The Paytriot Delusion

[MsDoodahs]

We'd be better off sitting on our butts then doing the enemy's bidding. So, my answer to your question is, yes.

You can sit on your butt at any number of online forums.

Forum Mission Statement

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this forum is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

 

[MsDoodahs]

To speak my mind.

Is there a problem with that here? Is it frowned upon to tell people what they don't want to hear? Am I supposed to be part of the "team"? Not hurt the "movement" and all that kind of stuff?

Yes. Please refer to the mission statement as provided by the forum owner, below:

Forum Mission Statement

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this forum is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

 

[MsDoodahs]

For example, any criticism of electoral politics as an effective means of achieving liberty is usually viewed as an attack on the majority here who are advocates of that approach, and is usually responded to with extreme hostility.

Advocating a stateless society, or failing to worship the federalist constitution is another form of independent thought that's frowned upon. It is also usually viewed as an attack, and is highly likely to elicit hostility.

As a reminder, this is the mission statement of the forum:

Forum Mission Statement

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this forum is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

But hey, if you come up with a new, creative way to raise money for political candidates, that kind of thing goes over well.

Since TODAY is the day of kentuckyfight, FOUNDED BY JOSHLOWRY, OWNER OF THIS FORUM, your comment above is both offensive and divisive.

Such behavior is outside guidelines.

 

[LittleLightShining]

The movement right now is about HR1207. Outside of that, it is people freely expressing their views, including Ron Paul.

That's part of it. Efforts to raise money and campaign for Rand, Schiff and Kokesh are other parts of it. There are a number of forum members who are running for state and local positions. Cap & Trade and Health Care Reform are just 2 of the many national issues that need attention and action from liberty-minded folk. The Patriot Act has key provisions set to expire which likely will be continued... There's no reason to box the movement in to the Fed Audit-- though we should be proud and inspired by what we've achieved so far and be ready to keep fighting that fight, too.

 

[RonneJJones]

Yes. Please refer to the mission statement as provided by the forum owner, below:

I have read the Mission Statement and Forum Guidelines and I am in agreement with their spirit as well as the letter.

Forum Mission Statement

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this forum is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

But what I think is being missed in this thread is a serious discussion regarding the means by which these goals are attained. Further, what I am extremely concerned about is that two other people in this thread appear to have been banned because they appeared to have also sought to discuss the means by which we reach these goals.

So, is it the goals set forth in the Mission Statement that we are here to support, or is it also some predefined unspoken path to these goals that we also must adhere to? And does this mean supporting political candidates already identified by this forum?

Clarification on these questions would be most helpful.

 

[pcosmar]

I'm not a Mod or an owner here, But I would guess they got banned for other reasons than this thread.


edit, perhaps someone was checkng IP's.
Hmm,,,

 

[Mini-Me]

I'm not a Mod or an owner here, But I would guess they got banned for other reasons than this thread.

edit, perhaps someone was checkng IP's.
Hmm,,,

My guess is a temp ban for today (or a few days at most) due to this thread, but only because of the money bomb. I think CCTelander got the short end of the stick this time, but I'm sure he'll be back. As for expendibleater, I think you may be right on the "checking IP's" front.

 

[MsDoodahs]

But what I think is being missed in this thread is a serious discussion regarding the means by which these goals are attained.

If you do not agree with the means used by our members, don't participate in their efforts.

There was no discussion of other means in this thread; just statements that what our members are attempting to accomplish is ineffective.

Further, what I am extremely concerned about is that two other people in this thread appear to have been banned because they appeared to have also sought to discuss the means by which we reach these goals.

No discussion of other means was taking place; rather, the usual "it won't work, don't bother" drone was being repeated yet again.

So, is it the goals set forth in the Mission Statement that we are here to support,

Yes.

or is it also some predefined unspoken path to these goals that we also must adhere to?

Forum Mission Statement

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this forum is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

Suggesting other means is not a problem - so long as those other means fall within the stated guidelines. Once again, no other means were suggested in this thread.

Efforts to dissuade activists from their activism at this forum does not represent other means and will not be tolerated.

And does this mean supporting political candidates already identified by this forum?

No one is under any obligation to support any particular candidate identified by other members of this forum.

Bashing of candidates supported by this forum will not be tolerated.

Clarification on these questions would be most helpful.

Hope that helps.

 

[RonneJJones]

Bashing of candidates supported by this forum will not be tolerated.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the reply. I have some followup questions.

Who are the "candidates supported by this forum" and what is meant by "bashing"? Perhaps you can direct me to this part in the forum guidelines.

Thanks.

 

[MsDoodahs]

Thanks for the reply. I have some followup questions.

Who are the "candidates supported by this forum"

To find some, go to the front page and then click on the forum area 2010 Liberty Candidates, some are in there. There are others, I can't list them all because I don't know them all.

and what is meant by "bashing"? Perhaps you can direct me to this part in the forum guidelines.

dictionary.com

+ Ad hominem attacks on other candidates and their support groups are discouraged. This is not a moderatable offense for established users but will have low tolerances for non-established users. All are encouraged to address other candidates with their proper name. Reason: This activity is discouraged as it can be used to generate a negative image for our support community.

 

[CCTelander]

My guess is a temp ban for today (or a few days at most) due to this thread, but only because of the money bomb. I think CCTelander got the short end of the stick this time, but I'm sure he'll be back. As for expendibleater, I think you may be right on the "checking IP's" front.

Hey, thanks for the kind words in my defense. Needless to say, I agree with you on getting the short end.

But hey, on the bright side, by banning me for the purported reason she did, she pretty much made my point for me, much more convincingly than I could have done myself in a thousand posts.

Anyway, I hope you'll forgive me for putting our earlier conversation on hold, at least for a while. No sense in getting banned again right away.

 

[BuddyRey]

I agree with the premise that patriotism is an outdated concept, like monarchy or caste, but how about some solutions?

Instead of trying to "take back the Republic", we ought to simply stop recognizing the authority of government and, if necessary, establish a voluntary society somewhere else. It doesn't mean we have to have a "revolution" since this normally connotes an overthrow of the established order. Rather, it would just be a mass exodus on the order of Atlas Shrugged. There wouldn't need to be any revolution, because the U.S., drained of its productive labor force and creative people, would collapse like a flan in a microwave.

 

[RonneJJones]

I agree with the premise that patriotism is an outdated concept, like monarchy or caste, but how about some solutions?

Instead of trying to "take back the Republic", we ought to simply stop recognizing the authority of government and, if necessary, establish a voluntary society somewhere else. It doesn't mean we have to have a "revolution" since this normally connotes an overthrow of the established order. Rather, it would just be a mass exodus on the order of Atlas Shrugged. There wouldn't need to be any revolution, because the U.S., drained of its productive labor force and creative people, would collapse like a flan in a microwave.

I hereby deem BuddyRey as the smartest person at RPF. Everyone here should read and digest the quoted paragraph.

 

[BuddyRey]

I hereby deem BuddyRey as the smartest person at RPF. Everyone here should read and digest the quoted paragraph.

LOL! I don't even think I'm in the top 20 smartest people on this site, but thank you for saying so!

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

 

[virgil47]

I hereby deem BuddyRey as the smartest person at RPF. Everyone here should read and digest the quoted paragraph.

And this would not qualify as a "New Beginning"?

 

[virgil47]

http://sovereignsentience.blogspot.com/2009/09/paytriot-delusion.html

The Paytriot Delusion
By Matthew D. Jarvie
September 18, 2009
Dissecting the New Age


You may think I am able to say that patriotism is a sham and that countries are nothing more than areas of land separated by imaginary lines drawn on a map, without being accused of supporting world government. Well, not according to some who have swallowed the "take back the Republic" BS hook, line and sinker. So let me say it again: Patriotism is a joke and what you believe is "your" country is nothing more than a piece of real estate which isn't nor has ever been yours at all. Patriotism is another artificially-created religion aimed at people's emotions and has historically served no purpose other than to get people to willingly go off and fight in some bogus war fabricated by an international banking syndicate when the time was right.

Now a new and improved form of patriotism I call paytriotism is being used to get people into a reactionary and confrontational state of mind that will be eventually exploited by the controllers to create an order out of chaos scenario. Do you not find it odd that "mainstream," particularly "conservative" (i.e. Republican) media talking heads like Glenn Beck are now saying many of the same things commonly heard in the "alternative" media and on "paytriot" (pay-to-riot) radio for the past eight years? Do you think this is by some mere coincidence? I think not.

I believe that what some people have been saying is correct, that there will be a revolution in America. Except it won't be a revolution of or by the people as there has never been such a thing, even in this country's past. It will be a revolution of and by the NGOs and think tanks (CFR, CNP, Bilderberg, RAND, etc.), the foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc.), and its lapdog media, on behalf of the international banking elite and their Ecclesiastic Freemason handlers hiding behind the facade of organized religion.

As people continue to go on about "revolution" and how it is a good thing, perhaps they should first understand the true meaning of the word REVOLUTION. A revolution is the great solar myth referring to the sun rising to a "NEW DAWN," ushering in a NEW AGE. Perhaps this explains why there hasn't been a revolution in modern recorded history that hasn't had Masonic fingerprints all over it. My feeling is that the next revolution will be no different.

The elite do not fear paytriots with guns, but perhaps they do fear too many people owning guns -- hence an increased push for further gun control and the deliberate depletion of ammunition around the country. However, when the time comes they will depend on just the right number of useful idiots to react in a way that creates the pretext for them to bring out their experimental crowd control toys and come down hard on us all. In an age of directed-energy weapons, guns are virtually obsolete.

It's quite clear that civil unrest is slowly being fomented in this country for a purpose unbeknownst to most. Most people's frustration is indeed genuine and justified, but that doesn't mean there are not devious people looking to exploit that frustration to further their own diabolical agenda.

This is simply the clap trap of a true "me first" individual. By his way of thinking we should not defend families, neighborhoods, states or our country. He believes that any effort to protect or recapture a way of life is a waste of time and effort. These views as he expresses them are a prime example of negativity run a muck. It is also the epitome of defeatism. If we listen to those that espouse this kind of clap trap we will all end up disarmed and in chains. I don't mean figurative chains by the way.

 

[LibForestPaul]

Just know you enemies. Slaves shouldn't fight slaves.

2009 Members of the FOMC

* Members
o Ben S. Bernanke, Board of Governors, Chairman
o William C. Dudley, New York, Vice Chairman
o Elizabeth A. Duke, Board of Governors
o Charles L. Evans, Chicago
o Donald L. Kohn, Board of Governors
o Jeffrey M. Lacker, Richmond
o Dennis P. Lockhart, Atlanta
o Daniel K. Tarullo, Board of Governors
o Kevin M. Warsh, Board of Governors
o Janet L. Yellen, San Francisco

* Alternate Members
o James Bullard, St. Louis
o Thomas M. Hoenig, Kansas City
o Sandra Pianalto, Cleveland
o Eric S. Rosengren, Boston
o Christine M. Cumming, First Vice President, New York


* BIS home
* About BIS
* Organisation
* Board of Directors

Board of Directors

Guillermo Ortiz, Mexico City (Chairman of the Board of Directors)

Hans Tietmeyer, Frankfurt am Main (Vice-Chairman)

Ben S Bernanke, Washington, DC; Mark Carney, Ottawa; Mario Draghi, Rome; William C Dudley, New York; Stefan Ingves, Stockholm; Mervyn King, London; Jean-Pierre Landau, Paris: Christian Noyer, Paris; Guy Quaden, Brussels; Jean-Pierre Roth, Zürich; Masaaki Shirakawa, Tokyo; Jean-Claude Trichet, Frankfurt am Main; Paul Tucker, London; Alfons Vicomte Verplaetse, Brussels; Axel Weber, Frankfurt am Main; Nout H E M Wellink, Amsterdam; Zhou Xiaochuan, Beijing

anagement of the BIS

The General Manager is Jaime Caruana. The Deputy General Manager is Hervé Hannoun.

The General Manager - the Bank's chief executive officer - carries out the policy determined by the Board of Directors and is responsible to the Board for the management of the Bank.

The heads of the three main departments are Peter Dittus (General Secretariat), Stephen Cecchetti (Monetary and Economic Department) and Günter Pleines (Banking Department). The General Counsel is Diego Devos.

Other senior officials are Jim Etherington (Deputy Secretary General), Már Gudmundsson (Deputy Head of Monetary and Economic Department), Louis de Montpellier (Deputy Head of Banking) and Josef Tošovský (Chairman, Financial Stability Institute).

Eli Remolona is Chief Representative, Representative Office for Asia and the Pacific, and Gregor Heinrich is Chief Representative, Representative Office for the Americas.

Governing Board

The day-to-day management of the De Nederlandsche Bank rests with the Governing Board, consisting of a President and up to five Executive Directors. Governing Board members are appointed by the Crown, for consecutive seven-year tenures.

Supervisory Board and Bank Council

Supervisory Board

The Supervisory Board oversees the management of DNB and the general operations at the public company. The Supervisory Board has a number of important powers, such as approval of the budget, the annual report and specific governing board decisions, and adoption of the annual accounts. One member of the Supervisory Board is appointed by the government. The tasks profile of the Supervisory Board is attached below as download.

* J.F. van Duyne – Chairman
* E.H. Swaab – Secretary
* HRH The Prince of Orange
* F. Bolkestein
* A.H. van Delden
* A.M. Fentener van Vlissingen
* E. Kist
* G.J. Kleisterlee
* W. Tuinenburg
* By government appointment: T. van de Graaf

The Bank Council

The Bank Council acts as the Governing Board’s sounding board. The President of DNB reports to this body on the general economic and financial developments and on the policy pursued by DNB. The Bank Council may advise the Governing Board. Two members of the Supervisory Board serve on the Bank Council, including the member appointed by the government. The Bank Council is furthermore composed of representatives of the social partners and the financial sector as well as independent experts.

* P. Bouw – Chairman
* By government appointment: T. van de Graaf
* A.W.A. Boot
* A.H. van Delden
* W.A.J. Duin
* R. Gerritse
* L.M.L.H.A. Hermans
* A.M. Jongerius
* A.J. Maat
* F.J. Paas
* K.B. van Popta
* B.E.M. Wientjes
* B. Staal
* E.R. Steenberg

http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/storysupplement/ceopay/

 

[RonneJJones]

This is simply the clap trap of a true "me first" individual. By his way of thinking we should not defend families, neighborhoods, states or our country. He believes that any effort to protect or recapture a way of life is a waste of time and effort. These views as he expresses them are a prime example of negativity run a muck. It is also the epitome of defeatism. If we listen to those that espouse this kind of clap trap we will all end up disarmed and in chains. I don't mean figurative chains by the way.

Are you proposing a violent approach? If so, why?

And why are you so convinced that the author's approach is simply a "clap trap of a true 'me first' individual?" Please explain what you mean by this statement, because I'm not sure I understand what you are saying and why you are so convinced that it is so.

 

[virgil47]

Are you proposing a violent approach? If so, why?

I am all for using violence to save my family or country. I will not whine or cry or beg to anyone. If we are to regain our freedom we will have to fight for it. No one will give it to us.

And why are you so convinced that the author's approach is simply a "clap trap of a true 'me first' individual?" Please explain what you mean by this statement, because I'm not sure I understand what you are saying and why you are so convinced that it is so.

He is a naysayer when it comes to history, is anti religion, is anti country but firmly believes in the NWO. He is the typical new age, self absorbed, over educated individual of the new left.