TruthSeeker24's anti-N.W.O. corner

Pro-God, Pro-Life, anti-New World Order, Anti-Secret Societies, Pro-Civil Liberties, anti-Torture, anti-National ID Card, Pro-Family, pro-Constitution, Pro-Republic, Anti-Neo Conservativism, Pro-Net Neutrality, Pro-Home Schooling, Anti-Voting Fraud, Pro-Good Israelis & Pro-Good Palestinians, Anti-Human Trafficking, Pro-Health Freedom, Anti-Codex Alimentarius, Pro-Action, Anti-Jesuit Order, Pro-9/11 Truth Movement, Anti-Genocide, and Pro-Gun. My name is Timothy and I'm from the state of Virginia.

Friday, January 27, 2012

Universal Health Care and the Founding Fathers

Neo-Confederates, Ron Paul, the CNP, etc.

Debates, Symbolism, and Life

The Republican political process has been interesting. The recent CNN debate in Florida mainly consisted of Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich debating each other for the nomination. Romney was the aggressor in the debate, because he tried to defend himself against Gingrich’s views on him. For example, Mitt Romney said to Newt Gingrich that he isn’t anti-immigrant since his relatives were from foreign nations. Rick Santorum attacked both Romney and Gingrich as not being conservative enough basically. Santorum said that Romney promoted a government top down health care system, yet he wants to abolish Obama’s new health care law. He called Romney a hypocrite. Romney in response said that his state has the right to devise whatever health care system he wish (and his system allows private insurance access to people and forces people to pay a fine if they refuse to get any form of health care). The truth is that Mitt Romney and the President Barack Obama’s health care plans are very similar. That’s just the truth. Ron Paul offered humor in the debate by challenging his competitors for a 25 mile bike race in Texas during the summer. Mitt Romney told the neo-conservative Laura Ingraham that the economy is improving and he wants to use the same free market fundamentalism as a way to promote his economic ideologies. Ron Paul discussed his views on how individual initiative and not government intervention is the best means to improve American society. Newt Gingrich wasn’t the aggressor in the debate. Newt seems to lose the debate despite winning the debates in South Carolina. Mitt Romney accused Gingrich of having financial investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Romney voted for Paul Tsongas back in the early 1990’s, because he was a more independent candidate. Mitt Romney used advice from a debate coach to be prepared to not only execute words, but respond to Gingrich’s attacks. The establishment media supports Mitt Romney to be the Republican candidate for President blatantly. Romney said that anyone advocating in his company of trying to colonize the Moon by 2020 will be fired. Newt Gingrich is using a new ad to call Romney out. Gingrich accused Mitt Romney of being dishonest on various issues. The bigger picture is that all of the candidates believes that if you just tax the wealthy more and end nearly all regulations, the sun will shine (clouds will end and the glory return of tranquility will reign in the land). Frankly, they are wrong since economic prosperity is caused by fair taxation, progressive thinking, and radical solutions. Some people from the NY Times believe that Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum would add much money to the national deficit in one year. If an injured man is suffering, then the government should help that person out.



There is video proving that military helicopters are conducting covert exercises over the U.S. bank Building in Los Angeles, California. Videos prove that 5 military helicopters were buzzing over downtown LA. They were doing special ops urban warfare drill according to the LAPD. The footage was captured by CBS Los Angeles. The deal was that CBS Los Angeles shows a huge Black Hawk helicopter hovering over the U.S. bank building. There were 4 other OH-6 choppers called “Little Birds.” The CBS reported noted seeing the Black Hawk conduct a drop off in a nearby park before taking to the sky above LA again. The helicopters staged at Dodger Stadium during the whole exercise. The helicopters were seen flying low over the Staples Center as the LA Lakers played inside. So, the LAPD and the elite military units were conducting anti-terrorism training over Downtown LA. The former U.S. Army aviator David Duran told CBS affiliate KCAL9 News that the training was likely a dry run for a future mission. “They do a lot of mockup training,” said Duran. “But it’s always best to get the closest terrain layout to what the objective is.” “If it’s a mountainous terrain, they go to the mountains; if it’s a desert terrain, they use the desert; if they’re in a coastal terrain, they use the coast,” said Duran. “If it’s an urban terrain, you know, whatever’s needed.”  There was a statement issued on Monday by the LAPD. The state reads that the exercises (which are closed to the public) are: “…designed to ensure the military’s ability to operate in urban environments, prepare forces for upcoming overseas deployments, and meet mandatory training certification requirements.” The LAPD said that training sites are being selected to ensure the event does not negatively impact the citizens of Los Angeles and their daily routine. This is odd since the drills occurred near civilian locations. The exercise represents another example of recent military drills that are going to hit heavily populated areas all over America. During April of 2011, residents of Brickell, Miami witnessed at least 3 large Black Hawk Like helicopters conducting military exercises over their heads. Some initially believed it was a movie shoot. Similar exercises have occurred in Boston back in August of 2011. So, it’s fine to promote freedom and not a police state.



There is a bill that would ban food products made with aborted baby cells. It’s a commonsense and reasonable bill. The person who introduced the bill is the Oklahoma state Senator Ralph Shortey. He’s a Republicans, who introduced this bill in his state legislature. It will ban food products developed using aborted fetal material. Last year, there has been an outcry last year over Pepsi and other companies contracting with a company. Senomyx uses fetal cells from babies victimized by abortions to test and produce artificial flavor enhancers. In May of 2011, Pepsi ignored corners and criticism from pro-life groups. Thousands of pro-life human beings disagreed and opposed PepsiCo contracting with biotech company Senomyx (even after it was found to be testing their food additives using fetal cells from abortions). Pepsi now faces action form its shareholders. Senator Ralph Shortey told KRMG Radio that he doesn’t’ want aborted fetal material to be placed in artificial flavor in order to enhance flavor. To place dead fetuses in food is sick. “There are companies that are using embryonic stem cells to research and basically cause a chemical reaction to determine whether or not something tastes good or not,” he said. “As a pro-life advocate, it kind of disturbed me that we would use aborted embryos or aborted human fetuses to extract stem cells and use them for research to basically make things taste better.” I can’t believe that people are criticizing this commonsense legislation, but many folks are. Mainstream media outlets are criticizing the bill. Debi Vinnedge (or the Executive Director of Children of God for Life) believes that the media’s criticisms are groundless. The articles consisted of an onslaught by the mainstream media. The media expressed disbelief or crass remarks in trying to denigrate Shortey over his bill. “This is perhaps the worst case of irresponsible reporting by the mainstream media that we have witnessed in this millennium,” Vinnedge said. “A simple fact check would have revealed that Senator Shortey is correct about how some of our foods are being produced.” The focus is on San Diego based biotech company Senomyx, who states on their website that, “We created proprietary taste receptor-based assay systems that provide a biochemical or electronic readout when a flavor ingredient interacts with the receptor.” What they don’t tell the public is that they are using HEK 293 (human embryonic kidney cells) taken from an electively aborted baby to produce those receptors, Vinnedge says. There is one of over 75 patients on file in which the aborted fetal cells are utilized, Senomyx states in U.S. Patent number 7,297,543: “…The invention provides a preferred mammalian cell lines, e.g., HEK-293 cells that stably express T1R2/T1R3 and G.sub..Alpha.15 under inducible conditions. These cells are useful in cell-based assays for identifying compounds that elicit or modulate sweet taste.” Pro-Life people say that Senomyx has entered into agreements with various food giants (like PepsiCo, Nestle and Cadbury Adams LLC, a division of Kraft Foods) in which the companies pay Senomyx for the research and development of the flavor enhances (and then continue to pay royalties on the products sold). Some of these companies have products in the market now in America using Senomyx flavors, but PepsiCo’s products are still in the development stage. That is why Children of God for Life has begun a massive worldwide boycott of PepsiCo beverages when they admitted that would be the focus of their Senomyx research collaboration. Vinnedge said that PepsiCo could have requested Senomyx could have utilized morally acceptable cell lines. Campbell Soup even severed ties with Senomyx, because the public was outraged over the situation. Vinnedge wanted PepsiCo to be boycott as Vinnedge mentioned that PepsiCo misled the public (and created a public relations nightmare for them). Senator Shortey is right to outline his bill to the public. The mainstream media is wrong on not reporting on this issue, because we shouldn’t be cannibals and eat parts from dead unborn babies at all. Children of God for Life wants other state to join Oklahoma’s efforts as well. Over 30 pro-life groups supported the PepsiCo boycott. A shareholder resolution filed late last year with the Security and Exchange Commission by a concerned stockholder would require that PepsiCo “adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements.” PepsiCo attorneys responded with a 36 page plea to the SEC in an attempt to quash the information. Both sides are currently awaiting the SEC ruling. So, life is more important than 21st century style cannibalism.



The truth about 9/11 is known. It’s interesting to note that Colleen Rowley (The Time’s “Person of the Year”) was a 9/11 whistleblower about what the government knew about various terrorist threats. She was never called to testify to the 9/11 Commission. One major figure in the 9/11 Commission process was John Lehman. John Lehman was the former Secretary of the Navy during the Reagan administration. He was also a signer of the September 20, 2001 letter from the Project for the New American Century calling for a war on terror against Iraq. This is a conflict of interest to say the least. The reason is that it is unjust to allow a neo-con (who wants a preemptive war against Iraq) to exist as a leading figure in the 9/11 Commission. A lot of people don’t realize that Lehman scapegoated the valiant New York City firefighters by saying that they didn’t do enough. Lehman omitted that the feds removed potential evidence from the crime scene over the protests of the same firefighters. FBI agents allegedly had advance knowledge of dates, targets, financial transactions as well as the names of the perpetrators of the impending terrorist attacks. But they claim that they were ignored or legally obstructed. Experienced FBI agent John O’Neill claims that his investigation of Osama bin Laden was opposed and obstructed by the White House. And FBI agent Ken Williams, who investigated terrorist suspects at flight schools in Phoenix, was reallocated halfway through his investigation. John O’Neill resigned from the FBI. He was found dead in the World Trade Center on 9/11. He was Head of Security for the World Trade Center in New York. Now, the official story believes that 9/11 was a complete surprise attack in America by a bunch of radicals. The truth is the opposite. The truth is that 9/11 related attacks were known about by the federal government for years. Efforts to prevent the attacks were suppressed by federal agencies. The war games on 9/11 were o coordinated by Muslims, therefore all of 9/11 wasn’t a product of Osama bin Laden at all. 9/11 was allowed to happen by the same people who created this war on terror & police state existing today in 2012. There are still unanswered questions about 9/11 as well. Why could the “black boxes’ couldn’t be found from the planes, yet a paper passport of a hijacker somehow survived the fireballs and was found in the streets of lower Manhattan. Why numerous warnings from allied governments were supposedly ignored (at least a dozen countries, possibly more, warned the US that 9/11 was coming)? How does a flight school dropout managed to execute a high speed, high G fighter pilot maneuver into the nearly empty, under reconstruction part of the Pentagon despite the refusal to rent him a single engine plane the previous month (they said he had no flying skills)? There are similar to questions like these previous ones. We live in a new era. Many libertarians are very strong supporters of civil liberties and the militarist Empire. They are right on those issues, but their economic views will rarely limit toxic pollution (which harms the biosphere) or promote help for those living in harsh poverty. We don’t need 1 trillion dollars in budget cuts to harm our land. Don’t you realize that the words that Ron Paul and Alex Jones speak are very similar to the words from the John Birch Society? Patriots have exposed the origin of the JBS. Members of the JBS even slandered President John F. Kennedy as communist. What we can agree on are the principles of human freedom, peace, universal health care, our civil liberties, and being against any form of oppression against any human being.



Quantum of Solace is a famous 2008 film from the James Bond film series. Quantum in physics is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. One example is that a photon is a single quantum of light or the light quantum. It’s the 22nd film from the series. It was produced by Eon Productions for MGM and Columbia Picture. It came after 2006’s “Casino Royale.” James bond takes on Dominic Green (played by Mathieu Amalric). Greene was a member of the Quantum organization. Green poses as an environmentalist, but he intends to stage a coup d’état in Bolivia to get control of the nation’s water supply. Bond takes extreme measures in the film since his lover was killed named Vesper Lynd. Camille Montes works with James and she desires revenge as well. The end of the film shows Greene as being murdered with 2 bullets in the back in his skulls and motor oil in his stomach. Bond and Camille kiss before they part. Symbolism and esoteric influence is throughout the film. There are deeper meanings in the movie indeed. The inventor of the James Bond’s novel series was Ian Fleming. James Bond is 007. 007 was the signature of the occultist, mathematicians, and aide to Queen Elizabeth I Dr. John Dee. Yes, Ian Fleming loved the occult. He said that: “…Everything I write has precedent in truth…” Ian Fleming had direct associations with Aleister Crowley. He even based some of his characters like LeChiffre (or the villain of Casino Royale) on Crowley. This is proven by a review of a Fleming from Times Online writer Ben Macintyre. Aleister Crowley was the famous occultist who is loved by some musicians, occultists, and likeminded individuals. Crowley was a drug addict, done sexual rituals, and was called the world’s “wickedest man in the world.” Crowley’s Thelemic mystical doctrine dealt with the words of “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” That means that in his mind that man can do what he wants to do as a part of his own will (even evil). He participated in orgies, used the Ouija Board, and other actions. Ironically like Dr. John Dee, Crowley worked for British Intelligence. Alchemy is a part of Dr. John Dee. Dr. Dee viewed himself as an alchemist. Today’s Hollywood’s pictures regularly use occult/alchemical symbolism to represent not only the anti-God themes, but the pro-human godhood views. In other words, Gnostic themes regularly exist in Hollywood. These images are called archetypes that the pro-Gnostic Carl Jung studied. The beginning of many Bond film shows silhouettes of females dancing (some in a swastika or eye image). People realize that the swastika symbol comes from the ancient cultures of India, Mesopotamia, and the ancient Americas as representing the image of the sun (or the sun wheel). Carl Jung studied the symbol of the swastika all of the time. He believed that archetypes are universally a part of the collective unconscious. Alchemy in esoteric terms refers to transformation pretty much. During the Middle Ages, alchemists wanted to transform base metals into gold. Not only that, the alchemists also believed that the elements of nature can transform man into a higher, conscious, godlike being. This transformation fulfills the Great Work among man for thousands of years. This Great Work deals with all things of the Universe sent into perfection, harmony (or the solace) under the gaze of the “All Seeing Eye.” The eye represents the divine image of intelligence. It’s found universally in secret societies and intelligence agencies (like MI5/6, DARPA, etc.) that influence global geo-politically policies globally. The transformation of the human world and consciousness into divinity is alchemy too (or turning physical matter or prima material into the divine). Today, some folks believe in this process and promote transhumanism as a means in trying to get that goal accomplished. Jung believed that the archetypes of the subconscious being can be explored to have harmony in the psyche of a person. In the Bond film, James Bond struggles between his internal struggle (the death of his lover and revenge) and his external struggle (his battling against the Quantum terrorist group trying to get secretive world domination). The PM’s office in the film shows Sacred geometry images, shapes, and swastikas. There are Masonic columns and the Labyrinth image there as well. Vesper means evening or night in Latin. James Bond finds out that Quantum has infiltrated British Intelligence. Quantum is similar to intelligence agencies that use fronts like environmentalists as an excuse to promote global domination. This is similar to the globalist WWF organization (headed by the Saxe-Coburg Gothas and European bloodlines) that uses the environment as an excuse to dominate lands inside of Africa. Greene at one point in the film blames government as the problem, and touts privatization, while demonizing “government.” Dominic Greene is an apostle for the Green Movement, and claims to support numerous environmental causes, and brings to mind someone like Al Gore. Globalists promote the idea of the Georgia Guidestones (which wants millions of human beings to die in order for us to return to “Nature”). Bond goes into Port au Prince and gets Greene’s identity. Greene wants to control the natural resources in Bolivia like oil, water, etc. He used his phony Tierra Project to engineer a fake water crisis to be blamed on global warming and environmental degradation. In real life, global corporate groups use global warming or climate change (this doesn’t mean real environmental issues don’t exist. They do) as an excuse to gain the world’s resources. The IMF does it and the World Bank definitely does it. The Quantum is a corporation that’s larger than most government in the world. The CIA and British Intelligence ally with Greene and Bond opposes this development. Dominic wears a metallic belt with the heart with sun images on it. Greene is in on the conspiracy. Symbols of the Carbonari secret society are in the film too. The Club of Rome and other groups want a globalized war in trying to return man into Nature too. Greene discovers Bond is onto him and sends him a message by dipping and drowning Agent “Strawberry Fields” in oil. This causes M and MI6 think Bond has gone rogue and that Greene is after oil. Bond realizes he is after the control of resources. Bond leaves the Andrean Grand. It has black and white Masonic floor coloring and has a large G placed in the Hotel. G is in Freemasonry that stands for Geometry, Grand Architect of the Universe, Generation, etc. Black and white imagery refers to dualism (or the law of opposites in especially Eastern religions like Daoism and Buddhism). So, the film shows good and evil battling against each other (while all sides are managed by the higher power knowing all sides in the mix). In real life, people are under mind control and confusion to not know that they are being manipulated by upper echelon individuals. Greene even admits that he deals with the left and the right, dictators or liberators. Gnostics and the occult teaches that the process involves the overcoming of one’s conscience – overcoming the dialectic of good versus evil, into a supposed higher synthesis of transcending such absolutist categories. The global elite want their Great Work by using scientific regimentation, world control, etc. via alchemical stages. So, the movie deals with James Bond trying to live in a world rules by mysterious figures, he seeks revenge over his inner pain, and he tries to defeat an enemy with ties to the globalists.



By Timothy

Quotes on Poltics

Viper
Former repub, still repenting
4 hours ago ( 3:17 PM)
"When economic power became concentrat­ed in a few hands, then political power flowed to those possessors and away from the citizens, ultimately resulting in an oligarchy or tyranny." John Adams

Thomas Jefferson. “Progressi­ve taxes are required to prevent a permanent rich aristocrac­y that then buys government and ends democracy as happened in England ” ..

This happened under the robber barons which repub policies return us to, and not unlike now.

"As riches increase and accumulate in few hands . . . the tendency of things will be to depart from the republican standard." Alexander Hamilton

Ab Lincoln: "I hope we shall crush ... in its birth the aristocrac­y of our moneyed corporatio­ns, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country".

Justice Brandies: “ You can have great wealth or democracy, you can have one or the other,but not both” .

The founders were Locke liberals fighting the Burke conservati­ve 1000 richest families of the British Empire. Our founding fathers were secular progressiv­es. The Conservati­ves , called Tories were on the side of King George and Aristocrac­y. Somethings never change.
____________________


MarkModerator6 days agoin reply to EmbraceTheTruth
"Slavery was on its way out?" What, was it a fad? What are you talking about?

Owning slaves was owning free money. You owned human beings that you could legally order to do anything in the whole wide world except to kill, injure, or offend a fellow of your own 'people-owning' class.

Do you know how much money a person could make by being able to force just one person to do some shit you don't want to do? You wouldn't have to go to work. Get the slave a job. Need some extra cash? Rent out a slave. Ask a pimp about it.

So what you're telling me is that a bunch of very rich and powerful Southern families - some of them entrenched for more than two centuries, possessed with what they feel is a sacred duty, to pass down their family fortunes, along with their legacies and honorable names - would be willing to give all up without a fight when offered a measly one time payment for their slaves?

Nay, Capitalism does not work like that. With each of the family's generations growing up and multiplying, the number of slaves they owned increased exponentially, as did the family fortune. That is why Southern businessmen and lawmakers were fiercely scheming to bring more slave states into the union, including the newly occupied territories seized in the Mexican-American war in 1848.

Rather than to hasten the demise of slavery in the American south, The Industrial Revolution gave the slave industry a tremendous boost. When Eli Whitney patented his mechanical cotton gin in 1794, demand for more cotton and more slaves skyrocketed.

The property value of individual slaves increased after the very last ship to bring slaves to the United States arrived in Alabama in 1857. And the Dred Scott decision by the. Supreme Court held, that a slave did not become free when taken into a free state, Congress could not bar slavery from a territory, and blacks could not be citizens. There were 3,953,696 slaves in the United States in 1859. The total number of slave owners was 385,000. This does not look like a business model "on its way out."

You say "the only single positive that came out of that war was the end to slavery," as if it were the most insignificant problem or issue a person could have. You don't think one group of your fellow Americans forcibly holding another group of your fellow Americans in captivity for forced labor, or any other purposes, under threat of severe violence or death is worth having a war about?

What kind of master of irony are you EmbraceTheTruth? That you could speak reverently of "the entire Constitution" and indignant about "the value for freedom" being trampled upon, at the same time you're trivializing the necessity to fight for freedom against slavery, and downplaying the urgency of immediate release from tyranny.
_____________
Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to David
"The Industrial Revolution had already made slavery irrelevant in the North and the US was basically the last Western power to abolish slavery in their own country - so yes, it was on it's way out."

I'm sorry, but there's very little evidence that it was on its way out. Quite the contrary, there is evidence that the South was resisting integration into the industrial economy of the North, a major factor in their secession. As of 1860 the percentage of Southern families that owned slaves has been estimated to be 43 percent in the lower South, 36 percent in the upper South and 22 percent in the border states that fought mostly for the Union. This statistic comes from James G. Randall and David Donald's book "Civil War and Reconstruction".

Southern concerns included not only economic loss but also fears of racial equality. The Texas Declaration of Causes for Secession said that the non-slave-holding states were "proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color", and that the African race "were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race". Alabama secessionist E. S. Dargan warned that whites and free blacks could not live together; if slaves were emancipated and remained in the South, "we ourselves would become the executioners of our own slaves. To this extent would the policy of our Northern enemies drive us; and thus would we not only be reduced to poverty, but what is still worse, we should be driven to crime, to the commission of sin."

In any case, I agree that the Civil War was one of the worst things that happened to our country and it could've been avoided, but Lincoln and the Northern States were not in the wrong nor were they the primary culprits of the Civil War. As to why the War was fought, well South Carolina first seceded arguing for States Rights for Slave owners in the South, but complained about States Rights in the North with respect to the Fugitive Slave Act, claiming that Northern states were not fulfilling their federal obligations under the Constitution. All the alleged violations of the rights of Southern states were related to slavery.
____________
Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to Jay
"Also, the British Empire did eliminate slavery without a war. The U.S. could have as well."

This is a very bad argument. The British Empire was very different from the United States economically and culturally. Nevertheless, the U.S. could've ended slavery peacefully, but the South refused.
__________
Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to Jay
His history is radically mistaken and his proposed solution is morally offensive because it suggests that Black people are property that can be bought and sold. His history is mistaken for a number of reasons.

(1) The South was the aggressor. It was not Lincoln that started the war.
(2) Ron Paul's suggested proposal was actually proposed numerous times by Lincoln as a representative. Once in November 1861 and then in March 1862. The 1861 proposal was to purchase all of the slaves from the State of Delaware. Delaware was the smallest slave state. The proposal was rejected by the Delaware State government by 1 vote. In 1862, Lincoln proposed legislation to purchase all slaves. It passed with Republican support despite opposition from the Democrats. The Democrats were largely representing the slave states. So it passed, but the offer of money was rejected by slave owners, so the plan stalled. Ron Paul's "solution" just wasn't an option at the time, and we have pretty clear evidence of that. Slavery was so ingrained in the Southern culture that there simply was no chance that they would take steps to eliminate it.
____________
MarkModerator6 days agoin reply to NoQuestion
First of all it's not true.

Under the leadership of former slaves Toussaint Louverture, Jean-Jacques Dessalines, and Henri Christophe, rebel slaves overthrew the French in Haiti and abolished slavery in 1801.

In 1793 Canada abolished the importing of slaves and by 1803 had completely abolished slavery without either having to buy them or having a war about it.

When the Mexican War of Independence began in 1810, Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla declared slavery abolished, but it wasn't official until the war ended in 1829.

In Argentina, the law stated that those born after January 31, 1813 would be granted freedom when contracting matrimony, or on their 16th birthday for women and 20th for men, and upon their manumission would be given land and tools to work it. In 1853, slavery was completely abolished.

In 1814, Uruguay declared all slaves in their territories free.

Bolivia abolished slavery in 1831.

The British Slavery Abolition Act abolished slavery in their West Indies colonies in 1834.

In 1848, Slavery was abolished in all French and Danish colonies in the West Indies.

Argentina abolished slavery while enacting its Constitution in 1853,

Peru and Venezuela abolished slavery in 1854.

In 1862, Cuba abolished the slave trade.

Only in Gran Colombia (Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Panama) was compensation paid for freed sons and daughters born to slave mothers.

Secondly, economic powers in the southern United States were not interested in ending the institution of industrialized slavery. Their entire economy, culture and lifestyle was based on slavery. Many may have sold their slaves, but many more would not, or would simply relocate and purchase more of them.

At the time, Southerners were seeking to expand the number of slave holding states entering the union. Territory annexed after the Mexican-American war was targeted by them for this purpose. The main reason the northern dominated Congress refused to expropriate more than the 55% of Mexico than The United States did, was to prevent the south from expanding slavery into the deeper reaches of Mexico past Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.

That is why 'we' did not do the same.

And that is not the flag of Mississippi. The Mississippi state flag has the 'stars and bars' in the upper left corner with a thick blue and a thick white horizontal stripe to its right and one long thick red stripe along the entire bottom beneath everything else. Ron Paul is speaking in front of the Confederate flag.

________

Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to NoQuestion
Lincoln tried (tor purchase and free all slaves) in 1862. Southern slave-owners refused. Furthermore, the proposed "solution" buys into the racist ideology that Black people can legitimately be bought and sold. This is why it makes sense to call him a neo-confederate.
__________
MarkModerator6 days agoin reply to Nathaniel Hamrick
That's because there wasn't a whole class and culture of beneficiaries willing to fight to the death to preserve the industrialized chattel slavery that upheld their economy and their very way of life like in the American south.
______
Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to Tim
Saying he's against the war entirely is rather empty. The South was against the war as well. They would've much rather preferred to be able to own their slaves without opposition.

His "solution" is more telling. It assumes that Black people are property that can be bought and sold. Anyone who recognizes that people aren't property, will immediately see what's so offensive about his "solution".
________-
Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to Tim
Except that his solution is morally offensive and his history is wrong. It's morally offensive because, like I've stated earlier in the thread, it assumes that Black people are property that can be bought and sold. His history is mistaken because his proposal wasn't an option at the time. In fact, it was tried by Lincoln, passed in the Congress, but was rejected by Southern slaver owners. Ron Paul just doesn't understand what the world was like at the time, especially in the South.
_________
Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to Ash K
"the Civil War was not fought over slaves"

This is so absurdly false, it's hard to believe people are trumpetting it. All the alleged violations of the rights of Southern states were related to slavery. See the official declaration by South Carolina, "Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union"

Historian James McPherson writes concerning states' rights and other non-slavery explanations:
"While one or more of these interpretations remain popular among the Sons of Confederate Veterans and other Southern heritage groups, few professional historians now subscribe to them. Of all these interpretations, the state's-rights argument is perhaps the weakest. It fails to ask the question, state's rights for what purpose? State's rights, or sovereignty, was always more a means than an end, an instrument to achieve a certain goal more than a principle."

It's great that they put their motivations in writing. It makes it easier to refute b____.
__________
DandelionModerator6 days ago
Bull crap, Dr. Paul. If the slave owners sold their slaves, who were they going to use for free labor?
________
Donna StevensModerator6 days agoin reply to Hana Johnson
I see you got neo-confederate Lew Rockwell on your twitter feed. Nice try! Sorry sister, the South shall NOT rise again...not in our lifetime at least.
____________
Donna StevensModerator6 days agoin reply to Mary Hysmith
The very fact Ron Paul claims the North should have paid to buy slaves from southern slave owners shows he does not regard them as people but as a commodity.
 ________________

Jonathan MooreModerator6 days agoin reply to USSConstitution
The morally appalling thing refers to his "solution" since it still presumes that black people are property that can be bought and sold instead of human beings that deserve to have their rights protected.

The false thing(s) is the premise of his "solution". (1) He failed to mention that his proposal was rejected by southern slave owners in 1862. (2) He failed to mention who was the aggressor of the war. (3) He claimed that slavery wasn't the main cause of Civil War, which virtually every historian disagrees with, etc...
 
__________
 
Joey TranchinaModerator2 days agoin reply to Max RonPaul Rich
Max RonPaul Rich wrote:
"great speech. this has nothing to do with racism you ignorant assumptuous d____"

That's a perfect example of how Libertarians never get it.

Their principles are a mask for racism, and they allow it on principle.

There are two sorts of Libertarians fools and wolves. The fools are too stupid to know that the enemy is the bigotry that has disgraced America from its inception — the bigotry written in its Constitution; the wolves know how to make use of stupidity — they convince White people that racism works for them, when it weakens them by dividing them from natural allies, while it strengthens predators.

Why do you think the KKK burned Black schools? The canard still works.

As I wrote in a poem decades ago:
They have a word for "victim" in the jungle. It's "lunch."
 
__________
 
Joey TranchinaModerator2 days agoin reply to Tiffany Madison
What did I say: "fools & wolves." I was one of the fools. I grew up on a cattle ranch. I admire the principles of self reliance but it is a moral responsibility, in a political organization, to honestly appraise the uses to which one's principles are being put.

The Libertarian Party, in fact the entire Conservative movement, is used as a front for predatory capitalists (the opposite of free enterprise — read Adam Smith), for Christian reconstructionists and for the comfort of Southern bigots, to keep the Old South voting block under the GOP circus-tent.

Principles meet practice. High sounding principles about liberty do not match the smell test when one examines Republican policy. Of course, the LP has no policies because they have virtually no one in office and are thus a debating society, which offers a quiasi-principled front for the degenerate Republican Party, that is almost entirely corrupt.
 
_______
 
Donna StevensModerator6 days agoin reply to carlton
"We don't need your kind "??? Spoken like a true racist. Unfortunately for you and your fellow Paulbots when the main stream media shows the video they won't be explaining any of what you said they will simply play the part with him saying "the south was right" and how slaves should have been continued to be treated like a commodity and sold to the North because as you know the 'evil' mainstream media does not like Ron Paul. He's finished. Now please resume your cousin loving.
 
 
 
 
_________
 
Donna StevensModerator6 days agoin reply to MattAH84
smoke screens in politics? Ron Paul is standing in front of a confederate flag. The image alone is worth a thousand words. He's in fourth place in a four man race. He raised 4 million on his December money bomb but his January money bomb barely netted 1.3 million. He's finished. People are waking up and the only one who is ignorant are supporters like you who refuse to admit it.

Syria Activists: 'Terrifying Massacre' In Homs

Refuting the Claim Women Will Resort to Coat Hanger Abortions

Cutting Edge Ministries Newsletter

 
src="http://www.prolifeblogs.com/prolifeblogs6.gif" border="0">
 
Vote For TruthSeeker24's anti-NWO corner
at Conspiracy Top Sites

TopSiteList

Powered by Blogger

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]