After careful analysis of the available data, we are convinced that separating our grassroots website from RonPaul.com would be counterproductive. There are literally hundreds of thousands of inbound links directed to specific articles, videos and blog posts at RonPaul.com that would all be misdirected if you put up a new website at the domain.

Also, we have many email addresses, social media accounts, t-shirt designs etc. linked to the domain (in particular the popular Facebook page “RonPaul.com”) that we would have to change or abandon. In short, such an abrupt change would lead to chaos on the Internet and - at least temporarily - disrupt the message of liberty.

To avoid these complications we’d like to offer you an alternative domain name, RonPaul.org, for your new website at no cost whatsoever. Please don’t use a monstrosity such as “RonPaulsHomePage.com” as is being speculated on the forums. RonPaul.org is an attractive, high quality alternative, and it won’t cost you anything. (Other than the annual renewal fee; all domains have to be renewed each year and that costs about $10 per year.)

If you do insist on obtaining RonPaul.com (it is the best Ron Paul related domain name), we could relocate our grassroots site elsewhere and sell you the domain name at its current market price of $250,000. That would include a copy of our 170,000 strong RonPaul.com email list; these supporters proactively signed up for our email updates, they expect and welcome frequent communications, and they are completely “untapped” in terms of donations. This means that you (and/or Campaign for Liberty) could easily make back the purchase price in a matter of days. Only you can put this list to its best possible use, which is why we’d include it as a free bonus with RonPaul.com.

It’s worth noting that Paul hadn’t registered the domains in 2008, which is why the fans who built the current site bought them instead. Considering that they would’ve arguably been more valuable when he was running for president, it’s strange that he wants them now. What’s crazier about this situation — that his supporters are trying to charge him $250,000 to ensure some T-shirts don’t have broken links or that Paul, who generally is anti-government-intervention, is trying to get the UN involved?

Ron Paul talks about 9/11

Ron Paul : Ten years ago shocking and horrific acts of terrorism were carried out on US soil, taking over 3,000 innocent American lives. Without a doubt, this action demanded retaliation and retribution. However, much has been done in the name of protecting the American people from terrorism that has reduced our prosperity and liberty and even made us less safe. This is ironic and sad, considering that the oft-repeated line concerning the reasoning behind the attacks is that they hate us for who we are – a free, prosperous people – and that we must not under any circumstances allow the terrorists to win.

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the September 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life. Neither is it our religion, or our wealth. Rather, it is primarily occupation. If you were to imagine for a moment how you would feel if another country forcibly occupied the United States, had military bases and armed soldiers present in our hometowns, you might begin to understand why foreign occupation upsets people so much. Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It”. In fact, of 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95% were in response to foreign occupation.

Pape notes that before our invasion of Iraq, only about 10% of suicide terrorism was aimed at Americans or American interests. Since, then however, not only is suicide terrorism greatly on the rise, but 91% of it is now directed at us.

Yes, the attacks of 9/11 deserved a response. But the manner in which we responded has allowed radicals in the Muslim world to advance a very threatening narrative about us and our motivation in occupying their lands. Osama bin Laden referred to us as “crusaders” with a religious agenda to convert Muslims, westernize their culture and take control of their resources. If we had targeted our response to only the thugs and criminals who attacked us, and refrained from invading countries that had nothing to do with it, this characterization would seem less plausible to the desperate and displaced. Blaming Islam alone is grossly misleading.

Instead, we chose a course of action that led to the further loss of 8,000 American lives, left 40,000 wounded and has hundreds of thousands seeking help at the Veterans Administration. We are three to four trillion dollars poorer. Our military is spread dangerously thin around the globe, at the expense of protection here at home. Not only that, but we have allowed our freedoms to be greatly threatened and undermined from within. The Patriot Act, warrantless searches and wiretapping, abuse of habeus corpus, useless and humiliating searches at airports are just a few examples of how we’ve allowed the terrorists to “win” by making our country less free.

Suicide terrorism did not exist in Iraq before we got there. Now it does. There are no known instances of Iranians committing suicide terrorism. If we invade and occupy Iran, expect that to change, too.

Sometimes it can be very uncomfortable to ask the right questions and face the truth. When a slick politician comes along and gives a much more soothing, self-congratulating version of events, it is very tempting to simply believe what we would like to hear. But listening to lies does not make us safer, even though it might make us feel better about ourselves.

The truth is that ending these misguided wars and occupations will make us safer, more prosperous and more free.

Watch on iambinarymind.tumblr.com

Ron Paul vs. RonPaul.com: Stephan Kinsella interviewed on Adam Vs. The Man

Stephan Kinsella appeared last night on Adam vs. the Man (episode 192) to discuss the Ron Paul v. Ronpaul.com dispute. The segment goes from about 1:30:30 to about 1:54:30, which is excerpted above.

See also:

Ron Paul Calls on United Nations to Confiscate Domain Names of His Supporters

Headline/Article Source: RonPaul.com

Implied: Headline implies that Ron Paul has specifically petitioned the United Nations to take down domain names bearing his name.

Reality: Ron Paul has filed a domain name complaint with WIPO, a domain name arbitration agency who’s decisions in matters of domain name disputes are binding. While WIPO is an agency under the umbrella of The United Nations - it is the channel for domain name disputes of any kind and standard operating procedure for anybody with a dispute to go through. It usually handles cases of cyber-squatters and everybody from celebrities to corporations petition rulings from the agency to settle these disputes. For Ron Paul to settle a grievance (whether actual or perceived) over a domain name bearing his name - this is the only action that can be taken and be considered binding.

Text
Photo
Quote
Link
Chat
Audio
Video