Posts Tagged ‘constitutional’

Is the media orchestrated?

August 16, 2015

Most “traditional” media writers (broadcast, cable, paper-legacy press) don’t realize they are part of an industry and government-media complex.

The truth of the matter became clear to me in 2009 when Honduras deposed the sitting caudillo president. He had won the election by fraud, as he himself even admitted out loud to Jorge Ramos in a Univision interview: “Everybody does it, Jorge!”, he said.

That year, 2009, was when I watched in surprised awe as EVERY SINGLE ONE of ALL the traditional international (Establishment-approved) Media sources, like CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN-Espanol, NYT, Reuters, AP, LA Times, BBC, NPR, the French agency, all of them called it a “coup”, and they said NOTHING about Zelaya taking on the mantle of dictator. That was right after the summit of Caribbean and Central American presidents in Santo Domingo in November 2008 where George Soros was their “keynote speaker”.

And then ALL of the votes in the United Nations, including the Zelaya-appointed ambassador, condemned Honduras for defending itself from a Hugo Chavez-style coup-by-fraud, a criminal runaway president. They dotted their “i”s, and crossed their “t”s, constitutionally, and the Congress recognized his removal from the presidency with a list of his crimes, major thefts of government money, abuses, refusal to obey court orders (from “pipsqueak judges”, “juecesitos”), refusal to abide by laws passed by the Congress and violating multiple sections in the Constitution.

The day after slanderous and libelous CNN-Espanol broadcasts that Sunday, July 28, Hondurans were enraged. Half the adult population poured into all the central city and town plazas to support the transitional government, to protest against the demands to reinstate the dictator, AND TO PROTEST THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA COVERAGE.

That same evening, one of the news analysts on CNN-Espanol let it out on the broadcast of events that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the massive numbers of emails they were getting from Honduras and Hondurans were in favor of the removal of Zelaya and in favor of the transitional president Micheletti, and she begged for even one that would be in favor of him.

The colossal river of money for leftist organizations has buried the videos on Youtube of those demonstrations in searches but they are there (unless Google has removed them).

The joke in Honduras was that Zelaya had unified the nation, and brought the people together in one cause. Protestants and Catholics, rich and poor, Chambers of Commerce and the unions, young and old, Liberal Party members (Zelaya’s own) and National Party members, men and women, professionals and laborers, doctors and illiterate, they all united in protesting Zelaya and international coverage.

International coverage was unanimous. That was telling for me.

THANK GOD FOR THE INTERNET BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY PLACE YOU COULD FIND THE TRUTH IF YOU WANTED IT.

In one program, NPR had a panel of these “experts” talking about Honduras, and they got one caller who corrected them with the truth. One of these vacant “experts” immediately explained to the audience that Obama simply wanted to stop the American meddling in Latin America. The caller was already gone, so they missed the chance to understand that Obama WAS meddling in Honduras when he condemned its defense against another strong-man dictator. They kept meddling. Hillary Clinton called Micheletti personally to order him to resign. He said “No!” Gretchen later asked him what would it take to get him to resign (and let the socialist back into power) and he said “Only an invasion.”

American officers no doubt said “No way” they were going to invade, if Obama asked them. When Chavez did threaten invasion, American colonels said the Hondurans were an awesome fighting force. But let’s leave one thing very clear. The military stayed out of the political activity then completely and only obeyed legitimate court orders at all times.

Only local media in Honduras reported more accurately. (except for the one apparently owned by leftist diehards).

Brazilian legislators who visited while Zelaya was there, were shocked to discover that his smuggled appearance inside their embassy was a surprise. They were even more shocked to discover that the entire community of Brazilians living in Honduras were outraged at Zelaya and disagreed with the news coverage outside.

Honduras changed history. That’s when Latin American politicians and activists saw that going socialist was NOT inevitable at all! The FLMN-party president in El Salvador shortly announced they would not join the Venezuelan petro club. An ex-president of Guatemala said maybe they should coordinate foreign policy with Honduras. The mayor of Caracas said maybe they should import some Honduran “huevos” to Venezuela. Paraguay later also removed a leftist caudillo strong-man president.

Lobo, the next elected president (elections were maybe the most-oberved, most scrutinized in the history of the world) was Lobo. He immediately asked for input on how to move Honduras out of poverty. The result was the Smart Cities project, which was later scrapped for a much better plan, the ZEDE. (Zonas Economicas de Desarrollo y Empleo). It has begun and we will see how that unfolds now.

Just because you won an “election” doesn’t mean you’re not a totalitarian or dictator. Look at Obama. Even Lincoln suspended habeus corpus, threw reporters in prison, closed down opposing newspapers, sent an opposition (northern) Congressman fleeing to Canada for his life, and had troops fire on anti-draft demonstrators.

Advertisements

Christians, libertarians, gay marriage, who wants big government?

February 1, 2015

I am a very vocal Bible-believing Christian, and I got to tell you, that Christian libertarians are now in very great numbers, and the numbers are growing by leaps and bounds, as they realize that it is this approach to society that is the only view that anyone can say with certainty that God actually endorsed.

We have no king but JESUS!

Like God told Samuel, when the people demanded a government, a king, “They have rejected ME!” Because they didn’t want GOD to rule over them.

And Samuel warned them with the same warnings conservatives used to repeat in this country: The king will take your sons off to war, he will take your daughters off to his palaces to cook their delights, he will build his palaces with the burdensome taxes that will be to your grief. Needless to say, God’s warnings against government were validated with only the third king in Israel, because Solomon did all these things when he strayed from God’s wisdom. The result was a divided kingdom after his passing.

Even then, they said they wanted it because Samuel’s children were corrupt, after he appointed them judges, meaning they also wanted a king to protect them from abuse by their neighbors. BUT that means they themselves were already so corrupt they could not see that there was no obligation to follow those corrupt appointees. The laws of Moses are very clear, and there is NOT ONE reference or mention to ANY kind of government there. That’s how the custom of judges arose, they were spontaneous callings of God to the farmers like Gideon who raised armies to expel invaders who did impose kingships on them. Then they beat their swords back into plows and farmed again. And sometimes the people went to those judges to mediate disputes and for guidance later on….

In fact, the laws of Moses not only makes no provision for government of any kind, except the individual’s governing of himself and what is his, the Ten Commandments condemn it explicitly.

If somebody takes your property without your explicit permission, that’s THEFT. That’s why taxation is pure THEFT. THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

Romans 13 was very specific and the reasons given for respecting secular authority was contextual and conditional. The Romans actually kept the high priests in check, and God anointed them to both protect the Messiah from the persecutors and to expand the early reach and the future of the Gospel.

The “libertarians” that promote government intervention in things like marriage are just as clueless as Christians who look to government instead of God for a marriage certificate!

Remember the presidential debates, when they asked the question about “gay marriage”, the born-again Baptist who said EVERYTHING he did was from his Christian faith, Ron Paul, said the government should get out of it and leave it to churches like it was before. And the not-so-Christian Gary Johnson actually said the same thing!

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. Ask yourself: what in the entire world did Caesar have that did not come from conquering by THEFT and spoils of the wars of lust that James spoke of?

Matthew 17 tells you what Jesus thought of tribute to Caesar.

He said we pay taxes so as not to offend them, in other words, so they’ll leave us alone.

Second Amendment: Did they mean to protect the right of only governments to arm themselves? Really?

May 30, 2014

Mr. P. H. would have his readers believe that the Second Amendment was meant to ONLY protect the right of the *government* to “bear arms” for the protection of a “free state”!

Yessir, they say, the Founding Fathers knew that without a constitution that guaranteed the right of the government to bear arms, why, the poor Congress and the poor Executive and the poor government-financed Army and the militia that they organized would be left defenseless! Nobody would let them arm the police! How could they have a standing army!

You heard right. They do agree that these rights are for all individuals, and that the fourteenth amendment recognized that these rights extend to individual rights from all governments (federal, state, local):

–free exercise of religion
–freedom from a religious establishment (official church)
–speech
–press
–assembly
–petition the Government for redress
–freedom from forced hosting of soldiers, whether in time of peace or war both
–to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable and warrantless searches and seizures
–no holding to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury
–freedom from double jeopardy
–to refuse to be forced to testify against one’s self
–to one’s life, liberty AND property, except by *due process* of law (not arbitrary process)
–freedom eminent domain except for a public purpose
–fair compensation for properties seized under eminent domain
–if accused, a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of peers, to confront witnesses against him, assistance of counsel, and to obtain witnesses in his own favor
–and, no excessive bail
–ALL other rights even if not enumerated

But some people say that there is one that was included in this list of INDIVIDUAL rights that was the ONE exception. That is, they say, that the right to defend your freedom against your own government is a right that they reserved for only the government itself!?!

Columbians want to finish what Uribe started

May 28, 2014

The FARC may be protected –I do believe that. After all, for example, Jimmy Carter pushed “Rhodesia” into elections that Muzorewa won, and when the Mugabe gang cried foul (they didn’t win) then Carter pushed Zimbabwe into elections that Mugabe won. And he has not let go since.

The fracking story, same as here in the States, is just another meme that the elites are pushing to keep the gullible agitated about something, fearful about something so that their astroturf grassroots (with the gullible) can then demand more control. Elites to the rescue! After all, they are (this is their term, not mine) our “interplanetary guardians”! (Kid you not! You can’t make this stuff up! Stranger than fiction!)

About *-Columbia-* now, I lived there in Medellin as a missionary when there was a strong cartel presence and strong guerrilla presence both, and I’ve known lots of Columbians here in Miami. One I worked with agreed, that Uribe is a national hero among the people. In the States even alternative media doesn’t get the facts as well as they do with what’s going on here and to some extent in Europe.

Columbians in general were sick, tired, and disgusted with the lame way things were going. Gaviria got elected precisely on a platform of negotiating with FARC, and he was so serious about it he met their demand for a safe zone territory inside Columbia where they would not be bothered. (Probably to the consternation of its inhabitants). But Columbians wanted peace that’s why they elected him.

That was then. This is now. The FARC only used their safe zone to hold their couple hundred kidnapped ransom hostages, and stall, stall, stall, and they kept on killing people and blowing up things, business as usual. This went on for almost Gaviria’s entire one constitutional term. Near the end, due to pressure and embarrassment, he finally declare talks over and gave an ultimatum for that zone.

Biggest embarrassment for Gaviria was when the “paramilitary” groups –which had nothing to do with the military, that word is usually a propaganda trick of the elites, in my opinion. They circled that zone at one point and the FARC broke off talks demanding the government stop them. (OH, the irony! Government could not defeat FARC but stop the other guys). The independent self-defense forces were much more effective against them. (I met one guy who had land who gave us a ride once while hitchhiking). They just wanted to defend themselves.

So when Uribe ran for president, he spoke very clearly about getting serious about shutting them down. I think Columbians knew by then that the civilian politicians were timid about it, and saw Uribe as more serious. And serious he must have been, because during the campaign they murdered his son. Uribe’s next campaign speech after that was furious, and he said they thought they would stop him, but he was more determined than ever.

He proved to do exactly that, and the Columbians awarded him with a change in their constitution (not very easy there) to let him run a second term. They began getting some victories. That’s when Uribe got intelligence that led their forces to a FARC camp inside Ecuador that the Chavista president was obviously protecting. Correa was more angry about Columbian forces violating their territory than he was over Columbian guerrillas violating their territory (oops, maybe he had invited them?) or over Ecuador violating Columbian territory by supporting guerrilla bases.

So the Columbians changed their constitution again! And Uribe got a *third* term!

And my Columbian friends could not say enough good about him! In spite of the worldwide leftist propaganda machine. They indicted some Congresswoman to make it look like Uribe used dirty tricks to get re-elected but Columbians are not stupid. Not all that much.

So yeah. Leftists like Chavez, Correa in Ecuador, Morales in Bolivia, sure corporations can deal with them. They prefer a government that can guarantee them protection and deals. But like Paraguay shows, there are chinks and leaks in the Propaganda Machine. According to Bible passages in Daniel, Revelation and others, the description of the prophesied world government fits socialist regimes. (“Shall by peace overthrow many”, “shall gain the kingdom by flatteries”, “a collector of taxes shall rise up”..) But they also speak of plenty of trouble for his regime, including from many who are not Bible believers.

So for all this, no, I would not be surprised at pseudo-capitalists, fascist-capitalists, working with leftists. At least the elites, the ones that coordinate. No doubt they do. Armand Hammer, Warburg. Saw a Cold-War era movie made in Russia once, about the Swedish capitalists that worked with the Bolsheviks to make great numbers of train cars to save the masses from hunger (according to this movie haha).

Also about the USG helping leftist regimes, I’ve shared many times (my contra-propaganda mission) that the American ambassador Hugo Llorens to (my wife’s country) Honduras (Hugo Llorens) was used in Zelaya’s TV spots as if he endorsed Zelaya’s fraudulent “referendum/survey”. He was at Zelaya’s presidential palace the night before the “survey” would take place that would justify his Chavez-style dictatorship, at the same table as the inner circle of planners. He was “known” in Honduran social circles to be in a compromising relationship with Zelaya’s son.

Hondurans were massively relieved when Zelaya was relieved of his then illegitimate occupation of the presidential palace.

USG intervention was definitely and unequivocally tilted “leftist” in that case. Who knows? Maybe they knowingly cooperated with the phony “coup” in Venezuela. The Chavista Supreme Court cleared the top military brass of all charges and they got full retirement with benefits, very quietly, a year or so later.

Columbia is a beautiful country and are horrified –like it says there– at the prospect of one of these brutal killers getting office. Columbia still has an ongoing amnesty program, and any one of them can just give up at any time. Uribe had them almost wiped out. Columbians are mad that Santos eased off the goal of ending it.

In Guatemala, Efrain Rios Montt put a halt to ranchers-motivated killings of protesting Indians and started a “guns and beans” program. The Indians themselves were armed and trained to defend themselves against the guerrillas and they made sure they didn’t go hungry doing it, and helped them trade too. The result was that the guerrillas lost the war right then in Guatemala, and the “Left” has never forgiven him. Guatemala would have elected him.

Aaron Task writes disinformation spin for the Fed

January 26, 2012

Here’s where his article appears at yahoo:

No, the Fed Does NOT ‘Print Money’: Just Explain It:

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/no-fed-does-not-print-money-just-explain-150433185.html

This is from the “Give Me A Break” Department.

In the third paragraph, the guy couldn’t help but let slip why they are publishing this article now, probably setting the stage for a bit of another illusionist’s deceit it their bag of tricks to save the rigging somebody apparently set up for the election.

All you guys who are in your first class of Economics and Finance They Never Taught You in School, who are asking “what somebody?”, either keep your dial tuned to this station, or, just simply Follow The Money!

Hey! When Ron Paul talks about “printing money“, everybody that supports him ALREADY KNOWS he’s talking about MONEY SUPPLY, not printing presses!

Here’s LOOKING AT YOU, AARON TASK! —AND YOU KNOW THIS!

In fact, Ron Paul took note during a congressional hearing once that the Fed has stopped publishing their estimates of what they call “M3 money supply” which Aaron Task knows is more what Ron Paul is talking about when he says “printing money”, saying they could not estimate the figure anymore with sufficient accuracy. Ron Paul rightly observed that it’s a good guess that their real reason is that Americans would be shocked at the figures.

All the manipulations that Mr. Task listed that the Fed does to control the real money supply, that is what they do.

BUT HERE IS WHAT AARON TASK DELIBERATELY LEFT OUT, because I think he knows a little more than he is explaining, so I will “just explain it”.

The Fed DOES put out dollars in circulation now with electronic entries authorities by the selected persons at the Fed, and Quantitative Easing is exactly what is meant by “printing money”, meaning putting dollars into the money supply (now mostly electronic transfers anyway), which has the same effect as printing press dollar production, only worse and faster.

If buyers around the world were not eating up all this cash by using it to buy Treasury Bonds and other means, the dollar would have crashed a long time ago.

The big money players around the world have lost confidence in the stability of the dollar, and the “full faith and credit of the United States” has lost its polish, and even the guys in charge of the American economy (the administration) and the guys in charge of manipulating our money (the Fed) and the central banks around the world, have said they need to study a transition to another worldwide currency.

But they are already married to the dollar, they have gobs and gobs of dollars, and they want to get their money’s worth, so they are riding out the dollar, this “green paper pig”, a  balloon they know is about to go bust, while they work out how to do it. And whatever deal they cut, we all know that what they have in mind is making Americans pay, the American economy. They may market it here in the USA as a “tax on the rich”, but they know it will be our blood, sweat and tears they will  require.

The only presidential candidate telling the truth to the American people about all this is of course RON PAUL. The detractors are committing big sins of omission, in what they are NOT saying, what they are hiding from you. (Here’s looking at YOU, Aaron Task).

And the truth is, that every increase in the money supply is grand theft larceny from the pockets of the poor and the middle class. That’s inflation, a word that does not do justice to the value it robs from the dollars the poor use to buy food and gasoline and pay rent. This is the kind of deceitful theft that the Bible calls a “false balance”. The “false balance” was what merchants of old used to cheat their customers, like pretending they were selling you a pound of wheat when the stone they used in the balance was actually lighter than a pound and the buyer was getting less that he was told.

Proverbs 11:1 “A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.” (Proverbs 11:1).

John 8:32  And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

 

Glenn Beck is losing credibility, Ron Paul knows his subject

January 20, 2012
Ron Paul Revolution design
Ron Paul at a rally in the Nashville War Memor...

Image via Wikipedia

Ron Paul presidential campaign, 1988

Image via Wikipedia

Ron Paul's blimp
Image via Wikipedia

This does not pass the smell test:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/glenn-beck-ron-paul-backers-threatened-my-life/

This sounds like the media playbook that pretended it was a Ron Paul supporter that said “Let him die!” when a moderator asked him about somebody without insurance that died of cancer.

I told my brother I thought it was most likely somebody who did not like Ron Paul yelling that.

And that was the Ron Paul who treated such cases in his private practice free of charge when they could not pay, and worked for a while at a Catholic hospital that treated for free many patients who could not pay.

Nowadays, the people who were generally treated for free before, now get Medicare and Medicaid, so the demagogues can now say there’s all these people who depend on it. Blah blah. How much wealth would be freed up if you eliminated the zillion-dollar federal “health care” bureaucracy?

Now Glenn Beck wants to discredit Ron Paul by saying this crap? And why is HE the ONLY one supposedly getting all these “death threats”?

I’ll bet you, there are so many trillions of corrupt dollars at stake for some interests it would surprise me greatly if it is Ron Paul who was not getting death threats!

So big deal, Glenn Beck! And go have your logic examined for reality!

The thing you say is crazy about Ron Paul’s perspective on the Middle East is the same thing the CIA experts on the subject are saying, that American meddling has a blowback principle.

What, you think American bases on Saudi Arabian soil doesn’t irk some Saudis and Arabs? How about an Arab whose grandfather or cousin  was killed in Deir Yassin? You don’t think American support for Israel would not bother Arabs?

We Americans complain about United Nations authorities telling us what to do here.

And why not try the same thing that worked for so long in American foreign policy, the Founding Fathers version, be friends with all with entangling alliances with none. How about that? Speak softly but carry a big national defense stick?

Like the respected international security analysis company Stratfor said when we went into Afghanistan, they predicted this too. They said if the USA goes in and overthrows the Taliban and chases al Qaeda into the nooks and crannies and then gets out and leaves it to the Afghans, they would be able to declare a victory and destroy their credibility, as in “Don’t tread on me”, and don’t mess with this tiger.

But instead, they made al Qaeda into this big evil monster that was going to overthrow the United States of America and take us over if we didn’t invade Afghanistan and Iraq and suspend the Fourth and Fifth Amendments with the Patriot Act and put out yellow and red threat alerts and check our genitals at the airports.

Give me a break! It would be a comedian’s laugh line if it weren’t such a real threat to us!

Our biggest threat right now to our freedoms is our own federal government and a looming unconstitutional police state that has full arbitrary confiscatory powers over all our production, it’s not those Arabs, jihad or no!

Rather than paying to have troops in 150 countries around the world in 900 bases with money we do not have, better to have them spend their money here and strengthen national defense here at home, protect our own borders instead of Afghanistan’s, use the savings from cutting out useless and burdensome federal bureaucracies to pay for the nuclear submarines (which Ron Paul strongly supports).

And that way they will have to take notice: You attack us here, or you attack our ships carrying freight or passengers, we will not hesitate to defend ourselves…

And hey Glenn Beck! Since when does a Mormon oppose the Golden Rule?

Politifact lies: Pants on Fire!

January 11, 2012

 

Politifact arrogantly claims to hold the corner on truth. A lot of militants that criticize Christians with this same meaningless charge (they themselves are culpable, claiming to know better than Christians) run to their “findings” like this one as if it were the last word on it:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/08/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-barack-obama-socialist/

They fall back on the old definition of a socialist as one who believes in government ownership of the means of production and distribution in an economy.

This pretension falls under what we all know is another legitimate definition of socialism, found at thefreedictionary.com, from the American Heritage Dictionary:

2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

And then there is Fabian socialism, a term adopted to refer to the stepwise sneaky way of implementing it promoted by the Fabian Society, one which has been adopted today by many who scoff at the mere suggestion that they are “socialist” while doing all the steps that a socialist would do:

Fabian Society – an association of British socialists who advocate gradual reforms within the law leading to democratic socialism

And then there is Obama‘s claim to Teddy Roosevelt‘s proclamation of the foundation of socialist ideology, which is the idea that the government actually owns everything you have but lets you “keep title” to what it thinks you deserve to keep:

“The New Nationalism,” Roosevelt proclaimed, “rightly maintains that every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it.”

That’s right, Politifact, you are wrong! Busted! Pants on Fire!

And when you play with fire like you have done here, you get burned!

Socialism is better described as theft and plunder, a government taking whatever it wants.

YOUR NEIGHBOR’S PROPERTY IS NOT YOURS FOR THE TAKING!  THAT IS SOCIALISM AND IT IS WRONG, WRONG ,WRONG!

 

 

Republican Insider: GOP Establishment Planning To Subvert Iowa to Prevent Ron Paul Win

January 4, 2012

From January 3rd:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/republican-insider-gop-establishment-planning-to-subvert-iowa-to-prevent-ron-paul-win.html

The web page includes a video with a Republican Party insider in Iowa boldly proclaiming the kinds of tricks that party leaders were going to use to make sure that Ron Paul would not come out in first place in Iowa.

The host of the show refers to state GOP insiders showing “great concern” that Ron Paul is performing well in Iowa because they fear a Paul win would undermine Iowa’s position as being the first Republican primary. He implies that influential members of the Republican establishment within the state are offering sweetheart deals to prominent voting blocks in key swing districts in order to “sway” the result and ensure Ron Paul doesn’t win.

Despite the fact that this is brazenly unethical and, if bribery was involved, without doubt illegal, the host dismisses such conduct as “just politics”.

“Is it possible that the party apparatus here could be silently asking those District Chairmen to start swaying some important caucus members over to the anti-Paul side which may end up being Santorum…do you see a scenario like that happening,” he asked Benkie.

“I’ve talked to the party officials, I know they’re concerned about it,” said Benkie, adding, “Ron Paul doesn’t do us any good in Iowa, doesn’t do the country any good, will never get there, so let’s figure out what we need to do.”

Benkie said that the GOP establishment was concerned about splitting the vote between Santorum and Romney because it could increase the chances of a Ron Paul win, remarking, “We really don’t want Ron Paul to win.”

There you have it. They MSM is yapping about where is the “stop-Romney” candidate, but it’s Ron Paul they’re really worried about.

What are they afraid of? A genuine cut to the budget instead of an increased budget that cuts some of the increase? Bringing the troops home to the bases here at home and to the borders? An end to the inflationary poor-robbing money printing of the Fed and the officers it gets from Wall Street? An end to these wars that have done nothing for American interests except for some corporate interests?
A return to the Constitution to measure legislation and executive action?

December 30, 2011

Here is my answer to one or another hysterical anti-Ron Paul rant:

Ron Paul is the anti-racist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pTgp3vF-eM

What other candidate promises to stop the federally pushed total institutional racist war on drugs, which puts up to 5X more blacks into prison per arrest rate that whites? And who is the one blasting the racist drug laws that by law and by judicial decision make much more brutal sentences.

This is all a distraction from the real issues that are attracting people of all kinds and backgrounds to Ron Paul’s cause. Anti-gay? I’ve met enthusiastic gays at Ron Paul rallies. Blacks? I’ve won blacks over the cause who asked for extra issues cards to give to their own friends. As soon as awareness of what Ron Paul stands for reaches critical mass among blacks, it’s all over for Obama.

Freedom brings all kinds of people together to support Ron Paul’s message and platform: blacks, whites, Latinos, rednecks, anarchists, former mainstream Democrats, former mainstream Republicans, gays, straights, atheists, Bible-thumping preachers, liberal theologians and conservative theologians, more soldiers than the other candidates, women, men, feminists, strippers and prudes, gun owners, business owners, technologists, software engineers and lawyers, corporate executives and blue collar workers, almost anything you can think of except for crony capitalist supporters and socialists who want more government power!

He is against the institutional racism of the drug laws and the drug wars.

He is the one we can count on to stop the mad rush to use the American military to enforce goodness on the world.

He is the one admitting the failure of American interventionist policy around the world.

His policies would return the nation to a truly strong national self-defense. The United States is sgoing broke and its military is about to crash and burn against the wall of economic catastrophe brought about by fiat currency with no independent value. Bringing the soldiers home to bases, and there is plenty of room for them on US soil, would mean spending that money at home and soldiers to protect our borders. Releasing the oil that has been banned by fiat would release the country from sovereignty-killing dependence on foreign imports.

Besides which, this is no pansy for abuse by those who would interfere with trade by Americans. Citizens could feel safer abroad. He excoriated Congress and the President for their neglect of the constitutional use of letters of marque and reprisal, rewards for those who kill or capture anyone who after Congressional debate is determined to be a real threat to American interests.

I think Somali pirates would take note. A letter of marque and reprisal for someone who was attacking US merchant ships for ransom might have to face an army of his own kind of pirates seeking the reward money. You think that’s ugly, you should see the army of the kind of people our most respected district attorneys use for informants.

So President Paul that got his wish list, at least at the federal level, would mean the end of institutionally racist drug laws, savings from the end of ineffective drug wars, a MUCH stronger national defense, a MUCH stronger currency, a MUCH stronger economy, MANY more resources for the multitude of charities helping the poor from the spillover of a much richer nation, and a population much less afraid of government abuse.

 

Do not trust Internet voting EVER!

December 30, 2011

There’s a new ad on some of the political and news web sites that calls itself  “Americans Elect” that claims it’s not a third party, BUT IT IS A “THIRD PARTY“. Liars, liars, pants on fires.

This is an ad-driven thing, not a grassroots insurgency like the Ron Paul campaign.

So I want to know, where did the money for all these purchased ads come from, WHO is paying for them? And how many layers does it have to pull back to see who is behind the curtain?

I have nothing against a third party, there are a lot of them that are better than the two monsters that presently are practically our masters. They’re getting another line on the ballot in different states, they’re claiming they will have all 50 states. They claim that Americans will directly participate and nominate their candidate of choice by the thousands in an “on-line convention” in June.

I’m a software engineer, and DO NOT BELIEVE FOR A MOMENT that anybody can “secure” a nominating or a voting process like that. A “printable receipt” is NOT a sufficient recourse for recounts for example, though the real masters of this “independent” process will claim it’s not necessary.

They’ll have a technical panel that will “guarantee” the security of the process.

I have worked on banking software, and they had more security than anybody else, and you trust it and I trust it with the ATM. But YOUR VOTE IS MUCH MUCH MORE VALUABLE THAN YOUR BANK ACCOUNT.

And we all know how many banks have lost our data to cyber crackers.

Like some of the experts who have testified before Congress about electronic voting say, THERE IS NO PROTECTION –AT ALL, AT ALL– AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE SYSTEM.

No, when it comes to voting, there is no substitute for a hard copy of a vote in a physically secured location stored not in secret but openly and publicly where not just party representatives but anybody at all can watch.

Me, I have said for decades that the two-party political cartel that passes laws that keep its members in power and keeps other groups out is unfair and is unequal treatment under the law and keeps new alternatives out and the incumbent scoundrels in. It rigs the system to offer one of two party-boss selected candidates that do basically the same thing over the years. During administrations of both faces of this two-faced political system, the government has only grown, unconstitutional undeclared wars continue apace, nation-building by the military continues instead of self-defense, crony capitalism and phony welfare-ism only grows, the debt only multiplies, budget “cuts” are really budget increases that are less than original proposals, and the Federal Reserve continues to gush rivers of phony currency and manipulate the money supply and play whiplash with the economy and give us zig-zag recessions and lead us headlong toward monetary catastrophe.

Now we have an actual alternative emerging from the Republican Party nominating process, an upstart that embarrasses the big-money powers-that-be and party bosses, and has a chance to turn the country around.

Ron Paul has earned that trust. Trust is earned, not a “right”.

This new Internet party does not convince me. It has not earned my trust at all. I suspect it will be a media-driven thing that will be beholden to the architects that set it up. They are in the invisible background. Who is behind this thing, that kind of ad money did not come from a spontaneous grassroots thing!

I want to know, where did the official funding for all these purchased ads come from, and from whom, because by knowing what tree this new branch spouts from, we’ll know the rest.

Do NOT trust software or computer technicians, they are just as corruptible as anybody.