[graffis-l] PEACE, JUSTICE AND RON PAUL

[Guest guest]

At 08:35 AM 9/2/07, you wrote:

> >Sat, 01 Sep 2007 08:58:24 -0500

> >FlybyNews

> >Jonathan Mark <flyby

> >Re: Peace, Injustice and Ron Paul

> >Cc: kucinich4president

> >

> >

> ><http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=comment/reply/26365#comment->Re:

> >Peace, Injustice and Ron Paul

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >Submitted by jonathan mark on Sat, 2007-09-01 08:36.

> >The following is in reply to an article by David Swanson

> >called: Peace, Injustice and Ron Paul, posted at:

> ><http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/26365>http://afterdowningstreet.org/n

> ode/26365

> >

> >by Jonathan Mark

> >

> >As those who read Flyby News over the years, or

> >check out our Campaigns for reclaiming a lost

> >USA democracy [

> ><http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1096139627

>

,51253,m>www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1096139627,51253\

,m

>

> >]

> >you would be aware of my history with Dennis

> >Kucinich, which began years before he was a 2004

> >presidential candidate. With goodsister, we

> >launched one of the most active at

> ><kucinich4president/>http://groups..co

> mkucinich4president/

> >

> >What brought Kucinich and I together was from

> >Flyby News first campaign after the 1999

> >high-risk Cassini earth flyby, which was to

> >attempt to stop an expansion of the arms race,

> >to prevent the weaponization of outer space.

> >Congressman Kucinich introduced " Preservation of

> >Space Treaties " and tried to win a lawsuit when

> >Bush unilaterally terminated the 1972

> >Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. For more than a

> >year before his announcement to run for

> >President, we encouraged him to enter the

> >campaign, and did all we could in support of his

> >nomination in 2004. I met with Congressman

> >Kucinich about 8 times when he was in the

> >northeast US. However, disappointment came from

> >his management of his campaign especially in NH.

> >He had the platform that could have done much

> >better than the 1% of votes he received in the

> >Primary. Each individual has their weaknesses,

> >and his campaign staff under his leadership

> >failed to communicate why he should become the

> >next President. He supported John Kerry for

> >President, but Kucinich and John Kerry did not

> >support the people of the US when the second

> >national election theft in a row happened. The

> >first time in Florida; the second time in

> >Kucinich's state of Ohio. They were silent, and

> >mostly silent, too, about the unanswered

> >questions from the attacks of September 11,

> >2001. Does Kucinich even question why WTC-7 fell

> >at free fall speeds, with no precedent of such

> >an event occurring in all history?

> >

> >He says he will conduct a narrow investigation,

> >but is he playing a game, or silenced by threats

> >against him and his family. The author of the

> >following critical article on Ron Paul, David

> >Swanson, is also mainly silent regarding the

> >crimes of September 11. Some may be silent

> >because of mind control, and concern of being

> >attacked if they questioned the official

> >version. Kucinich may be silent from threats

> >that could really harm his family. Whatever the

> >reason, he is not running for the US President

> >to win in my opinion, but to make good points

> >for some future time or administration. This is

> >why Flyby News is not endorsing his campaign.

> >The critique of Ron Paul and similar overview is

> >also why FN is not endorsing Ron Paul. The only

> >possible candidate we would trust to endorse is

> >Cindy Sheehan if she won the nomination at

> ><http://www.unity08.org>www.unity08.org as an

> >independent candidate, since she, as a

> >protective mother uncompromising spirit, who had

> >lost her son in an illegal war, has the strength

> >to stand up to threats. Her realization or

> >suspicions expressed about the false flag

> >attacks of September 11, in my opinion, is an

> >act of independence and truth. A criminal

> >element is running this country, who established

> >themselves especially after WWII and recruited

> >NAZIs for (sic) intelligence agencies that

> >justified the 'national security' threat as a

> >reason to overlook the principles to honor our

> >rights and freedoms expressed in the US

> >Constitution. This group has gone mad, and

> >killed John F. Kennedy and maintain a control

> >over the media, Congress and now the voting

> >systems of a pseudo democracy that is actually

> >run by totalitarian group of thugs and

> >murderers, brainwashing themselves to believe

> >they are acting to safeguard us all. Yet their

> >actions are suicidal for all life, and Kucinich

> >and Ron Paul will not stand up to the power structure of corruption and

> deceit.

> >

> >Those who are working to really expose the

> >crimes of 9/11 have the best chance in stopping

> >the criminals from destroying our country and

> >world. David Swanson does a good job if he was

> >in a just society and not perpetuating the

> >denial that buildings do not fall from the sky

> >for no reason. Truth is sometimes difficult to

> >face; yet we as independent people need to keep

> >waking up our neighbors and friends, which is

> >happening, ever slowly, but that is the path for

> >peace and justice is in confronting a reality

> >beyond the empty words and innuendos of a peace movement with no spine.

> >

> >Jonathan Mark

> >Publisher

> >Flyby News - <http://www.flybynews.com>www.flybynews.com

> >

> >

> >> " David Swanson " <david

> >><media

> >>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:39:17 -0400

> >> Peace, Injustice and Ron Paul

> >>David Swanson <david

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>Peace, Injustice and Ron Paul

> >><http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/26365>http<http://afterdowningstreet

> .org/node/26365>://afterdowningstreet.org/node/26365

> >>

> >>

> >>By David Swanson

> >>

> >>If Ron Paul had been president for the past 6

> >>years, a million more Iraqis would be alive,

> >>and another 4 million would not be

> >>refugees. The world would be a safer place,

> >>and Americans would have lost fewer freedoms.

> >>

> >>But more Americans would lack decent health

> >>care. More American children would lack

> >>adequate education. More families in America

> >>would struggle in poverty. Immigrant families

> >>would face increased threats and abuse. Women

> >>would have lost rights. And a growing

> >>oligarchy would further dominate American

> >>politics, making reversal of any admirable Paul policies likely.

> >>

> >>Paul arrives at some admirable positions for

> >>some unexpected reasons. And his principles

> >>lead him to many reprehensible positions as

> >>well. He opposes occupying Iraq because it

> >>involves massive government expense and

> >>power. That, and not the million corpses, is his primary concern.

> >>

> >>Paul is brave enough to say what he thinks and

> >>stand by it. While there are Democrats, like

> >>Dennis Kucinich and Barbara Lee, who have that

> >>same quality, the Democratic Party as a whole

> >>has an established reputation of not standing

> >>and fighting for anything, and least of all peace.

> >>

> >>It & #039;s the War, Stupid

> >>So, it's not completely surprising that a lot

> >>of opponents of the occupation of Iraq are

> >>looking to Paul as the best presidential

> >>candidate out there. Many Paul supporters

> >>really want peace and want it for the best

> >>reasons, but they detest the word " liberal " and

> >>loathe " big government. " Others are not quite

> >>in that camp but consider the war such an

> >>overwhelmingly important issue that they don't

> >>much care what Paul's other positions are.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>But Paul would end the occupation of Iraq and

> >>offer the Iraqi people not a dime to help

> >>rebuild the nation we've destroyed. In fact,

> >>he would cut the pittance we give in foreign

> >>aid around the world. But Paul has never, to

> >>my knowledge, said he would cut a single dollar

> >>from the biggest big government expense there

> >>is, much bigger than any war: the yearly budget

> >>of the Pentagon. And if he thinks he can keep

> >>funding that and NOT launch new wars, he hasn't

> >>thought about the workings of our government quite enough.

> >>

> >>So, a Paul government would be stingy,

> >>extravagant, war-prone despite itself, and in

> >>debt. Would Paul solve that problem be

> >>reinstating progressive taxation for the super

> >>wealthy and corporations? No, he'd cut

> >>taxes. Of course, taxes SHOULD be cut for most

> >>people. But unless they're raised for the

> >>wealthy and corporations, we will have even

> >>more debt (which Paul says he opposes) or we

> >>will have to make massive cuts in what's left

> >>of the non-military public sector. And that's

> >>exactly what Paul would like to see: " wasteful

> >>agencies " and " governments collecting foreign

> >>aid " are among his targets. Rather than

> >>increasing funding for public schools, his

> >>solution for education would be to cut more

> >>taxes (the thinking being that this would allow

> >>parents to teach their children at home). That

> >>works for parents who want to do that and don't

> >>have to work. But most parents don't want to

> >>do that and do have to work. And with a

> >>president Paul allowing the minimum wage to

> >>plummet, opposing living wage standards, and

> >>doing nothing to restore the right to unionize,

> >>parents' work hours would not be shrinking.

> >>

> >>Of course parents who don't work, or don't work

> >>jobs with good benefits, tend to lack health

> >>insurance. Paul would offer these tens of

> >>millions of Americans and the even greater

> >>number with inadequate health insurance nothing

> >>more than a middle finger. Paul believes the

> >>greatest crisis in our health care is the

> >>imposition of vaccinations. Everything always

> >>comes back to his notion of personal " freedom, "

> >>even if it's the freedom to die of a curable

> >>disease. The only solution that has been found

> >>to provide everyone decent health care ­ in

> >>fact it works in almost every industrialized

> >>nation in the world ­ would mean private

> >>medicine, allowing everyone to choose their own

> >>doctor, but would also mean replacing the

> >>health insurance companies with the

> >>government. This is the last thing Paul would

> >>ever stand for. Better that people suffer and

> >>die than that the government be involved in helping them.

> >>

> >>Women who value the right to abortion would

> >>lose it under a Paul Administration. This is

> >>not speculation. He openly says he wants to

> >>overturn Roe v. Wade. That's his principle and

> >>he stands by it courageously and honestly, but

> >>most Americans disagree with him.

> >>

> >>Life would change dramatically for all

> >>Americans under this sort of right-wing rule,

> >>but much more so for immigrants. Paul would

> >>allow fewer legal immigrants, while denying any

> >>illegal immigrants a path to become

> >>citizens. An immigrant woman here without

> >>papers who was raped would be denied the right

> >>to an abortion. Her child, born in America,

> >>would be denied citizenship. Her family would

> >>be denied welfare, as well as health care, and

> >>education, not to mention any investment in

> >>public transportation. Undocumented workers

> >>would gain no workplace rights under a Paul

> >>government, and so the rights of all of us

> >>would continue to erode. In fact, immigrants

> >>would be scapegoated and associated with 9-11,

> >>and Paul's priority would be " securing borders. "

> >>

> >>Under a Paul administration there would be

> >>fewer immigrants for a good reason: he opposes

> >>the trade policies that destroy the economies

> >>of the nations they flee to come here. But

> >>Paul opposes those policies because they are

> >>international, not because they empower

> >>corporations and hurt workers. That's none of

> >>his concern. He's a " property rights " man,

> >>even if it's at the expense of those without

> >>property. He opposes NAFTA for the same reason

> >>he opposes the United Nations. He would erode

> >>international law far more swiftly than Bush,

> >>thereby endangering us all in the long

> >>run. International law is what works against

> >>wars of aggression. The UN told Bush not to

> >>invade Iraq. Bush illegally invaded anyway.

> >>

> >>But if Paul is as major an opponent of justice

> >>as I suggest, why then are so many advocates of

> >>peace and justice flocking to him? It depends

> >>in each case. Many passionately oppose the

> >>occupation of Iraq, but they don't call it an

> >>occupation. They call it a war. And their

> >>chief concern is not the million Iraqis dead,

> >>but the nearly four thousand Americans. And

> >>(this is key) they don't like the Democrats.

> >>

> >>Paul is a man with principles, bizarre and

> >>twisted principles, but principles. Beside

> >>him, most of the Republicans look like

> >>charlatans, and the Democrats who are allowed

> >>on television and in the New York Times look

> >>like spineless cowards. They look like

> >>spineless cowards not because they favor peace

> >>(they don't), but because they refuse to stand

> >>up to Bush and Cheney. Paul stands up to Bush

> >>and Cheney. NOTHING is more powerful than that

> >>in today's politics, and he does it. Standing

> >>up to Bush and Cheney is what propelled Howard

> >>Dean's campaign so rapidly, and few paid close

> >>attention to what his positions were either.

> >>

> >>Of course, there is a candidate in the 2008

> >>presidential race who stands consistently and

> >>courageously on principle for both peace AND

> >>justice. And if we had the courage of our

> >>convictions we would put everything we have

> >>into backing him. Not only might he win, but

> >>our backing him now might force the Democrats

> >>in Congress to act like they believe in

> >>something, and force other candidates to

> >>improve their positions. His name is Dennis

> >>Kucinich. Paul doesn't want people to give

> >>their money to Washington. Give it to

> >><http://www.kucinich.us/>http://www.kucinich.us

 

******

Kraig and Shirley Carroll ... in the woods of SE Kentucky

http://www.thehavens.com/

thehavens

606-376-3363

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release 2/14/05