Posted on 03/23/2010 4:05:57 PM PDT by La Enchiladita
Below is a video of Rand Paul with his pal Adam Kokesh talking about their common "movement".
Read a report at Gathering of Eagles about James Bancroft's "mighty stand for truth" as he has resigned the Hartford Tea Party over their support for Peter Schiff who is part of this Libertarian "movement" with Adam Kokesh. Please read the whole post.
There is no doubt in my mind that Ron Paul's libertarian movement is attempting to take over the Republican Party through co-opting the Tea Party movement. We've seen this here in Kentucky as a good chunk of our Tea Party leaders supported Bill Johnson, but Rand Paul's big money (77% of it coming from out of state people in this "liberty movement") gave him credibility with the media and made him able to bill himself as "the Tea Party candidate" here. It was all a hoax, of course, and now Kentucky's grassroots-selected candidate has been disenfranchised.
Across America, the story seems to be the same. Many people involved in politics for the first time in many years have no idea that the Ron Paul / Rand Paul camp is actually anti-war, hates the 14th amendment and the 17th amendment and.....believe in UFOs. Like the people in the Hartford Tea Party who would not listen to Mr. Bancroft, they are being duped with the "broadened message" of Rand Paul and other candidates in this "movement". It's like Obama all over again.
(Excerpt) Read more at genuinegopmom.blogspot.com ...
To wit:
I'm all for nuking Mecca and Medina, let's do it already. Problem is, it'll never happen. Western Civilization doesn't have the cajones to ever do that. Also, the threat of nuking these cities doesn't work either. It's like telling the Japanese, “Hey, we got these two really big bombs, it's time to surrender” - And, then we never drop the bombs. Only the actual bombing of Hiroshima/Nagasaki woke them up. But that was the 40’s and West. Civ. still had a spine. It'll never happen again.
Well, then, I don't know what to tell you -- other than we can probably expect semi-continual, on-and-off War from the Islamosphere for another 1400 years.
The Destruction of Mecca (you don't even need to take out Medina, unless you just want to be thorough) would be as theologically devastating to Islam, as would the discovery of Jesus Christ's bones would be to Christendom (that is if Jesus Christ's bones were here on earth to be found; you can't keep a good man down). There's no point in fighting for a Religion which you know to be False... and if there is no Mecca, then Mohammed's commands and prophecies would be proven to be false.
You can't make a hajj to Mecca, if there is no such thing as "Mecca".
The 13th Imam cannot arise from Mecca, if there is no Mecca.
And etc. I could go on.
Now THAT is how you win a 1400-year conflict. If the West isn't willing to face up to what's necessary... well, then the conflict will continue. Indefinitely.
As far as fighting for decades in backwater hellholes -that won't happen either and I wouldn't support it. For all intents and purposes, the Iraq war is over and we now have a new ally in the M.E.
But we had Iraq as an "ally" before. As long as Muslims still have the religious motivation to seek new conquests (which is to say, as long as Mecca continues to appear on the map), there's really no telling which Islamic state will be our "main enemy" in another 10 years, or 10 years after that. It's like whack-a-mole with an endless supply of moles.
The Afghan war will probably take another 5-10 years, but, yes, I believe it's worth it. I say we send about 500 Predator drones there and let them reign down hell on the enemy. Drones are cheap and don't put lives in danger - that's how we'll win Afghanistan.
Except that you still face the same basic problem... just maybe not in Afghanistan. Who's next? Iran? Pakistan? Egypt, or even Turkey, after another Islamist revolution? Who knows?
If you haven't the gumption to kill the root, weeds just keep re-appearing.
We'll probably never agree on foreign policy issues, especially in regards to the Pauls, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.
Well, perhaps you realize that I'm not a total peace-nik; it's just that I agree with Ron Paul's proxy writer, Gary North: either fish or cut bait. If you're not willing to Nuke Mecca, then the best you can hope for is to try to avoid Wars with the Islamosphere. Hope that the alligator eats someone else -- encourage China to keep poking their Muslim Uighur population with a sharp stick, let them deal with the Muzzies for a few decades, or what have you.
We might have to agree to disagree; but surely you can at least understand my frustration with Middle Eastern wars when US war policy basically comes down to "No one's willing to say so out loud (except Ron Paul's people, writing on little-read internet blogs), but we do know how to win this war, permanently. We're just too squeamish to do it." HUH??
Oh, and build nuclear power plants for energy, so that we can end our crack-addict dependence on foreign oil and thus hopefully take much less of an involvement in the Middle East, altogether.
But, if GreenPeace and Earth First continue to get their way, I suppose that won't happen either. (sigh)
I’ll not break bread with the losertarians. 10% of their ideology is conservative...80% is wackadoo and 10% is liberal.
Peter Schiff appears at a Rand Paul/Adam Kokesh/Peter Schiff fundraiser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYwb_P-ssK0
Rand Paul, Adam Kokesh, Peter Schiff, and others holding a fundraiser at Webster Hall in New
York.
http://www.randpaul2010.com
http://www.schiffforsenate.com
http://www.kokeshforcongress.com
DONATE TO THESE CAMPAIGNS TODAY!
TAGS: Rand Ron Paul Adam Kokesh Peter Schiff Scott Garrett Fundraiser Money Bomb Congress
Senate 2010 HR 1207 S604 Freedom Campaign For Liberty Economy Monetary Policy
Depression Niel Cavuto New York City Webster Hall Chris Dodd Mexico Kentucky Connecticut
Category: News & Politics
Tags: Rand Ron Paul Adam Kokesh Peter Schiff Scott Garrett Fundraiser Money Bomb
Congress Senate 2010 HR 1207 S604 Freedom Campaign For Liberty Economy Monetary
Policy Depression Niel Cavuto New York City Webster Hall Chris Dodd Mexico
Kentucky Connecticut
http://www.workers.org/2007/world/protests-0920/index.html
Why is the workers world party announcing Adam kokesh’s protests?
This is a Communist organization, right?
So why are they saying this about a GOP candidate??
Thanks, Drango. I am learning that lie-bertarian is actually left of left. Obama may have even gotten some of his ideas from Ron Paul, circa 2008.
FYI, not directed at you personally:
Click on the links and look at the dates. SEE FOR YOURSELF
And in case you lost that e-mail, here is a 25 MONTH old link to Adam Kokesh and Peter Schiff found all over the Internet
Yet someone in Connecticut insists that Peter Schiff and Adam kokesh don’t know each other. How do those statements from last week compare to the dates I found of websites that connect Adam Kokesh and Peter Schiff for the last TWO years?
“there is ZERO connection to Schiff and Kokesh” someone in Connecticut insists
That’s what someone in Connecticut says
What question could someone possibly ask Schiff that would exonerate him?
So, the next question, HOW ABOUT 36 MONTHS OLD WEBLINKS???
Yet someone in Connecticut insists that Peter Schiff and Adam kokesh don’t know each other. How does those statements from last week compare to the dates I found of websites that connect Adam Kokesh and Peter Schiff for the last THREE years?
And yes, I did search
there is ONE in January 2006
That is 4 years old
SCHIFF + KOKESH
JANUARY 2006
Yet someone in Connecticut insists that Peter Schiff and Adam kokesh don’t know each other. How does those statements from last week compare to the dates I found of websites that connect Adam Kokesh and Peter Schiff for the last FOUR years?
So, just what question would a sound minded person ask Peter Schiff about his connections to Adam Kokesh?
He is joined at the hip, and YOU ALL KNOW IT NOW.
The Tea Party needs to DUMP SCHIFF
or to use the someone in CT’s rhyming usage, I say they need to SCRAP SCHIFF
LOL. whoever beats Murphy. That is who I likee ...
It doesn’t get anymore pro abortion than the Libertarian party, their position is that the only position is no position, each mother does whatever she wants, whenever she wants, and at whatever stage she wants, in regards to abortion.
As far as Rand Paul, the statewide Republican voters of Kentucky support him as a Republican, I am concerned about your turning against freerepublic in support of Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney.
I took the fact that you withdrew your monthly support of FR as a deliberate action, as turning against FR.
As far as Mitt and Rudy, I wrote you a long response on that already in post 172, and you ignored it, which part of it did you disagree with?
Your posts don’t make any sense. You state that Libertarians are very pro-abortion. Guess what?????? That is NOT a conservative position. That is a LIBERAL position.
Not supporting the troops - LIBERAL position.
I deliberately stopped paying $50 per month because I did not like the way Rudy and Mitt supporters were being treated on FreeRepublic.
You say it it not right to allow Rudy supporters on FreeRepublic because they are pro-choice and then you say Libertarians are extremely pro-abortion, but we should support them.
You make no sense.
“You say it it not right to allow Rudy supporters on FreeRepublic because they are pro-choice and then you say Libertarians are extremely pro-abortion, but we should support them.
You make no sense”
It doesn’t make sense because I never said any of that, for one thing I am very actively against the libertarians and their party.
Post 172
You claimed >”and purging people from FreeRepublic that disagreed with him “<
I never saw that, FR has many Rudy and Giuliani supporters, you just said that you are among them.
I think the people that Jim bans are people that become trolls, that become so loud and persistent and nasty in pushing a non conservative agenda or candidate, that they start hijacking threads and stopping conservative discussion and become a serious hindrance to the free flow of useful information and exchange here.
Another liberal type troll that I think gets banned is someone that does the above on a new account, when it becomes clear that they are purely here to disrupt and have no other conservative value or interest to freerepublic, then Jim may dump them pretty quick, I’m sure you have seen that nooby troll sign up, that was just here for grins and giggles.
If you mean that all candidates should be given equal footing on freerepublic, then think about it a little more. FReepublic is a conservative web site, intended to advance conservatism and conservative candidates, once a candidate is seen as clearly an enemy to those purposes then he becomes our enemy and must be stopped, that is what political activism is about.
I don’t know what your limits are so it is hard for me to think of an example that would lead you to accept the necessity of banning some of a anti-conservative candidates more radical, obstinate, and dominating advocates, but Jim has his own vision of the purpose of freerepublic and it’s influence, and his limit was Rudy Giuliani, and is now Mitt Romney.
Liberal candidates such as pro abortion candidate Rudy Giuliani cannot be advanced here without his defenders trying to win at the very least, tolerance for abortion and their other failings, did you think that Jim Robinson would let his forum come to be used in advancing the abortion movement into the very core of conservative activism here at FR, or that he would block that cancer to free-up and return to the discussion of acceptable, conservative candidates that we can advance to victory over the cancerous one?
Read your post on number 211
“It doesn’t get anymore pro abortion than the Libertarian party, their position is that the only position is no position, each mother does whatever she wants, whenever she wants, and at whatever stage she wants, in regards to abortion.”
If you are anti-Libertarian, then what are we even discussing? I am done discussing with you. I can’t follow your logic. Maybe I a dumb, but I can’t follow your train of thought.
I was interested in the fact that you turned against freerepublic in support of Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.
I posted about Romney to a well known Romneybot and you jumped in and posted to me that Jim Robinson turning against Romney is what turned you against freerepublic, your posting that to me triggered me to respond back to you.
It seems that you want freerepbulic to be inviting to Romney and Giuliani, as far as the RLC, they seem to be part of the same crowd as Giuliani and Romney.
Many, many of the Libertarians are pro-choice. And most of them do not support our troops. That is my number one issue. Just because someone is fiscally responsible does not make them a true conservative. People complain about RINOs. Well, Libertarians that become Republicans so they can have a chance to run for office are most definitely that - RINOs. Rand Paul is no Republican.
Very well stated. Now I wish your clarity could penetrate Sean Hannity's pea brain. His attitude is, come one come all: conservatives, tea partiers and libertarians. These are his peeps, as he stated today. People getting caught up in the emotion of being angry -- listening to buzz words only -- are not checking who their fellow travelers are.
"...As a teenager, Obama went to parties and sometimes sought out gatherings on military bases or at the University of Hawaii that were mostly attended by blacks. He wrote in his book that he tried drugs and let his grades slip in his final years of high school.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.