Ron Paul slams Boston occupation

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how opinions would vary if Paul had a (D) besides his name?

:corn:

soo true! ...

inmytree

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how opinions would vary if Paul had a (D) besides his name?

:corn:

good question...Methinks the OP would not have created this thread...therefore this discussion would not have happened...

BOOM....mind blown....

unsung

I'm still waiting for a democrat, any democrat, to have the guts to speak up.

I'm confused, wasn't the Democrat Party the strong believers in civil liberty?

At least the ACLU spoke up about the militarization of the streets.

JimmyV

This is one of the least surprising articles I have read, headlines I have seen, and threads that have been started on this board.

There will always be attention to grab, headlines to seek, and followers to appease.

And if one Paul would blow up a suspect for stealing $50 from a liquor store...what would they have done in Watertown?

JimmyV

mikepegg44 wrote:

josevolution wrote:

I have never doubted that the gov can just step in and declare a lockdown this didn't surprize me at all and so tell me how would you go about trying to catch someone on the run it's not like there was only one way in & out of Watertown i ask agin how would you go about catching this guy ...and yeah screw him i bet he would of been the 1st to criticize the authorities if this guy would of gotten away ...

First, if you read what I wrote I said I don't necessarily agree with him here. I think in much of what happened they acted inside of probable cause boundaries. But it also is a bit terrifying to see the paramilitary style capabilities. That's all.

If you think he would have come out and criticized the boston police department for not catching the guy you don't know much about him.

The son would have handled those duties. Cheap political points to score and all.

Bentleyspop

unsung wrote:

I'm still waiting for a democrat, any democrat, to have the guts to speak up.

I'm confused, wasn't the Democrat Party the strong believers in civil liberty?

At least the ACLU spoke up about the militarization of the streets.

I have friends and family who are all liberal democrats who live in and around Boston and every single one of them along with their neighbors was all for what the various law enforcement agencies did and were glad it ended so quickly because of the way the law enforcement handled things.

I also have friends and family who are republicans who live in and around Boston and they were happy with the way things were handled and with the eventual capture of the second suspect.

JimmyV

polaris_x wrote:

i tried to bring this up in the original thread ... but i really don't think it's possible to have this discussion ... it's not just about a couple of guys detonating a bomb ... there are so many issues that are tied to this event:

* civil liberties
* police/military states
* us foreign policy

but i feel like most people just want this to be about 2 radicalized brothers (preferably muslim and tied to al qaeda) and that the police are the heroes ... it's the story people want to sleep with ...

rule #1: don't piss on cops ... no matter what ...

And I feel some people are desperate for it to be about anything other than these two murderers.

JimmyV

unsung wrote:

I'm still waiting for a democrat, any democrat, to have the guts to speak up.

I'm confused, wasn't the Democrat Party the strong believers in civil liberty?

At least the ACLU spoke up about the militarization of the streets.

Not sure what Bill Maher clip was linked to earlier in the thread but as of his most recent broadcast he was unhappy with what happened in Watertown.

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

he would have been completely dismissed had he said that you can not do things the way they were done in watertown.

you are talking about a guy who tried to explain to neo-cons at the primary debate that 9/11 didn't happen because terrorists hate freedom.

Also, at what point does Ron Paul not get completely dismissed by most D's and R's?

Jason P wrote:

I wonder how opinions would vary if Paul had a (D) besides his name?

:corn:

He did have a D by his name...he went by Paul Wellstone and he had a "plane crash" :think: ...and I respected him then too.

josevolution wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

josevolution wrote:

Yes i know what you wrotte , i felt good that the military got involved in this ....this kind of crime and suspect warranted the lock down ...

Ok, but some don't think so, guess that is why there is a discussion about it. So the next time it happens and the response might differ and best practices might be put into place to do our very best to ensure that the rights of all citizens are respected. there is no way to figure out what is reasonable without a discussion.

Are you honestly telling me that it is not ok in the least to question the tactics used because the guy got caught? If the ends justify the means in this case to the point where the response cannot even be questioned less you are called crazy etc.

Let's take this as an example of ends justifying the means. Why don't we require all people to be naked in public with no bags. Guarantee you that there will be no unnoticed firearms used to kill, there will be no way for someone to drop a bomb at the marathon...would those ends justify the means? or do you think we should have a conversation about what is reasonable?

It is the same thing...a discussion about how far we go is should always be viewed as constructive. Sorry if that comes of as condescending it wasn't meant to be.

mikepegg44

JimmyV wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

If you think he would have come out and criticized the boston police department for not catching the guy you don't know much about him.

The son would have handled those duties. Cheap political points to score and all.

Probably right

PJ88

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

ron paul monday morning quarterbacking again...

he didn't speak up as all of this was unfolding...

:yawn:

I don't agree with your point of view sometimes, but, I absolutely agree with you on this. Where the hell was he when all this was unfolding? Time for him to move on.....

JimmyV

PJ88 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

ron paul monday morning quarterbacking again...

he didn't speak up as all of this was unfolding...

:yawn:

I don't agree with your point of view sometimes, but, I absolutely agree with you on this. Where the hell was he when all this was unfolding? Time for him to move on.....

Exactly, and a very important point to remember. The question was asked repeatedly on this board and elsewhere regarding what should have been done, and there were very few answers. A discussion of tactics is one thing, but that is not what we have seen. If someone can point to anyone who had constructive ideas on what should have been better done as the search was underway I will give that person credit right now. But I sure didn't see any of that.

gimmesometruth27

PJ88 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

ron paul monday morning quarterbacking again...

he didn't speak up as all of this was unfolding...

:yawn:

I don't agree with your point of view sometimes, but, I absolutely agree with you on this. Where the hell was he when all this was unfolding? Time for him to move on.....

i know what you are saying, many people disagree with me, but there is usually some common ground somewhere, and sometimes we find it. sometimes not

he knew that if he said what he was thinking he would have been dismissed. it is easy for him to sit home in texas and criticize or second guess the response, but with a bomber on the loose, people were scared. they were terrified. they wilfully cooperated with law enforcement for the good of the entire city and the guy was captured.

people in boston liveblogged what was happening. they did what was asked of them and they handled themselves beautifully. there were no "rugged individualists" out there in the streets getting in the way of law enforcement screaming about their freedom to be a dumbass...

dimitrispearljam

when you are not on stage you can say that you can sing better than everyone up there...

if Americans want him to tell how things should be,would be the president

he is not..


History is written by the winners...period..

JimmyV

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

people in boston liveblogged what was happening. they did what was asked of them and they handled themselves beautifully. there were no "rugged individualists" out there in the streets getting in the way of law enforcement screaming about their freedom to be a dumbass...

And we are a city that prides ourselves on our freedom to be dumbasses!

Cosmo

A couple of observations...
The so-called 'militarization' of Boston was actually a police dragnet. To those persons who were not aware, there was a fugative at large. A fugative that would be easier to locate if he is the only one on the streets.
Also, to those people who are afraid of the government... this was an example of what you are up against. And, they were not even operating at 10%. The bulk of the enforcement was local police, state police and regional FBI along with a small detachment of National Guardsmen. Imagine if it were several Companies of the U.S. Army with their .50 cal. turretted HMMWVs, armoured personel carriers and M-1A-1 Tanks parked on your driveway. You are probably going to need something greater that that AR-15 that will eventually be taken from your cold, dead hand.
So... you paranoid folks have a reason to be paranoid. The government is coming to get you. They have helicopters with Forward Looking InfaRed that can see you as you hide in the bow if a boat on a trailer in some ramdom backyard. There are cameras... everywhere... taking pictures of you everytime you step out your door. In fact, that survellience camera across the street in you neighbor's house is capturing images of you in the edges of it's peripheral vision through your unshaded windows.
Finally, more of the American people are on their side than on your side and will drop a dime on you when they see you climbing under the tarp of their boat.
Have a nice day.

josevolution

Cosmo wrote:

A couple of observations...
The so-called 'militarization' of Boston was actually a police dragnet. To those persons who were not aware, there was a fugative at large. A fugative that would be easier to locate if he is the only one on the streets.
Also, to those people who are afraid of the government... this was an example of what you are up against. And, they were not even operating at 10%. The bulk of the enforcement was local police, state police and regional FBI along with a small detachment of National Guardsmen. Imagine if it were several Companies of the U.S. Army with their .50 cal. turretted HMMWVs, armoured personel carriers and M-1A-1 Tanks parked on your driveway. You are probably going to need something greater that that AR-15 that will eventually be taken from your cold, dead hand.
So... you paranoid folks have a reason to be paranoid. The government is coming to get you. They have helicopters with Forward Looking InfaRed that can see you as you hide in the bow if a boat on a trailer in some ramdom backyard. There are cameras... everywhere... taking pictures of you everytime you step out your door. In fact, that survellience camera across the street in you neighbor's house is capturing images of you in the edges of it's peripheral vision through your unshaded windows.
Finally, more of the American people are on their side than on your side and will drop a dime on you when they see you climbing under the tarp of their boat.
Have a nice day.

There you go Cosmo making all kinds of sense some people can't understand it ...

Cosmo

unsung wrote:

I'm still waiting for a democrat, any democrat, to have the guts to speak up.

I'm confused, wasn't the Democrat Party the strong believers in civil liberty?

At least the ACLU spoke up about the militarization of the streets.

...
I was unaware that setting off a bomb in the middle of a crowd of people was considered to be a 'Civil Liberty'.
I learn something new from you, everyday.
Thanx.

dimitrispearljam

Cosmo wrote:

A couple of observations...
The so-called 'militarization' of Boston was actually a police dragnet. To those persons who were not aware, there was a fugative at large. A fugative that would be easier to locate if he is the only one on the streets.
Also, to those people who are afraid of the government... this was an example of what you are up against. And, they were not even operating at 10%. The bulk of the enforcement was local police, state police and regional FBI along with a small detachment of National Guardsmen. Imagine if it were several Companies of the U.S. Army with their .50 cal. turretted HMMWVs, armoured personel carriers and M-1A-1 Tanks parked on your driveway. You are probably going to need something greater that that AR-15 that will eventually be taken from your cold, dead hand.
So... you paranoid folks have a reason to be paranoid. The government is coming to get you. They have helicopters with Forward Looking InfaRed that can see you as you hide in the bow if a boat on a trailer in some ramdom backyard. There are cameras... everywhere... taking pictures of you everytime you step out your door. In fact, that survellience camera across the street in you neighbor's house is capturing images of you in the edges of it's peripheral vision through your unshaded windows.
Finally, more of the American people are on their side than on your side and will drop a dime on you when they see you climbing under the tarp of their boat.
Have a nice day.

i like you...
its really funny how people think can fight the goverment back cos they have AK-15..
goverment can clik a button and make a city disapear from the map..for ever

unsung

Cosmo wrote:

unsung wrote:

I'm still waiting for a democrat, any democrat, to have the guts to speak up.

I'm confused, wasn't the Democrat Party the strong believers in civil liberty?

At least the ACLU spoke up about the militarization of the streets.

...
I was unaware that setting off a bomb in the middle of a crowd of people was considered to be a 'Civil Liberty'.
I learn something new from you, everyday.
Thanx.

And that isn't at all what I was talking about and I think you know that. Every single reply I've had on the subject has been exactly the same, catch up next time before spouting off inaccuracies on my position. Thanksverymuch.