Co-Chair of 9/11 Inquiry: American Government Covered Up State Assistance to Hijackers

It's front page news today that:

Journalists at Rupert Murdoch’s now-shuttered News of the World paper tried to access the mobile phones of 9/11 victims, a former New York City police officer claimed on Monday.

It's also front page news today that the new Secretary of Defense - Leon Panetta - said that American soldiers are in Iraq because of 9/11, even though AFP notes:

That was one of the justifications for the 2003 US-led invasion, but the argument has since been widely dismissed.

(see this for details).

But a more important story - and one which might focus on a more appropriate country
than Iraq - is that the co-chair of the Congressional Joint 9/11 Inquiry (Bob Graham) today alleged a cover up by the U.S. government of state assistance by Saudi Arabia to the 9/11 hijackers.

Graham is no flake. He was a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence for 10 years (including 18 months as chairman), member of the CIA External Advisory Board, chairman of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, 18-year U.S. senator, two-term governor of Florida, co-chair of the national commission on the BP oil spill, and member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.

Graham writes today in the Daily Beast:

The first two hijackers who entered the United States did so through Los Angeles International Airport in mid-January 2000. Within days they were urged by a shadowy man, already described in an FBI report as an “agent” of the Saudi government, to relocate to San Diego with promises of extensive support—promises on which he promptly delivered.

The agent’s cover was as a ghost employee of a contractor to an agency of the Saudi government—paid a salary and allowances but never expected to show up and work. His real job was to monitor Saudi youth in San Diego getting an education to ensure they were not also plotting the overthrow of the monarchy.

When the two future hijackers reached San Diego, the agent’s allowances were substantially increased. Upon their arrival the agent secured and paid for an apartment. He arranged flight lessons. He introduced them to a tight circle of Muslims, primarily Saudis, who offered additional support.

Yet the support being funneled to the two visitors proved insufficient for their decidedly non-Islamic tastes—alcohol, strip clubs, even a desired, though unfulfilled, marriage to a stripper. The agent then tapped another source of funds: a welfare account maintained for the benefit of Saudis in need by the wife of the kingdom’s ambassador to the United States.

That is some of what we do know, and we got a sufficient glimpse to know what we didn’t know. Still unanswered after nearly 10 years are the questions of the full extent of the Saudi pre-9/11 involvement: Did any or all of the other 17 receive support from Saudi interests? Why would Saudi Arabia do this? Do the Saudis have the will and capability to aid future attacks against the United States? And most important: Why the cover-up by our government?

I have attempted to address these questions in the final report of the congressional commission and the nonfiction book Intelligence Matters, published in 2004. Each was censored by authorities in the intelligence community, particularly on the role of the Saudis in 9/11.

***

Why would the Saudis have given substantial assistance to at least two of the hijackers, and possibly all 19? The answer I have come to is survival—survival of the state and survival of the House of Saud.

This is stunning. Graham is saying - and actually has said for years - that the Saudis were involved in 9/11, but the U.S. government has been censoring this fact.

But it doesn't end there.

As I noted last year:

Investigators for the Congressional [9/11] Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House.

As the New York Times notes:

Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence...

* * *

The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.

In his book "Intelligence Matters," Mr. Graham, the co-chairman of the Congressional inquiry with Representative Porter J. Goss, Republican of Florida, said an F.B.I. official wrote them in November 2002 and said "the administration would not sanction a staff interview with the source.'' On Tuesday, Mr. Graham called the letter "a smoking gun" and said, "The reason for this cover-up goes right to the White House."

And see this Newsweek article.

The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission also described numerous obstructions of justice by the government into the 9/11 inquiry.

As I also pointed out last year, Graham - as well as the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission - found that witnesses were also intimidated into being quiet:

As I detailed previously, both the Joint Intelligence Committee and 9/11 Commission investigations into 9/11 had government "minders" intimidating witnesses into not saying anything the government didn't like.

You may assume that the issue of "minders" is overblown, and is not really that important.

But, as the New York Times noted in 2003:

The panel [i.e. the 9/11 Commission] also said the failure of the Bush administration to allow officials to be interviewed without the presence of government colleagues could impede its investigation, with the commission's chairman suggesting today that the situation amounted to "intimidation" of the witnesses.

***

9/11 Commission co-chairs] Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton suggested that the Justice Department was behind a directive barring intelligence officials from being interviewed by the panel without the presence of agency colleagues.

At a news conference, Mr. Kean described the presence of "minders" at the interviews as a form of intimidation. "I think the commission feels unanimously that it's some intimidation to have somebody sitting behind you all the time who you either work for or works for your agency," he said. "You might get less testimony than you would."

"We would rather interview these people without minders or without agency people there," he said.

And as I previously noted, a recently released 9/11 Commission memo complains that:

• Minders “answer[ed] questions directed at witnesses;”


• Minders acted as “monitors, reporting to their respective agencies on Commission staffs lines of inquiry and witnesses’ verbatim responses.” The staff thought this “conveys to witnesses that their superiors will review their statements and may engage in retribution;” and


• Minders “positioned themselves physically and have conducted themselves in a manner that we believe intimidates witnesses from giving full and candid responses to our questions.”

Still think this isn't an important issue?

Senator Bob Graham, former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and chair of the Joint Inquiry of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees into 9/11, said in 2005:

The [9/11] commission's findings were based on an interview with al-Bayoumi in Saudi Arabia with Saudi Arabian officials present. "He had no motivation to speak truthfully as to his role," he said.

When government officials are present, it creates conditions where the witness "has no motivation to speak truthfully."

Bottom Line: The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Tom Keane and Lee Hamilton, and chair of the the Joint Inquiry of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees into 9/11, Bob Graham, said that minders obstructed the investigation into 9/11.

In his Daily Beast article today, Graham also goes into more detail regarding the American cover up of 9/11:

The most perplexing unanswered question remains: Why would the United States engage in a cover-up? Many have pointed to the special personal friendship between the royal family and the highest levels of our national government. The fact that the Saudis were allowed to fly a planeload of their elite home from the United States in the days immediately after 9/11, when all other commercial aviation was grounded, is often cited as support for that position. In fact, all that actions such as this do is make America’s post-9/11 reaction to the Saudis even more mysterious.

Secrets deemed this critical by both governments are bound to be buried under many layers of official protection and unofficial obfuscation. The actions since 9/11 are a perverted application of Winston Churchill’s truism on the Allies’ plans to end World War II: “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.”

How far has the American cover up gone?

Here are some hints:

• The 9/11 Commission's co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)


• 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue
  
• 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"


• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up"


• 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version... We didn't have access...." He also says that it might take "a permanent 9/11 commission" to end the remaining mysteries of September 11.


• And the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) - who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry - recently said "At some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is not spin. This is not true." And he said: "It's almost a culture of concealment, for lack of a better word. There were interviews made at the FAA's New York center the night of 9/11 and those tapes were destroyed. The CIA tapes of the interrogations were destroyed. The story of 9/11 itself, to put it mildly, was distorted and was completely different from the way things happened"


• A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials (Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”


• The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup"


• The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility


• The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission


• Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg says that the government has ordered the media not to cover 9/11

Other than that, the American government has been totally forthcoming .)

Note: This essay does not address one way or another whether any countries other than Saudi Arabia might have been involved in the 9/11 attacks themselves.

Update: Graham appeared on MSNBC and talked about this issue:




Source

Once Again, The Will of the Voters Is Denied

October 9, 2009

Yesterday afternoon, Justice Edward Lehner of the State Supreme Court rubberstamped Referee Louis Crespo’s recommendation that the decision to establish a local commission to investigate the events of September 11th not be put before the voters on November 3rd.

After showing interest in weighing both sides’ arguments in the hearing, the Judge’s short decision gives no indication of having considered the arguments put forth in the Petitioners’ memorandum of law, nor any acknowledgement of the need for a new investigation, which the City of New York callously dismissed as “irrelevant”.

On a dark day for democracy, the patriotic call for answers by hundreds of 9/11 families, first responders and survivors has been stifled, and the will of the people of New York City once again denied.

Judge Lehner ruled that modifying the petition to make it “legally permissible” would result in it being “inconsistent with the law sought by the signatories of the Petition” despite the fact that all 80,000 signatories agreed by signing the Petition that “If any provision of this law is held to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, the remaining provisions shall be in no manner affected thereby but shall remain in full force and effect.”

The deadline for inclusion on the ballot falls just before the election, making it possible to appeal Judge Lehner’s decision. NYC CAN is weighing all options and will make an announcement early next week on this issue, as well as on how it will be moving forward on other fronts. Regardless of the outcome in court, the quest for answers continues full throttle. This fight is only the beginning.

Source

Charlie Sheen Demands Obama Reopen 9/11 Investigation In Video Message

Actor Charlie Sheen has followed up on his “20 Minutes With The President” letter by directly addressing President Obama in a You Tube clip to request he use his executive power to reopen the investigation into 9/11 and its aftermath.

On Tuesday, Sheen published a fictional account of a meeting with the President on radio talk show host Alex Jones’ Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com websites in which Obama was confronted about what Sheen alleges is a cover-up surrounding 9/11. In his letter, Sheen requests a real meeting with Barack Obama.

Now Sheen has taken his challenge a step further by appearing in a You Tube video that asks Obama to “be on the right side of history” by reopening an investigation into 9/11, while highlighting that the majority of the 9/11 Commission members have publicly dismissed the official government version of the attacks as a deception, with former Senator and Commission member Max Cleland labeling the government response to the Commission’s questions as “disgusting” and “a scam”.

Sheen highlights several issues in the video, including the unexplained collapse of WTC 7, a 47-story building that was not hit by a plane yet collapsed in free fall fashion into its own footprint within 7 seconds later in the afternoon on September 11. He also cites multiple reports from firefighters, police, first responders and others who were at ground zero and who all described explosions before the collapse of the twin towers and Building 7.

He also discusses how former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds broke her gag order to go public with the revelation that Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda were working with the U.S. government right up until the day of 9/11.

Sheen also demands to know why NORAD’s standard operating procedure was not followed on 9/11, allowing the hijacked jetliners to find their targets, asking, “Where were the planes?”

Sheen expresses his hope that President Obama has read his letter, adding, “We have questions Mr. President, lots of questions….people of the United States and the world demand the truth sir,” adding that Obama has the power and the responsibility to initiate “a truly independent Congressional investigation into the events of 9/11 as well as its aftermath.”

“We want our country back Mr. President, therefore I’m not just calling on you I’m calling on your team, I’m calling on each and every American citizen to wake up, stand up, and demand the truth,” states Sheen in the video.

Source

Feds knew Air Force One photo-op flyover might spark panic in the city - but didn’t give a hoot

Federal officials knew a flyover in lower Manhattan could spark chaos and panic in the streets below - but they did it anyway.

A memo clearly marked “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY,” shows the Federal Aviation Administration was aware that sending a Boeing 747 and F-16 fighter jet over New York City at a low altitude raised “the possibility of public concern.”

Yet, the agency demanded the information be shared on a “need to know” basis and the public and media be kept in the dark.

It was a move branded “sheer stupidity” by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) yesterday.

“To say that it should not be made public knowing that it might scare people, it’s just confounding,” he said.

“It’s what gives Washington and government a bad name.”

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told WCBS-TV it showed “insensitivity to the psychic wounds” the city has suffered since 9/11.

Full article here

Source

Former 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Makes Bizarre Comments about Intelligence Failures before Attacks

Former 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton recently made some bizarre comments about the Zacarias Moussaoui case in an interview for Vanity Fair. The interview was used for a wide-ranging and very interesting oral history of the Bush White House. Hamilton’s comments appear to show complete ignorance of a key aspect of the investigation of which he was vice chair.

Moussaoui was arrested on an immigration violation due to suspicious he was planning to hijack an aircraft by the Minneapolis FBI on 16 August 2001, nearly four weeks before 9/11. His personal effects contained evidence linking him to eleven of the nineteen alleged hijackers and the local FBI suspected that he was part of a wider plot. It correctly assumed a search of the effects would uncover his links to the other conspirators. However, due to obstruction by FBI headquarters, no warrant was ever granted to search Moussaoui’s belongings. Middle managers at headquarters also failed to properly inform their superiors of the case.

Here are Hamilton’s comments on the Moussaoui case:

We knew, for example—when I say we, I mean the F.B.I. in Minneapolis knew—that those guys in flight-training school were more interested in flying the airplane than they were in taking off and landing. They knew that. Who didn’t know it? The director of the F.B.I. didn’t know it. The director of the C.I.A. did know it. His response was that it was none of his business. Technically correct, because his business is foreign intelligence.

Errors

Anyone familiar with the Moussaoui case can see that this is pretty much garbage from start to finish. Let’s go through it one point at a time.

Error No. 1: “Those guys in flight training.” Minneapolis did not know of any “guys [plural] in flight training.” It knew of one [singular] guy, Moussaoui. Moussaoui had an associate, Hussein al-Attas, but he was not in flight training. Minneapolis suspected Moussaoui had associates (who turned out to be the actual alleged hijackers), but did not know of them.

Error No. 2: “…more interested in flying the airplane than they were in taking off and landing.” This is an urban myth, which was reported shortly after 9/11. However, the flight school officials who alerted the FBI, Clancy Prevost, High Sims and Tim Nelson, have been interviewed numerous times about why they alerted the FBI to Moussaoui, and none of them have ever mentioned this. Neither was it mentioned at Moussaoui’s trial, in the Justice Department inspector general’s investigation of the case, the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry report or the 9/11 Commission report.

The flight school and the FBI were suspicious for other reasons, such as Moussaoui paid cash, he was too badly dressed to be an “affluent joyrider,” and he did not have a pilot’s licence at all, but wanted to train on a 747 simulator. Indeed, Moussaoui never trained on the simulator, he was arrested before the practical part of his course started.

Error No. 3: “The director of the C.I.A. did know it.” CIA Director George Tenet certainly did know of the case, as he was briefed on it on 23 August. However, he did not know Moussaoui was “more interested in flying the airplane than they were in taking off and landing” because this is not true. You can find the first information Tenet received about Moussaoui here. Here’s an update from a week later. See, no mention of Moussaoui being more interested in flying a plane than in taking off and landing, but both of them mention the cash payment.

Here’s the 9/11 Commission’s version of what Tenet was told (p. 275):

Tenet was also told that Moussaoui wanted to learn to fly a 747, paid for his training in cash, was interested to learn the doors do not open in flight, and wanted to fly a simulated flight from London to New York. He was told that the FBI had arrested Moussaoui because of a visa overstay and that the CIA was working the case with the FBI.

See, no mention of Moussaoui being “more interested in flying the airplane than they were in taking off and landing” here either. Perhaps if Hamilton could actually remember what the commission of which he had been vice chair had written, it might aid him in his public pronouncements.

Error No. 4: “His response was that it was none of his business.” Tenet may legitimately be criticised for many things, such as the missing WMD in Iraq affair and the torture of who knows how many people. He may even be criticised for his pre-9/11 actions and the mountain of BS he tried to sell investigators after the attacks. However, he demonstrably did not respond that the Moussaoui case was none of his business.

The briefings for him both point out “We are working the case with the FBI.” The commission itself points out that the CIA continued to work on the case after Tenet was briefed:

On August 24, the CIA also sent a cable to London and Paris regarding ‘subjects involved in suspicious 747 flight training’ that described Moussaoui as a possible ’suicide hijacker.’ On August 28, the CIA sent a request for information to a different service of the British government; this communication warned that Moussaoui might be expelled to Britain by the end of August.

Indeed, the mere fact of the second briefing a week later is evidence that he had not told his subordinates it was none of his business. If he had, they would not have troubled him with a second briefing.

Tenet has been criticised for failing to inform Acting FBI Director Thomas Pickard and others, such as counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke, of the case. Tenet’s response is that it was the FBI’s case, so he didn’t think it was his responsibility to brief people on it. You might find that response reasonable or, in the high threat environment in the summer of 2001, you might find it unreasonable. Whatever the case, Hamilton is some way off base with his comments.

Who Is Responsible?

While the failure to obtain the warrant to search Moussaoui’s belongings has garnered most of the media attention, the FBI’s failure to inform its own director of the case is, in some ways, more interesting. Although “systemic errors” and suchlike were blamed for the intelligence failures after the attacks, the bureau’s failure to inform its own director was a failure by specific officials to pass notification up the chain of command.

So who was responsible for this? Notification was passed from the field office in Minneapolis to the Radical Fundamental Unit (RFU) at headquarters. However, the RFU then failed to properly communicate the information to the next official up the chain of command, the assistant director in charge of the bureau’s International Terrorism Operations Section (ITOS), Michael Rolince. RFU chief Dave Frasca did briefly mention the case to Rolince in late August, but only in what the commission calls “two passing hallway conversations.” Rolince didn’t appreciate the significance of the investigation and didn’t become more involved in the case until September. By then, the decision had already been taken not to apply for a warrant, but to attempt to deport Moussaoui.

So Frasca was the line manager whose job it really was to tell Rolince and push awareness of the case up the chain of command, but things are more complicated than that. The other managerial-level employee involved in the case at FBI headquarters was Tom Wilshire, a CIA officer on loan to the bureau. His role in the case was ignored by the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry, the DoJ inspector general, and the 9/11 Commission, but an e-mail dated August 24 attached to his substitution for testimony at Moussaoui’s trial proves his involvement. In the e-mail, he asks for an update on the case, indicating it was not his only communication with the RFU about Moussaoui. He also makes light of the situation’s seriousness.

According to the substitution for testimony, Wilshire was “the CIA’s chief intelligence representative to ITOS Section Chief Michael Rolince,” and his “primary role at the FBI was to assist the FBI in exploiting information for intelligence purposes.” So should Wilshire shoulder some of the blame for Rolince not being informed in full and in a timely manner? In this context, I can’t help but note that Wilshire was involved in, at least, most of the other intelligence failures before 9/11 as well.

What happened to Wilshire and Frasca after 9/11? Nothing, they stayed in their positions. All the people who had failed stayed, some were even promoted. The entire US intelligence system was reconfigured to fit in a director of national intelligence, but the same people were still inside the system. And the lessons that should be drawn from this are what?

Source

Biden Brings His Prophecy to the Emerald City

Joe Biden the seemingly clairvoyant senator from Delaware, and vice presidential nominee was out making predictions, again. The last time Joe was using his crystal ball was on September 10, 2001, one day prior to the 9/11 attacks.

He was at the national press club when he made an astounding prediction, that came true hours later. "We will have diverted all that money to address the least likely threat while the real threats come into this country in the hold of a ship, or the belly of a plane, or are smuggled into a city in the middle of the night in a vial in a backpack."

Just this past Sunday, while out fundraising in Seattle Washington, Biden spoke about what he saw the future looking like, and this time he was much more precise. He offers a timeline, a JFK comparison, and a crisis.

"Mark my words...It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy...Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

He also offers four or five scenarios that, according to ABC news, include the middle east, Russia, a nuclear capable Pakistan, and of course Osama bin Laden. Biden wants to remind you that al Qaeda is everywhere, "and its real"! Still, all that fear mongering was not nearly as concerning as his warning of our civil unrest, here we are only offered a McGuffin - but what he is saying is chilling.

"we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

"Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

He is seriously asking us to just trust him, stick with us later no matter what, take whatever we give you, don't question, "the one" because he will know better than you. He Promises that whatever is going to happen will probably make everyone so mad that the illusion may not hold; but look away, continue your quest for hope. Any type of event would be difficult to pull off, there is little trust for government in America right now, low approval ratings all around. In reality there will be no change from Obama, and at the very least, we will notice and six months into his presidency they will no longer be able to hide it.

"There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision...Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."

This is when they'll begin to squeeze and we will not have any say because it is just too big for the non intellectuals to get,

"It's so much more important than that. It's so much more complicated than that. And Barack gets it."

Biden is outlining some kind of event that may lead to a sick dictatorship, where the eroded Constitution will come in handy, as will the new laws that the bush presidency put on the books, like PDD 51. We cannot just trust Biden, especially when he's predicting "international crisis" , Biden was linked closely to the financiers of the 9/11 attacks. In the days following 9/11, he met with Pakistani ISI General Mahmood Ahmed, the man who gave the order to get one hundred thousand dollars wired to Mohammed Atta.

Biden claims to have met with Ahmed to pepper him with threats, but has offered no reason why he let them leave the US without any investigation at all. Although he has been confronted on these issues by the independent media, the main stream media has failed to cover this topic, and has been forgotten throughout his race towards victory.

We cannot forget, because warnings like the one he gave in the Emerald City on Sunday, must be drawn out and put on display. The line we are walking is fine, we are heading down an uncomfortable path. They have a grip on the children who will become men and woman during the Obama Regime. Children singing his praises, "we're gonna change it, and rearrange it" . And young men dressing up in military gear, ripping out their individuality and self worth pledging to be - "because of Obama".

Biden was speaking in riddles but it is not too hard to figure out that it doesn't sound very good. Within a year we will be questioning President Barack Hussein Obama. Bush had a rough first few months too, 9/11 changed that. There appears to be a definite plan here, as well as a message:

America will be changing, and your not going to like it.

Source

Obama’s VP Needs to Come Clean On 9/11 Bagman Mahmood Ahmed

Now that Joe Biden is Obama’s running mate and may soon be the vice president of the United States, he needs to answer a few questions.

In Jason Bermas’ documentary Fabled Enemies, We Are Change activist Luke Rudkowski confronts Biden on his relationship to ISI director Mahmood Ahmed, who wired $100,000 to alleged hijacker Mohamed Atta through MI6 asset Saeed Sheikh.

As 9/11 Truth movement member Jon Gold notes, the following questions were asked by the Family Steering Committee, an independent, nonpartisan group of individuals who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.

Why did Mahmood Ahmed, Director of Pakistan’s secret service, the ISI, order Saeed Sheikh to wire $100,000 to hijacker Mohamed Atta?

What was Mahmood Ahmed’s relationship with Al Qaeda?

Where did the money come from?

Did officials in Pakistan know in advance about the terrorist attack?

On September 11th, Mahmood Ahmed had a breakfast meeting in Washington, D.C., with House and Senate Intelligence Committee chairmen, Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham. What were they discussing?

The 9/11 Commission also presumably heard about Lt. Gen. Ahmed from FBI Whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds during her 3 1/2 hours of testimony. At the insistence of the families. They may have also heard of Lt. Gen. Ahmed during a meeting with the Pakistani ISI. The 9/11 Commission did not answer the families’ question, and did not mention Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed in their report even though they were mandated to give a “full and complete accounting” of the 9/11 attacks.

As the New York Times reported September 13, 2001, Joe Biden, as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, met with Mahmood. Ahmed also met with George Tenet, CIA head, senators Bob Graham and John Kyl, Rep. Porter Goss, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

It is common knowledge that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, going under the name Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad, sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta, a fact confirmed by Dennis Lormel, director of FBI’s financial crimes unit. Former Pakistani president Purvez Musharraf told the London Times Sheikh was recruited by MI6, took an active part in demonstrations against the Serbs in relation to their role in Bosnia, was sent Kosovo to join the jihad alongside Harkat ul-Ansar, later Harkat ul-Mujahedeen, and attended ISI training camps. Muslim convert Aukai Collins, who fought with Islamic Chechen irregulars, claims Harkat ul-Ansar received support from Osama bin Laden, the documented CIA asset.

It is highly unlikely Biden, as chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, is ignorant of these facts. Biden needs to come clean on his meetings with Mahmood Ahmed. Considering Biden’s reticence, his harsh words for Pakistan, documented in Jason Bermas’ Fabled Enemies documentary, certainly ring hollow and his exchange with truth activist Luke Rudkowski on the subject raises more questions than it answers.

Get Jason’s Bermas’ Fabled Enemies at Alex Jones’ Infowars Store today.

Source

Congressman Ron Paul Wants A Free Market in Gasoline

(PressMediaWire) - Congressman Ron Paul's writings on free market on gasoline - Many Americans understandably are upset with the sharp spike in gas prices since Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf coast in August, and are concerned by reports of oil company profits.  But we must understand that high oil prices are not the result of an unregulated free market.  On the contrary, the oil industry is among the most regulated and most subsidized of U.S. industries.  Perhaps we need to ask ourselves whether too much government involvement in the oil markets, rather than too little regulation, has kept the supply of refined gasoline artificially low.

Consider Marathon Oil, which operates a refinery in Texas City.  Marathon recently announced the construction of new refinery that will bring several hundred thousand barrels of oil online every day- which is exactly what the nation needs.  But building a new refinery is a daunting task that requires billions of dollars in capital investment.  The process of obtaining federal permits alone can take several years.  As a result, we won't see a drop of refined gasoline from the new Marathon facility until 2009.  

Federal subsidies and regulations are largely responsible for limiting the supply of refined gasoline in this country.  The demand for gasoline has risen dramatically in America due to population growth in recent decades, but virtually no new refining capacity has been added.  Basic economics tells us that rising demand and a fixed supply will lead to higher prices.  No amount of congressional grandstanding about price gouging will change this economic reality.  We must increase domestic exploration, drilling, and refining if we hope to maintain reasonable gas prices.  We need more competition, which means we need less government. 

Most Americans agree that the American economy should not be dependent upon Middle East oil.  Economist George Reisman, however, explains that our own domestic regulations make us slaves to OPEC: "Today, it is possible once again to bring about a dramatic fall in the price of oil- indeed, one even larger than occurred in the 1980s.  And it could begin right away.  All that is necessary is to abolish the U.S. government's restrictions on domestic energy production inspired by the environmentalist movement." 

Reisman also explains how abolishing restrictions on coal production, natural gas production, and nuclear power would further reduce the OPEC stranglehold.  By increasing the supply of these other energy sources, demand for oil would decrease and prices would drop.

Note that much of the support for unrealistic environmental regulations comes from northeastern politicians and media, who weren't nearly as interested in oil fortunes when the business hit rock bottom in the 1980s.  Texas and the gulf coast have always been willing to supply the nation's energy, and it's a bit disingenuous to hear criticism from those who are happy to use oil but don't want refineries in their backyards.

Oil is critical, but it is not a magic commodity that somehow is immune from the laws of economics.  In fact, it is precisely because oil is so critical to our economy that we must allow the free market to deliver it.  Absent government interference in the oil markets, gas prices would rise or fall according to concrete realities affecting supply and demand.  High prices would encourage conservation better than any environmental regulations.  Entrepreneurs would race to develop viable alternate fuels if gas prices rose too much. 

Centralized government planning, on the other hand, cannot solve our energy dilemmas.  The Nixon-era price controls on gasoline in the 1970s produced nothing but disastrous shortages.  By contrast, the Reagan administration's immediate deregulation of the oil industry resulted in an unprecedented boom in oil production and a dramatic reduction in prices. This is the lesson we must remember.

What can Congress do to provide Americans with some relief at the pump?  First it can suspend federal gas taxes, which would save consumers nearly 20 cents per gallon.  In the long term, Congress must pass legislation like HR 4004, which I introduced earlier this month.  HR 4004 takes a comprehensive approach by allowing offshore drilling, eliminating regulations that restrict refining, and suspending harmful tax rules that discourage domestic oil production.  If we hope to have a stable, affordable supply of gas, we must allow the free market to operate.

Source

High Tide: The Ron Paul Revolution Continues

Grassroots effort stresses continuing the Ron Paul Revolution, restoring the spirit of freedom in the country and turning back the tide of sprawling foreign wars and disastrous economic policy

The High Tide could be a lifting anthem for the Ron Paul Revolution as it seeks ways to voice its message in the post-campaign era. The video features high quality 3-D animation and Dr. Ron Paul’s voice. It’s stunning imagery dramatically portrays the dark landscape of spreading wars and an unfolding economic wasteland that have resulted from bad policy.

It carries also the spirit of freedom that Ron Paul hoped his campaign would rekindle-- and in many ways already has-- as people across the country are now sparking debate over scaling back government power and following constitutionally-based policies.

Grassroots supporter Nate Evans (ArcFx, WeAreChange.org) donated months of work to put together the 3-D promo (click here for high quality) that will have to settle for underscoring the high-point of an unusual presidential campaign that has now receded from hopes of winning the GOP nomination. Nevertheless, the campaign succeeded in shedding light on the skewed policies of the phony candidates who shared the stage with him. His disenfranchisement in polls, electronic voting and media coverage demonstrated the manipulation over so-called free elections.

Ron Paul recently conceded that "convention victory" had been lost, but that the fight would continue. "Many victories have been achieved due to your hard work and enthusiasm," said Paul.

"I don’t mind playing a key role in the revolution, but it has to be more than a Ron Paul revolution," he said. Somehow, that is reflected in this animated video that transcends the mere man Ron Paul is individually and elevates instead the ideas and history his policy is based upon.

So, what will be the high mark of the Ron Paul Revolution, in their campaign for the presidency? What is its the lasting impact, and in what form will it continue?

Paul urges the continuation of meet-up groups, and even campaign races in effort to gain more delegates and take small victories where they are still available in the election, if only to stretch the political muscle for a future contest.

"At the rate our economy is slipping, we will likely see the disintegration of the American empire," said Paul. "Today’s events should be seen as a tremendous opportunity to change our country for the good."

The Ron Paul Revolution intends to make an lasting impression when it will march together in Washington. Which direction that will take us, is the next step.

Source

Ron Paul Hammers Neo-Con Rival To Retain Congressional Seat

 
 ABC News still claims it was close-fought, despite fact that margin of victory was Congressman's biggest ever in District 14

Ron Paul comprehensively defeated main rival Chris Peden last night to retain his Congressional seat and display a metaphorical middle finger to Neo-Con attack dogs who had attempted to deceive the public into doubting the Congressman's chances by making out it was a close-fought race.

Neo-Cons have egg on their faces this morning after Paul hammered Peden 70-30 to retain his seat in the House of Congress.

Even after the results came in, ABC News were still at it, claiming today, "The fiery Republican with a libertarian bent survived a strong challenge to his day job in Congress on Tuesday, besting a well-funded challenger."

Well-funded? Ron Paul raked in $500,000 in the past month compared to Peden's pathetic $20,000. How on earth can $20,000 be described as well-funded?

Writing that Paul's presidential run, "Nearly came back to bite him at home," the report conveniently fails to mention the margin by which Paul tanked his opponent - a margin 10 points higher than when Paul defeated Democrat Shane Sklar in 2006 and his easiest victory in any Congressional election since he first ran for District 14.

The establishment media and fawning neo-libs like Wonkette did their level best to prop-up Peden as someone who had a legitimate chance of challenging Paul for his Congressional seat, a clear double-standard considering the fact that they wrote off Ron Paul's presidential aspirations from the very start.

In a sophomoric hit piece, The Lone Star Times website, which proudly displays a Peden for Congress banner, cited a report that claimed "Peden holds a double-digit lead over "the taxpayer's best friend."

Under the headline, Could Ron Paul Really Fall?, the site quoted a Pajamas Media blog that falsely claimed, "Polls show Dr. Paul falling behind relatively unknown challenger Chris Peden in his 14th Texas District endangering his congressional seat in the Texas primary."

Other establishment media mouthpieces like The Nation attempted to get a Pedenphile bandwagon rolling by hoaxing readers into thinking the Councilman had a chance of beating Paul, when independent polls clearly showed the Congressman was drubbing his opponent, who was a virtual unknown amongst District 14 residents.

Neo-Con Peden, who advocates the military occupation of the middle east for "the remainder of the century", even had his campaign put out fake poll results in a crass effort to offset the fact that Paul was trouncing him at every juncture.

"Some Washington insiders would have you believe that Republicans no longer believe in the principles our country and party were founded upon, but the voters in my district have once again proven them wrong," Mr. Paul said, in a statement. "The message of freedom is popular, and I will continue to trumpet it in Congress and across America as I fight on behalf of the conservative, common sense values which made our country so great."

Source

Neo-Cons Admit Ron Paul Has "Changed GOP Forever"

Supporters need to value progress made in last 12 months and understand battle for liberty never ends

Amidst a certain amount of resentment amongst some Ron Paul supporters that the Texan has decided to scale back his presidential campaign in order to secure his Congressional seat, the real progress that has been made over the last 12 months has been highlighted by an unlikely source.

Newsmax, which is largely a Neo-Con news outfit, admits in its new print magazine issue that Ron Paul may have "changed the GOP forever," conceding that he is "sparking an incredible movement of libertarian conservatives in the Republican Party."

Newsmax writes that Paul's message of small government, limited taxation, and reduced intervention abroad "resonates with millions of Americans" and compares the Congressman's impact to that of conservative icon Barry Goldwater, who fundamentally shifted the course of the GOP 50 years ago.

The Ron Paul Revolution is still in its infancy and Ron Paul will only be the figurehead of the movement for a limited period of time. When the time comes, new personalities will emerge but the fundamental drive and purpose of the movement will remain the same.

As we have underscored, America was not demolished overnight and it won't be restored overnight. This is part of a long process that transcends the issue of Ron Paul's presidential campaign. People who are so naive as to lose hope and abandon the cause at such an early stage need to realize that the struggle to revive liberty is a long and arduous battle which really has no end.

We really need to continually remind ourselves to take stock of what we as a movement have achieved in just the last 12 months alone.

Talk of abolishing the private Federal Reserve, eliminating fractional reserve banking and returning America to a truly conservative humble foreign policy is so prevalent that it's a topic of discussion on The Tonight Show With Jay Leno. Such a thing was unheard of five or ten years ago.

Ron Paul's presidential campaign platform has educated millions of Americans about real issues and we can now safely count on the fact that around 10 per cent of the U.S. population are fully awake and aware - that's at least double the amount of support the founding fathers could rely on during the Revolutionary War.

Such a widespread and highly motivated grass roots movement is the antidote to the poison of big government and tyranny that has been injected into the heart of America since 9/11.

Beyond Ron Paul and beyond the 2008 presidential election this unprecedented freedom movement will remain a major force in politics - but only if Ron Paul supporters can have foresight and understand that the war is not over - it has only just begun.

Source

Media Smeared Paul For Racism, Ignored McCain’s "Gook" Comments

A shining example of how the media engaged in a witch hunt as part a coordinated campaign to sink the presidential campaign of Congressman Ron Paul is when they attacked him for vaguely racist comments made by other people in the 80's, while completely ignoring the fact that Republican frontrunner John McCain openly said he hated "gooks" more recently.

James Kirchick's New Republic hit piece, which was echoed by every sector of the establishment media for weeks on end, was a vitriolic, biased, and agenda-driven smear attack that lumped in half-truths, outright lies and guilt by association in an attempt to demonize Ron Paul as a racist.

Bear in mind that the comments Kirchick based his article on were largely drawn from newsletters put out in the 1980's of which Ron Paul had no editorial control over. Despite the fact that the comments were made by other people, Ron Paul apologized anyway and yet the feeding frenzy that ensued blatantly exposed the fact that the establishment had been chomping at the bit to seize on anything negative to attack the Congressman with. Meanwhile, John "Keating Five", ahem I mean John "anti-corruption" McCain, disgracefully said he hated "gooks" in public for assembled reporters to hear during his previous presidential campaign in 2000.

"I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live," McCain said on his campaign bus.

'So what? This happened eight years ago and McCain apologized for it soon after', would be the likely Neo-Con riposte.

Compare it to Ron Paul, who is still apologizing for comments made by other people 20 years ago, as establishment hacks ninny and obsess about his imaginary links to white supremacists.

But McCain can openly spew racist slurs in public and the media doesn't even give it the time of day when the man looks set to go head to head with Hillary for the White House and possibly become the President for over 12 million Asian-Americans, or "gooks" as McCain calls them.

Double standards? That hardly covers it. The corporate media are once again protecting their war candidate, Mr. "bomb bomb bomb Iran", Mr. "stay in Iraq for 100 years" while crucifying Paul for comments made by other people that pale in comparison to McCain's personal vitriol about his deep-seated hatred of "gooks".

Source

 

Ron Paul releases his Comprehensive Economic Revitalization Plan

Introduction

America became the greatest, most prosperous nation in human history through low taxes, constitutionally limited government, personal freedom and a belief in sound money. We need to return to these principles so our economy can thrive again. When enacted, my plan will provide both short-term stimulus and lay the groundwork for long-term prosperity.

Other candidates talk a lot about stimulus packages, but my record stands alone. I have fought for these measures for years as a member of Congress and will make them a top priority as president.

Ron Paul, a 10-term Republican Congressman from Texas's 14th District, is currently the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. He has been named "Taxpayers' Best Friend" for 10 consecutive years by the National Taxpayers' Union. Ron Paul is also the author of several books on monetary policy and economics.

The Four-Point Plan

1. Tax Reform: Reduce the tax burden and eliminate taxes that punish investment and savings, including job-killing corporate taxes.
   
2. Spending Reform: Eliminate wasteful spending. Reduce overseas commitments. Freeze all non-defense, non-entitlement spending at current levels.
   
3. Monetary Policy Reform: Expand openness at the Federal Reserve and require the Fed to televise its meetings. Return value to our money.
   
4. Regulatory Reform: Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that push companies to seek capital outside of US markets. Stop restricting community banks from fostering local economic growth.

1. Tax Reform

• Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.
  
  
  
  • Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.
    

  
  
• Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
    

  
  
• Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.
    

  
  
• Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.
    

  
  
• Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 4995 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.
    

  
  
  
  
• Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.J. Res 23 (The "Liberty Amendment"), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
    

  
  
• Eliminate Taxes on Tips.The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on "estimated income" is unfair and should be ended.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.
    

  
  
• Support the Mortgage Cancellation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from the gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.
    

  
  

2. Spending Reform

• Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. Our bases and troops should be on our soil.
  
  
  
  • It's time to stop subsidizing our trading partners in Europe, Japan and South Korea.
    

  
  
• Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels
  
  
  
  • I vote against all bloated, pork laden spending bills and will veto them as president.
    

3. Monetary Policy Reform

• Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. An institution as powerful as the Federal Reserve deserves full public scrutiny.
  
  
  
• Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve
  
  
  
  • Pass H.R. 2754 to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to continue to make available to the public on a weekly basis information on the measure of the M3 monetary aggregate and its components.
    

• Return Value to Our Money. Legalize gold and silver as a competing currency.
  
  
  
  • Level the long-term boom and bust business cycle by passing H.R. 4683, which would repeal provisions of the federal criminal code relating to issuing coins of gold, silver, or other metal for use as current money and making or possessing likenesses of such coins.
    

4. Regulatory Reform

• Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has seriously wounded our capital markets and helped make the UK a financial center at our expense.
  
  
  
  • Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States
    
    
  • Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.
    

  
  
• Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. Neighbors know best how to help their neighbors.
  
  
  
  • We need to make it easier for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions to better serve their communities and to help people in these communities get access to credit and capital.
    
  • Pass H.R. 1869 to enhance the ability of community banks to foster economic growth and serve their communities, boost small businesses, increase individual savings, and for other purposes.

 

Source

Ron Paul Comes in Second Again: This Time in Louisiana

Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul enjoys yet another second place finish in a state caucus. This time it's Louisiana.

The Louisiana contest, however, is not a battleground state in the race for the Republican nomination as candidates have focused on bigger prizes in South Carolina and Florida.

Fred Thompson dropping out of the race helped boost Paul's vote count

If Thompson had still been in the race, a Louisiana political source explained to NR, his state delegate strength in Louisiana would have been enough to potentially get him all of the state's 47 national delegates. The one big problem, though, is that he dropped out only hours before he finally won something.

John McCain won the state Tuesday.

Louisiana voters have become disenchanted with its state's stance against online gambling. Ron Paul is against Internet gambling prohibition.

Source

 

Clear Censoring of Ron Paul by Fox

What more do you need to see what is really going on? Mainstream media is not our friend and do not report facts. Stop watching and supporting their sponsors, because they don't support you!

Ron Paul won second place in Nevada, here's the proof. When will you wake up to the facts? Or would you rather be dumb, deaf, and blind? Do your children a favor and pull your head out of your ass so they don't have to serve in the 100 year Iraq war.

Nevada GOP dismisses Paul complaint

LAS VEGAS -- Ron Paul, other than Mitt Romney the only Republican actively campaigning for Saturday's Republican caucuses in Nevada, called this afternoon for the state party to consider postponing the contest due to "multiple inconsistencies."

But the state Republican Party immediately dismissed the allegations and said the caucus would go on as planned.

"We would hope that the Paul campaign would go act like adults and not try to set up straw men to make up for their lack of organizing," said Steve Wark, a caucus spokesman.

The Paul campaign complained that voters have received postcards with incorrect caucus locations, that eligibility requirements to participate have been changed several times, and that several rural counties could run out of ballots.

"The inconsistencies, errors and multiple changes in the rules reek of playing politics with the what should be a neutral process," said campaign manager Lew Moore said in a statement. "The people of Nevada deserve to know exactly what the rules are and to know that those rules are being fairly enforced. This has not happened up to this point, and the caucus appears to be in chaos."

A Las Vegas Review-Journal survey published today showed Romney leading with 34 percent and Paul in fifth with 7 percent. John McCain had 19 percent, Mike Huckabee 13 percent, Fred Thompson 8 percent, and Rudy Giuliani 6 percent.

Source

Ron Paul bags 2nd place in Nevada

SOUTHERN ARIZONA (SGT NEWS) - So-called long shot candidate Ron Paul managed to finish 2nd place in the Nevada caucuses held today, which proves the Texas Representative may have more support around the country, and especially out west, than he's getting credit for.

Romney destroyed the competition in Nevada with over 50% of the vote and finished first. Ron Paul came in second with 13%, and John McCain finished third, also with 13% but with fewer popular votes than Paul.

Independents overwhelmingly supported Paul in the western state, which clearly helped propel Paul into a much needed second place finish. Normally, independents support the much more liberal John McCain.

Fred Thompson finished fourth, Mike Huckabee fifth and Rudy Giuliani, again falling far short of popular expectations, came in a distant sixth place. Duncan Hunter rounded out the GOP candidates with a seventh place finish, barely picking up 2% of the vote.

Source

Imagine if there was no vote fraud!

Mitt's henchman have stolen way too many votes this time!

Ron Paul’s Intellectually Inferior Opponents

Ron Paul has many opponents. That statement alone should get your brain going and asking the question "Why?" It's not that difficult to explain because his opposition are the people that were the playground bullies when you were a kid. We all know them, the ones that weren't smart enough to finish their own school work but just smart enough to know that they were physically stronger than you or that they could outnumber you with their friends. It's true, the neo-conservative movement has taken control using their "bully" tactics. They are people like Leo Krauss, Alan Bloom, Irving Kristol, Bill Kristol, Richard Perle, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, etc. The list is long. These are people who truly believe in the philosophy of "shoot first and ask questions later". They want the USA to lose its sovereignty in favor of globalization and an eventual one-world government. They have a similar goal to what many would call fascists. What they want feels too much like communism for me to be comfortable. These people and their philosophy are dangerous to our Republic.

This neo-conservative philosophy is becoming commonplace and is part of the foundation of many of the latest crop of presidential candidates including: Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, and Rudy Giuliani. Don't even get me started on the Democratic candidates.

There is one candidate however who is speaking out against this philosophy and his name is Ron Paul. Dr. Paul has spent a significant part of his life working against the neo-conservative infection. He advocates a philosophy of Freedom, something held dear by those brave souls that fought for their freedom in the American Revolution. We're in a unique position at this point in history. We can stand up for the philosophy of Freedom and vote for Dr. Paul or, if you prefer, we can vote for someone who will allow our country to be turned into another USSR or China.

If you are the common everyday man or woman, you have been feeling the pinch. It's been mostly an economic pinch. If you are married, perhaps both of you are working jobs to make ends meet. Maybe you are a single parent forced to live in a neighborhood that's neither save nor beneficial for raising your child. Perhaps you are a recent college graduate who has to work an extra job to pay for that school loan you needed because your parents didn't have the savings to help you out. These are symptoms of a bigger problem. The neo-conservative movement believes heavily in centralized economic planning. The current system essentially is set up to transfer gains in wealth by the middle class and poor to the rich elite. On paper it may all be "legal" but when you get right down to it, it is theft. Ron Paul is fighting against this problem.

The pinch that you probably are not feeling just yet is the neo-conservative attack or your Constitutional Rights. There are subtle things going on in Washington. There are neo-conservatives who are using special interest money to further their agenda to destroy the rights we are guaranteed by our Constitution. These things must stop. Will you do the right thing?

When you head to the polling place over these next few weeks, think about these things. Keep in your mind what is best for you, for your family, and for future generations. These are the things that Ron Paul is keeping in his mind and fighting everyday to improve. Listen carefully, and you won't hear the other candidates speaking about Constitutional rights, freedom, or national sovereignty like Ron Paul does. Please, do the right thing.

Source

 

NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist

 Linder says Paul being smeared because he is a threat to the establishment

Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.

Linder joined Alex Jones for two segments on his KLBJ Sunday show this evening, during which he commented on the controversy created by media hit pieces that attempted to tarnish Paul as a racist by making him culpable for decades old newsletter articles written by other people.

"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

Click here to listen to the MP3 interview.

Source

Kucinich Asks for New Hampshire Recount in the Interest of Election Integrity

DETROIT--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, the most outspoken advocate in the Presidential field and in Congress for election integrity, paper-ballot elections, and campaign finance reform, has sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday's election because of "unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots."

"I am not making this request in the expectation that a recount will significantly affect the number of votes that were cast on my behalf," Kucinich stressed in a letter to Secretary of State William M. Gardner. But, "Serious and credible reports, allegations, and rumors have surfaced in the past few days…It is imperative that these questions be addressed in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery – not just in New Hampshire, but in every other state that conducts a primary election."

He added, "Ever since the 2000 election – and even before – the American people have been losing faith in the belief that their votes were actually counted. This recount isn't about who won 39% of 36% or even 1%. It's about establishing whether 100% of the voters had 100% of their votes counted exactly the way they cast them."

Kucinich, who drew about 1.4% of the New Hampshire Democratic primary vote, wrote, "This is not about my candidacy or any other individual candidacy. It is about the integrity of the election process." No other Democratic candidate, he noted, has stepped forward to question or pursue the claims being made.

"New Hampshire is in the unique position to address – and, if so determined, rectify – these issues before they escalate into a massive, nationwide suspicion of the process by which Americans elect their President. Based on the controversies surrounding the Presidential elections in 2004 and 2000, New Hampshire is in a prime position to investigate possible irregularities and to issue findings for the benefit of the entire nation," Kucinich wrote in his letter.

"Without an official recount, the voters of New Hampshire and the rest of the nation will never know whether there are flaws in our electoral system that need to be identified and addressed at this relatively early point in the Presidential nominating process," said Kucinich, who is campaigning in Michigan this week in advance of next Tuesday's Presidential primary in that state.

Source