default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Ron Paul is a good choice

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Sunday, December 30, 2007 10:00 pm

I am writing in hopes of informing those who don't know about Congressman Ron Paul's current campaign for the Republican nomination for the presidency.

Ron Paul is a 10-term congressman from Texas and also a licensed doctor. I would like to encourage people who are looking for a change in America to look into him.

He has never voted to raise taxes; he voted against the Iraq War; against regulation of the Internet; against the very unpatriotic, undemocratic Patriot Act; against an increase in executive power; wants to erase the Federal Income Tax and IRS; wants to revamp U.S. foreign policy; and voted against an unbalanced budget.

These are only a few items on Ron Paul's record, and he could very easily be considered the most conservative of Republicans running for the nomination this election.

Because mainstream media seldom cover him, discrediting him as a "long-shot candidate," much is left to his ever-increasing grassroots campaign of millions of Americans across this country. He has been credited by many for "curing" their political apathy, presenting them with different, yet very realistic change for a better, more free America.

Ron Paul supporters made records by raising more than $4.5 million in a 24-hour period Nov. 5 and staged another mass fund-raiser Dec. 15, in memory of the Boston Tea Party, the event that was a catalyst to our first American Revolution.

I urge citizens from all political parties to look at this man and what he can do for America. Please visit his Web site for more information.

Thomas Pazo


Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • posted at 10:46 pm on Thu, Jan 10, 2008.


    Danni: I don't believe that you actually believe the filth you post.

  • posted at 6:32 pm on Thu, Jan 10, 2008.


    Leonard: What you don't realize is that your filthy description only works in the small circle friends that you have assembled in the sand box. It doesn't work amongst the adults.

  • posted at 6:17 pm on Thu, Jan 10, 2008.


    Leonard: If you can ever say anything credible, I'll let you know.

  • posted at 6:16 pm on Thu, Jan 10, 2008.


    Leonard: Nope.

  • posted at 9:26 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    Danni: Your "story" (your word, not mine) is not credible.

    The reason why your "story" has drawn such attention is because it is an affront to basic human decency. You would have attracted the same sort of attention if you had said that you like to torture kittens or that you like to collect kiddie porn. The sort of filth that you are putting forward naturally draws revulsion and disgust.

  • posted at 6:07 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: I know you're lying, because the website has 4 pictures in it, and you spoke in the singular.

  • posted at 6:06 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: If you looked at "my picture," at http://www.lodinet.com/danielh/911/popMech_911.asp,
    you'd have a hecka lot more to say. The picture is pretty much unmistakable, and you'd have to do a lot of talking because you'd know you are backed into a corner.

  • posted at 4:56 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    If you only knew how we classify you into a group of people according to your way of thinking... We laugh at you quite a bit. I am the only person from within my groups (not just one), who exhibits a degree of patience to communicate with you, although my friends laugh at me for wasting my time.

  • posted at 4:54 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    You folks know that I have a credible story, and you are offended because it disturbs the protected status-quo environment, in which it is too easy to believe in what you are told in the controlled media.

    If I really did have a false story, you wouldn't be offended by it, and you would just lose interest.

    This story only had about 50 hits, until I offended thee. If you look at Arne Aasen's story, he only got 50 hits, because his story was not credible.

  • posted at 4:45 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    Folks: enjoy the play yard. It's all yours. Don't accept any rides home from strangers.

  • posted at 4:44 pm on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    I can't teach people that refuse to process external information in their surroundings.

  • posted at 11:26 am on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    It seems to me that Dann is part of a conspiracy to convince people that there is a pod on this aircraft. One wonders who could be behind such a nefarious plot.

  • posted at 10:30 am on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    I looked at your picture, I don't see a pod.

    What part of that don't you understand?

  • posted at 8:41 am on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    nylodian: You rested your case, but now you are still making remarks. Then my comment to you is the same. At http://www.lodinet.com/danielh/911/popMech_911.asp, you would have to be blind not to see the pod. The "hitcounter" is not functioning properly, so you can go in there anonymously, and I won't even know that you've been in there.

    I promise the pod is marked in a perfect rectangle. There is no way out, unless you don't look at the website.

  • posted at 1:27 am on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    If a tree falls down in a forest, and no one is around to hear it, will Daniel still be obsessing over imaginary pods? ;)

  • posted at 12:48 am on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    Boomer: If you would look at the pictures at http://www.lodinet.com/danielh/911/popMech_911.asp,
    you would have to be blind, or an accessary to the crime to not see the pod. You'll be so offended that you'll talk to me again.

  • posted at 12:01 am on Wed, Jan 9, 2008.


    Ron Paul has said over and over again that those THUGS who committed the 9/11 attacks were 100% responsible for 9/11.

    He says you HAVE to find their "motives." Just like when a murderer commits a murder...we find his MOTIVE.

    READ the following quote, please read the entire article online:


    "Those who think that Paul's noninterventionist outlook somehow amounts to a "weakness" on the terrorism issue might examine the view of the former chief of the CIA's bin Laden Unit, Michael Scheuer the man whose team gave the Clintons ten separate opportunities to capture or kill Osama bin Laden before September 11th."

    "After a debate last May, when Congressman Paul tangled with former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani over his view that we're threatened by suicide terrorists due to our bombings, occupations and support for dictatorships in the Middle East, Scheuer released a statement defending him."

    "Of [all] presidential candidates now in the field from both parties, only Dr. Paul has had the courage to square with the average American voter." He continued, "[Y]ou can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Dr. Paul's frankness was Osama bin Laden, who knows that the current status quo in U.S. foreign policy toward the Islamic world is al Qaedas one indispensable ally."

    THIS coming from Michael F. Scheuer the former CIA employee. In his 22-year career, he served as the Chief of the Bin Laden Issue Station (aka "Alec Station"), from 1996 to 1999, the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the Counterterrorist Center. He then worked again as Special Advisor to the Chief of the bin Laden unit from September 2001 to November 2004.

  • posted at 9:24 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    danielh: I looked at the photo, there is no "pod". I have seen video of the second plane flying into the tower, there is no "pod". Over two thousand of your fellow Americans were murdered by a foreign terrorist and you want to blame our own government. That is just sick. I am done talking to you on this.

  • posted at 4:46 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: Try the following website:

  • posted at 3:26 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: I don't know what else to say. I could either give up, or steal the image and make my own website with an arrow pointing at it. It is in good focus.

    Perhaps it takes an eye for details on aerospace hardware.

    Did you look on the right side of the fuselage, along the right, bottom edge, starting at the leading edge of the wing?

  • posted at 2:27 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    I saw the picture but I don't see a pod.

  • posted at 2:23 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: I was asking if you saw that thing mounted onto the side of an aircraft, would you board it?

  • posted at 2:22 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: If you can't find Boomer's picture, do a text search through this page for "popular mechanics".

  • posted at 2:21 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: Perhaps you entered late. Everybody is pretending nothing is strapped onto the side of the aircraft in Boomer's picture. A 6-foot diameter x 25-foot length aerodynamic hemispherical pod is mounted onto the starboard side of the aircraft. Beginning at the leading edge of the right wing, it extends about 10 feet aft of the nose.

    A tiny source of white light can be seen at the leading edge of the pod.

    I have my own ideas of how this whole system is integrated, and how it works, but I don't think this crowd could cope with life if I told them.

  • posted at 1:23 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Daniel, you asked me whether I would board the aircraft in the picture. There was not pod on that aircraft. If you want to ask me about a some other real or imaginary aircraft go ahead. I was speaking about the aircraft that crashed into the Twin Towers on 9/11

  • posted at 1:15 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    What pod? I don't see any pod?

  • posted at 12:32 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Let's see how many games people can play, to avoid the fact that their own photograph shows that the air vehicle was not carrying any passengers:
    1) Refuse to answer questions or participate in the discussion until Leonard returns from vacation.
    2) Don't look at the photo. Change the line of questioning to something else.
    3) State that a conclusion cannot be made from the photograph, except by reference to a qualified aerospace engineer. (Even if the person they are addressing is such a qualified aerospace engineer, they can pretend he is not qualified because they dont like his qualified conclusions.)
    4) Deny a human instinct not to accept a suitcase from a stranger if it ticks.
    2) After a prosecution introduces exhibit A into court, the prosecution challenges the defense for its authenticity. They lack the intelligence to see that it is their own photograph.
    3) Deny the fact that they are doing their own internet research to find another photograph, in hopes that they can find one that does not have the same strap-on pod.
    4) Learn Photoshop to remove the strap-on pod, to generate another photograph.
    5) So occupy the conversation with insanity, so as to avoid presentation of additional eye-witness testimony of the aircraft having no windows.

  • posted at 12:07 pm on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: You're playing games by changing the question. I'm asking you if you saw that pod strapped onto the side of the aircraft, would you board it?

  • posted at 11:00 am on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Knowing that the plane was about to be hijacked by Al Queda murderers and crashed into a building, would I board the plane?

    Heck no!

  • posted at 5:25 am on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: Would you board that aircraft?

  • posted at 5:21 am on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    nylodian: The prosecution cannot challenge the defense on the authenticity of its own photo.

  • posted at 1:49 am on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    Daniel: I'm well aware of who provided the picture. Again, if you're so sure it's a pod, missle, radar, whatever and NOT the credible explanation Boomer posted, PROVE it's not a doctored photo. Meanwhile, I'll be spending my time focusing on something more useful.

  • posted at 12:26 am on Tue, Jan 8, 2008.


    They had to strap the radar to the side because they never could have fit it under the avionics cone at the front of the plane... with all the other radar.

    This story just doesn't make any sense. Occams Razor tells us that the simplest answer is almost always the best answer and, based on that, I am with Boomer on this one.

  • posted at 11:48 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    joemonty, John Galt, NYC_Subway Rat: Thank you for your references to Americas monetary system, and NAFTA.

  • posted at 11:46 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    nylodian: Popular Mechanics provided the photo.

  • posted at 11:44 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Boomer: It's probably a radar device. Radar would be required to have a line-of-sight view of its target. If that can't be achieved in the nose of the aircraft, it could be strapped onto the side as a pod, like you see in the photo.

  • posted at 11:38 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Boomer: I trust my own eyes. Instead of asking someone if there is a pod strapped on the side of the fuselage, just look at the picture. It's a high quality image.

  • posted at 10:38 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.



  • posted at 9:00 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    danielh: continued from Popular Mechanics "When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching." So much for your "pod" theory.

  • posted at 8:55 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    danielh: From the Popular Mechanics article: "After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels."

  • posted at 12:06 pm on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Brian typed: As long as people are being born and growing up and entering the workforce it would be counterproductive to go back to gold or silver standard.

    To paraphrase Brian - fiat money is good as long as we are alive.

    Brian, This is a riduculous economic argument for the purpose of the Federal Reserve.

    Anyways, I found a quote from Bernanke on the federal reserve web site in which Bernanke says the Fed caused the Great Depression. I had to check it out myself, and sure enough it is in a Bernanke speech on their web site.

    It's amazing! The Federal Reserve chief admits they caused the Great Depression.

    Check it out.

    "Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry."

    Thank you.

  • posted at 11:58 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Brian, covert operations and torture are two seperate issues.

    "Torture is an issue for many governments. Our covert military operations are very effective."

    John McCain had experience with torture. Maybe you can do some research McCain's disagreement with using torture.

    Thank you.

  • posted at 11:46 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Google Ron Paul to learn more. I may not agree with all of his positions. But, I do agree with most! The IRS is out of control, have you done your own taxes lately? Public schools are dumbing down our kids. Tolls are being placed on our roads. 35,000 new laws are passed each year noting each law takes a little freedom from someone. We have 85% of all the attorneys in the entire WORLD! A 8 year old is getting sued for snow skiing in Colorado. Emergency rooms are closing because most of the accounts are "general delivery" and uncollectable. Inflation is running wild with food and gas going up each day. And, there is someone out there that doesn't think we need Ron Paul?

  • posted at 11:40 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Daniel: So who was I quoting, exactly?Here's my very own thought that, believe it or not, I was able to come up on my own and I didn't even get dizzy: PROVE the "missle" you see isn't digitally added by some nut trying to mislead the public.

  • posted at 11:20 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    nylodian: If you were told to board an airplane that had a 30-foot long bomb strapped onto the side of it, I think you'd be smart enough to know that it's not an airplane.

  • posted at 11:19 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    nylodian: The image is in excellent focus. If you can't look at the picture, and analyze what is shows, then you cannot defend your position. All you can do is quote people that have your same unjustified opinion. Maybe you can make a deal with someone, and you can quote each other.

  • posted at 8:04 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Vote "Yes" Ron Paul.
    Say "No" to the NAFTA Super Highway.

  • posted at 4:05 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Brian: I think that is an excellent analogy. Folks like Daniel look for the grain of sand that is inconsistent with the rest of the beach and then conclude that there is no beach.

  • posted at 2:30 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Nylodian, This is exactly how conspiracy theory works. They look for that grain of sand that is inconsistent with the rest of the beach to expand their theory. Not that their aren't conspiracies. It's how far some go to debunk an indesputable truth in a given situation.

  • posted at 1:24 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    I have a conspiracy theory of my own and know I will get grief for it, but I think it is possible that some Republicans fear the appeal of Ron Paul and are responsible for attaching the 9/11 conspiracy theories to him. I believe he would take more votes from Republicans than Democrats if he became a third-party candidate.

  • posted at 1:16 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Daniel: I did look at it and I am able to admit that I have no expertice on airplanes other than flying to visit Lodi a couple times a year. My point on matrixing and this photo was that given your preexisting views, if it was possible you were viewing the photo looking to find (and possibly misidentifying) something within it to fit you theories.

  • posted at 1:00 am on Mon, Jan 7, 2008.


    Dnielh wrote: The JBS source is of the opinion that terrorists attacked the WTC. However, it is their position that the govt had full knowledge of the attacks, in advance, and took steps to assure that the attacks would actually succeed. I am hoping someday that we can put our two versions together and come to a common understanding. "

    Danielh, It's apparent you feel your theory could be welcomed by the JBS.
    And on that note, you share many of the sentiments the JBS has on 9/11. It's quite obvious you consider yourself a spokesperson for the JBS.

  • posted at 5:35 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Leonard: You may be laughing, but you are validating my work. Thank you very much!

  • posted at 1:14 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    ROTFLMAO!!! Danni wants to negotiate with the JBS to come up with a common conspiracy theory! This is brilliant. Our boy actually wants to form a conspiracy to fabricate a conspiracy.

  • posted at 1:08 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    I can't speak for Brian but the point, as I see it, is that the JBS is the National Enquirer of political organizations.

  • posted at 1:00 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Brian: What's your point? I just said that my theory is different than theirs.

  • posted at 12:34 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    The John Birch Society's reputation precedes them. They have a great amount of experience in concocting conspiracy theories.

  • posted at 12:23 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Boomer: You endorsed a reference to Popular Mechanics, and I responded. In a meaningful discussion, you can at least look at your own photograph and see the pod mounted on the side of the aircraft, in a photograph that you endorsed.

    I am saying that passengers don't board aircraft that look like that.

    I am well aware of the 1993 bombing. As I was in the US Navy in 1993, I don't recall how I learned of the bombing. I recall reading a scary story about how a terrorist intended to destroy the main support columns within the parking garage below the building.

    Subsequently, when I joined the JBS, they identified the terrorist that coodinated the plot. Occasionally, they update the story with their latest findings on either the whereabouts of this terrorist, or how the government has allowing him to go free.

    The JBS source is of the opinion that terrorists attacked the WTC. However, it is their position that the govt had full knowledge of the attacks, in advance, and took steps to assure that the attacks would actually succeed. I am hoping someday that we can put our two versions together and come to a common understanding.

  • posted at 12:07 pm on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Boomer: Actually, the 93 attacks happened long before I moved to NYC but you are absolutely right. We are at war with radical Islam and the fact that fellow traveler's like Danni insist on spreading nauseating propaganda for the enemy makes me sick. I am all for Free Speech but one does wonder exactly how much aid and comfort these sorts of lies provide the enemy.

  • posted at 11:59 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    danielh: So if Bin Laden isn't responsible for 9/11, who tried to blow up the Twin Towers in 1993 with a truck bomb? The FACT of the matter is Bin Laden was responsilbe for both attacks. You probably don't remember the 1993 attack, but Leonard should.

  • posted at 11:55 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Chuckle... make that "were not".

  • posted at 11:54 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Danni: The verb in the sentence is "is". Apparently, language and syntax was not part of your alleged course of study.

  • posted at 11:53 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    nylodian: No worries. I hope that what you said about matrixing will give Daniel some food for thought. As I said before, I really do believe that, in his heart of hearts, he knows that the terrible things he says are lies but, sadly, he seems to be controlled by some sort of compulsion which he is unable to control.

  • posted at 11:51 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    nylodian: Did you go back and look at Boomer's reference and see the features of the photo that I pointed out?

  • posted at 11:50 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Boomer: If you want learn if foxes are eating the chickens, don't ask a fox. I responded to your previous post.

  • posted at 11:49 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Leonard: Incomplete sentence. Finish with a verb please.

  • posted at 11:33 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Danni: As far as I can see, you have only claimed credentials. I can see no evidence that you ever actually earned them and, frankly, given the atrocious lies you have told on this forum, I am not inclined to believe a word that you say.

  • posted at 11:31 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Danni: The fact that I lived through 9/11, the fact that I knew people who were in the towers when the planes hit, the fact that I knew people who were down the street when they fell, the fact that I know what I am talking about while you are utterly without a clue is entirely relevant.

  • posted at 9:33 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    The History Channel is running a program titled "The 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction". It's on now on satellite, it will probably be on at 5PM local time on cable. It a good job debunking most of the 9/11 myths.

  • posted at 9:23 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    nylodian: Oh! You live in NY. Looks like you know more about Rochester's weather than me.

  • posted at 9:21 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    nylodian: OK. Nope. I know what I see in the pictures. The photograph in Boomer's reference clearly shows a modified aircraft. Perhaps you are "matrixing" it into a passenger airliner.

  • posted at 9:14 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Leonard: my heart goes out to you having to witness such horror. I have always respected your posts regarding 9/11, and by questioning Daniel, I wasn't legitimizing his views nor making light of the tragedy which affected (and still affects) many of my friends here in NY.

  • posted at 9:11 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    ...and I hope that I never need authenticate my credentials again.

    Particularly, I recall a few people making jokes about them. That is OK, because they can't take my degrees away from me, and because it shows that I am important.

    People like Ron Paul get debated, and I was aware of him 3 years ago. Conversely, I never heard of Huckabee until people started voting for him for president.

    If a person never gets criticized, they aren't trying to inspire anybody for new thinking.

  • posted at 9:07 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    In regards to personal stuff: I was asked to qualify myself. Specifically, I was asked if I had credentials, and if I had personal experience with the conspiracy.

    The only personal stuff was the reference to weather in Rochester.

  • posted at 9:06 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Daniel: in regard to bias, I meant a bias towards an idea, or belief. Matrixing is phenomena where the human brain wants to process meaningless shapes into something it recognizes. In many claimed "ghost" photographs, believers in the paranormal see a face where in reality the shape is caused by light and shadow. Or a religious person may see the Virgin in a knot on a wooden fence.

  • posted at 9:03 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Leonard: The fact that you were in NYC on 9/11 doesn't mean that your beliefs about the situation are correct.

  • posted at 6:39 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Lodian: I took no offense at your post. What I was trying to say was that, while I normally try to stick to the issues, the presentation of a such a diseased point of view as Daniel's demands an analysis of the reasons behind it.

  • posted at 6:27 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Leonard: I agree with your comments. My comment about this board getting too personal was regarding danielh as he posted a lot of personal information about himself. I just thought that was reminiscent of the poster " real facts".

  • posted at 6:17 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    Leonard: I had no idea you had experienced 9/11 so closely. I can't even begin to imagine what that must have been like.

  • posted at 4:19 am on Sun, Jan 6, 2008.


    To be fair to Daniel, I believe that in his heart of hearts, he knows that the terrible things he says are lies. It is obvious to me that this man suffers from some pretty serious problems that drive him to deny the perceived truth on any and all issues.

    In many ways, I pity the man but I can not allow my compassion to cloud the duty I feel to condemn these outrageous lies.

  • posted at 10:08 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    To some people, this is all a game. Nothing is real to them. They can spout nonsense about 9/11 all day and night, just like they do about JFK, Elvis and the space aliens. What they don't understand is that real people died on that day.

    This is not a game. It is not an amusing pass time to fill the empty hours of an otherwise meaningless life. This is a real event that happened to real people and those people who lost their lives deserve to be acknowledged and accorded respect.

    People like Daniel are no better than Rev Phelps and the protesters who attack the grieving family members at military funerals.


  • posted at 10:02 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Lodian: I lived in New York on 9/11. I heard the second plane fly overhead, I stood by as coworkers watched their spouses die on TV. I breathed the incinerated remains of the victims. The minute someone starts espousing an obscene position like Daniel's, things get very personal for me.

    I have to admit that I am appalled to see otherwise decent posters legitimate such revolting nonsense.

  • posted at 5:43 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Why is this board getting so personal? I'm having flashbacks of "real facts". UGH!

  • posted at 3:33 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Leonard: This is just another one of your games. You know you're guilty. In boldface print, it says "Leonard." If you change your UserID, that would be different.

    Additionally, I don't care if LNS deletes my statements to you. I wouldn't be insulted.

  • posted at 3:30 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: If I ever wanted to become a politican, I might have trouble getting campaign donations from special interest groups that benefit from global warming. For politicians in higher offices, their cooperation with GW might be required. McNerney is a huge example of that.

  • posted at 3:28 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: Regarding: "reinforce a previous conclusion formed under a bias."

    In bias, usually a person has some sort of conflict of interest.

    My salary is low, and unconnected to anything that I promote. I also don't hold any kind of political power.

    Conversely, global warming politics is driven by a lot of political power, which is better than money. That is where the bias lies.

    One reason I am able continuously to oppose political pseudo-science is because of my having nothing to lose. Nobody can threaten to take my salary or contract away from me.

  • posted at 3:22 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: Rochester wasn't my home, but it broke my heart to leave some friendships out there.

  • posted at 3:21 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: And you are not kidding about Rochester. In addition to regular snowfall in the surrounding areas, they get extra moisture off of Lake Ontario because the circular air flow around a low pressure zone, brings extra moisture off the lake.

    I have been into the Sierras in the dead of winter, but never on a daily basis.

    In Rochester, we had 0-degrees, but with blistering wind. Wind chill was -45 degrees, for about a week.

    One time I flew through Chicago, and the temperature was -70 degrees. I got off the airplane and walked through the tunnel. It was just about that cold inside the tunnel.

    Police stopped all cars, asking them what was their emergency that necessitated their driving.

  • posted at 3:15 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: I am not familiar with "matrixing." If you are referring to some manipulation of the photograph, it wouldn't make sense for Popular Mechanics to change the photograph, because they are arguing that the "air vehicle" is a hyjacked airliner. If they altered the photograph, they certainly would not want to disguise the airliner as a missile.

  • posted at 2:27 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Daniel: I bet you don't miss January in Rochester. It was -2 around these parts a couple days ago.

  • posted at 2:24 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Daniel: I give you props with your science credentials, whether or not I agree with your views. I am still left to wonder if it is possible that you may be using your scientific knowledge to to reinforce a previous conclusion formed under a bias. As for your comment to Boomer and the photograph in Popular Mechanics: are you familiar with the phenomena of "matrixing"?

  • posted at 2:20 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Daniel: What part of "Your Exalted and Serene Majesty Leonard the Great" don't you understand?

  • posted at 1:54 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Leonard: I haven't seen any of my old friends for 15 years.

  • posted at 1:53 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Boomer: In your website http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html,

    excellent photography reveals that it is not a hyjacked aircraft.

    If you look on the starboard side of the forward fuselage, you'll see an extra cigar-shaped pod mounted onto it. It begins at the leading edge of the right wing, and runs alongside almost to the pilot area. This feature is conclusive.

    My further suspicions of the rear fuselage would not survive a jury, if it were the only piece of evidence by itself. But, since the forward section of the aircraft is conclusive, I will take liberties of saying that the rear fuselage has a double-cylinder cross-section, not circular.

  • posted at 1:37 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Ivan Dixon: Does Italy use the caribinieri to protect the government from its citizens? I don't spend very much time studying Italy.

  • posted at 1:29 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Brian: I'd be happy to answer your question, but first, can you tell me one difference between the SS, and Homeland Security/Patriot Act.

    If you want to say genocide, let me also ask, can Homeland Security not satisfy the same objective as the SS, if it does not commit genocide?

    So, what's the difference?

  • posted at 1:23 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: The only problem with asking me if I would be willing to consider the opposite side of my arguments and theories is that I used to have the opposite opinion, just like you.

  • posted at 1:22 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: When I was mentioning "thermite" and Newton's 2nd Law of physics, I knew what I was talking about.

    Personally, about 20 times, I have mixed my own private mixture of thermite, and set it off just for good show. In terms of safety, I know full well that it has burned a person's hand "off." It burns at 6000 deg-F, in about 1 second. I also know that my own private blow torch will not ignite the mixture. In fact, I am so certain that I know the behavior of thermite that I am not afraid accidental ignition when I hit it with a blow torch (temperature of burning jet fuel). I have to use my blow torch to ignite the fuse, which is very close to the mixture.

    I can recite the temperatures of the WTC situation.

  • posted at 1:21 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Danni: ROTFLMAO!!!! Is that why you are spouting all this nonsense about global climate change??? Its all because you are trying to get a job with Big Oil??? Literally LOL!!! As I was saying on the subject of credibility.....

  • posted at 1:19 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Danni: As I am sure you noted, I specifically requested that, when addressing me, you use the moniker "Your Exalted and Serene Majesty Leonard the Great". Seeing that you have not afforded me this basic courtesy, I have no choice but to request that the censors delete your offensive posts.

  • posted at 1:15 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: By personal experience of 6 years employment at Space Systems/Loral, in Palo Alto, CA, I witnessed from the sidelines of a scandal in the Clinton administration, and it affects America's security with staggering consequences.

    Thanks to the Clinton and G.H.W. Bush (Sr) administrations, both of their justice departments, and engineering treason from Space Systems/Loral, in Palo Alto, CA, the Chinese advanced their nuclear delivery technology, and they obtained sensitive cryptology codes for commanding our military space satellites.

    Clinton's tolerance for this compromise in America's security, is nothing short of treason. Additionally, Clinton's acceptance of Chinese cash in his political campaign, and in the Clinton library, constitutes bribery. These are the real reasons why he should have been impeached. Basically, the House's reduction of charges down to "lying to a federal grand jury" assured that Clinton would never be impeached for bribery and treason, and the senate would reduce the charges down to sexual dysfunction.

    You may recall that Space Systems/Loral gave its finest engineering expertise on some problems to the Chinese Long March II Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. If you are talking to Loral, ICBM is not politically-correct. You are supposed to say "space launch vehicle (SLV)." SLV's are used to launch INTELSAT-VII satellites. Nuclear warhead delivery is easier than SLV engineering. Hence, Loral provided critical engineering for China's nuclear delivery capability.

    If you are talking to the Chinese, 20 of these ICBM's are fitted with America's finest technology in MIRV'd nuclear warheads, capable of targetting with USA/Loral accuracy any target within the USA.

    I visited my friends at Loral after a launch failure, and we talked about their experience which resulted in China stealing a cryptology code box from a Loral satellite.

  • posted at 1:12 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Danni: I have never said that you were gay and I am not entirely sure why you keep bringing the concept up over and over and over and over again.

  • posted at 1:10 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Danni: I have absolutely no idea what your age or gender is since I have never met you in person. You say that you are a man in your 40s and, for the sake of argument, I am hesitantly willing to take you at your word.I have to say, however, that each time you spout an obvious lie about 9/11 or global warming the value of your word deteriorates.

  • posted at 1:00 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: If you note my credentials, you could observe that I am qualified to advance in my career into the oil companies, where I would just disappear, and noone in the middle class or lower class would ever hear from me again.

    I am not exaggerating to say that my personal values against big business is precisely what kept me out of oil companies for which I am qualified by my scientific knowledge and engineering talent.

    I denied myself a career path that was baited by extreme salaries, on account of moral values against big business.

    If this does not earn me some respect, it certainly does demonstrate my personal values.

  • posted at 12:52 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    nylodian: I appreciate your asking me to fess-up with my credentials. I have a B.S. Chemical Engineering from UC Davis. Additionally, I have a M.S. Chemical Engineering from University of Rochester.

    In my M.S. degree, I had option A, which requires a research project, a thesis, and a defense. I had a board of 5 professors who read my thesis, heard my public defense, and approved my degree.

    I am quite qualified to distinguish philosophy and politics from true scientific method. Accordingly, in any scientific claim, I can classify it, and if it truly is science, I can determine if the conclusion is supported by the experiment.

    If a subject is science, but lacks a scientific control, which is often the case in medicine, I can at least observe controversies, even if not understanding them completely, as would be the case in medicine or dentistry. In medicine, it is unethical to inform a critically ill patient that they are involved in a scientific experiment, and then treat them as a control or give them placebos, without notification, if they have a terminal illness.

    In the case of global warming, which is not science at all, any scientific experiment would need to address a control for comparison. This is difficult, but if it's not discussed, it's not science.

  • posted at 12:41 pm on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Leonard: You are a master at acting ignorant of facts. You know darn well that my gender is male, and my marriage, happily, is with a woman. I do not appreciate nor will I allow myself to be addressed as either gay or female.

    I have never complained, not ever, when you addressed me at an inferior age. It is irritating, but I just consider the source, and I continue communications. You have had more than a clue about my age. You do know that I am at least of age to be a military veteran, and also add enough years to have a graduate degree.

    If you want better respect, you might try addressing me as an adult, no matter how much you object to my posts and my letters, and certainly, you will address me as a male gender.

  • posted at 7:10 am on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Lots of countries have internal security forces. In Italy, they have the Carabinieri. In Spain they have the Polica Nacional. In the US we have the Department of Homeland Security. In Nazi Germany, they had the SS. How these forces behave is what distinguishes them from one another. The Carbinieri are incompetent bumblers. The SS were murderous monsters of incomparable barbarism.

  • posted at 1:53 am on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    It is the ACLU's intention to smear the Homeland Security Act based on insinuations that it is the American form of the German SS. POPPYCOCK!!!

  • posted at 1:50 am on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Though the Homeland Security Act has endangered First and Fourth Amendment rights and weakened more than a dozen privacy laws, the Act's sponsors contend that the post-9/11 climate justifies these intrusions, because, according to one Republican congressman, "The President needs the freedom and flexibility to protect the Homeland."

    I seriously doubt we are are at risk
    of getting marshall law in this country.
    I cannot stress enough the significance of the last sentence in paragraph above.
    It is the ACLU's intention to smear the Homeland Security Act based on insinuations that it is the American form of the German SS. POPPYCOCK!!!

  • posted at 1:35 am on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Danielh, The formation of the German SS is equivalent to Americas formation of Homeland Security?

    Readers Beware! Danielh takes his views very seriously even though Ron Paul would probably be committed to an insane asylum if he were to share this view.

  • posted at 12:56 am on Sat, Jan 5, 2008.


    Daniel: I am asking this with all sincerity and respect: are you able to take a step back and take an unbiased look at the evidence that refutes the conspiracy theories? Can you at least acknowledge that you appear to have a bias that leans towards these theories in the first place? Finally, what scientific degrees or credentials do you hold that make you more of an authority than the other bloggers here?

  • posted at 11:51 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    danielh: I know you won't beleive this article but the March 2005 cover story of Popular Mechanics debunked the myths about a government conspiracy. popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html? I present these FACTS to the rest of the readers so they can see for themselves how off base you are on this issue.

  • posted at 10:53 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Danni: I stand by my earlier post. I violated no policy, my use of the diminutive was not libelous, it did not constitute damaging innuendo, it was not profane, explicit or racist, it did not constitute a personal attack, an insult or a threat and it certainly did not represent an attempt on my part to use another person's real name or to disguise my own identity. If you have any questions about these facts, please review the comment rules.

  • posted at 10:52 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Danni: I have absolutely no idea what your actual age, gender, race or hair color might be so I don't see how I could change any of those things. This is the internet, my oversensitive friend, and everything is taken on credit.

  • posted at 10:48 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Danni: Chuckle.... well, in that case, I am putting you on notice that I expect you, from this day forward, to address me as "Your Exalted and Serene Majesty Leonard the Great". I will consider any posts that do not include this salutation to be both disrespectful and insulting and I will DEMAND that they be deleted on the same grounds that you have asked for my posts to be deleted.

  • posted at 5:17 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Boomer and nylodian:
    1)I was born in the USA (5th-generation Woodbridgian-Lodian), and my objective are to uphold the US Constitution.

    2)On scientific grounds, I can defend any aspect of the theory, and in 15 seconds, I was able to convince a former ATF agent of the same. The theory is based upon the presence of thermite at the scene, the dynamics of the failure, the melting point of iron, and a very large body of corroborating evidence from eye witness survivors, and film. Moreover, there has not been a public trial or hearing to report the evidence. YouTube reporting is excellent.

    3)This topic is of extreme importance because it identically resembles Adolf Hitlers false flag attack against his own Reich building. The German emotions that followed resulted in a unified German endorsement for their leader, and the dissolution of German Parliament. The formation of the German SS is equivalent to Americas formation of Homeland Security.

    4)I am willing to concede that it was the Israeli Mossad, in collaboration with insider Americans; but, I cannot perceive why they would do it. It appears that there werent any Jewish victims inside the WTC, and Israeli spectators flew to NYC to witness the attacks. I also have some additional information on the Mossad acting in other parts of the world. It was very bad.

    5)Barbara Walters: I think it was on 9/12 that The View commenced programming to encourage Americans to surrender their inalienable rights. The women discussed their willingness to carry a National ID to combat terrorism. Barbara Walters is a member of the Council on foreign Relations*, of which National IDs is within the scope of their agenda.

    6)Within 1 week, Bush lied to the American people when he presented the Hart-Rudmann Act to the American people. He stated that it was prepared because of the attacks, whereas he did not reveal that Senators Hart and Rudmann had drafted the legislation two years prior to the attacks. Neither did Bush mention how the Hart-Rudmann Act would establish an elaborate system for government to spy on its own citizens.

    7)Rosie ODonnell: I was amazed at what she said about 9/11, but I still dont like her anyway.

    * The hidden agenda of the CFR is revealed by the purpose of its creation when President Wilson received word of the Senates rejection of the League of Nations.

  • posted at 4:30 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Leonard: ...cont: accordingly, I am asking LNS to delete your Jan 4, 2008 5:18 PM post as well.

  • posted at 4:12 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Leonard: I told the LNS that you and I have had this discussion already 6 months ago, and you were posting a conversation with Mr. Hanner in this regards as well. Hence it is not like you have not been notified.

    Whether I get an appology or not, I am not going to give you permission to address me as such. I have a userID, and you can use it. I will also accept DH, or Daniel. If you make up anything else, it might be OK if it does not pertain to disrespectful innuendos, or change of age or gender.

  • posted at 1:28 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    I watched Ron Paul on Bill Moyer's Journal on PBS tonight at 9pm EST. Check the listings if you're interested.

  • posted at 1:24 pm on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Boomer: Daniel isn't making this stuff up - Rosie O'Donnell has claimed the same thing, and we all know how level-headed and credible she is LOL. All kidding aside, yes, Daniel, you will find some scientists (who perhaps subscribe to certain agendas) to back the conspiracy theories. However, there many other credible scientists who have disproved those same theories.

  • posted at 11:19 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Boomer: Your post is right on the money.

  • posted at 11:18 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Danni: If you are expecting an apology from me, you will be waiting an awful long time. I violated no policy, my use of the diminutive was not libelous, it did not constitute damaging innuendo, it was not profane, explicit or racist, it did not constitute a personal attack, an insult or a threat and it certainly did not represent an attempt on my part to use another person's real name or to disguise my own identity.

    Thus, according to the rules of this forum, it must have been deleted by accident. I fully expect that, once they realize their error, the censors will repost the blog in question.

  • posted at 10:10 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Brian: Ron Paul will end up doing better than Rudy Giuliani in the Republican Primaries, but neither one will get the nomination. You and I do agree on one thing, 9/11 was not a government conspiracy. Some people can't understand just how much Bin Laden and his followers hate us. (I think Daniel is just starting to make things up to suit his positions)

  • posted at 9:27 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Leonard: No appologies, and not interested in your psych.

  • posted at 9:01 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    So... I'm guessing everyone's power is off? I'm working off of batteries and cellular this afternoon. Deadlines are deadlines, however and they don't care about local storms overseas.

  • posted at 6:48 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    I personally think Ron Paul is gaining support because of the general dissatisfaction voters feel about the choices of candidates from either party. Not that that makes him a good candidate either. I don't plan on voting for him, but I'd pick him over Huckabee.

  • posted at 6:43 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Brian: first you posted: "Fox News sees Ron Paul for what he is. A kook. I am confident Rudy will get the nomination"... Then later you posted: "Given a choice between Paul and Hillary, I would vote for Paul. Bill's sexual addiction and Hillary's compulsive enabling would again be a dangerous combination"... If that's such a key issue in your voting, how is it you're okay with Rudy, who cheated on his wife and used taxpayer's money to cart at least one mistress around, with getting the nomination (which is not very likely))?

  • posted at 5:56 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    CENSORS: I am a little confused about the rules here. Should I understand that, if I wish to reference another poster, I must write out their ENTIRE blogname or risk having my post deleted? Will this be a consistent rule on these blogs? Will any post that fails to reference another posters ENTIRE blogname be deleted or will it only be posts that the blogger in question disagrees with?

    It seems to me that some posters here are using the pretext that their blogname has been abbreviated to get posts which, by force of argument, make them look foolish deleted.

  • posted at 5:52 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    DH: Man... you are SUCH a baby! If you want to play with the big boys you need to follow the big boys rules. That means, no running to the censors to get posts deleted just because they happen to make you look foolish. You need to grow up, my friend.

  • posted at 5:35 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Leonard: Notification: I do complain when you change my blogname, or my birth name, and that was me that complained this time.

  • posted at 4:17 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    This is, perhaps, Paul's biggest handicap. No matter how much money he may raise on the internet, the core of his support base remains homeless camps, mental hospitals and the John Birch Society, none of which endear him to mainstream voters. The more guys like Danni support him, the less educated and informed voters are likely to listen.

  • posted at 4:09 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Ron Paul has been even more explicit language than I have here in his condemnation of the so called "9/11 Truther" movement.

  • posted at 3:28 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Leonard: You are not qualified to know what I "need to learn." If I am ever impressed by your demonstration of God's gifts, I will ask you for your opinion. At present, I don't want what you have.

    You don't know what is "disgusting language" because it is acceptable to you.

    In your vacation absense, while we were having a conversation.

    If you don't want to know what is my opinion about 9-11, then don't ask, and certainly, don't express your opinion about my theory in the middle of the conversation where I was involved.

    As for Ron Paul having a contrary opinion, notice that I didn't take it personally. I am not offended. I am also grateful for nylodian giving me the advice of his statements.

    Additionally, I am not going to change my theory, which I have based upon scientific forensic analysis, because a politician makes a statement to the contrary. That is how poeple get into political quagmires.

    Instead, I will look for an opportunity to discuss my theory with one of Ron Paul's friends, and there is a good chance that I will have a 5-minute conversation with one of them within the next couple of years.

  • posted at 1:56 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Brian: Given the choice between Hillary and any other Democrat candidate, I would vote for the other candidate. Hillary's compulsive enabling of George W. Bush and his campaign to destroy America has left a stain on her that that beats any Monica ever found.

  • posted at 1:54 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Brian: With any luck, given last nights results, Hillary will not be the nominee. As for Paul, beating Giuliani hardly makes him a contender. I don't think anyone other than Daniel's crowd actually thinks the guy has a snowball in hell's chance of winning a single state. My educated guess is that the GOP nominee will either be Huckabee or McCain.

  • posted at 12:50 am on Fri, Jan 4, 2008.


    Given a choice between Paul and Hillary, I would vote for Paul.
    Bill's sexual addiction and Hillary's compulsive enabling would again be a dangerous combination when partnered with the power of the presidency if the Hildabeast became president.

  • posted at 10:41 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Daniel: You need to learn that everything that is "offered" is not necessarily true.

  • posted at 10:40 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Daniel: I am not sure what you mean by "disgusting language". Is it the word "garbage" that you object to? Honestly, I was being generous when I chose to use that word.

    In any case, I am not quite sure what this all has to do with Ron Paul who also dismisses your position as nonsense.

  • posted at 9:03 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Leonard: I have a policy of not classifying people, but there is a concept that you don't understand. Some people take what they like and leave the rest. You're not one of those people. You seem to be a person who will bend and pull on the outside world until it is shaped to your expectations. That doesn't do you any good.

    As such, you miss a lot of offerings.

  • posted at 8:45 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Leonard: Your disgusting language speaks for yourself. I showed you that you ignored one law of physics, and a property of chemistry that follows the laws. There was no logic to debate. Instead, your ignorance took over, and your misplaced modifiers.

    Truth is: you can't cope.

  • posted at 12:55 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    WTF: I was looking at the NY Times which shows Paul leading Giuliani with 67% of the vote counted. Huckabee is in first place having whipped our friend with the funny underwear decisively.

  • posted at 12:42 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Leonard are you getting your poll numbers from the TV? If so, please let me know which channel. I'm surprised Ron Paul was even mentioned. I'm asking because I have that only 5.83% of the precincts have reported in. This is where I'm following the numbers.


  • posted at 12:33 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    I don't know much about Huckabee but Ann Coulter hates him so he must not be completely evil.

  • posted at 12:18 pm on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Well... as the polls stand right now with 25% of the precincts reporting, Ron Paul is getting twice as many votes in Iowa as Giuliani who is in dead last place.

  • posted at 9:52 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Daniel: I will not dignify your absurd position by debating you on this (9/11) issue.

    Your argument is garbage.

    End of story.

  • posted at 9:35 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Leonard: Ignorant, harsh language.

    1) you need a grammar check.

    2) "thermite" obeys the laws of chemistry. you can't argue with it.

    3) Newton's 2nd Law is a law. Ignorance will not escape you from it.

  • posted at 7:37 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Daniel: I don't always choose the lesser of two evils. On more than one occasion I have voted for fine candidates who I thought would do an excellent job. Occasionally, those candidates have even won. That's not to say that I haven't also voted for the lesser of two evils....

  • posted at 7:35 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    daniel: I have read all the lies, including those about thermite and I have concluded that they are just that, lies concocted to dupe the stupid and the ignorant along with folks like yourself who will believe any story, no matter how absurd, as long as it is contrary to popular opinion.

  • posted at 7:30 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Sorry, danielh, I don't have any information on them.

  • posted at 7:26 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Leonard: Did you look-up "thermite" before you scoffed at my statements?

  • posted at 7:22 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    wtf: Do you have any information of Mossad?

  • posted at 7:22 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    leonard: You wrote, "America could do much worse [than giuliani]." One of America's failings is the popular concept of choosing the least undesirable candidate between a choice of two that is "spun" by the news media.

    Voters think their own voice would be wasted if they express their own personal opinion at the polls.

    Actually, since I can remember (which started after Goldwater), candidates popularized by the news media were identical.

  • posted at 5:56 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Truth gets rubbery on the US presidential trail: fact-checkers


    Hmmmm....could be why RON PAUL has so much support - he tells the truth!

  • posted at 5:51 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    US Laments Kenya's Election Irregularities


    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! LOL!

  • posted at 5:02 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    "We need to send a message to Fox's Rupert Murdoch & his fellow Neocon buddies that...Fox News cannot just stifle public opinion, debate and impact a primary election by excluding Ron Paul just because they don't like his message of freedom and liberty."


  • posted at 4:57 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Here's FAUX News' latest lame excuse for excluding Ron Paul:


    However this is what's **really** going on behind the scenes:




    But the question is WHY?

    Rupert Murdoch and William Kristol: Using the Press to Advance ***Israel's*** Interests

    ISRAEL!!!???! What about the UNITED STATES?


    Rupert Murdoch is the owner for FAUX News. And then there's this:

    Pre-Iowa Israel Factor: We know Clinton, we want Clinton


    WHAT!!!???!? What does **Israel** have to do with the elections in the United States??!!? And note that Ron Paul isn't even on their list.

    And why is an Israeli Defense contractor counting the votes for a U.S. election?


    And why is Israel and the U.S. integrating their missile defense systems?


    Geez! I thought this was the UNITED STATES of AMERICA not a territory of Israel. Take our country back!


  • posted at 12:45 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Leonard: good to see you're back to comment here. Glad you enjoyed Santa Cruz - it's a beautiful place. Brian: I'm not sure about Rudy getting the nomination. I believe he's lost his post-9/11 luster for a lot of people.

  • posted at 12:37 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Brian: I do have to admit that Daniel's endorsement is not exactly warming Paul to my heart. I see that you are touting Giuliani. I lived in NYC when he was mayor and I would have voted for him for another term if he had run. That said, I wouldn't vote for him for President, but America could do much worse (indeed, we already have).

  • posted at 12:30 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    Daniel: Chuckle... if you are "merely seek out the truth", you sure are having a hard time finding it. This nonsense about 9/11 is pure garbage and anyone with a 3rd grade education and an open mind ought to be able to see that in a minute. In your case, I believe that it is the lack of an open mind that is getting in your way.

  • posted at 12:11 am on Thu, Jan 3, 2008.


    We can all rest easy knowing that if there is anyone else like Danielh cheering for Ron Paul he doesn't have a chance in hell. The media is right on by steering clear of Ron Paul. And I don't necessarily agree with the MSM in many cases.

  • posted at 8:14 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    RON PAUL 2008

  • posted at 2:50 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Leonard: As for 9/11, a false flag attack is a conspiracy all the way. If you want to accept the Bush Administration's position, your side of the argument has not had a public hearing.

    If you want to refute my side of the story, you have to take a look at "thermite" chemistry, and start looking at temperatures that are required to ignite thermite, and the melting point of iron and/or steel.

    Additionally, I suggest you take a look at Newton's Second Law.

    You can't say something is wrong with the conclusions without understanding these forensics.

    Finally, there is a large body of people in the scientific community who agree.

  • posted at 2:20 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Leonard: I am not addicted to "conspiracy theories," as people call them. I merely seek out the truth.

    I also have a sense to investigate authenticity and chase footnotes. I've done a lot of reading. I am here because I am trying to share with all "regular-class" people.

    The phrase "conspiracy" cannot be used because it requires the plan must be held secret. In this case, the plan to establish a NAU is public information. Moreover the intentions of (David?) Rockefeller to establish a New World Order is not a secret, openly declared in his book, "Memoires."

    Additionally, the Council on Foreign Relations makes no secret of its ententions to establish a NAU, although they lie about the means that they adopt to establish the NAU. Conversely, the architect of the NAU, Dr. Robert Pastor, was forced to admit under questioning to a plan to establish a North American "community."

  • posted at 1:57 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    I sure wish I'd thought of that one!

  • posted at 1:56 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Brian: Literally LOL!!! Did you think of that one yourself?

  • posted at 1:30 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Q: How many liberals does it take to distort the truth as a lie?

    A: 1000: one to think of it and 999 to pass it off as their own.

  • posted at 1:02 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Daniel: As for 9/11, I have seen the same so called "evidence" that you have and I simply don't find it credible. I don't think you are an idiot but I think your addiction to conspiracy theories clouds your vision.

  • posted at 12:56 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Daniel: Yes, I had a great vacation. My wifes brother lives over in Santa Cruz so we went down there and hung out for a week and a half. I walked on the beach in the mornings, in the Redwoods in the afternoons and drank great beer in the evenings. The place we rented had no internet (a purposeful decision on my part) so I didn't even know that Bhutto had been assassinated until I saw the paper. It was great!

  • posted at 12:52 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Leonard: We were also talking about the Federal Reserve, because Ron Paul would have it abolished if he had his way, along with the IRS.

  • posted at 12:50 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Fox News sees Ron Paul for what he is. A kook. I am confident Rudy will get the nomination. Hucky is running out of money. Mit has changed his position too much. McCain is too old. And Ron Paul isn't getting any media coverage.

  • posted at 12:45 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    http://www.hinzsightreport.com/kntr/ken-052007.html Here's my source Leonard. Before you make a kneejerk reaction you should read George Weigel's book "Faith, Reason, and the War Against Jihadism." Even you won't deny the agenda of radical Islam goes much deep that the overthrow of Iran's government in 1953 by the CIA.

  • posted at 12:33 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Leonard: Call me an idiot all you want, but you can't ever say that I take the word of my government as gospel. The entire govt has never conducted a public hearing on the evidence, and widows have legitimate questions. They forced Henry Kissinger to resign from the 9/11 commission, which wasn't any different than the Warren Commission.

  • posted at 12:30 pm on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Leonard: It looks like you had a good vacation. I'm glad. I was hoping that was why you were gone.

    FYI #1: I am no longer a conservative. I am a constitutionalist. I didn't read to the end of your joke, but I agree that "conservatives" are not conservative at all, and that they are more dangerous than liberals who give advance warning of their opinions.

    FYI #2: If you ever wanted to blame jbs for my opinion on 9/11, mine is contrary to theirs. In fact, they have a publication stating that there are basically some crazies out there who believe the pentagon was attacked with a missile.

    FYI #3: I'm going to disqualify one of your statements, because you just don't know. You said, "Islamic Terrorist Murderers." I am beginning to wonder if it was the Israeli Mossad. There is only some weak circumstantial evidence, and I don't have anything strong that I can hang my hat on.

    The evidence is indisputable. The WTC being an inside job, with missile decoys disguised as airliners.

  • posted at 11:55 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Daniel: I haven't read the whole blog but, if your views on 9/11 are the same as they were a month ago, then they are still preposterous garbage. The attacks on September 11, 2001 were carried out by Islamic Terrorist Murderers. ANYONE who says otherwise is either a liar or an idiot. Most likely, they are both.

  • posted at 11:52 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Q: How many conservatives does it take to tell a lie?

    A: 1,000: One to think of it and 999 to copy it and pass it off as their own.

  • posted at 10:03 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Brian: Do you have to get someone else to do your work for you? I told you there is evidence. Rather than challenge the evidence to show what is wrong with it, you merely, stated that it doesn't exist.

  • posted at 9:35 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Addendum: The numbers I cited from the AOL "spam proof" poll were from the state of Iowa only. According to this same poll, the numbers for the entire U.S. are:

    Paul 29%

    Huckabee 18%

    Giuliani 17%

    McCain 14%

    Romney 13%

    Thompson 8%

    Hunter 1%

  • posted at 9:31 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Ron Paul is not only a good choice; but, contrary to the pundits in the MSM, he could win the Iowa caucus. Not so far-fetched when you look at this Zogby article; especially the last paragraph:

    "The blind bio question was also posed to a larger pool of 1,009 likely voters nationwide, including Democrats and independents, and Paul was the big winner among that universe of voters, winning 33%, compared to 19% for Giuliani, 15% for Romney, and 13% for Thompson."


    Looking at the current numbers on AOL's "spam proof" straw poll, they are:

    Mike Huckabee 36%

    Ron Paul 33%

    Mitt Romney 13%

    Fred Thompson 7%

    John McCain 6%

    Rudy Giuliani 4%

    Duncan Hunter 1%


    And FAUX news isn't inviting Ron Paul to their debate because he's polling low? Hey! If you believe that, I have a bridge in the Mojave you might want to buy.

  • posted at 9:30 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Brian: Would you care to share with the class the source of the thoughts that you were trying to pass off as your own?

  • posted at 9:28 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Leonard, I am. However, my copy and pasting aren't going to earn me an F
    in a government class because I would not do it in school. I am guilty as are many other of copy and pasting. Now tell Danielh his position on 911 is kooky and without any evidence.

  • posted at 9:16 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    I had my suspicions regarding plagiarism also.

  • posted at 8:54 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Here's an excellent article on Ron Paul from the Christian Science Monitor. The audio link is particularly good.


  • posted at 8:40 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Brian: Happy New Year! Are you familiar with the concept of "plagiarism"?

  • posted at 8:36 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    One of the latest in a long line of crude attempts at controlling who we get to choose from for president, FAUX news has not invited Ron Paul to the debate on January 6, 2008.


    This appears to have been the wrong move as those with stock in the FAUX News Corp have started dumping their stock. Ron Paul supporters tend to put their money where their mouth is i.e., supporting Ron Paul with donations and not supporting those who are attempting to put this country into a fascistic lock-step with the Frat Boy In Chief and his ungodly band of thugs.


    Of course, there will be those apologists for this mess we call our current administration; most likely avid FAUX news viewers; those who only *think* they're informed. Too bad they don't know what the owner of FAUX news, Rupert Morlock, thinks about them.


  • posted at 8:00 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    nylodian: OK. I look forward to seeing it on YouTube.

  • posted at 6:10 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    danielh: I was talking about the interview aired LAST NIGHT and Beck asked Ron Paul DIRECTLY about 9/11 conspiracy theories (including a missle was launched at the towers, the planes were flied by remote, etc.), in which Ron Paul called them preposterous.

  • posted at 5:48 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Chuck Baldwin's article pretty much says it all....

    Who Are These Kooks?
    by Chuck Baldwin
    December 18, 2007

    According to the Associated Press, "Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul's supporters raised over $6 million Sunday to boost the 10-term congressman's campaign for the White House."

    The AP report also said, "The [Paul] campaign's previous fundraiser brought in $4.2 million."

    According to the Paul campaign website, "In a 24-hour period on December 16, the campaign raised $6.026 million dollars, surpassing the one-day record of $5.7 million held by John Kerry.

    "During the day, over 58,000 people contributed to Dr. Paul's campaign, including 24,940 first-time donors. Over 118,000 Americans have donated to the campaign in the fourth quarter.

    "The $6 million one-day total means the campaign has raised over $18 million this quarter, far exceeding its goal of $12 million."

    Now, if one listens to most of the political pundits in the major media, Ron Paul is some kind of "kook," and his supporters are also a bunch of "kooks." So, the question must be asked, Just who are these kooks that are supporting him, and why are they giving Ron Paul all this money?

    First, let's take a look at this "kook" who is receiving all this money. Ron Paul was born the third son of Howard and Margaret Paul, and was brought up with a work ethic in which one worked six days a week and went to church on Sunday. His first job was at age 5 helping his uncle wash bottles. He worked all the way through his youth mowing lawns, delivering newspapers, working in a drug store, delivering furniture and laundry, etc.

    In high school, Ron was a track star, winning state as a junior in the 220-yard dash and running 2nd in the 440. His time in the 100-yard dash was 9.8. That's pretty good. I was never able to break 10-flat in the 100. Although, I bet I could have beaten him in the 50-yard dash. He also wrestled in high school. Coincidentally, so did I. But here Ron leaves me: he was president of the student council and an honor student. I never accomplished that. I was just glad to get promoted to the next grade. Even as a senior statesman, Ron Paul keeps himself in terrific shape. Have you seen him lately? He still maintains a rigorous exercise regimen.

    Ron's two brothers are both ministers, and he became a medical doctor. He graduated from Duke University School of Medicine. When the Cuban Missile Crisis arose, Ron became a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force. He also served in the Air National Guard.

    As an OB/GYN physician, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies, and he and his wife, Carol, have been married for more than 50 years. They have 5 children, 18 grandchildren and 1 great-grandchild. Ron Paul is currently in his 10th term as a congressman from Texas.

    As a congressman, Ron Paul has never taken a government-paid junket. He is not accepting a government pension. He returns a portion of his office budget every year to the taxpayers. As a member of Congress, he has never voted a raise for himself. Do you know any other member of Congress that can make such a claim? Of course you don't, because Ron Paul is truly one-of-a-kind.

    Former President Ronald Reagan said this about Ron Paul, "Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."

    Perhaps this helps explain why many of the "kooks" supporting Ron Paul are active-duty military personnel. In fact, Ron Paul has received more campaign contributions from active-duty military personnel than any other Presidential candidate from either party.

    But who are the other "kooks" supporting Ron Paul? What kind of people give more than $18 million in a quarter-year to a Presidential candidate that is almost universally ignored by the mainstream press? What kind of people give record contributions to a Presidential candidate that is lampooned by his fellow Republican Presidential contenders?

    For example, Mike Huckabee recently said he could support any of the other Republican Presidential contenders (including Rudy Giuliani), except Ron Paul. That means, Mike Huckabee would rather support a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control liberal such as Giuliani than support the pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-Second Amendment candidacy of Ron Paul. Why is that?

    Furthermore, why are the entire major media and establishment Republican machine either ignoring or lampooning a distinguished Air Force veteran, medical doctor, and ten-term Congressman? What is it about Ron Paul that the elite are so afraid of?

    Here is something else: while Ron Paul's contributions have exploded, Mike Huckabee is all but broke! How can that be? How can a political "front-runner" be out of money, while a man who "doesn't have a chance" is breaking fundraising records?

    So, who are these "kooks" who are sending Ron Paul so much money? And just why are they sending him so much money? I will tell you who they are, because I am one of them. They are rank-and-file, tax-paying citizens who are sick and tired of out-of-control federal spending and deficits. They have had it with an arrogant federal government that runs roughshod over both the Constitution and the liberties of the American people. They are people who have had enough of the IRS, the BATFE, and a thousand other federal agencies that have "erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance." (Declaration of Independence)

    They are people who see through the phony, disingenuous federal politicians who only want to fleece the American citizenry for the purpose of building their own personal fortunes. They have had it with the Military-Industrial complex that desires to build international empires at the expense of the blood and sacrifice of the American people. They have had it with David Rockefeller and his Council on Foreign Relations. They have had it with the arrogance of George W. Bush and Nancy Pelosi.

    They are sick and tired of paying outlandish taxes for a public education system that produces high school graduates who cannot read and write. They are sick and tired of working for 30 years to pay off a mortgage, only then to be forced to pay extortion money (a.k.a. property taxes) for the rest of their lives to the feudal state. They are sick and tired of the government telling them what they can and cannot do with their own property. They are sick and tired of watching people with food stamps buy T-bone steaks and expensive Nike tennis shoes while they are forced to buy fatty hamburger and cheap sneakers.

    They are sick and tired of watching their manufacturing jobs go to China and India. They have had it with money-hungry businessmen who hire illegal Mexicans at slave labor wages. They have had it with labor unions promoting politicians who support NAFTA, CAFTA, and the FTAA. They are sick and tired of being bled dry at the gas pump.

    They have had it with this phony "war on terrorism" that sends trillions of dollars to nations throughout the Middle East, but refuses to close our own borders to illegal immigration. They have had it with the "war on drugs" and the "war on terror" being used as excuses to trample people's freedoms. They have it with Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderon. They have had it with Bush's North American Union. They have had it with Joel Osteen and Rick Warren. In short, they have just had it!

    They also know that a vote for any other Presidential candidate is a vote for more of the same. Democrat or Republican: it is more of the same. Ron Paul, and Ron Paul alone, will bring a revolution of freedom and independence to America. Believe me, the Ron Paul revolution is bigger than Ron Paul. This is the beginning of a movement.

    No matter what ultimately happens to Ron Paul's candidacy, the fight to return America to its roots of freedom and independence has started. The fire is lit. There is no putting it out. There will be other Ron Pauls, other campaigns, other spokesmen, other fundraising. The people supporting Ron Paul will not be silenced; they will not be ignored; they will not be intimidated. In truth, Ron Paul's campaign may just be the beginning of the end of the elitist, globalist, stranglehold over America.

    As one who is also fed up with the globalist goons that dominate the two major parties, I join the Ron Paul revolution and vow to fight for the rest of my life for the freedom and independence of these United States. This means I will never again support a business-as-usual, millionaires-club, globalist toady from either party ever again! I will only support candidates who are fully committed to restoring constitutional government. If that makes me a kook, so be it.


  • posted at 3:46 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Why is the controlled media so scared of RON PAUL?


    Ron Paul - An idea whose time has come


    Ron Paul Rising


  • posted at 3:19 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    nylodian: I watched " Ron Paul Interviewed By Glenn Beck on CNN 12-18-07." I can only agree that Glenn Beck tried to question Ron Paul on his belief in a domestic enemy; however, Ron Paul did not associate the question with 9/11.

  • posted at 2:43 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    danielh wrote: wtf: I am very concerned about the vote count. I think there is real potential to change the outcome of the election.

    I totally agree with you, danielh. Many are concerned with vote tampering occurring given that 2000 and 2004 appeared to have been tampered with. Many, many eyes (and video recorders) will be watching the upcoming caucuses.

  • posted at 2:11 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Ron Paul's contention that 9/11 was a result of anger that Islamic fanatics have toward The United States due to our intervention in Middle East affairs is also based in part on the Fatwa manifesto that was given by Usama Bin Laden in 1998. He also bases his theory on CIA evaluation that US policy in the Middle East and other areas of the world has a, "blow back, "effect, which means that out intervention in certain areas could have an adverse effect on the US by in sighting anger.

    Paul's theory on the , "blow back, " effect concerning 9/11 finds one major flaw in its premise setting aside the contention that we not Al Qaeda are at fault for the attacks. His theory does not take into account the fanaticism of radical Islam.

    Radicals like bin Laden and other leaders in this Jihad against The United States are much smarter that they are given credit. They know the American mind set much more than we know and understand theirs. They realize that by claiming that US interventionist policy is the cause for their anger and attacks against us will strike a note in America and especially those who see this country as the worlds, "big bully."

    This is the cord that has stricken Paul and those who agree with him. What they and many do not understand or accept is the religious fanaticism that actually and factually drives Islamic radicals and especially their hatred for the US and our people. This hatred is not for our policies it is because we do not embrace their form of Islam therefore we are Infidels who deserve death and it is their holy duty to see to it that we die and our way of life no longer exists.

    The United States is also the major obstacle both in our power and influence to preventing Islamic radicals from converting and controlling the world as they do many areas in the Middle East. Our presence in that region is a constant reminder of the power of the Infidel and of our disobedience to Allah and their form of Islam. This religious fanaticism from radical Islam drives their Jihad and promotes their fighting and attacks which includes 9/11.

    Paul's contention that 9/11 was a result of US interventionist policy fails the historical test also. If one believes that 9/11 was a result of US intervention and brought on by The United States then in the same context one must conclude that Pearl Harbor was a result of our own intervention.

    Prior to the attack of December 1941, United States policy had us intervening in Far East countries like the Philippines and China as a stop gap for Japanese expansion. We also had a major oil embargo against Japan which hampered the country who was totally dependent on imported oil. Other sanctions were also in effect against Japan.

  • posted at 2:01 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    wtf, Torture is an issue for many governments. Our covert military operations are very effective. Off the record, our military leaders will say torure is a necessary tool. Again, Ron Paul wants to bring the troops home from everywhere and gather them around and sing carols. He seems quite confident that our enemies will not follow us here even if we secure the border. And he's confident U.S. interests abroad aren't in any danger from corrupt governments once the troops are gone. Oh, we'll give Mr. Wackjob plenty of notice that the military's packing their bags and heading back to Dodge and not to follow us. YEAH RIGHT!!!

  • posted at 12:35 am on Wed, Jan 2, 2008.


    Back to Thomas' letter about why Ron Paul is a good choice. Thomas states, "Because mainstream media seldom cover him, discrediting him as a long-shot candidate..." This is exactly what we are being told: Ron Paul is a long-shot, therefore we seldom cover him. This is circular reasoning. Could it be that, **because** the MSM refuse to cover him, Ron Paul is a long-shot? Look at what the MSM is telling us our voting choices are: Rudy Mc Romney; the Huckster; and Hilary Obama - now, if Ron Paul had the 24/7, in-your-face coverage by the MSM the way these alleged "front runners" do - I seriously doubt he would be a long-shot at all - he would be **it** - hands down. In fact, it's amazing how he IS the front-runner in many states even without the "help" of the MSM. The fact is, Ron Paul is the only viable candidate out there; the rest, Democrat AND Republican, are just two different wings on the SAME bird.

    Again, look at the AOL poll and click on each state where someone other than Ron Paul is shown as the front-runner; you'll find Ron Paul is TIED with this person or only 1-2% points behind.



    On the following link, make sure to look at the Debate Poll and Straw Poll links.


  • posted at 11:35 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    One quick note before I run off to work: because of this blog I watched Glen Beck (I took Benadryl so I wouldn't break out in hives, ha ha) to see the interview with Ron Paul. Ron Paul dismissed the 9/11 conspiracy theories as propsperous and renounced any idea that our government was behind or allowed the attacks.

  • posted at 3:55 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian (9:04 PM): FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM: How do you know that you detained the correct people?

  • posted at 3:52 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian (8:49 PM): WRONG: There is irrefutable evidence that the WTC was wired in advance. Rather than make an attempt to say what is wrong with the evidence, you just declare it doesnt exist. You must be on drugs, and I am thinking of this being a waste of time.

    Prior to 9/11, the WTC was closed in sections, thus giving an opportunity for the explosives to be rigged. Additionally, the demolition abounds with evidence, including thermite. FDNY and bystanders remarked of repetitive internal explosions. Inside WTC, surviving FDNY remarked it was like foundary.

    REVERSE: The US State Department has not conducted a public investigation. Hence the official Bush Administrations position on an hijacked airliner attack has not been cross-examined in a public forum.

  • posted at 3:04 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Danielh, Terrorists don't have any rights as far as I'm concerned. Nor are they protected under the Geneva Convention as enemy combatants. Overall, the vast majority of Americans are not under any threat when it comes to violating their habeas corpus. The Patriot Act gives our President somewhat of a loophole. I make you out to be quite illogical to think that the Patriot Act is too much of a compromise given it has thwarted many such terrorist attacks either in the making or about to happen. Repealling the Patriot Act is shortsighted at the least
    and gives me the impression that the supporters of this repeal are more concerned about the slight inconvenience
    the Patriot Act has wrought them then the nations security.

  • posted at 2:49 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Danielh, there is no evidence of any sort that the WTC was a controlled demolition. Orchestrating such an event would be almost impossible given how one would have to get the demolition equipment and charges. Since this equipment is not easily accessable except to qualified demolition proffessionals, anyone supporting this theory needs to have their head examined. Also, the media would be all over this. Nothing is sacred to the media. And since there has never been a high profile investigation on this conspiracy theory other than the "loose change" crowd I am confident you and your cronies are off your rocker.

  • posted at 2:40 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: Did something happen to Leonard, or is he on vacation? It is not like him to be away.

  • posted at 2:39 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: Ill take that question. My response involves sovereignty of nations, and their right to manage their own culture within the limitations of their own borders.

    Dont get me wrong. I disagree with Islamic religion and their way of life. Additionally I despise how they treat their women. Not only do they make them cover their face and not show their skin, but they also kill their women. This is horrible.

    However, Osama Bin Laden rose to power by American CIA influence. Inside Pakistan, CIA supported Bin Laden so that he could oppose the expansion of communism within Afghanistan. This is the root of the problem. We supported Bin Laden. Isnt he the source of power behind the Taliban?

    What about the expansion of communism? you might ask. The Soviet Union could not have established itself without American support, and we continue to send money and support them.

    How about Saddam Hussein? you might ask. He rose to power, again, by CIA intervention.

    Ron Paul is not trying to isolate in the sense that he is blocking diplomacy. He wants to curtail foreign aid to everybody, but especially to our enemies.

    There is nothing kooky about this. Ron Paul has been studying American politics abroad for many years, and he is extremely intelligent. I recommend trying to understand all this stuff.

    I persist in posting comments and letters in spite of peoples objections, in spite of people like tara, because these issues affect us all so dearly, and I dont see what else is more important.

  • posted at 2:26 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: Seriously, if there is any topic in this column to investigate, I think habeas corpus would be the most important one. I'm not sure if you know what habeas corpus is, and you have got to be seriously in the clouds to think it's not being violated. Briefly put, it is a right of a prisoner to be informed by the jailer of the charges that are against him. If a jailer holds a prisoner in violation of habeas corpus, that jailer needs an armed guard to withstand a militia who will attempt to free the uncharged prisoner. Additionally, the jailer cannot allow the prisoner to communicate with the outside world, to inform people of the violation.

    Consequently, if the jailer wished to perform any means of torture, such as waterboarding, they would need to violate habeas corpus to prevent word from leaking out of the jail.

    This occurred at Guantanamo Bay. The subject of Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez is related to his tolerance for the Bush Administration to conduct this violation of habeas corpus. In his testimony before a Senate committee, Gonzalez argued that the constitution does not grant a right of habeas corpus. Gonzalez was unaware of the inalienable rights that are declared in the Declaration of Independence, and protected under the constitution.

  • posted at 2:23 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wtf, Given that you allege that I am drunk and or delusional then the rest of the sane crowd I share sentiments with must then fit your allegations too.
    Ron Paul wants to dig up old dirt about the CIA overthrowing the democratic government in Iran over 50 years ago. He is alleging that the whole cause of all this Islamic Jihad is because of this. Give me a break! Given that the Jihadists have nothing more better to do than base their whole agenda on this overthrow is a slap in their face at the least. Their agenda goes much deeper
    than that. What about the Ottomans? Oh, you forgot. Ron Paul is as kooky as they get. He should just come out and say Islam is driven by American imperialism. Again, this is offensive to the Islamists. We shouldn't really care how the Islamists feel, Actually.
    However, if you're gonna lay the blame,
    at least try to have the facts straight.
    We're not doing ourselves any service by handing the victim card to the Islamists time and time again. Ron Paul has made it quite clear that the Islamists shouldn't be held accountable. He wants to tie the hands of the military up even tighter. Repealing the Patriot Act is just the tip of the iceberg. We do the Islamists a disservice by not pointing out their failings.

  • posted at 2:17 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: I decided that you have too much freedom in just one newspaper, so I am trying to get into one of yours, in your area. I don't know exactly where you are from, so I chose Tuscon. I don't know their political stance, so I picked 3 of them. Maybe one will print my letter.

  • posted at 2:15 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    tara: I have never seen you in here before. I have never seen you deal with Brian before. I don't see any controversy in wtf, but I do see some in you. You entered into the scene irritated, expressing your opinions, thinking you must be queen. I think your question to wtf, and your statement about me, is all looking in the mirror expressions of yourself. Obviously you have some kind of queen syndrome.

  • posted at 2:11 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: I realized that 9/11 attacks were a false-flag in YouTube, not "loose change."

    Someone showed me "loose change" on their laptop. On Loose change, I saw evidence that the pentagon was attacked by a passenger airliner. I had difficulty accepting this, because the evidence was not proof. The pentagon is difficult to prove, so I avoid talking about it.

    However, there is a multitude of corroborating evidence from the WTC, all showing controlled and engineered demolition.

    When I saw thermite in the WTC, inside YouTube, that was all I needed to know. Ask anybody from ATF, if you can find such a person. (Actually I have a friend who is former ATF, and he agreed with me instantly.)

    That understood, without a doubt, now I accept the pentagon attack as a missile attack.

  • posted at 2:00 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: I didn't see your post about the Federal Reserve being unconstitutional. Since you asked, "jmh" answered perfectly well at Dec 31, 2007 7:50 PM.

  • posted at 1:57 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    tara: Respectfully, there is another user whose UserID is in uppercase, not to be confused with "wtf." I made the same mistake. I'll be respectful and let wtf answer, since you asked wtf.

  • posted at 12:59 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    To: WTF; what makes your education so Hot, or better than anyone else's? Please explain to me, & the rest of the bloggers; we are interested in it!

  • posted at 12:54 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian said, "You echo the sentiments
    with the author to drop this debate because you can't hold a candle to me."

    OK, Brian, whatever you say....you obviously are a legend in your own mind and I've learned not to attempt debating with drunk and/or delusional people - of which you fit the description perfectly! You won, Brian! There! Doesn't that make you feel all better? LOL!

  • posted at 12:51 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian your comments show you to be, at least to me, most likely a paid shill. As for me being a liberal....hardly. You obviously know nothing on which this country was founded and can only sing one tune - that of the Neo-Con, Israel firsters - that have no business attempting to run OUR country. When you have actually done the research to back up your ridiculous claims, get back to me. You are truly a tiresome individual who sounds like a broken record and is salivating for the sound of jackboots hitting the ground. To you Brian: Sig Heil!

  • posted at 12:37 pm on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wtf, Right back at ya. Yes I do know of Prescot Bush's position on the board of a bank that lent money to the German war machine much before we knew of Hitler's true intentions. Everyone of those issues posted at 1:51 you so articulately ammassed are the essense of your liberal stance. Frankly, you don't understand how effective the Patriot Act has been, otherwise you would not want it repealed.Or is it you do understand how effective the Patriot Act is that you want it repealed because it makes you and your liberal cronies look bad? Ron Paul is not pro-abortion. He is not for giving a woman carte blanche with her body and neither should you be. You echo the sentiments
    with the author to drop this debate because you can't hold a candle to me.
    Now we have Daniel implying that those who support Ron Paul are more likely to support the loose change crowd. I knew it to be true that many Ron Paul supporters are way out in left field.
    You and Daniel take the cake.

  • posted at 11:33 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Well, Brian, I can see you're a product of our "education" system. LOL! And speaking of ad hominem attacks; I do think you protesteth too much my good sir! Seems to me that ad hominem attacks have been your mode of operation toward myself, jimh, daniel and anyone else with a voice of reason. You began your attacks with the falsely based smear of Ron Paul and the Nazis; did you know that Bush's grand-dad, Prescott Bush, really **did** cavort with the Nazis? He was busted under the "Trading with the Enemy Act" Get your facts straight; otherwise, I tend to agree with the author of the letter to basically drop this debate. On every board, Brian, you keep mouthing the same incorrect facts; otherwise known as propaganda and it gets tiresome debating someone who chooses to be so obtuse. You're wasting our time. In closing, however, please check out the following endorsement of our "fringe" candidate:




    And the best for last, veterans and military for Ron Paul.


  • posted at 10:57 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    I think Danielh is stupid, & cannot see beyond his nose!!

  • posted at 10:38 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Danielh, Now the cats out of the bag.
    You're a loose changer. I thought you had more sense than that. All I can say is you must redeem yourself before it's too late. Now you're starting your ad-hominem attacks on me as a desperate attempt to discredit me. It seems to me you are the desperate person grasping at anything for personal help. I wish Leonard was here. He despises anyone belonging to the "loose change" crowd. How is habeas corpus suspended? Because you swear you've got a wire tap on your phone? You're pathetic sir!

  • posted at 10:21 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    tompazo: Thanks for the letter, but a few members who have negative contributions on the gene pool do take offense. Inside of Brian is really a desperate person grasping at anything for personal help. This could be our only chance to help him.

  • posted at 10:17 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: Habeas corpus IS suspended. Loose-change IS correct about 9/11. WTC was wired for demolition, and brought down by internal explosive charges.

  • posted at 10:14 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wtf: I am very concerned about the vote count. I think there is real potential to change the outcome of the election.

  • posted at 10:11 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wow, a bunch of responses to my letter, but lets broaden the scope of discussion here... its getting redundant.. :p

  • posted at 10:01 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33898 Islam's 20 year plan for America

  • posted at 9:59 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wtf, Restore the constitutional division of church and state? So much of the constitution is based on the ten commandments. Where do I begin? I suppose you're for a completely secular government. This is exactly what the radical Muslims want here. Europe has become more and more secular. Last time I looked, non-muslim church attendance is way down in Europe. This has, in essence, created a power vacuum. You really need to look at Islam's 20 year plan for America. You'll be shocked to find out how in lock step you are with alot of their plan. I'll post the link.

  • posted at 9:45 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wtf, did you get that list of issues from a liberal website? In a nutshell,
    you don't want us to have the ability to
    get terrorists without clogging up the court system. You're pro-abortion, You can't stand the fact that our covert operations overseas uses torture and it is very effective. Last time I looked habeas corpus hasn't been suspended. This probably has something to do with the patriot act denying americans their civil rights, a myth. And you're quite clear that you believe what the "loose change" crowd says about 9/11. I have so much more to comment on your liberalism.
    I'll let you digest this for now.

  • posted at 9:17 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Don't mention it, daniel; I agree with everything you've posted. I also wanted to mention, again, that the writer of the letter, Thomas, is right on point. Here's some further info on Ron Paul:


    This is an excellent article, but the last sentence should read:

    "If he fails to produce a top tier finish right before your very eyes, it will only demonstrate that the prodigious conjuring of the American media has trumped him with a spellbinding illusion that he was simply no match for...and the vote was rigged."

    Diebold and all voting systems have been proven, repeatedly, to be extremely hackable and unreliable for a proper vote count. Then there's this:


    and, once again, this:


    We need a presidential candidate who puts AMERICA first, second and third and Ron Paul is that man.

  • posted at 9:04 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    wtf: Thank you for your support.

  • posted at 7:51 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian, this is where the current banking system has gotten us. Please note that the city of Stockton, CA has shown up in a British newspaper.

    And NAFTA? Part of what you seem to endorse just makes things worse for all parties involved. Not only are the Mexican workers harmed, Americans will have to pay for it.

    As 2008 begins, here are SOME of the issues that have endangered our democracy and the lives of so many around the world. For all of 2007, there was no action, nor were there any plans to:

    Impeachment against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
    End the illegal and immoral wars against Iraq and Afghanistan
    Challenge the lies about a nuclear buildup in Iran
    Investigate what really happened on 9/11
    Repeal the Patriot Act
    Investigate official misconduct by Alberto Gonzalez
    Investigate the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame
    Charge those who allowed the torture of Iraqis
    Investigate rendition and torture of detainees
    Close Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay Prisons
    Challenge the abuse of signing statements by George Bush
    Investigate the administrations spying on Americans before 9/11
    Challenge the constitutionality of the Military Commissions Act
    Challenge directives giving George Bush dictatorial powers
    Demand accountability for billions misspent and lost in Iraq
    Demand accountability for billions paid to private contractors
    Expose the influence of PNAC members on US foreign policy
    Challenge the lies to minimize the dangers of global warming
    Restore the constitutional division of church and state
    Protect a womans right to privacy
    Restore habeas corpus and the Fourth Amendment

    and on and on and on

    You support **that**???!!? You want more of that? With the current crop of politicians running for president, this is what we'll get.....more of the same.

    As the following linked article shows, this is a list of who is good for Israel. Israel!!???! What about America? And please note that RON PAUL is NOT in the list.


  • posted at 6:39 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian. What kind of prescription drugs are you taking? WRONG: "none of these politicians support erasing the borders." Actually, Dianne Feinstein supports erasing the borders. I suspect Barbara Boxer votes to subvert the borders, and I suspect she has a concealed relationship.

    WRONG: "The north american union does not involve erasing the borders." It most certainly does. In fact, the constitution would become an irrelevant museum piece.

    wtf was CORRECT: "[He] insists on alleging these politicians don't consider our sovereignty important.

    FACT: They don't.

  • posted at 6:34 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: The SPP and North American Union are the same. If these succeed, we won't be able to call ourselves American anymore, because there won't be an America anymore.

  • posted at 6:33 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    voter: I agree with you on moveon.org. There is something seriously wrong with that website. I think today was the first time I ever looked at it.

  • posted at 6:29 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    ALL: The relationship between congress and the Federal Reserve is a cartel, in the true English dictionary definition of the word. It means that the Fed and congress support each other: the Fed relies upon the police enforcement capabilities of congress to protect its existence, and congress relies upon the Feds ability to bring an unlimited supply of money to support its insatiable needs.

    The cartel relationship is concealed. Consequently, congress approves the Feds appointment of a chairman. The appointment is purely a theatrical display and a waste of time: if congress disapproves, the Fed could keep the chosen chairman anyway.

    Historically, honest banks have a vault of silver or gold, and they issue paper notes that are redeemable for silver or gold when they are presented back to the bank. Such honest banks were located in Carthage (ancient Africa), Constantinople, Venice (about 1000 A.D.), and Hamburg (which fell at the hands of Napoleon who pillaged the bank vault).

    By comparison, the Federal Reserve notes are not derived form a single ounce of precious metal. If Fort Knox serves any function, it might be for our elite leaders to control wealth, and to assure that the regular-class citizens do not have that gold. Hence, FDR confiscated the gold.

    The Federal Reserve uses debt as a basis to back-up the currency. If a bank shows a debt of $100, there is a shell game of about 30 confusing steps. Put simply, the Fed uses a ratio to calculate the amount of money return. I believe the ratio is 3:1. Accordingly, $300 is eventually returned to the bank that can show that it is owed $100.

    Banks hate to have their loans paid off, because the 3:1 ratio causes the Federal Reserve to take money back away from the bank. This is very much contrary to the thank you note, and the congratulations that the bank gives. People think that banks are in the business of earning interest on the value of the loan they borrow. This is only a small part of the truth. When someone takes out a loan, the bank earns interest on 3:1 of the amount that they borrowed.

    During WW-I, the treasury campaigned for citizens to buy war bonds, to help the war. The purpose of this campaign was to create the appearance of money coming out of citizens, not out of thin air as a magician trick. Every time someone bought a war bond, the Federal Reserve destroyed 3:1 times the value that was borrowed, and it actually depleted money from congresss storehouse of money. Although congress considered it a hindrance, the deception was very important.

  • posted at 5:28 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: I repeat: Most every evil war throughout the world, throughout history was funded by a bank. If you want to find the source of evil, follow the money trail. For this reason, the authors of the constitution delegated responsbility for "coining the money," to congress.

  • posted at 5:26 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian: If you had found the actual bug in the consitution and tried to interpret what it says, I would have given you and your post more respect. You cut-and paste 3000 words, whereas the constitution gives about 10 words for this topic.

  • posted at 4:03 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Other than a distaste for the mess/corruption the Bush people have gotten us into (war, debt, erosion of privacy, etc.), I don't see much that moveon has in common with Ron Paul. Moveon emphatically supports universal healthcare, science-based decision making (ie global warming, evolution, etc), investment in rebuilding infastructure (which requires tx dollars). No, I don't see any good fit for Ron Paul with Moveon.

  • posted at 3:31 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Voter, No, you probably won't. However, if you look a little deeper you will probably find that many of Paul's attributes are in tune with alot of what moveon.org is all about.

  • posted at 3:25 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Brian, I'm not a Paul supporter (I admire his independence, but haven't made up my mind yet) but I just went to moveon.org and couldn't find anything about him.

  • posted at 3:21 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Danielh Therefore, the historical legal precedent exists for Congress' power to create a central bank. It formed the Federal Reserve system in 1913 to perform many of the same functions as its predecessor. As before, the courts have agreed that a central bank, and the Federal Reserve in particular, is constitutional.

  • posted at 3:19 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Myth #3: The Federal Reserve Act and paper money are unconstitutional
    BY: Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C.

    The constitution does not give Congress the specific right to create a central bank. Unless the specific power is spelled out, according to a strict interpretive philosophy, then Congress does not have it. Therefore, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is unconstitutional. Moreover, paper money itself is unconstitutional for the same reason. Only gold or silver coin is permitted by the constitution.

    The Constitutional Basis for Central Banking

    First, the constitution grants the Congress the rights to regulate money. Specifically, it has the right to coin money and regulate its value. It is not clear from the constitution or the Federalist Papers what the authors meant by the term 'value.' Traditionally, it has meant the weight and metallic content of the coin. No one challenges this interpretation. On the other hand, the only relevant meaning of 'value' in the context of money is its value in trade, also known as its purchasing power. This a government cannot regulate merely by an Act of Congress. The government's only tool for regulating this latter value is altering the money supply.

    Second, Congress has the right to regulate interstate commerce. Banking and other financial services clearly involves interstate commerce as the courts have come to define it.

    Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Congress has the right to make any law that is 'necessary and proper' for the execution of its enumerated powers (Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 18). A law creating a Bureau of the Mint, for example, is necessary and proper for the Congress to exercise its right to coin money. A similar argument may justify a central bank. It facilitates the expansion and contraction of the money supply and it serves as means to regulate the banking industry.

    Is this a reasonable use of the necessary and proper clause? I do not know, but a test of its meaning came early. The history of central banking in the United States does not begin with the Federal Reserve. The Bank of the United States received its charter in 1791 from the U.S. Congress and Washington signed it. Secretary of State Alexander Hamilton designed the Bank's charter by modeling it after the Bank of England, the British central bank. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson believed the Bank was unconstitutional because it was an unauthorized extension of federal power. Congress, Jefferson argued, possessed only delegated powers that were specifically enumerated in the constitution. The only possible source of authority to charter the Bank, Jefferson believed, was in the necessary and proper clause. However, he cautioned that if the clause could be interpreted so broadly in this case, then there was no real limit to what Congress could do.2

    Hamilton conceded that the constitution was silent on banking. He asserted, however, that Congress clearly had the power to tax, to borrow money, and to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. Would it be reasonable for Congress to charter a corporation to assist in carrying out these powers? He argued that the necessary and proper clause gave Congress implied powers -- the power to enact any law that is necessary to execute its specific powers. A necessary law in this context Hamilton did not take to mean one that was absolutely indispensable. Instead, he argued that it meant a law that was needful, requisite, incidental, useful, or conducive to the primary Congressional power which it supported. Then Hamilton offered a proposed rule of discretion: Does the proposed measure abridge a pre-existing right of any State or of any individual? (Dunne, 19). If not, then it probably is constitutionally proper on these grounds. Hamiltons arguments carried the day and convinced Washington.

    The Supreme Court had its say on the matter as well. In McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) the Supreme Court voted 9-0 to uphold the Second Bank of the United States as constitutional. The Court argued with the doctrine of implied powers, stating that to be necessary and proper the Bank needed only to be useful in helping the government meet its responsibilities in maintaining the public credit and regulating the money supply. Chief Justice Marshall wrote, After the most deliberate consideration, it is the unanimous and decided opinion of this court that the act to incorporate the Bank of the United States is a law made in pursuance of the Constitution, and is part of the supreme law of the land (Hixson, 117). The Court affirmed this opinion in the 1824 case Osborn v. Bank of the United States (Ibid, 14).

    Therefore, the historical legal precedent exists for Congress' power to create a central bank. It formed the Federal Reserve system in 1913 to perform many of the same functions as its predecessor. As before, the courts have agreed that a central bank, and the Federal Reserve in particular, is constitutional.

  • posted at 3:11 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.



    It seems to me this is a reputable site.
    Let's see anyone try to refute any of the info on this site. I challenge you Ron Paulers. The fact of the matter is, this is a government site. Many of those democrats now supporting Paul probably visit the moveon.org site for their daily dose of propaganda. It's not even a government site.

  • posted at 2:46 am on Tue, Jan 1, 2008.


    Daniel, where do you get the impression that I ever supported the Clintons? The slimy thing about the Whitewater case is that the Clintons were made a full partner in the development without investing a single dime of their own money. The Republicans are licking their chops waiting to bring things like this out in the open again for the election.

  • posted at 11:40 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Fringe candidate? I'm not so sure of that either. I've been surprised at how many loyal life-long Democrats I know are supporting Ron Paul. One poll says he's fourth in Iowa now. As far as a "wasted" vote? Sorry, I will continue to vote using my own judgement on who I think is the best candidate.

  • posted at 7:54 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Cogito, I agree with danielh that no vote is ever wasted. And I beg to differ with you on Ron Paul being a "fringe" candidate. Go to AOL's "spam proof" poll, vote and look at the Republican results. It's Ron Paul all the way. In the few states that show another candidate, if you click on the state, you'll see the front runner is tied with Ron Paul. Ron Paul "fringe"? Only in the MSM's dreams. LOL! GO RON PAUL! http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/12/21/straw-poll-dec-21-jan-4/?ncid=NWS00010000000001

  • posted at 7:21 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Cogito: The topic of the federal reserve is one of Ron Paul's talking points. His speaker companion, G. Edward Griffin, authored our country's most important documentation of the federal reserve, "Creature from Jekyll Island." This is the most-informed documentation on the federal reserve. (I have read it.)

  • posted at 7:18 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian: The federal reserve is unconstitutional. If you trace out the world's evil, you will see that bankers are behind a great amount of it. That is why the authors of the constitution wanted congress in control of the money, not separate bankers.

  • posted at 7:17 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian: Your source of myth vs. fact is affiliated with the wrong people. When you take information like that, you are endorsing the objective of the people and organizations that are behind it.

  • posted at 7:14 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Cogito: Hillary and Bill were equally involved in Whitewater. I know enough about it to understand that people were ripped-off for their life's savings of equity in their home. The Clintons' had a clause that if a mortgage missed a payment by 30 days, all of the house, including equity, reverted to the seller, not the buyer. Hillary also has miraculous investment success, at the expense of other investors. Do you condone this?

  • posted at 7:10 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Cogito: There is an actually dead-body count around the Clintons'. Do you actually condone this brand of politics?

  • posted at 7:09 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Cogito: Votes for your favorite candidate are not wasted, even if they are outside of the media-selected favorites. Votes for the Independent Party serve a legitimate function of revealing to the American public how much support there is for these people. I would never vote for a corrupt candidate.

  • posted at 7:07 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    ALL: Few Americans are aware that this year's so-called immigration reform bills were really an endorsement for the SPP. These were hidden two times in Senator Kennedy's legislation that he introduced onto the Senate floor under two separate bill numbers. Both times, the bill was actually identical. I have still memorized the paragraph number in these bills. It was Section 413. I recommend anyone tracking down these bills and read Section 413. My friend Dennis Cochran got a letter on this topic. I might have also. Try google, "Section 413, Kennedy, SPP." This will reveal some references, but best to find the actual bill.

  • posted at 7:05 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    C'mon people! It never ceases to amaze me how far someone can get off task when it comes to politics. Me included! The topic here is Ron Paul as a candidate. The truth is that he has too much, and only too much, fringe appeal to be a serious contender. So you have a choice, it's Hillary or the Republican nominee. Any vote for anyone else is wasted. Much like those for H.Ross Perot. You will only get a candidate with less than a majority of America supporting them. Bill Clinton won both elections getting less than a 50% vote. America needs a candidate who will unite the country. A conservative who wins in a liberal state is what we need. And that's Mitt Romney.

  • posted at 7:02 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian, I'll pick the first one that I found out of the middle: "Myth: The SPP seeks to lower U.S. standards through a regulatory cooperation framework."

    Fact: What the SPP seeks to do, is unify Canada, USA and Mexico. Unification of economics must preceed unification of governments, so the SPP seeks to unify econoomics first. Consequently, jobs will flow not only into Mexico, out of Canada and USA, but more importantly, from the private sector into the large business sector.

    The purported myth is almost true. US Standards of economics will diminish. We will see diminishment of both quality and jobs.

  • posted at 6:59 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    The fact of the matter is, Brian, Ron Paul is a congressman; he's been in D.C. for quite a while. Personally, I think he would know what he's talking about; not to mention, even in our corrupt government, he's known as a man of integrity and honesty, which is precisely why the MSM and people like you are marginalizing him. Taking this into consideration, as well as the fact that the SPP you cite was written by those who are part of an administration that lied the U.S. into a war under false pretenses; I'll take Ron Paul. You appear to be an apologist for BushCo's lying and their corrupt practices. This is your right...as long as we have our rights.

  • posted at 6:58 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian: The SPP does not exist on hard-printed paper, so yes, it is not signed. Unfortunately, it cannot be ratified either, because there is no tangible documentation of its contents. It is a treaty.

  • posted at 4:01 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    It seems to me Ron Paul is spreading the notion that a North American Union is everything contrary to what the SPP makes it out to be.

  • posted at 3:53 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP):
    Myth vs. Fact
    Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.

    Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.

    Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

    Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

    Myth: The SPP is being undertaken without the knowledge of the U.S. Congress.

    Fact: U.S. agencies involved with SPP regularly update and consult with members of Congress on our efforts and plans.

    Myth: The SPP infringes on the sovereignty of the United States.

    Fact: The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.

    Myth: The SPP is illegal and violates the Constitution.

    Fact: The SPP is legal and in no way violates the Constitution or affects the legal authorities of the participating executive agencies. Indeed, the SPP is an opportunity for the governments of the United States, Canada, and Mexico to discuss common goals and identify ways to enhance each nations security and prosperity. If an action is identified, U.S. federal agencies can only operate within U.S. law to address these issues. The Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security coordinate the efforts of the agencies responsible for the various initiatives under the prosperity and security pillars of the SPP. If an agency were to decide a regulatory change is desirable through the cooperative efforts of SPP, that agency is required to conform to all existing U.S. laws and administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.

    Myth: The U.S section of the SPP is headed by the Department of Commerce.

    Fact: The SPP is a White House-driven initiative. In the United States, the Department of Commerce coordinates the Prosperity component, while the Department of Homeland Security coordinates the Security component. The Department of State ensures the two components are coordinated and are consistent with U.S. foreign policy.

    Myth: The U.S. Government, working though the SPP, has a secret plan to build a "NAFTA Super Highway."

    Fact: The U.S. government is not planning a NAFTA Super Highway. The U.S. government does not have the authority to designate any highway as a NAFTA Super Highway, nor has it sought such authority, nor is it planning to seek such authority. There are private and state level interests planning highway projects which they themselves describe as "NAFTA Corridors," but these are not Federally-driven initiatives, and they are not a part of the SPP.

    Myth: The U.S. Government, through the Department of Transportation, is funding secretive highway projects to become part of a NAFTA Super Highway.

    Fact: Many States in the American Midwest are proposing or undertaking highway projects to improve or build roads as Federal-aid and State or private sector revenue becomes available. All projects involving Federal-aid funds or approvals are subject to normal Federal-aid requirements, such as review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including public involvement. This public involvement, the common thread among all these activities, makes them anything but secret. In addition, Congress directs Department of Transportation funding for specific highway projects.

    The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will continue to cooperate with the State transportation departments as they build and upgrade highways to meet the needs of the 21st century. Rather than evidence of a secret plan to create a NAFTA Super Highway that would undermine our national sovereignty, the FHWAs efforts are a routine part of cooperation with all the State transportation departments to improve the Nations highways.

    Myth: U.S. Government officials sponsored a secret SPP planning meeting in Banff, Alberta in September 2006.

    Fact: The U.S. Government did not sponsor the meeting in Banff. The North American Forum, a private initiative that is separate from the U.S. Government, hosted the September 12-14, 2006 conference Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment. Academics, businesspersons, private citizens, and government officials from the U.S., Mexican, and Canadian governments attended the conference. The North American Forum is not a product of the SPP.

    Myth: The SPP will cost U.S. taxpayers money.

    Fact: The SPP is being implemented with existing budget resources. Over the long-term, it will save U.S. taxpayers money by cutting through costly red tape and reducing redundant paperwork. This initiative will benefit the taxpayers through economic gain and increased security, thereby enhancing the competitiveness and quality of life in our countries.

    Myth: The working groups and SPP documents are a secret and not available to the public.

    Fact: The SPPs initiatives and milestones with timelines can be found by clicking the Report to Leaders link at www.spp.gov. The Web site contains a section to enable interested persons to provide input directly to the various working groups.

    Myth: The SPP seeks to lower U.S. standards through a regulatory cooperation framework.

    Fact: The framework will support and enhance cooperation and encourage the compatibility of regulations among the three partners while maintaining high standards of health and safety. Any regulatory changes will require agencies to conform to all U.S. administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment. Enhanced cooperation in this area will provide consumers with more affordable, safer, and more diversified and innovative products.

    Myth: The SPP is meant to deal with immigration reform and trade disputes.

    Fact: Immigration reform is a legislative matter currently being debated in Congress and is not being dealt with in the SPP. Likewise, trade disputes between the United States, Canada, and Mexico are resolved in the NAFTA and WTO mechanisms and not the SPP.

    Myth: The SPP will result in the loss of American jobs.

    Fact: The SPP seeks to create jobs by reducing transaction costs and unnecessary burdens for U.S. companies, which will bolster the competitiveness of our firms globally. These efforts will help U.S. manufacturers, spur job creation, and benefit consumers.

    Myth: The SPP will harm our quality of life.

    Fact: The SPP improves the safety and well-being of Americans. It builds on efforts to protect our environment, improves our ability to combat infectious diseases, such as avian influenza, and ensures our food supply is safe through the exchange of information and cooperation ─ improving the quality of life for U.S. citizens. Americans enjoy world class living standards because we are engaged with the world.

    Myth: The SPP creates a NAFTA-plus legal status between the three countries.

    Fact: The SPP does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA. It creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.

  • posted at 3:49 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    wtf, none of these politicians support erasing the borders. The north american union does not involve erasing the borders. You insist on alleging these politicians don't consider our sovereignty important.

  • posted at 3:01 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian the following links are from the CFR document "Building a North American Community" http://www.cfr.org/publication/8102
    On page 8, it states, "Establish a common security perimeter by 2010. The governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States should articulate as their long-term goal a common security perimeter for North America" What was that you were saying about, Brian, about Ron Paul spreading a North American Union "conspiracy"? Hmmm...like jimh said, there's NO conspiracy, it's in the works. You want some politicos with that? Here are some notable members of the CFR you might recognize: Dick Cheney

    John Kerry

    Bill Clinton

    Al Gore

    Ronald Reagan

    George H. W. Bush

    Gerald Ford

    Richard Nixon

    John, David & Nelson Rockefeller

    Condolezza Rice

    Paul Wolfowitz

    Alan Greenspan

    Colin Powell

    Henry Kissinger

    Angelina Jolie (Yes, the actress has a five year term membership as an ambassador)

  • posted at 2:38 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian you wrote, "It seems to me the Federal Reserve is only doing what any other capitalist would do. Loan money with interest attached. Only here the government pays the interest. And they should. The government has no problem taxing us to death." Are you celebrating the New Year early? The government does NOT pay the interest on the money it borrows; hello! it taxes US to death to pay the interest on the money they borrowed from the Fed; when our congress is constitutionally mandated to coin our money with NO interest attached; hence NO taxes to repay a falsely accrued interest to a private corporation.

  • posted at 2:33 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian, you wrote, "Oil dictates the disposition of the economies of the world. In essence, it determines the value of the dollar." This is true to a point; however, when oil producing countries tie their product i.e., oil to the euro, what do you think happens to the dollar?

  • posted at 2:15 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    jmh, Site me a prominent politician who supports erasing our borders with Canada and Mexico and you'll find a politician who doesn't regard our soveregnty important.

  • posted at 2:09 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    It seems to me the Federal Reserve is only doing what any other capitalist would do. Loan money with interest attached. Only here the government pays the interest. And they should. The government has no problem taxing us to death. wtf, Give me an example of how our government will not have to seize gold and silver in order to go back to the old system before the federal reserve.

  • posted at 2:03 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    OK Brian, what happens when OPEC decides that they are going to use the EURO instead of the dollar? And by the way, that change has already started.

  • posted at 1:59 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    North American Union conspiracy?!?! Just wondering Brian, did you happened to read the 2005 report by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) entitled "Building a North American Community"? Whats the plan? Simple erase the borders. Check out "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" - google both of these. Its not a conspiracy - it's a well documented open fact.

  • posted at 1:56 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    wtf, why do you think they call oil black gold? Oil dictates the disposition of the economies of the world. In essence, it determines the value of the dollar. This is quite elementary, sir. Oil's uses reach far and wide. gold and silver have only limited uses. And it is a myth that oil is finite. Quite the contrary, the earth is constantly manufacturing oil.

  • posted at 1:51 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    US Constitution - Article 1 Section 8 The Congress shall have Power To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof... The problem is the government is not printing the money, a private corporation is, and they are profiting greatly from it. In simple terms, they are printing money, loaning it to the government, and making you and me pay it back with interest. But don't take my word for it, you obviously have access to the internet, do some research on how the system works from reliable sources and make your own conclusions.

    Ron Paul has no intention of having "the government to seize all the gold and silver from us." He actually believes that people have a right to their property. The goovernment does not have a right to peoples property, that is one reason that he opposes property taxes. Property taxes essentially require the people to pay rent on their property, and effectively the government thereby owns the property. He wants you to own your peoperty .. all of it, including any gold or silver you have.

  • posted at 1:48 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    wtf, Even the democrats don't want an end to the federal reserve. Please do try to follow along.

  • posted at 1:46 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    OK wtf, I slipped up. Still it's really the same. Are you suggesting THEY don't make a profit? Your libertarian views are getting sillier and sillier.

  • posted at 1:42 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Ron Paul is one of the people spreading the North American Union conspiracy. This is just one example of Paul talking up a mythical Bush administration merger of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, but you're not missing much if you don't. Reputable conservatives shouldn't be spreading these crazy conspiracy theories and the last thing the GOP needs is a conspiracy crank as our nominee in 2008.

  • posted at 1:36 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Newsflash Brian! The profit is NOT for people like you or me; it's for the small group who own the Federal Reserve. You really must take your time when reading the posts; it appears you do not fully comprehend what is being written and I would think you wouldn't like to keep appearing so foolish and uninformed.

  • posted at 1:26 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    wtf, I would hope that our money system is profit driven. Are you suggesting we don't make a profit? Last time I looked this is a capitalistic country. I don't know where you learned economics, I myself never took a class in it.

  • posted at 1:17 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    jmh, There is only a finite supply of gold or silver on this earth. It made sense at the time to create the federal reserve. In essence, the government has
    unlimited power to print money as the economy grows. As long as people are being born and growing up and entering the workforce it would be counterproductive to go back to gold or silver standard. Perhaps you are right that the federal reserve is unconstitutional. But then, I'm not ready for the government to seize all the gold and silver from us. This is what Ron Paul may be proposing. He's behind the times and longing for days of old. And you want his as president?

  • posted at 1:09 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    >>Brian wrote on Dec 31, 2007 4:55 PM:
    >>>If he had it his way, all of our
    >>>troops would be home singing carols
    >>>around the fire. All their hard work
    >>>in other countries protecting the
    >>>people from corrupt governments

    Brian, protect us from corrupt govt like the democratically elected govt in Iran in the early 1950s which our CIA overthrew? This caused more problems like the hostage taking and the current nuclear development issue.
    Iran had a democratically elected govt that we overthrew. Ron Paul would have left that govt in place and expand free trade with them. Brian could you imagine that we would now have better relations with Iran if we had followed Ron Paul's path?

    Also consider Cuba and what good/bad has come in the last decades of our embargo. Canada, Latin America, Europe all trade with Cuba. Why shouldn't America promote free trade with Cuba?

    Brian, please let me know your thoughts on our military progress in the past several decades with Iran and Cuba.


  • posted at 1:01 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    I'll add to what jimh said. Brian please get your facts straight. Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist; he is a non-interventionist. If you do not understand the difference, I suggest you look it up. Also, jimh is absolutely right. The Federal Reserve has NOTHING federal about it; it is what is called a quasi PRIVATE corporation. Do you understand what that means? It means our money system is owned by a few individuals and is profit driven. This was effected in 1913 when most of congress was on Christmas break. Incidentally, it was shortly after this, that the 16th amendment to the Constitution was added regarding taxation to pay the INTEREST on the money the gov borrowed from the newly created Fed. There has been ongoing debate on whether or not the 16th amendment is even Constitutional due to the question of whether or not it was properly ratified. Regarding Ron Paul and the Nazis...it was shown that the person who began this smear job was known as a whacko by the name of Bill White who does anything to get his name in the news.

  • posted at 1:00 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    jmh, Then Ron Paul should denounce the Nazi party's endorsement for him. He either doesn't have the courage, or the money they have lined his pockets is too hard to deny. Of course our government is corrupt. What a statement for you to make that I am implying our government isn't corrupt. Since you or Paul are not interested in protecting the people in other countries from corrupt governments you must not be interested in having all the foreign investment coming into this country. Just as you aren't interested in this you must not be interested in investing in emerging economies throughout the world. As long as you understand this, this is key to your understanding of Ron Paul's isolationist approach.

  • posted at 12:17 pm on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Brian asks - "How is the Federal Reserve Unconstitutional?" From Andrew Jackson - "A bank is constitutional, but it is .. the exclusive province of Congress and the President to decide whether the particular features are necessary and proper in order to enable the bank to perform conveniently and efficiently the public duties assigned to it as a fiscal agent, and therefore constitutional, or unnecessary and improper, and therefore unconstitutional. It can not be "necessary" or "proper" for Congress to barter away or divest themselves of any of the powers vested in them by the Constitution to be excersized for the public good. It is not "necessary" to the efficiency of the bank, nor is it "proper" in relation to themselves and their sucessors. They may properly use the discretion vested in them, but they may not limit the discretiion of their sucessors. This restriction on themselves and a grant of monopoly to the bank is therefore unconstitutional. Every act of Congress which attempts by grants of monoplies or sale of exclusive privileges for a limited time, or a time without limit, to restrict or extinguish its own discretion in the choice of means to execute its delegated powers is equilavent to a legislative amendment of the Constitutiion, and palpably unconstitutional. Congress has the power to regulate the currency, it was conferred to be executed by themselves, and not to be transfered to a corporation. It is neither necessary nor proper to transfer its legislative power to such a bank, and therefore unconstitutional.

    Your alegation that Ron Paul "has a liking for the Nazi party" is barely worth responding to, however for clarification for those that are uninformed, Ron Paul has never supported the Nazi party in any speech, writing, legislation, or any other fasion either directly or indirectly and any alegations to the contrary are nothing more than baseless ad hominem attacks by persons unable to factually find fault with his official Congressional record.

    Oh, and "All their hard work in other countries protecting the people from corrupt governments"?!?! How about some protection from our corrupt government? And don't try to tell me it's not corrupt.

    When people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty. - Thomas Jefferson

  • posted at 10:55 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Daniel, I don't know where to begin. How is the federal reserve unconstitutional? Yes, Ron Paul is a isolationist. If he had it his way, all of our troops would be home singing carols around the fire. All their hard work in other countries protecting the people from corrupt governments means nothing to Paul. I should also mentionthe support he has from the Nazi party in America and all their holocaust deniers. It seems to me Ron Paul wants us to take a closer look at those film clips of those in the internment camps in Auschwitz. He must think those pictures are doctored to have such a liking for the Nazi party.

  • posted at 8:11 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    I watched the hour long interview of Mr. Paul on the Glenn Beck show and found him to be a mediocre candidate. He had some good ideas regarding shrinking of government, but most everything else was unmemorable. His best take though was how some of his goofier followers believe in U.S. Govt involvement in 9/11. He said that kind of thinking is "bizarre", and missiles hitting the Pentagon was "preposterous". I'll give him points for some ability to reason.

  • posted at 5:18 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    The Iowa caucus is in just a few days. Here are some suggestions to ensure a proper vote count:
    Bev Harris doesn't know who tabulates the final vote; but look at my last post, a very good indication of who that is. This is very important when you look at AOL's "spam proof" poll. Where Ron Paul is not listed as the leader, he's tied with the person AOL has listed or just 1% point behind in second place.

  • posted at 5:05 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Ron Paul is the only real hope for America. Anyone in the position to do so, please help with the Iowa caucus.
    Here's why:

  • posted at 4:48 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Thanks for a great letter, Thomas and your insightful comments Daniel. And a double big thanks to you, LNS, for running this letter. Ron Paul is being marginalized by the MSM and people need to hear what he is about.

  • posted at 3:04 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Apparently, Ron Paul does not support impeachment of the president. Why? I think it is because impeachment takes 1 year, and the vote is rigged in the Senate. Quite a few senators are members of the Council of Foreign relations, or they have concealed relationships.
    After a failed impeachment drive, Bush would be more powerful than before.

  • posted at 2:55 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Finally, Ron Paul would request the United Nations to get off of US soil; and, let's just say that he would tell the Spanish construction firm to terminate construction of the NAFTA Superhighway.

  • posted at 2:54 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    How could I forget? Ron Paul would refuse to commit America's armed forces without a Declaration of War from congress. I would expect America to be out of Iraq by sunrise on the morning after his inauguration.

  • posted at 2:51 am on Mon, Dec 31, 2007.


    Thomas Pazo: Good letter. I will add that Ron Paul would abolish the unconstitutional Federal Reserve, he would ask congress to termainate all of its so-called "free trade agreements," and he would restrict the use of Executive Orders to within the jurisdiction of his own staff. I would anticipate G. Edward Griffin would be appointed as a member of his staff. (Griffin accompanied Paul on a campaign stop at Mountain View, CA.)


Recent Comments

Posted 19 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

So very much the truth Mr Adams - but you forgot to make the mention of the man who spend the millions and finally discover that the Mr Oba…


Posted 19 hours ago by Michael Fiske.

article: Letter: Suggestions for committee appoi…

Ed, everybody knows JoAnne hates Bob. If you don't know that than you don't know squat! Open your eyes. She campaigned against two candidat…


Posted 19 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Our leaders need to be better r…

The Mr Kindseth wrote that 'America’s attitude toward Royal Emperor Obama changed when he went from “We the People” to “Screw the People”' …


Posted 20 hours ago by Thomas Heuer.

article: Steve Hansen: Funding, researcher bias …

Skepticism is a smart way of saying "I DON'T KNOW." No more no less. It is not a lofty intellectual endeavor. It is used by the …


Posted 20 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

A correct assumption instead: Mr. Portal, like most conservatives, utilize information that is not true and when they do use the correct …



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists