Ron Paul: The NDAA Repeals More Rights

Ron Paul

Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed. The 4th amendment has been rendered toothless by the PATRIOT Act. No more can we truly feel secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects when now there is an exception that fits nearly any excuse for our government to search and seize our property. Of course, the vast majority of Americans may say “I’m not a terrorist, so I have no reason to worry.” However, innocent people are wrongly accused all the time. The Bill of Rights is there precisely because the founders wanted to set a very high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured.

The PATRIOT Act, as bad is its violation of the 4th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly. The main section of concern, Section 1021 of the NDAA Conference Report, does to the 5th Amendment what the PATRIOT Act does to the 4th. The 5th Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning. It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented or access to legal counsel.

The dangers in the NDAA are its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the US government without trial. It is now no longer limited to members of al Qaeda or the Taliban, but anyone accused of “substantially supporting” such groups or “associated forces.” How closely associated? And what constitutes “substantial” support? What if it was discovered that someone who committed a terrorist act was once involved with a charity? Or supported a political candidate? Are all donors of that charity or supporters of that candidate now suspect, and subject to indefinite detainment? Is that charity now an associated force?

Additionally, this legislation codifies in law for the first time authority to detain Americans that has to this point only been claimed by President Obama. According to subsection (e) of section 1021, “[n]othing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” This means the president’s widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law. That should chill all of us to our cores.

The Bill of Rights has no exemptions for “really bad people” or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the bill of rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire Unites States is a battlefield in the War on Terror. This is a very dangerous development indeed. Beware.

Originally appeared at http://paul.house.gov

Why Neo-Cons Hate Ron Paul’s Honest Foreign Policy

Jeremy R. Hammond

This article, originally titled “Ron Paul: Propagandist Or Prophet?”, was written by Jeremy R. Hammond and published at Foreign Policy Journal

Ron Paul is “the best-known American propagandist for our enemies”, writes Dorothy Rabinowitz in a recent Wall Street Journal hit piece. To support the charge, she writes that Dr. Paul “assures audiences” that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 “took place only because of U.S. aggression and military actions”. It’s “True,” she writes, that “we’ve heard the assertions before”, but only “rarely have we heard in any American political figure such exclusive concern for, and appreciation of, the motives of those who attacked us”—and, she adds, he doesn’t care about the victims of the attacks.

The vindictive rhetoric aside, what is it, exactly, that Ron Paul is guilty of here? It is completely uncontroversial that the 9/11 attacks were a consequence of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. The 9/11 Commission Report, for instance, points out that Osama bin Laden “stresses grievances against the United States widely shared in the Muslim world. He inveighed against the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam’s holiest sites. He spoke of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of sanctions imposed after the Gulf War, and he protested U.S. support of Israel.”

Read the rest at Alt-Market

Ron Paul Wins 2011 Values Voter Summit Straw Poll

Prison Planet
Ron Paul has won another straw poll, indicating he is the choice for many if not most voting Republicans.

Demonstrating that the influence of establishment Republicans remains strong in the party, Herman Cain came in a distant second.

Cain recently made the news when he said unemployment is basically the fault of the individual and not transnational corporations that have sent most of the decent jobs to slave labor gulags in China and Asia.

Cain is the former boss of the Kansas City Federal Reserve.

Here is the poll breakdown:

Ron Paul – 36.9% (732)

Herman Cain – 22.5% (447)

Rick Santorum – 16.3% (323)

Rick Perry – 8.4% (167)

Michele Bachmann – 7.9% (157)

Mitt Romney – 4.4% (88)

Newt Gingrich – 2.7% (54)

Undecided – 0.7% (13)

Jon Huntsman – 0.1% (2)

Note that the current darling of the global elite, Mitt Romney, comes in at a dismal 4.4%. Even the wash-out and faux Tea Party cowboy Rick Perry does better than Mitt.

Ron Paul: Wars Are Biggest Threat to Families

ABC News

War is the greatest threat to the modern family, Rep. Ron Paul told an audience filled with social conservative activists today.

Speaking to a packed crowd at the Values Voters Summit in Washington D.C., the Texas congressman said that wars in the last decade cost thousands of soldiers’ lives.

Paul added that many more were left jobless as trillions poured out of the economy.

“When you lose a job, it’s hard to keep the family together,” said Paul.

Full story here.

Ron Paul Leads Hearing On First Ever Audit Of Fed

Prison Planet

“Would it be much of a problem if we were doing this every year?”

Texas Congressman and 2012 presidential candidate Ron Paul held hearings Tuesday into a recent and rare one off audit of the Federal Reserve’s crisis-response emergency lending programs of 2008.

In his role as chairman of the Domestic Monetary Policy subcommittee, Paul relished the glimmer of transparency that was afforded as part of the Dodd-Frank Act, signed into law last year.

“More people now are starting to realize that the Fed isn’t independent of political independence because indirectly and some times more directly it is involved in political decisions or at least private decisions to serve some political interest.” Paul told those gathered at the hearing.

Along with Paul, Republicans in attendance argued that the audit should pave the way for regular reviews of the Fed’s policies, as well as more complete disclosure of exactly who has received upwards of $27 trillion in bail out funds since 2008.

“Would it be much of a problem if we were doing this every year?” Paul asked.

Robert Auerbach, Professor of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, backed Paul up by putting the case that regular and ongoing audits would not affect the Fed’s independence in any major way.

“The Fed’s mythical flag of independence from politics, a favorite Fed mantra to avoid individual responsibility, is merely a shield intended to protect the institution from being forced to act in a more transparent fashion,” Auerbach testified.

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, Republican of Missouri, expressed concern that although the GAO’s audit authority is now expired, some banks and firms that “borrowed” from the Fed, and by extension the American taxpaying public, as part of the Bear Sterns and AIG relief packages, have yet to pay back the funds.

Luetkemeyer also noted that the one time GAO audit was extremely limited in its scope.

Nevertheless, the GAO’s report found several instances of conflicts of interest and questionable practices involving Fed officials.

It was also revealed that the Fed made $16.1 trillion in secret loans to Wall Street firms at the height of the crisis.

The full hearing, beginning with Ron Paul’s opening statement, can be viewed below:

Congressman Ron Paul also appeared on Freedom Watch yesterday to discuss the economic situation, urging that politicians in Washington are “not offering a prescription”.

“We have too much spending and too much debt, so they’re trying to solve the problem with more debt. There’s not a chance that we can get out of the recession this way.” Paul told host Judge Andrew Napolitano.

“The people here don’t want to change because they have been conditioned by Keynesian economics. Where I’m encouraged is that people outside this place are getting the message. The answers are well known but how do you translate this new message that we have of free markets and the constitution, and get the people that are managing the affairs now out of office?” the Congressman stated.

Paul added that as president he would implement some immediate measures that would cut the deficit and reduce spending in a meaningful way.

“Immediately you could bring all our troops home and have them spend money here at home, that would give us some reprieve. We could change our foreign policy and indicate to the world that we are going to get our budget under control.” Paul said.

“We could remove taxation on all the money that is held overseas by our corporations and not double tax them. We could remove the interest paid by the Federal Reserve to the banks. The banks won’t invest their money because it’s too risky, but the Federal Reserve gives them their money, essentially, for free, and then they invest it back into Treasury bills, so they help monetize the debt too.”

“Those are a few things, but sending a signal will be most important, ‘we’re going to quit this spending’. Right now I’m working on a plan where in one year I want to cut a trillion dollars.” Paul revealed.

“The appetite for big government is the problem. The taxes and the Federal Reserve inflating, that is the symptom, and the budget problem is a symptom of the appetite for big government.” Paul continued.

“Too often the leadership is only in the business of preserving power… It’s a shame that despite all this arguing and bickering going on between the two parties, there is no difference. Regardless of which party it is they still don’t change the definition of entitlements, they don’t change the foreign policy and they don’t go after the Fed.”

The Congressman also reiterated comments he made earlier in the week regarding the unconstitutional killing in Yemen of the American born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

Watch the interview:

RealClear Politics Skews Ron Paul’s Poll Numbers

The Star Ledger
I got copied on this e-mail that Joe Sansone sent to RealClear politics:

Ron Paul is at 11% in this poll with Palin and Christie out of it. You are using everybody else’s numbers without Palin and Christie, except Paul. You are using 9% for him which is his number with Palin and Christie. This does not appear to be the first time this has happened on your site where Paul’s numbers have been shown as less than they are because you have used polls with non candidates for publishing his numbers but published other candidates numbers without using the non candidates included. I have sent this information to the Drudgereport and blind copied other news organizations in hopes that someone brings attention to it.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

Here is the actual poll. For now on I will send this stuff to the DrudgeReport when it appears falsely on your site. If this is just a repetitive error on your part, which I am sure it is, I do hope that the potential exposure from other news sources will help you guys to be more accurate in the future.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postabcpoll_100211.html

I checked the numbers and it looks like Joe is right. The Romney number in the field containing non-candidates is 21, not 25. That 25 number comes from the same poll that has Ron Paul at 11.

Yet RealClear quotes the high number for Romney and the low number for Paul.

I imagine this was simply a mistake, but such mistakes make it difficult to assess the field. Even if you assume Paul won’t win, as long as he’s in double digits he will have a major role in the race.

Those double digits have to come out of someone’s else’s totals. Whose? Such questions decide elections. And RealClear is not real clear on this one.
Joe,

UPDATE: RealClear responds, and Joe concedes the point:

We use “registered voter” #s as opposed to “general population” numbers when they are avaliable. We entered the RV #s (w/o Christie and Palin) this morning when the poll was released. They are correct.

Thanks,

John

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postabcpoll_100211.html

21/23/24. (IF WOULD VOTE FOR CHRISTIE OR PALIN) If neither (Christie) nor (Palin) run, for whom would you vote? Which candidate would you lean toward?

NET LEANED VOTE PREFERENCE

————— Without Christie/Palin —————–

Among gen pop Among RVs

10/2/11 9/1/11 7/17/11 10/2/11 9/1/11 7/17/11

Mitt Romney 25 25 30 25 25 30

Herman Cain 16 4 7 17 5 7

Rick Perry 16 29 8 17 30 8

Ron Paul 11 10 11 9 10 10

Newt Gingrich 7 6 6 9 5 6

Michele Bachmann 7 8 16 7 9 17

Rick Santorum 2 3 3 2 3 3

Jon Huntsman 1 1 3 1 1 3

Tim Pawlenty NA NA 3 NA NA 3

Other (vol.) 2 2 1 2 2 1

No one/None of them (vol.) 5 5 2 4 4 2

Would not vote (vol.) 1 2 1 1 1 *

No opinion 7 5 8 7 5 9

Opposition to Obama grows — strongly

Washington Post

Four in 10 Americans “strongly” disapprove of how President Obama is handling the job of president in the new Washington Post-ABC News poll, the highest that number has risen during his time in office and a sign of the hardening opposition to him as he seeks a second term.


While the topline numbers are troubling enough, dig deeper into them and the news gets no better for Obama. Forty-three percent of independents — a group the president spent the better part of the last year courting — strongly disapprove of the job he is doing. Forty-seven percent of people 65 years of age and older — reliable voters in any election — strongly disapprove of how he is doing his job.

Strong opposition to Obama has grown markedly since the start of the year.

In a mid-January Post-ABC survey, 28 percent strongly disapproved of the job Obama was doing. With the exception of a poll in early May that followed hard on the killing of Osama bin Laden , that number has steadily ticked upward, as the year has worn on and the economy has remained sluggish (at best).

Read the rest on Washington Post

Rick Perry Is Finished

ALIPAC

Texas Governor Perry destroyed his chances of winning the GOP Presidential primary during last night's debate when he defended his support for in-state tuition for illegal aliens which is opposed by 81% of all Americans.

"Rick Perry proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is not the right choice for America by supporting these radical illegal immigration attracting measures," said William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. "Perry's support for in-state tuition for illegals forces taxpayers to pay to replace their own children in the limited seats in our colleges!"

Prior to 2005, several states like Texas passed in-state tuition for illegals into law without adequate public or lawmaker debate and knowledge.

In 2005, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC defeated North Carolina's HB 1183's In-state tuition for illegal immigrants and then went on to use new strategies to defeat similar measures in 20 other states. Americans for Legal Immigration PAC has become a top voice in America representing the over 80% of US citizens opposed to this measure.

 Rick Perry was heavily booed for the second time last night as he continued to promote in-state tuition for illegal aliens.

 Mitt Romney opposed Perry's positions and pointed out that Perry's in-state tuition for illegal aliens law was forcing Texans to pay approximately $100,000 in tax monies to support each of the current 16,000 illegal immigrants in Texas colleges.

Romney went on to paraphrase ALIPAC's platform "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement" which includes adequately enforcing America's existing immigration and border laws by cracking down on employers, securing the borders, and removing taxpayer benefits for illegals like Perry's tuition breaks.

"GOP voters cannot vote for Rick Perry now without legitimizing and supporting in-state tuition for illegal immigrants," said William Gheen. "Perry has assured his own defeat despite the fact that he is receiving so much support and favoritism from globalist groups in the media. It is clear to me that the globalists who are responsible for illegal immigration in America are using their power to promote Rick Perry at this time."

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has just released a new study illustrating that 81% of the 'new jobs' created in Texas under Rick Perry have been taken by legal and illegal immigrants instead of suffering American citizens.

Rick Perry Booed Again For Illegal Immigrant Support Plan

"Obama has fired more Cruise missles than all other Peace Prize winners combined."

How Rick Perry courts the Zionist vote

Salon 

Appearing with Jewish extremists is designed to win over apocalyptic Christians

At a press conference in New York on Tuesday billed "pro-Israel," Republican presidential hopeful Rick Perry was flanked by Orthodox Jewish leaders. At first blush the event looked like a play for Jewish voters who would buy his claim that President Obama was a modern-day Neville Chamberlain despite official U.S. opposition to the Palestinian bid for statehood recognition at the United Nations. But while Perry touted his Jewish endorsers, his intended audience was not Jews but Christian Zionists.

Perry, no doubt, seeks the approval of conservative Jewish pundits and the campaign contributions of hawkish donors. But in the battle to prove himself to the crucial voters in evangelical-heavy early primary states like Iowa, South Carolina and Florida, Perry needs to distinguish himself from the merely Israel-supportive Mitt Romney. And for that, he needs to prove beyond the boilerplate Israel-is-America's-greatest-ally that he embraces Israel's role in what Christian Zionists believe is prophesied in the Bible: that the establishment of the state of Israel is one step in the chain of events that will lead to a bloody showdown at Armageddon and culminate in the Second Coming of Christ.

As a Texan, Perry is well familiar with this base, and in particular the religious underpinnings of its beliefs. His friend John Hagee, the San Antonio televangelist who endorsed and spoke at Perry's August prayer rally the Response, is a leading Christian Zionist who in 2006 founded Christians United for Israel, which in short order became the leading Christian Zionist political organization in the country. With a national network of pastors and supporters who host regular "pro-Israel" events at churches, and Hagee's solid relationships with both Republican and Democratic elected officials, CUFI has managed to transform Hagee's apocalyptic fervor into a political movement with the ear of prominent politicians.

Read the rest on Salon