PDA

View Full Version : delete


STAGE 2
11-18-2007, 11:30 PM
delete

Josh3239
11-18-2007, 11:40 PM
Your gonna have this entire thing put under a microscope, your better off editing it down to the bold part only.

That said, as someone who definetly doesn't agree with Ron Paul, most of those arguments are terrible. What happend with just plain old crazy or wrong?

DedEye
11-19-2007, 12:11 AM
I like chocolate.

xrMike
11-19-2007, 10:12 AM
Ron Paul is the favorite candidate of a number of racist, neo-Nazi and conspiracist websites. While Paul cannot be held accountable for the views of cranks and kooks, he can disavow their support and return their checks. He received $500 from Don Black, the proprietor of Stormfront.org and former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. He has not yet returned it.

Again, all the rest of the stuff is extraneous. I just posted it for the sake of completeness. In other words please don't address it cause I don't care. All I want to know is whether or not the part in bold is true. Did Paul accept this donation and if so has he returned it? Can someone verify this.

R.P.'s campaign has no control over (or knowledge of) the identity and politics of the people who send him money.

The only reason the white supremecists like him is because he wants to pull the plug on our massive financial aide to Isreal -- something I agree with 100%.

Yeah, he should probably return that $500, now that info has surfaced about where it came from. It sounds like they are considering it. An R.P. spokesman, Jesse Benton, told the Lone Star Times (the source that first reported the story in late October):

"At this time, I cannot say that we will be rejecting Mr. Black’s contribution, but I will bring the matter to the attention of our campaign director again, and expect some sort of decision to be made in coming days."

There are other issues involved that are factoring into their response, as you can imagine. Personally, I'd rather his campaign spend their limited resources getting his message out, rather than screening and investigating the source of incoming contributions.

Bizcuits
11-19-2007, 10:44 AM
If a racist can discredit a presidential candidate, we need to write stormfront and email asking him to support Hillary, so we can get her discredited.

Come on now, how many not nice people support Hillary and Obama? They make it sound like only bad guys support Ron paul...

xrMike
11-19-2007, 1:51 PM
Yeah, but if he returns the money now, you'll just post a new thread tomorrow, something along the lines of:

"Why is Ron Paul supporting and giving money to the White supremecist movement!?!?"

With you, he can't win no matter WHAT he does... Am I right? Now be honest! :D

Rob P.
11-19-2007, 2:12 PM
Yeah, but if he returns the money now, you'll just post a new thread tomorrow, something along the lines of:

"Why is Ron Paul supporting and giving money to the White supremecist movement!?!?"

With you, he can't win no matter WHAT he does... Am I right? Now be honest! :D

Now this type of commentary isn't fair. The question is legitimate and isn't being asked from a personal standpoint. The OP is asking if it's "true" or not. It obviously IS true and now the question is: "Did he give it back?" Answer = apparently not.

What's interesting is that RP is being "discovered" to be not what he seems to be by all sorts of folks. People who look into the data and post the facts that they find.

Yeah, there are skeletons in everyone's closet. The difference is that the RP supporters claim that he doesn't have ANY. But, when RP's skeletons are shown to exist, these same guys claim that he is being unfairly singled out by biased detractors.

Even if that's the case, how does that answer the original question? Is it true and if so, did he give it back? Further, how does that look to the average illiterate voter? RP has apparently accepted and returned stolen CC fraud funds and now has accepted campaign donations from radical white supremacy groups.

As for the "he has not control or knowledge of who contributes to his campaign" thing. RP has PAID STAFF whose job it is to peruse the contributor lists looking for illegal contributions/contributors. Red flags are everywhere. The names of people known to be 'subversive' or otherwise are 'bad to do business with' are (or should be) on the red flag list. The fact that the names didn't sound any alarm for return of the contribution means either that RP condones their views or his campaign and/or staff is inept.

So which is it? The man isn't what he proffers himself to be, or the man chooses incompetents as his subordinates.

grywlfbg
11-19-2007, 5:59 PM
I think RP is a bit kooky myself but I'm still voting for him. Is he actually going to be able to dissolve the IRS and the Fed by himself? No. In the same way that whatever the rest of the politicians are promising won't happen either. Anyone remember how "W" was going tom implement tort reform?

But I would hope it would get people in this country to engage their brains in between episodes of American Idol. All the rest of the candidates are just business as usual. Let's give another few billion to farmers to not plant crops or jack food prices by giving tax breaks for ethanol production. What about the $12B we gave to Israel this year? What do we get in return? A bunch of people who hate us.

This whole universal health care thing is making me crazy. No one up there is taking a completely objective look at the whole system. Instead everyone's just trying to stick their fingers in the dike and hope they can keep the flood back until they can be re-elected. Makes me sick.

But back to the subject at hand. I don't outwardly fault RP from taking money from whomever. Politicians take money form donors and then go against their desires all the time. Politicians lie for a living.

Also, a whole lot of hedge fund managers and other financial types have given piles of cash to lots of politicians. These are people who are largely responsible for the recession we're about to endure which IMO is way more destructive then a bunch of ignorant skinheads. Yet are any candidates returning money from Countrywide or the National Association of Realtors?

You want to judge someone on their beliefs then fine - that's what we're supposed to do when we choose a leader. But trying to decide someone's values by who contributes to them... Like Bizcuits said above, let's contribute $500 in Kim Jong Il's name to Fred or Rudy and see what happens. This is just distracting people from the real issues.

G17GUY
11-19-2007, 7:23 PM
Received via PM.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2007/191107_zogby_poll.htm

G17GUY
11-19-2007, 8:06 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA

bwiese
11-19-2007, 8:14 PM
these are people who are largely responsible for the recession we're about to endure which IMO is way more destructive then a bunch of ignorant skinheads

Recession? What recession? My work is gonna be busy as hell next year - hell, it's too busy now.

Stores are packed. Every Best Buy I see people hauling out flat-screen TVs.

The so-called subprime crisis is affecting only a small portion of the economy, and mostly folks who bought homes for speculative 'flip' purposes.

One San Jose realtor told me RE offices have a bunch of buyers waiting in wings, they're just timing the market - the demand is there, just behind a curtain.

stag1500
11-19-2007, 8:40 PM
So long as the FED keeps interest rates low, the inflation (resulting in a weakening dollar) is going to send our economy into recession. Just look at what happened in the late 1970's. People's salaries are not going to keep up with inflation and the standard of living is going to go down. A country cannot sustain itself indefinitely while its currency is continuously losing its value and it keeps borrowing money from other countries. This country is essentially bankrupt and the FED is simply prolonging the inevitable.

You also need to take into account the durations of economic cycles, which usually last about 8 years (give or take). We're approaching that 8 year mark again. I hate to say it but things are looking pretty darn bleak.

Rob P.
11-19-2007, 8:49 PM
Recession? What recession? My work is gonna be busy as hell next year - hell, it's too busy now.

Stores are packed. Every Best Buy I see people hauling out flat-screen TVs.

The so-called subprime crisis is affecting only a small portion of the economy, and mostly folks who bought homes for speculative 'flip' purposes.

One San Jose realtor told me RE offices have a bunch of buyers waiting in wings, they're just timing the market - the demand is there, just behind a curtain.

The real data indicates otherwise. All financial data sources say that we are headed into a recession.

There are NO machinery orders being placed with Caterpillar for 2008. NONE, NADA, ZIP, NOTHING. Caterpillar is a leading forecast indicator on the economy because heavy industry places orders for machinery a year or so in advance of anticipated need. This single indicator means that mining, agriculture, waste management, forestry, construction, and all the other big industries are anticipating NO NEED for equipment. Or they anticipate that they will not have the income to pay for it based on doubtful sales of their products.

Fed Chairman Bernanke says that the Fed is watching the economy and that it is soft and if the housing issue continues we could head into a recession in 2008.

The stock market has lost over 1000 pts in 3 weeks.

The price of oil is going through the roof. This increases the cost of EVERYTHING since everything is transported by truck/train/ship or mfg's in (or with) a machine which uses oil in some manner (ie: electricity, gasoline/fuel oil, etc). Even food is going up in price reflected in the cost of crude oil.

Major employers are laying off employees in the thousands. UAW just cut a deal with the big three and one of the major concessions they won was job security even at the cost of retirement, health care, and wage increases.

Sales of new cars are FLAT. Not 'down', but FLAT. Ditto for anticipated holiday spending on gifts and travel.

The 'sales' you're seeing on luxury items are sales being made by only a small part of the economy and most of those sales are being made on credit or with RE equity advances.

My particular job niche is also doing well and I anticipate that it will do even better if/when the economy tanks. That doesn't mean that we're not going to have a recession. It just means that I have marketable job skills that will be in high demand no matter what the economy does.

Liberty1
11-19-2007, 9:46 PM
I don't think Ron should give any money back unless it was given illegally. Ron is the farthest thing in this campaign from a racist. If racists want to send in their money, they shouldn't expect Ron to implement their bidding because of it. In 10 congressional terms he has not been corrupted by lobbyists money so how is he then connected with the views of a view dozen supporters? I say take anyone's money, nazis, commies, etc... and use it against them by campaigning against big government central control and for limited constitutional government dedicated to the protection of individual liberty FOR ALL.

Last I head nazis and kkk types were for gov. forced race separation and subjugation. Things RP stands squarely against.

Here are a couple of articles by Ron on racism. I doubt the neo-nazi skin sihtheads would agree with these:

Celebrating Juneteenth
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=566

Government and Racism:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=508

If somebody objects to RP's views on liberty and the constitution or foreign policy then I can respect their opinion and offer counter points, but if this Nazi/kkk stuff is considered a "skeleton" in RP's closet I don't get it. Let's debate something substantive and relevant to the future of this country. Nazis are boring. Who cares? I don't live in Idaho.

Stage 2 do you have anything positive to say about anyone running. Who's your guy? What does he stand for? Does he have a voting record to back up what he/she says?

I only care about one specific part so lets leave all the other stuff out.

Why care only about one specific part? Didn't the rest of the articles hit points not hit home with you? Or did you dismiss them as inconsequential arguments without merit? Don't you care about what RP says about the constitution? Sound money? 2nd Amendment? (there it's OT now) Rule of Law? Secure Borders? Or why the candidates or moderators laugh at him for invoking love of individual liberty and limited government? Or the media telling us it's going to be Hitlerly vs Benito even without the first vote being counted?

Buddydog
11-20-2007, 7:36 AM
I have a feeling that many of the people who support Paul right now feel the same way. Could this be why you're so terrified of talking about this?

There is jumping to conclusions and then there is JUMPING to conclusions. I support the guy and do not think that this is a racial issue. Let's examine what taking money form someone looks like in the real world.

You own a garage, some slick guy comes in driving an Escalade. He says the alignment is off so you fix it for him. He pays you and goes on his way. A week later you find out that this guy had cheated on his taxes, cheated on his wife and was running from creditors. Would you track him down and throw his money back at him because your Dad worked for the IRS, or you had always payed your bills on time? I doubt it.

Now imagine that you work for a place that processes 1000's of internet orders a day, you never see a face or an ideology with each order....Anyways, you know what I'm getting at so don't go off the deep end by drawing associations like RP supporters are all racists waiting for Helter Skelter to start.

Just to push your buttons, remember that unlike supporters of other candidates, Ron Paul supporters are thoughtful and critical about statements being thrown around that might otherwise go unchallenged.
Bud

stag1500
11-20-2007, 9:46 AM
There is no way that I could ever cast a vote for someone who supported these peices of trash even if they promised and could deliever on repealing every gun control law, getting rid of the IRS, returning to the gold standard and reducing the size of government.

Would you be happier having Guliani or Hillary as your president? I'm pretty sure they've gotten donations from questionable sources and less reputable people. Were you just as upset when Bod Dole received campaign contributions from the tobacco industry? After all, they're killing more people than the Neo-nazis and KKK combined.

And what makes you think Ron Paul supports trash like the Neo-nazis and the KKK anyway? Ron Paul stands for peace and invidual liberty. That doesn't sound like somebody who would support a bunch of racists.

It's despicable how the media is trying to smear Ron Paul's name because they can't dig up any dirt on him.

Bizcuits
11-20-2007, 9:57 AM
This is the crap I'm talking about. You want to talk about everything under the sun except this. Sorry, misdirection doesn't rate very high with me.

Who my candidate is doesn't matter. What Paul thinks about the constitution doesn't matter. What does matter is what Paul thinks about a former KKK leader and nazi sympathizer. One way to tell is how he deals with this donation since he's already given money back for things that are in my mind less egregious

You may not "get it", and you may not "care", but as someone with family members who were among the millions to fight in europe I do.

There is no way that I could ever cast a vote for someone who supported these peices of trash even if they promised and could deliever on repealing every gun control law, getting rid of the IRS, returning to the gold standard and reducing the size of government.

I have a feeling that many of the people who support Paul right now feel the same way. Could this be why you're so terrified of talking about this?

So in other words you don't support the 1st Admen? This redneck hill billy exercises his 1st Admen right in a way you may not like and totally disagree with, as do I. The fact still remains his beliefs are covered under the constitution, hence the reason he isn't sitting in prison for preaching his racist beliefs.

If ron paul does return the money, people will start screaming he is a hypocrit as he is refusing someone's donation based on their belief which is protected under the constitution.

xrMike
11-20-2007, 10:45 AM
I have a feeling that many of the people who support Paul right now feel the same way. Could this be why you're so terrified of talking about this?Nope, terror has nothing to do with it. We just don't care. This is no more than a minor distraction that has nothing to do with the larger, more important issues that really concern us.

If you want to believe that R.P. supports kookery just because some kook gives him a few bucks, go right ahead. Nothing we can say will change your mind.

And since you aren't going to change ours either, why waste each other's time?

Kestryll
11-20-2007, 10:51 AM
Gotta love all the attempted misdirection in the responses here.

It's not a First Amendment issue, it's an issue of what views does he acknowledge and lend even tacit support to by not distancing himself from them. The nazi whackjob is more than able to exercise his 1st Amnd. rights by trying to donate, not accepting it does not squash those right nor his right to have an opinion or view. It just means you do not agree with that view. Unless you take the money. The 1st says you can preach it, not that anyone has to listen.

This crap about 'Well taking the money doesn't mean he supports them' is flat bull crap and you know it. Frankly the line I've sen used about this issue, 'He'll take anyone's money, it just won't buy them influence' is pretty damn disturbing. So basically then values, morals and convictions can be overridden by enough cash. Nice. I suspect that is not what is intended to be said but it is the message conveyed.

Not returning it and not distancing it gives credibility and acceptance to to a racist organization. Not saying anything about it is, especially in politics, an offhanded way of saying it's okay and everyone here knows that.
Pleading ignorance is just trying to get away with not having to deal with it.

When a politician 'abstains' from a vote that his party wants but his constituents don't everyone knows where he stands by his lack of response.

When a Mosque does not decry and condemn a terrorist everyone is sure that by their silence they support the terrorist.

Starting to look familiar? Or is it just a double standard because it's 'your guy'?

Would you be happier having Guliani or Hillary as your president?
WTH does that have to do with it?
Is that all the defense there is? Threatening people with Hillary? So the answer to concerns is 'At least he's not her/him!' How is that different than other politicians as is often claimed?

Everyone knows about, decries and condemns Hillary and Bill for their Chinese money laundering, did anyone say it was acceptable? No. Just a diversion I guess.

Bob Dole, who cares if he got money from tobacco companies? Last I looked tobacco was legal and the companies were American. Should I pitch a fit because a candidate gets money from the firearms industry?
Or is it only when it's industries we don't like or are 'socially unpopular', kinda like firearms manufacturers are.

Whoops, there's that double standard again.


To get back to the issue without the clouds and fog.
Is he going to return the money or does he acknowledge the white supremest/nazi/racist views as acceptable?

Kestryll
11-20-2007, 10:54 AM
And since you aren't going to change ours either, why waste each other's time?

Because you want to waste my time by telling us a dozen times a day how cool he is and how only he can save us but will not address a question or point without claiming that 'You just think he's a nut, your opinion/question/view isn't valid'
So does your above claim mean you don't want me to 'waste' your time but it's okay for you to 'waste' my time?

xrMike
11-20-2007, 11:16 AM
Because you want to waste my time by telling us a dozen times a day how cool he isSorry, but you have mistaken me for somebody else. You don't like me, put me on Ignore. I certainly won't lose any sleep over it.

and how only he can save us but will not address a question or point without claiming that 'You just think he's a nut, your opinion/question/view isn't valid'
So does your above claim mean you don't want me to 'waste' your time but it's okay for you to 'waste' my timeI could respond, but that would be a waste of time for both of us. :D

Kestryll
11-20-2007, 12:46 PM
Sorry, but you have mistaken me for somebody else.
You got me on a point of generalization, it isn't specifically you but the Ron Paul contingent was referring to.
You don't like me, put me on Ignore. I certainly won't lose any sleep over it.
I can't put anyone on my ignore list even if I wanted to.

I could respond, but that would be a waste of time for both of us. :D
Okay, that was funny. :D

SchooBaka
11-20-2007, 11:17 PM
Ron Paul's campaign director responded to an article today that answers the question of the donations here:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTJmOWM2ZGQzNzAzOTQwYWJlMDg4YjJiMjE4MWRlZTY=

And here's is Ron Pauls' stance on racism:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/racism/

ALTSEC972
11-21-2007, 1:01 AM
Ron Paul is one of the following:
-A bigoted anti Semite, who attempts to conceal the truth by hiding behind the cloak of Anti Israel rhetoric
-A democratic Operative, planted to be the current version of Ross Perot
-A KKK Grand Dragon, who left his white hood in the closet of his current political office
Or - An absolute moron, who is too ignorant and foolish to see the damage stormfront and the like will cause him...... and how truly evil their agendas are.

Now that I have just pissed off a bunch of gun toting cohabitants of PRK.....

Here's what I base my conclusion on:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmU0ZDFhYjIxM2VlMTEzMjkyY2ZiNDA3Y2RiZmU1YTc=
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27860_Ron_Pauls_Old_Newsletter_Revealed&only

This is just the beginning- I will follow up with more, when I can.... but for now... Its bed time...... I especially want to find the only Jewish Staffer's comments (the only Jewish staffer Ron Paul has ever had, quit, and had some interesting things to say)... And I would also specifically like to find the research on the "Jews for Ron Paul" Investigative Report that broke in the last 2 weeks.... and will do so when there is time.....

ALTSEC972
11-21-2007, 1:12 AM
And here's one more for you (It's really 2, but...):

http://antiracistblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Jews%20for%20Ron%20Paul

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-lone-jewish-staffer-speaks.html

http://http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2007/11/jews-for-ron-paul-exposed-as-fraud-jim.html

buff_01
11-21-2007, 2:35 AM
If a candidate receives a contribution from someone who disagrees with their views, then it is the idiot contributor's loss.

Ron Paul should absolutely use the money for his own purposes, which are clearly not the same as Stormfront's, just because they both support the same end in eliminating taxpayer funding for foreign governments.

Gmountain
11-21-2007, 4:20 AM
November 20th, 2007

A Personal Message from Aaron Zelman

Under the current laws of the United States of America, tax-exempt educational organizations like Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (of which I happen to be the founder and executive director) are strictly prohibited from engaging directly in electoral politics. That's why it's important to make sure you understand thoroughly that the following opinions are entirely mine, at the present moment, and do not necessarily reflect those of JPFO.

I have before me an article in which the Anti-Defamation League's "Assistant Director of Civil Rights", Steven Freeman is attempting to take Republican Congressman -- and dark horse Presidential Candidate -- Ron Paul to task for receiving a small campaign contribution from an otherwise obscure individual who turns out to run a white supremist website.

Aside from noting that, rather like the American Civil Liberties Union, the ADL's devotion to civil rights is rather hypocritically selective -- for example, they can't abide the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and can barely tolerate anyone who employs his or her right to free speech in order to defend the private ownership of weapons -- there are one or two questions this sudden concern evokes.

Apparently there's a small handful, out there, of similar websites which, for some reason defying all logic, offer support to a man who is, in fact, their mortal ideological enemy. Paul, as I interpret what he has said over the past 20 years, is for individual freedom above all other considerations. Obviously racists and neofascists are collectivists, meaning that to them, it is the group that comes first, far above and beyond the interests of any "mere" individual. They are, therefore, socialists of one stripe or another (never forget that Hitler considered himself a socialist), and the enemies of freedom.

"Nazi" is an acronym for "National Socialist Workers' Party".

Why these socialists should admire Paul is a puzzlement. But then, they are what they are -- racists and neofascists -- so none of their lunatic thought processes should be taken very seriously, nor should the object of their irrationality be held in any way responsible for them.

Of course the ADL's real objective here is to force a candidate whom they see as their ideological enemy (once again, much more a matter of the eye of the beholder than of any character flaw their enemy may possess) to do a little dance for them whenever they feel like it. They want to push him through the ceremonial meat-slicer of renunciation, regret, and remorse that so many others have been pushed through in recent years. The trouble is that, like every other form of blackmail, it never ends. The instant he complies with their demands, he becomes their property, their toy, their organ-grinder's monkey, no longer a threat to the anti-Constitutional establishment they are part of.

It's clear that, before the ADL starts accusing anybody else of being unduly influenced by political undesirables, they have a few questions of their own to answer under the harsh light of public scrutiny. For example, to how many self-proclaimed Marxists might some tiny minority of donations to the ADL be traced? It's statistically inevitable that such a thing has happened, probably more than once. To my (admittedly incomplete) knowledge, they have never renounced such supporters or sent any money back. Does this make ADL a communist front group? I certainly don't think so, but by ADL's own standard, it does.

Much more importantly, the ADL has a little housecleaning of its own to do before they start pointing fingers. How can anybody take anything about them seriously as long as they continue to defend a blatantly unconstitutional federal law -- the late Senator Thomas Dodd's infamous 1968 Gun Control Act -- that is very little more than a translation into English (one performed at Dodd's written request by the Library of Congress) of Adolf Hitler's evil weapons legislation of 1938?

Go to http://www.jpfo.org/images02/handbill-adl.jpg to see for yourself a photograph of the actual letter that Dodd received from Lewis C. Coffin, Law Librarian of the Library of Congress, cheerfully replying to Dodd's request for a translation of the original Nazi legislation which the ADL presently supports. You might enjoy this http://www.jpfo.org/images02/handbillpoliticians.jpg too. ADL's shameful approval and compliance have helped turn a once-insignificant bureaucracy into a new Gestapo and a once-free America into a police state.

Furthermore, in light of the incontrovertible fact that every one of history's massive genocide campaigns was preceded by the forcible removal of weapons from private hands (as what politician wouldn't want to make sure the individuals he or she was planning to murder in cold blood couldn't fight back?), how can the ADL justify any kind of gun control laws -- more accurately termed "victim disarmament" -- at all?

Surely Abe Foxman, current national director of the ADL ought to know better. As a boy, most of his relatives were murdered by the Nazis precisely because they had been deprived of the means to defend themselves.

By contrast, see http://www.jpfo.org/alerts/alert20040304.htm a webpage dedicated to the impressive accomplishments of a 2003 JPFO movie Innocents Betrayed where Paul himself is quoted as saying, "Innocents Betrayed has an important message for America. It shows why gun control must always be rejected, and it shows it very convincingly."

It's long past time for the ADL to do a little dance of their own, a dance of renunciation, regret, and remorse for the hundreds, or the thousands, or perhaps even the millions of innocent individuals that the policies they advocate are responsible for having injured or killed.

They must apologize to the shopkeeper, robbed, maimed, and killed because government, at one level or another, under policies the ADL has helped to shape -- allowed him nothing with which to defend himself.

They must apologize to the helpless woman who was raped and murdered because she wasn't permitted the physical means of self- defense.

They must apologize to the families of those who died needlessly because pressure groups like the ADL would rather see them all dead in a darkened alley somewhere than see them alive with a gun in their hand.

Go look at that handbill again. Send it out (along with this message, of course) to everyone you know, to all your friends and associates, to every enemy of freedom you have an e-mail address or URL for. ADL's hypocrisy must be exposed for what it is. Encourage everyone you know to write to the ADL and ask about their repulsive double standard. Ask them exactly what sort of moral compass Abe Foxman has that can allow that double standard to influence his own organization.

Visit ADL at http://www.adl.org/contact_us.asp .

Please understand, we are all living -- or at least we ought to be -- in a Bill of Rights culture, and that the ADL and racist groups have a right to express their opinions freely, although I personally think they're both festering boils full of pus on the derriere of the American body politic. But for the ADL to refer to itself as a civil rights organization is pure humbug. It is the Anti-Defamation League, and not Congressman Ron Paul, who are guilty by association -- with themselves.

ADL, burn in Hell.



Permission granted to distribute without additions or deletions.
Copyright Aaron Zelman 2007

Liberty1
11-21-2007, 9:06 PM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block89.html

From Walter Block on this recent "controversy". He says it better then my poor attempt to add to the question at hand:



An Open Letter to the Jewish Community in Behalf of Ron Paul, Part II by Walter Block

On November 3, 2007, I published An Open Letter to the Jewish Community in Behalf of Ron Paul. Among the many letters I received in response to this essay was one from a former student of mine with whom I am still on very good, close personal terms. He is an orthodox Jew and a highly intelligent professional man, who has lived in Israel for a number of years now.

In what follows is a correspondence between the two of us, in response to my Open Letter. I will identify his words by FS, for former student, and my own by WB...

...FS: Anti-Semites. While I'm sure Paul is not an anti-Semite (and you are someone I can trust to vouch for that), he is supported monetarily and editorially by some of the biggest anti-Semitic people and groups. He doesn't seem to disavow them, which is a big problem. He didn't return that $500 from that neo-Nazi. If you don't disavow them, then you are welcoming their support, even indirectly. It seems that the holocaust denying industry is rallying around him. Am I wrong?

WB: As a Jew, I can vouch for Ron as a non anti Semite. I've known him for four decades, personally. Never even a whiff of anything like that have I ever experienced. But this is not just me. There is now an organized group, Jews for Ron Paul, who feel about him as I do. They would hardly join if they thought this charge had any merit whatsoever.

Ron's view on accepting money from such groups is that "they support us, we do not support them." That seems eminently reasonable to me.

I think that people who make this charge are "singling out" Ron. Other candidates get money from all sorts of nefarious sources. The Democrats are supported by unions. I regard unions as no better, worse, actually, than criminal gangs. Is there anyone asking the Democrats to return union money?

What about taking government money? Ron refuses, on principle. (I disagree with his stand, on this matter.) The other candidates, all of them, in both parties, would happily and enthusiastically take government money for their campaigns if they thought it would help them financially. Many refuse, but only on prudential grounds. Is there anyone asking any candidate to return government money?

The communists support the Democrats. Is there anyone asking the Democrats to return this money? When Prince Harry of UK wore a swastika, everyone went ballistic. And, rightly so. But, half the kids in the US wear t shirts that support Communists (Che Guevara is the most popular, but there are plenty of others). No one bats an eyelash. Why the vast difference in popular response? The Communists are International socialists. The Nazis are National socialists. Apart from that "vast" difference, they are just about the same: mass murdering scum, the both of them.

Wait, there is one more difference: the Nazis are avowedly anti Semitic, the Communists are not. But so what? They are both evil, pure evil. Actually, according to Courtois, Conquest and Rummel, the Communists killed far more innocent people than did the Nazis. To tell a political candidate like Ron that he can accept money from Communist groups, but not Nazis, is surely to commit a moral blunder.

We must "never forget" that it was the US which overthrew Mossadegh in the 1950s, then undermined the Shah in the 1970s, bringing the mullahs into power in Iran. Engaging in contrary to fact history is a risky endeavor, but had the US not done this, it is entirely possible that Israel would not now be facing its present threat from Iran. Congressman Ron Paul, a Taft Republican, would never in a million years be guilty of any such external meddling. No, for that, you would need a Rudy, or a Hillary.

Here is Ron in his own words on 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." Are these the words of an anti-Semite or an Israel hater? Hardly.

Walter Block wishes to acknowledge the help of an anonymous Israeli citizen in writing this essay.

November 20, 2007

Liberty1
11-28-2007, 2:27 AM
Who is Walter Block? I'm guessing: http://www.walterblock.com/

Is he afiliated with the the Ron Paul campaign? I don't think so, but don't know really.

I guess my biggest concern is that all these other people are addressing this issue and Paul isn't. All I can offer is the assumption that he doesn't wish to encourage such a distraction from his main message and campaign strategy. Other then illegal contributions has any candidate returned money from "suspect" legal sources? Communists, polygamists, NY mobsters, etc...

I think Ron's correct to not comment other then to have staff repeat his policy of taking anyone's money and using it for good with no strings attached and no quid pro quo understanding.