15 votes

"Content on the Daily Paul is the opinion of the original poster, not necessarily of the Daily Paul"

To add to a post earlier directed at Jon, every post made to the DailyPaul contains this verbage in search engines such as Google, therefore even though the site may be private property, one would technically not be trespassing or amassing liability upon the site itself. The original poster is the one supplying their "opinion" which should be protected by the First Amendment if such a disclaimer is going to attach and indemnify the site of agreement or support, right?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Wow...

this thread wasn't voted on for what appeared to be several days, so I ask for a possible upvote to spread and keep the information and topic alive as it is important foundational-wise...and the thread receives 3 downvotes in less than an hour...we are not alone here...the wolves are present.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

And They Are...

...rabid. It does seem pretty clear at this point that there are individuals who are not even remotely aligned with Ron Paul and his values. I guess we shouldn't be surprised, but many have probably been lulled into a false sense of commonality and "haven" for free thinking. Sorry you were downvoted. I would upvote but I did that the first time around, so can't double vote. Finding out this stuff is "out there" was like finding out the "facebook" stuff was out there. So yeah, "private" doesn't quite describe this online community *house*.

20 votes makes the board...

let's get this thread there...it is important for all those posting to know they are published on google, especially if they haven't read the terms...

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

The recent dust-up...

...between DP factions over particular posts and members and mods is unsettling to me, as I'm sure it is to all of us. Not to insert myself into a squabble, but I wonder -- is there a middle way, a compromise that would be a path to reconciliation? I see fair points on both sides of the coin: the owner and mods have a right to present a respectable, well-maintained site in the manner they feel best represents the message and material they would like to emphasize, and I don't think they have some perverse pleasure in banning people and removing posts. On the other hand, I understand the impulse of presenting the Liberty movement as unafraid to question any topic or challenge any orthodoxy or presupposition, no matter how controversial.

Going back to the private house analogy we see so often here, maybe a way to think of it is that you don't necessarily want everything that goes on within the rooms of the house on full display for anyone coming up the sidewalk onto the front porch and crossing the threshold. Perhaps some conversations are best had in the privacy of an inner room than being shouted out the front door and heralded with banners over it. In other words, is there a way to tactfully approach more disturbing, controversial topics and theories without them being stamped out altogether? Maybe this would mean moving such posts into a place not visible from the front page but accessible to those within to hash out their ideas without them being deleted?

As an example, I'll pick on one of my own favorite topics: theology. Do we really want verbal debates between theists and atheists being something that is front and center in headlines on the front page? I certainly don't want such discussions banned or hidden in some obscure place no one will ever go, and I wouldn't want comments on front-page posts being sanitized of anything theologically related; but certainly we don't want banners with 'Christianity is antithetical to Liberty' or 'Atheism is antithetical to Liberty', etc. strung over the threshold to welcome all visitors with, do we?

Maybe what I'm thinking is all nonsense, and too lukewarm of an approach to find favor with anyone. Just throwing it out there. Any thoughts/counter-suggestions?

Joη's picture

we tried that, it was called "off topic"

the result is people will not post in there, nor accept posts being moved there.

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?

I guess...

...'Off-Topic' feels like some kind of limbo or hell where posts go to die -- some closet under the stairs where the uncle and aunt hide Harry away. I was thinking more along the lines of a post debating theology in a manner you wouldn't want displayed on the front page, still staying in the 'Religion' room, but having some kind of flag set, such that it won't spill out that room's door. Then it doesn't have the stigma of 'Off-Topic' nor the pedestal of the front page.

deacon's picture

what do you mean

""people will not post in there""
there are 90 pages of off topic posts
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Joη's picture

people post there

realize it doesn't appear anywhere, then never post there again, and are unaccepting of mods moving their stuff as necessary.

Then complain. And complain. And complain some more.

So, no, that's not the best solution.

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?

deacon's picture

sorry,i was unaware

of all that,i try not to get involved too much
in affairs that aren't my own,such as your job
i wouldn't want it,nor even take it
people haven't learned the ability to leave others alone they disagree with,or posts that make them uncomfortable,and i don't see it happening any time soon either
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

nah,

just ban all the fruitcakees

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

I always love it when...

a post strikes a chord, nerve or a conversation up...this is what the site should be about.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

Opinions EXCEPT those that Jon does not agree with.

Jon informed me at the mod thread that there is no ambiguity regarding Bauman. Silly me, I thought he was a COMPUTER guy, and me with all my medical tyraining and experience, I guess I felt more qulified than he to have a medical opinion.
Pardon my arrogance for expressing my professional opinion, my husband's professinoal opinion (RN / paramedic), and linkingn a story to the opinion of an orthopedic surgeon with 35 years experience. We did not get our opinions approved by the computer guy, so we are wrong. Proven by the computer guy's ability to stop me from expressing any further dissenting opinions.
Jon, I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, tried to make peace with you, now I am going to try to tolerate you until Nystrom is back, but I do NOT consider you an ally in any way, shape or form at this point.

THIS OPINION IS NOT JON'S SO YOU MAY NOT HAVE IT EITHER:
http://fauxcapitalist.com/2013/05/10/dr-stan-monteith-a-35-y...

Read it fast, it will be gone in a minute.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

little man/big ego

Free Fishy!!!

They tried to bury us, they didn't know we were seeds. -mexican proverb

A comment from Fishy's

A comment from Fishy's link...

http://fauxcapitalist.com/2013/05/10/dr-stan-monteith-a-35-y...

"He asked why he’s in a wheelchair because that’s contrary to what would normally be done, and why did the woman next to Bauman get taken away in a stretcher by a professional, whereas Bauman was wheeled off by a guy in a cowboy hat?"

Those are great questions to raise.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

Love ya Fishy

You are as important to my freedoms as I am to yours, in that we both would suffer to insure the other remains free. I don't ever feel that I'm to be in agreement with all people all the time. It occurred to me today, in your short ( thank God ) hiatus, and the kerfuffle that followed ( uh ummm, Jon ) that to disavow or excommunicate someone over something as trite as a difference in opinion is nothing short of a behavior of a petty tyrant.
It is because of the free exchange of ideas, and the disagreements such discourse ALWAYS includes due to personalities, that we've the document called the Declaration of Independance and the Bill of Rights, not to mention the Constitution at all. Is it not then, in the same spirit that we who hold dear these very documents, and by association the very discussions and assemblages that preceded them as being the bedrock of our own purposes?

When personalities come into play, one must place the principals held in common above them and carry on to completion.

God Bless
Stēkō

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Have you heard of anti

Have you heard of anti personnel mines?

Seen the now famous images of children with limbs missing? Could they have been 'crisis actors' too? If not I suppose we have a lot of 'miracles' to be thankful for don't we?

"Don't you know it's impossible to survive a double amputation."

"That's why they used an actor with a real double amputation, because it's impossible to survive a double amputation."

lol

One of the stupidest of the stupid pieces of speculation I've seen to support the "crisis actor" claims, is that there is no way Jeff Bauman could have survived.

So it's impossible for Jeff Bauman to have had both his legs severed during a blast and survive, so they used an actor who had previously had both his legs severed in a blast and survived?

Impeccable logic.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Sounds legit

We're the only ones who find this logical conundrum funny apparently.

Eric Hoffer

things still make sense

I am not married to either conspiracy theory of the Boston Bombing. What gives me pause is not only that the man survived two femoral arteries being severed but that he was sitting up in wheel chair. A sudden drop in blood volume should cause some one to be in shock. The fact that a retired surgeon has arrived at a similar conclusion suggests the idea merits discussion.

Vickie

I agree @ Vicki.

Several active and retired medical professionals have cried foul on this one.

Yeah a guy gets both legs blown off and is laying there conscious, not in shock, not screaming and not bleeding to death while cowboy hat dude, who was messing with the fencing eventually comes over to him. And they wheel him around in a wheel chair with his leg bone sticking out (which they appear to have had to stop and secure back in place) instead of putting him on a stretcher?

It's as if with each one of these events they purposely do some things that are more far fetched than the previous events, just to remind themselves of how dumbed down and gullible we are. And when some call BS on it, the establishment cheerleaders play the ages old "kook, crackpot conspiracy theorist" card.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

Since when...

does losing your legs prevent someone from beign propped up in a wheel chair?

What argument are you trying to make based on the fact that he was in a wheelchair?

How can you claim he's not in "shock"?

Have you ever seen what happens when someone loses their legs in an explosive blast?

I'm sorry that it doesn't look like what you've seen in action movies.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Hi Josh: Thank you for

Hi Josh:

Thank you for sharing this video of the immediate care of a critically wounded wounded soldier. Part of the true horror of war; let us work together to have far, far fewer of them.

This poor soldier is out of it. He would not be able to sit in a chair unsupported. Severe shock looks like this - profound weakness. The image that I saw of the Boston amputee -he did not look that out of it.In one image he has strength to hold his head up and grasp his leg. Hence the questions _ I am not extrapolating from movies but experience (with animals) and what emt's and that doctor have written. I am keeping an open mind.

I will grant you that there is not as much squirting blood in this blast injury as I would have thought.

Vickie

If you watch the video in it's entirety...

you will notice the wounded man is not simply lying still, and is moving around making it harder for the medics to aid him.

How can you determine from photographs whether Jeff Bauman was sufficiently "out of it", as if there is some objective standard of "out of it" to measure against?

"In one image he has strength to hold his head up and grasp his leg."

How would this prove that he was an actor?

The wounded man in the video I posted was conscious and moving around and trying to get up, you aren't always knocked out by explosions, you don't always go completely limp and are not always knocked unconscious.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

It is hard from a video

It is hard from a video. I didn't say that his ability to grasp his leg and hold his head and leg up in various photos; it means that he still has awareness and muscle strength

Yes the soldier was up but he was totally dazed - like some one who is drunk. Also the soldier was also scortched by the blast. The Boston guy was not. So questions, not difinative but questions - it is good to discuss them and the official narrative.

Vickie

Didn't we all learn in high school health

that when "they're pale, raise the tail?" When you have profuse bleeding in the lower limbs, a sitting position is a big no-no. That's first aid 101.

People survive double amputation only because they receive prompt and effective first aid: legs raised and tourniquettes quickly applied.

Dr. Stan having questions means I would too. I have really enjoyed his work over time and some of his older work. He interviewed Norman Dodd back in the day and has been at the heart of the Fed Reserve/corporatist government fight a lot loner than I've been alive, earning him the title "Grandpa Liberty".

Right on @ republicanmother

Right on @ republicanmother

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

TELL IT GIRL TELL IT!

Don't give in and don't give up! What a crock that we can only talk about approved issues HERE OF ALL PLACES!

skippy

The theory is insane. Don't

The theory is insane. Don't you have anything better to do than promote insane conspiracy theories on the DailyPaul?

Stop pretending you are saving the world by "analyzing" Internet photos. The truth is out there and it's far far far from here.

Check out http://ronpaulforums.com for activism and news.

What Exactly Is SO Insane About It?

Hmmmmmmmm? Paaaaleeeasse explain how it's SO insane when having twin towers blown into oblivion in order to start a war in Iraq and to pass the UN patriot act ISN'T insane. All I know is that out of this ridiculous "terrorist act" has come the all new and improved martial law act of "Shelter your dumbass selves in place because you are falling for more bullshit" act. GIVE ME A BREAK!

skippy

Uhh....

Patriot Act was passed in the US, not the UN.

As for the argument, here's what you're proposing:

"It is impossible for a man to survive a blast that blows off both legs, as severing the femoral artery of both legs would lead to a quick bleed out and death, therefore, the government had to have faked his injuries. To do this, they used an actor who had both legs amputated after he survived a blast that blew off both of his legs."

Do you see why this is... off?

Eric Hoffer