Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Discuss principles, issues and candidates for the 2011/2012 elections.
User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:25 pm

LateOutOfBed wrote:Just Voted for Ron in the AZ Republican Primary. He may not be perfect, but he by far is the best support of righteous principles and the constitution.

-- Geoff

Thank you! God bless you!

Sponsored Links

Advertisements

Medical Cost Sharing - It's not insurance it's better!

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:26 pm

liberty_belle wrote:
LateOutOfBed wrote:Just Voted for Ron in the AZ Republican Primary. He may not be perfect, but he by far is the best support of righteous principles and the constitution.

-- Geoff


I also voted this morning...I disagree, Ron Paul is the perfect candidate! **== **== **== **==

Thank you ! **== **== **== :ymapplause:

SempiternalHarbinger
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:15 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Ut

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby SempiternalHarbinger » Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:14 pm

lundbaek wrote:I hope people take G. Edward Griffin's presentation seriously.


How can anyone take a liar and thief seriously?? What people should be taking seriously are those Griffin stole his "hard" research from. He piggyback on the shoulders of giants not having done any of the work himself yet took all the credit for years of hard work. Than he twists their work and history to fit into his paradigm. E Edward Griffin is not to be trusted. A dis-information informant. He has adopted Satan ways to deceive. You know take a little truth and run with it making many others think he is actually against the very people we are fighting yet sleeps in the same bed as our enemies. How anyone can take Griffin serious or his twisted history is beyond me.

If Griffin Followers (gold, free market, Austrian school of economics) have no problem trusting a man who is known for plagiarizing, well than by all means keep pushing him. But anyone who actually reads the works of those he stole from ( Carroll Quigley and Eustace Mullins ) will see with discerning eyes that the guy is a fraud. Not only did he steal the hard work of these men he gives them no credit whatsoever. What an honest approach to make millions. Griffin is a parasite on humanity, while deceiving even the very elect. Anytime I watch or hear Griffin I see right through his thin skin. He is like a fish.... No backbone with a tiny brain.

“No matter where we begin, if we pursue knowledge diligently and honestly, our quest will inevitably lead us from the things of the earth to the things of heaven.”

liberty_belle
captain of 100
Posts: 575
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:09 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby liberty_belle » Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:20 pm

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:
lundbaek wrote:I hope people take G. Edward Griffin's presentation seriously.


How can anyone take a liar and thief seriously?? What people should be taking seriously are those Griffin stole his "hard" research from. He piggyback on the shoulders of giants not having done any of the work himself yet took all the credit for years of hard work. Than he twists their work and history to fit into his paradigm. E Edward Griffin is not to be trusted. A dis-information informant. He has adopted Satan ways to deceive. You know take a little truth and run with it making many others think he is actually against the very people we are fighting yet sleeps in the same bed as our enemies. How anyone can take Griffin serious or his twisted history is beyond me.

If Griffin Followers (gold, free market, Austrian school of economics) have no problem trusting a man who is known for plagiarizing, well than by all means keep pushing him. But anyone who actually reads the works of those he stole from ( Carroll Quigley and Eustace Mullins ) will see with discerning eyes that the guy is a fraud. Not only did he steal the hard work of these men he gives them no credit whatsoever. What an honest approach to make millions. Griffin is a parasite on humanity, while deceiving even the very elect. Anytime I watch or hear Griffin I see right through his thin skin. He is like a fish.... No backbone with a tiny brain.



hmmmm. that is intereting, I did not know that.

User avatar
moonwhim
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4029
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby moonwhim » Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:55 am

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:
How can anyone take a liar and thief seriously?? What people should be taking seriously are those Griffin stole his "hard" research from. He piggyback on the shoulders of giants not having done any of the work himself yet took all the credit for years of hard work. Than he twists their work and history to fit into his paradigm. E Edward Griffin is not to be trusted. A dis-information informant. He has adopted Satan ways to deceive. You know take a little truth and run with it making many others think he is actually against the very people we are fighting yet sleeps in the same bed as our enemies. How anyone can take Griffin serious or his twisted history is beyond me.

If Griffin Followers (gold, free market, Austrian school of economics) have no problem trusting a man who is known for plagiarizing, well than by all means keep pushing him. But anyone who actually reads the works of those he stole from ( Carroll Quigley and Eustace Mullins ) will see with discerning eyes that the guy is a fraud. Not only did he steal the hard work of these men he gives them no credit whatsoever. What an honest approach to make millions. Griffin is a parasite on humanity, while deceiving even the very elect. Anytime I watch or hear Griffin I see right through his thin skin. He is like a fish.... No backbone with a tiny brain.


Wow, Sempi, you are an excellent example of a nasty arrogant name-caller! I just love your "scholarly" posts! It sure brings the spirit of "something" into this forum!
"Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:54 am

lundbaek wrote:I hope people take G. Edward Griffin's presentation seriously.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:How can anyone take a liar and thief seriously?? What people should be taking seriously are those Griffin stole his "hard" research from. He piggyback on the shoulders of giants not having done any of the work himself yet took all the credit for years of hard work.
Griffin mentions Quigley and Mullins in his references, then furthers their research. The reason he does not embrace them is because Quigley is self-proclaimed apologist and cheerleader for the banksters.


On page 950 of “Tragedy and Hope”, Quigley says:

“There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act.

In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.

I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records.

I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. ... my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known”

(Quigley, “Tragedy and Hope” pp 949 - 950)


And Eustace Mullins believes in immoral use of government force to control money supply (think government controlled milk supply, or government controlled iPod supply, etc.), which violates Fundamental Principles of Liberty leading to the destruction of Liberty and of society itself.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Than he twists their work and history to fit into his paradigm.
Is it a crime to disagree with Quigley, who has "no aversion to [bankster world control network] or to most of its aims?" Griffin takes the facts from both, but presents them in a correct larger picture, and points to a correct solution, which is Liberty and Free Market (which is nothing more than cumulative expression of individual freedom). Are you against Liberty?

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:E Edward Griffin is not to be trusted. A dis-information informant. He has adopted Satan ways to deceive.
Prove it. You've got nothing except your word only. The correct principles he embraces prove otherwise. You are wrong.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Not only did he steal the hard work of these men he gives them no credit whatsoever.
That is a blatant lie. He mentioned both repeatedly. Especially Quigley. So this is a BLATANT lie. Good going, Semp! I am surprised. Didn't expect that from you!

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Griffin is a parasite on humanity,
Griffin's contribution to Liberty movement is inestimable. He took the work done before him, and improved and analyzed it further, and added to it!

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:while deceiving even the very elect.
What about Fundamental Principles of Liberty? Think for yourself. Griffin is in harmony with them, you are not.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:He is like a fish.... No backbone with a tiny brain.
I think his brain is much bigger than yours, and so is his backbone! (Your backbone points in a wrong direction and punctured what's left of your brain!) Griffin teaches correct principles. Prove them wrong, if you can. Show what fundamental principles of Liberty he is violating? If you can't then you better stop spouting your falsehoods!

Reason, Logic, and Correct Principles, are King. So concentrate on these, instead of mindless name calling. Reason, Logic, Correct Principles, my friend. That is key.

User avatar
LateOutOfBed
captain of 100
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:14 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LateOutOfBed » Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:04 am

LoveIsTruth wrote:
LateOutOfBed wrote:Just Voted for Ron in the AZ Republican Primary. He may not be perfect, but he by far is the best support of righteous principles and the constitution.

-- Geoff

Thank you! God bless you!


Let's just say for the first time in years I won't have voter regret, nor do feel like I need to repent of which way I cast my vote. ;)

-- Geoff

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:18 am

Ron Paul Wins CLEAN Elections; How To Have a Transparent Vote Count


Ron Paul WON Iowa, Nevada and Maine.




User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:52 am

Ron Paul won Detroit...


Ron Paul won the Detroit GOP vote, with 5,525 ballots cast
Rick Santorum 4,047 votes.
Romney just 1,338 votes here (Detroit).

SempiternalHarbinger
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:15 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Ut

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby SempiternalHarbinger » Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:06 pm

moonwhim wrote:
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:
How can anyone take a liar and thief seriously?? What people should be taking seriously are those Griffin stole his "hard" research from. He piggyback on the shoulders of giants not having done any of the work himself yet took all the credit for years of hard work. Than he twists their work and history to fit into his paradigm. E Edward Griffin is not to be trusted. A dis-information informant. He has adopted Satan ways to deceive. You know take a little truth and run with it making many others think he is actually against the very people we are fighting yet sleeps in the same bed as our enemies. How anyone can take Griffin serious or his twisted history is beyond me.

If Griffin Followers (gold, free market, Austrian school of economics) have no problem trusting a man who is known for plagiarizing, well than by all means keep pushing him. But anyone who actually reads the works of those he stole from ( Carroll Quigley and Eustace Mullins ) will see with discerning eyes that the guy is a fraud. Not only did he steal the hard work of these men he gives them no credit whatsoever. What an honest approach to make millions. Griffin is a parasite on humanity, while deceiving even the very elect. Anytime I watch or hear Griffin I see right through his thin skin. He is like a fish.... No backbone with a tiny brain.


Wow, Sempi, you are an excellent example of a nasty arrogant name-caller! I just love your "scholarly" posts! It sure brings the spirit of "something" into this forum!


Now what did I do to deserve that response moonwhim?? What is your problem? Speaking of scholarly posts, most of your post are just copy and paste with no thoughts of your own. I am no scholar, does that mean I cannot partake? Can one only post if it is qualified as scholarly? Nobody ever has a problem when I call Barry Soetoro a radical communist, nobody has a problem when I call him a usurper, infidel and godless. Are these not facts? Nobody has said I am wrong when I say Barry Soetoro is traitor and is an enemy to we the people. Nobody has a problem when I call Bush, Bush Sr., FDR, Clinton traitors and should be hung for their actions. So what the problem moonwhim? Why are you piling on? Is there a friendly way or friendly words to put to these men and their acts? How would you like me to describe Barry Soetoro? Want me to address him as though he is my constitutional president like Ron Paul? Well, you will never, ever hear me refer to Obama as my president. Because he isn't. I have never had one problem with you. In fact I have for the most part enjoyed your post and thoughts. You could even say immensely at times. The other day I was having a bad day and said things that made me look bad, not you. I still feel real stupid. I am just telling you that you should not take it personal. So why don't you just keep piling on. I could care less what you think of me or my post. (though I am going to try and improve on some things both you and OI recommend) Did I mention you or call you any names in the post above? Did I call one person on the forum a bad name in the post above? How else does one describe a thief? Nobody has a problem how I describe Obama or Bush, but once I go into anyone who is apart of the Austrian school of economics or their paradigm the gloves come off.

Edward G Griffin did in fact plagiarized and stole the hard work from Eustace Mullins. Go get both books and compare chapter headings, compare words and you will find this to be the case and in fact true. It's very easy to see. Yea, he might mention him with his backhand, but defiantly not the credit he should have gotten. Eustace Mullins and those around him paid a very dear and severe price for trying to share the truth. His family was brutally assaulted and interrogated through out the years. He suffered grievously for his work to bring the dark things to light. For crying out loud, his Parents were murdered. Every Job he had the FBI would come in and he would be fired the next day. It got to the point where he eventually lived on the streets never to have a public job for the last 50 years of his life. His mentor Ezra Pound became a political prisoner. Put in a mental hospital which many have described as a literal hell hole. His other friend was also sent to prison for 6 years without a trial (FDR)while his son was murdered and covered up. All there homes were raided and destroyed many times. Along with many historical documents. He couldn't get anyone to fund or publish his works because of fear. You have no idea what the man has had to endure as well as those who publicly spoke out and help him. The pain and suffering he had to go through to obtain his information cannot be put into words.

So Here you have Edward Griffin who stole his work and left out the most critical points and than twist history to favor his stance with the Austrian school of economics. How should I describe a thief Moonwhim? And last I checked, Edward Griffin has not been harassed persecuted by anyone. He can't smell or taste in the slightest what Mullins had to go through. He didn't pay any price to obtain his information, just copy and paste, edit here edit there. If you read Mullins writings you will sense the hatred in his words. But I cannot blame him one bit knowing what he went through. I have tried before to put myself in his shoes and I am not sure I could do it. I tell myself I could but until one is tested you can never say for certain. He should be commended and praised which Griffin does neither. (At least Ron Paul does.) No, he has made millions upon millions while his book is all over the place being promoted without anyone having a problem. Why? When you are a real threat you are persecuted, harassed, false accusations, name driven in the mud, and at worst killed. President Abraham Lincoln, President James Garfield, President Andrew Jackson (attempted multiple times) President John F Kennedy were killed because they were threats. Louis McFadden, Larry P. McDonald, John Heinz, John Tower and many others were murdered and taken out because they were threats. The list goes on and on about those who were threats. Eustace Mullins could even keep a job at a library stacking papers yet Ron Paul can stay in political power for over 35 years?

When Eustace Mullins passed, this is what Ron Paul posted on his website;

"Today we morn the passage of Eustace Mullins; Eustace Mullins was a great author and told the truth about the Federal Reserve, the Constitution, Liberty and American History. A man who had a book burned in Europe, was fired from the Library of Congress for political reasons and had to be on the right track. He will be missed."

http://secure.campaignforliberty.com/bl ... view=32190

"told the truth about the Federal Reserve, the Constitution, Liberty and American History."?? If this is true how is it possible that Ron Paul avoids the major points in Mullins books? Not only does he avoid them he preaches the opposite. Why? Why is it than that Ron Paul's history is so much different than Mullins if Mullins told the truth? What's ironic is Mullins didn't think to highly of Ron Paul or Edward Griffin and their history. Maybe he was jealous. Maybe he thought, "I didn't get a penny for my work while they have racked in the millions, having a red golden carpet rolled out for them." But I am certain he was not jealous. Ron Paul also notes to a small degree on what happens to those who are threats and those who tell the truth. Ron Paul said he had to be on the right track. And he was. So what does that say about Ron Paul? Does it not say he must be on the wrong track? Mullins, his family and friends suffered beyond imagination. All of which Ron Paul or Edward G Griffin HAVE NOT experienced in any way. It's simple to find out the difference between those who are threats and those who are not. All one has to do is look at the life of Edward G Griffin and Ron Paul (millionaires, life time Politician) and than look at the life of Eustace Mullins. (Poor, broke, persecuted, murders ect...) Ron Paul's son Rand has not been murdered. No, he is now a Senator in tap with the very people Mullins never could. The big time Book publishing companies. The very people who were pressured by the FBI and other agencies not to give Mullins a second are the very people pushing the books of Ron, Rand Paul and Edward Griffin Why?

Same thing with Carroll Quigley's book Tragedy and Hope. Cleon Skousens book the Naked Capitalist was a book report on Quigley's book. Though Quigley was not persecuted like Mullins there was something in his book the the powers that be did not like. So they suppressed his book. And that's the question, why was his book suppressed? And what did it have in common with Mullins books? And that's is whats so bizarre about this whole thing, what the books have in common are the very things Ron Paul, Edward Griffin, Austrians school of economics, Lew Rockwell the Ludwig von Mises Institute all ignore and what they all support. And that Is why Quigley's and Mullin's books were surpassed by the powers that be while Griffin and Paul's are not. One is a threat to the establishment while the other is no threat. But it's all perspective I guess. To each his own. If you think I am a nasty arrogant name-caller, I am really sorry you fell that way. But maybe you should direct that to Loveistruth. Look at his last post directed at me at tell me who is the nasty arrogant name caller. I didn't say one thing towards anyone on this forum or LIT and this is the responses I am getting. I didn't say you or LIT had a tiny brain or no backbone. I called a thief those words. I called a filthy millionaire a fish. Not you!

If there is a more polite way to describe someone who is a thief by all means I am all ears. But it is what it is. And I hear you on the links thing. I have posted my thoughts in my own words connecting all the dots from deflation, free market, Austrians school, gold ect.... But it is lost in a some other thread. Maybe I will post it in Jasons "What has Ron Paul Accomplished." Maybe you will find it more useful. Than it might help connect the dots when going through Jasons post.

President Garfield who was assassinated openly declared that whoever controls the money supply controls the people. After only four months in office, President Garfield was shot at a railroad station on July 2, 1881. Why? This is exactly why the Constitution says we the people have this right through a representative Congress. If Barack Obama were to purpose Ron Paul Monetary policies tomorrow, A free market... Honest money... abolish article 1 section 8 of the US constitution... A monetary system free of government intervention nothing would happen to him but support of big corps. Now if Obama were to openly declare tomorrow that we were going to restore Article one Section 8, take back the power that we the people are in tilted to and go to a similar system as Lincolns green backs... Obama would not last one day. It would be audios Amigo. Sayonara. Say Hello to my little friend.

"The Bank of the United States is one of the most deadly hostilities existing against the principles and form of our Constitution. The system of banking is a blot [defect] left in [unsolved by, and unfortunately tolerated by] all our Constitutions [state and federal], which if not covered [eventually solved and revoked] will end in their destruction. I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity is but swindling futurity [on the greatest possible scale]." -Thomas Jefferson-

"If the American people ever allow banks to issue their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation [by having to maintain a vital circulation by perpetually re-borrowing principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, increased perpetually so much as periodic interest], the banks and [bank owned] corporations which will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." -Thomas Jefferson-

"Banking was conceived in iniquity, and born in sin. Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from them, and all great fortunes like mine will disappear. And, they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be the slaves of the bankers, and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money, and control credit." (-SIR JOSIAH STAMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND, Texas University-)

"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace, and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies, all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes.

"I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. [As a further undesirable consequence of the war...] Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." (- President ABRAHAM LINCOLN-)

"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity."(- President ABRAHAM LINCOLN-)

"Once in debt, interest is your companion every minute of the day and night; you cannot shun it or slip away from it; you cannot dismiss it; it yields neither to entreaties, demands, or orders; and whenever you get in its way or cross its course or fail to meet its demands, it crushes you. ( -J. Reuben Clark, Jr. 1938-)
“No matter where we begin, if we pursue knowledge diligently and honestly, our quest will inevitably lead us from the things of the earth to the things of heaven.”

User avatar
Juliette
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2748
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:42 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby Juliette » Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:17 pm

I'm back SEMP! I got time out, :D I'm so happy you and Jason are still here.
Hang in there, you are doing a GREAT job!

SempiternalHarbinger
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:15 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Ut

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby SempiternalHarbinger » Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:23 pm

Juliette wrote:I'm back SEMP! I got time out, :D I'm so happy you and Jason are still here.
Hang in there, you are doing a GREAT job!


:ymhug: Juliette, I am glad you are back!! I was thinking about sending a message your way thinking you might have left. I had no idea you got a time out. I do find it a little funny. I think I am the one who needs a time out!
“No matter where we begin, if we pursue knowledge diligently and honestly, our quest will inevitably lead us from the things of the earth to the things of heaven.”

User avatar
Juliette
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2748
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:42 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby Juliette » Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:31 pm

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:
Juliette wrote:I'm back SEMP! I got time out, :D I'm so happy you and Jason are still here.
Hang in there, you are doing a GREAT job!


:ymhug: Juliette, I am glad you are back!! I was thinking about sending a message your way thinking you might have left. I had no idea you got a time out. I do find it a little funny. I think I am the one who needs a time out!



Its not so bad. The " I can be reverent tape" over my mouth was uncomfortable. ( thats an inside joke we had in Primary!) :ymhug:

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:10 am

Jay Leno - Ron Paul does not need Secret Service


User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:18 am

Ron Paul Revolution: THE GREAT AWAKENING


User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:41 am

Ron Paul Was Holding a 'Silver Circle' Preaching Sound Money!

Image

During Ben Bernanke’s testimony to the Committee on Financial Services yesterday, Congressman Ron Paul responded to the Chairman’s typical Keynesian explanations by showing the world and Congress what real money is. While speaking, Ron Paul lifted up a shiny, one troy ounce Silver Circle from the upcoming, Boston based film, Silver Circle.

All of the articles covering the Committee on Financial Services hearing people were claiming that Dr. Paul was holding an American Eagle or a Buffalo. No folks!

This is no handy working of Photoshop. News sources everywhere including Forbes, and many from the liberty community, ran with the story. However the round was mentioned many times incorrectly. Some referred to it as an “American Eagle” and others a “Buffalo”. We are here to set the record straight! Ron Paul laid the sound money smack down on Bernanke by showing him a Silver Circle Round from the Silver Circle.">film hitting theaters this August.

We gave Ron Paul a one-ounce round last January when we met him in Houston, TX at a Ludwig Von Mises event. He must be carrying it around in his pocket!


User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:32 am

I like most of your post, Semp. And I like Eustace Mullins a lot, though I don't think he understands the real great role the Jews have to play in God's plan. They are indeed God's covenant people, and He will fulfill his covenants unto them, and they will be saved if they repent. However, most of the facts Eustace uncovered are correct. Everyone should study his work. Thanks for bringing him to my attention. I didn't know anything about him before.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:President Garfield who was assassinated openly declared that whoever controls the money supply controls the people.
He was right. This is why money is TOO important to be controlled by government. Government should NOT control the people. This is the very essence of Liberty. You said it! Free Market will control money as any other product. This is why 100% commodity based currency is the money of a Free Market, because it does NOT require government coercion to operate. Free Competition in Currencies is what we demand, because it is intrinsic part of Freedom itself, and honest money is quite impossible without it.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:After only four months in office, President Garfield was shot at a railroad station on July 2, 1881. Why? This is exactly why the Constitution says we the people have this right through a representative Congress.
People have no right to FORCE anyone to use or not to use any medium of exchange, because the people have no right to violate Private Property of any one. This is why Free Competition in Currencies exists in truly Free societies.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:If Barack Obama were to purpose Ron Paul Monetary policies tomorrow, A free market... Honest money... abolish article 1 section 8 of the US constitution...
You don't even have to abolish that, as long as people are free to use ANYTHING they please, unmolested, as the medium of exchange. (See Honest Money Constitutional Amendment).

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:A monetary system free of government intervention nothing would happen to him but support of big corps.
Banksters would object because that is the source of their power. But you are right. Since they own a lot of gold, even though they would very strongly object to people being free from their monopoly, they would object even more if that monopoly was not only abolished, but given to someone else (i.e. the trustworthy politicians). It will be one criminal gang fighting another gang of criminals. They don't like competition.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Now if Obama were to openly declare tomorrow that we were going to restore Article one Section 8, take back the power that we the people are in tilted to and go to a similar system as Lincolns green backs...
That is a contradiction of terms. What Lincoln did was in violation of Article I section 10 because he produced UN-BACKED paper money that the States are FORBIDDEN to use by the Constitution.


    "No State shall ... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts"
    (US Constitution, Article I Section 10).
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Obama would not last one day. It would be audios Amigo. Sayonara. Say Hello to my little friend.
Yes, because not only he would destroy their monopoly, but he would have taken it to himself, which is even more objectionable to them than no one having the monopoly (which is the proper way). Are you getting this? Freedom is the TRUE answer. FREEDOM. (i.e. The Fundamental Principles of Liberty.)

User avatar
Jason
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 16489
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby Jason » Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:58 pm

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:
moonwhim wrote:
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:
How can anyone take a liar and thief seriously?? What people should be taking seriously are those Griffin stole his "hard" research from. He piggyback on the shoulders of giants not having done any of the work himself yet took all the credit for years of hard work. Than he twists their work and history to fit into his paradigm. E Edward Griffin is not to be trusted. A dis-information informant. He has adopted Satan ways to deceive. You know take a little truth and run with it making many others think he is actually against the very people we are fighting yet sleeps in the same bed as our enemies. How anyone can take Griffin serious or his twisted history is beyond me.

If Griffin Followers (gold, free market, Austrian school of economics) have no problem trusting a man who is known for plagiarizing, well than by all means keep pushing him. But anyone who actually reads the works of those he stole from ( Carroll Quigley and Eustace Mullins ) will see with discerning eyes that the guy is a fraud. Not only did he steal the hard work of these men he gives them no credit whatsoever. What an honest approach to make millions. Griffin is a parasite on humanity, while deceiving even the very elect. Anytime I watch or hear Griffin I see right through his thin skin. He is like a fish.... No backbone with a tiny brain.


Wow, Sempi, you are an excellent example of a nasty arrogant name-caller! I just love your "scholarly" posts! It sure brings the spirit of "something" into this forum!


Now what did I do to deserve that response moonwhim?? What is your problem? Speaking of scholarly posts, most of your post are just copy and paste with no thoughts of your own. I am no scholar, does that mean I cannot partake? Can one only post if it is qualified as scholarly? Nobody ever has a problem when I call Barry Soetoro a radical communist, nobody has a problem when I call him a usurper, infidel and godless. Are these not facts? Nobody has said I am wrong when I say Barry Soetoro is traitor and is an enemy to we the people. Nobody has a problem when I call Bush, Bush Sr., FDR, Clinton traitors and should be hung for their actions. So what the problem moonwhim? Why are you piling on? Is there a friendly way or friendly words to put to these men and their acts? How would you like me to describe Barry Soetoro? Want me to address him as though he is my constitutional president like Ron Paul? Well, you will never, ever hear me refer to Obama as my president. Because he isn't. I have never had one problem with you. In fact I have for the most part enjoyed your post and thoughts. You could even say immensely at times. The other day I was having a bad day and said things that made me look bad, not you. I still feel real stupid. I am just telling you that you should not take it personal. So why don't you just keep piling on. I could care less what you think of me or my post. (though I am going to try and improve on some things both you and OI recommend) Did I mention you or call you any names in the post above? Did I call one person on the forum a bad name in the post above? How else does one describe a thief? Nobody has a problem how I describe Obama or Bush, but once I go into anyone who is apart of the Austrian school of economics or their paradigm the gloves come off.

Edward G Griffin did in fact plagiarized and stole the hard work from Eustace Mullins. Go get both books and compare chapter headings, compare words and you will find this to be the case and in fact true. It's very easy to see. Yea, he might mention him with his backhand, but defiantly not the credit he should have gotten. Eustace Mullins and those around him paid a very dear and severe price for trying to share the truth. His family was brutally assaulted and interrogated through out the years. He suffered grievously for his work to bring the dark things to light. For crying out loud, his Parents were murdered. Every Job he had the FBI would come in and he would be fired the next day. It got to the point where he eventually lived on the streets never to have a public job for the last 50 years of his life. His mentor Ezra Pound became a political prisoner. Put in a mental hospital which many have described as a literal hell hole. His other friend was also sent to prison for 6 years without a trial (FDR)while his son was murdered and covered up. All there homes were raided and destroyed many times. Along with many historical documents. He couldn't get anyone to fund or publish his works because of fear. You have no idea what the man has had to endure as well as those who publicly spoke out and help him. The pain and suffering he had to go through to obtain his information cannot be put into words.

So Here you have Edward Griffin who stole his work and left out the most critical points and than twist history to favor his stance with the Austrian school of economics. How should I describe a thief Moonwhim? And last I checked, Edward Griffin has not been harassed persecuted by anyone. He can't smell or taste in the slightest what Mullins had to go through. He didn't pay any price to obtain his information, just copy and paste, edit here edit there. If you read Mullins writings you will sense the hatred in his words. But I cannot blame him one bit knowing what he went through. I have tried before to put myself in his shoes and I am not sure I could do it. I tell myself I could but until one is tested you can never say for certain. He should be commended and praised which Griffin does neither. (At least Ron Paul does.) No, he has made millions upon millions while his book is all over the place being promoted without anyone having a problem. Why? When you are a real threat you are persecuted, harassed, false accusations, name driven in the mud, and at worst killed. President Abraham Lincoln, President James Garfield, President Andrew Jackson (attempted multiple times) President John F Kennedy were killed because they were threats. Louis McFadden, Larry P. McDonald, John Heinz, John Tower and many others were murdered and taken out because they were threats. The list goes on and on about those who were threats. Eustace Mullins could even keep a job at a library stacking papers yet Ron Paul can stay in political power for over 35 years?

When Eustace Mullins passed, this is what Ron Paul posted on his website;

"Today we morn the passage of Eustace Mullins; Eustace Mullins was a great author and told the truth about the Federal Reserve, the Constitution, Liberty and American History. A man who had a book burned in Europe, was fired from the Library of Congress for political reasons and had to be on the right track. He will be missed."

http://secure.campaignforliberty.com/bl ... view=32190

"told the truth about the Federal Reserve, the Constitution, Liberty and American History."?? If this is true how is it possible that Ron Paul avoids the major points in Mullins books? Not only does he avoid them he preaches the opposite. Why? Why is it than that Ron Paul's history is so much different than Mullins if Mullins told the truth? What's ironic is Mullins didn't think to highly of Ron Paul or Edward Griffin and their history. Maybe he was jealous. Maybe he thought, "I didn't get a penny for my work while they have racked in the millions, having a red golden carpet rolled out for them." But I am certain he was not jealous. Ron Paul also notes to a small degree on what happens to those who are threats and those who tell the truth. Ron Paul said he had to be on the right track. And he was. So what does that say about Ron Paul? Does it not say he must be on the wrong track? Mullins, his family and friends suffered beyond imagination. All of which Ron Paul or Edward G Griffin HAVE NOT experienced in any way. It's simple to find out the difference between those who are threats and those who are not. All one has to do is look at the life of Edward G Griffin and Ron Paul (millionaires, life time Politician) and than look at the life of Eustace Mullins. (Poor, broke, persecuted, murders ect...) Ron Paul's son Rand has not been murdered. No, he is now a Senator in tap with the very people Mullins never could. The big time Book publishing companies. The very people who were pressured by the FBI and other agencies not to give Mullins a second are the very people pushing the books of Ron, Rand Paul and Edward Griffin Why?

Same thing with Carroll Quigley's book Tragedy and Hope. Cleon Skousens book the Naked Capitalist was a book report on Quigley's book. Though Quigley was not persecuted like Mullins there was something in his book the the powers that be did not like. So they suppressed his book. And that's the question, why was his book suppressed? And what did it have in common with Mullins books? And that's is whats so bizarre about this whole thing, what the books have in common are the very things Ron Paul, Edward Griffin, Austrians school of economics, Lew Rockwell the Ludwig von Mises Institute all ignore and what they all support. And that Is why Quigley's and Mullin's books were surpassed by the powers that be while Griffin and Paul's are not. One is a threat to the establishment while the other is no threat. But it's all perspective I guess. To each his own. If you think I am a nasty arrogant name-caller, I am really sorry you fell that way. But maybe you should direct that to Loveistruth. Look at his last post directed at me at tell me who is the nasty arrogant name caller. I didn't say one thing towards anyone on this forum or LIT and this is the responses I am getting. I didn't say you or LIT had a tiny brain or no backbone. I called a thief those words. I called a filthy millionaire a fish. Not you!

If there is a more polite way to describe someone who is a thief by all means I am all ears. But it is what it is. And I hear you on the links thing. I have posted my thoughts in my own words connecting all the dots from deflation, free market, Austrians school, gold ect.... But it is lost in a some other thread. Maybe I will post it in Jasons "What has Ron Paul Accomplished." Maybe you will find it more useful. Than it might help connect the dots when going through Jasons post.

President Garfield who was assassinated openly declared that whoever controls the money supply controls the people. After only four months in office, President Garfield was shot at a railroad station on July 2, 1881. Why? This is exactly why the Constitution says we the people have this right through a representative Congress. If Barack Obama were to purpose Ron Paul Monetary policies tomorrow, A free market... Honest money... abolish article 1 section 8 of the US constitution... A monetary system free of government intervention nothing would happen to him but support of big corps. Now if Obama were to openly declare tomorrow that we were going to restore Article one Section 8, take back the power that we the people are in tilted to and go to a similar system as Lincolns green backs... Obama would not last one day. It would be audios Amigo. Sayonara. Say Hello to my little friend.

"The Bank of the United States is one of the most deadly hostilities existing against the principles and form of our Constitution. The system of banking is a blot [defect] left in [unsolved by, and unfortunately tolerated by] all our Constitutions [state and federal], which if not covered [eventually solved and revoked] will end in their destruction. I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity is but swindling futurity [on the greatest possible scale]." -Thomas Jefferson-

"If the American people ever allow banks to issue their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation [by having to maintain a vital circulation by perpetually re-borrowing principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, increased perpetually so much as periodic interest], the banks and [bank owned] corporations which will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." -Thomas Jefferson-

"Banking was conceived in iniquity, and born in sin. Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from them, and all great fortunes like mine will disappear. And, they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be the slaves of the bankers, and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money, and control credit." (-SIR JOSIAH STAMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND, Texas University-)

"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace, and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies, all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes.

"I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. [As a further undesirable consequence of the war...] Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." (- President ABRAHAM LINCOLN-)

"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity."(- President ABRAHAM LINCOLN-)

"Once in debt, interest is your companion every minute of the day and night; you cannot shun it or slip away from it; you cannot dismiss it; it yields neither to entreaties, demands, or orders; and whenever you get in its way or cross its course or fail to meet its demands, it crushes you. ( -J. Reuben Clark, Jr. 1938-)


Nice summary and insights!!!

In a world where much comes down to basic faith and trust....you point out some serious questions people should be asking themselves....because in "this" world -

“Secret combinations flourished because, as Helaman tells us, the Gadianton robbers ‘had seduced the more part of the righteous until they had come down to believe in their works and partake of their spoils’ (Helaman 6:38)... even as today.”

- Ezra Taft Benson, The Savior’s Visit to America, Ensign, p. 4. May 1987.

[b][u]I testify that wickedness is rapidly expanding in every segment of our society. It is more highly organized, more cleverly disguised, and more powerfully promoted than ever before. Secret combinations lusting for power, gain, and glory are flourishing. A secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries is increasing its evil influence and control over America and the entire world.[/u][/b]”

- Ezra Taft Benson, I Testify, Ensign, p. 87. November 1988.

May 1990: Dallin H. Oaks, Wealthy Wall Street elitists, enabled and empowered these and many other mass murderers. The documentation for this can be found in several books including the works of Antony Sutton. World Peace, Ensign:
As we seek to understand the causes of wars, persecutions, and civil strife, we can see that they are almost always rooted in wickedness.
The mass-murders of the twentieth century are among the bloodiest crimes ever committed against humanity. We can hardly comprehend the magnitude of the Nazi holocaust murders of over five million Jews in Europe, Stalin’s purges and labor camps that killed five to ten million in the Soviet Union, and the two to three million noncombatants who were killed or who died of hunger in the Biafran War.

All of these slaughters, and others like them, were rooted in the ancient wickedness Satan taught—that a man could murder to get gain. (See Moses 5:31) The mass-murderers of this century killed to acquire property and to secure power over others.

And Satan said unto Cain: Swear unto me by thy throat, and if thou tell it thou shalt die; and swear thy brethren by their heads, and by the living God, that they tell it not; for if they tell it, they shall surely die; and this that thy father [Adam] may not know it; and this day I will deliver thy brother Abel into thine hands. And Satan sware unto Cain that he would do according to his commands. And all these things were done in secret. And Cain said: Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I may murder and get gain. Wherefore Cain was called Master Mahan, and he gloried in his wickedness.(See Moses 5:29-31)


...where secret combinations rule...and wickedness is rampant....we definitely have to be on our toes and pray that we are elect and not deceived (un-ignorant).
Teuful Hunden - Saepius Exertus, Semper Fidelis, Frater Infinitas

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!!!

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:27 pm

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:President Abraham Lincoln,

You seem to like Lincoln, at the same time you like Eustace Mullins. I like Eustace (thanks for introducing me to his work. Very interesting.) Well, Eustace Mullins agrees with me that Lincoln violated the Constitution in preventing the secession of the Southern States, which they had a perfect right to do:

Starts at 1:50:40 mark.

Last edited by LoveIsTruth on Sat Mar 03, 2012 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

ktg
captain of 100
Posts: 842
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:43 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby ktg » Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:27 pm

"As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, providence punishes national sins by national calamities." George Mason

ktg
captain of 100
Posts: 842
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:43 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby ktg » Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:40 pm

LoveIsTruth wrote:Ron Paul Revolution: THE GREAT AWAKENING



Again, RP's words have summarized those give by church leadership.

“Popular feeling is being flogged into a support of this plan [to wage more war]. The press, the movies, the radio, the rostrum, all are deliberately used to build this terrible aim in our hearts. Enormous sums are expended by the military in propaganda, to scare us civilians into a blind following of their insanity. Often this propagandizing is crudely done, at other times it is carried on with great craft and cunning. We are to be made so jittery with fear that we shall follow with eyes shut where they lead.” - J. Reuben Clark

"The international gospel of the Founding Fathers was forecast by Jefferson in 1793. It was voiced by Washington in his Farewell Address in 1796, when he declared we should have “as little political connection as possible … It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world …" Nor may we overlook that great doctrine of neutrality set up under Washington himself and Jefferson and Hamilton… We have gone forward and are going forward, as if we possessed all the good of human government, of human economic concept, of human comfort, and of human welfare, all of which we are to impose on the balance of the world,— a concept born of the grossest national egotism… In values of government and law, these wars and the interminglings of men of different concepts of freedom and human rights, have brought into our own system, the despotic principles of European systems, against which the Fathers warned… All this takes us into a situation that places our destinies largely in the hands of those who appear to be urging us towards war, not peace.… It is time we returned to the political faith and work of the Fathers. It is indispensable that we do so if we are to have peace. I believe in the old faith and the old works, under which we had so much of peace. I am a political isolationist in the full sense of the term and am not fearful in declaring it.
I am a political isolationist because: I fully believe in the wisdom of the course defined by Washington, Jefferson, and other ancient statesmen. The whole history of America before and since the Revolution proves the truthfulness of their assertions. All during our pre-Revolutionary history we were at war, we were robbed, plundered, and massacred because of European wars in the issues and causes of which we had no concern. History is repeating itself...
... In my view, our whole international course and policy is basically wrong, and must be changed if peace is to come. Our policy has brought us, and pursued, will continue to bring us, only the hatred of nations now — and we cannot thrive on that, financially or spiritually — and certain war hereafter, with a list of horrors and woes we do not now even surmise. If we really want peace, we must change our course to get it. We must honestly strive for peace and quit sparring for military advantage. We must learn and practice, as a nation and as a world, the divine principles of the Sermon on the Mount. There is no other way...
We, the common people, have not been told the facts for years, since long before the last war broke. We are not now being told the facts." - J. Reuben Clark, 1947 Church News
"As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, providence punishes national sins by national calamities." George Mason

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Sat Mar 03, 2012 9:16 am

Thanks, ktg! Good one.

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Sun Mar 04, 2012 2:11 pm

Ron Paul Wins Taunton MA Republican 2012 Straw Poll

Wow! This from Massachusetts?

Ron Paul 51%
Romney 38%
Santorum 8%
Newt 3%

SempiternalHarbinger
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:15 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Ut

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby SempiternalHarbinger » Sun Mar 04, 2012 4:36 pm

Not sure why am responding to you. But I thought I would anyway in a peaceful way even though you have not apologized for your uncalled choice of words towards me.. But thank-you for the video you posted of Eustace Mullins. Also I have posted some of this in other threads but not sure if you have read it.

LoveIsTruth wrote:I like most of your post, Semp.Thankyou! And I like Eustace Mullins a lot,I knew you would! though I don't think he understands the real great role the Jews have to play in God's plan. I agreeThey are indeed God's covenant people,I agree and He will fulfill his covenants unto them, and they will be saved if they repent. However, most of the facts Eustace uncovered are correct.Thus the reason why they murdered friends and family, Persecuted beyond imagination, and couldn't get a job with anyone. And Ron Paul agrees with your assessment as well. Everyone should study his work. I agree!Thanks for bringing him to my attention. Your welcome!I didn't know anything about him before.
Well now you do!

As you have already found out he hates Jews for the most part with all his heart. And I also should warn you as with everything else in this world use the spirit of discernment when reading his works. He is not the source of all truth in any way. But he is a really amazing historian who paid dearly in bringing these things to light. Now what I like about him might just be the opposite of what you like. But it's important as with everything else to get confirmation and get original sources. He does a good job at this. "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." Also I have a couple of his extra books of his. I will look and see if I can find them. If so, if you want I will send you them for you to keep. Just PM address if interested.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:President Garfield who was assassinated openly declared that whoever controls the money supply controls the people.
LoveIsTruth wrote:He was right. This is why money is TOO important to be controlled by government. Government should NOT control the people. This is the very essence of Liberty. You said it! Free Market will control money as any other product. This is why 100% commodity based currency is the money of a Free Market, because it does NOT require government coercion to operate. Free Competition in Currencies is what we demand, because it is intrinsic part of Freedom itself, and honest money is quite impossible without it.
Not government. We the people. I am still waiting for an example of this so called free market ever working successfully in any society in the history of the world. Bottom line is Whoever does coin Money and regulate the Value thereof holds sovereignty. And the Constitution say we the people have that power.

Now lets discuss a few things.. Article one section 8 of the US Constitution states Congress has the power "to coin money AND REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF." Now does it say anyway that the free market should decide? Where in the Constitutions does it even talk about the free market?? Why would Congress be given the power to regulate the value? Why would they need that power? And if they have that power, does that not mean WE the people do not have that reserved to Ourselves? I believe it does. What we basically have today is a free market. Little if any government intervention. Our congress does not control or print the money. They don't set the prices for medals, gas, food, electricity. That would be credit agencies and Big private corporations. Our Congress has no say in these things. So if government is no involved today and Big Corps run America and the world how is it possibly going to change in a free market free of government intervention? It would be similar to what we have today.

Congress can never do the job the constitution gave them in this free market which is to regulate the value of the currency In the interest of the American people. Whoever does coin Money and regulate the Value thereof holds sovereignty. History proves this.

"The free market regulates itself." - Ron Paul

Not we the people.

The power to create money has been usurped from we the people. By no less than a private international bank. Which issues our money as DEBT and lends it back to us at interest. Not our government, not congress, but a private bank. The cartel gives the appearance that governments are creating our money, and Austrians love to blame big bad government and fiat money. But they are just pawns of the cartel. One side of the argument. We can turn this all around, we the people can get back our country ONLY by repenting, forgiving others, and by reclaiming the power to create our money as article 1 section 8 says. This real problem of exploitation can only be overcome when the use of the money created benefits all the people. A market free of government involvement, the law of the jungle prevails and the continuation of the exploitation of the weak and strong. Austrian's really want is government completely out of the picture. They want to abolish Article 1, Section 8, destroying the true sovereignty of the US Federal Government. I could be wrong but to me it appears by advocating a free market, free of government involvement all we are doing is undermining we the people's power to control the value of currency and its issuance. And by blaming government we destroying our only hope. Besides turning from our wicked ways.

So, who is going to be the "hidden-hands" guiding this virtuous "free-market" free of government intervention?

It would be the money interests. It would be big international corporate financial interests. The ones who are looting the American people today. J.P Morgan, Goldman Sucks, Bank of America, etc, etc, ect..... And by going to a free market what we will have effectively done is move the power of the purse out of the hands of an elected body, into the hands of private corporate interests. Just as it is right now.

GOLD

You think the greenbacks were unconstitutional... You think paper is unconstitutional. and only advocate gold. Because it is hones money. I will get to weather it is or is not constitutional in a second.

So In this virtuous "free-market" system free from government, Austrians want to make gold and silver legal tender so that "sound money" can compete on a level playing field. Now who is going to lead the way? Do you think you can just go digg up enough Gold to meet the demands of the American people overnight? If not, Who in this world owns enough gold and silver to set up a competing currency banks backed by precious metals? I sure can't. I don't think many people here can. To me it is simple, the big banks of today. They'd be the very ones setting up competing banks under this free market system making loans at interest. That would be in the banks and big corporations best interest and they would have zero resistance doing this in a free market, free of government intervention. There would be no one able to stop them. They would gain total control of this free market in no time without any consequences. It is in the gold bugs best interest to compete with the free market and set up competing currency banks to make loans at interest. They have done this for ages.. It's exactly how the Rothschild's gained control of Europe. they loaned the gold out at interest never to look back. I see no reason to believe they would not or could not do this if we got rid of government.

And the only way we'd know for certain a competing currency certificate was actually redeemable for a precious metal, would be to have some sort of publicly monitored depository. But if government can't be trusted who would be responsible for this? The Free Market regulates itself remember. I wonder if that's in the plans. If not, the ability to loan out more certificates than you have reserves for would prove irresistible. Than were back to fiat money. And that leads to the same dead end. And I read no where in the US Constitution about “free competition in currency" or “competing currencies.“ And I don't see anywhere where it says to let the “free market” regulate itself.

Greenbacks and Abraham Lincoln

Austrians condemn the greenbacks and say it was an act of treason and unconstitutional all because it was paper. I disagree. But lets discuss this. Who and Why was Abraham Lincoln assassinated? During the Civil War Lincoln needed money. He went to the European banks and asked for money at the recommendation of his Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase. The banks told him they would help him but they wanted 19% interest for the loans. (some say it was 24% to 36%. Either way it was enough to enslave America for a very long time) Now for a few seconds put yourself in Lincolns shoes.... What options do you have?? Either the government could succumb to debt slavery money from the bankers. Or? Lincoln did not have the luxury or the time to go dig up enough gold and silver to cover the coast of War. Not an option. So accepting loans at interest from the banks and not being able to go digging were not options..... What would you do?

Well Abraham Lincoln ignored Salmon P. Chase who wanted America to become enslaved, Lincoln bypassed the European banks and decided to do what many of our founding Fathers advocated. Which was create an independent and inherently debt free currency. The Greenback. Shortly after this measure was taken an internal document circulated between private British and American Banking interest stated; "Slavery is but the owning of labor, and carries with it the care of labor, while the European plan... is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages. This can be done by controlling the money. It will not do to allow the Greenback...As we cannot control that." In essence, today federal reserve system is in fact a modern day slavery system. And if the allowed the green back to continue they would lose their power and control over America.

It also should be noted that Salmon P. Chase tried to pressure Lincoln into accepting the Loans at interest from the European banks by repeatedly threatening resignation. Also being Abraham Lincolns Secretary of the Treasury was not enough. he had bigger aspirations.

So Lincoln had two option which were to either...

Government could either print its own "DEBT FREE" money with no interest attached?

Or

Accept Debt slavery money of private bankers at huge interest rates attached?

What would you choose? The European Banks lost so much money when Lincoln ignored Salmon P. Chase and went to the greenback. It took years and years for the bankers to recover from this. And Lincoln and his Greenbacks were the reason. The bankers would not allow this so Lincoln and the Greenbacks had to be taken out. And they succeed in both. And the Greenbacks were a serious threat to the bankers.

So, were the greenbacks constitutional??

Now here is something you might find of worth or you may choose to ignore it.. But the question must be asked... Were the Greenbacks constitutional? Here is one of the fathers from the Austrian School of Economics who gives a serious history lesson on the matter. Here is the 1884 version with commentary by Nobel Prize winning economist, Prof. Milton Friedman of Stanford University.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Julliard v. Greenman (110 U.S. 421, 448) in 1884 ruled that:

Congress is authorized to establish a national currency,[color=#000000](as the constitution states) either in coins or in paper, and to make that currency lawful money for all purposes, as regards the national government or private individuals.[/color]” (So it first was ruled Constitutional. The highest court of the land ruled it Constitutional.)

Nobel Prize winning economist, Milton Friedman describes some of the history of the battle leading up to this historic decision by the U.S. Supreme Court:

“During the Civil War, Congress authorized greenbacks and made them a legal tender for all debts public and private. After the Civil War, in the first of the famous greenback cases, the Supreme Court declared the issuance of greenbacks unconstitutional.[color=#000000](So after the civil was it the greenbacks were ruled unconstitutional. One 'fascinating aspect of this decision is that it was delivered by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, who had been Secretary of the Treasury when the first greenbacks were issued. Not only did he not disqualify himself, but in his capacity as Chief Justice convicted himself of having been responsible for an unconstitutional action in his capacity as Secretary of the Treasury.' [/color](I agree with Milton Friedman and find it truly fascinating. Since he could stop the greenbacks as Secretary of the Treasury, the only way to stop the greenbacks is to have the supreme court rule them unconstitutional. What better way to do this than gain control of the highest court of the land and have himself as head of it. Salmon Chase was an enemy to our country and we the people. his only interest were the same interest as the European banks.)

“Subsequently an enlarged and reconstituted Court reversed the first decision by a majority of five to four, affirming that making greenbacks a legal tender was constitutional, with Chief Justice Chase as one of the dissenting justices." (Of course Chase voted it unconstitutional. Of course he was dissenting.)

“It is neither feasible nor desirable to restore a gold-or-silver coin standard, but we do need a commitment to sound money. The best arrangement currently would be to require the monetary authorities to keep the percentage rate of growth of the monetary base within a fixed range. This is a particularly difficult amendment to draft because it is so closely linked to the particular institutional structure. One version would be:

‘Congress shall have the power to authorize non-interest-bearing obligations of the government in the form of currency or book entries, provided that the total dollar amount outstanding increases by no more than 5 percent per year and no less than 3 percent.’

“It might be desirable to include a provision that two-thirds of each House of Congress, or some similar qualified majority, can waive the requirement in case of a declaration of war, the suspension to terminate annually unless renewed."

“A Constitutional Amendment would be the most effective way to establish confidence in the stability of the rule. However, it is clearly not the only way to impose the rule. Congress could equally well legislate it."

Quoted from: A Program for Monetary Stability, by. Dr. Milton Friedman, Fordham University Press (N.Y. 1960, 1992), pgs. X, 66-76, 100-101; and, Free to Choose by Dr. Milton & Rose Friedman, Harcourt Brace & Co. (San Diego 1980, 1990), pgs. 307-308.

Gold money systems just do not work. And NO ONE knew this better than Eustace Mullins and Carroll Quigley.

Delving into monetary history in the 1800s makes it obvious that gold is the money of plutocracy, not democracy, not freedom for a sovereign nation. It's an intellectually dishonest approach that will eventually leave its proponents disgraced on the ash-heap of history. If you actually do any honest research of the 1800's, and 1970's, you would see the fallacy of "gold money." Any open-minded review of the monetary history of the world shows that gold is absolutely manipulable by bankers! Austrian's economics has always worked out great for the world’s richest people --- the holders of the majority of gold. Gold money has never worked well to provide freedom from serfdom for the common man.

Early America had no gold. They were forced, in order to have a medium of exchange, to print their own homegrown paper money. This was money issued by the individual colonial governments, without debt. It worked very well, and the colonies began to prosper.

Unfortunately, as of 1694, England's tally stick system --- also a debt-free money system --- had been killed with the founding of the Bank of England. After 700 years of prosperity under the debt-free tally stick system, England was suddenly thrust into a situation where they had to borrow all of their money into existence, at interest, from bankers. Of course this new money, was backed by gold. How did that work out?

By the mid-1700s, the interest on this new national debt was crippling the empire on which the sun never set. Fully 75% of British taxation went to paying just the interest on England’s titanic debt. As a result, England was forced to squeeze increasingly exorbitant taxation out of all her colonies; America was no exception. Of course, they demanded this payment in gold, but America had no gold. To the gold money system of the bankers, America’s debt free “colonial script” was worthless.

So, the British passed the Currency Act of 1764. This outlawed America’s “worthless” fiat paper money and ordered all Americans to pay their taxes in fiat gold or silver coin. The result was the same as would occur today if the average American was told that they could no longer make transactions in anything but gold or silver coin. Most of us would immediately be bankrupt. Look what befell the American colonies. As Franklin put it:

"In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."

To Ben Franklin this return to a gold money system was the basic cause for the American Revolution.

"The Colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the Colonies [their] money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction."

So, to Franklin, this banning of America's debt free currency was the primary and underlying cause of the American Revolution.

Here is a video of Eustace Mullins on some fascinating history on Rockefellers, Lincoln, and JFK. I think you will like it. But I find it fascinating how he describes the health of the American people and the cause of our health problems. You will agree 100% with this assessment.



Now if you watched, you will noticed how he talks about how over time his work became very easy because the more he experienced he figured out all these men behind the scenes, all of the men who ran Big Corps, who owned the Fed, medical industry, institutes ect.. were all interconnected. And because this his work was easy and basically just wrote the same thing describing many aspects of the mob cartel. I am sure you can understand this. You are well aware of this fact except Mullins knew that those who funded, financed the Austrian Schools of Economics were they very people who control America. Thus the reason why the Rockefellers funded the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and today receive hundreds of millions of dollars each year by wealthy donors of this cabal.

Eustace Mullins. In his book "The World Order, A Study in the Hegemony of Parasitism"

"Hence his [Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England] campaign in favour of completely autonomous central banks, dominating their own financial markets and deriving their power from common agreement among themselves. They would succeed in taking out of the political realm those problems which are essential for the development and prosperity of the national financial security, distribution of credit, movement of prices. They would thus prevent internal political struggles from harming the wealth and the economic advancement of nations."

"In short, Norman wished to see the imposition of the World Order over the financial affairs of the nations. It was this agreement among the central banks, rather than the front organization, the League of Nations, which became their final instrument of power. Crucial to these arrangements was the monetarist school, the Austrian School of Economics, an outgrowth of the Pan-Europe movement."

Carol Quigley said an elite group of global financiers were bent on controlling the world. He said, Their goal was "nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole." This system was "to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements." He called this clique simply the "international bankers." Their essence was not race, religion or nationality but was just a passion for control over other all humans. And the key to their success was that they would control and manipulate the money system of a nation while letting it appear to be controlled by the government. Today they not only control the money supply, they now control the creation and the own most of what will soon replace it.

Winston Churchill, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, reintroduced the gold-standard in 1925. In 1932, Churchill testified the following before the House of Commons:

"When I was moved by many arguments and forces in 1925 to return to the gold standard, I was assured by the highest experts, and our experts are men of great ability and of indisputable integrity and sincerity, that we were anchoring ourselves to reality and stability, and I accepted their advice. I take for myself and my colleagues of other days whatever degree of blame and burden for having accepted their advice.

"But what happened ? We have had no reality, no stability. The price of gold has risen since then by more than 70 per cent. That is as if a 12-inch foot rule had been stretched to 19 or 20 inches…. Look at what this has meant to everybody who has been compelled to execute their contracts upon this irrationally enhanced scale. Look at the gross unfairness of such distortion to all producers of new wealth, and to all that labour and science and enterprise can give us. Look at the enormously increased volume of commodities which have to be created in order to pay off the same mortgage debt or loan. Minor fluctuation might well be ignored, but I say quite seriously that this monetary convulsion has now reached a pitch where I am persuaded that the producers of new wealth will not tolerate indefinitely so hideous an oppression. . . .

"I therefore point to this evil, and to the search for the method's of remedying it as the first, second and third of all the problems which should command and rivet our thoughts."


Here is Ezra Pound, who was one of the all time great poets of our time who was Eustace Mullins mentor. As I already told you he was a threat to the establishment and was a political prisoner for many years and was put in a mental hospital without trial.

“The present war dates at least from the founding of the Bank of England at the end of the 17th century, 1694-8. Half a century later, the London usurocracy shut down on the issue of paper money by the Pennsylvania colony, A.D. 1750. This is not usually given prominence in the U.S. school histories. The 13 colonies rebelled, quite successfully, 26 years later, A.D. 1776.” According to Pound, it was the money issue (above all) that united the Allies during the second 20th-century war against Germany: “Gold. Nothing else uniting the three governments, England, Russia, United States of America. That is the interest–gold, usury, debt, monopoly, class interest, and possibly gross indifference and contempt for humanity.”

And elsewhere: “Gold is a coward. Gold is not the backbone of nations. It is their ruin. A coward, at the first breath of danger gold flows away, gold flows out of the country.”

Brigham Young would agree with this assessment!

"Gold is good for nothing, only as men value it. It is no better than a piece of iron, a piece of limestone, or a piece of sandstone, and it is not half so good as the soil from which we raise our wheat, and other necessaries of life. The children of men love it, they lust after it, are greedy for it, and are ready to destroy themselves, and those around them, over whom they have any influence, to gain it”
Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 1:, p.250

That is the real face of Gold as Pound saw it.

Pound, evidently, had no problems seeing the self evident: that the Gold Standards of the past and most certainly of modern history, beginning in Amsterdam, were banker operations.

Neither had Eustace Mullins, who left very little to guess in his book:

“The international gold dealings of the Federal Reserve System, and its active support in helping the League of Nations to force all the nations of Europe and South America back on the gold standard for the benefit of international gold merchants like Eugene Meyer, Jr. and Albert Strauss, is best demonstrated by a classic incident, the sterling credit of 1925."

J.E. Darling wrote, in the English periodical, “Spectator”, on January 10, 1925 that:

“Obviously, it is of the first importance to the United States to induce England to resume the gold standard as early as possible. An American controlled Gold Standard, which must inevitably result in the United States becoming the world’s supreme financial power, makes England a tributary and satellite, and New York the world’s financial centre.”

Mr. Darling fails to point out that the American people have as little to do with this as the British people, and that resumption of the gold standard by Britain would benefit only that small group of international gold merchants who own the world’s gold. No wonder that “Banker’s Magazine” gleefully remarked in July, 1925 that:

“The outstanding event of the past half year in the banking world was the restoration of the gold standard.”

This evil scheme was revealed by Sir Josiah Stamp, director of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. Speaking at the University of Texas in 1927, he dropped this bombshell:

“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit."

And That's exactly what the greenbacks did.... They took power to create money from the bankers and had to be taken out. It's now forgotten history.

We need to restore Article One Section 8. We the people need to take the power back of issuing and controlling money which is our right to begin with. Gold will do i guess as long as that power is controlled by we the people. I just don't see any reason to to go gold digging.
“No matter where we begin, if we pursue knowledge diligently and honestly, our quest will inevitably lead us from the things of the earth to the things of heaven.”

User avatar
Juliette
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2748
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:42 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby Juliette » Sun Mar 04, 2012 4:49 pm

Great post Semp!! Who are you?? I wonder about everyone on this site. Where did all this knowledge come from?
Are you also a moderator?

Do these Ron Paul followers know so much because they've followed him through the years? With this same kind of enthusiam?
I've never seen anything like it. I have only jumped in the game this election. Interesting to say the least.

liberty_belle
captain of 100
Posts: 575
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:09 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby liberty_belle » Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:04 pm

LoveIsTruth wrote:Ron Paul Wins Taunton MA Republican 2012 Straw Poll

Wow! This from Massachusetts?

Ron Paul 51%
Romney 38%
Santorum 8%
Newt 3%




Here is the problem....In AZ Ron Paul won hands down in the Poll at 85%
In the exit polls http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Scv5TVuTITM

yet, we are to believe that Romney ran away with it.

This is the problem with primaries with computers doing the calculating! No one ever can see the votes tallied

liberty_belle
captain of 100
Posts: 575
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:09 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby liberty_belle » Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:56 pm

Juliette wrote:Great post Semp!! Who are you?? I wonder about everyone on this site. Where did all this knowledge come from?
Are you also a moderator?

Do these Ron Paul followers know so much because they've followed him through the years? With this same kind of enthusiam?
I've never seen anything like it. I have only jumped in the game this election. Interesting to say the least.


I can only speak for myself...I jumped into politics when I was 20 years old (24 years ago) when our Governor Meecham was being wrongfully recalled. I listened carefull to the arguments and then I spent 2 hours every day reading the Book of Mormon and the D&C for direction. In that course of study I was being lead to research more about modern day gadiantons and secret combinations.

After I graduated from a bsns college (ya, that was dumb) I took on a job where I was daily at the Capital rubbing shoulders with the States top Legislatures. I had my eyes open to corruption and self-grandizement. The majority of these people did not really care about the State and that was very clear.

Some years later, I became locally involved and labored diligently at the our State Capital, first as a parent for Parental Rights, then later as the AZ Dir. for the International Coalition for Drug Awareness/

I did not know about Ron Paul until 2007, but when I heard him, I had already understood the Constitution, Civil Liberties etc. I never thought in my life time that I would ever see such a person with unwavering commitment to the People of the Country. At first their were a couple of issues that I had problems with ie social issues, but that was only because I did not fully understand agency, I guess. Over the last four years, I have done even more studying into exactly what agency is and God's plan on how we should use it. That is why I can, with fervency stand behind Ron Paul.

Hope that can give you a little light into one of Ron Paul supporters

User avatar
Juliette
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2748
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:42 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby Juliette » Sun Mar 04, 2012 7:17 pm

liberty_belle wrote:
Juliette wrote:Great post Semp!! Who are you?? I wonder about everyone on this site. Where did all this knowledge come from?
Are you also a moderator?

Do these Ron Paul followers know so much because they've followed him through the years? With this same kind of enthusiam?
I've never seen anything like it. I have only jumped in the game this election. Interesting to say the least.


I can only speak for myself...I jumped into politics when I was 20 years old (24 years ago) when our Governor Meecham was being wrongfully recalled. I listened carefull to the arguments and then I spent 2 hours every day reading the Book of Mormon and the D&C for direction. In that course of study I was being lead to research more about modern day gadiantons and secret combinations.

After I graduated from a bsns college (ya, that was dumb) I took on a job where I was daily at the Capital rubbing shoulders with the States top Legislatures. I had my eyes open to corruption and self-grandizement. The majority of these people did not really care about the State and that was very clear.

Some years later, I became locally involved and labored diligently at the our State Capital, first as a parent for Parental Rights, then later as the AZ Dir. for the International Coalition for Drug Awareness/

I did not know about Ron Paul until 2007, but when I heard him, I had already understood the Constitution, Civil Liberties etc. I never thought in my life time that I would ever see such a person with unwavering commitment to the People of the Country. At first their were a couple of issues that I had problems with ie social issues, but that was only because I did not fully understand agency, I guess. Over the last four years, I have done even more studying into exactly what agency is and God's plan on how we should use it. That is why I can, with fervency stand behind Ron Paul.

Hope that can give you a little light into one of Ron Paul supporters


Thank-you for that Liberty. I did attend some Evan Mecham rallies at ASU. I was very upset at the way he was treated.
My Father started a business in the Valley when I was young. When we graduated from high school, we worked at his business. No college for us. And that was ok. My family is wealthy because of his, and our, hard work. He built his company up until he had one in Phoenix, North Phoenix, Chandler, Mesa and Apache Junction. Our family recently sold the business.
I spent my life, after working for the business, raising children. I have a beautiful family. My son served a mission in Edmonton Canada. My daughters married in the Temple and are outstanding women. My Mothers maiden name is Udall. I come from a political family, but just wasn't interested.
When I decided to join this forum, after being on the apostate sight, I had no idea how little I knew. I also have never been talked down to like I have been here. Not even on the other site. I'm not used to that. I have served as the president in almost all the organizations for the women in this church. I have never been attacked like I have been on here. I know I have attacked back also. I felt like it was dog eat dog, and I wasn't going to be eaten. Even though I was not very well informed! :-\
I do see your enthusiam for Ron Paul. He is a great man. He is very intelligent. He stands for the constitution. I have learned so much.
It doesn't change my mind concerning Mitt Romney however. I wanted him in the last election. I think he has the best chance of being the nominee and thats what I want. If Ron Paul should be the nominee, I would vote for him. I would not vote for Gingrich. My family and all the people I know here in Az want Romney. If the vote is changed and dishonest, why are we even trying? I'm afraid that Obama will be our next President because of that very thing. Sad state of affairs! :(

ktg
captain of 100
Posts: 842
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:43 pm

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby ktg » Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:42 pm

Juliette wrote: If the vote is changed and dishonest, why are we even trying?


Elder Verlan H. Andersen explains that we have a duty to do so.

From his book "The Book of Mormon and the Constitution":

CAN POLITICAL BELIEFS AFFECT PERSONAL SALVATION?
Some may remain aloof from politics because they believe it has nothing to do with salvation or exaltation. With this thought in mind let us look at this scripture:
We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man, and that he holds men
accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them for the good and safety of society. (D&C 134:1)
In a nation of self-governing people like the United States, all citizens have a moral responsibility to the Lord for their political conduct. With the privilege of self-rule comes the obligation to exercise that privilege in accordance with the Lord’s commandments. Moral principle is as applicable in group action as in individual action. When one decides to befriend or oppose a law, he exercises moral judgment. This judgment is also his personal political philosophy and code of justice. His judgment indicates whether he is just. One’s political philosophy also contains his views on human freedom. Every act he would allow others their freedom to do is allowed by the laws he favors. Conduct which he wants to use force and the fear thereof to prohibit is forbidden by those laws. Thus, one’s political philosophy is an expression of his beliefs on free agency. When we recall what the scriptures have to say regarding the fate of those who made the wrong decision on this matter in the pre-existence, we may want to be certain we do not use force to deny a rightful freedom here. This is the question at issue with respect to every law and every government action upon which we pass judgment. It seems that one can jeopardize his eternal welfare through group action as well as through individual conduct. Even though one acts in concert with others, and even though there may be thousands or millions who join with him in punishing the innocent, in judging unjustly and in opposing freedom, he is not thereby absolved from personal accountability.
The scriptures verify that we were judged by our attitude toward free agency in the pre-earth
life. Those who opposed it are even now suffering the worst punishment known. If it be true as
President McKay has indicated, that free agency may become the measuring rod by which we will
be judged here in mortality, it is of transcendent importance that we know and do those things
which provide freedom and that we identify and avoid those which injure or destroy it. The attempt
to destroy freedom in the pre-earth life was probably undertaken mainly by teaching false doctrines
concerning it. This appears to be one of the main ways of destroying it here on earth also. But in
addition to this, we can use our mortal bodies to injure and destroy the freedom of others by
forcibly depriving them of one of those physical possessions they must have to exercise it—life,
liberty and property.

Also, read the chapter titled "THE LORD JUDGES MEN BY THE CIVIL LAWS THEY SANCTION OR OPPOSE" in his book "The Great and Abominable Church of the Devil."

Both books can be downloaded for free at http://www.inspiredconstitution.org/books.html

If you only read 2 more books in your entire life, PLEASE read these!
"As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, providence punishes national sins by national calamities." George Mason

User avatar
LoveIsTruth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5007
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:13 am

Re: Ron Paul runs - Ron Paul Wins!

Postby LoveIsTruth » Sun Mar 04, 2012 11:30 pm

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Now lets discuss a few things.. Article one section 8 of the US Constitution states Congress has the power "to coin money AND REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF." Now does it say anyway that the free market should decide? Where in the Constitutions does it even talk about the free market?? Why would Congress be given the power to regulate the value? Why would they need that power? And if they have that power, does that not mean WE the people do not have that reserved to Ourselves?
To "REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF" means nothing more nothing less than to determine what is the WEIGHT of gold or silver to be in the dollar. That's all. It is part of determining weights and measures. Once that is set it does not change, just like pound does not change, or foot, or yard. They stay the same, or it is fraud. That's all the Congress could do with regards to the money used by the States, i.e. gold and silver. As for things reserved to Ourselves, The Constitution Limits the government only, NOT the people. People can coin and use any private currency they please.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:What we basically have today is a free market. Little if any government intervention.
Are you kidding me? I can't believe you would say something so absurd! Almost every facet of our life and economy is controlled by the government!

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Our congress does not control or print the money. They don't set the prices for medals, gas, food, electricity. That would be credit agencies and Big private corporations. Our Congress has no say in these things.
Congress is the only institution that creates monopolies in all these areas, and allows bureaucrats right regulations that massively distort operation of free market for the benefit of well connected corporations. That is NOT free market, it is fascism, the rule of government connected to corporations.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:So if government is no involved today and Big Corps run America and the world how is it possibly going to change in a free market free of government intervention? It would be similar to what we have today.
Wrong. It is because of government force that big corporations can distort free market, by granting themselves government forced monopolies and/or privileges. Again I say that is NOT Free Market. It is Fascism. Remove this immoral government force, the Free Market will operate again for the benefit of the consumers.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Congress can never do the job the constitution gave them in this free market which is to regulate the value of the currency
To regulate a metal currency is to ONCE determine the WEIGHT of gold or silver in a dollar, and that's all.
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Whoever does coin Money and regulate the Value thereof holds sovereignty. History proves this.
People should be free to produce private currencies. And the Constitution did not forbid it. The Constitution limits only the government, not the people. As for sovereignty, the people, i.e. individuals are sovereign, not the government.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:A market free of government involvement, the law of the jungle prevails and the continuation of the exploitation of the weak and strong.
Exactly the reverse is true. It is government involvement that makes possible the legal plunder we are witnessing. Thieves get rich via government forced monopolies. Free Market is NOT the law of the jungle, but its opposite. Free Market has much stricter regulations than that of the government bureaucrats who bail out their buddies. Free Market, and freedom in general, can exist ONLY if private property rights are religiously preserved. And absent government plunder this is what you will get, because private sector can enforce private property rights, MUCH, MUCH better than a government monopoly.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Austrian's really want is government completely out of the picture. They want to abolish Article 1, Section 8, destroying the true sovereignty of the US Federal Government.
Government is NOT sovereign, the people, INDIVIDUALS are.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:I could be wrong but to me it appears by advocating a free market, free of government involvement all we are doing is undermining we the people's power to control the value of currency and its issuance.
Wrong. In a Free Market, ANYONE can issue any currency he likes, and the preference of people determines which currency takes hold of most of the market. (The same as with any other product in a Free Market.) History shows that it will undeviatingly be an 100% commodity based currency, because it is the most stable and the most honest monetary system known to man.
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:And by blaming government we destroying our only hope.
You sound like a statist. Government is NOT "our only hope;" quite the opposite, it is our only problem. As Reagan put it: "Government is NOT the solution, it is the problem."

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:So, who is going to be the "hidden-hands" guiding this virtuous "free-market" free of government intervention?
Supply and demand, plus private property rights.
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:It would be the money interests. It would be big international corporate financial interests. The ones who are looting the American people today. J.P Morgan, Goldman Sucks, Bank of America, etc, etc, ect..... And by going to a free market what we will have effectively done is move the power of the purse out of the hands of an elected body, into the hands of private corporate interests. Just as it is right now.
You are mistaken. What we have now is NOT free market. The banksters are so powerful because they were granted a GOVERNMENT FORCED MONOPOLY on counterfeiting. That is the direct opposite of Free Market. Remove this immoral government force and you will have Free Competition in Currencies, with Free Market rejecting worthless unbacked paper. Then it will be fulfilled what Sir Josiah Stamp said in 1927: "Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. " (Thanks for that quote by the way). Take this government forced monopoly away and you will have a better world.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:So In this virtuous "free-market" system free from government, Austrians want to make gold and silver legal tender so that "sound money" can compete on a level playing field. Now who is going to lead the way? Do you think you can just go digg up enough Gold to meet the demands of the American people overnight? If not, Who in this world owns enough gold and silver to set up a competing currency banks backed by precious metals? I sure can't. I don't think many people here can. To me it is simple, the big banks of today. They'd be the very ones setting up competing banks under this free market system making loans at interest. That would be in the banks and big corporations best interest and they would have zero resistance doing this in a free market, free of government intervention. There would be no one able to stop them. They would gain total control of this free market in no time without any consequences. It is in the gold bugs best interest to compete with the free market and set up competing currency banks to make loans at interest. They have done this for ages.. It's exactly how the Rothschild's gained control of Europe. they loaned the gold out at interest never to look back. I see no reason to believe they would not or could not do this if we got rid of government.
If money cannot be conjured out of nothing, then it will move into the hands of those who produce things. Thus people who produce valuable goods and services will end up with most of the money.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:And the only way we'd know for certain a competing currency certificate was actually redeemable for a precious metal, would be to have some sort of publicly monitored depository. But if government can't be trusted who would be responsible for this?
Private sector. If they violate people's trust they will lose customers, and with government NOT granting any special privileges (or monopolies) those customers will go to someone who provides a better service, and the scheming bankster will go to jail.
SempiternalHarbinger wrote:The Free Market regulates itself remember. I wonder if that's in the plans. If not, the ability to loan out more certificates than you have reserves for would prove irresistible. Than were back to fiat money. And that leads to the same dead end.
I just answered this. If a bankster tries that and gets caught (unable to return a gold deposit) he loses his customers and goes to jail, because the government is not there to bail him out or grant him special privileges, etc. Free Market in money will work just the same as Free Market in milk, or cement or computers, because money is NOTHING more than just another product. It is that simple. There is nothing magical about money. IT IS JUST ANOTHER PRODUCT, like milk, cement, grain, or computers or iPods. It's just another product that is used as a medium of exchange.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:And I read no where in the US Constitution about “free competition in currency" or “competing currencies.“ And I don't see anywhere where it says to let the “free market” regulate itself.
Neither does it prohibit these. But, you are right, that is a flaw in the Constitution which I seek to fix with Honest Money Constitutional Amendment.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Austrians condemn the greenbacks and say it was an act of treason and unconstitutional all because it was paper. I disagree. But lets discuss this. Who and Why was Abraham Lincoln assassinated?
Because he wanted to create a government forced monopoly to counterfeit money (i.e. conjure purchasing power out of nothing). Banksters wanted that monopoly for themselves. That's why they killed him. It was one group of criminals fighting another group of criminals. NO ONE should have a counterfeiting monopoly: NO ONE! It is immoral, and is the essence of tyranny and plunder. Free Market rejects such fraud, because no one likes being plundered, and people, when free, will demand a 100% commodity backed currency, the most honest and the most stable monetary system known to man. Free Competition in Currencies will establish just that system, because it is a superior product compared to an unbacked paper.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:During the Civil War Lincoln needed money. He went to the European banks and asked for money at the recommendation of his Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase. The banks told him they would help him but they wanted 19% interest for the loans. (some say it was 24% to 36%. Either way it was enough to enslave America for a very long time) Now for a few seconds put yourself in Lincolns shoes.... What options do you have?? Either the government could succumb to debt slavery money from the bankers. Or? Lincoln did not have the luxury or the time to go dig up enough gold and silver to cover the coast of War. Not an option. So accepting loans at interest from the banks and not being able to go digging were not options..... What would you do?
Not go to war, unless people are willing to VOLUNTARILY finance it, and only if the war is just.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Well Abraham Lincoln ignored Salmon P. Chase who wanted America to become enslaved, Lincoln bypassed the European banks and decided to do what many of our founding Fathers advocated. Which was create an independent and inherently debt free currency. The Greenback.
Most of the Founders were adamant against unbacked paper. Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams and many others spoke forcefully against it. This is why they put it into the Constitution that NOTHING but gold and silver is to be used as money by the States (Article I, Section 10). Can you at least read?

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Shortly after this measure was taken an internal document circulated between private British and American Banking interest stated; "Slavery is but the owning of labor, and carries with it the care of labor, while the European plan... is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages. This can be done by controlling the money. It will not do to allow the Greenback...As we cannot control that." In essence, today federal reserve system is in fact a modern day slavery system. And if the allowed the green back to continue they would lose their power and control over America.
Yes and hand that power into the hands of nice and trustworthy politicians, until the government ends up owning all the property of the people and Liberty is destroyed. I feel so much better now! The problem with unbacked fiat money is not that it is issued by banksters instead of government, but that it is issued at all. It is plunder, it is theft, it is immoral. The analogy is Nazi concentration camps,-- the problem with them was not that they were ran by private companies instead of government, but that they were ran at all! It is immoral; It is THEFT! It is legal plunder. It DESTROYS Liberty, and consequently the society itself!

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:So Lincoln had two option which were to either...
Government could either print its own "DEBT FREE" money with no interest attached?
Or
Accept Debt slavery money of private bankers at huge interest rates attached?

What would you choose?
Neither.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:And the Greenbacks were a serious threat to the bankers.
Yes, one criminal cartel (i.e. the government), was a serious threat to another criminal cartel, the banksters. Both wanted to plunder the people. Neither had a right.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:So, were the greenbacks constitutional??
States can use NOTHING but gold and silver as money. Also the congress was granted authority to COIN money, not to PRINT money. Don't you think the founders knew English? It was obvious that Constitutional money were METAL, namely Gold and Silver. The Supreme Court should have been hung for treason when they said unbacked paper was Constitutional!

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Gold money systems just do not work.
If they do not work, why are they then preferred every time by the Free Market absent government coercion? We have 6000 years of history to prove that.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Early America had no gold. They were forced, in order to have a medium of exchange, to print their own homegrown paper money. This was money issued by the individual colonial governments, without debt. It worked very well, and the colonies began to prosper.
Really? Have you not heard the phrase: "Not worth a continental?" Google it. It was an unmitigated disaster that wiped out the property of many of our Founding Fathers, after which they insisted on putting it into the Constitution that "nothing but gold and silver" to be used as money by the States (Article I, Section 10). You got your history wrong.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:England was suddenly thrust into a situation where they had to borrow all of their money into existence, at interest, from bankers. Of course this new money, was backed by gold. How did that work out?
It was government forced monopoly with "fractional reserve banking" (read legalized counterfeiting). Of course they bankrupted England in few short decades! That's what legalized and monopolized counterfeiting does EVERY TIME. Gold was NOT to blame; legalized and monopolized counterfeiting (in the form of "fractional reserve" banking) was.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:The result was the same as would occur today if the average American was told that they could no longer make transactions in anything but gold or silver coin. Most of us would immediately be bankrupt.
The debts of the US government are fraudulent and need not to be paid. Those who made those debts need to go to prison. Secondly, a smooth transition requires a Free Competition in Currencies, with good money gradually driving out the bad. That's what happens absent government coercion when Free Market is allowed to operate, because no one likes being plundered, and unbacked fiat is legalized plunder, nothing more nothing less.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:Winston Churchill, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, reintroduced the gold-standard in 1925. In 1932, Churchill testified the following before the House of Commons:

"When I was moved by many arguments and forces in 1925 to return to the gold standard, I was assured by the highest experts, and our experts are men of great ability and of indisputable integrity and sincerity, that we were anchoring ourselves to reality and stability, and I accepted their advice. I take for myself and my colleagues of other days whatever degree of blame and burden for having accepted their advice.

"But what happened ? We have had no reality, no stability. The price of gold has risen since then by more than 70 per cent.
That is ridiculous. I knew Churchill was a crook. This doesn't even make sense! Think about it: If British Pound was anchored (backed) by gold, the price of gold CANNOT rise when expressed in Pounds, because Pound means nothing more than a certain WEIGHT of gold. The only way how the price of gold could have risen in terms of pounds if pound is NOT anchored to gold, which contradicts his previous statement where he said: "we were anchoring ourselves." So the man is either an idiot or a liar, because he blatantly contradicts himself, and he was not an idiot. Therefore I will have to go with him being a liar.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:"Gold is good for nothing, only as men value it. It is no better than a piece of iron, a piece of limestone, or a piece of sandstone, and it is not half so good as the soil from which we raise our wheat, and other necessaries of life. The children of men love it, they lust after it, are greedy for it, and are ready to destroy themselves, and those around them, over whom they have any influence, to gain it”
Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 1:, p.250
He merely pointed out that food is more important than gold. And he was right. However gold is great as a common medium of exchange. If it was not so, why would then Brigham Young and the twelve apostles create a gold backed currency in Utah in 1800's with gold backed certificates bearing their signatures? So you are taking this out of context, my friend.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:“The outstanding event of the past half year in the banking world was the restoration of the gold standard.”

This evil scheme was revealed by Sir Josiah Stamp, director of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. Speaking at the University of Texas in 1927, he dropped this bombshell:

“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing.
You contradict yourself and misapply Stamp's excellent quote! You cannot have gold standard (i.e. 100% gold backing) and creating "money out of nothing." They are the opposites of each other, because you cannot conjure gold out of NOTHING, but you can unbacked paper.

SempiternalHarbinger wrote:And That's exactly what the greenbacks did.... They took power to create money from the bankers and had to be taken out. It's now forgotten history.

We need to restore Article One Section 8. We the people need to take the power back of issuing and controlling money which is our right to begin with. Gold will do i guess as long as that power is controlled by we the people. I just don't see any reason to to go gold digging.
Free Market will decide whether it is profitable to go "gold digging" not you. That is the whole point of Free Competition in Currencies which is a MUST if people are to be truly free. On what moral basis would you forbid Free Competition in Currencies? And if Free Competition in Currencies is to exist, then unbacked fiat money will unavoidably die by the hand of Free Market, because no one likes being plundered, and people will freely choose a 100% commodity based, interest free currency, because it is the most honest and the most stable monetary system known to man. Let Free Market decide, or in other words, let the free people decide. What do you have against Freedom?
Last edited by LoveIsTruth on Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:04 am, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “2011 / 2012 Elections”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 4 guests