The photos of Dr. Paul and Don Black...
- Thread starter Danzig
- Start date
- Status
Well THAT would not only be speculation but would prompt a quick lock and potentially a mandatory break from TFL.
I'm NOT egging BTW. I'm just a little knocked back after hearing that audio. In case you didn't notice, I haven't been anti-Paul. I have been trying to change the tone of the Paul discussion to be lest vitriolic by suggesting some dignity and pointing out that some supporters are HURTING Paul's cause more then PROPELLING Paul's campaign. That's hardly egging.
Hear the audio, read the posts, speculate for yourself if you feel so inclined. But after the audio is heard the tactics will be seen for what they are by folks.
Don't be defensive. It's Stormfront and their tactics under the sunlight not you.
I'm NOT egging BTW. I'm just a little knocked back after hearing that audio. In case you didn't notice, I haven't been anti-Paul. I have been trying to change the tone of the Paul discussion to be lest vitriolic by suggesting some dignity and pointing out that some supporters are HURTING Paul's cause more then PROPELLING Paul's campaign. That's hardly egging.
Hear the audio, read the posts, speculate for yourself if you feel so inclined. But after the audio is heard the tactics will be seen for what they are by folks.
Don't be defensive. It's Stormfront and their tactics under the sunlight not you.
Redneckrepairs
New member
folks i have honestly tried to get behind paul , really , i have listened to " the message " maby its me , the " signal to noise ratio " just does not jibe . We cannot have a gold standard currency any more , we cannot have an isolationist foren policy . You can agree with the war on terror or not as you see fit , however no one chose to take war against fundamentalist islam ( wherever they may be found , and personally i suspect the kingdom of saud more than Iraq ) they chose to bring the war to us . You see i agree with GWB on the basic decision to go to war , the difference is i would have had our forces hunt mulls down , sewn them up in pig skins, and buried them in shell fish . preferably alive . And all on vidio . To hell with the " truthers " To hell with anyone who speculates its Americas fault and frankly thank the Christian god for folk who are more forgiving than i . Ron paul and his ilk are imho little more than an enemy of America Wrapped in a flag . Hillery and Obama at least have the base honesty to come at us honestly with thier aims .
Sorry mods but its an honest opinion .
Sorry mods but its an honest opinion .
huchahuchax
New member
Look, I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and there is a perfectly less than appealling explanation for all the racist charges against Ron Paul. I've been doing a little drinking, watching football (woo hoo, go New England!) but I happen to know the truth - or at least I think I do. As far as the photos with Don Black - it's old news. Don Black went to some Ron Paul event and got his picture taken without disclosing his identity to the campaign.
As for the 15 'or so' year old racist newsletters - Ron Paul did not write them. Most likely a guy named Lew Rockwell wrote them. Ron Paul most likely knew what was in the newsletters, but did nothing. The reason - money. Going by the solicitation letter in the recent New Republic expose, the price of the newsletter was $99 per subscription at one point.
Sorry, like I said I'm drunk and lazy, so I don't care to sight my sources, but basically at some point Ron Paul and associates commited fear mongerring for profit (probably still do to an extent - that explains all the 9/11 truthers that have latched onto the campaign). None of this bothers me - politics is a dirty business and there is a sucker born every minute. It's not like the other candidates AREN"T scaring the hell out of people for money too.
As for the 15 'or so' year old racist newsletters - Ron Paul did not write them. Most likely a guy named Lew Rockwell wrote them. Ron Paul most likely knew what was in the newsletters, but did nothing. The reason - money. Going by the solicitation letter in the recent New Republic expose, the price of the newsletter was $99 per subscription at one point.
Sorry, like I said I'm drunk and lazy, so I don't care to sight my sources, but basically at some point Ron Paul and associates commited fear mongerring for profit (probably still do to an extent - that explains all the 9/11 truthers that have latched onto the campaign). None of this bothers me - politics is a dirty business and there is a sucker born every minute. It's not like the other candidates AREN"T scaring the hell out of people for money too.
As I've mentioned several times on other threads, I have an ethnically Jewish mother and have relatives on that side of the family who were actually in Nazi camps.
If I thought there were ANY chance that Ron Paul were anti-Semitic, I would obviously not support him.
Come on, people, use your heads. If you're a politician, some guy you don't know comes up to you and shakes your hand, and a picture of you is taken shaking that guy's hand, does that mean you're a neo-Nazi if that other guy turns out to be? LOL
Also, this threadbare claim that anyone who opposes aid to Israel (either in the form of tax dollars, weapons, running politicial interference for them in the UN, or just plain attacking other countries for them) must be an "anti-Semite" is a cheap smear tactic. Unfortunately, it tends to work very well. Jews like me (and the good folks at www.nkusa.org) are often branded "self-hating" if we don't toe that ethnocentric line and put Israel, rather than America, first. It's perfectly ridiculous. Most Jews don't even live in Israel, a nation that was founded in part by terrorists such as the Stern and Irgun gangs. I'm quite happy right here in this country. And anyone living in THIS country has a duty to be absolutely loyal to THIS country -- not to ANY foreign country.
Obviously I don't want to see Jews exterminated or oppressed. But neither do I want to see the Palestinians or other Arabs live in poverty, misery, and torment because Israel insists on occupying their lands, shooting missiles into populated areas, and punishing millions of refugees for the actions of a few terrorists. (In fact, both sides are equally guilty of terrorism.) I believe in justice and equal rights for everyone, regardless of race or ethnicity. And it bothers me greatly that my tax dollars and my government are being used to promote human rights abuses. (This doesn't just happen in Israel, BTW. Remember the "School of the Americas"? Disgusting!)
It also doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that Iraq was invaded to strengthen Israel. I mean, come on -- hasn't anyone noticed that with all the serious human rights abuses going on around the world (e.g., Africa), the US is almost exclusively focused on saber-rattling against nations that just happen to be Israel's Muslim neighbors? And if you trace the backgrounds of the chief architects of the Iraq war, almost all of them are Jewish Zionists. Even an Israeli newspaper points this out:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/...&subContrassID=14&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y
Other interesting pieces of the puzzle:
The spies who pushed for war on Iraq (about the Israeli spies in the Pentagon who helped fabricate the intelligence about "Saddam's WMDs")
http://www.acpr.org.il/publications/policy-papers/pp141-xs.html (America gets its marching orders)
My advice to those here: Anytime you see a commentator pushing hard for war on Iran, investigate his background. I can almost guarantee you'll find connections to the Israel lobby or one of the neocon think tanks (e.g., American Enterprise Institute, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs).
Anti-Semitism? NO. Self-hating Jew? NO. This is simple reality, and it's up to all Americans of good conscience -- regardless of ethnicity -- to resist the use of our country to serve the agenda of a foreign state. Ron Paul might not even be aware of these things I've discussed here, but even if he isn't, he puts AMERICA FIRST. That's why so many are out to smear him as a "racist," "anti-Semite," "neo-Nazi," etc.
If I thought there were ANY chance that Ron Paul were anti-Semitic, I would obviously not support him.
Come on, people, use your heads. If you're a politician, some guy you don't know comes up to you and shakes your hand, and a picture of you is taken shaking that guy's hand, does that mean you're a neo-Nazi if that other guy turns out to be? LOL
Also, this threadbare claim that anyone who opposes aid to Israel (either in the form of tax dollars, weapons, running politicial interference for them in the UN, or just plain attacking other countries for them) must be an "anti-Semite" is a cheap smear tactic. Unfortunately, it tends to work very well. Jews like me (and the good folks at www.nkusa.org) are often branded "self-hating" if we don't toe that ethnocentric line and put Israel, rather than America, first. It's perfectly ridiculous. Most Jews don't even live in Israel, a nation that was founded in part by terrorists such as the Stern and Irgun gangs. I'm quite happy right here in this country. And anyone living in THIS country has a duty to be absolutely loyal to THIS country -- not to ANY foreign country.
Obviously I don't want to see Jews exterminated or oppressed. But neither do I want to see the Palestinians or other Arabs live in poverty, misery, and torment because Israel insists on occupying their lands, shooting missiles into populated areas, and punishing millions of refugees for the actions of a few terrorists. (In fact, both sides are equally guilty of terrorism.) I believe in justice and equal rights for everyone, regardless of race or ethnicity. And it bothers me greatly that my tax dollars and my government are being used to promote human rights abuses. (This doesn't just happen in Israel, BTW. Remember the "School of the Americas"? Disgusting!)
It also doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that Iraq was invaded to strengthen Israel. I mean, come on -- hasn't anyone noticed that with all the serious human rights abuses going on around the world (e.g., Africa), the US is almost exclusively focused on saber-rattling against nations that just happen to be Israel's Muslim neighbors? And if you trace the backgrounds of the chief architects of the Iraq war, almost all of them are Jewish Zionists. Even an Israeli newspaper points this out:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/...&subContrassID=14&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y
Other interesting pieces of the puzzle:
The spies who pushed for war on Iraq (about the Israeli spies in the Pentagon who helped fabricate the intelligence about "Saddam's WMDs")
http://www.acpr.org.il/publications/policy-papers/pp141-xs.html (America gets its marching orders)
My advice to those here: Anytime you see a commentator pushing hard for war on Iran, investigate his background. I can almost guarantee you'll find connections to the Israel lobby or one of the neocon think tanks (e.g., American Enterprise Institute, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs).
Anti-Semitism? NO. Self-hating Jew? NO. This is simple reality, and it's up to all Americans of good conscience -- regardless of ethnicity -- to resist the use of our country to serve the agenda of a foreign state. Ron Paul might not even be aware of these things I've discussed here, but even if he isn't, he puts AMERICA FIRST. That's why so many are out to smear him as a "racist," "anti-Semite," "neo-Nazi," etc.
Redneck repairs, until you understand the differences between isolationism and non-interventionism, you're right not to like Ron Paul.
When you understand that Ron Paul is all about non-intervention and using war as a last resort ( we didn't, congress didn't approve the war, commander in chief decided on his own! )... You'll see he has the only logical and economically feasible stance on foreign policy. We should trade, talk, travel and be allies, but non intervene, waste borrowed money and get in the way! We get in the way more than we help!
I'd not call the only candidate running who's inline with the founders principles and who tirelessly supports the constitution and liberty, an enemy of the US wrapped in a flag. I'm more concerned with the media propaganda, new world order and a country looking for reasons to begin WWIII. I'm concerned with the voters that think we can even afford to stay in Iraq! We cannot! Our economy is already in recession, headed towards depression! Time to focus on the US and set examples that way.
When you understand that Ron Paul is all about non-intervention and using war as a last resort ( we didn't, congress didn't approve the war, commander in chief decided on his own! )... You'll see he has the only logical and economically feasible stance on foreign policy. We should trade, talk, travel and be allies, but non intervene, waste borrowed money and get in the way! We get in the way more than we help!
I'd not call the only candidate running who's inline with the founders principles and who tirelessly supports the constitution and liberty, an enemy of the US wrapped in a flag. I'm more concerned with the media propaganda, new world order and a country looking for reasons to begin WWIII. I'm concerned with the voters that think we can even afford to stay in Iraq! We cannot! Our economy is already in recession, headed towards depression! Time to focus on the US and set examples that way.
SteelCore: we agree more than not on this topic, but this would be one exception. I happen to know a bit on the subject, and everything that I know points to the fact: Palestinians live in poverty not because of Israel. Israel would be happy to leave all occupied lands if this would've bought them peace. Problem is - it wouldn't, and that was demonstrated on numerous occasions. If all US and UN money donated to Palestinians would've been converted into infrastructure and transfered to the people, each one would've been able to afford a house with a golden roof. Instead, they still rely on Israel for electricity and supply chains, and pay back with missiles. But hey - late Yasser Arafat left about 10 billion dollars in a network of accounts.
Why I don't think that this is relevant - US involvement into affairs of Israel is oftentimes more detrimental than helpful. US dictates pretty stiff price for the help that it provides. For example, Israeli military had to decline very lucrative contracts with China because US said "no". Israel would not only survive, it might even be better off if US stops to dictate it's terms and if US stops financial support of the Arab world.
samoand,
You're very correct to point out the corruption on the Palestinian side of things. It has unquestionably played a role in the hardships those people experience.
My position is that there's plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the fence and that the US shouldn't be involved (except perhaps as an unbiased negotiator). The problem is that the US is completely biased in favor of the Israelis and doesn't even make an attempt to hide it. To the US government, everything Israel does is justified self-defense, and everything the Palestinians do to resist the occupation (even attacks on soldiers rather than civilians) is terrorism.
We've heard all about the Palestinian suicide bombings, and any bombing intended to kill at random is a perfectly horrible act of terrorism. No question about it. But how many Americans know about the Arab schoolchildren who've been shot while sitting in their classrooms or while walking to school? http://www.amnestyusa.org/children/stories_israelot.html
How many Americans know that this sort of thing is being done with their support:
Israelis Reveal the IDF's Treatment of Palestinians
The above article (which is from a Jewish online magazine) shows the kind of atrocities that are being done in our name. Frankly, I'm amazed more terrorists haven't targeted the US. If someone stomped my child like that or shot one of my relatives just for fun, I'd probably become a suicide bomber, too. I would make getting revenge my life's mission, even if I had to lose my own life to succeed. No promise of "72 virgins" would be necessary at all.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm disgusted with both sides of the conflict. It's just that we only hear one side of the story in this country, and we're only condemning the atrocities committed by one side. We're basically supporting atrocities committed by the other side by providing weapons, money, UN vetoes of all condemnatory resolutions, and so forth. If the situation were reversed and we were only supporting the Arabs against the Israelis, I'd have a major problem with that, too.
Thus, I oppose aid to Israel, aid to Egypt, aid to corrupt Arab nations in general, and just about any aid (especially military aid) to anybody. Most of all, I oppose the US going to war for the benefit of Israeli hegemony (as with Gulf War II) or any other nation unless there's an unambiguous threat to the security of the US or world peace, or some other extraordinary circumstances. This is far from the only reason I support Ron Paul, but it's definitely one of them.
You're very correct to point out the corruption on the Palestinian side of things. It has unquestionably played a role in the hardships those people experience.
My position is that there's plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the fence and that the US shouldn't be involved (except perhaps as an unbiased negotiator). The problem is that the US is completely biased in favor of the Israelis and doesn't even make an attempt to hide it. To the US government, everything Israel does is justified self-defense, and everything the Palestinians do to resist the occupation (even attacks on soldiers rather than civilians) is terrorism.
We've heard all about the Palestinian suicide bombings, and any bombing intended to kill at random is a perfectly horrible act of terrorism. No question about it. But how many Americans know about the Arab schoolchildren who've been shot while sitting in their classrooms or while walking to school? http://www.amnestyusa.org/children/stories_israelot.html
How many Americans know that this sort of thing is being done with their support:
Israelis Reveal the IDF's Treatment of Palestinians
The above article (which is from a Jewish online magazine) shows the kind of atrocities that are being done in our name. Frankly, I'm amazed more terrorists haven't targeted the US. If someone stomped my child like that or shot one of my relatives just for fun, I'd probably become a suicide bomber, too. I would make getting revenge my life's mission, even if I had to lose my own life to succeed. No promise of "72 virgins" would be necessary at all.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm disgusted with both sides of the conflict. It's just that we only hear one side of the story in this country, and we're only condemning the atrocities committed by one side. We're basically supporting atrocities committed by the other side by providing weapons, money, UN vetoes of all condemnatory resolutions, and so forth. If the situation were reversed and we were only supporting the Arabs against the Israelis, I'd have a major problem with that, too.
Thus, I oppose aid to Israel, aid to Egypt, aid to corrupt Arab nations in general, and just about any aid (especially military aid) to anybody. Most of all, I oppose the US going to war for the benefit of Israeli hegemony (as with Gulf War II) or any other nation unless there's an unambiguous threat to the security of the US or world peace, or some other extraordinary circumstances. This is far from the only reason I support Ron Paul, but it's definitely one of them.
Sorry, Danzig. But I thought it was sort of relevant because some have accused Paul of being anti-Semitic (or at least undesirable as a president) because he doesn't want the US to continue to support Israel (or other nations) blindly. Here's an example of the kind of argument I was trying to rebut:
http://inverted-world.com/index.php/blog/blog/why_i_dont_support_ron_paul/
The Don Black photo (which I actually haven't even seen yet) is just another example of people trying to lend weight to that smear.
Do you have a link to that photo, by the way? Thanks.
http://inverted-world.com/index.php/blog/blog/why_i_dont_support_ron_paul/
The Don Black photo (which I actually haven't even seen yet) is just another example of people trying to lend weight to that smear.
Do you have a link to that photo, by the way? Thanks.
Not any more. It used to be one side - the Palestinian side - up until fairly recently.
Things that media doesn't like to mention even now are media-provoked conflicts, fake funerals, beaten Jews that are knowingly (!) passed by media as beaten Palestinians, roofs of hospitals being used for missile bases (with later acquisitions of Israelis shooting at a hospital), mob lynches of Israelis, gunmen hiding behind stone-throwing children, staged shootouts (as if real ones isn't enough), and many, many, many other things. They where shooting missiles from Gaza for decades; it's only couple years ago that media started talking about it - because political climate has changed.
And yes, the topic is diverting. This is my last post on this subject.
samoand: Fair enough; we could debate that stuff for hours, so we might as well agree to disagree.
Danzig: Never mind, I found the pic at this blog, along with all sorts of idiotic comments from various mouth breathers.
Walk up to just about anyone Paul's age on the street and ask him if he knows who Don Black is, what he looks like, or if he knows anything about him. Chances are very high that they'll have no clue. Heck, I didn't even know what Don Black looked like until I just looked at that photo.
Danzig: Never mind, I found the pic at this blog, along with all sorts of idiotic comments from various mouth breathers.
It isn't going to hold water because Paul's detractors don't want it to.
Walk up to just about anyone Paul's age on the street and ask him if he knows who Don Black is, what he looks like, or if he knows anything about him. Chances are very high that they'll have no clue. Heck, I didn't even know what Don Black looked like until I just looked at that photo.
Bruxley said:
Apart from your mentions in the other thread that "well, gee, it sure looks like Ron Paul was at a Stormfront event" when that assumption was so easily debunked, having been discussed all over the internet for many months now, I noted a few others...
In chronological order:
Redneckrepairs said:
WildassumptionAlaska said:
Bruxley said:
I don't see how. I agree at least in part with every one of those positions, except I'm not sure what a "pro-jew" war is. You know, these Stormfront guys might also believe in jury trials and property rights. Eerily enough, I believe in those things as well! The "connections" between Ron Paul supporters and racist groups just go on and on!
Bruxley said:
(rejected)
- Status