| ||||
| ||||
| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   |
|
|||||||||||||
| Summit | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10th, 2007 02:06 pm |
|
1st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I am going to begin speaking for the candidates in this topic thread. I've done this on another forum where the moderator ended up excluding me from tha forum (banned). The idea is to Debate the real topics that matter in the real world. I've sent challenges to Mike Gravel, Ron Paul, and Dennis Kucinich. I did so via the normal e-mail channels that those three provide to me (one person amid "The Public"). I am pretending to speak for all three candidates. Allow me to set the stage first. On YouTube (and anywhere on the network called "The Internet" and/or any "Major Media" outlet such as T.V.) a series of Debates occur where Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel debate. The Debate is called Summit by me. Summit 1 part 1 Topic: No More Legal Criminals Dennis Kucinich (DK): No moral human being alive can do nothing while legal criminals are torturing and mass murdering. Dick Cheney (and the NEOCONS) must be stopped now, not later, and this is why impeachment must move on. I (Dennis Kucinich) support No More Legal Criminals – including me. Mike Gravel: I too support No More Legal Criminals; however – I am no longer a Senator in power so I cannot vote on this current impeachment effort as a Senator in power. I can lend my support to stop the legal crime by offering a method of empowering the people directly into the legal process. Ron Paul: If the current power (democrat leadership) can bring impeachment to a vote, then, I will vote on that issue. Summit 1 part 2 Topic: Economy Ron Paul: Gold as legal tender will compete against any other form of currency. Gold as currency will flow equitably (without transferring purchasing power from earners) and this competing currency can empower people with the required tool to prosper. The current legal monopoly on legal currency held by the Federal Reserve Corporation (limited liability) can easily be seen as inadequate by comparison to many examples of more economical forms of currency suppliers. E-gold is one example. The greatest power of Gold as currency in legal terms (legal tender) is the power acquired through economical supply and demand limitations imposed by Gold (as currency). This is simpler than many economists project into the debate. Gold as legal tender will force the Federal Government to balance the federal budget because a direct link will be established between the costs of government and the income of government which, as we all should know, is the earning power of the tax base. Individual State governments may tend toward alternate laws concerning internal currency and do so at their own risk, their own cost, and very likely at their own peril, since, Gold flowing out of one State because of poor monetary legal policy will compete clearly against States maintaining a rich and economical policy. May, and this has always been the case, may the best policy win in a truly free money market. Dennis Kucinich: The currency form is secondary to the currency usage; like the cart before the horse. When blaming the form of currency for the problem there is a diversion of focus away from the abuser of currency. If the abuser of currency is hidden, then, the abuse can continue even if the currency form is changed. Perhaps a truly free money market will reach for the most accurate and least costly currency for any group of people; however – the economy is currently threatened by much more than the inflationary and deflationary insider trading policies of the Federal Reserve Board of investors. When the health of the populace is up for sale and when the highest bidder is given license to profit from sickness, then, the people will be injured for profit. This is really simple. If any organized human effort is moral, then, it spends power toward healing – it does not invest in sickness. Human organization that intends to profit from sickness will be human effort expended toward creating sickness. That cannot be tolerated in a free society. That, my friends, is truly a race to the bottom. Mike Gravel: All of these issues will continue to be unreasonable, perpetual, and self-defeating, on purpose I must add, because the power to act (legally) is monopolized by the powerful against the weak. People have to gain more power. This is as simple as it gets.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Dec 11th, 2007 01:39 pm |
|
2nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I sent out messages to the three candidates and I didn't bother sending any challenges to the morally challenged crimanals who are pining for more war profits at the expense of the tortured and mass murdered. I can't wait long for responses; cause time marches on. How about some "NEWS"? http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/volatile1.html
Ron Paul has yet to endorse impeachment. That is an abuse of power in my opinion. Impeachment is a bringing to account a criminal who has so far been 'above the law'. Where is the whole 'rule of law' principle on that oversight or, if you prefer, that ignorance of complicity? What is not known in this equation? Shouldn't the people be informed accurately? I am a 'people' and there is enough accurate information available to me to justify at the very least an indictment or the least bit of effort to find out the facts in some official manner according to some semblance of law, order, justice, and equitable commerce. How many tortured bodies does it take, huh, Ron Paul? Is there something not known about this whole grisly business of war profiteering?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Dec 12th, 2007 01:59 pm |
|
3rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I have a REPLY to my challenge e-mail from Ron Paul's agent (or program):
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Dec 13th, 2007 11:37 am |
|
4th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/nicholas/nicholas43.html What can be brought to the table during the summit? I have a few suggestions. When two democrats (Kucinich and Gravel) are actively fighting against torturing mass murderers rather than allowing those torturing mass murderers to go on torturing and mass murdering with impunity, then, credit is due those individuals. It is an error of omission that appears to be a matter of political expedience when one person is raised above another person as the champion of right and good as if right and good was exclusively embodied into one man – alone. See? The Summit idea intends to find agreement where disagreeable things turn into large piles of dead corpses and the deaths were anything but voluntary. Yes; it is a good idea to focus on things that can be done and avoid wasting focus on things that cannot be done. The idea, again, is to be more accurate about the actual discretion or prejudice toward one and away from the other – the idea is to pool resources JUST in case one is missing something that the other may not be missing – at all. See?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Dec 13th, 2007 11:46 am |
|
5th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/boyack1.html So many people are speaking on behalf of Ron Paul. Ron Paul, and you can correct my error if one exists, speaks on behalf of liberty. I did this too when I ran for Congress in 96. Here is the thing about Ron Paul. Why allow the torturing mass murderers to go on torturing and mass murdering when a measure of support toward the trial of suspected torturers and mass murderers could, possibly, stop at least one more torture session and stop one more murder - or two. This is the part I don't get. If it were me or my loved one on the rack, then, my position wouldn't be any different. See? I would still support the trial of suspected criminals as a means of, at least, slowing down the torture and mass murder. Perhaps during the trial, as I continue to watch the torture and mass murder of me or my loved ones, I may slip into a fit of suicidal rage - perhaps. The pain may become to great. How does the saying go? Waste not Want not
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Dec 13th, 2007 11:55 am |
|
6th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2225984,00.htmlThe noisy, confusing US presidential campaign marks a focus on serious questions and one that transcends partisan lines The idea with the summit continues: As the Corporate Media Front Runners Splinter off from the 'Fringe' candidates on their way to their Corporate Election and as those Crooks and Liars (torturing mass murderers) spin reality into DOOMS DAY or ELSE (Pay and Suffer) the IDEA is to 'counter' the falsehood with constructive debate where the actual candidates representing honest and equitable human beings (equity is the opposite of torture and mass murder) work toward perfecting a more equitable campaign. See this? The stage can be set where the torturing mass murderers are spinning their webs of deceit on channel X T.V. "NEWS" WHILE a stage is set and billed as "THE REAL DEBATES FOR LIBERTY" or some such "NEWS" item? What do you say champ? It IS past time for a SUMMIT.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Dec 13th, 2007 06:56 pm |
|
7th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/kucinich-booted-from-iowa-debate-2007-12-12.html
Summit MAN! Gravel first now Kucinich and if Paul isn't Next, then, he's INSIDE!
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Dec 27th, 2007 06:50 pm |
|
8th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Orwell certainly was right about the use of meaningless words in politics. If we hope to remain free, we must cut through the fog and attach concrete meanings to the words politicians use to deceive us. We must reassert that America is a republic, not a democracy, and remind ourselves that the Constitution places limits on government that no majority can overrule. We must resist any use of the word “freedom” to describe state action. We must reject the current meaningless designations of “liberals” and “conservatives,” in favor of an accurate term for both: statists. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18951.htm The word 'government' can be confused with the term "State". What is the difference; and if there is no difference, then, why are two words used instead of one word? Why not use ‘voluntary’ association and organized crime or even simpler – association or crime? When the idea is to profit at the expense of innocent people by fraud or force, then, confusing terms, on purpose, is almost a no brainer. The person seeking to have someone else work while that person reaps the rewards of that work performed by someone else can hardly announce his intent honestly and accurately. Example: Hi, I am going to take what you earn. That may work when the person threatens an obviously greater injury with accurate and effective communication. Example: Hi, I’m going to take what you earn and if you resist in any way, then, look here: The person doing the taking may at that point torture and mass murder a few hundred thousand innocent human beings including babies, toddlers, children, teenagers, young adults, adults, and old people. Throw in a number of sick people, retarded people, insane people, and injured people on huge piles of rotting bodies and the honesty rises along with the stench of decaying flesh and blood. Point taken; no need to doctor the message up with fancy words or attractive illustrations; 8 x 10 glossy photos for example – no need to do that in order to get the message transferred with effective accuracy. The stink will suffice in time if the screaming does not accomplish the task currently. I’m not here to defend Mike Gravel or Dennis Kucinich and their viewpoints as representatives of the opposition. They can speak for themselves. I contend with the usage of ‘government’ as a synonym for “The State”. If an association is voluntary, then, the word used to describe that voluntary association can be ‘government’ and cannot be ‘The State’. See this? How do you or I know how to participate in a voluntary association without some form of governing principle that is agreeable to everyone volunteering to abide by the governing principle, and, if someone volunteers to enforce a injury upon an innocent person (in or not in the voluntary association), then, that person volunteers to take away someone’s freedom. Is that someone doing the injury to an innocent a ‘governor’ in or outside the voluntary association? I think not; a governor will submit a possible change in the application of the governing principle. If one, two, three, a minority, a majority, or any one other than the ‘governor’ agrees to the new change (without injuring an innocent), then, those people form a network of users of the governing principle. What is that governing principle? Do I really have to say it? Has that governing principle evaporated from our currency; our usage of language? Do No Harm. How is that done when so many people harm on purpose and do so for profit by deceit and by the application of violence against innocents? That is the problem. Solve it. If the idea is to harm, on purpose, by deceit and force if needed, then, the confusion of words is a given – or it is taken. Confusing ‘government’ with “The State” is akin to confusing The Constitution with The Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. Like this: The Declaration if Independence is the application of voluntary association or self-government. It is factual. I won’t take this crime anymore. I will earn my freedom from now on – thank you very much. The Bill or Rights is like a deal between those who have had enough (want no part of “The State”) and those who cause, lie, fraud, violently enforce, create, and maintain THE STATE. The deal is a deal with the devil. The Constitution is THE STATE. It is a man-made, man fabricated, and man enforced FALSE front for organized crime that is easily known (accurately known) as extortion; or an extortion racket. Pay or pay more. The Bill or Rights intended to derail organized crime. How did it work? Don’t go telling me what words mean according to me. That is either silly or intellectually dishonest – on purpose or at a subconscious level. Either way the lie, if it is a lie, is destructive to me. Que bono? Who gains? Democracy can be defined as no one gains at the expense of anyone else because everyone is as powerful ‘by law’ as everyone else. To suggest that ‘democracy’ can only be defined as involuntary rule by the majority upon the minority is to dictate the meaning of words despite objection. See?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 31st, 2007 07:26 am |
|
9th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/preston6.htmlIn Defense of Ron Paul, Part Two: Why Left-Libertarians Need Not Worry
I have a problem with the above because none of those 'justifications' are known to me. Who are these people who have a problem with Ron Paul's stance on Abortion, Civil Rights for racial minorities, and immigration? Anyone? My problem with Ron Paul is his lack of support for the constitution as Ron Paul fails to support impeachment against some of the worst legal criminals in history - while they continue committing torture and mass murder on his watch as he commands his portion of The Constitution. He, in fact, is 'they' due to his lack of enforcement of his representative POWER. If he has a legitimate excuse for his failure to support impeachment (his public statement was 'lack of evidence' or some other 'excuse'), then, what is it? No; the 'lack of evidence' excuse is exactly what is done during the trial that is supposed to be started by congress when the 'representative' deems that there is a need for impeachment. Who is the guy who keeps saying that the 'Neo-cons' are going to attack Iran? What were the Nazi's convicted of doing (and hung)? If Ron Paul considers Iraq to be 'constitutional', then, why say it isn't? If he considers the aggressive invasion of Iraq to be un-constitutional, then, why not support impeachment? This is a self-confessed contradiction that (without the 'real' reason stated by Ron Paul) leaves the obvious reason for failing to utilize his power to hold up the rule of law in this land i.e. POLITICAL or without the fancy PC label = LIES TO COVER UP LEGAL CRIME. I have been interested in Ron Paul since my first exposure to his messages on newsgroups awhile ago. His message remains the same. That is worth something. This failure to impeach may destroy all that consistent support for liberty. At least expose the lies. I'm not suggesting that the Neo-Cons need to go to an American Jail or Prison. They may be treated better in Iran where people are civilized.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 31st, 2007 08:23 am |
|
10th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18976.htm Ron, Mike, and dear Dennis, You may want to read that above and consider stepping outside your skins for a moment to see from our shoes. I mean to say the average Joe's shoes. I'm one of them. Your fans will mourn the loss of your leadership when it passes; meanwhile – who takes your place? Can you see this necessity? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVyEba8xov0 Come on. Start that song link above and read along with me. The neocons have accomplished much for their elite puppeteers, and have been given in return free reign to loot at will, funneling all those billions for the Iraq War into their own corporate coffers and investment portfolios. They for their part have established the foundations of a fascist state in the US and Canada, secured Iraq’s oil reserves, built permanent forward mega-bases in Iraq, successfullly destabilized Iraq and prepared it for balkanization, secured pipeline routes in Afghanistan, restored the profitable opium trade, and made progress toward achieving the first-strike capability that will be needed when the time comes to take on Russia and China. Quite a bundle of major achievements in a very short time indeed. But to our clique, the question always is, “What have you done for me lately, Sunshine?” The primary mission of the Hillary administration, under the banners of ‘doing something about climate change and peak oil’, will evidently be to undertake a massive resource grab in the global South, leading to the selective and massive elimination of certain populations through starvation. In other words, the mission is to expand the starving-Africa model globally, a process that will presumably be helped along by the usual shadowy suspects in their usual destabilizing roles. My big fear with the Bush regime was the likely attack on Iran...or was it the unleashing of the Gestapo? It was a close race in those dark days. Now we are on the verge of a regime bent on genocide on a scale that would put the Nazis to shame. I suggest that we have escaped the kettle only to fall into the frying pan. Say it isn't so - Joe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-wHzlfLKbM&feature=related It is past time - NO MORE LEGAL CRIMINALS Last edited on Mon Dec 31st, 2007 08:26 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 31st, 2007 03:19 pm |
|
11th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/giles/giles19.html Bla, bla, bla, "They" are bad and 'we' shine like gold. No mention of Dennis Kuncinich (who is a congressman actually using 'The Constitution' to slow down the torture and mass murder) nor any mention of Mike Gravel who actually did use The Constitution to end the corporate rape, torture, and mass murder of Vietnamese innocents. What causes myopia? Possible answer: Business as usual How does it go…half the truth is better than no truth or the least of two evils is preferred over the worst evil? The problem with that ‘logic’ is, perhaps, not obvious – on purpose.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 31st, 2007 03:19 pm |
|
12th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/giles/giles19.html Bla, bla, bla, "They" are bad and 'we' shine like gold. No mention of Dennis Kuncinich (who is a congressman actually using 'The Constitution' to slow down the torture and mass murder) nor any mention of Mike Gravel who actually did use The Constitution to end the corporate rape, torture, and mass murder of Vietnamese innocents. What causes myopia? Possible answer: Business as usual How does it go…half the truth is better than no truth or the least of two evils is preferred over the worst evil? The problem with that ‘logic’ is, perhaps, not obvious – on purpose.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jan 1st, 2008 01:18 pm |
|
13th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson4.html
Note: A split occurs in 'capitalism' between those who support 'the state' and those who do not support 'the state'. I am not making this up. Here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north512.html
If a person can step back and view the conflict from a truce perspective where the viewer no longer has a stake in the outcome of the conflict, then, that can be called a disinterested viewpoint. Put down your guns and your words awhile; long enough to see clearly what will happen as the conflict continues to build. If the ‘side’ of capitalism, for example, that supports 100% reserve banking decided to step back and give the other side one day, one week, one month, and one year from Christmas to Christmas a chance to ‘give peace a chance’ and call off the dogs of war, then, the conflict would be a voluntary one. The conflict would then be a competitive race to see who can fill in the vacuum left when ‘the state’ no longer enforced the SYSTEM. If (after one year) the ‘free banking’ experiment didn’t work, then, the truce can be called off and the dogs of war unleashed again. There are many more unintended consequences associated with this type of truce called during a summit during a conflict. People may actually find agreement rather than focus upon disagreement. The removal of the enforced monopolies, for example, could inspire the counter revolutionary reactionaries to lose their target protagonist. Put more simply, for those who may as yet not see this clearly, the involuntary version of capitalism actually creates the involuntary version of socialism or visa versa. The common denominator is, and always will be, force. When ‘the planners’ of capitalism and socialism don’t get their way, then, they turn to involuntary means. Violence alone is bad enough. It is, in fact, evil when it is forced upon the innocent. The twin sister of falsehood creates that ever so ominous choice between the lesser evil. See this? If someone were to step back and look at the reasons why ‘freedom’ can’t work without deception and violence against the enemy, then, they may need to look in the mirror first. The enemy may be reacting to the ‘first strike’ ordered by your leaders many past Christmases ago. That first strike created the involuntary nature of Capitalism/Socialism, Right/Left, Conservative/Liberal, Tory/Whig, Capital/Labor, 100% reserve banking/free banking. Take a look around and find the real enemy first before pointing the finger at them. Do you really fear freedom yourself? Are the ‘socialists’ the enemy always? Have you ever actually heard one speak or did you merely jerk a knee in reaction to the color of the uniform? Last edited on Tue Jan 1st, 2008 01:19 pm by Joe Kelley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 12:48 pm |
|
14th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.newsmax.com/politics/Ron_Paul_Furious_over_Fox/2008/01/01/60958.html?s=sp&promo_code=422A-1 Reading the link above causes me to chuckle. Why you may ask? Did Ron Paul get upset when Mike Gravel was taken out? If Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel start holding their own debates, then, can those examples provide leadership? What is the point - people?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jan 4th, 2008 07:09 am |
|
15th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/taylor-j3.htmlTo me, voting for Kucinich, Gravel, McKinney, or Paul makes some sense even though they're unlikely to win. At least we're asking for something honest and principled during the first round of voting. Ron Paul isn't the perfect candidate and his Jeffersonianism is not as full-bodied as I would prefer (e.g., he's too weak on the ecological dimension), but at least he's a step in the right direction and his ability to attract a wide range of grassroots support is commendable. He's not the only good choice, but he's no lunatic and there is some logic behind his campaign. It's not everything, but it is something. In a rigged system with a populace divided by secondary issues and exploited by a bipartisan elite, it may be the best we can do in 2008. See here; the need to BYPASS the PR 'establishment' (I call it the Interest/Profit/Wage Paying/SYSTEM Limited Liability Corporate Nation State) is all too evident in this current 'leadership' supply aiming to meet a demand. Is that too hard to understand (I get people telling me I can't write for shit)? If the idea is to be represented accurately by empowering someone into a position of control over many varied collective forces, then, why play the game of the opposition? Why not work the game in our favor? Why wrestle with rats in a dark cold dungeon? Why attack sharks in the deep water? Move the debate to the internet where the market for information does not exclude accurate information? Leave the dungeon full of rats behind sooner rather than too late. Sure – it may be a small step in this round because the balance of power remains tipped toward the legal criminals (torturing mass murderers for profit) today. It is past time to think ahead for a tomorrow that isn’t apocalyptic – in purpose (again – for profit). Get the real front runners together and showing how real leaders debate. If they aren’t real leader, then, they won’t lead. See? They follow. Don’t Lead don’t follow It is past time.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jan 4th, 2008 10:38 am |
|
16th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
But that’s the choice we have at the moment. In Iowa, I think there are steps people could take to start to challenge that system, if they wanted to. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18991.htm ? Last edited on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 10:54 am by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jan 8th, 2008 01:10 pm |
|
17th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79IoHFaFTNc !
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jan 10th, 2008 01:42 pm |
|
18th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.anarchism.net/forum/board_entry.php?id=21122&page=0&order=last_answer&descasc=DESC&category=0
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jan 11th, 2008 11:08 am |
|
19th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19038.htm No Escape from War and Unemployment By Paul Craig Roberts
Alone their power is wasted against each other; see?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jan 11th, 2008 11:33 am |
|
20th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. If both 'sides' refuse to seek an agreement to combine power in defense against evil, then, guess what happens?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 07:45 am | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
| Power Independence > Networking > Expanding Connectivity > Summit | Top |
