?”The pop star continued her defense, saying: “Man my eyes have been opened to so much hate tonight. If y‘all ever disagree with something I say please don’t feel the need to attack me. I will listen to what you say and any articles or viewpoints you have when you say it with respect. Being hateful is not a healthy way to get people to see or hear you. I was raised to respect people and their decisions and beliefs and I hope you will grant me the same decency. If you don’t agree with me simply unfollow me. It’s really that easy. I hope you don‘t because I would love the chance to hear what you have to say but if you’re so blinded by hate you can’t seek peace and progress then that is your unfortunate prerogative.”
Despite her detractors, it seems many more are supportive of Clarkson than disapprove. The website Gossip Cop reports that sales of her album “Stronger” are up a whopping 192% on Amazon.com:

Sales of Clarkson’s album “Stronger” have soared on Amazon ever since the singer tweeted, “I love Ron Paul,” and “He’s got my vote.”

In the past 24 hours, Clarkson’s record was up 192% on the online retail site.
A day before the former “American Idol” winner explained why she’s a Paul supporter,

“Stronger” was ranked #41 on Amazon’s “Movers & Shakers in Music” list.
Today, the album is up to #14.

A snapshot of the Amazon.com “Movers & Shakers” web page confirms the jump:


Stronger, indeed.


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sing...t-of-ron-paul/

Part 1


Ron Paul Has Already Won
Friday, December 30, 2011 – by Staff Report

What happens if Ron Paul wins Iowa? ... Paul seems to have a natural ceiling among GOP voters: A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll found that nearly half of Republican voters feel Paul's foreign policy views are a major reason not to vote for him. Indeed, the primary reason Paul has an opening to win in Iowa is that no consensus candidate has emerged among social conservatives, which dominate the GOP electorate here – a situation that allows Paul to potentially win with less than 30 percent of the vote. Still, a Paul win in Iowa would have significant ramifications. It would go a long way toward pushing his Libertarian views, long dismissed as outside of Republican mainstream, to the center of the conversation. The resultant media coverage would allow Paul to further spread his message – and potentially win a host of new supporters. And if Paul can do well in New Hampshire on January 10, where he is currently tied for second place with Gingrich, Paul could even move to shared front-runner status with Romney, who is now ahead by more than 20 points in New Hampshire. – CBSNews

Dominant Social Theme: Paul is a crank and will never light up the sky.

Free-Market Analysis: The Internet Reformation is a process not an episode. US GOP Presidential candidate Ron Paul shows us the accuracy of this statement. Ron Paul and his libertarian allies are winning the battle for the hearts and minds of Americans by the millions. In fact, they have already won. More on this below.

It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that a substantial minority, if not a majority, of Republicans and Democrats are really libertarians of some sort. This gives Ron Paul a natural constituency that is far larger than the mainstream media admits.

There is apparently only one struggle in the world – and in the US. That is the seeming struggle between a handful of ancient, elite families who control hundreds of trillions via central banks around the world and want to move to world government (dominated by them) and the rest of us.

This Anglosphere power elite has used its unimaginable money base to seemingly pervert the workings of the entire world. It apparently uses dominant social themes – fear-based promotions disseminated by its bought-and-paid-for media, think tanks, universities and governments – to frighten middle classes into giving up wealth and power to cleverly crafted globalist institutions. This is the internationalist government-in-waiting.

But a funny thing happened on the way to world government. The Internet. About a decade ago, we began to focus on the idea that the Internet was a modern-day Gutenberg Press and would have a similar impact.

The Gutenberg Press basically spawned the Renaissance, Reformation and contributed to counter-Reformation trends such as the Age of Enlightenment that was spawned by the elites themselves in an effort to counteract the power of the Gutenberg Press. The Age of Enlightenment postulated that man was perfectible and the agency of perfection was government.

Government is an absolute necessity for power elites. With the advent of the Gutenberg Press, however, something changed. The great families of Europe found it advisable to promote the fallacious idea of "democracy." This idea, that people would "have a say" in their governments, allowed the power elite then and now to withdraw from the public scene and dominate from behind the scenes. This domination is called "mercantilism."

Just as it is imperative these days for the power elite not to reveal itself, so it is imperative that the elites continue to have access to all levels of government in order to pass the laws necessary to its survival. Without the faux-system of civil society that the elites have erected in the past 150 years, there would be no prospect of a one-world order.

No one wakes up in the morning and decides to spend one's life building global government. It is an entirely false paradigm that this happens. People are coerced into believing that global government is inevitable and that their self-interest is better fulfilled by working with the powers-that-be than against them. This sense of INEVITABILITY is part of what drives the push toward the New World Order.

But it has long been our contention that those who predict the inevitability of the coming one-world order may not be entirely correct. It continues to be our contention – as we follow modern events – that the elites seeking global governance have been considerably set back by the Internet, as we have long predicted.

We know this to be true by the amount of violence the elite central banking families are turning to. Violence, insane legislative initiatives like SOPA, the erection of prison camps and the fomentation of wars around the world are all signs of the fear that has overtaken these elites. They do not want to be found out.

One needs only to study a little history to begin to understand the relevance of the paradigm we are suggesting. After the Gutenberg Press began to expose the power elite of the day and its manipulations, the first copyright laws were passed, the "isms" were suddenly developed, the Hegelian Dialectic was brought into play significantly and wars broke out throughout the West and lasted for decades.

There IS likely a playbook. There are surely manipulations that the elites pursue over and over in their loony quest for world government. One sees them put into play after the advent of the Gutenberg Press just as they are being put into play today. This is not an easy idea to accept, however, even for the alternative Internet Press. It is much easier and more psychologically satisfying to speak of ancient cabals, such as Jewish/Zionist penetration via vast Illuminati-Masonic plots.

But the truth TODAY is simpler than that, in our view. The world is being run by an intergenerational mafia of familial elites that USE religion and symbolism to affright people and impress on everyone the inevitability of what it is to come.

This is the reason, for instance, that Muammar Gaddafi's execution was shown over and over for weeks. This was the reason his purported buggery was made available throughout the world though ordinarily the Western mainstream media is averse even to showing so much as a kiss to a general audience that includes children.

Gaddafi's death was a warning. Just as the wars in Africa and the Middle East are cautionary ones. They have little or nothing to do with oil or the "great game" or other resources. When the Pentagon wanted to make a case for staying in Afghanistan it suddenly discovered a trillion-dollars'-worth of rare-earth minerals and other commodities. It is all so transparent.

The powers-that-be seek control. The stiff-necked Pashtuns and tricky Punjabis that are now 300 million strong and have dominated the navel of the earth for millennia must be conquered and pacified. This is the struggle taking place today.

And yet, we have predicted the Anglosphere may already have lost this war for global domination. The hidden influence of Money Power in our view peaked in the 20th century. The 21st century has offered them one disaster after another.



http://www.thedailybell.com/3417/Ron...as-Already-Won

part 2 of 1

9/11 itself is still a questionable event. Attempts to impose the phony meme of global warming are also not going well. The war on terror is increasingly met by disbelief. Scarcity memes of all types have less power to upset, and are increasingly exposed on the Internet.

And then there is Ron Paul. Four years ago, libertarian politician Ron Paul was regarded by the mainstream media as a harmless, crazy crank. Today, according to a CBS article (see excerpt above), the only thing standing between Ron Paul and a sociopolitical consensus around his libertarian points of view is the view by many that he will "undermine" national security. Or so we are told.

But this meme, too, shall have its day – and be gone. That's because the Internet is a process not an episode. The damage control that the elites practices in the 20th century doesn't work anymore. They have turned to a more ancient playbook, in our view, but history shows THAT is not so effective, either.

People naturally lose perspective. But back in the 1990s a trio helped change the world. Dr. Ron Paul and economist Murray Rothbard were close friends. Lew Rockwell was the organizer and raised the money. Rothbard wrote prodigiously and Ron Paul kept delivering babies and running for office. Ron Paul is the most famous and successful libertarian politician of the past 100 years.

This trio built on what is good in what we today call civil society and eventually, as the Internet era began, were joined by popularizers like Matt Drudge, Alex Jones ... and then more. And so once again the ideas of freedom and individual HUMAN action (versus Adam Smith's Wealth of NATIONS) were propagated as they had been before. No one is perfect, but this aspiration is larger than personal agendas, and grounded in the logic of civil society built up over centuries by the greatest and most courageous of minds.

This is the story of civilization, in fact. It is a language and a conversation. It reoccurs. It cannot be extinguished because it may blaze anew in the hearts of the next generation. Sure, it may take a village, but it is one made up of INDIVIDUALS. And everyone is welcome. All who subscribe to the individual greatness of the human species are conveyances for what is worth carrying forward in human society. God damn those who do not.

History seems to us a series of cycles, struggles between historical elites and the rest. Such a struggle has been joined today. This is REAL history. We are lucky enough to live at a time when the old order is passing. Maybe what we are seeing is its death struggles.

The Internet is making it impossible for it to thrive in its current form. Central banks printing monopoly money-from-nothing, wars of aggression, the incarceration of millions ... these are indefensible paradigms when one does not fully control the media anymore.

The Internet Reformation is like a wildfire, perhaps. It seems to be burning away the manifestations of the American Empire by incinerating the disingenuous moral buttresses that hold together this phony construct of the modern power elite. By the time the Internet Reformation has run its course, today's authoritarian verities may have perished entirely. (They will of course emerge in another form.)

Right now, according to this CBS article, only the lie that the military-industrial complex "keeps America safe" stands between the fullness of Leviathan and its subsidence. But what happens, as will be inevitable, when Americans in larger numbers find out that this "safety" is non-existent?

What happens when Americans finally realize that the string of wars that have "defended" them were perhaps phony? What happens when the seeming manipulations that caused the phony Cold War fully penetrate popular consciousness? What happens when the truth about 9/11 – whatever it is – is finally revealed?

The last memes of the power elite that will tumble (as we have long predicted) are the fundaments of the state itself: the insanity of the current model of state justice (where the state itself and its controllers make the laws and then pay for the legislatures, courts and military and civilian police and penitentiary guards that enforce this phony "justice.")

The corollary is the military-industrial complex itself and its myriad millions of intel operatives in London, Washington, DC and Tel Aviv. These individuals are already worried; their privacy invasions, incarcerations and tortures weigh heavily on them. It is occurring to them that they may be on the wrong side of history – real history.

George W. Bush is afraid to travel outside of the United States. David Rockefeller is approaching the century mark and is not his old persuasive self. The Rothschilds are regularly making appearances on business television to show they are merely struggling businessmen and bankers. The US Congress attempts to pass evermore Draconian laws to stop the Internet Reformation. Wars are fomented to take over the world. And yet the navel of the world remains unconquered.

Conclusion: The Internet, which was never supposed to happen, continues to inform people every day about the despicable nature of the elite's 20th century directed history. The old paradigms are crumbling. A thousand, ten thousand, a million prison camps may not capture the truths echoing around the world. The Internet is a process not an episode.


http://www.thedailybell.com/3417/Ron...as-Already-Won

Democrats Abandon Obama For Ron Paul