# Liberty Movement > Liberty Campaigns >  What do we do in 2012?

## Ridiculous

After serving one term Ron would be about 76 and pretty realistically may not be able to run for a second term (as much as the nation would probably want him to). So you have to think that there is a good chance that Paul presidency would only be four years long. After all, he would be the oldest person ever to take the office. So whoever he chooses as vice is very important as there is a good chance they would be the 2012 republican candidate. 

Also, say the nightmare comes true and Ron does not get elected, we don't really have anyone to vote for in 2012. There is really no one like him in the house or senate, or in a governors seat. The libertarian party puts up sub par candidates with no real government experience and at this point I don't really see a Ron Paul-Republican with experience taking the ball in four years.

----------


## Zydeco

one thing at a time, but Ron is very healthy and will live to 100!

----------


## ronpaulyourmom

Maybe we hand it off to Ron's VP.

----------


## erowe1

We have to have in mind the various consolation prizes that we stand to get if Paul doesn't win. We still need to be motivated to make this movement as huge and influential as we possibly can. The better of a job we do at that, the more we will cause other constituion-minded politicians (like Sanford and Otter) to build support and gain attention for their future endeavors, and the more we will entice other constitution-minded people to run for office and to be taken seriously and to win.

Reagan lost in 1976. But he simultaneously changed the Republican party for a generation by the attention he drew to a "conservative" brand of Republican. Even if we end up losing we stand to do the same thing for the constitutional brand of true small-government Republican.

And if Paul does win in '08, which I'm sure we're all convinced he has the ability to do, then this impact will be all the greater, causing clear front-runners to carry his mantle in 2012 to emerge, should he choose to step down at that time (perhaps even his VP).

----------


## Elwar

I think Ron Paul needs to come out with his possible vice-presidential candidate.

If (heaven forbid) Ron Paul does not win, we need to have a 4 year campaign to get his VP elected in 2012.

Either way, I'll be writing in Ron Paul if I have to next year.

----------


## Richie

This man is probably healthier then myself (I'm 17) and definitely has more energy.  I think he'd be up for a second term.

----------


## richard1984

We should prepare for blackouts!!!

The peak of the next 11 year solar storm cycle will be in 2012, and the storms are predicted to be _really_ strong.  
This is a very real, very important reason to get Ron Paul elected.  
In the case of blackouts (of power grids, satellites, etc.), if a neocon...or basically anyone other than Ron Paul...is in the White House, America will become a full-fledged police state over night (the laws are already on the books...and "in a state of emergency..."   ).  

To learn more about the upcoming peak of this solar storm cycle, just google "solar storm 2012" or something like that.  There is a large amount of research and information on this topic.  
The media isn't going to make a big deal out of it until it's too late, though.  We're really going to have to take care of ourselves.  We need America back!

(Also, isn't it ironic--in a scary sort of way--that the Mayan calendar ends in 2012?  Kinda creepy....)

----------


## UtahApocalypse

Its ok.... the world Ends in 2012 anyways

----------


## erowe1

Great. More weirdos. Just what we need.

----------


## richard1984

> This man is probably healthier then myself (I'm 17) and definitely has more energy.  I think he'd be up for a second term.


I know...it's wild!  I don't know how he does it.  How are there enough hours in the day for Dr. Paul to get all of his work done...and then still find time to exercise?!  
I wish I could learn how he does it.  I could really use some of the Doc's skillz.

----------


## richard1984

> Great. More weirdos. Just what we need.


Research it, dork.  I'm not speculating.
Don't pull a 'Rudy' and deny the existence of something that you don't know anything about (though it is supported by the experts).


(Oh, and if you weren't referring to me, then I appologize for my tone.  If you were, then I don't.)

----------


## Razmear

Ron Paul should talk to South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford ASAP and ask if he would be willing to be his VP, then start campaigning as a team right away. This would almost guarantee him a win in SC and give him a major financial boost. 
Sanford and Paul worked well together when they were both in the house, and Sanford was often 'the other no vote' along with Paul. 

eb

----------


## Razmear

> Its ok.... the world Ends in 2012 anyways


Yes, the world will end on December 20, 2012, but it doesn't hurt to have a back up plan just incase. 

eb

----------


## richard1984

> Ron Paul should talk to South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford ASAP and ask if he would be willing to be his VP, then start campaigning as a team right away. This would almost guarantee him a win in SC and give him a major financial boost. 
> Sanford and Paul worked well together when they were both in the house, and Sanford was often 'the other no vote' along with Paul. 
> 
> eb


Dr. Paul mentioned Mark Sanford in a recent interview.  Oh...but which one was it...?  lemme get back to you.

----------


## EvilTwinkie

> Yes, the world will end on December 20, 2012, but it doesn't hurt to have a back up plan just incase. 
> 
> eb



I thought the last day was Dec 23 2012. 

I had _plans_ on the 23rd dammit.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Ron Paul should talk to South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford ASAP and ask if he would be willing to be his VP, then start campaigning as a team right away. This would almost guarantee him a win in SC and give him a major financial boost. 
> Sanford and Paul worked well together when they were both in the house, and Sanford was often 'the other no vote' along with Paul. 
> 
> eb


Yeah, I thought so too, but Sanford seems to have cozied up a lot with Jeb Bush and I sure don't like that.

----------


## constituent

> Yes, the world will end on December 20, 2012, but it doesn't hurt to have a back up plan just incase. 
> 
> eb


though i suppose it could be a good or bad thing....

depending on how _you_ define "world."

let us not forget, since it has been brought up now, that the mayan calender is cyclical (circular)....

for all of those who've forgotten this since geometry class, can someone please remind everyone
where you end up at the end of a circle?

----------


## constituent

> I thought the last day was Dec 23 2012. 
> 
> I had _plans_ on the 23rd dammit.


i've heard both... 

i'd consider it an honor if the "world" "ended" on my birthday.
so, i've got the date i'm rooting for.

----------


## Santana28

Thats why we need to continue the movement and work extra hard, no matter the presidential election outcome, to find, support, nominate, and elect Ron Pauliticians to offices in ALL level of government.  I'm quite concerned that if they realize they can't beat him FOR the 2008 election, they may just roll over and concede victory to him only to sit back, lick their chops, and plan ways to discredit and sabotage his actual presidency (in order to squash the entire movement and keep it from moving beyond him).

----------


## UtahApocalypse

I was referring to the meteor thats hitting on May 12th

----------


## Kregener

Is it a Mayan meteor?

If not, then it is just more propaganda....

----------


## Chester Copperpot

> After serving one term Ron would be about 76 and pretty realistically may not be able to run for a second term (as much as the nation would probably want him to). So you have to think that there is a good chance that Paul presidency would only be four years long. After all, he would be the oldest person ever to take the office. So whoever he chooses as vice is very important as there is a good chance they would be the 2012 republican candidate. 
> 
> Also, say the nightmare comes true and Ron does not get elected, we don't really have anyone to vote for in 2012. There is really no one like him in the house or senate, or in a governors seat. The libertarian party puts up sub par candidates with no real government experience and at this point I don't really see a Ron Paul-Republican with experience taking the ball in four years.


If Ron Paul wins and gets to do everything he wants.. the people will have the same response they had to Jefferson.. they will all want him in again.. at very least they would trust WHOEver ron endorsed.

----------


## trispear

> Great. More weirdos. Just what we need.


I think we ought to be a little more tolerant of weirdos, afterall some of us Christian weirdos (myself included) believe in a guy that supposedly walked on water, turned water into wine, healed people and rose from the dead himself and we're considered mainstream

That isn't to say that some of our followers shouldn't be locked in the closet when polite company is over but we can certainly live and let live and even have them wave a ron paul sign or two 

Each and every person probably entertains at least a few irrational beliefs

----------


## richard1984

First of all, I just want to say that I wasn't actually suggesting that I expect "the end of the world" or anything like that.  Throwing in the reference to the Mayan calendar was more for humor (and to point out the irony--especially since the Mayans worshipped the Sun).  

_My point_ was that scientists are expecting exceptionally violent solar storms in 2012 and that they suspect that the flares may be powerful enough to cause extensive blackouts.  _This_ problem is made exponentially more dreadful because of damn Dubya and his insanity (remember things like the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, etc).  

If we let these powers get into the wrong hands (e.g., Hillary, Rudy, etc.), we can be _sure_ that America as we know it will be lost if the solar storms are as powerful as predicted.

It's just motivation to get Ron Paul elected!!!    (And to maybe stock up on nonperishable food items, water, guns...you know  )


(as for the Mayan calendar and such, I was going to give some responses/comments, but I've spent too long on here as it is, so it'll have to wait.  damn tests.... )

----------


## fluoridatedbrainsoup

Four years of Hillary or Giuliani and the world will end. That's not conspiracy theory, it's just knowing the enemy. This is motivation to save the planet. Do or die. Anyone ever hear that Donovan song about Atlantis? I feel it's somehow related and here it is:

The continent of Atlantis was an island which lay before the great flood

in the area we now call the Atlantic Ocean.

So great an area of land, that from her western shores

those beautiful sailors journeyed to the South and the North Americas with ease,

in their ships with painted sails.

To the East Africa was a neighbour, across a short strait of sea miles.

*The great Egyptian age is but a remnant of The Atlantian culture.*

The antediluvian kings colonised the world

All the Gods who play in the mythological dramas

In all legends from all lands were from fair Atlantis.

Knowing her fate, Atlantis sent out ships to all corners of the Earth.

On board were the Twelve:

The poet, the physician, the farmer, the scientist,

The magician and the other so-called Gods of our legends.

Though Gods they were -

And as the elders of our time choose to remain blind

Let us rejoice and let us sing and dance and ring in the new

Hail Atlantis!

Way down below the ocean where I wanna be she may be,

Way down below the ocean where I wanna be she may be,

Way down below the ocean where I wanna be she may be.

Way down below the ocean where I wanna be she may be,

Way down below the ocean where I wanna be she may be.

My antediluvian baby, oh yeah yeah, yeah yeah yeah,

I wanna see you some day

My antediluvian baby, oh yeah yeah, yeah yeah yeah,

My antediluvian baby,

My antediluvian baby, I love you, girl,

Girl, I wanna see you some day.

My antediluvian baby, oh yeah

I wanna see you some day, oh

My antediluvian baby.

My antediluvian baby, I wanna see you

My antediluvian baby, gotta tell me where she gone

I wanna see you some day

Wake up, wake up, wake up, wake up, oh yeah

Oh glub glub, down down, yeah

My antediluvian baby, oh yeah yeah yeah yeah

----------


## richard1984

> I think we ought to be a little more tolerant of weirdos, afterall some of us Christian weirdos (myself included) believe in a guy that supposedly walked on water, turned water into wine, healed people and rose from the dead himself and we're considered mainstream
> 
> That isn't to say that some of our followers shouldn't be locked in the closet when polite company is over but we can certainly live and let live and even have them wave a ron paul sign or two 
> 
> Each and every person probably entertains at least a few irrational beliefs


I still think he said that in response to what I posted, and it's just funny because I wasn't giving _opinions_ (except for the police state part--though it is possible...and I would think that we as Ron Paul supporters would be more privy to the anti-Liberty laws)--I was stating facts (though perhaps not worded with the greatest of care).  
So that guy calling me a weirdo (if he was...and I'm not offended--I just wanna make my point) is exactly like the media and the other candidates calling Dr. Paul a weirdo when he talks about blowback.  
What's weird is that people started talking about the Mayan calendar reference, though I only said that as a side note--not as my main point.  Anyway...I just thought it was weird how everything got sidetracked because of the little "coincidence" that I pointed out.    

But anyway, _I've gotta study_!!

----------


## erowe1

> Research it, dork.  I'm not speculating.
> Don't pull a 'Rudy' and deny the existence of something that you don't know anything about (though it is supported by the experts).
> 
> 
> (Oh, and if you weren't referring to me, then I appologize for my tone.  If you were, then I don't.)


Look. Everybody knows about the 2012 myth craze that's going on out there, just like how there was a 1994 craze when I was in college, and then a year 2000 craze, and just like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists were started by similar screwy predictions. The last thing the Paul campaign needs is people who believe that crap supporting him and trying to bring it into the campaign.

I mean come on, the Mayan calendar?

Oh, and I like how you refer to "the experts". Nice touch.

----------


## SeanEdwards

Ron's brain preserved in a jar full of formaldehyde would make a better chief executive than 99% of the $#@!wits in Washington.

----------


## erowe1

> I think we ought to be a little more tolerant of weirdos, afterall some of us Christian weirdos (myself included) believe in a guy that supposedly walked on water, turned water into wine, healed people and rose from the dead himself and we're considered mainstream
> 
> That isn't to say that some of our followers shouldn't be locked in the closet when polite company is over but we can certainly live and let live and even have them wave a ron paul sign or two 
> 
> Each and every person probably entertains at least a few irrational beliefs


Yes, Trispear. I'm an evangelical Christian, and I believe those things. I agree with your point about considering beliefs like these and being tolerant of similar suspensions of scientific thought. But there's a difference between somebody who holds to a major religion that has an entire intellectual tradition that has wrestled with those issues, and somebody who is piggy-backing on the latest silly end-of-the-world craze that they just heard about for the first time in the past year, and that they'll trade in for another baseless apocalyptic craze after that one doesn't happen. These people are somewhere in the same boat as conspiracy theorists. And we have seen what that crowd has to offer Ron Paul.

----------


## JosephTheLibertarian

> After serving one term Ron would be about 76 and pretty realistically may not be able to run for a second term (as much as the nation would probably want him to). So you have to think that there is a good chance that Paul presidency would only be four years long. After all, he would be the oldest person ever to take the office. So whoever he chooses as vice is very important as there is a good chance they would be the 2012 republican candidate. 
> 
> Also, say the nightmare comes true and Ron does not get elected, we don't really have anyone to vote for in 2012. There is really no one like him in the house or senate, or in a governors seat. The libertarian party puts up sub par candidates with no real government experience and at this point I don't really see a Ron Paul-Republican with experience taking the ball in four years.


you're getting ahead of yourself.

----------


## john_anderson_ii

> Look. Everybody knows about the 2012 myth craze that's going on out there, just like how there was a 1994 craze when I was in college, and then a year 2000 craze, and just like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists were started by similar screwy predictions. The last thing the Paul campaign needs is people who believe that crap supporting him and trying to bring it into the campaign.
> 
> I mean come on, the Mayan calendar?
> 
> Oh, and I like how you refer to "the experts". Nice touch.


2012 Myth Craze?  Myan Calendar? 

I think he was referring to a well known, accepted, and documented phenomenon that's part of natural life.

http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/dis...?News_ID=22337

2011 to mid 2012 is the next solar maximum.  Solar maximum years always play hell with satellites, communications, a violent enough flare has the potential to disturb power grids, and has been historically documented.  In 1989, the last solar maximum, a power grid in Canada was knocked out.  (http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...re_031028.html)

So, it's not crazy, conspiracy theory talk at all!  Its something science geeks and discovery channel addicts would get, that's all.

----------


## erowe1

Yes, John, he referred to that, and then he extended way beyond it. He tried to make these solar storms seem like a big deal that portends to involve states of emergency and such, things that NASA hasn't said, nor anyone else, except people who are looking for a disaster to predict and 2012 is their newest fad. And no, it's not something that "science geeks" and discovery channel watchers would get unless they're total wannabes whose actual education about science comes mainly from places like this: http://survive2012.com/.

----------


## john_anderson_ii

Ah.

I was under the impression you were calling solar cycles a myth.

----------


## Kregener

> Ron's brain preserved in a jar full of formaldehyde would make a better chief executive than 99% of the $#@!wits in Washington.


Thanks a lot Sean. I am wiping coffee off the laptop...

----------


## Shiranu

Ero, chill man O.o He stated something, on a fourm, and here you are getting all up-tight about it... if you think he is a...weirdo or w/e...kook?... fine, but going all over him only makes people think your a snob, so eh... you reap what you sow

----------


## richard1984

> Look. Everybody knows about the 2012 myth craze that's going on out there, just like how there was a 1994 craze when I was in college, and then a year 2000 craze, and just like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists were started by similar screwy predictions. The last thing the Paul campaign needs is people who believe that crap supporting him and trying to bring it into the campaign.
> 
> I mean come on, the Mayan calendar?
> 
> Oh, and I like how you refer to "the experts". Nice touch.


I think that you _completely_ missed my point.   

If you look at my original post, I wasn't focusing on the Mayan calendar at all.
I only mentioned it at the end, in parenthesis, because when I first learned about the solar storm cycle peaking in 2012 and the expected severity of the coming storms, I was watching the first showing of "The Universe: Secrets of the Sun" on the History Channel, and I was reminded of the Mayans because I had just watched a video on them in my anthropology class a few of days before.  

Of course (and as is very clear from my post), I was really only concerned about what would happen if we experienced widespread blackouts _and_ our next president was someone like Hillary or Giuliani.  
This was before I learned about Ron Paul, too, so I was _really_ concerned by this _very possible_ scenario.

And, like I said in the previous post, all you have to do is Google "solar storm 2012" to bring up loads of information from _EXPERTS_ about what we are in for.

So try reading next time.  You might actually _prevent_ putting your foot in your mouth.

(note: I'm not attacking you.  I'm not that kind of person.  But you did _completely_ misunderstand/misrepresent what I said (or maybe you just didn't read what I wrote, but, rather, only looked at the last line...in parenthesis...), and then you proceeded to repeat your blatant mistake.  I usually wouldn't care, but your tone is rather disrespectful/condescending, you're new and thus have no clout or reputation here (you have to _earn_ respect, buddy), your attitude is reminiscent of Sean Hannity, and to top it off, I didn't sleep last night _and_ I'm on a bunch of Adderall trying to study for two big tests that I have tomorrow--so I'm a bit edgy.)

----------


## richard1984

> Yes, John, he referred to that, and then he extended way beyond it. He tried to make these solar storms seem like a big deal that portends to involve states of emergency and such, things that NASA hasn't said, nor anyone else, except people who are looking for a disaster to predict and 2012 is their newest fad. And no, it's not something that "science geeks" and discovery channel watchers would get unless they're total wannabes whose actual education about science comes mainly from places like this: http://survive2012.com/.


Ohh...I think I see the problem now....  You just don't have very good reading skills.  Try reading a little slower next time so you can keep up with what _I'm_ saying (and not what you _think_ I'm saying).  

Or maybe you just don't see widespread blackouts as a problem (especially after considering what this Nazi president of ours has done to our civil liberties)...?

I don't know.  But it's no big deal.  This is getting retarded.




(I really don't like being rude, by the way.  It makes me feel bad.)

----------


## richard1984

I'm sorry.  One more thing.




> But there's a difference between somebody who holds to a major religion that has an entire intellectual tradition that has wrestled with those issues, and somebody who is piggy-backing on the latest silly end-of-the-world craze that they just heard about for the first time in the past year, and that they'll trade in for another baseless apocalyptic craze after that one doesn't happen. These people are somewhere in the same boat as conspiracy theorists. And we have seen what that crowd has to offer Ron Paul.


Again...reading skills, buddy.




> Yes, John, he referred to that, and then he extended way beyond it. He tried to make these solar storms seem like a big deal that portends to involve states of emergency and such, things that NASA hasn't said, nor anyone else, except people who are looking for a disaster to predict and 2012 is their newest fad. And no, it's not something that "science geeks" and discovery channel watchers would get unless they're total wannabes whose actual education about science comes mainly from places like this: http://survive2012.com/.



Here's my first post:




> We should prepare for blackouts!!!
> 
> The peak of the next 11 year solar storm cycle will be in 2012, and the storms are predicted to be _really_ strong.  
> This is a very real, very important reason to get Ron Paul elected.  
> In the case of blackouts (of power grids, satellites, etc.), if a neocon...or basically anyone other than Ron Paul...is in the White House, America will become a full-fledged police state over night (the laws are already on the books...and "in a state of emergency..."   ).  
> 
> To learn more about the upcoming peak of this solar storm cycle, just google "solar storm 2012" or something like that.  There is a large amount of research and information on this topic.  
> The media isn't going to make a big deal out of it until it's too late, though.  We're really going to have to take care of ourselves.  We need America back!
> 
> (Also, isn't it ironic--in a scary sort of way--that the Mayan calendar ends in 2012?  Kinda creepy....)



I sorry if you just don't understand what I'm saying.  I'm really not saying anything that extreme or over-exaggerated at all.


Now I'm done.

Peace!

----------


## alaric

> After serving one term Ron would be about 76 and pretty realistically may not be able to run for a second term (as much as the nation would probably want him to). So you have to think that there is a good chance that Paul presidency would only be four years long. After all, he would be the oldest person ever to take the office. So whoever he chooses as vice is very important as there is a good chance they would be the 2012 republican candidate. 
> 
> Also, say the nightmare comes true and Ron does not get elected, we don't really have anyone to vote for in 2012. There is really no one like him in the house or senate, or in a governors seat. The libertarian party puts up sub par candidates with no real government experience and at this point I don't really see a Ron Paul-Republican with experience taking the ball in four years.


Not only is he healthy enough, but getting reelected would be a piece of cake, compared to this time.  After 4 years of cleaning up and getting rid of congressmen who violate their oath of office, there should be a lot less garbage to put up with. Hey, maybe he resurrects the original 13th amendment that strips citizenship from all titled officials (and esquire is a title of nobility), that should wipe out 3/4 of the traitors posing as senators/congressmen. No more lawyers in elected office: think about that!

----------


## erowe1

> I'm sorry.  One more thing.
> 
> 
> 
> Again...reading skills, buddy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The storms aren't expected to be anything abnormal. Like people have said, they happen every 11 years. This cycle isn't supposed to be any more severe than others that have happened before. And even if a blackout happens from time to time, that's not something that has the potential of turning into a Marshal law situation or any kind of other conspiracy theorist's dream. So, yeah, you are exaggerating. I read your post just fine. I get where you're coming from. I've seen the pseudo-science sites that say the same stuff. It was you who mentioned the Mayan calendar, I didn't just falsely attribute it to you. It's hogwash. And it doesn't become less hogwash when it gets attached to some minor natural occurrence that happens every 11 years and may involve a blackout or two.

----------


## Kregener

Tell me these "solar storms" are not being predicted by the same folks who brought us "Global Warming" and the ensuing "Climate Change"....please.

----------


## richard1984

> Tell me these "solar storms" are not being predicted by the same folks who brought us "Global Warming" and the ensuing "Climate Change"....please.


Do a google search, dude.  Seriously.  This is well studied, thoroughly documented stuff.  Scientists watch the sun very closely.  It's a big ass motherf*cker!  You know?
We're not talking about people who are politically motivated here.

The encorporation of politics into the potential dangers of solar storms was my doing.

----------


## richard1984

> The storms aren't expected to be anything abnormal. Like people have said, they happen every 11 years. This cycle isn't supposed to be any more severe than others that have happened before. And even if a blackout happens from time to time, that's not something that has the potential of turning into a Marshal law situation or any kind of other conspiracy theorist's dream. So, yeah, you are exaggerating. I read your post just fine. I get where you're coming from. I've seen the pseudo-science sites that say the same stuff. It was you who mentioned the Mayan calendar, I didn't just falsely attribute it to you. It's hogwash. And it doesn't become less hogwash when it gets attached to some minor natural occurrence that happens every 11 years and may involve a blackout or two.


While I'll give you the fact that I am absolutely no expert on this matter (and upon writing that first post I hadn't read anything about it since I saw that show on the History Channel) and the fact that this sort of topic is always fraught with kooks and other conspiracy nuts (of which I am not one--e.g., we should talk about 9/11 sometime...you know...the king of modern conspiracy theories; I think you'd find me very down-to-earth and reasonable (of course, it's hard to have a thoughtful conversation when there is too much aggression--it turns agreeable, curious people into uptight, unrelenting, narrow-minded, and unproductive asses)) it's sometimes tedious to sift through the bullsh*t in search of legitimate articles.

Try this one, though (at http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...ec_cycle24.htm ).  Here's a quote: 




> Solar cycle 24, due to peak in 2010 or 2011 "looks like its going to be one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began almost 400 years ago," says solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.


I've noticed that some scientists think that the peak will be earlier than I had previously heard--"in 2010 or 2011"--but they're still predicting big flares, so my concern still holds.  
oh man...I'm tired of expounding on my previous statements, but...I sure can imagine a scenario where we suffer extensive damages to our power grids and satellites, thus the government declares the country to be in a state of emergency.  Obviously, they're going to worry about riots, mass vandalism, general panic, etc.  So what would be their answer?  Send in the military!  It's not a stretch to imagine such areas entering complete lockdown, with military police patrolling the streets (think Iraq...), tanks cruising around, helicopters flying over, etc. etc.  And, if the president at the time is anything like Bush, s/he will probably not be very willing to remove or ease-up on the patrolling.  "If the military-police leave, they'll be chaos!" they'll say.  ....

Get the picture now?  That's what I was trying to suggest.  Now, if my wording isn't perfect, don't crucify me.  Just try to understand what I'm trying to get at.  And _realize_ that it's not so farfetched.

----------


## CurtisLow

When the Moon is in the Seventh House, and Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace shall guide the planets, and love will steer the stars.
This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuDYRmjXiOU

----------


## Kregener

I would submit that what "scientists" do NOT know about the sun would fill a dump truck.

But hey, whatever blows your skirt up!

----------


## erowe1

Thanks for the clarification Richard. I had noticed the 2010-11 thing too and refrained from mentioning that point. But I'm glad you did. I'm pretty sure that the tendency of some to say 2012 instead is because of the Mayan calendar and the apocalyptic predictions that have gotten attached to it, especially recently. And I actually have a hunch that the History channel show you watched was probably piggy backing on that in order to attract an audience by sensationalizing (granted I didn't see it). But the NASA article you mention still doesn't claim that the 2010-11 cycle is anything to fret about. I've seen other articles that claim the biggest storms in recent memory were in the 1950's and that the 2010-11 ones are expected to be less severe than those. The only sites that talk about "widespread blackouts" are the ones that are trying to make something apocalyptic out of this. I've never seen a reputable scientific source say that. A mere blackout or two, even over a major grid, is the kind of thing that can happen from time to time and is not a huge deal, certainly less than Katrina and other events of the sort every administration has to deal with at some point.

----------


## erowe1

OK, actually, let me just call a truce. I think we both see what each other was saying now. I'm sorry for being uptight about it and looking like I was having a fit here. And I'm ashamed to admit it, but I do feel much better knowing that you don't believe in 9/11 conspiracies. I have to admit I assumed the opposite, and part of my annoyance was because of the bad reputation that 9/11 truthers have brought to Ron Paul. As I see it, one of the best things that can come out of a forum like this that's just for the Ron Paul family is that the 90% of us who don't believe in 9/11 conspiracies can use these boards to shame the truthers into keeping their opinions to themselves any time they are in campaign mode.

----------


## richard1984

> I would submit that what "scientists" do NOT know about the sun would fill a dump truck.


I'd say that's the case with _all_ science.

But, I mean, I'm not even a strict, traditional physicalist (though I don't deny its utility).  I _know_ that there are whole vast realms of reality that science hasn't even begun to acknowledge.
My main, foundational intellectual interest is in philosophy of mind and, specifically, developing my qualia theory (which is really just an alternative, more inclusive, more specific, _strictly_ "empirical"--i.e., less abstract--way of explaining reality).  Anyway, that's a pitiful brief explanation, but oh well.  I've got so much $#@! to do....   I hate my procrastination....  (though not as much as I hate the mental and physical slavery that is school.  I need to be free to follow my own train-of-thought--not some damn one-size-fits-all curriculum.  I just can't believe they call this "getting an education"....)

----------


## DahuiHeeNalu

Hopefully in 2012 the Mayans where right and things really change!

----------


## richard1984

> OK, actually, let me just call a truce. I think we both see what each other was saying now. I'm sorry for being uptight about it and looking like I was having a fit here. And I'm ashamed to admit it, but I do feel much better knowing that you don't believe in 9/11 conspiracies. I have to admit I assumed the opposite, and part of my annoyance was because of the bad reputation that 9/11 truthers have brought to Ron Paul. As I see it, one of the best things that can come out of a forum like this that's just for the Ron Paul family is that the 90% of us who don't believe in 9/11 conspiracies can use these boards to shame the truthers into keeping their opinions to themselves any time they are in campaign mode.


Awesome!  If I could shake your hand...*shake*.   


(please forgive me for the length and off-topic--"hot-topic"--content of this post.)

I am skeptical of the "official" report.  I think that it left out and/or failed to follow through with some of the really damn perplexing aspects of the attacks.  
For example, I really can't conceive how WTC 1 & 2 completely collapsed because of the Boeing 767 impacts (not to even mention WTC 7...).  If anything, the top part of the buildings (above the impact zone) should have fallen off.  There's just no way to explain how all three buildings crumbled into dust, imploding into their own footprints at near freefall velocity, as the result of isolated fires and some impact damage.  
I'm sorry, but it's just physically impossible--completely illogical--save for the possibility that the "official" reports left out key evidence/information.  

I don't really like to venture beyond this point in public, though.  I don't _really_ know what happened, so I prefer to refrain from expressing my opinions--since they're really just speculation.

So I'm one of those people who finds a lot of things very fishy about the whole incident, but I try not to go beyond (unless I make it clear that I am only speculating) acknowledging skepticism about the obvious, very public, physical facts of the WTC 1, 2, & 7 collapses.

So, to be clear, if I happen to talk to someone about 9/11, I will say that I find it really curious/strange that they imploded at near freefall velocity (including WTC 7--which my dad didn't even know about until recently...); but I don't really go beyond that.  
Because, honestly, I don't think that I need to.  
Once I point out that I find it really weird that they fell like they did (only offering my own opinion on the matter), I don't have to do anymore pushing.  People can decide what they think for themselves.

The problem with the "Truthers" (besides their label...which is giving the word 'Truth' a bad rep) is their methods/tactics.  Nobody likes people who rant and rave and act like so many of them do (self-righteous, rude, obnoxious, and inconsiderate).  
9/11 is an _extremely_ sensitive subject, and if they don't have enough intelligence (or at least decency) to treat it as such (as something that shouldn't be thrown in people's faces) then they should just shut up.

Some of what I've seen of them reminds me of the evangelical "Christians" who stand around on campus and scream/preach "hellfire and damnation!" upon the soul of everyone who walks by (some of them just straight-up violently yell things like "you're going to hell you sinful adulterer!!!" at innocent girls walking by...I've seen them make girls cry...).  The tactics that many "Truthers" use are _very_ off-putting.  I mean really...they're just _begging_ to be criticized, ignored, begrudged, and written off as crazy, kooky, loony weirdoes.  
There's no logic to it at all.
Just like I don't consider those evangelicals _true_ Christians, I don't consider many "Truthers" sincere in their mission/objective.  I think that people like them are just loud, attention-hungry, deeply obnoxious, and rude.  It's not the message that's the problem as much as their presentation and methods of communication.  
But anyway...you know what I'm trying to say.  These kinds of loud-mouthed, self-righteous $#@!s are the problem.  Not only do they turn everyone off (even people who agree with them), but they undermine their own message and ruin the potential for positive progress for the civilized, thoughtful people.  When they should be trying to open minds, they’re actively closing them and pissing them off.

So yeah...good Lord....  I'm really tired, but I'm just going and going and going....  I'm spinning my wheels, though...and I still have so much studying to do!!!   


(Adderall helps me to work hard and stay on task (once I get on task)...but most of the time I get sidetracked and work hard doing things like writing excessively long (this _was_ twice as long as it is now), verbose posts that don't even fit into the thread's initial subject and probably won't get read (and if it does, I'll probably catch flack for writing about the dreaded "9/11"), but once I get going man....  Damn.  Did I mention I didn't sleep last night?  )

----------

