I want to see these "racist" newsletters! Produce them or be silent!

I see a trend...Ron Paul isn't FOR the groups, the groups are FOR Ron Paul. So in other words, Ron Paul is right and you are lying.

 

With that viewpoint shouldnt all countries have bases around the world to protect their "security".

 

That's my main problem with him also. The revisionist history and Lyndon LaRouche conspiracy stuff is a big concern also.

 

Writing a few columns is not writing all the newsletters. No one denies there was many people writing for him. Pointing out that he admitted to writing some does not mean he wrote them all. You are spinning this for all you are worth and it still amounts to nothing.

 

The way you mention this I can't help but think you just heard of it yourself. There was a NYT piece over the weekend about the newsletters. In it, Ron Paul had this to say....

Mr. Paul described Mr. Rockwell and Mr. Rothbard as political provocateurs. “They enjoyed antagonizing people, to tell you the truth, and trying to split people,” he said. “I thought, we’re so small, why shouldn’t we be talking to everybody and bringing people together?”

He said he did not discuss the content of the newsletters with Mr. Rockwell because readers never complained. “I was pretty careless about what was going in my own newsletter — that was my biggest fault,” he said.

So is RP perfect? NO. Is he a racist? NO.

 

Dallas Morning News 1996.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/15/can-ron-paul-win/

'...he did read them, every line of them, off his fax machine at his Clute office before they were published. He would typically sign them at the bottom of the last page giving his okay, and re-fax them to Jean to go to the printer.'

Eric Dondero

Eric Dondero, Personal Asst./Travel Aide
Ron Paul, Libertarian for President, 1987/88
Crdtr. Ron Paul for President Exploratory Comm. 1991
Campaign Coordinator, Ron Paul for Congress, 1995/96
Senior Aide, US Cong. Ron Paul, 1997-2003


How long you guys going to try to keep this up? The most egregious statements underlined in pen throughout the eight page letter I posted then signed at the bottom in the same pen by Ron Paul.

 

There you go with conspiracy talk again. You had a thread about this and did not want a discussion after the evidence was provided to you.

Does anyone believe these conspiracy ramblings from Ron Paul...which are all happening and happened right before our eyes?

 

What was the military expenditure in say...1941? Were we warmongering then? Ron Paul's political ancestors in the America First Committee and the isolationist block in the Senate certainly proclaimed so loudly up until Pearl Harbor.

 

The newsletters that are most questioned are from the early 90's....a time frame which your own post shows that Dondero was not associated with RP. Also, Dondero's charge is not that he was a racist, but an isolationist.

Don't try to muddy the water here.

 

Spot on!!!

 

You mean the isolationist practices of blockaiding Japan from oil and other resources? Very non-interventionalist if I do say so myself. Were we attacked by Germany, or Japan again?

 

Paul doesn't want to cut defense spending. He wants to cut the militarization..that is policing foreign nations, "liberating" them, overthrowing governments, covert operations, nation building.

It's expensive and immoral, and the reality is we are broke.

 

The entire thrust of the Newsletters was insane conspiratorial disinfo. It was part of an effort by Rothbard, Rockwell and Paul to attract the fringe right. If you're really interested in libertarianism you would do well to read this article as it's written by a libertarian and on a libertarian site. Gives a pretty good account of Ron Paul's ideological roots:

http://bleedingheartlibertarians.co...-old-newsletters-matter-so-(*)(*)(*)(*)-much/

EDIT: Link has been edited because it contains a naughty word. For the article google "bleedingheartlibertarians' (name of the site) and 'how did we get here or why do 20 year old newsletters matter so'

 

What's 1941 got to do with today? Why not pick any random year and ask the same question? The fact is that, in 2010, almost half of the ENTIRE WORLD'S military expenditure was ours. China and Russia combined spent less than 11% while we spent 43%.

And people wonder why we're broke.....

 

You gathered that from the little snippets of some articles? How can you tell the "entire thrust" of the newsletters when you have only read an extremely small sample size.... You cant.

It would be like you read a few pages in The Hobbit concerning the spiders and then saying the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings was 4 books about a forest of giant spiders.

 

Firstly we didn't 'blockade' oil or other resources. All we did was stop selling them oil because:

Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931. Became one of the most brutal and evil regimes in the history of the earth. Allied themselves with Nazi Germany and Italy. Invaded China in 1937. You really believe that if we had kept selling them oil and let them rampage throughout Asia massacring millions of people that it wouldn't have come back to bite us? You clearly must be a deeply immoral/ignorant person if you believe we should not have given Lend Lease aid to Britain and cut off oil to Japan in the late 1930's.

Both. Germany threatened our shipping lanes and attacked our merchant vessels because we helped Britain - same as in WWI. Germany declared war on US not the other way around. Nazi Germany and Japan were the greatest menaces we and the world have ever faced. We are faced with regimes today even worse who are armed with nuclear weapons and expressed genocidal intent.

 

Well, to be totally honest, our biggest expense is the troops. The troops in America get a liveable wage to support a family, have homes, buy cars, live very comfortably. China has a standing military 2x the size of America, and gives their soldiers food and residence and that is about it for wages. But yes, we spend way more than we have to by paying rent to nations to be on their land to protect them from their enemies, and usually when those contries could fiscally support their own defense just fine without us.

 

You trying to be funny? We are faced with a menace of greater magnitude and peril than mankind has ever faced. Greater than Nazism and Stalinism. I find it difficult to believe you that you are being serious.

Because comparing to 1941 is relevant for so many obvious reasons and other years aren't? Aren't we in a world war that we didn't start but that genocidal, warmongering anti-Semites who like Adolf Hitler started? Isn't that a good reason for starters?

Came about as a consequence of the Second World War, the Cold War and the new threats we face today.

 

Not to mention that the troops are spending our tax dollars in other nations, when we could desperately use their spending here in America at the titty bars.

 

So instead we let the communist chinese do it to themselves. Much better. But since we did what we did to Japan, we were attacked and US sailors were killed.

Again, you showed where we were war profiteering. Gee, wonder why they attacked the SUPPLY chain for their enemies.

 

WATCHOUT, there is a Muslim behind you, or lurking under your bed when you go to bed at night ready to kill you. Or are you talking about the boogie man in the closet?

No, we started it by invading their land, bombing their people, overthrowing their DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments, and causeing pain and hardship to the people of the region for decades. Did they like Hitler, yes. Did we like Hitler? Yes till Japan attacked us.

All because of our own actions and continuing actions of occupying other countries.

 

How so? That's all revisionism that's regarded as nonsense by all serious academic historians. Do you know about Mossadeq's rule and the Shah? About Stalin's refusal to withdraw his forces? About the Communist insurgency Stalin fueled and the Tudeh Party he started? About how Khomenei's mentors assassinated the democratically elected PM in 51?

When Mossadeq realized he was losing the 51 elections after the assassination of Haj Ali Razmara he unconstitutionally stopped the election. Then after being constitutionally blocked in parliament he sent out mobs into the streets to attack the opposition until they re-instated him.

After that he puts through unconstitutional legislation to allow him to rule by decree then issues a land reform decree which gives him the power to confiscate the entire property of anyone in the country who opposes him. This and his nationalization platform gave him the support of the Stalinist Tudeh Party.

Mossadeq became progressively more unpopular until in 1953 he unconstitutionally dissolved the parliament, abolished the secret ballot and called an unconstitutional "national plebiscite" which had an obviously fraudulant result of 99.93% in favor of his dictatorship.

As I said, you are just repeating revisionism that has been thoroughly discredited by all serious historians. Much of it has even been exposed as part of a Soviet disinformation campaign - see Mitrokhin archive etc.

 

Couple years ago I put up an anti government sign on my business place. I was drunk and it was a stupid thing to do, but thx to the local news media, I soon became known localy as an anti veteran... media are professionals in making a story out of nothing - it's they and their families eat from. With someone like Ron Paul, there's even more motivation...

 

he makes lots of predictions, few of them materialize, for example:

in 1988 ron paul said, "I anticipate, and many Austrian free market economists anticipate, that the recession that's coming will not be a recession at all but it will a depression and it will probably be bigger than the one we had in the 1930s"

now it has been more than 23 years since that prediction, what happened, was he not smart enough to understand that the fed would prevent it?