CONGRESSMAN BUSTS BUSH POLICE STATE

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - FreeMarketNews.com

A member of the House of Representatives, Ron Paul, who some call “the most courageous man in Congress,” appeared on alternative newscaster Alex Jones' radio show to make a series of stinging charges about the Bush administration. Paul represents the 14th Congressional district of Texas. He also serves on the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, and the International Relations committee. He is know for his principled stand regarding the American Constitution – and for refusing to vote for legislation that he believes goes against the Founding Father’s intentions. Paul is also an FMNN commentator.

He is said to have made the following statements:

-Upcoming indictments of Bush administration officials will be far more damaging than most have expected.

-The Bush administration is attempting an end run around the Constitution by creating a militarized police state to take effect in the event of an avian flu pandemic – one that would include gun confiscation and ultimately martial law.

-The administration’s aggressive posture toward Iran, Syria, North Korea and China is “delusional.”

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=1306

BUSH WANTS TO TAKE YOUR GUNS !!!!

That'll get the knuckle-draggers' knickers in a twist !!

The gun nut who says his fight against gun laws it so we as a people can protect ourselves from a fascist takeover is pathetic. Helloooo. It's fascist takeover time! Noone tried to knock down your door and all that Anne Frank stuff? Well, you mean they just depended on your stupidity, your nationalist sucker fever to make you do their bidding? What - a - surprise. Gosh, now I'm just a Prole and I din't even get to fire a shot. Bwahhhh.

I thought it was them thar commnist librals what wanted to git my guns? Ya mean them good Republican politician fellers done lied to me?

They'll be the first ones to crawl on their bellies up to someone from FEMA or Homeland Security, simpering and batting their eyes and saying, Here, Officer, take my guns and give them to our heroic leader. Anything for the Lord God Bush. . .Ooh! I think I may have tickled in my pants a little!

For those who don't know, he is a Republican, but NOT a Bushie. He's a Libertarian-leaning maverick who has been very vocal about the Iraq war and abuses of the so-called "USA Patriot Act".

More smoke...more fire.....

he's definitely committed to his philosophy first and his party second. he's a lifetime member of the libertarian party and while he does run as a republican, i think it's more because it's next to impossible to actually win as a 3rd party candidate in this country.

Ran for Prez as one back in 88

think they're concerned about the remnant, the remnant of those individuals who don't buy into stuff and think that they should take care of themselves on their own, that they should have their own guns and their own provisions and they don't want to depend on the government at all and I think that is a threat to those who want to hold power. They don't want any resistance to their authoritarian rule."

Paul opined that the government was on a delusional power trip that threatened the country.

"These guys are ready to start a war with Iran, Syria, North Korea or China. They can't possibly do that, it's so insane, we don't have the money, we don't have the troops, we probably don't even have the ammunition."

"But, if they are truly delusional they just might do something that's totally irrational."

Paul expressed his hope that finally some conservatives are waking up to the fact that the Bush administration is a trojan horse, especially after arch-liberal Harriet Miers was chosen by Bush to supposedly move the Supreme Court to the right, even though her record is atrocious and she has been involved in the past covering up for the Bush crime family's activities.

1) The use of the term "trojan horse" is especially telling. It makes me wonder if conservatives are trying to grab at the right "excuse in a simple word" (that they can explain to their followers) to use in bringing down Bush. Are they beginning to sell the idea that Bush is some kind of plant (either by liberals or "new world order" types) to make conservatives/Republicans look like shit for decades to come?

2) Ron Paul isn't the only one arguing stridently that Bush is indeed a danger to the republic. Republican Paul Craig Roberts has also been saying as much. Pat Buchanan is staunchly against an attack on Iran. We're seeing all sorts of conservative commentators back away from Bush one baby-step at a time.

Heck, my position all along regarding Bush is not just that I disagree with his policies (simply taking a partisan side). If that were it, I would be patient for democracy to do its work. My position all along is that Bush is demonstrably DANGEROUS (NOW!) to the country I love, and thereby needs to be removed (IMMEDIATELY!), to SAVE the nation.

By incompetence or malice, Bush is wrecking the country. Even for the conservatives, he's wrecking it, but all of them just haven't realized it yet. But I'm confident they will before long.

If we had real politics in this country, he'd be an honored and respected leader of the Opposition...

And that type of an indictment will be much more serious than the indictment of shifting campaign funds around.....there's some political infighting which could make that really interesting."

On the subject of the police state, Paul stated,

"If we don't change our ways we will go the way of Rome and I see that as rather sad.....the worst things happen when you get the so-called Republican conservatives in charge from Nixon on down, big government flourishes under Republicans."

"It's really hard to believe it's happening right in front of us. Whether it's the torture or the process of denying habeas corpus to an American citizen."

"I think the arrogance of power that they have where they themselves are like Communists....in the sense that they decide what is right. The Communist Party said that they decided what was right or wrong, it wasn't a higher source."

Paul responded to President Bush's announcement last week that he would order the use of military assets to police America in the event of an avian flu outbreak.

"To me it's so strange that the President can make these proposals and it's even plausible. When he talks about martial law dealing with some epidemic that might come later on and having forced quarantines, doing away with Posse Comitatus in order to deal with natural disasters, and hardly anybody says anything. People must be scared to death."

Paul, himself a medical doctor, agreed that the bird flu threat was empty fearmongering.

"I believe it is the President hyping this and Rumsfeld, but it has to be in combination with the people being fearful enough that they will accept the man on the white horse. My first reaction going from my political and medical background is that it's way overly hyped and to think that they have gone this far with it, without a single case in the whole country and they're willing to change the law and turn it into a military state? That is unbelievable! They're determined to have martial law."



Paul opined that the martial law provisions now being promoted by the Bush administration were a direct response to people's unwillingness to relinquish their firearms, as was seen in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Harper's Magazine: We Now Live in a Fascist State

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:34:38 -0700

The article below appears in the current issue of Harpers and was written
by Lewis H. Lapham

The difficulty doesn't arise among people accustomed to regarding themselves as functions of a corporation. Thanks to the diligence of out news media and the structure of our tax laws, our affluent and suburban classes have taken to heart the lesson taught to the aspiring serial killers rising through the ranks at West Point and the Harvard Business School -- think what you're told to think, and not only do you get to keep the house in Florida or command of the Pentagon press office but on some sunny prize day not far over the horizon, the compensation committee will hand you a check for $40 million, or President George W. Bush will bestow on you the favor of a nickname as witty as the ones that on good days elevate Karl Rove to the honorific "Boy Genius," on bad days to the disappointed but no less affectionate "Turd Blossom." Who doesn't now know that the corporation is immortal, that it is the corporation that grants the privilege of an identity, confers meaning on one's life, gives the pension, a decent credit rating, and the priority standing in the community? Of course the corporation reserves the right to open one's email, test one's blood, listen to the phone calls, examine one's urine, hold the patent on the copyright to any idea generated on its premises. Why ever should it not? As surely as the loyal fascist knew that it was his duty to serve the state, the true American knows that it is his duty to protect the brand.

Having met many fine people who come up to the corporate mark -- on golf courses and commuter trains, tending to their gardens in Fairfield County while cutting back the payrolls in Michigan and Mexico -- I'm proud to say (and I think I speak for all of us here this evening with Senator Clinton and her lovely husband) that we're blessed with a bourgeoisie that will welcome fascism as gladly as it welcomes the rain in April and the sun in June. No need to send for the Gestapo or the NKVD; it will not be necessary to set examples.

<snip.

The early twentieth-century fascists had to contend with individuals who regarded their freedom of expression as a necessity -- the bone and marrow of their existence, how they recognized themselves as human beings. Which was why, if sometimes they refused appointments to the state-run radio stations, they sometimes were found dead on the Italian autostrada or drowned in the Kiel Canal. The authorities looked upon their deaths as forms of self-indulgence. The same attitude governs the agreement reached between labor and management at our leading news organizations. No question that the freedom of speech is extended to every American -- it says so in the Constitution -- but the privilege is one that musn't be abused. Understood in a proper and financially rewarding light, freedom of speech is more trouble than it's worth -- a luxury comparable to owning a racehorse and likely to bring with it little else except the risk of being made to look ridiculous. People who learn to conduct themselves in a manner respectful of the telephone tap and the surveillance camera have no reason to fear the fist of censorship. By removing the chore of having to think for oneself, one frees up more leisure time to enjoy the convenience of the Internet services that know exactly what one likes to hear and see and wear and eat. We don't have to murder the intelligentsia.

Here again, we find ourselves in luck. The society is so glutted with easy entertainment that no writer or company of writers is troublesome enough to warrant the compliment of an arrest, or even the courtesy of a sharp blow to the head. What passes for the American school of dissent talks exclusively to itself in the pages of obscure journals, across the coffee cups in Berkeley and Park Slope, in half-deserted lecture halls in small Midwestern
colleges. The author on the platform or the beach towel can be relied upon to direct his angriest invective at the other members of the academy who failed to drape around the title of his latest book the garland of a rave review.

http://www.organicconsumers.org/Politics/harpers101205.cfm

And Harpers is consistently one of the best rags around. In the piece you expert from, he hits the nail on the head, once again.

Hi,

I'm new here and not sure of the house style, but may i ask for a source for that?

Much appreciated in advance.

hello to everyone else as well.:)

Here: http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=1306

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=1306

That's where I looked, got the source for the original post, but not for the update.

If you really need it and you've tried to google it, and still no response from a thread request, then try a PM, Private message. Be sure to copy the permalink (right-click permalink and copy the shortcut into the PM message area.)

Many people here are extremely professional. But, with many fast flying posts occasionally a follow-up post can get lost and a PM can be a nice way to prod.

Thanks for realizing the importance of links. Have fun here.

is because the original thread on this subject was DELETED I believe because of the link to the whole interview so I will not use it. You are correct one can find it if you google.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

We often ask for links when something warrents further study.. I believe you will find the source at the link in the post in question.

(So far, your "style" is more polite than the usual :D )

:hi:

The opponents of BushCo have a strange habit of meeting unfortunate "accidental" endings or being suicided.

They are punks... nothing more. If we can't subdue a country the size of Iraq - there ain't no way martial law would work here.

I haven't heard no Dem's bitching about this. Have you?

Don

would be a lot of opposition to that...more than he has employed in his NorthComm troops. So 'them' would be NorthComm, state and local police (maybe) against the rest of 'us' which I make out to be upwards to the rest of the country.

...I prefer not to keep a firearm in the house. I have always believed that in a rush of anger that it was better not to have an easy way to resolve the conflict.

I now own a deer rifle, shotgun and a pistol. This is against my better judgment; but in this time of an mis-administration who seems to believe in a fascist police state; I have erred on the side of paranoia.

Just because people at DU are paranoid does not mean that they are not out to get us...

up everything else.

However, the possibility of launching more attacks on other countries is very scary. It really sets up some nasty scenarios. MKJ

had full blown open market firearm sales on the streets of Baghdad. No background checks involved.
The Iraqis (at least the loyalists) freely discharged those weapons at open air Saddam rallies.

Never once did one round even get directed toward him.

By those standards we live under an exponentially more regressive regime.

The militarized police forces here swarm like flys on shit whenever they encounter even legally held weapons in the civilian sector.

Given the advanced state of our regression. I believe they are having a tougher time there than they will have here... also don't fool yourself into believing they have overwhelming force there doing confiscation. They are spread thin. If it happens here it will be a much different ballgame. There are agreements for foreign troops to be kicking in doors when that day comes.

the Congress, and we the people are the biggest dupes in the history of man, or there about for seemingly never in recorded history has a people been so duped.

Joseph Goebbels. Hitler's minister of Propoganda.

It feels like such a relief to hear someone actually saying these things out loud - and especially a Republican! He does seem like one of the most "courageous men" in Congress right now. (Although there isn't much competition)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Heck, a good deal of his base are there because they're afraid of the "'rats grabbing their guns" (which is nutty, of course).

Does anyone recall Clinton ever threatening martial law, even when his Presidency was threatened? Anyone?

You are a hero!

H.R. 3037, look it up, and show your support!

I posted the same article (different source) in the GDP forum - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2153452&mesg_id=2153452

you should take the time to read more about his fight against our fiat money system.

I know lots of elderly and when you say the word doctor its like WOW..

so DR. Paul has prescribed a new medicine for your acute bushititis..

Its very tasty and its known as Fitzgerald leafs ,made from genuine imported Irish herbs known only to St Patrick himself and his merry band of elfs.and it will leave no criminal unindicted plus its good for your SS pension

Consult your pharma-CIAST FOR THE Best deals..

he is a man of courage and integrity and at this point should take the logical step and... leave the R behind and become what he is, a Libertarian

:)

Friends of various political opinions (that differ from my Democratic mind) have sent me links to this very thing. One was from infowars.com.

Americans are not delusional - they're awake "now."

There will be those who take up arms. But those of us who believe there are powerful nonviolent ways to resist and overcome may get a good chance to put into practice the strategies of Gandhi and MLK.

Will there be teach-ins here on DU???

At any rate it will fail if Bush attempts it. These guys have failed at everything else.

Here's a dandy compendium of stuff Rep. Paul's concerned about from our friends at the Federation of American Scientists:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/

Warning: Long load time, with all them links and such.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul247.html

"When Congress passed the Patriot Act in the emotional aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks, a sunset provision was inserted in the bill that causes certain sections to expire at the end of 2005. But this begs the question: If these provisions are critical tools in the fight against terrorism, why revoke them after five years? Conversely, if these provisions violate civil liberties, why is it acceptable to suspend the Constitution for any amount of time?



Supporters of the Patriot Act argue that its provisions have not been abused since its passage in 2001. In essence, Justice Department officials are claiming, “Trust us – we’re the government and we say the Patriot Act does not threaten civil liberties.”

But this argument misses the point. Government assurances simply are not good enough in a free society. The overwhelming burden always must be placed on government to justify any new encroachment on our liberty. Now that the emotions of September 11th have cooled, the American people are less willing to blindly accept terrorism as an excuse for expanding federal surveillance powers.

It's easy for elected officials in Washington to tell the American people that government will do whatever it takes to defeat terrorism. Such assurances inevitably are followed by proposals either to restrict the constitutional liberties of the American people or spend vast sums from the federal treasury. We must understand that politicians and bureaucrats always seek to expand their power, without regard to the long-term consequences. If you believe in smaller government, ask yourself one simple question: Does the Patriot Act increase or decrease the power of the federal government over your life? The answer is obvious to those who understand that freedom cannot be exchanged for security."

MAYBE AN OCT SURPRISE HEY OCTAFISH

:kick:

sounds like we finally found ourselves the new "it's the economy, stupid!"

I'd be cleaning one and keeping a nice stock of dry ammo rather than handing it over to Bushco in the present political climate.

He's their Zell Miller! :rofl::rofl::rofl: Karma. Isn't it great?