|
||||||||||
Aaron Dykes / Jones Report | June 2, 2007 Presidential candidate Ron Paul commented Thursday on the threats that he could face as a true anti-establishment candidate if he continues to succeed in the bid for the executive, as history has proven that politicians who seek fundamental change are often put in danger, which is particularly true for presidents and would-be presidents who buck the system. Congressman Paul acknowledged that such a threat is "real," agreeing with a number of historical examples where leaders were killed or attacked for successfully standing up to the system. "That's right. They'll do it," Paul said, making reference with Alex Jones to upstarts like Andrew Jackson, "The Kingfish" Huey Long, Bobby Kennedy, George Washington and even George Wallace. "But I'm still working on the assumption that my automobile may well be a lot more dangerous than me being attacked," Ron Paul stated unwaveringly. "I think we're at a point right now where they're still hoping I will go away-- but the fact that they've started to attack me means that we are annoying them, to say the least."
Ron Paul was not only attacked by a variety of mainstream media outlets after clearly winning both Republican debates, but was defamed live on-air as poll votes showed Paul to be the victor. Fox News' Sean Hannity expressed his "surprise" at Ron Paul leading and proclaimed that he simply hadn't had the opportunity to text in his vote because he was busy hosting on-air, encouraging a vote against Ron Paul-- who might ruin the whole rigged game Fox represents, defends and promotes. "I think right now, they're going to just try to ridicule and to make me a fringe candidate," Paul said, but added: "There's a lot at stake if we shake up the establishment. What's at stake for us is our freedom. What's at stake for them is the money and control and the power and the monetary system-- this is high stakes. So yes, they will be very determined."
And such has been the case throughout American history. President Andrew Jackson fought to kill the Bank of the United States-- a privately owned bank deceptively named to sound like a legitimate part of the federal government. Jackson vetoed an 1832 bill to re-charter the bank-- the height of an ongoing struggle with bank president Nicholas Biddle that eventually led to a failed assassination attempt in 1835. Jackson stated with his veto:
Ron Paul embodies much of what Jackson strived for-- upholding the Constitution and fighting against bank control. Paul consistently and tirelessly vows to end income taxes for ordinary Americans and shut down the Federal Reserve (another deceptively named private bank)-- something Huey P. Long, a populist governor from Louisiana better known as The Kingfish also longed to do. Long was assassinated in 1935 after developing momentum enough to challenge Franklin Roosevelt for President.
Hopefully, Ron Paul would not parallel Long in that respect, but again acknowledged the historical precedent: "If we get a little bit closer to really achieving success in the political sense, then I think there's reason to be concerned and be alert." Bobby Kennedy was assassinated the very night he won the California Democratic primary-- a state with enough electoral votes to initiate critical momentum and win the party's nomination. His June 6, 1968 death came just months before the late August Democratic Convention of 1968. Likewise, Dr. Martin Luther King was assassinated on April 4, 1968, and had been rumored to be a possible RFK running mate if Bobby Kennedy secured the nomination for president. Regardless, the powerful anti-war sentiment conveyed by both leaders was itself a viable threat to the establishment, which refused to end the Vietnam War for as long as possible. That, coupled with the civil rights movement they also represented made the two sixties icons dangerous agents of change-- they simply could not be allowed to be elected. Ron Paul again parallels in his anti-war stance. He is the only Republican candidate to have opposed military action in Iraq, and, like RFK, sought a radical change in foreign policy. Robert Kennedy stated in March of 1968:
Congressman Ron Paul would reinstate a traditional position of non-intervention in foreign affairs, seeking to avoid entangling alliances, as the forefathers advised, but rather trading with and befriending foreign nations. While Robert Kennedy's brother JFK was assassinated for a cocktail of reasons, all of those reasons were essentially anti-establishment in nature-- he sought to withdraw troops from Vietnam, threatened to break the CIA into "a thousand pieces", intended to break free of entangling conflicts round the world, essentially ending the cold war and also sought monetary policy threatening to banking interests, by issuing a version of Lincoln's "greenbacks." President James Garfield, too, was assassinated over monetary issues in 1881 after only a few months in office. Excerpts from his inaugural speech reveal possible related motives, as gold, silver and the bank's attempt to reinstate power were all contentious issues in the day.
Even Lincoln was likely assassinated, at least in part, over monetary issues. He rejected high interest loans, reportedly offered by the Rothschilds, to finance the civil war and instead implemented a "greenback" system issued and controlled by the federal government (though many would argue against the benefits of this system as well). The combined loss of war profits and control over inflationary debts is recognized by many historians as a motivating factor in his murder. American history alone reveals an obvious trend of assassination attempts on the life of any serious reformers or momentous challenges to the military-industrial complex and banking-based oligarchy that has been ruling this country for more than 100 years and has always vied for control (at least in the case of banking). However, such violent resistance to populism taking root again is no historical imperative-- Ron Paul intends to pursue his message of hope, taking caution when necessary, but without diluting his criticism of current detrimental policies, particularly in foreign policy and fiscal issues, as well as many other important issues. "The exciting thing is that the message has caught on. One of the more interesting things about it is who is responding-- and that's the younger generation-- and I think that's good news for the country," Ron Paul expressed, clearly overwhelmed by support that has shown itself through the Internet, through crowds at campaign stops, through donations and through numbers in the polls-- many of which put him in the lead. "It's the idea of freedom, that if I'm willing to present the case to allow these young people to have their way and not put a burden on them, all of a sudden, they have become very excited about what's happening." Ron Paul appeared on the Alex Jones Show May 31, 2007.
CLICK ON THE BANNER TO
BUY TERRORSTORM IN |
|
|||||||||
