Our Advertisers Represent Some Of The Most Unique Products & Services On Earth!


Ron Paul The Deceiver - Out Of The Closet
By Dick Eastman
Ron Paul the deceiver --  this man is consciously your enemy, deceiving you on behalf of the worst criminals in the world. Unfortunately only one in a hundred can see it.
Comment from Social Crediter Wallace Klinck:
[Klinck is arguing against Ron Paul's solution in the passage presented by Ken Freeland that the solution to the debt crisis is that we "to live within our means"  -- what Klinck says here is the answer to all money power apologists for austerity in order to keep up debt payment to the international creditor aristocracy. -- DE ]
The whole idea of "living within our means" is from a realistic perspective an absurdity.  We cannot  eat a turnip that has not been grown or drive an automobile that has not been produced.  Living beyond our physical means at any given period of development is a physical impossibility and if anyone is so foolish as to attempt to do it then one must wish them luck.  When we are subject to the demand that we must "live within our means" the meaning of the words is that we must live within our financial means-- a quite different thing altogether.  The patently false assumption is made that our financial means accurately reflects our actual or real physical/psychological means or capacity to produce goods and services as, when and where required or desired.  That is what Social Credit calls a nation's "real credit".  "Financial credit" is what Social Credit calls the ability to deliver money "as, when and where required or desired."  Social Credit calls for the two forms of credit, real and financial, to be balanced or equated.  Today they are increasingly unbalanced with finance failing to serve production and consumption up to the full potential.  That is why although the physical cost of all production if fully met when it is completed in final form for consumer use the financial costs are increasingly not met and we must resort to exponentially increasing debt in order to claim the outflow of consumer goods from the production line.  Briefly, the consumer in final retail prices is quite properly charged with real capital depreciation but quite wrongly not credited with real capital appreciation.  The true cost of production is consumption and we are producing far more than we are consuming--as is readily evidenced by a mere glance around us.  Surely anyone who accepts the bogus argument that we should constrict those physical activities of production and consumption for which we are entirely capable in a real sense must surely be hopelessly naive or subject to some form of psychotic delusion.  Money is simply a ticket system, a means of transferring information, a means which should reflect, not control, what we actually do in an economic sense.  Are we to genuflect before a mere falsified numerical abstraction and restrict our lives according to its dictates?  Surely therein lies madness.
Comment Eastman: Yes, and elsewhere I heard him blame the borrowers for taking out the loans -- Ron Paul not giving any indication that he understood the role of domestic economy loop DEFLATION as the cause of their not being able to meet payment schedules that were perfectly reasonable at the price levels that were obtaining when the loans were made. The absurdity of Freeland and Paul thinking that all of those loan officers just happened to get reckless at the same time -- without seeing this as coming from the financial sector as a concerted effort to make up interest drain with a million toll-free salespeople calling every homeowner three or four times a night asking them to refinance their home and get extra cash to pay debts by giving up equity. So that rather than the financial sector giving us the purchasing power needed -- they just took our home ownership and threw that into the interest-rate black hole -- that ends up out of our universe in a Swiss or Chinese bank account or building a super estate in the Amazon.
I remember exactly warning Freeland BEFORE RON PAUL PULLED OUT OF THE PRIMARIES AGAINST MCCAIN that Ron Paul was a pied piper, that he was not really in the race to win and that it was obvious from a hundred "tells" in his badly played game. Freeland attacked me then -- then when I was exactly vindicated he remained loyal to Paul and now he is defending Paul as the trick is done a second time to prevent a populist from emerging in 2012.
Comment from UK polymath Peter Wakefield Sault:
You get my vote, Dick - because of 9/11.
Yes, how can Ron Paul have been in Congress all these years and never once have been shown the conclusive evidence that I and a thousand other people sent to him. How can he sound like O'Reilly or Hannity every time 9-11 is brought up.
If Ron Paul was the man poor Ken Freeland thinks he is that he would have survived as long as he has, that he would not have died ina plane crash somewhere between DC and Texas? He has not been vilified because the media knows he is really working for their side. The media know all about Congressmen, their real talk and their real positions and the phony talk they put out for home consumption.
One would have to ask Ken Freeland -- why the wall between Ron Paul and populists? Why does he not even acknowledge our existence, our arguments, our evidence? (Again, in this he is exactly like Hannity and other known disinformation mouthpieces.) And look at Rand Paul -- his idiot son -- another George W Bush with a pack of libertarian slogans but really ignorant and instinctively dishonest and evasive in defending his views -- you know all about the father by looking at the son.
Ron Paul blames government -- looks to sound (gold) money to cure it. Ron Paul Does not believe in monopoly. Glenn Beck and Ron Paul  -- everyone cheers then when the blame the Fed -- but notice that Ron Paul blames inflation, not deflation. He speaks of debt, but does not mention the real killer which is deflation in a high debt situation.  
Watch these two gold-bug charlatan's here.
And what is Ron Paul's solution -- "sound money" rather than "paper money" -- in other words deflationary gold standard that changes control of the money supply from the Fed directly to the Rothschild gold monopoly. Ron Paul is the media darling who is leading the charge on the Federal Reserve. He wants to get rid of it, and that's certainly a good idea. Right? But what would replace the Fed?
The replacement for the Federal Reserve Bank would be the Global Reserve Bank, where all spending power must be tied to backing by the Rothschild gold monopoly, a bank coincidentally owned by the same global banking cartel. You must remember that the old standard has always been Rothschild preferred international currency. Von Mises and the other Austrians are internationalists. For them the gold standard has to be international. Money has to be controlled by international gold. There is not room for a national monetary policy under von Mises libertarian/Austrian/hard money proposals. Gold is Rothschild control over who gets to create money out of thin air -- yes, there will still be credit, but you will need to be a bank that holds some Rothschild gold in order to have the privilege of having a loan etc.  
Did you hear Ron Paul say that gold would reduce debt? No. He wants debt reduced by austerity -- but the people having less private consumption and public goods. Ron Paul is simply a tool of the same conspiracy that Obama, Clinton and the Neo-Cons are about. And he knows it and is happy with it.
Ken Freeland take note.  
To: chdouglas@yahoogroups.com
From: diogenesquest@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2010 07:52:34 -0500
Subject: RE: [chdouglas] Ken Freeland Defends Ron Paul FW: Dick Eastman or Ron Paul for GOP Candidate in 2012? Decide for yourself.
First of all, you are quoting me out of context. I sent you the quote in question to remind you of the authenticity of Ron Paul's antiwar (anti-imperialist) convictions, NOT to promote his economic platform, with which I told you I had serious disagreement. A good example of this would be the example you adduce below of his supposedly supporting NAFTA et al. Whether he did or not I do not know, but it would not surprise me, given his libertarian economics (with which I told you I disagreed and which I told you I thought were limiting his populist vision).
Dick Eastman: How can I quote you out of context when I presented your entire letter word for word? The subject you are defending is Ron Paul's "character" and that laps over both economics and foreign policy. And note this on Ron Paul's foreign policy -- while he is "against war" just as he is "against abortion" the killing goes on -- and Ron Paul NEVER ON EITHER ISSUES EVER ATTACKS THE RATIONALS FOR THE KILLING -- he accepts the Bush view that Moslem terrorists exist, that the war on terror is real, that 9-11 was really Moselms with box cutters despite being shown again and again by people like me that that is an untenable position given multiple lines of evidence proving otherwise -- and I mean PROVING!   
Now, I have taken the time to listen to the youtube interview you cited. I hope others have also. There is not a WORD on this about endorsing "pedophilia" or "the sexual predation of young men." What he does do is to present a scientific answer (as becomes a member of the medical profession) to the dogmatic interviewer in which he properly presents the issue of homosexuality as a complication of nature and nurture. His answer is extremely agreeable to me, and strikes me as quintessentially Christian. If some people are BORN with homosexual proclivities, who is any of us to say that he or she is any less a child of God? A genuine Christian (which I consider Ron Paul) cannot get around this question. Anyone who answers an unequivocal "yes" to this question is a bigot, in my view (as this interviewer surely is, and he is attempting to bait Dr. Paul throughout the interview).
I was once vice president of Washington Together Against Pornography with a post-gradauate degree in experimental psychology of a very rigorous behaviorist school that examined behavior in terms of Pavlovian classical conditioning (of emotional and conditioned reflex responding) and Skinnerian operant conditioning of instrumental behavior that is reinforced by the consquences of similar responses emitted under similar conditions on past occasions -- believe me there is a lot more to it than you or anyone likely to be reading this knows. At any rate as Vice President of WATAP prepared a seminar showing that pornography when paired with masturabation affects future behavior, conditions fetish attractions, conditions a sexual valance to submission or dominance, conditions sexual valance for scenarios -- increasing that liklihood that the viewer when given occasion will attempt to respond in ways that terminate in that scenario. At the same time as I was putting out this message -- a so called great Christian, James Dobson, was going around telling everyone that masturbation was OK -- while he attacked pornography purely on the grounds that it was "immoral" and -- with no reason given -- that it led to sexual crime and adultery and poorly bonded marriage. I made phone calls to Dobson's "ministry" and I wrote letters -- but I was shut out. Then Dobson was sued by the pornographers. He -- not having any good reason for saying that pornography affects behavior -- since he would not hear and use mine -- which is the right one and the one that cannot be answered or shot down -- Dobson allowed the pornographers' lawyers to chill him -- and he never put up a fight against pornography again -- after taking everyone's money and after all that talk against pornography and for masturbation. I also went around to churches offering to give a lecture on how pornography and masturbation combine to change disposition.
I have news for you. No one is born a homosexual. Also, no one is born heterosexual or monogamous. All homosexuals are set up for their "orientation" by the absence of male role model, by the attack of homosexuals when they are young boys who enter the hero-worship stage without good male role models, but are latched on to by paedophiles who show them pornography and attack their parents morality and integrity and knowledge. Soon the boy is masturabting to the themes the homosexual has provided -- always lots of pornography, usually starting with female porn etc. -- then when the boy gets an errection the homosexual tells him : you are a latent homosexual, you were born gay, don't fight what you really are etc. And now the schools are doing exactly the same thing in sex ed. It is politically correct to say people are born homosexual and to deny any role of conditioning in what they become -- when the truth is what they become is entirely due to conditioning.  
Now what does this have to do with Ron Paul? 
Simply that he has been a Republican in Congress for over 20 years -- he knows how male prostitute seduce and control congressmen. He knows. He knows. The conspiracy needs people who are alienated from American middle class society. Zionist are alienated by Jewish racial hatred and chosen-people supremacism. Others are controlled by secret society rites that involve homosexuality -- Bohemian Grove for example -- and others are controlled by prostitutes, male and female. The homosexuals become libertariains -- in order to promote "man-boy" freedom. If a homosexual will cross the male-female line he will think nothing of crossing the 18-year old line to go after 16 year olds or 12 year olds. There is a giant market for kidnapped children, for international child prostitution. Israel leads the world in this trade. They are also the great pornographers on the web -- Jews have always been behind the sex magazines -- Hugh Hefner being merely a token goyim "who made the field respectable." And of course Larry Flynt was "born again" and kept publishing his pornographic magazine. 
I grew up in the San Francisco bay area -- not the Bible belt -- I have known homosexuals very well -- friends of the family -- otherwise good men -- but in the closet -- and when they get to Washington the Jews control them from that closet. So, yes, Ron Paul is a libertarian in favor of homosexuals having the freedom to "be themselves" -- in the military and in classrooms etc. with no intellectual protection -- like I wanted to give parents, churches and schools -- against the lies of homosexual seduction. 
I fought that fight and as always people sided with Dobson -- who is just another phony Zionist televangelist and his ministries ineffective garbage that don't even know the cause or mechanisms of the evils they pretend to treat. Ron Paul's Christianity is made of the same stuff.  
I don't care if you are homosexual or not -- of course I hope that you are not, what I mean is, whether you are a homosexual or not that does not give you any special insight into what made you that way. Most homosexuals think that masturbating relieves sexual pressure. That is exactly what does not happen. After masturbation there is an immediate fall off interest -- but after that post-reinforcement interval - the sexual predisposition comes back in strength, now modified by the conditioning of the last event. One example I used in my lecture (I was not paid for this work by the way -- it was voluntary to save children from sexual predation, to save men from becoming caught in the sexual web that destroys the life they otherwise wanted for themselves. The example was that one of the famous "slick" pornographic magazines would have the monthly centerfold naked woman shown along with an inset that was a photograph of her as a child of 8 or 9. The men who buy pornography buy it to consume with masturbation. 
That means that the customers of pornography will be masturbating with that picture of a young child in view -- causing all children resembling that child to take on a sexual valance in the eyes of the man who has so conditioned himself. That way when he sees a child in a park or something who resembles the child in the picture inset, he will respond, weakly or strongly, kept to himself, or, if the conditioning is strong enough and the occasion presenting an opportunity he will bring it to some kind of interaction with the child. 
And this is why I am against pornography, why I want to CONTROL THE INTERNET to have it removed, why I blame Israel and all Jews who run pornography as they run everything else having to do with corruption of our "character" as you call it. This is why I am anti-libertarian and for anti-Ron Paul and his dishonest separation of homosexuality and paedophilia. One more thing -- Ron Paul has been shown giving Masonic handshakes and signs and tokens of Free Masonry. Free Masonry is a conspiracy for people to keep silent about each others crimes and sins (infidelities) -- a network where you can get help you can trust when there is a way to gain money that involves crime or unethical conduct. Homosexual lifestyle just adds to this culture of (screw each other and in a different sense, screw the world as a team but never tell). I've sent out the Ron Paul pictures giving the those signs but I no longer have outlook express or my photo album having made the mistake of buying a laptop with windows 7 or I would include those pictures.
You say that Ron Paul is "pro-drugs," but I suspect that, Libertarian that he is, what he really supports is the decriminalization of drugs, which of course is key to depriving organized crime of its multi-billion dollars of tax free income every year. It has been estimated that more money is spent annually on illicit drugs than on food. You got a better solution to this problem, Dick? Even the Libertarians are right about some things.
Ron Paul has never fought for that and with that argument. He has not led that cause -- he has just given philosophical lip service to it. I am the one who for over a decade has made that argument -- and unlike Ron Paul I went all the way with the argument -- how the drug money is laundered into the banks and ends up investing in China and buying presidents. You would not hear Ron Paul talking about Clinton and drugs in Mena Arkansas -- or the history of opium and the big Money Power families. All those years and Ron Paul never spelled it out like it is. He just gives it lip service when defending his libertarian credentials and looking for the criminal vote. Ron Paul is the big phony -- he is the fake token of non-establishment lockstep in Congress. If they did not have "libertarian" Ron Paul -- allowed to vote "libertarian" against "neo-con" or "Obamacon" or "Clintoncon" only when the vote is so overwhelming that Ron Paul's vote won't count. BUt where did Ron Paul ever give a memorable fight for any of these issues. Where is Ron Pau's compassion for the victims of drug addiction who are in prison even though if it were not for drug addiction and the need to get money to pay their habit they would be constructive citizens, contributing to production instead of draining everyone's money for incredibly expensive incarceration.
I know what Ron Paul has done -- and I know what he could have and should have done if he really had his heart where his mouth is. He is a libertarian ideolog -- pretending to be completely oblvious of the evil caused by the practitioners of his creed. No libertarian will debate me on Ron Paul's economics or his late-term-abortion run for the presidency or his libertarian stand on homosexuality. Why is that? Do you really think that none have them have every been shown my refutations of their stupid beliefs. I know the classics of Austrian Economics better than 99 percent of libertarians -- and what they take on authority of von Mises I reject on a clear understanding of where von Mises buried his errors in justifying the gold standard and defending Says Law -- when in fact it is only "Says Condition" that never obtains as long as there is compound interest on loans -- and which requires social credit ever to be realized in an actual economy.
Tony writes:
Dick, I don't know where you stand on freemasonry but I know it as downright satanic. Ron Paul, and all his family are life-long masons, part of the self appointed elite. That alone is enough for me to realize he is simply controlling opposition. Like another such fake, Ross Perot, he too, when it appeared he could actually win the presidency, found a reason to dismiss himself from the fight, backing out. But he kept the suckers' hard earned money with which they backed him. Obviously, his purpose in running was to draw votes from other candidates as part of the fix for the next president.  
His pronouncements about proper money are plain stupid, in exactly the same manner as the "Austrian" (not American) school's ridiculous, monopoly capitalistic theories. BTW, it is those monopoly capitalist corporations who keep the wars going for high profit. You know, Paul's "free market."
Ron Paul is either not very smart or smart enough to flim-flam good people. His son, however, is more upfront about his anti-American stances. How the hell he got elected I don't understand. On daddy's coat tails?
Tony B.
Ron Paul FreeMason:  
From: chdouglas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:chdouglas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of RICHARD EASTMAN
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 1:57 AM
To: Ken Freeland
Subject: [chdouglas] Ken Freeland Defends Ron Paul FW: Dick Eastman or Ron Paul for GOP Candidate in 2012? Decide for yourself.
To Ken Freeland,
You need to look closer at the Ron Paul quote you sent me. Break it down. See what he is really saying and what he is not saying.
First Ron Paul's predictions:
The whole reason why nobody wants to address the real problem is, we're spending a trillion dollars a year overseas running an empire, and it's coming to an end. This country is bankrupt, and we won't admit it. Eventually though, the dollar will go bust, and we will bring our troops home, and we will live within our means, but we ought to do it sensibly, rather than waiting for the collapse of the dollar, and this is what we're doing, we're on the verge of destroying our dollar. And then, you think we have problems now, problems then will be a lot worse, it'd look like the Weimar Republic, or a third world nation. And a lot of people know that, and they're scared to death, but we don't need to be making the problem worse by just propping up everything with more government programs, more inflation, and more helicopters, it won't work.
Now the bad things Ron Paul is against:
The whole reason why nobody wants to address the real problem is, we're spending a trillion dollars a year overseas running an empire, and it's coming to an end. This country is bankrupt, and we won't admit it. Eventually though, the dollar will go bust, and we will bring our troops home, and we will live within our means, but we ought to do it sensibly, rather than waiting for the collapse of the dollar, and this is what we're doing, we're on the verge of destroying our dollar. And then, you think we have problems now, problems then will be a lot worse, it'd look like the Weimar Republic, or a third world nation. And a lot of people know that, and they're scared to death, but we don't need to be making the problem worse by just propping up everything with more government programs, more inflation, and more helicopters, it won't work.
Now the causes of the bad things that Ron Paul identifies:
The whole reason why nobody wants to address the real problem is, we're spending a trillion dollars a year overseas running an empire, and it's coming to an end. This country is bankrupt, and we won't admit it. Eventually though, the dollar will go bust, and we will bring our troops home, and we will live within our means, but we ought to do it sensibly, rather than waiting for the collapse of the dollar, and this is what we're doing, we're on the verge of destroying our dollar. And then, you think we have problems now, problems then will be a lot worse, it'd look like the Weimar Republic, or a third world nation. And a lot of people know that, and they're scared to death, but we don't need to be making the problem worse by just propping up everything with more government programs, more inflation, and more helicopters, it won't work.
Now the solutions Ron Paul offers:
The whole reason why nobody wants to address the real problem is, we're spending a trillion dollars a year overseas running an empire, and it's coming to an end. This country is bankrupt, and we won't admit it. Eventually though, the dollar will go bust, and we will bring our troops home, and we will live within our means, but we ought to do it sensibly, rather than waiting for the collapse of the dollar, and this is what we're doing, we're on the verge of destroying our dollar. And then, you think we have problems now, problems then will be a lot worse, it'd look like the Weimar Republic, or a third world nation. And a lot of people know that, and they're scared to death, but we don't need to be making the problem worse by just propping up everything with more government programs, more inflation, and more helicopters, it won't work.
His solution is to cut government spending and promote deflation to cut consumer spending in order to "live within our means"
But who sets the constraints we must live within, who defines what our the means we must live within will be? who but the lenders/creditors.
Ron Paul never fought abortion in Congress. He is pro drugs and pro-homosexuality (paedophelia, legalized predation of young men, the bringing of sexually obsessed homosexuals into the military barracks and the classroom. Listen to what libertarian Ron Paul says here:
Ron Paul also voted for all the "free trade" agreements -- and has not expressed any regret or given an explanation of what went wrong-- in fact he has not admitted that anything did go wrong. As far as he is concerned on inflation and government spending have caused our problems -- the financial sector and international trade had nothing to do with it.
Ron Paul is not really pro-life. He is a Texas politician. He delivered babies in Texas -- a very Christian place -- and then he ran for office there. But as a one time head of an anti-abortion organization (lifeline to the unborn in Issaquah Washington) I know very well that Ron Paul has been nothing but lip service. I always voted for abortion when the outcome was pre-determined. But he NEVER did or said anything in Congress to convince his colleagues or pull a Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. He is an anarcho-capitalist -- and they are for abortion and "boy-man love."
But above all, it is impossible -- yes, impossible -- that Ron Paul could have quit the campaign when and how he did just prior to the convention and it not have been an intentional misleading and betrayal of populist opposition to the McCain-Obama-Clinton choice.  
No one who was taken in by Ron Paul is worthy of being called a populist.
Dick Eastman
You, on the other hand, try to make it seem that Ron Paul's antiwar stance is opportunist and inauthentic. This you have no right to do. You would get much farther in your attempt to draw the contrast if you would show some respect for Ron Paul's actual principles as far as they go: he really is pro life, he really is a country doctor (ob/gyn), he really opposes American foreign military intervention in principle, he really is a strict constructionist with respect to the Constitution. Viz: Lobbyists don't even bother going to his office. If their scheme doesn't fall among the federal government's enumerated powers under the Constitution, they know perfectly well that there is no chance Ron Paul will support it. - View Quote Details on Lobbyists don't even bother going to his office. If their
You seem to constantly be verging on a kind of Manicheanism, where Ron Paul has to be seen as bad in all respects, not having any worthwhile characteristics, in order for your political position to be seen in contradistinction as all good.
If a man is a fraud and leads everybody into a deadly trap as Ron Paul has done -- it is very important that someone point that out -- and that no gullible dupe stupidly try to hinder the truth from reaching the people.
Diocletian decreed against the Manichaeans: "We order that their organizers and leaders be subject to the final penalties and condemned to the fire with their abominable scriptures"
Roman Emperor Theodosius I had issued a decree of death for Manichaeans in AD 382 and shortly before he declared Christianity to be the only legitimate religion for the Roman Empire in 391
In AD 2010 Ken Freeland called Dick Eastman a Manichaean, which was a very dark thing for him to do against a bringer of light.
But Dick, that reduces to a kind of mud slinging. You are really attacking Ron Paul's character, and I know him to be a man of character. True, not all of his principles are those on which I would choose to stand, and his purview is limited by his blunt libertarianism, but taking the stance of respectful disagreement would work much better here. In other words, instead of being an anti-Ron Paul, present yourself as a new and improved Ron Paul: a populist with a more practicable (SC) economic platform, who can help fulfil Ron Paul's antiwar agenda by relieving the economy of its obsessive need for multiplying debt, etc., etc. In short, stop trying to be Ron Paul's antagonist and demonstrate instead on how Paul's monetarist policies will fall short of his populist dreams, whereas yours just might be the ticket.
All the best on this Christmas day,
Ken Freeland
From: RICHARD EASTMAN [mailto:oldickeastman@q.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 25, 2010 10:35 AM
To: Ken Freeland
Subject: RE: Dick Eastman or Ron Paul for GOP Candidate in 2012? Decide for yourself.
Every "false word" was from a pro-Ron Paul mailing. All I did was change "he is for" for "Ron Paul is for" -- I added nothing else and changed nothing else. The source was full of articles advocating Ron Paul for 2012. I chose the list of reasons why Paul was the best choice for president. And you are right -- seeing people willing to be burned twice makes me very very insecure -- and hence the answering of the pro-Ron Paul selling points.
Thanks for saying I am getting near having a coherent position on monetary reform. 
Send me the real Ron Paul positions that you say I missed? The ones made of bricks and not straw or sticks. I'd like to see what real coherence looks like.
In friendship on Christmas Day,
Dick Eastman
From: diogenesquest@gmail.com
To: oldickeastman@q.com
Subject: RE: Dick Eastman or Ron Paul for GOP Candidate in 2012? Decide for yourself.
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:24:25 -0500
LOL, Dick, you never tire of arguing with the straw man. I will say this for you: you are getting closer to articulating a comprehensive monetary policy too bad you still have to put false words in Ron Paul's mouth to do it. Perhaps some day you will feel secure enough to state your own opinions on fiscal policy without needing to disparage the much-maligned Dr. Paul in the process. When you do, I predict that you discover that you never needed this "fall guy" in the first place, and that a positive open statement of a politically correct position attracts people much more than does shadow boxing with a puppet opponent.
Peace (and a merry Christmas),
Ken Freeland
From: RICHARD EASTMAN [mailto:oldickeastman@q.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2010 3:42 PM
Subject: Dick Eastman or Ron Paul for GOP Candidate in 2012? Decide for yourself.
Dick Eastman or Ron Paul for GOP Candidate in 2012?
How would you vote in a primary?
Ron Paul has never taken a government junket.
Dick Eastman if elected would operate entirely outside Washington DC, setting up small offices in Michigan, Indiana, Kansas and Utah and junketing back and forth among those cities.
Ron Paul does not participate in the lucrative Congressional Pension Program.
Dick Eastman has no expectation of living past his first term in the presidency -- he has given the last 12 years of his life to saving this country with no thought of compensation and he will continue doing so. He will not have servants -- his lower middle class background makes him is repelled by servants. He will not be eating snacks on the job anyway.
Ron Paul returns a portion of his annual Congressional Office Budget every year.
Dick Eastman will spend what is needed accomplish his objectives. He gets his clothes from Good Will and will continue to do so. The budget for stamps and computer paper are of no interest too him, although he admires skinflints if they save in order to have more for doing good for people.
Ron Paul has never voted to raise taxes.
Dick Eastman will finance government entirely by taxes and inflation -- not by deficit spending (debt financing) that Mr. Paul votes for every time he votes against taxes. But Dick Eastman will repudiate the entire national debt and will end system where money is created by bank loans. Eastman will give new money to each household as the replacement of the open market operations of the Fed and the fractional-reserve banking system. Only this will bring domestic prosperity to American households and businesses. Then the financing of the public services we need which people vote for can be simply paid for with taxes. There will be no government bonds. Inflation with non-debt government fiat -- Lincoln money -- will be the means of government paying for disaster relief and other unexpected large expenditures. That way bankers will have no incentive to buy politicians any more.
Ron Paul has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
Dick Eastman will make balanced budgets actually possible. And the biggests items on the budget will not be war and interest payments either. Dick Eastman knows that Ron Paul knows that in every vote Ron Paul has taken his vote would not be decisive and that the unbalanced budget would pass anyway. But Dick Eastman also knows about Ron Paul -- that he would balance the budget by cutting public services of government rather than by cutting debt financing, by changing the system by which government expenditure for the public is paid for. The best government is good government, not no government. Eastman supports strict separation of banks and the federal government. The government will create the money and distribute it with social credit checks to housholds, and banks will all be state banks and all will simply pay savers some interest on time- deposits so the banks can lend that money and only that money for local business development. Dick Eastman will make unbalanced budgets possible without Ron Paul's austerity and selling off the government to international privateers and speculators.
Ron Paul has never voted to restrict gun ownership.
Dick Eastman does not own a gun and would personally rather be shot dead than shoot anyone -- but he agrees with Jefferson (and Mao) that all rights and political power comes down to the power of the people to fight and overcome tyranny with guns and other things not so nice. The Constitution guarantees nothing unless the guns of the people guarantee the Constitution. Eastman, like Jesus, believes that the best way to bring about a better wolrd is not through a war on terror (Eastman believes that the City of London, Tel Aviv, New York City, and Beijing are behind the worlds terrorism and false-flag terrorism -- and he intends to stop American guns serving those interests. Eastman will reserve his firepower for going after white collar crime in the US.
Ron Paul has never voted to raise Congressional Pay.
Dick Eastman thinks Congressional Pay is too small an issue for a president to consider. Let Congress look after its own shame and honor. Dick Eastman also thinks that "not voting for a pay raise for himself is a piss poor reason to give for voting for a man for president.
Ron Paul never voted to increase Executive Branch Power.
Dick Eastman likes the power of the President -- the power to do good as well as evil. Dick Eastman intends to expand the power of the Presidency and really and truly seriously encroach on the powers of bankers in this country. Eastman will so increase the power of the Presidency at the expense of the Money Power that no President that comes after him will ever have to worry about kissing the ass or Rockefeller or Rothschild or Goldman-Sachs ass ever again.
Ron Paul will Reinstate The Constitution and Save The Republic
Dick Eastman will reinstate selection of presidents by the electoral college and will end the system of political parties picking candidates and running them -- so that local people chosen for their intelligence and vitue by the people will get together in the electoral collage and when they have done so will pick the best person they can find in the country without consideration of party or anything else other than the good of the nation. We will also return to the system of having the state legislatures pick US Senators -- as the Founding Fathers, with very very good reason, originally intended. Only the House of Representatives will be picked by direct democracy -- where local politics and local needs are taken into account. This is what Dick Eastman means by restoring the Constitution. It is not what Ron Paul means. When Ron Paul says he will reinstate the Constitution all he means is that he will give us the gold standard. And a gold standard is deflationary poison for the country, as well as being a gold choke chain around all of our necks with a gold leash held by the Money Power's gold monopoly. With the Ron Paul gold standard, only the friends of Rothschild with access to Rothschild gold will be able to extend credit to anyone in a deflationary and debt-slave ridden gold. Ron Paul thinks "reinstating the Constitution" means that the loans the bank made to you by money by "creating it out of thin air" will now have to be paid back to the creditors in gold -- gold you willl have to break your back to earn -- not just as a wage earner, but as a tax payer, because before we can have Ron Paul's "constitutional money" the nation will have to borrow it from the Rothschilds. Dick Eastman says the heck with that noise. Dick Eastman intends not to restore any gold and/or silver standard. That part of the Constitution came from Hamilton and from misinterpretations by Federalist Supreme Court Justice John Marshall. Dick Eastman will use the influence of the Presidency to teach Congress and the nation the importance of revising the constituiton to provide for exclusive Lincoln money -- government fiat that is not created as a debt, but as pure legal tender purchasing power -- purchasing power that forst comes into existence in the hands of the citizens of each household to spend as they wish and thus propel a robust profit driven economy that serves the sovereign consumer and not the international speculators who don't give a hoot about the American Standard of living. Ron Paul will give you austerity and debts that must be paid in gold and he will call it "reinstituting the constituion. Eastman will restore the best parts of the original founding fathers' ideas but will fix the fatal flaws of a debt and gold based system which Rothschild agent Hamilton insinuated into that great document.
Ron Paul will END the unconstituional FED.
Dick Eastman will nationalize the FED and immediately defang it. He will immediately send in Federal Agents to secure all documents not yet shredded or memories erased -- so that the criminal network have been up against can be identified and delt with appropriately. He will then use political power of holding the Fed under entirely new management to negotiate with member banks the terms on which they can stay in business as they transition to state savings banks. Ron Paul will merely break up the Federal Reserve -- he has no intention of ending the open market operations of the New York Fed Resever Bank -- merely putting that function in the hands of private banks unanswerable to congress or the president or anyone else -- just as they are unanswerable in Fed. Ron Paul taks about ending the Fed but he gives not one word of the architecture of the system with which he intends to take over its functions. He is leaving that to his libertarian friends like Alan Greenspan -- whose libertarian philosophy is identical to his own.
Ron Paul will phase out the unconstitutional IRS beginning immediately.
Dick Eastman will nationalize the IRS and merge it with the Treasury. Dick Eastman will end the income tax. He will institute tariffs all goods according to the wage differential between the exporting country and the US-- so that the biggest profit will not longer be going to the most ruthlessly wage cutting slave driver and American investment capital will no longer leave the country because slave labor elsewhere is viewed as an absolute advantage over American workers earning a middle class income. Eastman will also impose a stiff tax on all financial transactions -- that will not be burdensome for the average American but will be prohibitively high for the mere speculators who only think of paper profits and not real production to meet real consumer demand. All Ron Paul wishes to do is cut taxes on the rich -- and what is not paid for by selling off public lands and other public assets will be made up by belt tightening -- like the Obama health care proposal written by Goldman Sachs etc as a means of cutting government medical expenditure so that taxes on the rich can be cut. -- his proposal does not get to the heart of the problem. Eastman's plan does. Furthermore, if anything needs to be cut it will be from the financial sector and the creditor class who have been robbing us for two hundred years, not from the sick and the old.
Ron Paul will secure the borders
Dick Eastman says Jews are our problem, not Mexicans. Jews and Drugs. The drug money is laundered in the big Jewish banks and the proceeds are used to invest in China and wherever big international bankster crime wishes exploit slave labor or build private empires for the elite. Mexicans are hard working. I have yet to see an unemployed Mexican who was not waiting in line to take a hard menial job. Mexicans are the last people who want to get involved in drugs -- they do it because they can't get hired by people who would like to hire them here. They are family oriented -- and their music and culture are cheerful and bright - like a Mariachi band -- as opposed to Judeo-pornographic trash/poison that is pumped over the "Anglo" stations. If you are against Mexicans Dick Eastman doesn't want your vote or your friendhship. But at the boarder is a Banke-Israel -RedChina plot to create a race war -- and Ron Paul plays right into this. The first cure Eastman has for this is to make cocaine and other drugs legally available through state run stores that provide any and all proven addicts with the drug of their addiction and do so at cost -- a few pennies per use -- all grown on state government contracted farms. Why? Why would Dick Eastman who is a Mormon who does not use drugs, who does not drink alcohol, who does not smoke or drink coffee or tea -- and who knows and has seen the damge drugs and alcohol do to people -- why would he favor the state governments providing addicts with what they crave at cost. The reason is simple. It would take trillions of dollars out fo the hands of the worst international theives in the world. It would empty our prisons which are filled with victims of addiction. It would end the crimes -- from murder to young teens stealing from their mothers purse or their father's wallet. It would end the drain of dollars out of the country -- which with the money multiplier effect costs everyone a trillion in lost purchasing power that could keep us employed etc. And by legalizing the use of drugs by certified addicts and allowing them to have the drugs at cost -- we will would cut "pushers" out of the picture entirely. They would not be trying to hook celebrities with lots of money and no brains to take their drugs, and they would not be hanging around schools in the hope of pushing addiction on the son or daughtrer of middle class parents from whom those children will then steal to satisfy their habit. That Eastman Plan is what will sove the problem of our boarders -- not building walls to "keep out Mexicans" -- and which Eastman reaslly suspects are intended to keep Americans from escaping the American that the Money Power (including its minion Ron Paul) are imposing on us.
Ron Paul will limit Big Government in your private affairs
Dick Eastman will end, through the power of government, the evil and deadly power of the private super rich over your life, over your government, over your future.
Ron Paul will Stop Illegal Immigration an No Amnesty
Dick Eastman favors easy citizenship for everyone who can show that they live clean and are willing to work. That is most Mexicans. Dick Eastman allows himself no friends that think otherwise.
Ron Paul voted against regulating the Internet
Dick Eastman wants pornography off the internet and he wants all ADL and Mossad operations that infiltrate chat rooms and political discussion forums exposed. People have a right to know when they are speaking with a conspiracy. I would make it illegal for Israel to invade American forums in covert operations with the intention of killing the free discussion, working against the people. The FBI should know who these operatives are and they should make them known to the world. Government cannot surrender control of the Internet to corporations and hostile goverments (like Israel) when Zionist monopoly powr and money already completely dominates all other forms of information exchange.
Ron Paul voted against the Iraq War and warned us against going forward with an undeclared war.
"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberty
and wealth are in Jeopardy" Ron Paul July 10th, 2003
Dick Eastman was on of the first to present the evidence that 9-11 was a flag operation. Ron Paul will not even look at this evidence, much less comment on it. Dick Eastman pointed out to the world before the war that Mohammad Omar was offering to turn bin Laden over to the Us if President Bush would only show some evidence of bin Laden's involvement -- which Bush did not do. Eastman also pointed out that the Taliban had been eliminating poppy trade in the areas of Afghanistan that they controlled. Moslems are against drugs and alcohol just like Dick Eastman. The Bush administration, controlled by Jews like Weinbergerr, Richard Perle, Kissinger and other neo-cons went to war with the Taliban allied with the Northern Drug lords who provide the opium from poppies that is the prime input of world heroin production. Also China as well as Zionist Israel wanted american forces split up in Eurasia making war on Israel's and China's Moslem neighbors. All this Dick Eastman was pointing out in November 2001. Ron Paul to this day admits none of this, will consider none of this. The criminals of 9-11 are anarcho-capitalists exactly as is Ron Paul. Dick Eastman is not fooled by the folksy country doctor image of Ron Paul -- Eastman has the brains to see what interests Ron Paul is really serving and how Ron Paul's politics are a phony pose -- like the pose of Ross Perot before him. Ron Paul gathers the ignorant and fills them with platitudes and waves the flag -- but what did he do. In the last presidential election he gathered everyone's money and volunteer time and pretended to run for president -- and then, when the convention was coming up -- and there was no way that short old grumpy stupid and mercenaryJohn "Manchurian Candidate" could possibly have defeated Ron Paul in the GOP convention -- Ron Paul simply quit the race -- leaving his supporters high and dry -- after it was too late to raise up another candidate to oppose the Candidates from Goldman Sachs. So Ron Paul voted against the Iraq war -- knowing that his vote would not make any difference -- and knowing that being able to say "I voted against the Iraq war" would come in handy in deceiving tghe people about what he really stands for. Dick Eastman does not want the American people -- Democrats, Republicans, independents to make that mistake again -- not with Ron Paul or with Sarah Palin or with Glenn Beck or any other phony populist.
Ron Paul voted against the un-patriotic so called Patriot Act.
Dick Eastman use the Patriot Act to clean out the Isreal Directed conspiracy that wrote the patriot act and that imposed Homeland Security on us. How many Americans know that the "homeland" referred to in the name of that agency is Israel? The DHS exists to protect Israeli war criminals and mass-murderers (9-11, etc.) against people like Dick Eastman. Dick Eastman shut the organization down and reopen its doors to pursue Joe McCarthy/Richard Nixon investigations to root out Zionist conspirators and expose the extent of the Money Power conspiracy against the US. I will purge the agency of Jews -- simply because, the have shown that even if they are not active in perpetrating Jewish super crimes against the US they have all amply proven their unwillingness to speak up when they know about such operations when they involve Jews or Israel. Jewish and Zionist is not race -- it is a hostile ideology at war with Americans and our form of Government.
Ron Paul supports a non-interventionist foreign policy.
Dick Eastman says that Ron Paul was in congress for several decades and never led a vote and won a vote hindering those policies. He is non-interventionist because that is what we like to hear -- but he has never attacked the real underpinning lies upon which our foreign policy is based. He opposes intervention (by words only and by votes when the outcome of the vote is already assured) but he opposes intervention simply because it is intervention -- not because the intervention is murderous super crimes perpetrated against innocent victims.
Ron Paul will end the inflation tax.
Dick Eastman is an inflationist. Dick Eastman knows that the Depression we are in is the resput of DEFLATION, not inflation. Dick Eastman knows that only INFLATION ends depressions. Ron Paul is saying he is for deflation -- gold standard is deflation. Ron Paul wants us to pay our debt and starve if we have to to live up to our debt obligations to the money power. Is for the interest tax -- that is made worse by the deflation he favors. And people look at their small wage (which is caused by the deflation by the way) and at the price of gasoline and food etc and they are ready to agree with Ron Paul about the evils of inflation. But Dick Eastman has news for them. The high prices we pay are the result of Monopoly Power of the international corporations backed by all street. The high prices are not caused by too much spending power in the hands of households. The fact is that if we don't have inflation of the money in peoples wallets and handbags we will continue our plunge to grapes of wrath dirt existence as wage slaves on the margin of life -- with many of us dying as happened in Russia after their "free market reforms." The only people worried about inflation eating their weath are the creditor class -- and the fact that Ron Paul can only see and only talk about how bad inflation is and never a world about the real monster among us, deflation -- simply proves that Ron Paul serves the tiny creditor class and is in a dirty war (including his dirty trick on "Ron Paul supporters" in 2008) against the debtor class -- which means he is against people and government. Eastman will save you from deflation and from anti-inflationists and from all of the traps and double-crosses of phony populists like Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is a true Constitutionalist
Dick Eastman disagrees with Ron Paul about the consitituion. Dick Eastman's view of the consitition is the one that Jefferson and Madison and Paine would agree with. Ron Paul is selective in what he wants to "reinstate" (namely the gold standard).
Ron Paul supporters say Ron Paul would have soundly beat Obama in 2008 because Independents trust him and like him.
Dick Eastman says that the two strongest workers seeking to put Obama over the top were 1) John McCain (of whjom Janet Neapolitano said before the election "John is running for second place") and 2) Ron Paul (of whom Dick Eastman says he was a pied piper who ran the people wanting a popiulist revolution right over the cliff. Of course Dick Eastman has not supporters. There is not one person urging him to run for president. He belongs to no orgtanization except his own Church (LDS) among whom is his views are not known -- most Mormons presumably following "leaders" like Glenn Beck or Mitt Romney in politics. Dick Eastman knows that there is never support for the man who promotes the common good, the general interest. Only those who promise a particular interest group a windfall gain from political favoritism will put up money to get a man elected
Ron Paul for President 2012
Because no one else can be trusted to say what he means and do what he says like Ron Paul does.
Dick Eastman against Ron Paul 2012
Because I trust Ron Paul to do what he says and for each of the stupid reasons he gives for doing them. Also, Dick Eastman has for four congressional elections running offered to run against Richard Hastings for Congress -- the man whose voting record in congress was closest to Newt Gingrich -- a wishy washy tub of paste who always votes as he is told. Every time no one supported my offer.
You really don't like populists -- not real ones. And you pay for that prejudice.
Populist Nationalist Social Credit Brotherhood of American Citizen Peacemakers of All Races andCreeds -- This is our Common Ground!!!
Dick Eastman Supports American Social Credit
Paid for by Dick Eastman
Thanks to the following volunteers who made this effort possible: writing: Dick Eastman research: Dick Eastman distribution: Dick Eastman editing: Dick Eastman publicity: Dick Eastman graphics design: Dickk Eastman
Donate to Rense.com
Support Free And Honest
Journalism At Rense.com
Subscribe To RenseRadio!
Enormous Online Archives,
MP3s, Streaming Audio Files, 
Highest Quality Live Programs


This Site Served by TheHostPros