Anonymous DOES NOT support Ron Paul

www.youtube.com...

sarah palin is supporting him now....?

ok i am not voting this 2012

i hold the right to not complain of any presidential decisions then

seems kind of... mind boggling to see the obama faithful in the 2008 elections in comparison to the RP faithful in 2012.

obama faithful = blind, believed a message of hope from someone that wasn't qualified to take the job as president

rp faithful = blind, believe a message of restoration from someone that IS qualified to take the job as president.

now the masses are starting to question the government, i.e. 9/11, iraq war, etc....

if i was the PTB i would cash in on this conspiracy movement spirit.. and it seems like they have.

TPTB remind me of the WWE... they cash in on the spirit of the momentum... a la CM Punk with his agent of change attitude and stone cold steve austin with his badass attitude of the 90's

idk it seems like everything is lining up and its scary...

or maybe im just paranoid/crazy?
who knows?

Originally posted by Amaterasu
reply to post by Destiny777

 

Except... Every candidate has waffled on many issues - depending on which way the political wind is blowing. Except...

Ron Paul.

For decades His stances have not changed. Ever. AND His voting record reflects that. Unlike Obama (and all others) who promise one thing (bait) and then switch.

What leaves Me aghast is that You fail to see the vast differences here.

I agree to this. Ron Paul has been in action for decades now.... Obama on the other hand?? If the "evil side" wanted to plant and plan Ron Paul winning, I'm sure they wouldn't have waited for like what, 40-or-so years for him to finally win Presidency?

reply to post by Destiny777

Well then, that gives us ALL THE RIGHTS IN THE WORLD to arrest them. GET IT? THEY LITERALLY GAVE US LEGAL PERMISSION TO ARREST THEM. Obama recently EMPLOYED AL QAEDA to do our biddings for us in Libya. Its all laid out in the link provided above, but, I'll put it here one more time just to make my point.

NDAA 2012 was signed into law 15 Dec 2012, correct? Material/alleged support of Al Qaeda in Libya occurred prior to enforcement of NDAA 2012.

Two things are immediate: 1) ex post facto law is prevented by the American Constitution (i.e. the events involving Al Qaeda that you make reference to occurred before NDAA 2012 was signed into law); 2) there is probably no simple path to prosecution of officials engaged in foreign policy venture prescribed as "in the interests of the United States." Good or bad, public officials are endowed with unique flexibility.

I'm not endorsing the provision in NDAA 2012 that allows for the indefinite detention of American citizens under the prescription of "associated activity" (whatever that is), but suggest that the prosecution you seek (or that of those whom you've sourced) is probably dismantled based on bullets one and two.

If there are others who possess more knowledge and understanding of this sub thesis then your input would be useful.

I have to agree with you here 17.777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777. RP has as many maybe more blind followers then obama did. All the media non-coverage has just brought him more attention then the media attention itself woulda. The way his opposition has one by one had some kind of negative exposure only to lift him up. Yea he has a good constitutional voting record but people dont understand were not playing checkers, this is chess and he could be simply part of been a well thought out plan. Alex jones rides his nuts i know that much. All ive got to say is this can only end in one of two ways, either he comes in and audits the fed/ fixes everything or the establishment is all in with this guy and its going to end terribly terribly bad.