I've really been strapped for time lately, but I'm going to try and hit every angle on this post.
RebelKev Wrote:He said part of what caused 9/11 was the US patrolling the No Fly Zone and another part was the US's policy of having people in Saudi Arabia. Um, I'm thinking he IS saying America caused 9/11, GTS. He's just a tad bit coy about coming out and saying "America caused 9/11". Anyone with half a brain can put 2 and 2 together.
Ron Paul says that US foreign policy on the Arabian peninsula caused blowback and ultimately played a part in the decision of (predominately Saudi) Islamic Extremists to commit the attacks on 9/11. It's the same position the 9/11 Commission Report has, as well as our CIA past and present.
Now it's nothing less than a spin job say the above constitutes "America caused 9/11" or "Americans asked for 9/11 to happen".
It's a complete departure from reality to say that the above means Ron Paul believes in a 9/11 conspiracy. This is what Fox News did in their "reporting" in the video in my original post.
The problem is the current neocon approach to foreign policy, which is nearly identical to Woodrow Wilson's "making the world safe for democracy" .... COMBINED with US bases on the Arabian Peninsula on what is considered Islamic holy land.
There is no excuse for the atrocities of 9/11. I think everybody in America wanted to go after Al Qaeda. Ron Paul and AFAIK everybody else in Congress voted for the authority to go into Afghanistan and take them out. It would seem we have since forgot about them. What we're doing in the Middle East right now is TOTALLY UNRELATED to Al Qaeda, and has been from the start. If anything, we are making ourselves LESS safe as we pull most of our border guards to go serve in Iraq, and incite further hatred and blowback. Nothing happens in a vacuum. It's naive to think they attacked us on 9/11 simply because we're free and they hate freedom. They attacked us because:
- The US has bases on Islamic holy land in the Arabian Peninsula
- The US greatly aided Israel in the past
- The US previously aided Osama and his band of psychos with both money and arms, before later supporting his enemies in the same way. Why couldn't the US have, ya know, minded its own effing business and leave him alone to die in squabbles with other psychos?
- The US is soft on illegal immigration, making it easy to get in
- There's far too much data in the FBI/CIA, and not nearly enough intelligent people to sift through it
- The US took away from the airlines the very right to protect its own passengers and equipment, further pushing away from the 2nd Amendment , respect for private property, and free markets. A hijacker with a box cutter will think twice when there's a guard with a Glock 9 / shotgun in the cockpit.
- They've ****ing bat**** crazy, and given the above impetus, they feel justified (in their bizarro world) in slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans.
But the icing on the cake is .... if you read quotes from nearly every big Republican leader during Clinton's cluster effs in Somalia and Kosovo .... their objections over foreign policy sound ALOT like Ron Paul's today ... and yet the Republicans continue to smear HIM as the liberal. It's a little stunning to think how far the neocons have marched this country toward liberalism and totalitarianism in so short a time span. Fear has gotten the best of this country, and in it's panic it has turned to more big government, fewer rights, fewer freedoms, fewer liberties, and less respect for the law and free markets.
PS - GGniner ... I'm pro choice. If I go to a bunch of Sam Brownback public meetings, and ask him questions (which of course he fields), does that make him pro choice? Is he still pro choice even if he outright says to my face and on national TV (without waivering) that he's pro life?
If we switch this around to Ron Paul and the 9/11 conspiracy nuts, your answer would be an unwaivering yes..... yes Brownback is pro choice, and yes Paul is a truther. Seriously ... are you a producer on some of the Faux News smear pieces? That's fatally flawed logic, and even saying it's not logic gives the implicit compliment that the person who made it was of sound mind, and if you really think the above is of sound thought, you are not of sound mind.
What is Ron Paul suppose to do?
Refuse donations from anybody he doesn't 100% agree with?
Have police escort away anybody at any public event he doesn't 100% agree with?
Scream like Howard Dean anytime he sees somebody he doesn't 100% agree with?
Refuse to be interviewed or ask questions from anybody he doesn't 100% agree with?
The only way to appease you is for all of the above to be true. In which case let's refund every donation ever made to any campaign. Let's shut down all debates, all public rallies, all public forums, all town hall meetings. No more interviews by any news/media/person for any candidate. Then we'll forever be assured that no loony who believes in a 9/11 conspiracy can dare associate in any way with any candidate. We, the majority, will censor and destroy without mercy the minority's opinion. After all, that's what a Democracy is, tyranny of the majority. Next election cycle, we'll work on installing thought police and establishing thought crime, too.
And for the record, because I bet GGniner you're at least thinking it ...
- The attacks on 9/11 were committed by Islamic Extremists .... most of them Saudi. That goes for the WTC, Pentagon, and Pennsylvania.
- The US did land on the moon. I've even touched a moon rock.
- JFK was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald.
We don't live in a Democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution isn't there to protect popular speech, it's there to protect unpopular speech. It's not there to allow the President to start wars that don't end without Congressional consent, it's there to force representatives of the people all across the country to be in support of War before the President has the authority to act. It's long overdue for a Restoration of the Republic. Ron Paul 2008.