[Video] Open Mic @Pentagon Press Room "See This Room, 2/3s' of us Laid-Off With Ron Paul"
- Thread starter HOLLYWOOD
- Start date
limequat
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,968
Do it!
Yep. We have influence over the national conversation now. Amazing.
Real_CaGeD
Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,131
Laid off pentagon press=peace
HOLLYWOOD
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 22,314
Some reporter says, "[inaudible]...Ron Paul Group...[inaudible]"
I just ran this through. Thanks Grado headphones
It's a group of three or four men and one woman talking about foreign policy. The words I'm unsure about are in brackets. I have a nicer DAC that I can run it through again to try and pick up more detail.
Reporter 1: When in fact [we've shelled] we've proved for the last defenders...
Reporter 2: We've proved for the last ten years, we've said repeatedly we only can run it, we can fight two wars... [win this]
Reporter 3: This is all good for the [run] for the company, when Ron Paul becomes President. (woman laughs) They... [inaudible, something about the company again]
Reporter 1: (interrupts) See this room? Two thirds of us laid off when Ron Paul becomes President. (two men laugh)
Another reporter: Someone emailed me this fundraiser [with] two more valuable positions were valid before Obama was born.
Reporter 2: Well World War II. We fought two wars.
Woman: Right.
Reporter 2: That's where it comes from.
Another: Right.
Reporter 2: [Sick of being here/there] right. This'll be fine. It's like a [forty] mobilized countries with everyone [inaudible]
Woman: Now it's company [inaudible] for the ground troops... [inaudible]
Older man: For the idea also being, from like, [inaudible] [troops]...
CSPAN Reporter interrupts.
The interesting thing is both men definitely say when Ron Paul becomes President. The first guy sounds a bit sarcastic though.
newbitech
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 8,847
You need to change those people's minds on that one. That is a blatantly false perception. IMO, attacks on RP in regards to cutting back the military are among the weakest attacks out there and the easiest to defend against. In fact it's easily a pivot point if that is the ONLY think they are concerned about.
Rudy G tried to hurt Dr. Paul and it backfired. Recently, Michelle Bachman tried to do the same. See where that got her.
Now if people can just make the connection between the corporal who supports Ron Paul because he is sick of 10 years of war, and the media who wants to see perpetual war because that is the basis of their jobs, then it becomes crystal clear that War for Profit is what is driving policy, rather than the supposed concern to keep American's safe.
limequat
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,968
I just ran this through. Thanks Grado headphones
It's a group of three or four men and one woman talking about foreign policy. The words I'm unsure about are in brackets. I have a nicer DAC that I can run it through again to try and pick up more detail.
Reporter 1: When in fact [we've shelled] we've proved for the last defenders...
Reporter 2: We've proved for the last ten years, we've said repeatedly we only can run it, we can fight two wars... [win this]
Reporter 3: This is all good for the [run] for the company, when Ron Paul becomes President. (woman laughs) They... [inaudible, something about the company again]
Reporter 1: (interrupts) See this room? Two thirds of us laid off when Ron Paul becomes President. (two men laugh)
Another reporter: Someone emailed me this fundraiser [with] two more valuable positions were valid before Obama was born.
Reporter 2: Well World War II. We fought two wars.
Woman: Right.
Reporter 2: That's where it comes from.
Another: Right.
Reporter 2: [Sick of being here/there] right. This'll be fine. It's like a [forty] mobilized countries with everyone [inaudible]
Woman: Now it's company [inaudible] for the ground troops... [inaudible]
Older man: For the idea also being, from like, [inaudible] [troops]...
CSPAN Reporter interrupts.
The interesting thing is both men definitely say when Ron Paul becomes President. The first guy sounds a bit sarcastic though.
Who or what is "The Company"?
CIA?
specsaregood
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2007
- Messages
- 39,143
Thats the only entity I've even known referred to as the company.
http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php..._central_intelligence_agency_or_cia_nickname/
Last edited:
KingNothing
Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,662
but that isn't why they are biased against him. They're biased because the people they admire and respect in power, the people they depend on for access, do not want Paul to win because he would upset their apple cart. So those people in power tell the reporters that Paul is inconsequential and absurd, and like the sycophants they are, they repeat the nonsense they are told. It's not so much that they would lose their jobs if Paul won that leads them to marginalize him, its that the people they admire and use for access tell them that Paul is insignificant.
raider4paul
Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 258
I actually have a job I'm pretty sure I'd have a chance of losing if he becomes president.
Still worth it.
Still worth it.
limequat
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,968
I'm still trying to get the gist of the conversation.
We get the first part about them losing their jobs when RP puts the MIC out of business, but what about the Company? Are they insinuating that the CIA would have their hands full to create MORE wars if RP was president?
Similar threads
