Posts Tagged ‘freedom’

January 28, 2008

When I started this campaign more than a year ago, I was a somewhat reluctant candidate. I knew our message of freedom, peace, and prosperity was the right one for our country, but frankly, I didn’t know how many people today would have ears to hear it.
Well, did I learn a lesson! Millions of Americans understand what ails our country, and what is needed to fix it. So, with you at my side, I am in this effort to win. Not only by building the ideas of liberty, but by getting the nomination. Our opponents would call that nuts — you know, the advocates of more inflation, more spending, more taxes, more war. But let me explain why they are, as usual, all wet.
For one thing, for the first time since 1952, we are headed towards a brokered convention. Instead of a coronation of one of the establishment candidates, the delegates, influenced by the people, will decide. And I am afraid that this will take place in a time of heightened economic crisis. That means even more Americans will be ready to hear our message. But it also means I am really going to need your help.
One would never know this from the mainstream media, but we’ve only had a few primaries and caucuses, and even after the extremely important date of February 5th, we will still have more than half to go. And the Republican nominee will not be decided by the popular vote among the “leading candidates” in a few states also handpicked by the media. The nominee will be decided by the delegates. So let me tell you a little about our “under-the-radar” strategy to get those delegates.
On “Super Tuesday,” February 5th, there will be 22 primaries and caucuses. I have a hunch that we’re going to do very well. But, of course, the media and the rest of the establishment refuse to recognize that. It’s the attitude of the small child who covers his eyes to make something scary go away. But we are not going away.
While the media focus on the couple of states they claim are important, we’re competing everywhere. And the reason that we’re able to do that is because of your grassroots support. You all are an asset that no other campaign has: donors, and activists who want no special deals from the government, just the Constitution.
We’re competing very strongly in all the caucus states, and in all other states where delegates are up for grabs. And we’re going to keep picking up delegates. Our strategy’s already working.
And we’re committed to winning states. I have little doubt that if we can double our efforts in this coming week, we’re going to grab many delegates from other candidates. Then we’ll start getting ready for the biggest moment of all – the convention in September.
The path to the convention is twisty, however. When we were in Iowa, we got 10% of the vote. But no delegates were awarded that night. That’s because voters didn’t directly choose national convention delegates; they selected the county and state delegates who will make that decision. And if another candidate like Mike Huckabee is no longer in the race at the time of the state convention in June, his delegates are free to support whomever they want. If we work extra hard, we can convert them into delegates for our campaign!
A similar thing happened in Nevada. We won 14% of the straw poll vote that the media reported on, but what they didn’t tell you was that we may have gotten up to a third of Nevada’s delegates to their county conventions! I always laughed when I heard some people say Nevada didn’t matter. Nevada chooses more delegates to the national convention than South Carolina.
So, while the media will focus on the results from Florida, and probably take down the campaign of my friend Rudy in the process, those results are less important to you and me. Let them fight in Florida while we bring our message to Americans in other areas, like the economically hard-hit state of Maine.
We want to win as many delegates to the Republican National Convention as possible, even if other campaigns don’t see some areas of the country as “important. But in this work, I need your help. Help me get many, many delegates to this historic convention, by these three methods.

1. Donate. Your generous contributions are essential if we’re going to keep going until September. We need, frankly $5 million by February 5 to run more TV and radio ads in the Super Tuesday states. Your help means everything: https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate.

2. Canvass. You can help us identify those who support our message in your precinct. You can help us to convert others, too. After all, your neighbors pay attention to you. I am going to visit as much of the country as I can, but I need you as my partner in your area: https://voters.ronpaul2008.com.

3. ASK others to sign-up on our website. I meet so many people on the campaign trail who don’t even receive my letters! I’ve told my campaign to make communication with you, the engine of all this, much better. But if people don’t sign up for my e-mails, that won’t happen. If you could just get one extra person to sign-up, that would be great. More would be tremendous.

We’ve come so far, but now the fun is really starting! I have a feeling the mainstream media will move from ignoring us to attacking us. But that will be a sign of our success. Join me as we continue this great movement into year two, and to a hot convention in Minneapolis-Saint Paul. We can do it!
Sincerely,
Ron
Join the Ron Paul Revolution!!
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/join
.

Advertisements
 From Huffpost’s “off the bus”

 James Freedman

 Posted January 23, 2008 | 01:43 AM (EST)

Ron Paul’s libertarian ideology is dramatically revealed when you get him started on topics such as the War on Drugs, the FDA and forced immunization that draw on his background in medicine. Paul, a ten-term member of Congress who’s hoping to pick up the Republican nomination for president, feels strongly that the federal government, in most cases, shouldn’t be telling Americans what they can and cannot put into their bodies.

“I don’t think anything should be forced on us by the government, [and] immunization is one thing that we’re pressured and forced into,” he said. “The other thing they’re doing right now is the government’s doing this mental health testing of everybody in school and they’re putting a lot of pressure, in a way forcing kids to be put on psychotropic drugs, which I think are very, very dangerous. So anything medical that is forced on us I think is bad.”

What if a dangerous disease was spreading like wildfire? Would Paul cave and require immunization in such a dire situation?

“No, I wouldn’t do it, because the person who doesn’t take the shot is the one at risk…” he said. “A responsible parent is going to say, ‘Yeah, I want my child to have that,’ [but] when the government makes a mistake, they make it for everybody. You know, that’s what worries me. They don’t always come up with the perfect answer sometimes… and people have had some very, very serious reactions from these immunizations.”

Just as Paul wants to limit what Americans are forced to put in their bodies, he also wants to restrict the federal government’s dictates of what Americans are allowed to consume.

“I want the [federal] government to stay out of it,” he said. “I don’t think the federal government should be enforcing laws against the use of marijuana in states like California, where it’s been legalized for medical use… I just think the states should regulate it.”

Paul compared the War on Drugs to the long-ago repealed Eighteenth Amendment banning the manufacture and sale of alcohol in the United States.

“I think the prohibition of drugs and the War on Drugs has been every bit as detrimental as the prohibition of alcohol,” he said. “We probably have more danger in our prescription drugs and more addiction from those drugs–there’s a great deal of harm.”

He added: “If we accept this notion that the federal government is going to dictate what we can put into our bodies, then it leads to the next step: that the government is going to regulate everything that is supposedly good for us. That’s where they are. They have an FDA that won’t allow somebody who’s dying to use an experimental drug which might speed up the process of finding out which drugs are good and which drugs are bad and the federal government comes in and dictates that they want complete control over vitamins and nutritional products and I just think the whole principal of government telling us what we can take in or not take in is just a dangerous position to take… it’s related to the drug industry because they’d like to control all of this.”

Although he concedes that some regulation is prudent, the situation under a Paul Administration would be vastly different than where things stand today.

“[When] it comes down to… the use of drugs for kids and other things they have a right to regulate it. They regulate alcohol all the time, not very well but at least they can do it,” he said. “[But] I don’t think you need the federal government sending their policemen out to try to enforce a law that’s virtually unenforceable.”

Paul, who ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988, clearly has a strong desire for change, and has done surprisingly well in caucuses and primaries so far — coming in second in Nevada, for instance. Still, most pundits do not think he’ll get the nomination this time around, either. If that turns out to be the case, would he ever consider running for president again in the future?

“Well, I probably wouldn’t want to run again, but I can’t believe any time in my life I would not want to promote these views, because I’m so firmly convinced that it would be beneficial to all of us,” he said.

Original Article: http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo139.html


by Thomas J. DiLorenzo


“Lincoln is theology, not historiology. He is a faith, he is a church, he is a religion, and he has his own priests and acolytes, most of whom have a vested interest in [him] and who are passionately opposed to anybody telling the truth about him.”

~ Lerone Bennett, Jr.,

Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream
, p. 114

The gigantic collection of myths, lies, and distortions that comprise The Legend of Abraham Lincoln is the ideological cornerstone of the American warfare/welfare state. It has been invoked for generations to make the argument that if the policies of the U.S. government are not “the will of God,” then at least they are the will of “Father Abraham.” Moreover, this legend – this false history of America – did not arise spontaneously. It was invented and nurtured by an intergenerational army of court historians who, as Murray Rothbard once said, are absolutely indispensable to any government empire. All states, said Rothbard, depend for their existence on a series of myths about their benevolence, heroism, greatness, or even divinity.

Since very few Americans have spent much time educating themselves about Lincoln and nineteenth-century American history (much of which has been falsified anyway), it is easy for members of what I call the Lincoln Cult to dismiss all literary criticisms of Lincoln as the work of “neo-Confederates,” their code-word for “defenders of slavery” (as though anyone in America today would defend slavery), or “racist.” Although they label themselves “Lincoln scholars,” the last thing they want is honest scholarship when it comes to the subject of Lincoln and his war. They are, at best, cover-up artists and pandering court historians who feed at the government grant trough, “consuming” tax dollars to support their “research” and their overblown university positions.

But they’ve got a big problem (more than one, actually). The big problem is the publication of a 662-page book by the distinguished African-American author Lerone Bennett, Jr. entitled Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream. The book was originally published in 1999 and was recently released in paperback. Bennett was a longtime managing editor of Ebony magazine and, among other things, the author of a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr., What Manner of Man. Although several “Civil War” publications have labeled yours truly as the preeminent Lincoln critic of our day, Forced into Glory is a much more powerful critique of Dishonest Abe than anything I have ever written. The Lincoln Cult, which would not dare to personally attack a serious African-American scholar like Bennett, has largely ignored the book instead.

When they are not ignoring the book and hoping that it (and the author) would just go away, they “have responded by recycling the traditional Lincoln apologies,” writes Bennett. (Being a “Lincoln scholar” means taking some of Lincoln’s unsavory words and deeds, such as his lifelong support for the policy of “colonization” or deportation of all black people in America, and dreaming up excuses for why he was supposedly “forced” into taking that position).

Bennett argues that “academics and [the] media had been hiding the truth for 135 years and that Lincoln was not the great emancipator or the small emancipator or the economy-sized emancipator.” He presents chapter and verse of how the Emancipation Proclamation freed no one, since it only applied to “rebel territory,” and specifically exempted all the slave-owning/Union-controlled border states and other areas that were occupied by the U.S. army at the time. He quotes James Randall, who has been called the “greatest Lincoln scholar of all time,” as writing, “the Proclamation itself did not free a single slave.” It was the Thirteenth Amendment that finally ended slavery, he correctly notes, and Lincoln was dragged into accepting it kicking and screaming all the way.

So what was the purpose of the Proclamation? Primarily to placate the genuine abolitionists with a political sleight of hand, says Bennett, and to deter Britain and France from formally recognizing the Confederate government.

Since so few Americans are aware of these facts, Bennett correctly concludes that “the level of ignorance on Abraham Lincoln and race in the United States is a scandal and a rebuke to schools, museums, media, and scholars.” This of course is no accident; it’s exactly the way the state wants it to be.

Bennett is especially critical of how the Lincoln Cult uses black historical figures as pawns in its defense of “Father Abraham.” For example, he contends that there is no way to get around the fact that Lincoln was a lifelong white supremacist, loudly proclaiming that he was opposed to “making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people.” He said far worse things than that, as Bennett documents. The typical response of the Lincoln Cult is to “find a slave or a former slave or, better, a Black officeholder to say that he adores Lincoln and doesn’t care what people say . . . “

Why, one would ask, is such a distinguished African-American journalist so incensed over the Lincoln myth? It is because of his twenty years of painstaking research, resulting in this book, that proves, among other things, what a vulgar racist Lincoln was. Bennett provides quote after quote of Lincoln’s own words, habitually using the N-word so much that people in Washington thought he was weirdly consumed by his racism. Bennett tells of first-hand accounts by some of Lincoln’s generals of how they left a meeting with him during a crisis in the war in which the president spent most of his time in the meeting telling off-color “darkie” jokes (Lincoln’s language). General James Wadsworth, for example, was “shocked by the racism in the Lincoln White House.”

I will not repeat any of this language here; suffice it to say that Bennett has scoured Lincoln’s Collected Works and demonstrates that he used the N-word about as frequently as your modern-day “gangster rapper” does. Bennett also describes how this has all been covered up by the Lincoln Cult. Despite the hundreds of examples that are right there in black and white in Lincoln’s own speeches, “Carl Sandburg, who spent decades researching Lincoln’s life, denied that Lincoln used the N-word.” And “Harold Holzer, who edited a collection of the Lincoln-Douglas debates, was surprised that Lincoln used the N-word twice in the first Lincoln-Douglas debate.” (Lincoln personally edited the transcripts of the debates, so there is no question that he said these things).

Original Article: http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo139.html

Copyright © 2008 LewRockwell.com

 Another excellent Article by The Mises Institute.

This one about Liberatarianism

Myth and Truth About Libertarianism

By Murray N. Rothbard

Posted in Mises on 1/11/2008
Original Article: http://www.mises.org/story/2616#0 

  • Introduction
  • Myths
  • Libertarians believe that each individual is an isolated, hermetically sealed atom, acting in a vacuum without influencing each other.
  • Libertarians are libertines: they are hedonists who hanker after “alternative lifestyles.”
  • Libertarians do not believe in moral principles; they limit themselves to cost-benefit analysis on the assumption that man is always rational.
  • Libertarianism is atheistic and materialist, and neglects the spiritual side of life.
  • Libertarians are utopians who believe that all people are good, and that therefore state control is not necessary.
  • Libertarians believe that every person knows his own interests best.
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
[This essay is based on a paper presented at the April 1979 national meeting of the Philadelphia Society in Chicago. The theme of the meeting was “Conservatism and Libertarianism.”]
Libertarianism is the fastest growing political creed in America today. Before judging and evaluating libertarianism, it is vitally important to find out precisely what that doctrine is, and, more particularly, what it is not. It is especially important to clear up a number of misconceptions about libertarianism that are held by most people, and particularly by conservatives. In this essay I shall enumerate and critically analyze the most common myths that are held about libertarianism. When these are cleared away, people will then be able to discuss libertarianism free of egregious myths and misconceptions, and to deal with it as it should be on its very own merits or demerits.
For the rest follow this link: http://www.mises.org/story/2616#0 



NSA Gets Real Time Access to Your

Email

For the Full Article:  http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1327

Kurt Nimmo
TruthNews
December 19, 2007
It was inevitable: the Advanced Research Projects Agency, later to become DARPA, right out of the Pentagon, created the internet. The RAND Corporation invented modern packet switching. DARPA and ARPANET recruited Vint Cerf of Stanford University to work on TCP/IP. Cerf is regarded as “the father of the Internet,” or maybe that should be the military-NSA snoop network. Now we learn NSA increasingly controls SSL, now called Transport Layer Security, the cryptographic protocol that provides secure communications on the internet for web browsing, e-mail, instant messaging, and other data transfers.

In other words, increasingly, the NSA is reading your email and everything you type in your IM client — and in real time, that is to say there is no delay in the timeliness of the information, the underwear drawer snoopers have the ability to read your IMs as you type them.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/011408_revolution_reunite.htm

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, January 14, 2008

The last two weeks have thrown up a number of divisive controversies that have been exploited by the establishment to slow the momentum of the Ron Paul Revolution. Now is the time to sweep these issues aside and concentrate on reinvigorating the movement to restore peace, liberty and prosperity in our time.

Before we discuss such issues it is necessary to stress just how successful the Ron Paul Revolution has been and continues to be. Our influence and impact is only growing and despite what happens in this current election cycle the future looks exciting. Never before has a genuine grass roots movement blossomed so expansively in such a short space of time. After the primaries and the election are long gone, the seeds of the Ron Paul Revolution will remain and they will continue to act as a beacon for the growing liberty movement.

Perhaps the biggest issue is the establishment media’s smear tactic in attempting to dismiss the Congressman as a racist for sentiments expressed in articles written by other people 20 years ago. For long-standing Paul supporters, the fact that the media would play this card came as no surprise, but for others, the faux controversy served to dampen some of their enthusiasm for the campaign.

First of all, as we have documented and as the President of the NAACP in Austin and a man who has known Ron Paul 20 years has testified to, the claims are lurid, slapdash, out of context and purely designed as political fodder to derail a movement that threatens the establishment and the very racist policies in everyday society that it upholds. Ron Paul is not a racist, has never been a racist, and anyone that has engaged in even a cursory study of his public statements and articles can see that this is self-evident.

140108rp2.jpg

Secondly, Ron Paul supporters who saw this as an excuse to withdraw themselves from helping the campaign need to grow a thicker skin.

This is an election season and all manner of personal smears are going to be flying around. The establishment is terrified that 10 per cent of the politically active population have committed themselves to saving America and they will tell all manner of lies in an attempt to drives wedges between Ron Paul supporters.

Expect it, deal with it, fight it, and move on. Don’t become disheartened because the momentum is still with us and we should only redouble our efforts every time another attack is launched on the good name of the Congressman.

Another divisive wedge that the establishment have tried to exploit, notably in a Fox News debate question last week, is the issue of the 9/11 truth movement and its link to Ron Paul.

Many 9/11 truthers are upset that the Congressman has not fully embraced their views and see his public distancing from them as a kind of rejection.

Whatever Ron Paul’s views on 9/11, and he has publicly supported a new investigation in the past, truthers need to be more savvy in accepting the fact that the Congressman has now entered the belly of the beast and will have to play politics to a certain degree simply to fend off the establishment’s relentless attack pattern.

That is not to say that Paul should compromise his values in the interests of appeasing the status quo and so far he has performed admirably in sticking to his positions and stubbornly reinforcing them in the face of constant backlash from every one of the other establishment candidate dupes.

Whatever truthers think about Ron Paul’s rhetoric on this issue, all they really need to do is ask themselves one question. If, as the evidence clearly indicates, the government had a hand in 9/11, do you really think that a government led by Ron Paul would do the same thing again? Clearly not, which is why truthers need to get past their gripe and throw their considerable skills of impromptu educational activism behind the Congressman’s mission to restore America.

You cannot please all of the people all of the time. Ron Paul’s supporters are never going to agree with him on every single issue but this should by no means provide them with an excuse to become despondent and give up the fight.

The third and most recent controversy to divide Ron Paul supporters is the fact that the Congressman has declined to follow up on efforts to get a recount in New Hampshire following numerous indications of vote fraud.

Ron Paul made a statement on Friday in which he made it clear that he thought vote fraud was not beyond those in the establishment who wish to mothball his campaign.

However, he followed this up yesterday by indicating he would not be pursuing a recount in New Hampshire, preferring instead to focus on the upcoming primary in Michigan.

“After a careful investigation, I have decided against seeking a recount in New Hampshire. I am confident that not asking for a recount is the right decision,” read the statement.

“I carefully considered the arguments for and against a recount before instructing my campaign staff not to pursue it. Without a firm belief that vote fraud had taken place, and without the possibility that a recount would have increased the chances for success of our campaign, a recount would have diverted campaign resources, time, and energy away from crucial battles elsewhere.”

Though we can readily see why the Congressman’s campaign prefers to focus on the battles ahead, the reasons for taking another look at New Hampshire are legion and that is why we support the efforts of Democrat Dennis Kucinich and Republican candidate Albert Howard in mandating a recount on both sides.

Here is why a recount is necessary.

– Obama had a 13 to 15 point lead over Hillary Clinton heading into the primary. Nothing occurred that boosted Hillary’s numbers immediately before the election, in fact immediately after the staged crying incident, many pundits argued it could only have harmed her chances. And yet Hillary somehow managed to instigate a near 20 point swing to defeat Obama by three per cent. If not for her 7% swing as a result of Diebold voting machines, Hillary would have lost to Obama. If Obama was struggling he would probably contest this bizarre outcome, but he is likely to accept the results simply to save face.

– The New Hampshire town of Sutton admits that it voided every vote Ron Paul received. The Congressman got 31 votes and yet due to a “human error,” Sutton reported zero votes for Ron Paul. How “human error” can explain not counting 31 votes in succession for one single candidate is beyond the pale and Ron Paul’s campaign should ask for a recount across New Hampshire immediately.– As soon as people went public with the fact that their votes in Sutton had not been counted, other districts where Paul had supposedly received zero votes, such as Greenville, suddenly changed their final tallies and attributed votes to the Congressman.- Two days after the primary it was revealed that a high ranking executive at the company that was contracted to program all of New Hampshire’s Diebold voting machines has a criminal record, is a narcotics trafficker, and has previously defended the illegal act of “swapping out” memory cards for the machines during live elections.

– Going into New Hampshire Ron Paul was polling in the early teens and was a strong bet to take third place behind McCain and Romney. Four days before the vote, Rasmussen had Paul at 14% – a significant lead over Huckabee on 11% and Giuliani on 8% – and yet Ron Paul finished with just 8%. Proof of clear vote fraud, allied with the fact that Paul’s numbers show a 6% swing from normally accurate pre-polling forecasts, clearly indicate chicanery was at hand, especially considering the fact that Paul lost those crucial few percentage points to Giuliani as a result of electronic Diebold voting machines which are known to be wide open to tampering and fraud.
– Going purely on hand-counts, which as we saw in Sutton were by no means angelic but at least harder to cheat on than Diebold voting machines without getting caught, Ron Paul would have won 15% of the vote and finished third. This figure would have more accurately correlated to the pre-primary polls rather than the ridiculous 8% he was eventually given.

– Numerous districts reported totals of anything up to 22% for “other candidates”. What on earth does this black hole of “other candidates” mean? How can one vote for a candidate that is not on the ballot without spoiling the ballot paper? The district of Lisbon reported 22.5% votes for this mysterious “other” candidate, while in the large district of Londonderry, the “other” candidate received 10%. Many are now alleging that these “other” votes were merely siphoned from Ron Paul to keep his final number low.

Because the Congressman has decided to concentrate all his efforts on the upcoming primaries rather than a recount in New Hampshire does not mean that others cannot pursue a recount.

We fully accept the Congressman’s position and in hindsight it seems to be the right decision. Ron Paul supporters who view the campaign’s decision to move on as a rejection of their wishes and a kick in the teeth should put themselves in Ron Paul’s position and look at it from his perspective.

With just two primaries down and dozens to go, the Congressman’s schedule is only going to get more grueling. He needs to pour every ounce of his energy into obtaining a very achievable fourth place in Michigan and building the momentum from there. It is up to the rest of us to hold people accountable and watch for vote fraud while supporting other public figures like Kucinich and Howard who are pushing for a recount in New Hampshire.

Now is the time for the Ron Paul Revolution to get past the smear attacks, resolve the disputes and express more maturity in accepting the difficulties the campaign has to overcome amidst the rocky political terrain of fighting this corrupt establishment.

Now is the time to reunite, re-commit, and redouble our efforts to educate America about the only genuine and growing movement for real change, and what could be our last chance to rescue freedom and hope – the Ron Paul Revolution.

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/01/09/tsa-searches-detains.html

TSA searches, detains 5 year old because his name was on no-fly list

Posted by Cory Doctorow, January 9, 2008 1:25 PM
A five-year-old boy was taken into custody and thoroughly searched at Sea-Tac because his name is similar to a possible terrorist alias. As the Consumerist reports, “When his mother went to pick him up and hug him and comfort him during the proceedings, she was told not to touch him because he was a national security risk. They also had to frisk her again to make sure the little Dillinger hadn’t passed anything dangerous weapons or materials to his mother when she hugged him.”
It’s a case of a mistaken identity for a 5-year-old boy from Normandy Park. He had trouble boarding a plane because someone with the same name is wanted by the federal government. Mimi Jung reports from Sea-Tac Airport.
You know, if you wanted to systematically discredit the idea of a Department of Homeland Security, if you wanted to make an utter mockery of aviation safety, you could not do a better job than this.