JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: mord on October 11, 2007, 02:23:41 PM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yafeVz8eP0U
-
We will destroy Ron Paul for this, but we do need to destroy this website first.
How can we do it? but if you do go into it the money goes into their pockets.
-
lol @ 'jew media'
-
Wow!
-
We will destroy Ron Paul for this, but we do need to destroy this website first.
How can we do it? but if you do go into it the money goes into their pockets.
Ron Paul has actually raised as much as John McCain for the 3rd quarter of reported fund-raising.
-
Listen to that girl's voice... Lady Celtic... lol Wanna bet she's a 700 lb tub-a-chunk? A real bastion of good genes for the so-called white master race, no doubt.
-
lol, the irony of being of Irish descent and being a "proud" white. The Irish for centuries were condemned as the "[censored] of Europe", enslaved and starved to death by the anglo-saxons and persecuted on arrival in America by the anglo and germanic whites.
Also, her map is wrong, the majority of Ulster is not part of Ireland but part of Great Britain.
White "nationalists" should be hunted down and killed wherever we find them, they are a burden on society and their trailer parks take up valuable real estate which could house worthwhile things like tyre yards and sewerage plants.
-
Apparently those fools don't understand that their endorsement will only hurt the candidate...ort maybe they do and that's why they did it...I don't think the people there are the sharpest tacks in the box personally..
-
I am not sure we have too much to worry about from those cretins. I am more worried about the JTF members who from time to time pop up and say Ron Nazi Paul is a swell guy.
-
I am not sure we have too much to worry about from those cretins. I am more worried about the JTF members who from time to time pop up and say Ron Nazi Paul is a swell guy.
This may surprise you but MassuhDGoodname, a well-informed and intelligent person, is endorsing Ron Paul. I think he and Chaim disagree about this.
His analysis:
Every JTF member should ponder this thought:
Lenin advocated that all dedicated Marxists/Communists living in Western parliamentary/democratic countries should always vote for the most extreme anti-Communist political party and/or political leader seeking office.
Why?
How does that make any sense?...
The revolutionary seeks radical change in the social-political order; as opposed to a mere change in policy (while maintaining the same corrupt and unviable political order which they seek to overthrow).
Therefore, by using this logic, a taskforce seeking the complete and permanent end to Israel's present form of government (one which promotes corruption, feeds off of its own corruption, and which promotes Jew-hatred in exchange for the financial support of other nations seeking the destruction of the Jewish People), must support and vote for candidates whose governance will be the most oppressive, least tolerant, and most extreme.
This will greatly shorten the life-span remaining for the current status-quo government and social order, resulting in the citizenry revolting against the status quo.
[The current U.S. Republican/Democrat form of "musical chairs" government allows only for people with different names to assume the continuity of the same power structure; the real powers directing all domestic and foreign policy being international central banks and supranational globalist corporations which threaten the very existence of Israel as well as the United States of America.
By choosing the "most acceptable candidate who really has a chance of winning", or "the candidate who most promises continued support of Israel", one merely guarantees that Israel will continue to be dissembled through a "Roadmap To Peace in the Middle East". Ron Paul promises to "end American involvement in the Middle East, bring the troops home, end America's reliance on foreign oil, and "mind our own business".]
Now, I ask you all...
Which candidate should you be supporting if you desire Israel to be free from two political parties which both seek "A Two-State Solution--two democratic states, living in peace, side by side, Israel and P__les_ine"?
Which candidate should you be supporting if you desire Israel to be free from State Dept. pressure, free from Congoleeza and Madeline Albright, free from Jimmy Carter & the Clintons, free from the blackmail of international financiers, and free from the "Roadmap"?
And, which candidate should you be supporting if you desire to see an America free from the Federal Reserve, free from the IRS, free from Affirmative Action, free from forced busing and forced racial integration, and if you desire to live in an America with free enterprise, under G-d, under the rule of the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land?
Maybe Massuh's not quite so crazy as some think him to be?
-
I am not sure we have too much to worry about from those cretins. I am more worried about the JTF members who from time to time pop up and say Ron Nazi Paul is a swell guy.
This may surprise you but MassuhDGoodname, a well-informed and intelligent person, is endorsing Ron Paul. I think he and Chaim disagree about this.
His analysis:
Every JTF member should ponder this thought:
Lenin advocated that all dedicated Marxists/Communists living in Western parliamentary/democratic countries should always vote for the most extreme anti-Communist political party and/or political leader seeking office.
Why?
How does that make any sense?...
The revolutionary seeks radical change in the social-political order; as opposed to a mere change in policy (while maintaining the same corrupt and unviable political order which they seek to overthrow).
Therefore, by using this logic, a taskforce seeking the complete and permanent end to Israel's present form of government (one which promotes corruption, feeds off of its own corruption, and which promotes Jew-hatred in exchange for the financial support of other nations seeking the destruction of the Jewish People), must support and vote for candidates whose governance will be the most oppressive, least tolerant, and most extreme.
This will greatly shorten the life-span remaining for the current status-quo government and social order, resulting in the citizenry revolting against the status quo.
[The current U.S. Republican/Democrat form of "musical chairs" government allows only for people with different names to assume the continuity of the same power structure; the real powers directing all domestic and foreign policy being international central banks and supranational globalist corporations which threaten the very existence of Israel as well as the United States of America.
By choosing the "most acceptable candidate who really has a chance of winning", or "the candidate who most promises continued support of Israel", one merely guarantees that Israel will continue to be dissembled through a "Roadmap To Peace in the Middle East". Ron Paul promises to "end American involvement in the Middle East, bring the troops home, end America's reliance on foreign oil, and "mind our own business".]
Now, I ask you all...
Which candidate should you be supporting if you desire Israel to be free from two political parties which both seek "A Two-State Solution--two democratic states, living in peace, side by side, Israel and P__les_ine"?
Which candidate should you be supporting if you desire Israel to be free from State Dept. pressure, free from Congoleeza and Madeline Albright, free from Jimmy Carter & the Clintons, free from the blackmail of international financiers, and free from the "Roadmap"?
And, which candidate should you be supporting if you desire to see an America free from the Federal Reserve, free from the IRS, free from Affirmative Action, free from forced busing and forced racial integration, and if you desire to live in an America with free enterprise, under G-d, under the rule of the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land?
Maybe Massuh's not quite so crazy as some think him to be?
Ron Paul stated that American foreign policy caused 9/11. Enough said.
-
StørmFrønt are scum, Ron Paul is a (expletive deleted ).
-
If Ron Paul has any brains in his head, he will do everything he can to get this video removed. This endorsement will most certainly be his downfall.
Also LOL at Jew media.
-
I don't think anything Paul says about non-interventionism should be taken with anything more than a grain of salt. Mark my words--he WOULD declare war on Israel.
-
Being alligned with StørmFrønt is only going to act as transgression against his candidacy...
no one is going to take him seriously as long as members of a racist organization emulate his viewpoints
-
raiseyourfist: "...no one is going to take him seriously as long as members of a racist organization emulate his viewpoints..."
Well said!
Thank G-d that we don't have any racists posting on the JTF Forum!
To my knowledge there has never been so much as one person associated with StørmFrønt or other groups coming to join this forum!
Furthermore, never has anyone posted racially derogatory comments or photos on this forum, because they know that even the slightest hint of racism would tarnish Chaim Ben Pesach and JTF!
For this!....we must remain eternally grateful!
-
raiseyourfist: "...no one is going to take him seriously as long as members of a racist organization emulate his viewpoints..."
Well said!
Thank G-d that we don't have any racists posting on the JTF Forum!
To my knowledge there has never been so much as one person associated with StørmFrønt or other groups coming to join this forum!
because they know that even the slightest hint of racism would tarnish Chaim Ben Pesach and JTF!
For this!....we must remain eternally grateful!
Why don't you respond to Trumpeldor's post?
Based on your sarcasm, you apparently believe that this forum allows people from StørmFrønt to post here. Why don't you notify an administrator of this forum?
I'm not sure what you're implying about the second part.
-
ANTI SEMITE FORUM ENDORSES RON PAUL http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=58284
-
Based on your sarcasm, you apparently believe that this forum allows people from StørmFrønt to post here.
He's right.
At my own risk I exposed an antisemite posting here and even provided proof of this. But because the poster operated a site that made fun of [censored], and then later came back to suck up to everyone, he was allowed to stay.
-
Nazis endorsing Ron Paul isn't anything new. There happen to be Nazis who support Ron Paul but that doesn't make him a anti-semite or a nazi himself. I stand up for gun rights, would some consider me a nazi because many white supremists are concerned about their gun rights? If anything, Ron Paul supports freedom, he doesn't represent what nazis think, nazis happen to find some of his political beliefs similar to theirs which is why they support him over the others. He is against the war on Iraq for one (as am I), he supports gun rights (as do I), he wants to dismantle IRS (as do I), wants to fix up our borders (as do I) and this is why I support him. What if Neo Nazis supported Guliani? Would you no longer support him? We were at a protest with the minutemen protesting closing the borders and a bunch of white supremists from StørmFrønt showed up, does that imply that those who are against illegal immigration are nazis? There are too many emotions here clouding the facts, look at the bigger picture and don't take things out of context.
If anything, Nazis supporting Ron Paul are contradicting themselves because they are the opposite of freedom.
-
When the Klan endorsed Reagan what did he say
(http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/3185/reaganji5.jpg)
Shot at 2007-09-29
-
Based on your sarcasm, you apparently believe that this forum allows people from StørmFrønt to post here.
He's right.
At my own risk I exposed an antisemite posting here and even provided proof of this. But because the poster operated a site that made fun of schvartzas, and then later came back to suck up to everyone, he was allowed to stay.
Who?
-
Funny how she says "I'm of Irish decent" and "I'm proud to be white." The racists of the 20th century would have discriminated against her FOR BEING IRISH! And now she acts like part of the ingroup.
Ron Paul has a few good ideas but I find his stance on Iran to be troubling. He's not evil, he's just misguided.
-
You could not be any more mistaken, Eagle.
He is an EXTREMELY evil man--he is an Odinist German supremacist. The idiotic Irishwoman endorsing him isn't even white to Ron Nazi Paul.
-
You could not be any more mistaken, Eagle.
He is an EXTREMELY evil man--he is an Odinist German supremacist. The idiotic Irishwoman endorsing him isn't even white to Ron Nazi Paul.
Do you have evidence to back this up in regards that he is a German supremist or that he is even a Nazi?
-
What a Nazi. Ron Paul has made a fool of himself in every single Republican debate so far. He claimed that we should ask the Muslim Nazis why they hate us so much. So, according to him Americans should to make amends with Muslim Nazis who have killed thousands of Americans. And he claims we're responsible for 9/11, so, we shouldn't place any blame on the Muslims for blowing up the basement of the World Trade Center, killing hundreds, and eventually bringing both buildings down, killing thousands.
-
What a Nazi. Ron Paul has made a fool of himself in every single Republican debate so far. He claimed that we should ask the Muslim Nazis why they hate us so much. So, according to him Americans should to make amends with Muslim Nazis who have killed thousands of Americans. And he claims we're responsible for 9/11, so, we shouldn't place any blame on the Muslims for blowing up the basement of the World Trade Center, killing hundreds, and eventually bringing both buildings down, killing thousands.
No he's critical on foreign policy in which he feels was a result of what caused 9/11. He doesn't sound like he's against the war on terror in specific, he doesn't trust saudi arabia either.
-
What a Nazi. Ron Paul has made a fool of himself in every single Republican debate so far. He claimed that we should ask the Muslim Nazis why they hate us so much. So, according to him Americans should to make amends with Muslim Nazis who have killed thousands of Americans. And he claims we're responsible for 9/11, so, we shouldn't place any blame on the Muslims for blowing up the basement of the World Trade Center, killing hundreds, and eventually bringing both buildings down, killing thousands.
No he's critical on foreign policy in which he feels was a result of what caused 9/11. He doesn't sound like he's against the war on terror in specific, he doesn't trust saudi arabia either.
How can you possibly defend this man? He blames the US for 9/11 and states that the Muslims are innocent! He wants us to pull out of the Middle East and not worry about the nuclear program in Iran. This is not a man who is looking to save America from Muslim Nazi terrorists. He wants the total destruction of the US and Israel. Why else do you think so many left-wingers and neo-Nazis are supporting him?
-
What a Nazi. Ron Paul has made a fool of himself in every single Republican debate so far. He claimed that we should ask the Muslim Nazis why they hate us so much. So, according to him Americans should to make amends with Muslim Nazis who have killed thousands of Americans. And he claims we're responsible for 9/11, so, we shouldn't place any blame on the Muslims for blowing up the basement of the World Trade Center, killing hundreds, and eventually bringing both buildings down, killing thousands.
No he's critical on foreign policy in which he feels was a result of what caused 9/11. He doesn't sound like he's against the war on terror in specific, he doesn't trust saudi arabia either.
How can you possibly defend this man? He blames the US for 9/11 and states that the Muslims are innocent! He wants us to pull out of the Middle East and not worry about the nuclear program in Iran. This is not a man who is looking to save America from Muslim Nazi terrorists. He wants the total destruction of the US and Israel. Why else do you think so many left-wingers and neo-Nazis are supporting him?
Left wingers don't support him, left wingers are their own breed. Most of Ron Pauls supports are infact right wing and Paleoconservative. I don't believe he defends muslims, I believe his stance is similar to the founding fathers in that we don't have any business getting involved in what other nations do. Therefore its not that he defends Muslims (and he doesn't defend Jews either) but that he feels as a constitutionalist, it is none of our business what goes on in that region. Why do you think he wants to cut off aid not only to Israel but also to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He even mentioned that he feels that we are directly funding the war in the region to continue. It's not that he's pro muslim, anti Jew or vice versa but rather that he feels that the middle east is none of our business. I think what he says is taken out of context.
Neo Nazis support him like I mentioned before,
Think of it from this point of view
What do Nazis associate Jews as? Nazis associate us as supporting gun control, support illegal immigration, supporting the war in Iraq, support communism, etc etc etc. They blame the Jews for globalism. The only reason the Nazis support Ron Paul is because of his stance on illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, and ending foreign aid which they associate the Jews with.
You know that on JTF, many of us are against these issues, and self hating Jews.
Some nazis from StørmFrønt come here thinking we're a bunch of Jews that are different from the traditional Jew, should JTF be blamed for attracting Nazis because we may have similar views on certain issues?
The difference with the Nazi is that they blame the Jew for the worlds problem, they are targeting the wrong people for the problems. We blame liberals, leftists and muslims. That is our difference. Nazis also have some rather extremeist views in regards to white supremecy whereas we do not advocate the murder of another ethnic group.
Ron Paul is not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes, but he is also critical on Saudi Arabia and aid to Egypt. Does this make Ron Paul anti-muslim as well? I would rather have Ron Paul than the other candidates, if you want to talk about anti-semites, why not look at Pat Buchanan?
-
I'm probably the only person on the fourm who opposes Paul, but doesn't have any fantasy that he is the next Adolf Hitler either.
I agree that Ron Paul is a non-interventionist, I don't think he "supports" the Muslims, but by remaining neutral, he enables them. It's not that his intentions that are bad, but he doesn't realize that the game is already on, and we can't just "Ignore" the middle-east or negotiate with it.
This guilt by association is stupid. Just because Nazis support Paul doesn't make Paul himself a Nazi. Nevertheless, there are legitimate criticisms to be made about Paul.
-
He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes
but they are legal where as the saudi lobby is a group funded by the Saudis the funds are received by ex state dept officials arab groups in the U.S. which are not Saudi arabs as well as oil companies
http://www.nysun.com/article/63353
-
Left wingers don't support him, left wingers are their own breed. Most of Ron Pauls supports are infact right wing and Paleoconservative. I don't believe he defends muslims, I believe his stance is similar to the founding fathers in that we don't have any business getting involved in what other nations do. Therefore its not that he defends Muslims (and he doesn't defend Jews either) but that he feels as a constitutionalist, it is none of our business what goes on in that region. Why do you think he wants to cut off aid not only to Israel but also to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He even mentioned that he feels that we are directly funding the war in the region to continue. It's not that he's pro muslim, anti Jew or vice versa but rather that he feels that the middle east is none of our business. I think what he says is taken out of context.
Neo Nazis support him like I mentioned before,
Think of it from this point of view
What do Nazis associate Jews as? Nazis associate us as supporting gun control, support illegal immigration, supporting the war in Iraq, support communism, etc etc etc. They blame the Jews for globalism. The only reason the Nazis support Ron Paul is because of his stance on illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, and ending foreign aid which they associate the Jews with.
You know that on JTF, many of us are against these issues, and self hating Jews.
Some nazis from StørmFrønt come here thinking we're a bunch of Jews that are different from the traditional Jew, should JTF be blamed for attracting Nazis because we may have similar views on certain issues?
The difference with the Nazi is that they blame the Jew for the worlds problem, they are targeting the wrong people for the problems. We blame liberals, leftists and muslims. That is our difference. Nazis also have some rather extremeist views in regards to white supremecy whereas we do not advocate the murder of another ethnic group.
Ron Paul is not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes, but he is also critical on Saudi Arabia and aid to Egypt. Does this make Ron Paul anti-muslim as well? I would rather have Ron Paul than the other candidates, if you want to talk about anti-semites, why not look at Pat Buchanan?
Ron Paul also blamed Israel for the war in Iraq.
-
Left wingers don't support him, left wingers are their own breed. Most of Ron Pauls supports are infact right wing and Paleoconservative. I don't believe he defends muslims, I believe his stance is similar to the founding fathers in that we don't have any business getting involved in what other nations do. Therefore its not that he defends Muslims (and he doesn't defend Jews either) but that he feels as a constitutionalist, it is none of our business what goes on in that region. Why do you think he wants to cut off aid not only to Israel but also to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He even mentioned that he feels that we are directly funding the war in the region to continue. It's not that he's pro muslim, anti Jew or vice versa but rather that he feels that the middle east is none of our business. I think what he says is taken out of context.
Neo Nazis support him like I mentioned before,
Think of it from this point of view
What do Nazis associate Jews as? Nazis associate us as supporting gun control, support illegal immigration, supporting the war in Iraq, support communism, etc etc etc. They blame the Jews for globalism. The only reason the Nazis support Ron Paul is because of his stance on illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, and ending foreign aid which they associate the Jews with.
You know that on JTF, many of us are against these issues, and self hating Jews.
Some nazis from StørmFrønt come here thinking we're a bunch of Jews that are different from the traditional Jew, should JTF be blamed for attracting Nazis because we may have similar views on certain issues?
The difference with the Nazi is that they blame the Jew for the worlds problem, they are targeting the wrong people for the problems. We blame liberals, leftists and muslims. That is our difference. Nazis also have some rather extremeist views in regards to white supremecy whereas we do not advocate the murder of another ethnic group.
Ron Paul is not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes, but he is also critical on Saudi Arabia and aid to Egypt. Does this make Ron Paul anti-muslim as well? I would rather have Ron Paul than the other candidates, if you want to talk about anti-semites, why not look at Pat Buchanan?
Ron Paul also blamed Israel for the war in Iraq.
The same stance David Duke and StørmFrønt take (yelling "Israel, Israel, Israel")...Israel supported the war but only as a follower, not as a leader. The American leadership and Corporate interests are to blame.
-
Left wingers don't support him, left wingers are their own breed. Most of Ron Pauls supports are infact right wing and Paleoconservative. I don't believe he defends muslims, I believe his stance is similar to the founding fathers in that we don't have any business getting involved in what other nations do. Therefore its not that he defends Muslims (and he doesn't defend Jews either) but that he feels as a constitutionalist, it is none of our business what goes on in that region. Why do you think he wants to cut off aid not only to Israel but also to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He even mentioned that he feels that we are directly funding the war in the region to continue. It's not that he's pro muslim, anti Jew or vice versa but rather that he feels that the middle east is none of our business. I think what he says is taken out of context.
Neo Nazis support him like I mentioned before,
Think of it from this point of view
What do Nazis associate Jews as? Nazis associate us as supporting gun control, support illegal immigration, supporting the war in Iraq, support communism, etc etc etc. They blame the Jews for globalism. The only reason the Nazis support Ron Paul is because of his stance on illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, and ending foreign aid which they associate the Jews with.
You know that on JTF, many of us are against these issues, and self hating Jews.
Some nazis from StørmFrønt come here thinking we're a bunch of Jews that are different from the traditional Jew, should JTF be blamed for attracting Nazis because we may have similar views on certain issues?
The difference with the Nazi is that they blame the Jew for the worlds problem, they are targeting the wrong people for the problems. We blame liberals, leftists and muslims. That is our difference. Nazis also have some rather extremeist views in regards to white supremecy whereas we do not advocate the murder of another ethnic group.
Ron Paul is not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes, but he is also critical on Saudi Arabia and aid to Egypt. Does this make Ron Paul anti-muslim as well? I would rather have Ron Paul than the other candidates, if you want to talk about anti-semites, why not look at Pat Buchanan?
Ron Paul also blamed Israel for the war in Iraq.
Ok when did Ron Paul blame Israel for the war in Iraq? Do you have a direct source?
-
What a Nazi. Ron Paul has made a fool of himself in every single Republican debate so far. He claimed that we should ask the Muslim Nazis why they hate us so much. So, according to him Americans should to make amends with Muslim Nazis who have killed thousands of Americans. And he claims we're responsible for 9/11, so, we shouldn't place any blame on the Muslims for blowing up the basement of the World Trade Center, killing hundreds, and eventually bringing both buildings down, killing thousands.
No he's critical on foreign policy in which he feels was a result of what caused 9/11. He doesn't sound like he's against the war on terror in specific, he doesn't trust saudi arabia either.
How can you possibly defend this man? He blames the US for 9/11 and states that the Muslims are innocent! He wants us to pull out of the Middle East and not worry about the nuclear program in Iran. This is not a man who is looking to save America from Muslim Nazi terrorists. He wants the total destruction of the US and Israel. Why else do you think so many left-wingers and neo-Nazis are supporting him?
Left wingers don't support him, left wingers are their own breed. Most of Ron Pauls supports are infact right wing and Paleoconservative. I don't believe he defends muslims, I believe his stance is similar to the founding fathers in that we don't have any business getting involved in what other nations do. Therefore its not that he defends Muslims (and he doesn't defend Jews either) but that he feels as a constitutionalist, it is none of our business what goes on in that region. Why do you think he wants to cut off aid not only to Israel but also to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He even mentioned that he feels that we are directly funding the war in the region to continue. It's not that he's pro muslim, anti Jew or vice versa but rather that he feels that the middle east is none of our business. I think what he says is taken out of context.
Neo Nazis support him like I mentioned before,
Think of it from this point of view
What do Nazis associate Jews as? Nazis associate us as supporting gun control, support illegal immigration, supporting the war in Iraq, support communism, etc etc etc. They blame the Jews for globalism. The only reason the Nazis support Ron Paul is because of his stance on illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, and ending foreign aid which they associate the Jews with.
You know that on JTF, many of us are against these issues, and self hating Jews.
Some nazis from StørmFrønt come here thinking we're a bunch of Jews that are different from the traditional Jew, should JTF be blamed for attracting Nazis because we may have similar views on certain issues?
The difference with the Nazi is that they blame the Jew for the worlds problem, they are targeting the wrong people for the problems. We blame liberals, leftists and muslims. That is our difference. Nazis also have some rather extremeist views in regards to white supremecy whereas we do not advocate the murder of another ethnic group.
Ron Paul is not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes, but he is also critical on Saudi Arabia and aid to Egypt. Does this make Ron Paul anti-muslim as well? I would rather have Ron Paul than the other candidates, if you want to talk about anti-semites, why not look at Pat Buchanan?
Are you talking about the same Ron Paul? Ron Paul is a Nazi. He doesn't have legions of neo-Nazi supporters for nothing.
Ron Paul thinks it's America's fault that we lost the World Trade Center. So it's the US' fault that they flew jetliners into the buildings? It's the US' fault they killed thousands of people? It's the US' fault that the Koran commands all Muslims to kill all non-Muslims? According to him the US has caused all this. He thinks they're innocent. So, how does he figure that? He sounds like a pro-Muslim Nazi, and he is a pro-Muslim Nazi.
The man believes that we should stay dependent on Muslim Nazi oil. He feels that energy independence isn't necessary. He feels that the Iranian nuclear program isn't a threat, even though Iran's president has stated that he will destroy the US, just as he will Israel.
Ron Paul doesn't care about Israel or the US. He wishes they'd be destroyed. If he didn't, he'd realize that the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program is the top priority in assuring the survival of both countries.
-
What a Nazi. Ron Paul has made a fool of himself in every single Republican debate so far. He claimed that we should ask the Muslim Nazis why they hate us so much. So, according to him Americans should to make amends with Muslim Nazis who have killed thousands of Americans. And he claims we're responsible for 9/11, so, we shouldn't place any blame on the Muslims for blowing up the basement of the World Trade Center, killing hundreds, and eventually bringing both buildings down, killing thousands.
No he's critical on foreign policy in which he feels was a result of what caused 9/11. He doesn't sound like he's against the war on terror in specific, he doesn't trust saudi arabia either.
How can you possibly defend this man? He blames the US for 9/11 and states that the Muslims are innocent! He wants us to pull out of the Middle East and not worry about the nuclear program in Iran. This is not a man who is looking to save America from Muslim Nazi terrorists. He wants the total destruction of the US and Israel. Why else do you think so many left-wingers and neo-Nazis are supporting him?
Left wingers don't support him, left wingers are their own breed. Most of Ron Pauls supports are infact right wing and Paleoconservative. I don't believe he defends muslims, I believe his stance is similar to the founding fathers in that we don't have any business getting involved in what other nations do. Therefore its not that he defends Muslims (and he doesn't defend Jews either) but that he feels as a constitutionalist, it is none of our business what goes on in that region. Why do you think he wants to cut off aid not only to Israel but also to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He even mentioned that he feels that we are directly funding the war in the region to continue. It's not that he's pro muslim, anti Jew or vice versa but rather that he feels that the middle east is none of our business. I think what he says is taken out of context.
Neo Nazis support him like I mentioned before,
Think of it from this point of view
What do Nazis associate Jews as? Nazis associate us as supporting gun control, support illegal immigration, supporting the war in Iraq, support communism, etc etc etc. They blame the Jews for globalism. The only reason the Nazis support Ron Paul is because of his stance on illegal immigration, the war in Iraq, and ending foreign aid which they associate the Jews with.
You know that on JTF, many of us are against these issues, and self hating Jews.
Some nazis from StørmFrønt come here thinking we're a bunch of Jews that are different from the traditional Jew, should JTF be blamed for attracting Nazis because we may have similar views on certain issues?
The difference with the Nazi is that they blame the Jew for the worlds problem, they are targeting the wrong people for the problems. We blame liberals, leftists and muslims. That is our difference. Nazis also have some rather extremeist views in regards to white supremecy whereas we do not advocate the murder of another ethnic group.
Ron Paul is not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. He is critical on groups like AIPAC yes, but he is also critical on Saudi Arabia and aid to Egypt. Does this make Ron Paul anti-muslim as well? I would rather have Ron Paul than the other candidates, if you want to talk about anti-semites, why not look at Pat Buchanan?
Are you talking about the same Ron Paul? Ron Paul is a Nazi. He doesn't have legions of neo-Nazi supporters for nothing.
Ron Paul thinks it's America's fault that we lost the World Trade Center. So it's the US' fault that they flew jetliners into the buildings? It's the US' fault they killed thousands of people? It's the US' fault that the Koran commands all Muslims to kill all non-Muslims? According to him the US has caused all this. He thinks they're innocent. So, how does he figure that? He sounds like a pro-Muslim Nazi, and he is a pro-Muslim Nazi.
The man believes that we should stay dependent on Muslim Nazi oil. He feels that energy independence isn't necessary. He feels that the Iranian nuclear program isn't a threat, even though Iran's president has stated that he will destroy the US, just as he will Israel.
Ron Paul doesn't care about Israel or the US. He wishes they'd be destroyed. If he didn't, he'd realize that the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program is the top priority in assuring the survival of both countries.
Again you are not providing any sources, you are simply stating that because he does not want to engage Iran that somehow this makes him a Nazi? He doesn't feel it is Americas duty to invade Iran because it does not benefit Iran. If you listened to his last debate, he stated that Israel is more than capable of taking out Iran on their own. He has stated that AIPAC is one of the strongest lobbys within the US. You really seem to cheapen the use of the word NAZI. Do you disagree with our founding fathers as well? They were against getting involved in other countries as well.
Ron Paul is a constitutionalist
In the United States, a constitutionalist refers to someone who advocates strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution, and the term is often synonomous with originalism. Constitutionalists are also called constitutional conservatives in the United States. (See the United States Constitution.)
-
That proves that he is a Persian sympathizer, but not necessarily that he is a German sympathizer.
-
Before the U.S. House of Representatives, July 20, 2006
I rise in opposition to this resolution, which I sincerely believe will do more harm than good.
I do agree with the resolution's condemnation of violence. But I am convinced that when we get involved in foreign conflicts and send strong messages, such as this resolution will, it ends up expanding the war rather than diminishing the conflict, and that ultimately comes back to haunt us.
Mr. Speaker, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called non-interventionism. I do not believe we are making the United States more secure when we involve ourselves in conflicts overseas. The Constitution really doesn't authorize us to be the policemen of the world, much less to favor one side over another in foreign conflicts. It is very clear, reading this resolution objectively, that all the terrorists are on one side and all the victims and the innocents are on the other side. I find this unfair, particularly considering the significantly higher number of civilian casualties among Lebanese civilians. I would rather advocate neutrality rather than picking sides, which is what this resolution does.
Some would say that there is no room to talk about neutrality, as if neutrality were a crime. I would suggest there should be room for an open mind to consider another type of policy that may save American lives.
I was in Congress in the early 1980s when the US Marines were sent in to Lebanon, and I came to the Floor before they went, when they went, and before they were killed, arguing my case against getting involved in that conflict.
Ronald Reagan, when he sent the troops in, said he would never turn tail and run. Then, after the Marines were killed, he had a reassessment of the policy. When he wrote his autobiography a few years later after leaving the Presidency, he wrote this.
Perhaps we didn't appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines' safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.
It is very easy to criticize the Government of Lebanon for not doing more about Hezbollah. I object to terrorism committed by Hezbollah because I am a strong opponent to all violence on all sides. But I also object to the unreasonable accusations that the Government of Lebanon has not done enough, when we realize that Israel occupied southern Lebanon for 18 years and was not able to neutralize Hezbollah.
Mr. Speaker, There is nothing wrong with considering the fact that we don't have to be involved in every single fight. That was the conclusion that Ronald Reagan came to, and he was not an enemy of Israel. He was a friend of Israel. But he concluded that that is a mess over there. Let me just repeat those words that he used. He said, he came to the conclusion, "The irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there.'' I believe these words are probably more valid now even than when they were written.
Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.
-
Quit Meddling in the Middle East
by Rep. Ron Paul
The death of PLO chairman Yasser Arafat last week once again brings the Israeli-PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazi conflict to the international forefront. The Bush administration finds itself in an uncomfortable but familiar role as peacemaker for yet another intractable, ancient, and deadly Middle East conflict. The popular press and political world both accept without question the notion that the United States is somehow responsible for resolving any and all conflicts around the globe, but especially in Eretz Yisrael.
We conveniently forget, however, that American tax dollars militarized the entire region in the first place. We give Israel about $3 billion each year, but we also give Egypt $2 billion. Most other Middle East countries get money too, some of which ends up in the hands of PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazi terrorists. Both sides have far more military weapons as a result. Talk about adding fuel to the fire! Our foolish and unconstitutional foreign aid has produced more violence, not less.
Congress and each successive administration pledge their political, financial, and military support for Israel. Yet while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state. Many average Israelis and American Jews see America as hypocritically hedging its bets.
This illustrates perfectly the inherent problem with foreign aid: once we give money to one country, we have to give it to all the rest or risk making enemies. This is especially true in the Middle East and other strife-torn regions, where our financial support for one side is seen as an act of aggression by the other. Just as our money never makes Israel secure, it doesn't buy us any true friends elsewhere in the region. On the contrary, many Muslims hate the United States despite the billions we give to their governments.
It is time to challenge the notion that it is our job to broker peace in the Middle East and every other troubled region across the globe. America can and should use every diplomatic means at our disposal to end the violence in the West Bank, but we should draw the line at any further entanglement. Third-party outsiders cannot impose political solutions in Eretz Yisrael or anywhere else. Peace can be achieved only when self-determination operates freely in all nations. "Peace plans" imposed by outsiders or the UN cause resentment and seldom produce lasting peace.
Respect for self-determination really is the cornerstone of a sensible foreign policy, yet many Americans who strongly support U.S. sovereignty advocate interventionist policies that deny other nations that same right. The interventionist approach that has dominated American foreign policy since World War I has produced an unmitigated series of disasters. From Korea to Vietnam to Kosovo to the Middle East, American military and economic meddling has made numerous conflicts worse, not better. Washington and Jefferson had it right when they warned against entangling alliances, and the history of the 20th century proves their point. The simple truth is that we cannot resolve every human conflict across the globe, and there will always be violence somewhere on earth. The fatal conceit lies in believing America can impose geopolitical solutions wherever it chooses.
________________________________________________________________________________________
This does not sound like favoritism of one side over the other to me, he clearly identifys terrorists in the west bank and gaza. He also notes that by funding the middle east, it is adding fuel to the fire. He sounds completely neutral to me. I may get some heat about my opinions, but I really think a lot of what he has said is really taken out of context. Needless to say, I am still critical about certain aspects on him but hopefully he will disregard the StørmFrønt endorsement.
-
Your reply, Cohen, says what I've always said. He is neutral, however, I don't think that is acceptable at a time like this. He should not be neutral. He should be supporting Israel.
-
Who cares let people waste their money on ron paul,he'll just not win anyhow.... O0