By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Ron Paul warns of a Fascist Takeover in America

Republican Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate of either party to tell the truth that America is “slipping into a fascist system.”

That is unquestionably the critical issue of the hour for the United States of America and one that Paul’s Republican fellow candidates and their Democratic opponent President Obama choose to ignore.

Hand in hand with this existential crisis is that a nation that goes fascist at home invariably becomes a tyrant abroad. Thus, the Congressman from Galveston is right on the mark when he calls for the predatory U.S. to pull its troops out of the Middle East and Africa and close down its foreign bases. The U.S., indisputably, with its 1,000 military bases at home and a thousand more abroad, is now the most awesome military power ever.

“We’ve slipped away from a true Republic,” Paul told a cheering crowd of followers at a Feb. 18th rally in Kansas City, Mo. “Now we’re slipping into a fascist system where it’s a combination of government and big business and authoritarian rule and the suppression of the individual rights of each and every American citizen.”

According to the Associated Press reporter who covered his speech, “Paul repeatedly denounced President Barack Obama’s recent enactment of a law requiring military custody of anyone suspected to be associated with al-Qaida and involved in planning an attack on the U.S.” (Note: Paul is a consistent defender of individual rights. He also opposed that previous horrific piece of totalitarian legislation mislabeled as the Patriot Act.)

When Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act(NDAA) into law last New Year’s Eve he pledged he would not subject citizens to indefinite military detention without trial. Yet if Mr. Obama should change his mind, who lives free and who is shackled behind bars is up to him, not to any legal system. The rights guaranteed in the Constitution are worth zero to a person who can be imprisoned indefinitely on Mr. Obama’s say-so.

Ralph Munyan, a Republican committeeman who attended the Paul rally, told AP he agreed with Paul’s warnings of a “fascist system” and Paul’s pledges to end the War on Drugs as well as U.S. involvement in wars overseas. By contrast, candidates Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich are all hawks spoiling for a fight with Iran and who leave peace-minded Republican voters no one to turn to save Paul.

An article on Paul published in the Feb. 27th issue of “The New Yorker” quotes him as saying, “We thought Obama might help us and get us out of some of these messes. But now we’re in more countries than ever—we can’t even keep track of how many places our troops are!”

In the evaluation of “New Yorker” reporter Kelefa Sanneh, “So far, the Paul campaign is neither a groundswell nor a failure. He is slowly collecting delegates…” which could impact the final selection of the nominee even if they do not have the strength to nominate Paul.

Overall, Paul’s message appears to be “doing better, state by state, than he did in 2008,” Sanneh writes, but “he has conspicuously failed to establish himself as this year’s Tea Party candidate.”

“People don’t think of Paul as a top-tier Republican candidate partly because they think of him as a libertarian: anti-tax and anti-bailout, but also antiwar, anti-empire, and, sometimes, anti-Republican,” Sanneh continues.

To date, Paul’s shining contribution to the 2012 campaign is educational—even if the major networks and cable powerhouse Fox News downplay his candidacy in their primary night election coverage. Some of what he says gets through to the public, particularly youthful voters. On the grave issues of totalitarianism at home and tyranny abroad, Paul is the last truth-teller. As such, Paul is a dove fighting for survival among a flock of hawks, and his chances are not bright.

Source: http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/ron-paul-only-candidate-to-warn-of-a-fascist-takeover-in-america/article17643.html



Around the Network

“Now we’re slipping into a fascist system where it’s a combination of government and big business and authoritarian rule and the suppression of the individual rights of each and every American citizen.”

 

Could have fooled me. I thought we were already fascist...



Ron Paul is naive and well maybe just plain dumb. His plan to pull America's troops from around the globe.would lead to.genocides and wars all over. Global instability as weak and defence less countries would fall prey to the likes of China. In fact even more powerful countries would he defence less and likely fall.

The United States itself would then become a military state. I note Ron Paul in an early debate said he didn't intend to fire or lay off much of the army or decommission the weapons. He just wanted to bring the troops home and close all of America's foreign bases.

That is the first hint as to Ron Paul's actual intentions. A build up of soldiers and troops here in North America. A massive military force on Canada's border. Also with the Pentagon stating that homegrown terrorism is the biggest threat and the President and military now legally allowed to assassinate or detain American citizens without trial if they are thought to he terrorists.

Ron Paul appears to be the racist. Building up a massive force on your countries home soil. Right as an economic crisis is inevitable. Its hard not to draw parallels with Nazis Germany. While Ron Paul leaves all of America's allies for dead and betrays any countries that still support America he leaves the US isolated.

With no support globally for America. Trade support dropping alongside America's former allies. The US defaults in its loans which even after Ron Paul's cuts would occur within a few years. With the US economic collapse the occupy protestors rise again. This time violence breaks out Americans are desperate to survive. America has a huge armed force in the country to put down any rebellion. The country needs to distract its people while getting the country resources. The only way to do.that is war. Having seen allied forces massacred Ron Paul comes to the aid of any remaining.

Ron Paul is not a good leader if you want to avoid a Nazis repeat. Fact is building up a massive force at home right as the economy is struggling on the verge of collapse and the largest threat to America is now American citizens homegrown terrorists.

Sorry people need to think things through. What possible good could come from pulling all the US foreign operations troops? Lose trading partners as countries that sold to you did so do to America's military might and economic power neither of which would he relevant anymore. All of the American allies would be destroyed or turn on America. Americans at home in their economic crisis now have the full US military at home ready to suppress their uprising.

Sounds like a great democratic country or Republic. Man I so want to live there lol



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Joel, you're not even American. You don't have very much room to make such broad statements about our military/my friends, battle buddies, and colleagues.



 SW-5120-1900-6153

There's a simple way to crush corporate influence: publicly funded elections or the elimination of the notion of corporate personhood (return corporations to what they were originally meant to do: serve as safeguards against individual business liability, and ban them from being able to own intellectual property outright, and from contributing in any way, shape, or form to political campaigns)

One radical step being easier than multiple radical steps, and it will get everything back on track quickly by making politicians once again answerable to the people at large rather than the moneyed interests.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
Mr Khan said:
There's a simple way to crush corporate influence: publicly funded elections or the elimination of the notion of corporate personhood (return corporations to what they were originally meant to do: serve as safeguards against individual business liability, and ban them from being able to own intellectual property outright, and from contributing in any way, shape, or form to political campaigns)

One radical step being easier than multiple radical steps, and it will get everything back on track quickly by making politicians once again answerable to the people at large rather than the moneyed interests.


Funny that I usually think of shitty ass Monsanto when it comes to this.  They have pretty much taken over a lot of the seed market with their "terminator seed".  Basically, I view them as one of the biggest piece of shit companies of the world. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Terminator_seed_controversy



Joel, do you have any idea what your talking about? Because he pulls back troops, he is making it into a police state? That just doesn't make any sense... The reason why America is so prominently there in the Middle-east, is to have influence over the region, especially for the oil rich countries like Kuwait. They are just protecting the big companies over there like Exxon Mobil. And do you have ANY IDEA how expensive an army is in foreign land? Think about the massive amounts of supplies which needs to be send across the world. The money spend on the so called 'war on terror' has cost the US a stunning 1.3 trillion dollars. America could have rebuilt their entire infrastructure, boost the educational level and spent some money on research for a replacement of oil and other fossil fuels.



I don't have a problem with most of Ron Paul's beliefs. He's one of the few people who actually make sense, unlike some of the Neo-Conservatives we have running for President who proclaim "We believe in small Government, less spending, and a balanced budge. By the way, we also want to spend more money on the War on Drugs, maintain a Cold War-like military and we want to go to war with Iran" We also believe in the constitution, but also want to make the Patriot Act permanent". The other guys simply contradict themselves.

First of all, the War on Drugs does not work. It's nothing more than a morality war and it's unfortunately a morality war that has made the drug problem even worse and has actually increased the value of drugs. If anything, drug cartels benefit from an active drug war. Also, the cold war ended 20 years ago. It's time for America to stop having it's military presence on every square inch of the planet. I don't think we should bring ALL of our military home, but we should bring most of them home. I think after more than 60 years, Japan, Korea, and Europe should be able to defend themselves. Also, war with Iran is the last thing anyone should be talking about. We had enough trouble in Iraq, which is about the size of California. Just imagine how much of a hassle a country like Iran would be. Not to mention, Iran has a much more capable military than Iraq did in 2003. If war is a necessity, then it should be an international effort. Although, war should be avoided at all costs. Other than that, there isn't much to say. The Patriot Act and that other law that was passed recently is without a doubt unconstitutional and what's the point of having a constitution if we choose to ignore it?



Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com

Jon-Erich said:

First of all, the War on Drugs does not work. It's nothing more than a morality war and it's unfortunately a morality war that has made the drug problem even worse and has actually increased the value of drugs. If anything, drug cartels benefit from an active drug war.


Well if all drugs were legal then there wouldn't be any cartels.  They would either have to form a legit business or face being undercut by retailers.



If you want to reduce the amount of influence corporations have on government eliminate the benefits both parties get from this arrangement ...

Eliminate subsidies, tax credits, and countless other loopholes and make bailouts illegal, At the same time create strict anti-lobying laws, limit campaign contributions, and force contributions to super-PACs above $10,000 to be made publicly.