One reason Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are presidential vanity candidates and long shots to win their parties presidential nomination.
"The Patriotic Sheep" are often the most difficult to work with because they won't take a minute to consider that which they do not know…these folks are so busy defending the Constitution that they are often the last to consider the damage they are inflicting. — Rick Koerber, The “Brain-Off” Conspiracy…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Clavos
But, in any case, a significant proportion of them are wearing tin foil hats...
77 - Floccina
Deterance. If they nuke use they will surely die. No need for such reasolutions.
78 - Don Wills
The author writes "Thankfully, most Americans are able to see that both Paul's and Kucinich's positions are not based on principle but simply designed to boost their own egos."
In the case of Paul, this statement is a BOLD FACED LIE. Ron Paul is a man of principle, and votes on principle. His vote on the measure in question is obviously based on principle. The author is obviously shilling for the GOP establishment in an attempt to destroy Ron Paul's candidacy.
79 - Paul
Here are some interesting stats:
Campaign donations from the military. Ron Paul received 1/3 of the total donations from military members and vets to Presidential campaigns.
Ron Paul 32.94%
John McCain 22.99%
Hillary Clinton 13.92%
Bill Richardson 7.03%
Barack Obama 6.85%
Mitt Romney 4.68%
Rudy Giuliani 3.06%
John Edwards 2.97%
Tom Tancredo 1.85%
Duncan Hunter 1.32%
Joe Biden 1.06%
Mike Huckabee 0.20%
Mike Gravel 0.09%
Sam Brownback 0.07%
From The Spin Factor and Phreadom
80 - Clavos
So, what conclusion can you infer from the high level of donations Paul receives from the military and vets?.
Is that group somehow imbued with greater insight and political perspicacity, thus lending more legitimacy to the Paul candidacy?
81 - Perry
How can you NOT agree with Ron Paul's take on this. Who do you support, that idiot Giuliani?
Ron Paul brings in the CIA, the 9-11 Commission, the Constitution, and other credible sources to justify his argument. People like Rudy - neocons - offer NOTHING but fear and stupidity.
It seems to me it's others who are wearing the tinfoil hats.
Do the research.
There's NO way I'm going to die for Israel. I would give my life for MY country. Perhaps we should realize that Israel and America are NOT the same country!
Sure they're an ally, but belive me, Israel is MORE that strong enough to whip Iran's ass if need be.
82 - wayne
Dr Paul is also the only one that's not under investagation for LIEING,SEX,EMBEZZLEMENT,CHILD PORNOGARPHY,SPYING or some other SECRET WASHINGTON GAME. The washington fineist wouldnt know what to with themself if a HONEST AMERICAN WAS TO BE PUT IN POWER. It makes me think of a 3rd rate restaurant kitchen when the LIGHTS GO ON. Wayne
83 - Earl E Riser
You said Israel is a vibrant democracy. I assume when you say vibrant, you mean they actively drop bombs on people, hence vibrant.
I have recently decided that anything related to religion is dangerous. If millions of people differ on the one true god, it is probably because there is no god at all. We are just scared little animals and are more darwinian than we thought. Natural selection is based on strength. It doesn't matter from where that strength gets it underlying motivation, nationalism, religion, ethnicity, gender, or what. So to back a nation like Israel because some folks think it is the homeland of their god or to back a nation ready to destroy that homeland because their god told them to do it, is both a waste of time.
Mother Nature is the real threat. That battle we are all going to lose regardless of the god of the day. Ron Paul 2008
84 - handyguy
This article and thread certainly win the award for Largest Pile of Loony Bird Comments. The entire 'debate' seems to be taking place on Planet Pluto among a bunch of demented toddlers.
85 - crazychester
Well, whatever you do, don't refute any points or add any valuable information to this looney-bird commentary. If you did, it might involve doing more than name calling and generalizations and that could cause one whopper of a headache. Besides, any minute now Fox might announce something for us to be scared about while we waste time debating what the author seems to believe is the frivolous nature of the Constitution.
86 - disinter
Sounds like Abel Keogh is one of these
87 - disinter
Funny that to leave a comment, you read:
"Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy"
This whole blog post is a personal attack on Ron Paul.
88 - Dave Nalle
Re; #s 74 and 75.
I did indeed write the original pro-Paul article on this site. It was then responded to by a whole bunch of scary conspiracy loons.
That made me reconsider Paul in the context of the people who are supporting him. It made me concerned about the fact that Paul appears to be pandering to these people and even encouraging them.
Paul is basically a pretty decent guy with some good ideas and a mostly libertarian philosophy. But despite his efforts to downplay them, he does hold some very strange beliefs, and the lunatic fringe has picked up on that and made him their candidate.
Now things are going in another direction with his campaign which I find even more troubling. He's also begun to attract support from what I call Socialist/Libertarians. These are far left libertarians who combine libertarianism with socialist internationalism. They're LaRouchites and Wobblies and the like. They're extremely anti-American and anti-corporate and see the Iraq war as the wedge issue on which to bring down capitalism in America. They're flocking to Paul because of his anti-war position.
Increasingly it's becoming clear to me that the Paul campaign embodies most of the things I really despise politically, not necessarily because of Paul, but because of the people he's attracted to his banner.
Dave
89 - Mike
I'm not even going to waste my time trying to back some argument that reading stuff like this is a disservice to one's brain; I'll leave that to all the other people who now have a lower IQ thanks to having to read this pathetic article. I'm just going to give one tip: ease off the name-calling and actually cite some creditable evidence for once.
90 - Mike
Oh yeah, and Ron Paul is the best thing to happen to America in a long time. If you need evidence and further convincing, trying listening to what he's saying with an open mind rather than looking for things to be critical of.
91 - A.K. Smith
RE: 88
Dave - I too have noticed the strange support for Dr. Paul from some quarters. But I've met him and spoken with him and recently saw him in Las Vegas addressing a large crowd. All kinds of conspiracy theorists are certainly supporting him. And some haters are definitely supporting him. And being realistic, he can't exactly afford to turn away their support when the major media is trying its best to ignore him to death. And on his part, I haven't heard him tailor his message to satisfy these people. He has said the same things for the nearly twenty years I've been listening to him.
I've also met a lot of more normal people who support him. People interested in unflinching support for the second amendment. People who understand that non-intervention in foreign affairs is not the same as isolationism. People who understand that free trade is better than the pseudo-free trade we have under NAFTA and CAFTA.
There are some peace-at-all-cost types who mistakenly support him because they didn't notice that Paul favored a measured but aggressive approach to Osama bin Laden and 9/11, even though the Bush White House has dropped the ball. And DR. Paul has said that if there is an imminent threat to the U.S., he will act immediately and decisively. And he's rightly pointed out that the president has that power without having to consult congress.
I've watched and listened intently for conspiracy theory or hate or intolerance coming from Ron Paul. I really have. And I haven't seen it. My BS meter is usually pegged pretty easily by politicians. But not by him in particular. The day this election is over, I assume that many of the people who support his limited government ideas will be my antagonists in many ways. But I tend to believe that THEY, and not I, will be the one disappointed by Dr. Paul's presidency. When they realize he doesn't hate immigrants, but would encourage them once we dissipate the welfare state. When they realize he doesn't hate Jews, or subscribe to their loony theories about who the real and fake Jews are. When that happens, they will again be left without anyone to root for except the theocratic Constitution and Independent American Parties. Or maybe they'll filter back to the John Birch Society. But in any case, I don't see the "Bear False Witness For Christ" stamp on this man in any way. I'll only judge him by the people his ideas attract if the loons become the company he keeps once in the White House.
92 - crazychester
Smith does it again by posting one of the few sane statements here. kudos.
It should be a lesson to the Paul bashers out there.
If you despise him, it can only be because you are taking someone else's word for something. If you actually listen to him, and not judge him for the other people who are attracted to him, he makes a lot of sense and seems much saner than any other candidate I've ever seen. His record and his words speak for themselves. Let them.
93 - wayne
They still havent figured it out. Dr Paul is out in the open, you and they know what he stands for unlike the rest that do every-thing in SECRET in the back room closet. Their worse night-mare is an investagation. Ask Bush.
94 - Steve Barry.
This is far rightwing neocon propaganda. The neocon movement is dying and will soon be dead. Thank goodness.
95 - Mabel
You are hilarious! Your article is the funniest thing I have read in a long time! Wow! For a minute there I thought you were serious! Phew! Thanks for the laugh. (o=
96 - Al Barger
That sounds like something the UN would propose.
Ouch! Touche!
Brother Nalle, I'm SO ripping off that Ron Paul tinfoil hat picture. He's asking for that.
97 - Mazz
My observation indicates a beautiful synthesis between America and Is Ra El, a confluence of ideals and goals, hopes and aspirations. It is something of a symbiotic relationship. The Us being the dog and Is Ra El being the tick. They never did apologize for the USS Liberty..now did they.
mazz
98 - bill
A vibrant democracy and the only beacon of freedom in the Middle East? Top Ten Reasons why you are wrong:
1) Apartheid (I guess its a beacon of freedom if you are Jewish...)
2) USS Liberty
3) Rachel Corrie
4) Bulldozing of villages (Nuremberg violation)
5) The only thing keeping them from being found guilty of war crimes by the UN, on numerous occasions, was a US veto
6) The few resolutions that DID pass were ignored. No nation has violated more than Israel
7) They hold tens of thousands of Palestinians captive, with no rights (lawyer, phone, etc) and no charges against them
And they use lobby groups to:
8) steal countless Billions from governments around the world
9) Establish free trade with the US and Europe and pressure for higher tariffs between the two so all trade between the two must pass through their hands to remain economical
10) Pass laws in the US that all trade between the middle east must have something like minimum 15% Israeli involvement.
Lets see how long they get away with all of that once Ron Paul is elected. No more handouts. I'd love to argue so many other things in your article, but lets just say that probably the only thing I agree with is that Ron and Dennis voted against the Bill...
99 - Dave Nalle
I have to give credit to A. K Smith for one of the few rational comments on here. He actually listened to what I had to say and made a reasonable defense of Paul.
I've also met Dr. Paul and I worked on and contributed to his previous campaigns. This alliance with the radical crazies is a new development which came out in this presidential campaign, but he has provided them with enough fodder that they have reason to believe he's on their side.
For example, in one of his articles on lewrockwell.com he perpetuates and more or less endorses the mythical North American Union conspiracy which only exists in the minds of a couple of extreme internationalist thinktankers and a horde of xenophobic crazies. He's also promoted the NAU conspiracy in other forums, including on the floor of the House.
Similarly, he dances around supporting the 9/11 Truth movement. The truthers are about as dangerous a group of delusional fanatics as we've got in America today and Paul keeps throwing them bones. He's met with them, he keeps raising questions about the 9/11 Report, and he's hinted at a personal belief that 9/11 was the result of a conspiracy. He won't come right out and say it, but it's there.
Then there's the issue of Paul's longtime association with the John Birch society. No, I know he's not an official member, but they have supported him for years and are actively promoting him in this election, plus in the past he's had links to their sites on his web page. I'm not convinced that he's antisemitic as some have claimed. I'm pretty sure he's not racist at all. But an awful lot of really virulent racists do support him wholeheartedly and that looks bad.
I'd really like to see Paul make some sort of definitive statement on the conspiracy issues, especially denying any belief that a government conspiracy was behind 9/11. I think that if done right that would strengthen him a lot as a candidate. On the other hand it might make him look as if he's on the defensive, so it could be a mistake.
He does have to find a way to distance himself from the crazies if he wants to keep expanding his support. I suspect that he's so happy to have supporters at all that he's been over indulgent towards them. He needs to move beyond that weakness.
Dave
100 - REMF
"I have to give credit to A. K Smith for one of the few rational comments on here."
- Dave Nalle
I respectfully disagree, Nalle; I feel that most of the comments on here are more rational than anything you've written.
- MCH
101 - crazychester
So everyone who keeps an open mind regarding the activities of covert government agencies must be a "crazy". And have you investigated the issues fully enough on your own to be absolutely sure that no conspiracy exists on ANY level? How about mere facilitation rather than explicit involvement? Considering what we know about CIA activities in the past and recent disclosure about planned false-flag events in Cuba alone(Northwoods), nothing is beyond the realm of possibility for the shadow side of the U.S. government. We've supported both IRAN and IRAQ when it suited our purposes. Remember as well that these activities were planned and executed on ideology alone and rarely due to any real threat by another nation. Anyone dismissing the mere possibility out of hand does a disservice to the truth simply because they wouldn't know what to do with it or that it's too frightening a scenario to believe.
102 - Sam
I wasn't so sure about Paul or Kucinich before, but I like them a lot more after reading this cliche drivel.
103 - Mazz
Dave, it's time to come out of that warm, fuzzy box you're still in. Maybe you would explain Larry Silversteins comment on national TV..."WE DECIDED TO JUST PULL IT"...referring to the WTC Building # 7. Questioning government is our right and indeed our responsibility. You have not done your homework. Research 'Operation Northwoods","Operation Gladdio", "Operation Paperclip", "Operation Ajax"....and on and on ad infinitum. Consider Ron Paul, he is our last, best hope to neutralize this Global Corporatocracy.
Mazz
104 - Cindy D
You say Israel is "...a vibrant democracy and the only beacon of freedom in the Middle East." Have you closely examined the struggle between Israel and Palestine? Ask yourself if you have actually studied this for yourself or have merely relied on popular information to form your opinion.
Just for the sake of argument, I challenge anyone reading this to dedicate a some time to reading about the conflict between Israel and Palestine from the perspective of the Israeli refusenik soldiers. Go ahead, put that in google. Or just go to the URL I have listed. Read "the Combatant's Letter".
105 - T
Oh come on... I consider myself as conservative as they come but this editor is just blind. I mean do some research on what our government is doing before you blow this propaganda. I once also used to write pieces like this. Thank goodness my readers were few because I was wrong.
RON PAUL'08 BABY
106 - Irene Wagner
Antisemitism is horrible! No decent person who has studied the Holocaust wants its horrors to be repeated.
This is why, Mr. Keogh, it is disturbing to hear the charge of "antisemitism" so cavalierly applied in a way that waters down the power of the word's real meaning.
Examples: "You're criticizing neoconservative policy? You must be antisemitic." "You're criticizing U.S. support of current Israeli foreign policy? You must be an antisemite."
It's possible to be pro-Palestinian and pro-Jew, Mr. Keogh, but it takes imagination, courage, charity, and the magnanimity to renounce one's dearly-held former prejudices.
107 - Cindy D
The Greatest Enemy of knowledge is not ignorance... it is the illusion of knowledge. -Stephen Hawking
Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land
108 - Irene Wagner
Mr. Keogh, Have you heard of the economist Ludwig von Mises, an Austrian Jew who escaped Vienna mere hours before the Gestapo?
Through the efforts of Lew Rockwell, the Misean capitalist theory is enjoying a renaissance. Lew Rockwell is SOLIDLY behind the presidential campaign of Ron Paul.
You might want to give Lew's webpage a look-see.
109 - Al Barger
Miss Irene- I appreciate the conciliatory language in your comment 106, but it's nice language in fact covering for I'm sure accidental but nonetheless de facto anti-Semitism.
It's possible to be pro-Palestinian and pro-Jew, Mr. Keogh, but it takes imagination, courage, charity, and the magnanimity
In truth, in 2007 is NOT possible to be pro-Palestinian and also pro-Jew, anymore than it would have been possible to be pro-Nazi and pro-Jew. The main point of existence for most Palestinians at this point is their nearly universal desire to kill Jews.
You are right, however, in saying that it takes "imagination" to be both pro-Palestinian and pro-Jew.
110 - Irene Wagner
Mr Barger (my title is Mrs., by the way, but you may call me Irene)--
It's impossible to be pro-Palestinian suicide bomber and pro-Jew in 2007, I'll own that. But there are so many other facets to the group we broad-brush as "Palestinians" and also, I'm afraid, many facets to the group we broad-brush "Jews."
This is an article whose title might SOUND antisemitic, but I can assure you it is not. Why Germans supported Hitler.
It should give conservatives of every stripe pause.
111 - Cindy D
Al Barger. I like your comment. Because it is exactly the type of comment that makes my point. You may not know what my point is. That is intentional, as one would actually have to look at the information I have provided.
Let me ask you this. Here is a list of Palestinian solidarity organizations.
Do you think these Jews are Anti-Semites?
Jews Against the Occupation
Jews for Israeli-Palestinian Peace
Rabbis for Human Rights
Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
Bat Shalom
Machsom Watch
Women in Black
Jewish Voice for Peace
Criticism of Israel is not antisemitism.
Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land
112 - Irene Wagner
That's a powerful video, Cindy, particularly the clip of the Jewish woman talking about the pregnant Palestinian women,being denied access to medical care, dying at Israeli checkpoints. Thanks for sharing the link.
Perhaps there is already a group forming that calls itself Jews for Ron Paul.
113 - Dave Nalle
Listen up, tinfoilhatters. I never said there were no conspiracies. I have personal and direct experience of genuine conspiracies. I also didn't say there were no government coverups. They are certainly far more common than conspiracies.
But what does not exist are the giant world-spanning conspiracies which require the cooperation of thousands of people and many different groups to achieve extreme long-term goals which are logically improbable. Real conspiracies involve few people and have short-term, achievable goals.
For example, I'm willing to believe a number of things about 9/11. I'm willing to believe that Flight 93 may have been shot down and covered up. It makes sense and would involve only a small group of people. However, I've seen zero convincing evidence on it. I'm also willing to believe building 7 was deliberately demolished for one of a number possible reasons. But again, there's not much evidence. I'm also willing to believe that the government attempted to cover up the fact that they knew quite a bit about the attack in advance and in particular that they are covering up the fact that they completely dropped the ball. There's actually quite a bit of evidence to support this, and the 9/11 commission confirms some of it. What I don't buy is that the government or Israel planned the 9/11 attack to give them an excuse to start a war. Such a conspiracy woudl involve too many people and is just too complex and nefarious to pull off without someone ratting them out. It just doesn't stand the test of reason.
Dave
114 - Irene Wagner
We're not talking about conspiracy theory, Dave. We're talking about actual footage of actual human rights offenses of actual IDF soldiers against actual Palestinian human beings who are trying to do simple things on their illegally occupied, actually, land---things like get to the hospital before they die in childbirth, etc, etc.
Regarding 911, Ron Paul said in his now famous debate with Rudy Giuliani, "Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years." So many Ron Paul detractors have misconstrued that statement as an endorsement of 911 tinfoil conspiracy theories.
"They attack us because we've been over there here because we're over there" means Palestinians who have been under the heel of the nation of Israel are attacking the US, who is a supporter of Israel's Mideast expansion with dollars and military force. It's NOTHING to do with conspiracy theories or tin hats.
115 - Cindy D
Caught Red-Handed: Media Backtracks on Iran's Anti-Israel "Threat"
by Arash Norouzi / July 17th, 2007
For close to two years, the media has stubbornly clung to a long discredited story about the Iranian President's alleged threat to "destroy Israel" with nuclear weapons Iran doesn't have and denies any intent to acquire. 'Wiped off the map, wiped off the map,' they bleat incessantly, even though his actual words, "The Imam [Khomenei] said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time," were paralleled with the fall of regimes like the Soviet Union and Iran's former U.S.-installed monarchy [see: "WIPED OFF THE MAP" -- The Rumor of the Century for a thorough disassembly of this claim]. From the start of his Presidency, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has rhapsodized regularly about the demise of the 'Zionist regime' in various metaphorical terms. He and his associates in the Iranian government have compared its fate to the Pharaohs of Egypt and the former apartheid regime in South Africa (which they also did not recognize), but never have they threatened to start a war with any country.
Full Story - See URL
116 - EEKman
Dave:
Read "Crossing the Rubicon" by Mike Ruppert.
Government has indeed kept things quiet that involves 1000s of people. This book also provides a compelling case for the means, motive, and opportunity for high level members of our government to carry out 9/11. Something any investigative reporter would attempt to find out.
The evidence is out there, its just most people cant seem to break the psychological block and look for it.
117 - Irene Wagner
It's no surprise that the Republican Party's gatekeepers keep such shills on retainer, but to be fair, not every writer who supports the war in Iraq, including Abel Keogh, is necessarily one of them.
We're asking Abel Keogh to reconsider his stance that Ron Paul's supporters are, knowingly or unknowingly, causing harm to Jews in general and the United States in particular, and we'd like to extend that offer to him graciously.
I'm grateful for the opportunity to engage in meaningful debate about Ron Paul, and to direct people to the blog of economist and Ron Paul supporter Lew Rockwell.
I've also appreciated seeing the link Cindy D recommended, in which Jews support the cause, but not the methods, of occupied Palestinians.
Also, discussions about whether or not 911 was the product of a world-wide conspiracy are beside the point. One might as well engage in arguments concerning the existence of an ages-old conflict between Good and Evil. We can only change what we have power to change, and should direct our focus to that. That's what the Ron Paul supporters with whom I am personally involved are trying to do.
Ad hominem attacks usually backfire, sooner or later. Truth is strong enough to stand on its own merits.
118 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Cindy,
The organizations you mentioned in comment #111, listed as follows:
Jews Against the Occupation
Jews for Israeli-Palestinian Peace
Rabbis for Human Rights
Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
Bat Shalom
Machsom Watch
Women in Black
Jewish Voice for Peace
are not anti-Semitic. They are engaged in treason, as the law defines it here in the State, and their members deserve to be hung by the neck. But, it's pretty hard to make an accusation against them stick, when you have a traitor as president, a traitor as prime minister, a traitor as attorney general, and a bunch of traitors sitting on the "high court of justice."
In Israel, we are waiting for a war to start against us, and reading dumb comments like yours tend only to convince me that the ONLY friends Jews have are other Jews. But Jews cannot rely on other Jews (see the list above that you so kindly provided). We have to rely on G-d. America can only be relied to welsh on its obligations, as it did in 1973. Europe is a Jewish graveyard and the European pigs have not changed in 70 years.
So, to repeat for the zillionth time, we do not need America, we certainly do not need Europe. We need only our faith in the Almighty, the Living G-d of Israel by Whose command we are here, and our clutch of nukes to get rid of the local enemies and teach the rest of you that the price of Jewish blood has gone up a bit...
If that attitude bothers you, tough shit. As time goes on it will get more and more common here, so get used to it.
Oh, and Cindy - try spelling "maHsom" (roadblock) correctly, instead of the way the idiots in the media spell it... That capital "h" in the middle of "maHsom" stands for the gutteral letter "Het."
119 - Irene Wagner
Ruvy in Jerusalem,
Quixotically, I try to introduce an element of civility to this debate, and then I read your comment.
Listen Ruvy, G_d does not and never has counted as too high the price of Jewish blood when the leaders of Israel have acted in blood-thirsty manner, in His holy righteous name and in desecration of his merciful character. Certainly the occupants of Palestinian refugee camps have their tales of fear to tell, no less legitimate than your own.
Micah 3: 9 Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity.
10 They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity.
11 The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord, and say, Is not the Lord among us? none evil can come upon us.
12 Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the forest.
120 - tom
Abel: At first I thought this article was serious. Then I realized that it was satire and I saw how funny it was. For a moment I was actually worried that there were people in this country that actually thought like this. You got me. Thank goodness this article was a joke
There are many now that when lacking a good argument resort to just calling it un-American. Like opposing Bush's War on Terror is un-American, for example. And now disagreeing with Israeli foreign policy is un-American. For these 'wolves in sheep's clothing' we need a definition of what it is to be American. Is being American - hot dogs and Apple pie? If one does not like hot dogs or Apple pie does this mean they are un-American?
America is typically a reference to the union of 50 states rather than continental America. Hence an American is one who believes in and supports the fifty United States of America. Notice the word ‘fifty’. Fifty includes the fifty states, but does not include other countries like Israel, Iraq or Iran. Hence we cannot use the word ‘American’ when referring to these countries.
What defines America is what binds the fifty states: the constitution and the bill of rights. It’s as simple as this: if you defend the constitution and bill of rights, you are an ‘American’; if you do not defend this, then you are not ‘American’.
What has made America great for 231 years (+-6) is its protection of individual civil liberties. This is what sets it apart from many other countries that do not have such regard. Israel for example does not protect individual civil liberties. So saying that if one does not agree with Israeli policy then they are un-American is only about 180 degrees from the truth. Israel will not be like America until it accepts the principle that America is founded on which is the protection of individual civil liberty regardless of race. The founders considered these liberties God given and could not be granted or taken away by any man or government. Until Israel accepts this, I think they will be continually bombarded with violence and I don’t think that we should support them.
So we have a definition of what it means to be an ‘American’. I realize that there are many that do not like this definition and would like to change it. But this is the definition that it has been for the majority of American History. Many now would like it to mean something more akin to an ideology that has recently been imported from countries such as Germany and Russia. These ideologies might be valid, but let’s call them what they are and argue them based on their merit (or lack thereof) rather than attempting to sneak them in by calling them ‘American’. We Americans are wise to this guile. Yes I consider myself an American as well as Ron Paul.
121 - Dave Nalle
Opposing Bush's war on terror is not unamerican. Opposing America because Bush has engaged in a war on terror is unamerican. Do you get the difference, Tom?
Dave
122 - A.K.Smith
Wow, this is more entertaining than Oprah. Of course, dead air is more entertaining than Oprah.
I won't bore anyone with a history lesson, but the Palestinian homeland is vast because it actually historically includes Jordan. But since the Palestinians (Arafat) tried a bloody overthrow of Jordan back in 1974, the West Bank Palestinians are not welcome there.
Everyone on Earth, including Israeli's for the most part, feel badly for the average Palestinian. And that's the truth. Before the Intifadah, they built schools and hospitals, and supplied clean water and power to the Palestinian areas. But this was met with resistance of the occupation. And ahhhh, the occupation. Isreal was attacked once and about to be attacked for the second time in 6 years back in 1973. So they fought and won and advanced to more defensible borders. In the meantime they gained access to the ancient capitol of Jerusalem.
So, what country in history has won a war then been forced to give back the territory by an international body such as the U.N.? Not one other.
There is and has been a rough peace plan that has been agreed to for a long time. Shared capital in Jerusalem, give back some land won in 1973 and maybe even the Golan Heights, although that's very tricky for defense purposes if you know anything about the geography and battle tactics. But every time they were close to making it happen, Arafat would walk away, leaving everyone at the table scratching their heads, and start up with violence again. Either he never had the backing to agree to peace, which would be the fault of the Palestinian extremists, or he never had any interest in making himself less necessary, which would be Arafat putting his personal wealth and well-being ahead of those of his people. Myself, I think it was a mixture of both.
And if the Palestinians put down their arms today and came to the table in peace, Israel would settle with them peacefully with an agreement that would make both Jews and Palestinians a little happy and a little unhappy, and that's how these treaties work.
So how do we sort out blame? Maybe it's not productive to sort out blame. But think about the proposition. Israel would compromise instantly and help the Palestinians if they would agree to live peacefully as neighbors. Would the Palestinians do the same if the Israeli's came to the table and offered to compromise? Well, we already have our answer to that one, don't we?
And now to the present. Israel has made plans through Jordan and Egypt's good offices to meet with the Arab League to reach a comprehensive settlement. This was agreed to about 2 weeks ago. Israel is speaking to Syria about negotiating for peace and a resolution to the Golan. So what did Israel's great ally the U.S. do? The U.S. convinced Saudi Arabia to slow up the process by equivocating on whether they would come to the talks. And now the "quartet" has reinserted themselves into the process. Why? I sure don't know why. Things were going better without us.
So, my considered opinion is that Israel will be much better off the day we stop interfering in their affairs. And Ron Paul is the only one putting out this position. Can you imagine Rudy or Mitt staying out of other people's business? They never have before.
I'd truly love to see a non-interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East, and everywhere else. Because it sure seems like what we've been doing my entire lifetime isn't working.
123 - clay
The day I start basing my vote on who supports them, rather than their own beliefs, will be the day I turn into a sheep that only listens to peoples opinions rather than the facts.
124 - Irene Wagner
A.K.Smith,
Clay raises a good point--base your decision to support/not support Dr. Ron Paul on your own reasoned opinion, not on a revulsion of the possibility of guilt by association with those in tinfoil milinery, for example, who have glommed on to his campaign.
In order to win a presidential race in a pluralistic society such as ours, Dr. Paul will have to win the votes of all manner of strange bedfellows. I've seen Ron Paul supported by:
1. Folks with varying opinions on what to do about the immigration crisis (which, perhaps, one has to live in a U.S. border state to appreciate fully. Ditto, the desperate overzealousness of Palestinian suicide bombers raised in refugee camps.)
2. Jews such as yourself, who appreciate the sanity of Ron Paul's devotion to nonintervention policy, their own devotion to Israel and it's right to exist notwithstanding.
It is the policy that is not only best for the long-term national security of the US, but for all nations, as you point out.
3. Those, such as myself, disillusioned by the Christian Right, having realized that the over-zealous support for Israel promoted therein was largely due to infiltration by Trotskyite neoconservatives who, if you'll pardon the expression, did not give a da-n about G-d.
4. A lot of antisemitic loonies. Oh well. Distasteful I know, but I'd rather see their votes go to Ron Paul than to Hillary or Jewliani (did I really just make that up?) Those other candidates also have more than a few loonies supporting them.
125 - Dave Nalle
Irene.
Your 114 is a pretty strange response to my 113, since I didn't even mention Israel in my comment, but you seem to have directed it at me.
Israel's mistreatment of the Palestinians isn't a conspiracy. It's quite public and quite obvious.
Suggesting that AIPAC secretly controls our congress - not THAT is a conspiracy theory, and a popular one. And like most of them, it's a case of taking a nugget of truth - that it's an influential lobby - and blowing it way out of proportion.
Dave