Read-Only Archive โ€” 68,067 posts ยท 4,889 threads ยท 2,978 members ยท preserved from 2006โ€“2015
ron paul
#1
im giving him a second look


8|
#2
What the what?
I have a crazy lady that comes in talking about gov secrecy and everything that always talks about how everyone should vote for him.
She also says that the govt is staging a fake terrorist attack at the 101 and 202 and that they will searching random homes without search warrants during it. I forgot what date she said, but she told me she bought a video phone just so she can catch them when they come unlawfully into her house.
She also says that China is building a NAFTA highway through the center of America to bring in their poison dog food and lead infused toys directly through without regulation.
#3
skatchkins wrote:What the what?
I have a crazy lady that comes in talking about gov secrecy and everything that always talks about how everyone should vote for him.
She also says that the govt is staging a fake terrorist attack at the 101 and 202 and that they will searching random homes without search warrants during it. I forgot what date she said, but she told me she bought a video phone just so she can catch them when they come unlawfully into her house.
She also says that China is building a NAFTA highway through the center of America to bring in their poison dog food and lead infused toys directly through without regulation.


hmm yah she does sound a little crazy

although she is right on the gov't being able to eves drop without a search warrant.

Part of the powers congress granted the president is that whenever someone calls a person in a foreign country, the gov't can wiretap that call. So say I call up my friend Lijo in India, the gov't/president can listen in and record that call without a search warrant or congress approval. That whole thing is unconstitutional and Paul wants to revoke it

I like him for that fact that he takes the constitution as law and abides by it 100%
#4
See, I don't mind them tapping my phone. If it means they can catch more terrorists that way. (they already listen in anway with that computer)
I don't want to live in a country where Jack Bauer can't beat the hell out of a rag head b/c lawyers say they have rights under the const.
#5
skatchkins wrote:See, I don't mind them tapping my phone. If it means they can catch more terrorists that way.
I don't want to live in a country where Jack Bauer can't beat the hell out of a rag head b/c lawyers say they have rights under the const.


Think of the future though. Imagine Hillary is in the whitehouse, under that law in the patriot act she can listen to your phone call.

They can listen in even if you are calling your grandma who lives overseas. Its an invasion of privacy.

The 4th ammendment is suppose to protect us from unreasonable searches and seizures unless the gov't can establish probable cause that a crime is involved.

The patriot act as it stands is a clear violation of the constitution.

I dont have a problem with the gov't listening to a phone call if they follow proper procedures and obtain a search warrant. In fact there was an agency created in 1978 just to do that

In 1978, Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and created a new court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, to approve warrants when the federal government says they are needed to gather information related to foreign activities. FISA made it much easier for the government to get warrants, no longer requiring probable cause of criminal activity, but instead requiring only that the government show a reasonable likelihood that foreign intelligence information would be gathered.

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/01/eavesdrop1.html
#6
Paul was on Lenno last night
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5448653651359708857&hl=en

interesting ideas
#7
So Im over on hotair.com talking to some people about paul and his ideas. It seems that their major point for not withdrawing troops from around the world is that islam is a threat and always will be. They always refference the barbary pirates when saying this too. So, here is my reply to them on that thread.

I have read about the Barbary pirates and I agree the world has been fighting agains Islam for a very long time. A quote from Adja to the continental congress in 1786 summed up Islams views on infidels pretty good “That it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise”


I do agree radical islam is a threat to us. I do agree that we need to be vigilant in protecting our security.

However I do think that alot of our problems overseas are a result of our intervention.

The current situation in Iran is a direct result of CIA intervention. We overthrew their government in 1953. Of course we thought it was a good idea at the time but now look where that got us. Even the presidents office has admitted this was a mistake, in 2000 Secretary of State Albright called it a “setback for democratic government”

The US supported the Afghans in their fight against the USSR from 1979 - 1989. We provided them with weapons, money and training. Of course we thought it was a good idea at the time but after the war, the taliban were now well funded and armed. This allowed them to setup the opressive regime in Afghanistan. Oh and we helped out a guy named Osama during that time too.

Like I said before I think we invaded Afghanistan primarly beause of sept 11th. But how can you honestly say that we did not give consideration to a permanent US base in that region? Do you really believe that had no factor in it at all?

I think we need to stop trying to police the world. We need to focus on our domestic issues and secure our borders.


Agree? Disagree? Id like to hear your opinions.
#8
Hmmm. It sounds as though, and I believe you voiced it to me one day, that your view borders on a bad plane.
What I hear is, we should not have helped the Jews during the World War. I know you'll say, "But we didn't go in for them, we went after the bombing of Pearl Harbor."
But still by your stance, we should not have helped even for the most altruistic of reasons. That's no good. If I see someone fall down in traffic, is it more important that I think about my own well being or that the other cars would be inconvenienced? No, I'm not a democratic a-hole.

What if we should've helped earlier, but someone needed to send us a wake up call, boot us out of our comfort zone, to mount up, i.e. Pearl Harbor, 9-11.

Food for thought: I also understand it to be biblical to be against whatever side is against the Jewish people (I forget whether Islam is Jew friendly or not). They did get their own nation after being rescued in WWII which was predicted in the Bible.
#9
skatchkins wrote:Hmmm. It sounds as though, and I believe you voiced it to me one day, that your view borders on a bad plane.
What I hear is, we should not have helped the Jews during the World War. I know you'll say, "But we didn't go in for them, we went after the bombing of Pearl Harbor."
But still by your stance, we should not have helped even for the most altruistic of reasons. That's no good. If I see someone fall down in traffic, is it more important that I think about my own well being or that the other cars would be inconvenienced?


If we really care that much about suffering of people why don't we invade half of Africa? Factions their are killing people by the hundreds of thousands

Between April and June 1994, an estimated 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the space of 100 days. source http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1288230.stm

Since 2003 in Sudan and Dufar over 400,000 people have been killed in ethnic cleansing and violence

Why didn't the US and the rest of the world invade and stop this?

You were right, we didn't enter WWII because Hitler was killing people. We entered as a response to Japans attack against us.

Stopping a genocide is different then topling a government for the sole purpose of creating a democratic country. Our country has a history of intervention and the spread of democracy through force, whether that force was direct or by proxy.

We can still support countries, and help them with basic needs. I am in favor of groups like USAID and others. I do not think we should continue the practice of nation building though.

Pretend you gave a gun to a kid, that kid then kills his friend. Are you partially responsible for his friends death?

Of course you are. The same thing has happened with our foreign policy.

We support the ethnic afghans and we also gave money to the Pakistan ISI. The Pakistan ISI in turn gave money to radical groups in Afghanistan wich include Bin laden and others. Bin Ladens camps in Afghanist and Pakistan were built with ISI funds.

I am not saying we should not help out others in need. However I do think we need to stop policing the world. It is not up to the United States to make sure that countries do not invade each other or cause problems. It is the worlds problem. The world body needs to act, groups like the UN, EU and others need to take over peace keeping operations world wide.

We should not attack any nation unless attacked or provoked.

The world body as a whole is apathetic and does not want to take responsability. Why should they? They have the US to do the work for them. Then they can blame us when things don't work out.
#10
lots of good info here explaining Pauls ideas and views

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
#11
this is good too, short video of clips about paul (plus a bonus of dont tase me bro!)
http://www.freeme.tv

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html#ron_paul_a_new_hope