Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by truth on January 11, 2012 at 1:59am

Israel wants war Ron Doesn't

Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer: "Ron Paul's Policy/Perspective on Iran Most ...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 11, 2012 at 4:01pm

Key word being "most". Iran does not have nuclear missiles, or at least not as of a few months ago. Russia said they however would make sure that Iran was nuclear armed and would also assist them. Two mouth pieces on Faux does not weigh in to disprove hard cold facts. I seem to remember Obama saying he wants peace and would change things. 

  I don't always like what I find, but when there is hard evidence, I listen. Is Paul better than the rest, I think so. Is he good, I don't think so anymore. If you read through the links you will also see other runners mentioned and dispelled as well. Basically we're at the bottom of the ocean and comparing what animal feces sinks the lowest, when we need something on top and not from the bottom. I really don't care what party they belong to if they are not for the American people. I've really not seen any on DC that fit that bill.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 15, 2012 at 11:18pm

In all fairness to Paul I also found this tonight at  http://www.davidduke.com/general/will-americans-finally-get-a-real-... 

Ron Paul Rising

by Jeff Davis

It looks like Ron Paul may be getting the chance at the Republican nomination he was cheated out of during the 2008 election with its Diebold machines and outright fraud. Evidence of fraud in that election can be found here and here.

An article from the Atlantic Wire.com reports: “A new poll from Public Policy Polling shows that Ron Paul has taken the lead in the Iowa caucus race, while Newt Gingrich’s support is fading fast. A different Gallup poll shows Gingrich still holding the lead, but slipping, while Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight has Paul in the lead as well.”

“Gingrich has seen his numbers in the PPP poll drop from 27 percent to 14 percent in just three weeks, while his favorability rating is now split at 46 percent for to 47 percent against, the worst of any candidate not named Jon Huntsman. That’s quite a fall for someone who looked to be running away with the state and taking charge on the national level.”

“Mitt Romney has also seen his numbers tick up slightly (to 20%), putting him just behind Paul (23%) for second place. The poll measured voters who are planning to vote in the Republican caucus. Perhaps the most telling secondary question was, ‘Do you think Newt Gingrich has strong principles?’ Only 36 percent say that he does, but for Paul that number was 73 percent.”

On issues that have made the biggest difference to America, Ron Paul has been on the right side, opposing NAFTA and GATT, opposing the illegal war on Iraq and supporting US immigration law while Gingrich can’t be trusted.

The article notes “The bad news for Paul, however, is that when asked for their second choice for President, only 9% said they would vote for him after their preferred candidate. That means if supporters of any of the second-tier candidates sense defeat and decided to abandon their choice at the last minute, those votes are more likely to go to Romney. Even if Romney doesn’t win, the stronger than expected showing could be the snowball that starts a primary avalanche for him.”

Now why exactly should all these voters default to Romney? Romney supported a socialized medical program in Maine very similar to ObamaCare. Romney can’t be trusted on immigration. Romney seems to be a neocon warmonger, who might throw us into that war with Iran that the Zionists have been lobbying for.

Ron Paul’s strong polling numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire have recently forced the mainstream media to finally start talking about him. For the last six months, the media has been giving Paul the silent treatment even though he’s a strong candidate in a weak field.

After a couple days of semi-impartial coverage, the mainstream media shifted into attack mode against Paul. Article after article has appeared falsely accusing Paul of racist beliefs. The most hysterical attacks always seem to come from Zionists and their stooges with maybe a little hatred coming from ACORN.

Paul is a genuine outsider, and his growing success is an indication of just how fed up people are getting with the whole rotten two-party system.

It will be interesting to see how both parties react if Paul wins the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary (the one he was cheated out of in 2008 by blatant vote fraud.) Neither party wants him on the ticket. They want him not on the ticket and out of sight.

The Zionist wire-pullers don’t like a politician that they don’t control. That’s all it takes to incur their hatred. The kibosh (silent treatment) didn’t work. They’re now resorting to outright slander and smears against Paul. If that tactic fails too, I strongly advise Dr. Paul to buy a good quality bullet proof vest and to wear it religiously because the last populist politician that the Zionists couldn’t control and who stood a good chance of winning was named Huey Long, and he was gunned down by a Zionist assassin in 1936.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 21, 2012 at 12:55am

Depends of if your from the south or the north, lol. :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cryptocurrency on January 20, 2012 at 10:32pm

Lol, this website is an obvious disinfo operation. It's too in depth with "information" carefully interlaced with propaganda and suggestion.

I looked at your link, and everything I read was a lie of omission, commission or maximized.

Here is an example. I'll start with the truth. Ron Paul voted for action against al quaeda to root out terror cells when we were attacked in 2001. He has stated it numerous times in the debates. In fact it's a talking point of his.

The link provided stated,

"H.J.RES.64 and S.J. Res. 23 provided Congressional authorization for the October 7, 2001 invasion of Afghanistan: “Operation Enduring Freedom, the official name used by the U.S. Government for its War in Afghanistan, together with three smaller military actions, under the umbrella of its Global War on Terror.”... and," By the time Ron Paul voted against the War in Iraq in October of 2002, U.S. action in the Middle East was well underway. Where was Congressman Paul’s passionate anti-war rhetoric in September of 2001?"...

This apparent "fact" is presented as if Ron Paul was pro war, or that their is a portion of his voting record that has been obscured. Ron Paul never voted for a war in Afghanistan. He voted for military action against al qaeda. Not a military invasion. Classic propaganda spin of facts right here, but well done.

Now...

The next hole in this propaganda piece is the fact that Congress did not vote on the Iraq war until after it had already begun. IF you were in the infowar at this time (and paying attention), then you would know, that Bush Invaded Iraq without the approval of Congress. He just did it. Congress then voted, as did Paul when he voted nay, one year after the fact. This is precisely the problem right here. It is an unjust war initiated exclusivity through the executive.

Anyone that has studied social engineering, mind control, suggestion and propaganda sciences would know that this is a classic example of government propaganda.

The site you just referenced in your link is an op. Nicely put together but easily refutable. Nicer than any I have seen in awhile. Good find.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 21, 2012 at 12:54am

I might not post here a lot but I've been around a long time, just not here. I also get my news from something other than newsreaders and spin rooms. I really don't think that site is an op because it downs Zionism. But as for supporting, here is a video from the horse's own mouth. Paul is the best of a bad bunch but like people done Obamanation, he ain't the savior to the world. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ1dIcJJkik

  Funny, I don't believe in the "Official 911" story and even if I did, none of them were from Afghanistan. He did vote nay on the official vote but clearly here he was a bit different. As I said before, past time to wake up.  The ain't no difference between parties, it's a wrestling match. Fool the public then have a beer and laugh afterwards at the one's who fell for it.

  I look for real info and sometimes I don't like what I find, difference between being awake. http://zionistsforronpaul.blogspot.com , http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00005906 , http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.php?CID=N00005906&ye... , (might want to research some of these) http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?type=C&cid=N... , (hello Monsanto and the likes) http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmte=HFIN&... , http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmte=HINT&... ,. There is more with the financial parts. I ain't sayin he is the devil, but no halo either. Might want to look into his ... well, just look.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cryptocurrency on January 21, 2012 at 12:05pm

I don't see the point of your video. He is opposing military intervention in multiple countries. "Straight form the horses mouth" implies he has said something that is wrong or, there is some proof here of something. 

I seriously don't have time to mince words nor do I have time for misunderstandings.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cryptocurrency on January 21, 2012 at 12:27pm

Your links are bogus and prove nothing either. Ron Paul's net worth?? Really??? So because the man has been successful in life he is evil? You linked his campaign donations from military as if it's some big secret when he has mentioned it in almost all of the last 17 GOP debates.The troops support him because the wars are a lie and they want to come home so, ya know, they don't die...

Seriously, there are lines being drawn. Good and evil. Seems you are stuck in the limbo of disinformation. Evil is upon us but make no mistake, freedom is rising. It is the natural order of things.

Ahhh this is pointless. What can I say really, you'll just have to figure it out for yourself I guess.

Noticed you couldn't refute by first comments rebuttal. Interesting isn't it? I really can't believe people still fall for this bullshit propaganda online. Then again, I just watched South Carolina give Newt Gingrich a standing ovation sooo...

--------------------------------------------------

I feel bad for well meaning people that get roped into yet another trick. Just when they are so close to the side of good, they get snared by propaganda. Ok I'm done...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 21, 2012 at 6:36pm

Don't get me wrong, Paul is the best of the lot, just don't do with him like people done with Obama, not that they are in the same league.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 21, 2012 at 6:45pm

Ok, the 1st comment, there is no rebuttal, totally correct. Here is the thing though, which takes longer, to research facts or deal with them after it;s too late.

  Here is the thing though. Presidents are elected by Electoral votes, not popular ones. So really, does it even matter? Do you honestly think that is based on the people? I'll vote and so far I'll vote Paul unless someone better comes along, but nothing will change as long as we vote the same assholes into Congress and Senate, plus look at who counts them. 

   Here is a point to ponder for you. Obama is said to be a Muslim. Look and see who was behind him in getting elected. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Kimbrough on January 21, 2012 at 6:34pm

No country in their right mind would allow a country like us especially, to come in and pick and choose who we thought were good and bad. He did correct himself, but yes, he was all about it at first.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page