RETRACTION ISSUED
FOR ORIGINAL ARTICLE AT THE BOTTOM.
I WAS MISTAKEN ABOUT RON PAUL.
I DO NOT BELIEVE IN HIM ANY MORE.


Dear friends,

We are in desperate times and are all looking for people we can trust. When someone appears to offer an answer we are naturally excited and motivated. I have loosely watched Ron Paul for some 6 years and was excited about him running for President. I even wrote several articles and posted them on my website: http://rpmgt.org/RonPaul.htm I was sincere in my research of this person but I did miss some things until last week. I will show some other matters below that have completely convinced me of my error. Since I did present a positive endorsement of this candidate I feel the need to share why I feel I was mistaken. I do not endorse anyone else.

Sincerely,

Rick

Dec. 23, 2007.


Ron Paul and John Paul.

A few more reasons why I was mistaken.

Ron Paul has recently stated publicly that he opposes a new world order and globalism bodies such as the Bilderberger group's ideas. He said in the recent YouTube Presidential debate that people behind such groups have a "conspiracy of ideas." http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=181930

On the other hand he is open to making America trade with all nations such as China, Iran, North Korea and Cuba. Ron Paul also praises world leaders such as Pope John Paul II who attended a Bilderberger meeting with Clinton, supported the formation of a European Union, and who called for a New World Order and a one world religion (gathered with all the religions of the world he said, "We are all praying to the same god."). He called him "one of the great religious leaders of modern times, and an eloquent champion of human freedom and dignity." http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul242.html "The Pope's commitment to human dignity" was "grounded in the teachings of Christ" which Ron Paul supposed led him to oppose "the death penalty" (hypocritically). At the end of his first speech on the subject before the House of Representatives, after the Pope's death, he concluded that he was "pleased to pay tribute to Pope John Paul II. I would encourage those who wish to honor his memory to reflect on his teachings regarding war and the sanctity of life"... While these comments focus on a few issues, it is hard to overlook the sexual scandals that have rocked the church pertaining to the sanctity of life under the Pope's leadership (among other serious disregards of the sanctity of life too numerous to mention).

In the second speech Ron Paul praises the Pope for being "a great man of God and peace" POPE JOHN PAUL II RECEIVES A MARK IN HIS FOREHEAD BY A PAGAN SHIVA PRIESTESS and rebukes politicians for not honoring him in such a way during his life, and for "support [of] policies that are totally at odds with Catholic teachings." http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul244.html Paul was showing his universalism as you see in the picture to the right. He further rebukes them of hypocrisy for having "very short memories." We would ask that same question to the aged doctor with his opposition to the New World Order and the formation of a North American Union if he has either changed his mind or has a "very short memory"? He said further, "Liberals also routinely denounced the Pope for maintaining that Catholicism, like all religions, has rules that cannot simply be discarded to satisfy the cultural trends of the time." Jesuitism stepping on the neck of Protestantism Considering that "Catholic teachings" (as depicted in the present Vatican statues to the left where Jesuitism is stepping on the neck of Protestantism) and "rules" never "discarded", still retain the exact 'infallible' doctrines that called for total dominance and prescribed the bloody Inquisition, we find this hypocritical rebuke most astonishing. Despite any claims of regret about the longest and largest holocaust in human history, which also resurfaced during WWII where the same doctrines justified the Vatican uniting with Hitler and other tyrants to resume the same kinds of holocausts, official Catholic doctrine remains the same with no attempts to remove such "Catholic teachings" from their "rules". See the following documentary: http://arcticbeacon.com/movies/catholic_inquisition_torture.html He further rebuked the members of Congress while saying "that the Pope's pronouncements were theological, not political." Yet it would be very hard to understand how the actions and words of the leader of the Vatican were not political. Pope John Paul II declared mass murderer Sir Thomas More, Lord Chancellor of England during the reign of Henry VIII, the patron saint of statesmen and politicians. Sir Thomas More had Saint William Tyndale— the father of the English Bible— arrested and burned alive. Just look at all the top politians praying to Sir Thomas Moore here at the traditional Roman Catholic Red Mass. Indeed, doctor Ron Paul has a "very short memory."

Some people who oppose the Globalist neoconservative agenda, as Ron Paul has been well known for, are troubled by the fact that he coauthored a book in 1993 with Lewis E. Lehrman who is a neoconservative and one of the directors of The Project for a New American Century. People may explain away that connection but the late Pope's actions in promoting the United Nations as well as a new world order were very obvious to everyone. Further, the Pope made great efforts to make all world religions into one, contradicting the obvious fundamental differences they all have in reference to origins, meaning, morality and destiny.

While Ron Paul now says he does not support the conspiracy theories of Alex Jones, he has appeared on his show numerous times over the years in a way which gave most people the opposite impression. This has prompted critics like Glen Beck to ask Ron Paul directly what his views about government involvement with 911 terrorism are. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YUukbFgQcY Paul responded to the surprise of many conspiracy theorists that the theories were bizarre and preposterous while advocating that instead it all came down to a bad foreign policy and leadership ineptness. While it is true that the specific theories Beck asked about, which Paul used those words to describe, were one set of theories, Paul nevertheless did give a categorical rejection of all conspiracy theories for that event and used the same language when asked on other programs. Two things that were the most surprising about Paul's belittling statements against what Alex Jones holds as obvious fact, were that Ron Paul claimed to never even hear some of the well known theories Glen Beck had addressed, and that Alex Jones continued his support and respect for Ron Paul in the same way as if the interview never happened. Firstly, Ron Paul has heard these theories numerous times over the years in numerous interviews on the Jones show, as well as from numerous persons who have corresponded with him both as a Congressman as well as a presidential candidate. This denial is an obvious lie. When I asked the dailypaul.com forum what their thoughts were about this, many argued just as Beck said, that he had to lie.


    Update addition on this point.

    On the Alex Jone show Jan 8, 2008 the following question and answer was given at the end of the mid-day brodcast concerning Ron Paul's answer to Glen Beck's question about 911 conspiracy theories:

    1 minute clip of Alex Jones claiming Ron Paul was playing politics about 911

    "Ron can't really talk about that right now, can he?"
    "Let me just say this... everytime he is on this transmission, every time, he brings up, 'I'm afraid they might stage something to go into Iran, I'm afraid of a provication like Gulf of Tonkin. They've staged things before.' So to our audience he tips his hat. But ya he is playing politics on the other end of it. And I'm not going to say anything more. I happen to know. [pause] I'm just joking actually, I don't know anything. Ha ha, ha ha, ha, ha, ha. The point is that that just don't worry about it all right?"



    Further update on this point.

    On January 10th 2008 on the Fox debate in SC the second question asked to Ron Paul was the following as transcribed here, and on video here.

    "Many of your supporters call themselves 911 truthers. They believe that the US government was in some way complicit with the 911 attacks or covered it up. Are you tonight prepared to either embrace that rhetoric or ask those supporters to abandon it? Or divorce themselves from your candidancy?"

    "I can't tell people what to do, but I've abandoned those viewpoints. I don't believe that, and that's the only thing that is important. And so I don't endorse anything they say," he said without officially asking his backers to cease that type of rhetoric.

    "Sir would you ask them to cease that rhetoric on your behalf?" "Well, it doesn't do me any good, so if they care about me, they should. But the only thing I have control over is what I believe and what I say," Paul said.


Secondly, Alex Jones has been an outspoken and harsh critic of those who disbelieve his theories. His continued support of Ron Paul contradicts many years of criticizing of others who made the exact same statements as Ron Paul has just made. Further, while Jones has avoided almost all discussion about the Vatican and the NWO he did produce an article opposing the Pope a few years ago when he pushed for the NWO:

http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/pope_bush_proposed_chaplain_nwo.htm

To be consistent, if it were anyone else, Jones would have dismissed Ron Paul as endorsing the NWO for his comments about the late Pope (as well as for the way he dismissed Jones' theories).

The Alex Jones media machine has been a major contributor to the Ron Paul campaign. Most of Jones' listeners support Ron Paul. The question we have after the Beck interview and the praising statements about Pope John Paul, is why? The two are mutually exclusive. Alex Jones' doctrine and practice has called Ron Paul's views as stated deceitful and cowardly for someone in his position. But he will not act consistently. Instead, he went on the attack against Glen Beck for asking the questions Americans wanted to know about Ron Paul. Even Jones' sidekicks the Watson brothers, who run his websites and write articles for him, thought the interview went very well. But Jones said on his show that he disagreed with these brothers. Very revealing indeed!

Jones has further stated on radio that he was significantly influential in getting Ron Paul to run for President and also that his camp coined the term or started the recent Ron Paul Revolution. During the same period where Paul was distancing himself from 911 conspiracy theories, Jones published totally unsupported claims about NWO assassination plans for Ron Paul: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/121407_assassinating_paul.htm

This was a major subject on the dailyPaul.com forums for the next week even though there was much action to stop all discussion about it. I'm sure this will bring many thoughts to peoples minds... The Watson and Jones team have continually used these kinds of sensational claims in the past. Notice the strength of the argument in the following statement: " Estulin, whose information has unfortunately proven very accurate in the past, went public with the bombshell news [about a Ron Paul assassination plot] during an appearance on The Alex Jones Show today." Jones always draws a lot of attention to his industry whenever such prophetically false claims are made to scare his audience. Typical with all cult groups, the prophesy is given with some disclaimer and hope that it will not happen, but the natural impression is given to all followers that it will definitely happen. When it doesn't happen, and the hype is long gone, the disclaimer is then used to justify the sensational prophesy. Jones has done this repeatedly, and actually daily reinforces the false predictions. He is bound to be right one time out of a hundred. But just last year in the summer he gave a very solemn warning that the end was really coming this time. War was about to start up like we have never seen it, within a month. This was special and equal only to his prediction about 9/11 (which he falsely claimed he was the first to warn about). Well actually he did make a real fool of himself and his followers on December 31, 1999. The disclaimer clause in this more resent case was that his listeners could make a difference by activism. Nevertheless the terror continued to scare everyone in the same way that so many cult leaders have scared their sheep.


    Example of how hateful, violent and foul Alex Jones is. Warning graphic and murderous language!

    Alex Jones has rebuked others over the years for using foul language on his show, but lately he has finally shown his own real character in this regard. Alex Jones is an actor who has gradually lead his sheep to the delusions he has desired. For years he called for non-violence (while his body language and voice tones contradicted it) but this clip shows the listener his real philosophy and plan to stir up a violent revolution. If you really can know someone by their fruit we can see that Jones is just as perverse as those he is claiming to attack. It soon becomes manifest to the impartial observer that he is really promoting the same agendas. Like a frog in the pot his listeners have had the water temperature turned up slowly so that they did not suspect or notice the changes this man has made over the years. His program, run on the ABC owned GCN media, has gradually moved towards violence, filth and delusion. Another example is the increased promotion of death metal Satanic music on the program. He used to play music for only a short period of time but now he runs this death metal filth for prolonged periods after his breaks. He does not claim to be a saint even though he claims to be a Christian. The following video shows that he is not Christian and actually an agent provocateur. This is Ron Paul's friend.


    Lest you think Ron Paul is way above these kinds of things, the fact is that he has continually appeared on the Alex Jones show over the years and has spoken sympathetically with Jones as he made numerous sensational claims. Late this summer, just before the Ron Paul Revolution really took off, Ron Paul made the following statement on the show: "If I were a betting man I would bet that they will attack Iran before the end of this administration, which means in the next year or so. The plans have been laid just like the plans were laid to go into Iraq a long time before they did but they had to wait for the right opportunity." http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/280807_iran_attack.htm This fit in perfectly with all the hype Jones was engaged in for the last 3 or 4 years about Iran. First it was April 2005, then Fall of that year. Then Fall 2006. Now we have about a year to go. But now things have changed with Iran. The scare tactics will continue. Both these men criticize the government for scaring the people into following them, but they are on record for doing the same. Every time Alex Jones produces a new scary terrorism video of the nature of an Osama video, which many times features Ron Paul, it successfully draws in more support for this scare media industrial complex. (I should mention here also that GCN is actually owned by ABC!) Alex Jones always asks the fitting question on his show (or at least he used to), Who stands to gain? It should be evident by now. See also A Critique of Alex Jones' Endgam3 Documentary.

    Are these predictions and associations and endorsements a sign of hypocrisy and poor judgment or something merely accidental that is not worthy of our attention? Hope and fear for America may be a little more accurate. We hear that Hollywood went on strike but it appears the entertainment has just moved to the Internet.


    Further evidence of the incredible delusion and fundamental contradiction of Alex Jones about Pope John Paul II.

    After listening to the Alex Jones show for years, as well as reading his network of websites, there is precious little to be found there about the Vatican corruption in history and in modern times. Even though Jones tirelessly rants minute by minute and spouts forth threats of revenge and attacks against this "NWO and their minions," we only find one or two mentions about the Pope's involvement of such! In the below link we find one such example without any comment or reference to the following quote:

    "Bush senior proposed that Pope John Paul II become "the chaplain of the New World Order"

    http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/pope_bush_proposed_chaplain_nwo.htm

    Then we find another quotation of a CNN article about the Pope:


    Pope calls for a New World Order

    CNN | January 1, 2004

    [ http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/01/01/pope.ny.ap/ ]

    VATICAN CITY (AP) -- Pope John Paul II rang in the New Year on Thursday with a renewed call for peace in the Middle East and Africa and the creation of a new world order based on respect for the dignity of man and equality among nations.

    John Paul presided over a morning Mass inside St. Peter's Basilica to mark the World Day of Peace, which the Roman Catholic Church celebrates every January 1. He appeared in good form, delivering his entire homily in a strong and clear voice despite a relatively tiring holiday schedule.

    This year, John Paul directed his thoughts to continuing conflicts around the globe. But he stressed that to bring about peace, there needs to be a new respect for international law and the creation of a "new international order" based on the goals of the United Nations.

    He called for "an order that is able to give adequate solutions to today's problems based on the dignity of the human being, on an integral development of society, on solidarity among nations rich and poor, on the sharing of resources and the extraordinary results of scientific and technical progress."

Yet exactly 15 months later another article appears about the Pope after he dies. Alex Jones' webmaster Paul Watson wrote and published on his propagandamatrix.com website as well as both of Jones' prisonplanet.com and infowars.com websites the following article that remains to this day. Notice both the question asked and the ludicrous answer given to this vastly important subject. No other NWO, Bilderberger attendees, United Nations and EU promoters get this kind of treatment and reasoning. All others have received continual assault by this man and his friends. At the same time Ron Paul praises him as a great man of God, Alex Jones reasons thus:

    As Pope Nears Death; Has He Hindered Or Helped The New World Order?

    http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/april2005/010405nearsdeath.htm
    http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/pope_nears_death_helped_or_hindered_nwo.htm
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2005/010405nearsdeath.htm

    Propaganda Matrix | April 1 2005
    Prison Planet | April 1, 2005

    CNN SNIP : Pope John Paul II's condition remained "serious" early Friday, but he appeared to be responding well to antibiotic treatment for a urinary tract infection that caused him to develop a fever, a Vatican official said.

    Thursday night, as his health deteriorated, the pontiff was given the last rites of the Roman Catholic Church, a Vatican source told CNN.

    ---------------------

    Isn't it almost BEYOND COINCIDENCE that the Pope had a feeding tube inserted and now looks to be on the verge of death?

    Is it far-fetched to suggest that this is a sign from God - a message delivered as 'edtorial commentary' from the big guy upstairs? A sign that major global upheaval is again about to take place on the scale of 9/11?

    Many accuse the Pope of being a New World Order shill but his recent statements were on the whole, excluding his pro-EU stance, in line with what an ANTI-GLOBALIST would say.

    FLASHBACK: Pope Condemns Mercy Killings of Elderly
    FLASHBACK: Pope Condemns Unethical Science, Cloning
    FLASHBACK: Pope likens abortion to Holocaust

    But then again he was a Bilderberg attendee and not so long ago called for a New World Order so it's still an open question.

    It may be the case that in the last year or so as his condition grew worse he began to regret his past actions and tried to redeem himself.

    ----------------------

    Dear Paul;

    I just read your article on the website, and I would like to make a few comments:

    1. The Pope, while supportive of the EU, has nevertheless been very critical of their aims. Before the signing of the EU charter, he tried to get a clause placed in the charter recognizing Europe's Christian heritage, but it was rejected. He has since withdrawn much of his support for the EU, based on its secular character I would also add that his reasons for supporting the EU have to do with concerns over Poland's economic status, not with global empire.

    2. Secondly, as Jim Tucker stated on Wednesday's program, the Pope was not at the Bilderberg conference, but in his native Poland. Here's a press release from June 1999: http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/archives/.......

    3. Finally, the Globalists are supposed to have life-extension machines that rejuvenate health, and expand the human lifespan beyond the expected 120 year limit. If the Pope is such a big supporter of the New World Order, then where is HIS life extension machine?

    ----------------------

    OCCULT SYMBOLISM OF TERRI'S DEATH, MAYBE OF POPE TOO?

    Rumor Mill News

    The occult numerology symbolism in these dates cannot escape us.

    Terri died on the 31st after starving to death for 13 days

    that is a mirror, they do this a lot...

    13/31

    not to mention that 13 is a very highly important number for them...

    Also, as far as the Pope goes...

    IF John Paul were to die TODAY

    that would make a lot of sense that they would pick today because...

    ALL of the Fatima visions were given on the 13th
    Sister Lucia died on the 13th
    the Pope was shot on the 13th
    a lot of the third secret revelations were made on the 13th...

    for the Pope to die on the 31st, the mirror date to the 13th would make PERFECT sense....

    Unless he can hold on till the 19th as that is a very ritually significant day for them, but no, I predict here and now that when this pope dies it will be on the 13th or on the 31st of a month. The 13th has been so highly significant in John Paul's term as Pope, it has been prevelant all through his time as head of the church.

    It just might be today because after him being shot on the 13th and Lucia dying on that day, the same as the Fatima visions, it would maybe be a little too obvious to have him pass on the 13th, so they would go with the next best thing... the mirror date of the number, to keep the masses in the dark while sending the message loud and clear to those in the know.



    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul242.html

    Honoring Pope John Paul II A Consistent Pro-Life Figure

    Ron Paul Before the US House of Representatives, April 6, 2005.

    Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues in paying tribute to the life and legacy of Pope John Paul II. Pope John Paul II was one of the great religious leaders of modern times, and an eloquent champion of human freedom and dignity. Unlike all-too-many misguided religious leaders, the Pope understood that liberty, both personal and economic, is a necessary condition for the flourishing of human virtue.

    The Pope's commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become one of the most eloquent spokesmen for the consistent ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty.

    Unfortunately, few in American politics today adhere to the consistent ethic of life, thus we see some who cheered the Pope's stand against the war and the death penalty while downplaying or even openly defying his teachings against abortion and euthanasia.

    ....

    In conclusion, I am pleased to pay tribute to Pope John Paul II. I would encourage those who wish to honor his memory to reflect on his teachings regarding war and the sanctity of life,



    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul244.html

    Theology, Not Politics
    I'm happy to witness so many politicians honoring a great man of God and peace. The problem, however, is that so few of them honored him during his lifetime by their actions as legislators. In fact, most members of Congress support policies that are totally at odds with Catholic teachings.

    The hypocritical pro-war conservatives lauding him today have very short memories.

    Both conservatives and liberals cannot understand that the Pope's pronouncements were theological, not political.

    He was a man of God, not a man of the state. He was not a policy maker, but rather a steward of long-established Catholic doctrine. His mission was to save souls, not serve the political agendas of any nation, party, or politician.

    The Pope's commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become an eloquent and consistent advocate for an ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty.

    But no politician will ever produce even a tiny fraction of the legacy left by Pope John Paul II.

    ....

    Ron Paul



    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17083

    Clinton, Pope join Bilderbergers
    Secret meeting of global movers, shakers in Portugal

    What do Steven Spielberg, Pope John Paul II, Ted Turner, Boris Yeltsin, Bill Clinton and House Speaker Dennis Hastert have in common? They are among those on a "partial guest list" of expected attendees to the 1999 Bilderberg meeting in Portugal scheduled for next week.


Ron Paul Votes to make Bush the Decider

What makes Ron Paul's decisions about 911 evidence relevant is the fact that he voted in favor of the following Bill: http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/sjres23.enr.html even though he was aware of the intentions of the administration to seek an actual war in that direction This law stated: "That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." The key part is "he determines". He had already determined on the day of the event who was responsible. Paul now complains that this wrongly resulted in a war, but he was very much aware of the neoconservative plans for total domination (as fully developed in the PNAC policy a year earlier). Where is the evidence to justify a vote in that direction? He still supports that decision. This is a matter of concern and is inconsistent with anti-war or just-war philosophy when no proof exists for such a decision. That which was presented was mere statements without evidence amounting to proof. Mere assertion is not proof, and evidence is not proof until it is beyond reasonable doubt. For conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, who believe there was and is evidence in a contrary direction, this then becomes a fundamental issue. It is a persistent decision that would indicate a reckless policy of aggression in view of what was a predictable outcome. This single decision paved the way for the entire mess we are in today. Even a Ron Paul meetup group leader on the ronpaulforums.com admited that this was a mistake. John Stevens writes: "Sorry folks - it looks as though this is a blemish on the good Doctor's stellar record in Congress." "The best response I can give is that as good as Ron Paul is - he is not perfect. This vote was a mistake." This takes away much of the strength of Ron Paul's attacks against all the other candidates, as well as the administration, for their actions in relation to the war in Iraq. For he reasons the exact same way claiming that there was not sufficient evidence to justify such actions. Yet the evidence is still lacking for his vote. We would ask how one can favor the one intelligence analysis and reject the later? This is another fundamental inconsistency.

See also A Critique of Alex Jones' Endgam3 Documentary.

Halfway out of Rome into full Gospel Liberty. Progress from Luther's Partial Coming out of Rome to a Full Return to Biblical Consistency and the Real Principles of the Reformation.



THE FOLLOWING IS NOW RETRACTED:

FUNDAMENTAL DISCUSSION:
The Spirit of the Ron Paul Revolution

First posted at DailyPaul.com

Also below: Are You Above Reproach? Ron Paul's Virtue rather than the opposite.


IntroductionBookstoreLibraryPublishingGuest BookContactUpdates

This is a rather important topic that needs to be addressed throughout this next year. While everyone is primarily focused on the issues they agree with we also need to consider how this will manifest in believers. These Ron Paul forums are having some struggles with different personalities, and that is to be expected. This is America and there is every kind of people in America. There is every kind of attitude also. People will agree with Ron Paul on issues for different reasons. They will support him differently. We live in a day where the whole education system has taught people to be selfish and intellectually prejudiced. Thus we will see the fruit of this manifesting in any revolution. We will see fanaticism as well as commonsense and prudence. We will see many people wanting to push the revolution to a point that looks like violence. We already see people are desperate to try anything to get people's attention to Ron Paul and his positions, etc.

I expect that all types of Americans will continue to get behind Ron Paul. This will be very exciting to watch. It will also be ugly to see in some respects as we see the face of America, and where some relatively few evils can spoil the mood and name of a revolution. We have to learn to live with that and expect it. Ron Paul is about allowing freedom of expression. Thus you will see everyone wanting to express themselves as they think best. Many are anxious and will offend many with their imprudence. This will turn people off even though it draws attention to RP. Soon everyone will know of Ron Paul, having had good or bad introductions to him through people who support him. Hopefully the relatively few evils will not cause too much of a problem. The videos have been the best thing for the cause.

But here I want to recommend a solution for discussion. While this RP Revolution is not necessarily about Ron Paul the person, but about getting back to a just dealing with the Constitution and righteously upholding the rule of law in our day, etc., it is very important for us to look at the example of HOW Ron Paul has promoted this classic American philosophy over the last 30 years.

Please discuss this out in your own way as it is vital for America to express itself. It is vital that we understand Ron Paul's spirit and character. It is not merely the positions Ron Paul has taken over the years that have given him success, but the manner he has presented them. His tone or mood is critical. His attitudes are very worthy of our focus if we want to keep this cause sound and successful. If we just focus on the issues, irrespective of how they are promoted or received, then we will have a very ugly situation. And indeed, there are many people who would want to direct this revolution in the way of fanaticism and violence. We must guard against that with wisdom and virtue. So please discuss Ron Paul's character over the last thirty years in office. This will also help people to learn about who Ron Paul really is while also instructing the irrational on how to be civil and truly effective in promoting these causes. This will cure a lot of the evils going on.

I will start with a brief personal statement example, but want to allow you people to do some positive work here. I have watched Ron Paul for over five years in congress and on radio shows. He is always kind to those he disagrees with. He is patient with gathering facts and does not run off with the evidence that does NOT amount to proof as most people do today. He is a man of principle. Just look at the recent interview in the Situation Room where they brought up all the times he was the only person in congress to vote against something. Just look at his priceless response that shows him to be a simple man of principle. He was not willing to go with the flow even for a good cause as that would open the door to encouraging abuse of law. He is a man of priority and focuses on the most important issues. He is a man of wisdom in putting his energies where they will effectively accomplish a reasonable goal. He is responsible in that he really takes the time to read the bills he votes on, unlike most of the rest on the hill who are prejudiced. He is a man for the people because he is one of the people. Look at what he has proposed for the Congress in respect to their salaries and benefits. More importantly, look how he has lived in these last 10 terms. He returns money given him, etc.! He is a man that really listens to everyone and has no showiness about him. No fake PR moments like most of the rest. A down-to-earth guy, a real family man. Now look at his dealing with Bernanke the other day. There was our example of not only the words to say, all carefully stated and backed with strong arguments, but in meekness. He does not overstate his positions, but humbly gives us the facts as they are. No drawing attention to himself. No attempt to control others in desperation. No fallacies. No bad attitudes.

Do watch these videos people, and learn of Ron Paul's spirit and character. This is the single most important thing for this Revolution. This is a very important cure for those who are fanatical and imprudent and hasty and obnoxious. We need to push the videos over and over as Ron Paul is the best example we have today. Don't just stress watching them for the truth content, but also for the virtue content. Did you get the difference? Learn of Ron Paul's spirit. This must be the Spirit of this Revolution or it will come to nothing good. While we don't want to make Ron Paul the only answer for America, the best solution I have right now is to recommend people to focus in on Ron Paul's spirit in this way. I see this as the best solution for encouraging everyone on in this cause and to best ensure that the Ron Paul Revolution doesn't become taken over with bad attitudes, methods, and agendas. This will be the biggest concern over the next year. Please discuss this. I'm putting up a web page for people to read this. Please post your comments below and give testimony about how you recommend Ron Paul's spirit to the people in this Revolution and to your neighbors.

Rick Friedrich
November 10, 2007


Are You Above Reproach?
Ron Paul's Virtue rather than the opposite.

November 16, 2007

Again, I wish to encourage everyone to focus in a little to not just what Ron Paul stands for but how he stands for truth. We are at a critical point as supporters. Either we will act as Ron Paul does in wisdom and peace or we will go off on these distractions and go downhill into negatives.

Are we going to act like kids who are easily manipulated into falling into traps or we are going to act like adults and wisely place our energies where it counts?

Some of us warned that the use of the day Nov. 5th would give us the kind of reaction that has happened. This should have been a lesson. This mess over the last few days would have not existed to the extent that it does. One problem leads to another.

We saw the day as a lesser evil and so we gave on that day as well. We are glad for the drive but did not care about movie or the day in history. A better day should have been chosen. Ron Paul rightly had to distance himself from that part of the idea, and many other grassroots efforts. Yes he did mention the day at least once, but it was good that he did not get behind the choice of that day.

The same thing goes for the choice for Dec. 16 as the next day. This is going to have the same result, if not worse, among the critics. This could have been avoided by simply making it Dec. 15 and focus on the Bill of Rights. Instead of people focusing in on how our rights in the constitution have been removed people are going to focus in on the act of dumping tea into the water with all the negative implications. Why was this day immediately settled upon without discussion? It was decided before the worst criticism over the last few days, so does this not give grounds to change the day to Dec 15 instead?

There are going to be mistakes and evils that are unavoidable, but we need to strive to live above reproach. The only way the critics can gain any victory over us is to cause us to abandon the wise example of Dr. Ron Paul and descend into diversions, fanaticism, and anger. We need the virtue displayed in Ron Paul and hold back the tongue from returning evil for evil while forcefully driving the truth home with logic and facts. Everyone agrees that we have the facts to our advantage. Logic is also to our advantage, even though there still are many fanatics causing trouble with real facts. But do we have virtue? This is what the spirit of the Ron Paul Revolution has to become known for. Not just the truths. There is no Hope For America without America becoming virtuous. Hope implies a virtuous return to honesty and the truth, not a mere acknowledgment of facts.

Ron Paul has displayed such virtue over the last 30+ years. This is why people are attracted to him. We need to see such men multiplied by the thousands. Will each of you join up for the Ron Paul Revolution in this sense of virtue? Will you dare to stand alone for 30 years if it takes that? Dare to be principled? Or will you give into temptation to return dirt for dirt and play dirty politics? It is not even about the Constitution with Ron Paul, it is about virtue. He will not violate the real laws of the land when all the others in congress do so often. Why? Not because he worships the Constitution, but because he is a man of honor and principle. Now we need to have this reputation as well.

We will only win if our cause is right. It is only right if it stays above reproach. We must avoid the traps that will be set up. Many are falling into them because they are driven by passion and not reason with patience. People, don't follow the crowds into trouble. The critics are infatuated with terrorism, and eat, drink, and sleep with that passion. They will try and accuse us of such and will plant agents to stir up the same. So what will you do? Will you be lead by passion or virtuous principle? The choice is yours America. You will get what you want. Don't fall for the traps. Be an example of virtue and focus your energies on encouraging others to be likewise. Present the facts in the context of virtue as many are doing. This is the only thing that is attractive in the Hope for America message. The hope of the restoration of virtue in American politics, foreign and domestic. It is because we have FAITH in one man on the Hill. That man is virtuous. We want our governments to be virtuous,--honest, just, loving, compassionate, wise, efficient, etc. We must convince the country that he is just who he claims to be. But if we want to put him in office we need to act the same way.

I proposed a discussion about the spirit of the Ron Paul Revolution for people to post their testimony about Ron Paul's character:

http://dailypaul.com/node/6799

and relatively few people responded. It is easy to fall into speculation, gossip, and attacking others isn't it? I want to see you people stop tolerating distractions that take away rational hope. Instead, get down to the real issues. What is Ron Paul's message about? Is it about liberty to do your own thing irrespective of everyone else? Or is it about the liberty in virtue? You can only have real liberty and happiness if you are virtuous. Do not be slaves of men and fall to the distractions. Rise up to the example given us.



Financial disclosure form proves that he's authentic

On November 10th, 2007 mountain.maiden says:

Ron Paul's candidate disclosure form came out a few days ago and we studied it closely.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/pfd2006/N00005906_2006_Pres.pdf

Obviously he has had a decent income from being a medical doctor etc., and that is to be expected.

The investments into which he has put his money totally speak to him being a man of principle and good character. He puts his money where his mouth is. His investments are predominantly large and mid-cap precious metal mining stocks.

We were surprised, but very delighted, to see a portfolio that is very similar to what we (longtime precious metal stock investors) would expect of a fellow believer in a system of honest money founded upon the Constitution. We went down the list of companies and knew quite a bit about most of them, as we have owned some of the same ones. It was also clear from his list of mining companies that he either reads quite a bit and knows the difference between unhedged (the good companies) and hedged ones (the latter being companies who hypocritically seek to profit from the FALL in the price of their product), or else that he has a really good advisor who has studied the matter in as much detail as we do. Made us want to high-five and say "Brother!!"

The present monetary system of the United States is not in accordance with the following clauses of the Constitution:

  • Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 of the Constitution states: “The Congress shall have Power…To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.”
  • Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 states that: “No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.”
  • Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 states that: “The Congress shall have Power…To borrow Money on the credit of the United States.”

The Constitutionally-granted power to borrow money does not include the power to loan, create, or hold title to the money of The People of the United States.

Dr. Paul put his money where his mouth is. And from the stock portfolio it is apparent that he did it a long time ago. His position on this issue never wavered. This is a clear and shining example that unequivocally illustrates his character.

This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he believes in what he advocates. It proves that, unlike many other candidates who seize the "issue of the day" because some poll tells them it might be popular with a segment of the electorate (resulting in flip-flops on issues, a clear indication of lack of principle), Ron Paul is a man of principle.

A principled person is one whose behavior arises from a set of firmly-held foundational beliefs; therefore, their behavior tends to be very consistent over a very long period of time. This is so very important for a candidate. When you vote for a person, you would like some assurance that once in office, they will behave exactly the same way they did prior to being elected. By contrast, if the candidate is an "issue of the day" person who panders to every poll by getting a new makeover, then who knows what they will do in office? But if the person is a man of principle like Ron Paul, you can feel quite confident that he actually believes in what he espouses, because he has demonstrated a lifelong belief in it, and will continue to do so when in office.

There is nothing like putting your own money on the line to demonstrate what you really believe in.

To me, Ron Paul's investment portfolio is the most powerful statement of all that he is a true believer in a free and fair system, founded on the U.S. Constitution, that enables individual liberty for all, by limiting the powers of government and providing an honest system of weights and measures, and an honest monetary system. Such a system protects individuals from money confiscation by a untrustworthy government officials and a rapacious Fed. The Fed's mandate is, fundamentally, to confiscate the fruits of everyone's labors and deprive the economy of capital that enables growth, by penalizing hardworking thrifty savers and by continuously debasing the value of their savings. This present system also rewards those who do not save and those who demand handouts from government and their fellow hardworking citizens. (Compare this with Nancy Pelosi's speech a few days ago where she proposed heavily taxing retirement benefits and profits on investments, and giving the money to illegal aliens who "want to live like Americans"; that's flat-out communism in my book -- put your hand in my pocket, steal my money that I worked my whole life to save so I could retire with financial security, and give it away to people who broke our laws in an effort to buy their votes -- utterly despicable and reprehensible!!)

This is definitely a litmus-paper issue with these two voters!

Sincerely
Mountain Maiden

P.S. To see Ron Paul making these points when Ben Bernanke testified before Congress last week, see this video clip on You Tube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj9KHJRRUbQ

Dr. Paul ends by stating forcefully (and accurately) that the Fed's policy of increasing the money supply is exactly the same as stealing money from every person who saves. True! Bernanke's stammering response was weak and could have been rebutted in one sentence but I guess they ran out of time on that video. Bernanke said, I paraphrase, "A loss in the value of the dollar does not affect Americans as long as they live and shop inside the country." A bald-faced lie!!! Every product that Americans consume includes cost components that come from outside the country. For example motor fuels and transportation costs affect the cost of virtually every product we consume, even locally-produced food. Plastics are made from petrochemicals. The majority of commodities and raw materials come from outside the country, and their prices are rising to exactly the same extent that the US dollar is falling. A Fed chair who denies that $100 per barrel crude oil (because of the decreasing value of the U.S. dollar) will affect Americans who only shop domestically is either incompetent, or a liar. I suspect Bernanke is both. He certainly knew he was lying when he made the assertion. You could tell by the look on his face. What about automobiles? Few are produced in the country anymore, GM and Ford are dying, but those few domestically produced vehicles still have many foreign-sourced ingredients such as steel, plastic, energy, etc. We don't even have a manufacturing industry in this country anymore, due to the Fed's longstanding policies which caused most heavy industry jobs to move overseas where artifical currency levels set by governments deliberately promoted growth in foreign manufacturing while destroying our local U.S. industrial base. So in this way Bernanke's statement was also ludicrous, because there is no way that domestic products sourced entirely from domestic U.S. components are even available to Americans.

  • See what the NY Sun, November 12, 2007, wrote about this Ron Paul and Bernanke exchange: Ron Paul's Prescience nysun.com/article/66303


    http://www.RonPaul2008.com/

    Ron Paul Graphs

    Ron Paul A New Hope for America CD Drive

    A Critique of Alex Jones' Endgam3 Documentary.

    Does Hope for America mean that it may once again be said In God We Trust?

    Possible Third Great Awakening with the Hope For America Ron Paul Revolution

    An Urgent Appeal by a Regular Working American: Presidential Candidate Congressman Ron Paul is the only Perspective Answer to the Present Economic and Political Crisis.

    eXTReMe Tracker