In a recent Twitter post Libertarian firebrand Rep. Ron Paul wrote: "In a free society, we are supposed to know the truth," he wrote. "In a society where truth becomes treason, we are in big trouble."
Congressman Ron Paul on the presidential campaign trail in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, 01/10/08. (photo: Eric Thayer/Getty Images)
Ron Paul: What We Need Is More WikiLeaks
07 December 10
Reader Supported News | Report
Also See:
WikiLeaks' Twitter Page: http://twitter.com/wikileaks
WikiLeaks' Support Page: http://wikileaks.ch/support.html
Lieberman Attacks New York Times Over WikiLeaks Documents: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/07/wikileaks-joe-lieberman-new-york-times-investigated
exas Republican Congressman Ron Paul is no stranger to breaking with his party, but in a recent television appearance the libertarian-leaning Rep. went even further than any member of Congress in defending whistleblower website WikiLeaks.
Speaking to Fox Business host Judge Napolitano on Thursday about recent revelations at the Federal Reserve, Paul's typical candor showed through.
"What we need is more WikiLeaks about the Federal Reserve," he said. "Can you imagine what it'd be like if we had every conversation in the last 10 years with our Federal Reserve people, the Federal Reserve chairman, with all the central bankers of the world and every agreement or quid-pro-quo they have? It would be massive. People would be so outraged."
Paul, a longtime critic of the US Federal Reserve, is the incoming chairman of a House subcommittee on monetary policy. His most recent book, titled "End the Fed," takes aim at central banks the world over, blaming fiat money systems and fractional reserve banking for the world's increasingly volatile economies.
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," Paul insisted. "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it.
He added: "This whole notion that Assange, who's an Australian, that we want to prosecute him for treason - I mean, aren't they jumping to a wild conclusion? [...] I mean, why don't we prosecute The New York Times or anybody that releases this?"
The Texas congressman echoed his message from Fox Business in a twitter post early Friday.
"In a free society, we are supposed to know the truth," he wrote. "In a society where truth becomes treason, we are in big trouble."
Many Republicans have called for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, an Australian, to be prosecuted under the US Espionage Act, or for his site to be deemed a "foreign terrorist organization." The Department of Justice said it was looking into who leaked the massive caches of documents to Assange and whether or not he could be prosecuted.
The site experienced a series of domain take-downs by mid-day Friday, but was back online via an IP address, with mirrors popping up across Europe.
Data released by the Federal Reserve on Wednesday showed that foreign banks were among the biggest recipients of some $3.3 trillion in emergency loans offered by the US central bank amid the 2008 financial crisis.
More than $290 billion worth of mortgage securities were sold to Deutsche Bank, a German lender. Credit Suisse, a Swiss bank, got more than $287 billion in mortgage bonds. Corporations like Caterpillar, General Electric, Harley Davidson, McDonald's, Verizon and Toyota also relied the programs.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Live Occupy Wall Street Tweets
 14 May 2012
|
 14 May 2012
|
 13 May 2012
|
 14 May 2012
|
 15 May 2012
|
 14 May 2012
|
 16 May 2012
|
 13 May 2012
|
 13 May 2012
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Twain also said, "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes."
The Obama administration and his "Roberto Gonzales", Eric Holder, realize that it will be difficult to prosecute him for espionage, even though they still may try if they can get his hands on him, and they just might if either the UK and/or Sweden allow his extradition to the United States. But, if that doesn't work out, they plan on charging him with possession of stolen U.S. property. They'll figure something out. They're very good at that, and, if you haven't noticed, the U.S. is very good these days at setting up Kangaroo courts to almost guarantee a conviction. If the U.S. can get physical possession of Assange, and even if he's convicted on the most minor charge, they will find a way to put him in prison for life without parole.
Assange was foolish to allow himself to be arrested in Britain. If I had been him, I would have found some safe haven to go to rather than allow this travesty of justice to play out to its inevitable end.
WikiLeaks did not hack into anything. They are only reporting on the info given them, exactly like the New York Times and others did.
OMG you are so ignorant and probably ugly. Everything governments and its elacted reps say or do must be known to the public. If this is not possible because some people oppose release it means that those people are doing things that cannot bare the light nof day, and as far as I know governments aren't to function in that manner. If somebody has nothing dirty to hide why not go for 100% transparancy, especially in the case of governments and political parties WHICH ARE THERE TO SERVE THE PEOPLE, NOT TO MISLEAD THEM. Ron Paul is the only sane person in US politics, I think he is one of the few with nothing to hide. But that's just a gues. We should know everything about everybody in politics, that is the essence of democracy, did you forget? And if you are doning things that people aren't supposed to know, you should have your arse fired! That is how a normal society works, but that's a utopia.
and here we are. It's 1984, oh, I mean 2010.
Hacking into people's correspondence?
Do you honestly believe that there is such a thing as safety, on the Internet?
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and there is nothing to fear, if you are not guilty of unethical behaviour.
That goes for this Congressman too.
who declare anything they say as the truth and anything someone who disagrees with them as a lie. Ron Paul
if taken literally wants to end Civil Rights Legleslation, Public School, SS,
Gurantees of penison plans among a multitude of other programs. Remember only defense and Diplomacy and all other Government
programs gone.
very different shades of a "libertarian" perspective ....
I don't think he has ever called those called anyone a liar who disagrees with him. I think he's an honest guy with whom I almost totally disagree.
I think the Congress will explode in the next 3 weeks or by the first 3 weeks after the newly elected are seated. Sarah will take care of them with one of her ill-informed mandates - like the one on Kennedy.
Wikileaks did not hack into anyone's files -- they were left unattended for anyone to see. I'm sure the Chinese have seen all of them since it is now known they have hacked into our banks, government - etc.
There are many competent unemployed programmers -- the US Government should have hired a few to seal their secrets -- too late. Now we demand transparency and will get it
who rule us!
We'll I think Mr. Assange is right on target.
The question for political theorists is: "How much transparency can American government tolerate?" Or, more generally, "How much openness can a liberal democracy tolerate?"
The extant case will not likely become a major event in constitutional, criminal or even civil law. Despite all the anguish about "treason" on the right and all the talk about "shocking" revelations on the left, nothing much was made public that we didn't already know (though some of it was expressed in sillier language than we might have expected).
If any of this gets to the civilian courts, the question will (or should) boil down to this: "What violation of what statute was actually broken, if any?"
Meantime, the important issue concerns administrative punishments already being meted out: "Has the 14th Amendment become Constitutional collateral damage?"
"No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_States
What a shame!
He was a French resistant and he was deported to Buchenwald in 1943. The black triangle on his pajama meant just that: terrorist.
Manning should, of course, be prosecuted for violating his oath to maintain confidentiality . But the trumped up sex charges against Assange should be dismissed by all reasonable people and we have no right to prosecute him for publishing newsworthy material.
This position may make us uncomfortable but standing up for justice is often uncomfortable.
Lee Nason
We know who is the real crimnal.
and how about Obama's secret discussions with the republicans when he gave away all the help we need for people earning less than $250,000 per year? We need a transcript of those ugly dealings revealed immediately.
Mr. Obama - you have lost my vote...
They given us a rosy picture about how American is trying to help other nations around the world but the truth is that we have been taking advantage of them and their natural resources for the benefit of our corporations.
Remember the lie former President Bush told when he said that people around the world hated us because of our freedom and democracy.
The real reason they hate us, is because our foreign policy is hypocritical.
Color me ignorant, but how can you apply an American federal law against a foreign national living overseas? Would they not need to take advantage of an extant law with international jurisdiction?
Funny how the New York Times always seems to publish *what THEY say* and what we need to know. The beauty of RSN is that we get to talk about all "that stuff" as we reach our own conclusions.
RSS feed for comments to this post.