Many people claim that Dr. Ron Paul can never be president, on these boards and around the country. Yet when asked to back their claims, nothing of any value ever comes forward.[/quote]
He can’t be President - Paul couldn’t even win a Senate seat for the state of Texas should he run for it.
Consider the claims backed - he’ll never be president because (1) Americans don’t share his vile conspiracy theories about 9/11, (2) Americans generally are not hard-left Marxists with respect to foreign policy, (3) Americans do not want a president his age to be taking office, (4) Americans don’t share his vision of economics, (5) he doesn’t have any paricular executive experience, and (6) Americans would hae no interest in his connections to creepy racist and extreme right-wing militia groups.
Any one of these factors is enough to sandbag his candidacy on a national level - Dr. Paul, to his credit, has 'em all.[/quote]
You’re so full of shit I can smell you from my mom’s basement.
sexmachine: By far-leftist, I dont mean I have stacked bombs in my house, Its rather a term to describe
myself as left for the more spineless socialdemocrats. Ironically I am for a democratic and socialist society, but because the closet-liberals who call them self socialdemocrats have ownership of the term, its necessary
forme to distinguish myself from them. In that case I thought far-leftist would do the trick.
Regarding Paul: You just re-posted quotes from the very same article, and still without any references.
So I am still not totally convinced that he is the american equivalent of quisling or Anders behring breivik for that matter. I`l give you this, on a rather speculative christian website there where some book ads, and one of the books where about the threat of cultural marxism and Ron Paul where a contributer to that book/video-book. I find that rather disturbing because the conspiracy theory of cultural marxist infiltration of the western society, where part of Breiviks ideology. So you might be right abotu Paul, but I am still not shure.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
I thought that it was pretty well established that Lew Rockwell wrote most of the pieces for the newsletter.
[/quote]
No it isn’t. See the link to the undeniable evidence. Written in the first person; many of them signed by Ron Paul; Ron Paul listed as editor etc He even defended the contents.
Early 90’s.
See above. A known Soviet disinfo lie. Ron Paul’s entire foreign policy is based on a revisionist, largely Soviet version of ‘history’ - he is as anti-American as you can get. Rockwell is his closest associate and proxy. You’ve seen many of the other quotes from the Newsletters. Don’t give me this nonsense about it’s okay because it was before the internet and he didn’t know.
See above.
Nonsense. See above. See all the rest of the quotes from the Newsletters. See Paul’s voting record. See Paul’s supporters.
Had long been exposed as a Soviet disinfo conspiracy theory.
Well that can only be a good thing from my point of view.
Am I getting a pep talk now?
Why not stick to the topic? What do YOU think about Ron Paul or his proxy spreading Soviet disinfo lies about the AIDS virus being created at Fort Detrick Maryland?
Why not leave me out of it. Stick to Ron Paul and his revolution.
Stick to Ron Paul. Nothing is being published under my name, written in the first person and earning me hundreds of thousands of dollars - and if it was it would have nothing to do with this thread.
I’m all for militias. Just don’t incite them to start a race war and attack the government based on a load of Soviet/Islamist disinfo gibberish.
Yes me too. Jackson certainly WAS a whackjob in that regard.
What’s any of this got to do with Ron Paul’s extremist social and foreign policy agenda?
[quote]
Finally, I am glad that we can discover this and any other information on Dr. Paul. He along with all candidates should be thoroughly vetted. By this I of course mean the Republican candidates. I am not naive enough to expect the Democrat candidate to be held to the same standard. [/quote]
This was discovered years ago which begs the question again: what do YOU think of Ron Paul disseminating Soviet disinfo conspiracy theories about the US creating the AIDS virus at Fort Detrick Maryland?
Regarding Paul: You just re-posted quotes from the very same article, and still without any references.
[/quote]
They’re quotes from the Newsletters. No one denies that they are quotes from the Newsletters. The media have brought up those quotes and asked Ron Paul about some of them. I have even posted photocopied sections from the Newsletters. The ‘reference’ you want is the Ron Paul Newsletters and every quote is referred to the particular issue of the Ron Paul Newsletter they are quoting.
Those quotes are from the Ron Paul Newsletters. None of the Ron Paul supporters here nor anywhere else deny they are quotes from the Ron Paul Newsletters.
Well fortunately there are people who are sure and they make up the overwhelming majority of the American voters.
Jeaton put forward a claim that those newsletters are written by another author, so who am I to believe, you or Jeaton? Do you see that this is a obstacle for my ability to make up my mind about this.
Actually I am more confused now regarding the topic than I where before I started this discussion with you about if Paul is a racist or not, so I withdraw from this discussion. You can see that as a cowards way out or see it as win for your hypothesis. Either way it doesnt bother me how you see it, because honestly I dont know
the knee from my elbow on this topic( if ron paul is a racist or not ) so it would be moronic of me to continue to argue a point I am not even shure about.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Sexmachine: quisling supported the agressive and imperialist politics of germany, so no he doesnt cut it.
[/quote]
florelius: Ron Paul supports the aggressive and imperialistic politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.[/quote]
This is nonsense.
This is a utilitarian argument that presumes that you are responsible for an outcome not matter who is the actor, instead of only for your own actions.
The only one who could possibly live up to that standard is God.
Are you saying that you declare the federal government of the US to be your God?
This can offcourse be because he is a fraud, but I will give him the benefit of doubt untill it is crystal clear that he is or is not a racist lunatic who believes in rehashed conspiracy theorys claiming that jews and marxist or whatever are taking of the world without the public knowing it or other absurd theorys.[/quote]
No foreign country was mentioned in the Ron Paul Newsletters more often than Israel. Ron Paul termed it “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and on the subject of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, concluded, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” In 1990, the newsletter cast aspersions on the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.” - Ron Paul
[/quote]
Ah, speculating that Muslims might be a security risk because their loyalty to their Muslim identity supercedes that to the US is downright presidential, entertaining the same speculation when it comes to Jews and their identity is obviously lunatic and anti-semitic.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Jeaton put forward a claim that those newsletters are written by another author, so who am I to believe, you or Jeaton? Do you see that this is a obstacle for my ability to make up my mind about this.
[/quote]
No. In fact this is because you haven’t learned to think critically. Most people don’t. But you can learn how to think critically and evaluate sources.
This is what is true and no Ron Paul supporters deny it:
Ron Paul started a company called ‘Ron Paul & Associates’ and registered it in the names of “Ron Paul,” his family members and his closest associate Lew Rockwell. They published a series of ‘Newsletters’ called ‘The Ron Paul Newsletters’ written in the first person and with Ron Paul listed as the author and many of them signed by Ron Paul in pen. When the media first questioned him about it he defended the comments. He later said he didn’t write them and didn’t know about the contents. Regardless, Lew Rockwell is Ron Paul’s closest associate. No one denies that. All of this is in the link I provided you twice. The quotes are from the Newsletters and they make an undeniable case that Paul was author of the letters. Regardless, he knew about and profited from them for years. It was HIS company. HIS newsletters. In HIS name. Earning HIM money and gathering extremists to HIS movement.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Sexmachine: quisling supported the agressive and imperialist politics of germany, so no he doesnt cut it.
[/quote]
florelius: Ron Paul supports the aggressive and imperialistic politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.[/quote]
This is nonsense.
This is a utilitarian argument that presumes that you are responsible for an outcome not matter who is the actor, instead of only for your own actions.
[/quote]
Ron Paul on Iran: ‘let’s make friends with them’
‘let’s make friends with them’
[quote]
Are you saying that you declare the federal government of the US to be your God?[/quote]
This can offcourse be because he is a fraud, but I will give him the benefit of doubt untill it is crystal clear that he is or is not a racist lunatic who believes in rehashed conspiracy theorys claiming that jews and marxist or whatever are taking of the world without the public knowing it or other absurd theorys.[/quote]
No foreign country was mentioned in the Ron Paul Newsletters more often than Israel. Ron Paul termed it “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and on the subject of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, concluded, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” In 1990, the newsletter cast aspersions on the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.” - Ron Paul
[/quote]
Ah, speculating that Muslims might be a security risk because their loyalty to their Muslim identity supercedes that to the US is downright presidential, entertaining the same speculation when it comes to Jews and their identity is obviously lunatic and anti-semitic. [/quote]
This can offcourse be because he is a fraud, but I will give him the benefit of doubt untill it is crystal clear that he is or is not a racist lunatic who believes in rehashed conspiracy theorys claiming that jews and marxist or whatever are taking of the world without the public knowing it or other absurd theorys.[/quote]
No foreign country was mentioned in the Ron Paul Newsletters more often than Israel. Ron Paul termed it “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and on the subject of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, concluded, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” In 1990, the newsletter cast aspersions on the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.” - Ron Paul
[/quote]
Ah, speculating that Muslims might be a security risk because their loyalty to their Muslim identity supercedes that to the US is downright presidential, entertaining the same speculation when it comes to Jews and their identity is obviously lunatic and anti-semitic. [/quote]
Well, I seem to remember quite a few instances where Jews transferred state secrets to Israel.
So, it happens, yet is not seen as a problem.
At least not as one that has people frothing at the mouth and demanding the nuking of a whole country.
Ron Paul on Iran: ‘let’s make friends with them’
[/quote]
This is where I think people get lost. If you listen to what he is really saying and not th wording used from the moderators. He is saying at this state there are larger threats, but that instead of fighting a 10 year war, when it is time to declare war, you go in, you win and you get out with as few american casualties as possible. That those forces could be better utilized right now keeping american citizens safe at the southern border. That israel is more than capable of handling the situation over there if we would get out of the way and let them, and if the entire area jumped on them, and they asked we would aid them.
But you know moderators and journalists are devious and pretty good at asking questions to get the sound bites they want to push.
I must confess I am not as old as some and will have to look into these earlier newsletters and comments now. I am not saying I change my stance on which candidate I support, just that if there is some merit to this I will have to re-evaluate my position.
I could care less about “electability.” I will NEVER chose a candidate, simply based on “electability!” That is a weak criteria you have tb.[/quote]
These aren’t my criteria - I am not making the case to vote for or against Paul. I am discussing - specifically - whether in the current environment, Paul could be elected. Period. That’s it. It doesn’t matter if you “could care less” [sic] - I am not trying to convince you not to vote for Paul - I am talking about Paul’s [ichances[/i] in a general election.
I thought that it was pretty well established that Lew Rockwell wrote most of the pieces for the newsletter. [/quote]
That doesn’t absolve Paul’s role in the creation and dissemination, to which he has never provided a credible explanation.
If this is directed at me, you’re wasting your time.
[quote]I will conclude with some scatter-shot.
I would be willing to bet that if I were to comb your past and present that I could come up with some interesting characters with some colorful theories. Since you have known them and had some degree of association, is it therefore justified to assume such association necessitates knowledge of and agreement with any and all such theories? [/quote]
Give me a break. Obama’s association with the vile Jeremiah Wright was certainly important to weighing Obama’s character, was it not? I find it amazing that you are so dismissive of such an ugly pattern and practice of behavior. It’s one thing to have had some strange ideas back in the day - it’s entirely another to traffic in neo-Nazi and racist anti-government militia-types. That isn’t some goofy sidetrack of a college student that doesn’t know any better.
And your apology for it is nothing short of incredible.
We aren’t talking about state mmilitias organized to serve as the local army (in the absence of a standing professional army) - we’re talking about anti-government militias who seek a stand-off with authorities. Want a “Founding Father’s” approach to such a “militia”? Look up the Whiskey Rebellion and a gentleman named George Washington.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
I thought that it was pretty well established that Lew Rockwell wrote most of the pieces for the newsletter.
[/quote]
No it isn’t. See the link to the undeniable evidence. Written in the first person; many of them signed by Ron Paul; Ron Paul listed as editor etc He even defended the contents.
Early 90’s.
See above. A known Soviet disinfo lie. Ron Paul’s entire foreign policy is based on a revisionist, largely Soviet version of ‘history’ - he is as anti-American as you can get. Rockwell is his closest associate and proxy. You’ve seen many of the other quotes from the Newsletters. Don’t give me this nonsense about it’s okay because it was before the internet and he didn’t know.
See above.
Nonsense. See above. See all the rest of the quotes from the Newsletters. See Paul’s voting record. See Paul’s supporters.
Had long been exposed as a Soviet disinfo conspiracy theory.
Well that can only be a good thing from my point of view.
Am I getting a pep talk now?
Why not stick to the topic? What do YOU think about Ron Paul or his proxy spreading Soviet disinfo lies about the AIDS virus being created at Fort Detrick Maryland?
Why not leave me out of it. Stick to Ron Paul and his revolution.
Stick to Ron Paul. Nothing is being published under my name, written in the first person and earning me hundreds of thousands of dollars - and if it was it would have nothing to do with this thread.
I’m all for militias. Just don’t incite them to start a race war and attack the government based on a load of Soviet/Islamist disinfo gibberish.
Yes me too. Jackson certainly WAS a whackjob in that regard.
What’s any of this got to do with Ron Paul’s extremist social and foreign policy agenda?
[quote]
Finally, I am glad that we can discover this and any other information on Dr. Paul. He along with all candidates should be thoroughly vetted. By this I of course mean the Republican candidates. I am not naive enough to expect the Democrat candidate to be held to the same standard. [/quote]
This was discovered years ago which begs the question again: what do YOU think of Ron Paul disseminating Soviet disinfo conspiracy theories about the US creating the AIDS virus at Fort Detrick Maryland?[/quote]
You keep using the word “undeniable”. I do not think it means what you think it means.
BO’s “Dreams From My Father” is an excellent example. I will contend that it is “undeniable” that BO is not the sole author and creator of this book. It is bantered around Chicago with a nudge and a wink that Bill Ayers is the real author. I could accept this as Bill Ayers is a brilliant man a talent for writing and a certain style. He is evil as fuck, but this does not change his intellect or abilities.
BTW, late 80’s and early 90’s denotes a time shift of approximately 1 to five years. It does not change the validity of my statements.
The rest of your info seems to be a circular rant on “Soviet disinfo”. Let me tell you simply that it is not as cut and dry and you seem to want it to be. Having occurred approx 20 years ago, it is not as relevant to my decision process that you seem to have ignored. Therefore, let me repeat it for you:
I have Sirius XM and spend a lot of time in my car. My radio stays on the Patriot channel. I had never really considered Ron Paul until folks like Beck, Hannity and Levin started to talk shit about him. I started looking into this “nut case” so as to be able to discredit him when fellow Conservatives might mention an interest in him. Funny think is, the more I read the more I liked.
I remember the night that I was looking at Mitt’s web page. I had supported him the last go round and assumed that he would be my pick this go around as well. I remember looking at the issues tab, noting there were only three; jobs, healthcare and foreign policy. When I read what they had to say, I was struck by the lack of substance and the similarity to “hope and change.”
I then went to Paul’s site and noticed there were at least 12 issues, all important to me, and that he addressed them in a straight forward, no nonsense fashion. I then learned that he had a book that actually addressed the top 50 issues of our day. I read it and was amazed that a “politician” would come straight out and address these topics in such a direct manor with virtually no wiggle room. I did not know that such a man existed. I had never before seen what I now realize was honor, honesty, congruence and integrity in a politician before.
I fully admit that I do not see “eye to eye” with Dr. Paul on every issue. That is O.K. with me as I do know exactly where he stands on the issue. This is when I became a Ron Paul supporter.
Just an observation. If someone supports Mitt, Newt, Bachman, etc., others who disagree will proceed to attack the candidate for the most part. If someone supports Ron Paul, others are equally as likely to attack the supporter. It is done is such a fearful and fervent way, almost as though the RP supporter has stumbled upon a secret that threatens the others’ world view. I find this interesting.
Disinfo. Extremist. Whack job. Racist. Anti-Semite.
If all of this were true, you would not have to worry about RP. He would take care of himself.
You keep using the word “undeniable”. I do not think it means what you think it means.
BO’s “Dreams From My Father” is an excellent example. I will contend that it is “undeniable” that BO is not the sole author and creator of this book. It is bantered around Chicago with a nudge and a wink that Bill Ayers is the real author. I could accept this as Bill Ayers is a brilliant man a talent for writing and a certain style. He is evil as fuck, but this does not change his intellect or abilities.
[/quote]
Regardless it is not plausible that Ron Paul didn’t know the stuff his Newsletter was publishing in his name for years on end.
I just gave one example. There’s all the over-the-top ‘race war’ stuff; the black kids that should be tried as adults; wanting racial segregation; vehement attacks on Israel etc etc - and that’s just the Newsletters.
Not a rant. I’m interested to hear how people defend supporting someone like that. So I was trying to stick to specifics - that particular piece of craziness from the RP Newsletters.
Of course. He’s a demagogue. Very clever at being everything to everyone.
I don’t like Romney but it’s Ron Paul who’s pimping the ‘Hope and Change.’
It’s more to do with people being offended by the outrageous statements Paul makes about US history/foreign policy and his long and sordid association with extremists and 9/11 conspiracy nuts. That’s why some people - or at least me - can get hostile with some Paul supporters who disseminate his disinfo.
Absolutely.
I don’t worry about Ron Paul in the slightest. What concerns me is the number of people who subscribe to his brand of anti-Americanism.
