Is Ron Paul turning into a real politician who will take support from any quarter no matter how unsavory?
Much has already been made of the interest shown in the Ron Paul campaign by groups on the reactionary right, from 9/11 'truthers' to white supremacists. Less widely reported but of growing concern to those watching the Paul campaign and wondering if it is going wildly astray is the involvement of far-left groups who are flocking to Paul's banner for reasons which may be genuine or may mask an effort to undermine the entire Republican primary. I like Ron Paul and what he stands for on a great many issues and especially his devotion to the Constitution, but I can't help but worry about the unsavory character his campaign is beginning to develop.…
Article comments
176 - Dr Dreadful
How is it any less of a conspiracy theory that osama and friends perpetrated this crime? Because Bush's cfr panel said it did?
Er... no, because Osama said they did.
177 - Paul
Dread,
Er, nice try there bucko
Certainly you must be aware that he also denied responsibility. That being said if nothing else he is a liar, since both cannot be true.
So umm er, you take the word of a known liar to support your conspiracy theory. BRILLIANT! Even trying to support the government/cfr's position would have held more water than that remark bubba!
AMAZING
178 - Paul
Dread,
I also like how you ignored my main points, sigh I wish Dave would comment, as you obviously shadow him, and seem to be lacking in some of the finer nuances and complexities of the english language. Sigh......
179 - Dave Nalle
I hope that in your free time you can address post #167, as theres alot of meat in them bones, and imho clarifies the the issue of conspiracy theory. :)
Odd, I thought it was just an inadequate brush-off of my previous comment. But in point of fact I've been getting sick kids squared away and driving to the drugstore for late night medicines and plan shortly to put my own sick self to bed. OMG, everyone in our house is sick - it must be a conspiracy!
Dave
180 - Clavos
"sigh I wish Dave would comment, as you obviously shadow him, and seem to be lacking in some of the finer nuances and complexities of the english language. Sigh......"
Well, of course he is!
English isn't his native language, Strine is.
Go easy on the poor bastard, he's really a good bloke.
181 - Dave Nalle
Now am I the only one here who sees the double standard? Dave admits 9-11 was a conspiracy. Forgive the plain logic here Dave, but ummm unless one were in fact a party or witness to said conspiracy all else when people talk about it would be theory now wouldnt it? Hence the name
CONSPIRACY THEORY.
Theories come in all shapes and sizes, Paul. For a theory to be valid it has to fit all the facts without any proven contradictions. In most cases simpler theories with lots of corroboration are considered more valid than theories which involve complex coincidence, far-fetched hypotheses and the coordinated efforts of a great many public figures, all carried out in secret. When faced with a theory like the accepted one on 9/11 which has a plausibility rating of about 9 on a 1 to 10 scale vs. some of the popular alternatives which have glaring inconsistencies and leaps of assumption and rate about a 2 for plausibility, if that, I'm going to go with the theory that makes some sense until something better comes along.
Particularly dubious are theories which require multiple sub-conspiracies and multiple combinations of unprovable hypotheses. The more complex the conspiracy is the less likely it is to exist.
So whats with the nuts?
Perhaps Dave you just call nuts people that have different conspiracy theories than yourself.
No, I call people nuts who believe in things which require them to wilfully suspend reality and believe in things which are ridiculously improbable.
Again my arguments on that derisive comment stand. Its a way out of a debate, and on your way out, you choose to denigrate someone as a parting shot.
Paul, you've made plenty of derisive and dismissive comments here and not just to me. To believe in the ridiculous and to be arrogant about it is the height of folly.
Dave
182 - Paul
um Dave,
Have I called you a nut sir? I think not.
You also used alot of flowery language to not discuss the point of which I was referring to.
That being that YOU are the one who many times has said that conspiracy theories are ridiculous, and ridicule those that have them.
I only am pointing out a fact that you had to admit, that 9-11 was in fact a conspiracy, and unless you were an agent of said conspiracy or a witness to the inner working of it, ANYTHING that you deduce discussing it, whether or not it is the OFFICIAL verson of 9-11 or not, is in point of fact a "conspiracy theory." And under that definition you too are a conspiracy theorist sir,
and if you believe the official version of this conspiracy theory, (I dont know how to put this without sounding mean), um lets just say there are a few um holes in that particular theory, that are glaring and obvious.
Paul
183 - Clavos
Paul, re your response to me in your #173:
I had great difficulty understanding what you were getting at, since the circumstances that you say the CFR and others of their ilk are leading us into, you also say already exist.
For example, you say:
"Who do you think will actually have their political voices heard and heeded? You Clavos? Me? Hardly."
Paul, do you really think your (as single individual) political voice is heard today, beyond your one vote per election?
"Do you want to live in a world Clavos, where your every movement is monitored?"
Noticed all the security cameras, red light cameras, IRS, Social Security, and credit records being kept and cross referenced these days? We're already there, Paul, and nobody really wants to stop it; on the contrary, most in the government want to augment the surveillance. Surely you've read all the news reports.
"I believe in freedom, and my freedom ends where your nose begins sir, until that point I can think, say, feel, spend, articulate, any damn thing I want to.
That is what this country is all about."
Not any more, Paul. Try not paying your property taxes and see what happens to your house. These days, even if you DO pay your taxes, the one government or another can and does come along and take your house to give it to another, just as the IRS has done for years with your money.
"If you cannot see that this country has been hijacked by interests that could care less about the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, there is little that I can say at this point. It is all around you."
Obviously, I agree to some degree. The thing is, Paul, is it this CFR you're so worried about? Or is it US?? Aren't we the ones who have been voluntarily ceding more and more of our freedom to the various governments that touch our lives in exchange for "safety," "security," a danger free, risk free life?
It's not some amorphous, loose confederation of the wealthy and powerful, Paul. It is We The People, who no longer hold self reliance as a value; who expect the government to provide everything for us from cradle to grave, which the government is more than happy to do, because with each tidbit and benefit comes more and more control.
And by believing that there's a collection of boogeymen out there trying to take over the world, you distract yourself from what's really going on.
184 - Dr Dreadful
You... seem to be lacking in some of the finer nuances and complexities of the english language. Sigh......
This I get from a person who doesn't even know how to code a link, cite his sources or, apparently, think critically. Sigh...
As proof that Osama lies (He lies??? No!!!) you give me a frickin' PBS timeline of the events following 9/11?
He may not be FBI Most Wanted for 9/11 (the guys who pulled that off are all dead, after all), but the FBI website does say this: "IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD."
the very moment the planes were attacking the President in thief's father was having lunch with Osama's brother
Actually it was the day before, and it wasn't lunch, it was a business meeting.
Please dont respond by telling me that Osama has 200 people in his family so its not that odd. If you divide 5 billion by 200 the odds again are at the very least astronomical that such and anamoly would occur.
Well, I'm no business expert, but it strikes me that since Bush Sr is an oilman, it's really not that odd that he would be meeting with a member of a prominent Saudi family.
Some Americans unfortunately will believe ANYTHING as long as the goverment tell them it is so.
I'm not American, I don't believe everything your or anyone else's government tells me, and I get my information from reputable news agencies.
So excuse me if I do not believe ONE WORD of what Bush, Lee Hamilton, James Baker, or any one else of that ilk tells me is truth, in fact I now ASSUME that they are lying until shown otherwise. You might consider doing that yourself.
For the record, I'm of the opinion that George W Bush is a complete and utter turdbucket who in an even remotely just world would have been tossed out of office so hard in 2004 that he would still be airborne. He so royally fucked up his response to 9/11 that he attacked not Saudi Arabia, whence 95% of the hijackers hailed, or Pakistan, where bin Laden is and probably already was hiding, but Afghanistan and Iraq, who although governed by a bunch of medievally-minded fuckwits and megalomaniacs had pretty much been minding their own business.
I think, when I'm in England next week, I'll visit the village of Ockham and look up my pal Bill, who has a razor you might be interested in.
And you can shove my use of the English language (which effortlessly surpasses yours) up your nuanced, complex behind.
185 - Paul
Clavos,
Great so lets all turn our back on everything that made America what it was and take our orders. Sounds a bit totalitarian to me. How about you? I am a Patrick Henry kinda guy.
The question is how far do you bend over when taking it from behind? For me if Im gonna take it, I wanna know who is shoving it in so I turn around and look. Some people dont they just take it. Looking is what conspiracy theory is really about.
Also according to what you have just written dont you think that the term "Land of the free and home of the brave are just a wee bit dated?
It is indeed a sad state of affairs.
Clavos I never voluntarily gave up any of my personal sovereignty to anyone nor will I. Others may have, but I certainly have not.
When you use the term "WE" I think to whom you are actually referring to is the sheeple, and I am not one of those, so I must take exception to that definition Clavos. What was it that one great stateman said? I think it was Jefferson, "those that would give up their liberty for security deserve neither". I like that, and subscribe to it, how about you?
186 - Dave Nalle
BTW, I'm still waiting for any kind of substantive response to any of the points I brought up in 156 or 161.
But just to be nice I'm going to give you a free, bonus response to your key points in 173 and 174 so I can go to bed with a peaceful mind.
There is a far cry between internationalism which is conducting business internationally, and globalism. Globalism has to do with Sovereignty
and political power, or lack therof. I would have no qualms about a United States of the world, with a constitution and bill of rights, however that is not what the globalists have in mind.
True, though I think your terminology is imprecise. But your real fault here is in who you think the 'globalists' actually are. The CFR clearly is NOT a globalist group by your definition, because it is dominated by Americans and Brits, focused primarily on their interests, especially business interest, and clearly intended to embody Woodrow Wilson's idea of creating a sort of a kinder, gentler version of the British Empire with America in charge.
There may be a few people in the CFR who are what you call internationalists and I would call 'tranzis' or 'transnational socialists', but they're a token minority. I do agree that they are the real threat, but you're looking for them in the wrong places and by doing so you're distracting from the real threat.
It will be the same entrenched vested interests that already control most if not all government, media, and industry only magnified about 100 times.
You see, this is your paranoia and class envy speaking - the very motivation which drives people like Lou Dobbs and Pat Buchanan. In fact, those large corporations DO represent us, because we are consumers, and catering to what we want is how they make money. Sadly a lot of the time what we want is purely idiotic and not in our best interests, but there's nothing more willing to cater to the public than a business that's trying to make profit.
Do you want to live in a world Clavos, where your every movement is monitored? Where someone in Brussels or Moscow is setting the price for the corn you spent all year producing? Not by free market economy, but by fiat?
You see, this is an entirely separate issue from Rockefeller and the CFR. This is decidedly NOT what they want to accomplish. They want unfettered trade, not a centralized command and control world economy. That would be antithetical to their most basic interests. When you become distracted by these big conspiracies you overlook the much smaller conspiracies or open and public movements which really do exist and want to do the things you suggest.
Here's a good example. The Kyoto treaty was obviously designed as an attack on US sovereignty and on the US economy. No conspiracy to it, just people who are hostile to the US using the environment as a weapon. Yet the CFR has not been strongly pro Kyoto. In fact, they even applauded Bush recently for essentially killing Kyoto. Doesn't that suggest that the CFR's motivations are actually more pro-American and thus pro-business than not?
It's the people behind Kyoto who we need to worry about, not the CFR which is at worst neutral to the US and at best leading the charge towards US world economic domination.
I was born and raised in the USA.
Perhaps you need to get out more and see some of the rest of the world to put things in context.
The reason that I do like Ron Paul is because of his unswavoring commitment to the US constitution. I believe in freedom, and my freedom ends where your nose begins sir, until that point I can think, say, feel, spend, articulate, any damn thing I want to.
That is what this country is all about.
Can't argue with you there. That's certainly the good thing about Ron Paul.
If you cannot see that this country has been hijacked by interests that could care less about the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, there is little that I can say at this point. It is all around you.
I would agree that some negative things have happened as a result of 9/11. I don't see them as a conspiracy, but rather as poor policies based on fear. They certainly don't originate in the international elite, as many of them run directly counter to their interests and beliefs.
Things are so bad in this country right now that you have to submit your urine because you are guilty until proven innocent just to get a job washing dishes. My oh my how far we have come.
Sorry, that's garbage. In most of this country you don't even have to speak English or have a green card to get a job washing dishes, much less pee in a cup.
How about free-speech zones?
How about an american citizen being detained, possibly tortured, held without bail for years?
Yep, these things suck. But they have nothing to do with some overarching conspiracy.
What we have today is a skeleton, a facsimile if you will of freedom. It makes the masses feel good thinking they are free when they no longer are.
We have the freedom we choose to exercise and we dare to demand. A few excesses don't make an instant police state.
Sure Dave, Skull and Bones is a friendly fraternity club, Bohemian Grove is a playground for rich eccentric male bonding (hehe). and there is an easter bunny.
Actually, it's a giant owl.
I suppose they really don't have the cremation of Care (mock human sacrifice) there.
Mock human sacrifice isn't actually a big deal. It goes right along with the ritual cannibalism of the eucharist.
And the cfr is just a bunch of good meaning scholars trying to make a better world for all of us.
Yep, that's about the size of it, sorry.
You would be shocked to the very core of your existence as the the abhorence and genocide done in your name.
What a load. What genocide is being done in my name?
In point of FACT sir, your OPINION of 9-11 is nothing more than a CONSPIRACY THEORY. The fact that the goverment says so does not make it true.
The fact that someone other than the government or opposed to the government says something doesn't make that true either.
Conspiracy theories are classic examples of the 'big lie' principle in practice. The more outrageous and improbable they are the more likely those inclined to believe are to believe, because they could never conceive of telling such a giant whopper themselves, so they assume that the most far fetched story must be true. It's too outrageous NOT to be true.
Even to this day Osama is not on the top ten fbi most wanted for that crime,
The FBI most wanted list is of domestic criminals or criminals who have operated inside the US
not to mention they hauled off most if not all of the evidence to China as fast as they could. You dont find it odd that the very moment the planes were attacking the President in thief's father was having lunch with Osama's brother? Do you believe in the Easter Bunny too? Please dont respond by telling me that Osama has 200 people in his family so its not that odd. If you divide 5 billion by 200 the odds again are at the very least astronomical that such and anamoly would occur.
Perfect example of how conspiracy theories work. All you have here is conjecture, coincidence and a willingness to believe. None of that is actual evidence in any sense. Bush the Elder is a lobbyist and front man for oil interests. The bin Ladens own the largest construction company in the middle east. Why on earth would he NOT be talking to them? If he was in on the attack he'd have made every effort to stay as far the hell away from them as he possibly could.
This kind of theory is on the level of saying that because Richard Nixon was making a speech in Texas the day before the Kennedy assassination he was responsible for it.
To make a theory work you have to have facts and a chain of identifiable causality.
Some Americans unfortunately will believe ANYTHING as long as the goverment tell them it is so. In my opinion of all the reasons that our constitutional republic may not survive it is because of naivetee such as this.
In my opinion the willingness of people to take far-fetched conspiracies seriously is a far greater threat.
We have three distinct branches of goverment because our very foundation as a nation was founded upon the principle that government cannot be trusted, that the people must be on constant vigilance against tyranny. So excuse me if I do not believe ONE WORD of what Bush, Lee Hamilton, James Baker, or any one else of that ilk tells me is truth, in fact I now ASSUME that they are lying until shown otherwise. You might consider doing that yourself.
Except that there's no evidence to support it and no logical motivation for it. Hatred of the establishment is not sufficient evidence to prove anything.
Dave
Dave
187 - Dave Nalle
I only am pointing out a fact that you had to admit, that 9-11 was in fact a conspiracy, and unless you were an agent of said conspiracy or a witness to the inner working of it, ANYTHING that you deduce discussing it, whether or not it is the OFFICIAL verson of 9-11 or not, is in point of fact a "conspiracy theory." And under that definition you too are a conspiracy theorist sir,
and if you believe the official version of this conspiracy theory, (I dont know how to put this without sounding mean), um lets just say there are a few um holes in that particular theory, that are glaring and obvious.
Ok then. I'll stick with the simple, logical conspiracy with a few unanswered questions and actual evidence to back most of it up. You can have the incredibly complex and improbable conspiracy with no real evidence and holes you could fly a 757 through.
When you use the term "WE" I think to whom you are actually referring to is the sheeple, and I am not one of those, so I must take exception to that definition Clavos.
As a believer in these conspiracies you are the definition of a 'sheeple'. You're letting Alex Jones and his ilk lead you around by your fears and prejudices rather than seeing the world clearly.
And on that note I'm off to bed.
Dave
188 - Dr Dreadful
Paul, you got it slightly wrong. Dave is the one who shadows me, except he's a bit more polite about it.
189 - Nancy
Dave
Is stealing/taking our tax dollars to fund wars to support corporate global interests killing in our name or simply stealing to kill?
These people who pull the strings do profit from all this killing don't they? Haven't they always?
How could they both care about the people in an enlightened manner, and murder them simultaneously? Perhaps for their own good?
What ever snottyness or arrogance you accuse Paul of is certainly far exceeeded by their arogance; don't you think?
What exactly are they doing through their internationalism that is so good when their treaty's supersede the laws of the lands they involve often to a lower standard. When soverignty is breached to make a buck?
Aren't the dots connecting in the Bush dynasty between father and son and grandfather from the support of the Nazi's plans to the present insanity?
Perhaps it is the illusion of ever having been free that we must give up. Perhaps the period of freedom we were allowed by those with food in thier mouths and a surplus of means, was one calculated to grow and populate a rich country until it was ripe for culling.
When have the elite not been ruthless? Why should they not be so now? Is it because you are well fed for the moment and that the monkey is only on someone else's back; (name any person in any country that we have gone to war with for some supposed ideal, that allows you to be so cavaleer as to why their plans should not include you?
It has always been a conspiracy. Just because it is larger and more global now and so large and complex that it is probably often beyond our wildest dreams to be able to connect all the dots, doesn't make it less of one. It just means that we are following the bread crumbs and like any sluth trying to get the larger picture.
There is no commercial media we can go to to tell us what is going on. They own all the media.
190 - Clavos
"There is no commercial media we can go to to tell us what is going on. They own all the media."
If they exist as you describe, then they also own the internet. Yet here you are exposing their horrible evil conspiracy to the world, something not even the media dares do, and nobody is trying to stop you???
Some conspiracy; they can't even control a few people on a network they made and control utterly?
The Chinese government is able to control their people's access to the 'net.
Is the cfr that inept?
191 - Dr Dreadful
The Chinese government is able to control their people's access to the 'net.
To a certain extent, Clav. A lot of Chinese use proxy servers, mirror sites and other tricks to get around the Great Red Firewall.
What's really sickening is that US companies, like Cisco and Google, actually provided the Chinese government with the software and know-how to develop their so-called 'Golden Shield'.
192 - Jacob
Speaking of conspiracies, what would cause Rudy “Family Man” Giuliani to pick someone like Podhoretz as a senior foreign policy adviser. unless there is something or someone pressuring him to do it?
193 - Jacob
“[Giuliani] also did what seemed to be impossible, surrounding himself with a team of foreign policy advisers even [censored] than Bush's people. Giuliani has chosen Norman Podhoretz, the columnist and "Godfather of neoconservatism," to head his team as senior foreign policy adviser. Podhoretz is [censored] as an outhouse [censored] and his tiees to Giuliani tell us all we need to know about the direction we would take in the world.
194 - Jacob
Podhoretz has been pleading with Bush to launch an attack on Iran as soon as possible. Podhoretz calmly said in an interview, ‘Well, if we were to bomb the Iranians, as I hope and pray we will, we'll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we've experienced so far look like a love fest.’
“Podhoretz has been wrong about everything he's said about Iraq, and now he wants another war in Iran. Podhoretz is dangerous, and Giuliani turns to him for guidance on the Middle East.”
195 - Jacob
The US has an out-of-control political system that needs changing and the Dems are no better.
196 - Dr Dreadful
Speaking of conspiracies, what would cause Rudy "Family Man" Giuliani to pick someone like Podhoretz as a senior foreign policy adviser. unless there is something or someone pressuring him to do it?
Stupidity?
197 - Nancy
Clavos:
We have been "free" for a long time. We are currently "free" in name only and people still believe they are free: i.e. that their will can have some effect. However, if regime change and the will of the people can't even oust the incumbents then what is really going on? (I don't buy that it is because they will be in office soon enough in their opinion and estimation). I believe it is because they know it doesn't really matter. The will of the people could not be screaming any louder than they are now; and the judiciary committee has it on the back burner. Why is this do you suppose? How can they get away with that. (With a wink wink to each other?). And if they were pressured into it to preserve the appearance, what would really happen? If Cheney and even Bush were removed from office at this point; after they have stolen all the money from the taxpayers to fund their "Perpetual wars for perpetual peace", what difference would it really make to them?
Perhaps it's a large game of good cop bad cop. Wear the people out until they can't stand it any more and then give them the good guy for a respit until you can milk them again.
If their opponents too are mostly all bought and paid for; or enough of them to make certain that things go the way that the elite want, then it isn't necessary to curtail free speach completely.It's better not to for as long as possible so that it done as quickly yet imperceptably as possible. They do it little by little; like a lobster being bioled in a pot, and people don't even know what is happening until it is to late. (One of my favorite fortune cookie fortunes read: "You don't need to fool all of the people all the time you only need majority").
Don't the attempts to abolish the constitution bother you? Why do you think they are doing it?
You see how ignorant people in our country are, you see them being fed a constant diet of sensationalism in the media to desensitize them. You see them barely able to make ends meet, you step over the homeless constantly so you can't even register the distress of an individual.
You think this is an accident?
China's internet is controlled because that is what they can get away with at this point in China. Ours is not yet, but again if our voices can have no effect because those we have elected are really impotent, then what difference does it make that we exercise them?
It wears us out, makes us think we are doing something, and we go to bed nice and tired, like I did last night.
198 - Nancy
p.s.: "Good guy" above should have been in quotes.
199 - Jacob
Nancy, it's a frog, not a lobster. Lobsters are dropped into boiling water.
200 - Nancy
Thats right!
201 - Paul
Hello Dave,
Top O the morning to ya. A shower, shave, fresh cup o coffee, looked at the morning paper to check my Haliburton stocks, all is good in the world, ready to engage.
How easy it is to assume about other writers on here. Two primary examples come to mind. The first by me.
Having responded to Dr Dre in Post #178 and made a giant assumption because of his short often times snide remarks, I made the mistake of saying that I thought his english skills were rather elementary After perousing his blog I realized that I was wrong, and I do acquiese to his superior english skills, not that I had such a mean post coming.
The second one written by you Dave when I said I was born and raised in the USA. For some strange reason you assumed that I needed to get out and travel the world. I already have Dave. I have been all through Europe. I have ventured into and explored Japan, Taiwan, S Korea, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and the Philippines.
I only bring these two examples up to show how easily we all make assumptions about the other person, that oftentimes are not true.
That being said I would like to return to your favorit subject being conspiracy theory. I have attempted numerous times to get you to admit, that you have your own conspiracy theories, and those which you do not agree with you simply deride and ridicule rather than engage. It is apt as you come off as I have said rather smug, and all knowing.
What I am aiming at here Dave, is for you to at the very least admit, which you already have that you too are a conspiracy theorist. That being said, quite frankly what you do instead of engaging on a particular theory that someone is espousing, you simply deride it as being a "conspiracy theory". So I find this at the very least quite hypocritical regarding this subject.
You have admitted that 9-11 was in fact a conspiracy, however since you I assume were not in on said conspiracy, and since I assume you did not witness personally the inside machinations of said conspiracy, ANYTHING you have to say on the subject is theory, not fact.
Now I would like to share some information with you on the Muslim Brotherhood which you may not be familary with. As Dr Dre so meanly pointed out, I do not know yet how on this forum to make a link, I will use the url instead. The first link is a realaudio file of anti-facist researcher Dave Emory, who in my opinion is an expert on this subject.
The title of this talk is "compendium on the moslem brotherhood" and shows quite clearly how this facist organization came to be, how it was affiliated with national socialism, and how after the war British Intelligence MI6 came to use it as an asset, and sold it to US intelligence twenty years later, way before the Afghanistan war with the Soviets.
The second link is by a man named John Loftus formerly with the Justice Department, and had the highest security clearances in the US for years and this link you might find interesting as well.
202 - Dr Dreadful
Paul,
This is a pretty good tutorial on how to use the HTML "anchor" tag to link to another page on the web. Hope you get good use out of it - however, please remember that here on BC you are limited to three links per comment.
Sorry you feel that you didn't deserve my rude response. I considered that I was simply giving as good as I'd got.
And I stand by everything I wrote about Bush. You have to admit that was pretty choice.
203 - paul
Dr Dre,
Thanks for the tip, and yes I did enjoy your comments on our commander in thief. I will attempt to keep most if not all of my comments in the future of a more civil and polite nature. However I cannot promise!
Paul
204 - Dave Nalle
That being said I would like to return to your favorit subject being conspiracy theory.
Hardly my favorite subject, just someehwere where I feel obligated to stand up for reason.
I have attempted numerous times to get you to admit, that you have your own conspiracy theories,
There are all kinds of conspiracies. Some are real, some are fantasy. The existence of one conspiracy does not legitimize others which are nonsensical
and those which you do not agree with you simply deride and ridicule rather than engage. It is apt as you come off as I have said rather smug, and all knowing.
I guess that's not so surprising given the context.
What I am aiming at here Dave, is for you to at the very least admit, which you already have that you too are a conspiracy theorist.
No more than anyone else. I acknoweldge that some conspiracies exist. That's not the same as believing credulously in any conspiracy that comes along.
That being said, quite frankly what you do instead of engaging on a particular theory that someone is espousing, you simply deride it as being a "conspiracy theory". So I find this at the very least quite hypocritical regarding this subject.
I'd say that I deride it as being a ridiculous and implausable conspiracy theory.
You have admitted that 9-11 .was in fact a conspiracy, however since you I assume were not in on said conspiracy, and since I assume you did not witness personally the inside machinations
of said conspiracy, ANYTHING you have to say on the subject is theory, not fact.
What's your point here? Yes, without incontrovertible evidence everything is a theory. So?
I'm familiar with the Muslim Brotherhood and their nazi connections. And your point is?
Dave
205 - Paul
Dave,
My point is simple, by your own words you too are a conspiracy theorist, but what I object too, is the conspiracy theories that you do not agree with you simply deride. That is not too hard to understand is it? So I find it hypocritical at the very least that you continually do this.
9-11 was in fact a conspiracy, you just happen to subscribe to the official conspiracy theory which at this point according to ALL major polls most Americans don't. And the reason being that most do not subscribe to the official version is that it has more holes in in than swiss cheese. So instead of discussing the holes you deride, deride, deride.
As to the Moslem Brotherhood, and what about them. I sent you a link already sir, and it was not just about their past Nazi connections but more about how the British and later the Americans through their intelligent services had co-opted them way before the Afghan war.
If you choose not to listen to the link that is your choice, but then dont go asking me (what about them?)
I suggest in the future when talking about 9-11 you start out the thread by saying "Hi my name is Dave and I am a conspiracy theorist." People might take you more seriously then.
cheers
Paul
206 - Lumpy
I would say that Ron Paul had sold out his libertarian values to the worst sort of traitprs to our nation, but I read in the Post today that he freely admita that he's totally lost control over his campaign and that the grasroots (traitorous socialist fifth columnists) have pretty much taken over.
207 - Jacob
“the grassroots (traitorous socialist fifth columnists) have pretty much taken over.”
That’s the reason Joseph Goebbels gave for why the Nazis had to take over.
208 - Dave Nalle
Jacob, that actuallly fits in rather well with something I'm putting in an article I'm working on. One of the first things a conspiratorial movement like the Nazis does is to accuse someone else of being almost exactly what they are.
Dave
209 - STM
Jacob: "The US has an out-of-control political system that needs changing".
That's what the Nazis said about the Weimar republic.
210 - Jacob
au contraire -- The Nazis came to power in Germany in January 1933 and established a dictatorship, ending the 12-year-old Weimar Republic. The police, who had been charged with defending the Weimar Republic, were integrated relatively easily into the Nazi regime. There was neither a wholesale purge nor a wholesale resignation of policemen.
211 - Jacob
The Weimar Republic sank of its own weight. From the time Hitler had his pusch in 1923, until 1933, inflation and war reparations had sunk the Republic. There was no need for fighting in the streets as was done earlier.
212 - Jacob
That's putsch, not pusch.
213 - STM
Dave: "clearly intended to embody Woodrow Wilson's idea of creating a sort of a kinder, gentler version of the British Empire with America in charge".
Well it happened, Dave ... The only problem is, is ain't kinder or gentler.
214 - STM
The Nazis said, in short, Germany now has an out of control political situation that needs changing. And we're changing it.
Their coming to power WAS the end of the Weimar republic.
215 - Jacob
In November 1932 an agreement was reached between Hitler and von Papen, a former chancellor to form a government with Hitler as chancellor, but with non-Nazis in most other posts. Once in office, Hitler quickly secured full political power.
It was smooth and bloodless. It was totally unlike what happened in Russia in 1917.
216 - STM
And of course, while the Nazis were orchestrating their bloodless coup, they never had any intention of killing off the republic and turning it into a totalitarian state.
They only got the idea for that later, is that what you are saying Jacob?
217 - Jacob
You are way off track. Haven't you read Mein Kampf? Hitler attempted a coup known as the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923. As early as 1923, Hitler wanted to emulate Mussolini who already was a dictator.
218 - Dave Nalle
Technically you can't call Mussolini a dictator until at least 1924. Prior to the election of 1924 the Fascists did not have complete control of the government and had not shut down the normal process of democracy and he had not assumed individual dictatorial power outside of the rule of law. That wasn't really until 1925.
Dave
219 - Colin
I'm listening to you as I type Dave - congratulations on getting the show out after some early technical difficulties. Nice to put voices to yer.
220 - John
If Ron Paul can cause an entire sub-set of socialists and "populist progressives" to wake up to the value of free markets and limited government, I don't see a problem with that :)
I realize that Paul's left-leaning supporters may not be so keen on constitutionalism and the idea of state's rights (10th amendment) as I am, but he's at least planted that seed of doubt as to the far-reaching negative effects of a powerful government.
221 - A.K. Smith
Dave - Been away for a while. But yes, I do deny that anything like what you said ever happened. And if Dumbdero's "former Libertarian State Chairwoman" in Nevada really exists, she will know who I am and tell me all about what happened.
Of course, Eric and Dave, this never happened because I normally run the meetings in part or in total, and it's simply fiction.
If there is anyone from Moveon.org in our Meetup, they've hidden it pretty darn well. In fact, they've likely hidden it from themselves as well, since they don't exist in the group.
I am thinking it's time to grow up and realize that the Republican Party, at least here in Nevada, is dying. It is ossified from years of self-satisfied belief in its own bull. And it's getting a wakeup call now. And the old line doesn't like being woken up. They'd rather congratulate themselves on becoming a blue state (look at the voter registrations lately?). The only people registering Republicans in this state are Paul supporters. And we're getting hundreds and hundreds of them. But because we don't feel like sucking up to pro-war zealots, they don't want us. Too bad.
And before we will support a war-mongering Republican, we will either elect Ron Paul or sit on our hands and show them just how small and insignificant the Republican Party is and will be without us. (No, I can't bring myself to vote for a Democrat, no matter how bad the R candidate is. But I sure can go fishing on election day.)