Ron Paul for president

[kimbertac2]

By the way Marshal'ette , great picture. When you pulish the calendar, count on me for several copies.

[Dharmaeye]

I just have to say that this is the most inspiring and informative forum I've ever encountered. Its interesting too though, despite everyone's intense knowledge of history the evident vast differences in perception of historical cause and effect. And still,  a significant fiber of respect remains.  And despite the verbose nature of the responses, the reading is incredibly captivating in large part to the well written and obviously well educated responses. Nice to listen to folks who know how to "THINK" while entertaining opposing views.

Too bad our congress can't exhibit some of this outstanding character.

That is why a return to the original constitution (that is being destroyed by those sworn to defend it) is so important. It was to prevent the federal government from having any real power over the people. We are starting to see the consequences of this with the looming financial disaster as a result of the federal government taking us off the gold standard (against the constitution) and other wise partisan politics. The elite are getting super rich from partisan politics. The true end and need to start another revolution will be when the federal government tries to take away our guns - this has already started.  The constitution is meaningless piece of paper unless the people have the right to enforce it.
History is full of examples of this. The earliest example is in the bible were the Philistines prevented the Isrealites from having blacksmiths (to make weapons) to more recent Hitler who set up a situation to justify taking away arms and that allowed him to murder millions of his own people - Jews and the handicapped.
I personally will never find anyone guilty of a crime ,as a juror, of defending his constitutional rights against anyone.
The police, arm forces......have to know the constitution for as in the Neuronburg Trials, following orders is not a defense.
YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE not the f ing government.

[Cogz]

Where to begin?

Your premise that we are causing our own sorrows by our military and cultural extensions int the rest of the world begs a huge questions. IF this were true, how then do you explain the hundred of years of Muslim attack against western culture and civilization? How can this explain Suleimon's presence at the gates of Vienna in the 13th century, or the muslim conquest of most of Spain that ended in the 15th century? Can we minimize these and hundreds of other events simply by ascribing them to just some form of fundamentalism - another term used to minimize anyone with a religious point of view, BTW, or the opinions of a few?

If you've read the Koran and seen the suras that state quite clearly - more than 2 dozen times in fact - that it is good to kill non-believers, you will begin to understand that it is not fundamentalism, or the few, it is part of the essence of the religion. Domination is the goal, the so-called world caliphate based on reason if possible, but death and destruction is perfectly acceptable too.

Your point has minor validity in that many, if not most, of the people we face (based on the ones we kill or capture) are not native Iraqis, but foreigners who have been smuggled into Iraq through Iran and Syria bent on killing the "infidel". Our presence in Iraq is drawing them into the fight. But that simple fact cannot be extended to cover the fourteen hundred years in which the world's civilizations have been faced with Muslim attacks.

In this you, and to the degree I have read his stuff, Ron Paul are at best dangerously naive.

Pathfinder - I appreciate your viewpoint, but I would like to explain the story you cite above and what it tells me.  You cite several incidents to try and prove that muslims have been terrorizing the world for 1400 years - but when you look back at the history of Islam, the initial (till about 1000 AD) push of Islam was more of a land grab (because in those days, land was money and power) than a forced conversion and subversion.  There are records of Christian and Jew communities existing within the Muslim Arab empire - and in some cases finding less restrictions than under Byzantine rule.  Rather than force conversion, early Islam instead imposed a head tax on those who were not Muslim, and rather than convert by force, those in power in Christian regions converted mainly to free themselves from taxation and to gain favor with the Muslim state (if you will) which would let them keep more of their individual power.

So tell me, if Islam is a religion that is so intolerant of non-Muslims, why less than a hundred years after after Mohammed's death did the expanding Arab empires not lay waste to all Christians and Jews?  Why in fact, were there laws against conversion (not just forced conversion, but conversion at all!) in those periods?  If this is the time of the most purity in message, why was everything so non-violent?

The expansion of empires of that era was about land and power not the supremacy of a religion or a people.  Before Mohammed, the Persians were advancing the empire - The Romans were fighting to increase their empire - and it was all about land, and the ability to TAX (money).

You reference the gates of Vienna - which was a land grab by the Ottoman empire under Suleiman not a holy war of conversion.  (matter of fact, some argue that Suleiman saw Alexander the Great as a hero, and wanted from childhood to unit the East and West)

Forgive me for ending here, I need to get to work.  If you would like be basis for my arguments, please reference:
Wikipedia:  Muslim History, Byzantine Empire, Islamic Forced Conversion, Spread of Islam, Islamic Conquest of Persia, Suleiman the Magnificent, Ottoman Empire, and Siege of Vienna.

In writing this I have spent over three hours researching the alleged tyranny of Islam over other religions.  If you wish to cite that the Qur'an states that it is good to kill non-believers (and I agree that it does http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/sina.htm - why don't they on a grand scale?  Why didn't the Ottoman Empire lay waste to all Christians?  Why didn't the Islamics murder the Persians? (indeed, this battle was waging while Mohammed was alive!)

My point is that in my and many historians opinion, your allegation that islamic fundamentalism was to blame in Spain and the Gates of Vienna is untrue.  Also, while the Qur'an does say the things you allege - that doesn't mean that it is or was the justification used in those assaults.  They along with just about every other invasion or subversion or siege was for military (border security) political, or money reasons.  Just like they are today.

[Cogz]

Just for clarification purposes, can you describe what you mean by this?

IF this were true, how then do you explain the hundred of years of Muslim attack against western culture and civilization?

I find it hard to research something if I don't know the era, the alleged good guys or bad guys.

Thanks.

(And to echo what Kimbertac said, I am very thankful that we can all discuss opposing viewpoints openly and respectfully.)

[wheels]

I am from Texas and embarrassed that this guy got elected. He is more doom and gloom as the democrats. Ron did say we deserved to be attacked on the first presidential debate and Rudy busted his butt for it.

Ron Paul is a whiner and he whines about how this war is costing us the ability to pay for more health care, social securty etc..

[Sponsor]

[Hazcat]

Hey Wheels,

Don't fret too much.  He lies about that too, he was born and raised in PA.  Greensburg I believe.  His parents had a dairy farm.

[Teresa Heilevang]

First..( before I get on my LONG tangent) I want to say thank you to everyone for making this forum a great place to gather and talk and learn..whether it's about guns, politics/religion. We're pretty proud of Down Range and to have folks like you all as Down Range family make me even more proud.

Oh yeah.. and kimbertac2? Uhhh about the calendar? Don't hold your breath. I can just about guarantee that it's not gonna happen. HaHaHa   But thanks for the compliment anyway..
Now....enough of all that ..................

I read these posts with interest..as I don't know squat from sic-um about the long ago history of other world culture religions. I am totally ignorant on most of that kind of stuff. But what I do think..and I don't know if it coincides with this thread ( as it has gotten a bit off course) but..I do believe it rates merit among the top contenders...

I read an article the other day and it pretty much states my worries on the way I think.. I will try to explain it the best way I can and not drag it out anymore than I am famous for doing...

I have always said that this war is a religious war. I know that there are many things connected to it, but still.....it is a A Religious War. It's also time to call a spade a spade and name our enemy.

 Israel seems to be/is the songbird in the depths of the world events. Well..It's time to open our ears and listen people...cause the canary is singing.

( *I quote*) The phrase "separation of church and state" is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists.  In that letter, referencing the First Amendment of the United States of America's Constitution, Jefferson writes

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
Another early user of the term was James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights, who often wrote of "total separation of the church from the state."

 "Strongly guarded . . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States," Madison wrote, and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States." This attitude is further reflected in the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom originally written by Thomas Jefferson.. but championed by Madison, and guaranteeing that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination

...no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. *unquote*

The Left in our nation, who make government their religion, have formed ranks around separation of church and state as a bedrock. So ...you wonder how  this relates to the current crisis between Israel and her enemies?
The inferno breaking out around the world like a forest fire out of control  is religious.

 It's not oil, it's not haves and have-nots, it's not Marxism versus Capitalism, it's not Globalists versus independent free thinkers.

It's religion. 

It's a war to the death between those who stand for Religion as State, and those who will not live under their rule of religion as state policy.

Some say it's an Oil war... It's not oil.. Oil is just a bargaining chip. It's not Globalism.  Globalism is only a sidebar. The deadly pieces of Marxism play a major role in money and state...sponsored support, but Marxism is not the name.

Our enemy... the enemy of civilization... and I dare say the enemy of mankind itself is a religion which will kill, brutally maim and terrorize any who will not accept religion as the State.

Which brings me back to the answer to the original question .......??

  Islam.

 Islam was founded as a religion that IS the state, where the state IS the religion. The ultimate theocracy.

There is no separation, no wall, no division. It is an endless seamless entity... and any behavior is allowed to maintain that power. No crime is too gruesome, no argument too convoluted, no terror too shocking, and no theology too cancerous to be off limits in conquering the world for "their god".

They mean to have government BE religion, and for religion to BE government. Jihad is the mechanism by which all of mankind will be brought into to ummah, the world community of Islam. And in their warped way of thinking... Only then will we know peace.

I am appalled and in shocked anger that those in America who believe and work so hard for the separation of church and state are not horrified at the Islamist threat. Those who passionately insist on the separation of church and state ought to be heard every day denouncing Islam and their global terror campaigns....  pressing for Islam to be destroyed.

But they aren't denouncing Islam. Oh no...Quite the opposite. They advocate eradicating Bush and the United States.

This is total and incomprehensible to me. Insanity at its best.

The very people inside our borders who work the hardest to see to it that America and Israel are ruined and kicked into the dust bin of history are the same people who take every opportunity to remind us about the separation of church and state. Are they not paying attention? Are they blind and deaf? Are they just so full of hate that they are stupid?

I am truly flabbergasted and appalled that these separation people seem to have no concept that if Israel is cast down and if America is driven to her knees, they're going to get a church that is the State in such totality it will defy description. And it won't do for America to simply refrain from international affairs as if a disinterested observer. It will be way too late for that!

This is the kind of annihilating threat that must be stopped before it grows any larger. Acceptance and diversity are nice sounding phrases, but not when we could be discussing the end of civilized man.

A word of warning to our citizens who live on the Left side of the aisle, the anti-war crowd, the anti-globalist crowd, the anti-America crowd .... Listen up!

You say you are as separation of church and state as can be .... but what you're going to reap is the soul crushing whirlwind of church AS state and state AS church if you don't get a grip and wise up. You're rooting for the worst kind of theocracy the world has ever seen! The kind that treats women as less than objects... who kill dissenters, and whose Friday evening fun is not drinks at Harry's Place ...but beheadings of those who have sex out of wedlock, or show too much skin in public. That is just a few of the many of their crimes you and I now take for granted as our liberties.

Islam is the zenith of religion as government, and government that is religion. Our friend Israel is on the front line of the war to determine the future of mankind. Religion as state, or secular freedom that guarantees religious freedom.

Do we REALLY want to bring to pass a murderous medieval theocracy? Is that the future we think we'll enjoy? Is that the outcome we're working for? Because if we keep tearing at our foundations and empowering this nation's enemies, if we keep heaping scorn and invective on our President, if we insist that America is evil and must be radically assimilated into a metastasizing United Nations global plan, that's exactly what we're going to get and there will be no wall of separation.

It will already have been torn down!

Thanks for listening to me spout off... but I get so frustrated with the whole dang mess! 

[Cogz]

MR. GOLER: Congressman, you don't think that changed with the 9/11 attacks, sir?

REP. PAUL: What changed?

MR. GOLER: The non-interventionist policies.

REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)"

_____________________________

Understand and deserve are two totally different concepts.  It is your (and Giuliani's) interpretation of what he said that leads you to believe that be thinks we deserved 9/11.  Lets put it this way.  Say your spouse was cheating on you and you killed them.  When you go to court - the prosecution has to prove motive.  By helping the jury to understand the motive, the prosecutor is surely NOT trying to tell the jury that the spouse deserved it!

Whatever happened to putting yourself in someone else's shoes?  Looking through their eyes at the world?  Understanding the enemy does not make you a sympathizer, or else thousands of analysts in the CIA would be traitors.

[Cogz]

By the way Marshal'ette, I am quoting you because you are one of the few people talking - not as an attack.

It's not oil, it's not haves and have-nots, it's not Marxism versus Capitalism, it's not Globalists versus independent free thinkers.

It's religion. 

It's a war to the death between those who stand for Religion as State, and those who will not live under their rule of religion as state policy.

What about Pakistan?  Turkey?  Are they part of that war, and if so, who's side are they on?  They are Muslim countries.  Last I heard they were our friends.

Our enemy... the enemy of civilization... and I dare say the enemy of mankind itself is a religion which will kill, brutally maim and terrorize any who will not accept religion as the State.

So its religion not people that does this?  And guns kill people, right?

Islam was founded as a religion that IS the state, where the state IS the religion. The ultimate theocracy.

Guns were invented to kill or cause injury to living beings.

There is no separation, no wall, no division. It is an endless seamless entity... and any behavior is allowed to maintain that power. No crime is too gruesome, no argument too convoluted, no terror too shocking, and no theology too cancerous to be off limits in conquering the world for "their god".

They mean to have government BE religion, and for religion to BE government. Jihad is the mechanism by which all of mankind will be brought into to ummah, the world community of Islam. And in their warped way of thinking... Only then will we know peace.

I am appalled and in shocked anger that those in America who believe and work so hard for the separation of church and state are not horrified at the Islamist threat. Those who passionately insist on the separation of church and state ought to be heard every day denouncing Islam and their global terror campaigns....  pressing for Islam to be destroyed.

being satirical:
"I am appalled and shocked that those in America who love life and want to protect it are not horrified at the evil of guns in our society.  Those who love life and want to protect it should denounce firearms and the bullets they fire...  Pressing for all guns to be outlawed."

But they aren't denouncing Islam. Oh no...Quite the opposite. They advocate eradicating Bush and the United States.

I personally denounce, and most Muslims denounce - violence done in the name of Islam (or in my case, Christianity) 

I am truly flabbergasted and appalled that these separation people seem to have no concept that if Israel is cast down and if America is driven to her knees, they're going to get a church that is the State in such totality it will defy description. And it won't do for America to simply refrain from international affairs as if a disinterested observer. It will be way too late for that!

This is the kind of annihilating threat that must be stopped before it grows any larger. Acceptance and diversity are nice sounding phrases, but not when we could be discussing the end of civilized man.

A word of warning to our citizens who live on the Left side of the aisle, the anti-war crowd, the anti-globalist crowd, the anti-America crowd .... Listen up!

You say you are as separation of church and state as can be .... but what you're going to reap is the soul crushing whirlwind of church AS state and state AS church if you don't get a grip and wise up. You're rooting for the worst kind of theocracy the world has ever seen! The kind that treats women as less than objects... who kill dissenters, and whose Friday evening fun is not drinks at Harry's Place ...but beheadings of those who have sex out of wedlock, or show too much skin in public. That is just a few of the many of their crimes you and I now take for granted as our liberties.

Exactly how is this going to take place?  Blackmail?  An islamic Navy?  Invasion through South America or Canada?

And while I doubt you are putting me into the anti-America category - I have never myself, nor have I ever seen any "left leaner" rooting for suppression and objectification of women, beheadings, and other atrocities performed by those in extreme Islamic states.  What I personally approve of is denouncing those very same practices and butting out of those countries internal affairs.  It is my personal opinion that if we butt out of places like Saudi Arabia and Iran, instead of being afraid of external threats and provocations, the people will rise up against those internal oppressions far more effectively than we ever could.

It takes brave Iraqi's, Iranians, and other Arabs just as it took brave Americans to stand up to the British.  When a people depends on its government for external security it tends to not struggle so hard against what is right and wrong in their own land.  (ooh, thats us!)

Because if we keep tearing at our foundations and empowering this nation's enemies, if we keep heaping scorn and invective on our President, if we insist that America is evil and must be radically assimilated into a metastasizing United Nations global plan, that's exactly what we're going to get and there will be no wall of separation.

It will already have been torn down!

Tearing at which foundations?  Right to privacy?  Right to free speech?  Right to habeas corpus? Right to defend ourselves with whatever arms necessary to protect ourselves from criminals and the theoretical threat of a tyrannical government?

Being critical of our government is our duty as Americans.  It is the voting, the protesting, the discussion of this very sort (in this thread) that defines us as citizens and not subjects.  While I disagree with people who believe that the United States are evil - I oppose the idea that we should turn off our brains and follow.  Stupidity will be found out and ignored, but some things that sounded dumb turn out to be true.  (IE: world is round, etc)  Why get angry because someone says something you don't agree with.  Instead ask (or look for) evidence.

Thanks for listening to me spout off... but I get so frustrated with the whole dang mess! 

Any time!  Thank YOU!

[DonWorsham]

_____________________________

Whatever happened to putting yourself in someone else's shoes?  Looking through their eyes at the world?  Understanding the enemy does not make you a sympathizer, or else thousands of analysts in the CIA would be traitors.

In your own words, Cogz, what should have the US government done in response to the 9/11 attack?