Stormfront White Nationalists Showing Overwhelming Support For Ron Paul

Ron Paul's associations with Stormfront, the John Birch Society etc

http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/opinion-ron-paul-is-a-white-supremacist/

'Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.

I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.

For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.

He really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism.'

 

The linked article is crap.

For example, the bit you quoted from the article.... the part about RP meeting White Nationalist figures... uses a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing post from an internet forum as a source...

 

Yeah right, you fawn over any so called "black leader", even a scumbag like Wright. And to say Wright has never harmed another human being is disingenuous at best.

You're right, wrong is wrong, and a piece of (*)(*)(*)(*) America hating scumbag like Wright, is clearly wrong.

 

LOL, liberals are defending Wright, still?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnlRrxXv-v8"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnlRrxXv-v8[/ame]

 

No doubt Rev. Wright encountered much of the racism in his life in the military. When I was in the army I knew a guy who used to brag to anyone who would listen about his attending KKK meetings, as if that was something to be proud of. G-D America, indeed.

 

You met one racist person in the military. F(*)(*)(*) the country.

Typical mindset of a leftist.

 

So is it illegal for white people to not want to have their culture swamped under millions of immigrants??

Immigration is determined by congress, it's not a guaranteed right.

 

That's why I asked when the picture was taken. The donation was four years ago, not recent. So far I haven't seen anyone show when the picture was taken.

 

OK, I googled it. And what I found was page after page of the same photos being posted over and over again. The very first page that comes up is an article from Andrew Breitbart, one of the leading propagandists in the country, posted on a blog called Biggovernment.com. I didn't see anything from any mainstream site, nothing to corroborate the accusation that Obama knew those men would be at the march or even knew who they were. I mean, if you are trying to convince me that Ron Paul might not have known who Don Black is, why do you assume Obama knows Shabazz or the "unidentified NBPP member"?

If he had scheduled this appearance for a very historic march I'm not sure why he would want to leave just because some undsesirables showed up. He believes strongly in free speech, as do I, as did our founding fathers. It hasn't been established that he "shared a podium" with them just because they also spoke (if they actually did speak from the podium, which I did not see demonstrated from any of those links).

Don't get me wrong, I know all about the New Black Panther Party and they are without doubt as racist (unlike the original Black Panther Party) as the KKK or Aryan Nations, but unlike those two groups, they are not to my knowledge resposible for acts of violence against a targeted race.

The video you posted of the two "security guards" is one I've seen numerous times. Unfortunately for your point of view, it doesn't identify them as members of the NBPP. I don't know who they are from that video. I believe they are acting to make sure no black people are intimidated or turned away from voting as has happened many times in the past. There were reports, for instance, of police roadblocks set up in certain Florida counties during the 2000 election that were turning back cars with black passengers, preventing them from getting to their assigned polling places. I don't blame these gentlemen at all for feeling the way they do. I wouldn't feel intimidated by two black people standing at a polling entrance, one of them holding a billy club, any more than I would be by policeman doing the same. They weren't preventing any one from going in. This is just an overused trope to try to create a narrative (that black people are trying to prevent whites from voting) out of whole cloth. There's nothing here but inuendo and the same kind of guilt by association nonsense that was rightly condemned way back in the 50s. It has no more validity now than it had then.

 

Here's the real story of Ron Paul's racist newsletters:


Angry White Man
The bigoted past of Ron Paul.
James Kirchick

......



Most voters had never heard of Paul before he launched his quixotic bid for the Republican nomination. But the Texan has been active in politics for decades. And, long before he was the darling of antiwar activists on the left and right, Paul was in the newsletter business. In the age before blogs, newsletters occupied a prominent place in right-wing political discourse. With the pages of mainstream political magazines typically off-limits to their views (National Review editor William F. Buckley having famously denounced the John Birch Society), hardline conservatives resorted to putting out their own, less glossy publications. These were often paranoid and rambling--dominated by talk of international banking conspiracies, the Trilateral Commission’s plans for world government, and warnings about coming Armageddon--but some of them had wide and devoted audiences. And a few of the most prominent bore the name of Ron Paul.

Paul’s newsletters have carried different titles over the years--Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report--but they generally seem to have been published on a monthly basis since at least 1978. (Paul, an OB-GYN and former U.S. Air Force surgeon, was first elected to Congress in 1976.) During some periods, the newsletters were published by the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, a nonprofit Paul founded in 1976; at other times, they were published by Ron Paul & Associates, a now-defunct entity in which Paul owned a minority stake, according to his campaign spokesman. The Freedom Report claimed to have over 100,000 readers in 1984. At one point, Ron Paul & Associates also put out a monthly publication called The Ron Paul Investment Letter.

The Freedom Report’s online archives only go back to 1999, but I was curious to see older editions of Paul’s newsletters, in part because of a controversy dating to 1996, when Charles “Lefty” Morris, a Democrat running against Paul for a House seat, released excerpts stating that “opinion polls consistently show only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions,” that “if you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be,” and that black representative Barbara Jordan is “the archetypical half-educated victimologist” whose “race and sex protect her from criticism.” At the time, Paul’s campaign said that Morris had quoted the newsletter out of context. Later, in 2001, Paul would claim that someone else had written the controversial passages. (Few of the newsletters contain actual bylines.) Caldwell, writing in the Times Magazine last year, said he found Paul’s explanation believable, “since the style diverges widely from his own.”

Finding the pre-1999 newsletters was no easy task, but I was able to track many of them down at the libraries of the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society. Of course, with few bylines, it is difficult to know whether any particular article was written by Paul himself. Some of the earlier newsletters are signed by him, though the vast majority of the editions I saw contain no bylines at all. Complicating matters, many of the unbylined newsletters were written in the first person, implying that Paul was the author.

But, whoever actually wrote them, the newsletters I saw all had one thing in common: They were published under a banner containing Paul’s name, and the articles (except for one special edition of a newsletter that contained the byline of another writer) seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him--and reflected his views. What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays. In short, they suggest that Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing--but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics.

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/angry-white-man

It is just not believable that Paul did not know what was being written in his name considering that he one of the newletter he had "a minority stake in" and another was from a "non-profit (Paul) co-owned". And you think he knew nothing about any of this? Is he that dense? Brotha, please.

More from the article:

This “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” was hardly the first time one of Paul’s publications had raised these topics. As early as December 1989, a section of his Investment Letter, titled “What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author--presumably Paul--wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”Such views on race also inflected the newsletters’ commentary on foreign affairs. South Africa’s transition to multiracial democracy was portrayed as a “destruction of civilization” that was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”; and, in March 1994, a month before Nelson Mandela was elected president, one item warned of an impending “South African Holocaust.” …

The newsletters were particularly obsessed with AIDS, “a politically protected disease thanks to payola and the influence of the homosexual lobby,” and used it as a rhetorical club to beat gay people in general. In 1990, one newsletter approvingly quoted “a well-known Libertarian editor” as saying, “The ACT-UP slogan, on stickers plastered all over Manhattan, is ‘Silence = Death.’ But shouldn’t it be ‘Sodomy = Death’?” Readers were warned to avoid blood transfusions because gays were trying to “poison the blood supply.” “Am I the only one sick of hearing about the ‘rights’ of AIDS carriers?” a newsletter asked in 1990. That same year, citing a Christian-right fringe publication, an item suggested that “the AIDS patient” should not be allowed to eat in restaurants and that “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva,” which is false.

 

Oh, yeah? Where is the black supremacist site equivalent to Stormfront whose members praise Obama? I'll wait....

 

that signature sure looks shakey.....looks like his signature in 2007 as an old man.

 

The military is full of racists, just like there are racists in any sector of society. I'm sure Rev. Wright encountered much racism in the 60s. Desegregation was still fairly new. One of the tactics of white supremacists today is to join the military to get weapons training and then take that knowledge back home to launch attacks against minorities and government institutions. The Southern Poverty Law Center is currently working with military officials to oust these people.

There's nothing wrong with Rev. Wright offering an opinion about this country's racist past and present. It's just an opinion. Opinions don't hurt anybody. And you are free to express your opinion that he is a scumbag or whatever. Although I do have to wonder about the type of people who get so bent out of shape whenever white racism is so much as brought up.

 

You wonder about people who get upset about racism? Wow.....

 

here's ron's signature on a letter promoting the political report

http://ronpaulsurvivalreport.blogspot.com/2007/12/faq-ron-paul-and-his-racist-newsletter.html

 

That blog is funny. You can click quote of few of his links that go to other sites but they dont show what the link is supposed to prove.

"False. James Kirchick of The New Republic cites dozens of different newsletter clippings, along with the appropriate scans. These newsletters were tracked down at "the libraries of the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society."

For example brings you to the New Republic main page....


"Just because that newsletter Ron Paul has his name on that, doesn't mean that he was involved! (new)
This is an evasion tactic. This is not open to debate. Ron Paul himself has accepted moral responsibility for the content of the newsletter. His signature appears on the solicitation letter. If you don't think that he should be held responsible for it, then you're going to need to take that up with him, and not with us."

Brings you to Ronpaul.com......

Your blog is bogus.

 

thats just not true, ron paul owned the company that published the newsletter, ron was listed as editor, he profited from the newsletter and signed the solicitation letters

 

I guess you cant read. I quoted from the blog you linked. And you quoted it as if i said it.

Troll less.

And no one said he was involved. He didnt write the articles.

Its that simple. You have been in probably 20 threads discussing this and you STILL dont get it.

Again. Troll less. Find another hobby.

 

Do you have any evidence to support this claim? I have heard of Mexican mafia members and black supremacists doing this to be more competitive on the streets, but I haven't heard of groups of whites targeting minorities. Not lately, at least.

You posted the story of meeting one racist in the military, and then echoed Wright's "G-D America" comment. It's simply amazing how little it takes for leftists to condemn the entire country. I think hating America is just hardwired into your DNA.

 

an abundance of evidence indicates that he did write many articles in the newsletter



http://www.conservativesnetwork.com/2011/12/16/who-wrote-the-ron-paul-newsletters-ron-paul-wrote-them-clear-proof/

 

You keep saying that. You link a blog that isnt credible and says it has sources. When you click some of those links it goes to front pages of websites that have nothing to do with the item linked.

You show us that he was an editor but nothing that says he wrote the articles.

In a quick look 97 out of the last 100 posts for you are anti Ron Paul. I think that qualifies as obsessed.

Just saying.

 

you're mistaken, the links work and the sources are reliable

http://www.conservativesnetwork.com/2011/12/16/who-wrote-the-ron-paul-newsletters-ron-paul-wrote-them-clear-proof/

 

I linked two that didnt. The first two i checked.. Keep reaching.

That site is hardly credible. Atleast i know now where you got those pictures you keep spamming.

 

I wasn't trying to convince you that Ron Paul was unaware of who Don Black is.

I'm saying this Obama photo is more questionable considering the circumstances.

Seriously, how could Obama be unaware that the NBPP would be speaking at the same event, or be unable to recognize a uniformed NBPP member... at a civil rights event nonetheless?

How does the Holder DOJ justify dropping a clear case of voter intimidation?

Here's an explanation from Malik Shabbaz @ 2:25:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JunrpGf5QRc

Well, it's the politically correct thing to do of course! Imagine a GOP presidential candidate showing up at some kind of patriot rally where actual Klan or Neo-Nazis spoke, and then later marched with them in tow only feet behind. Yeah, that would go over really well...

No, those two guys are the same two that had their case kicked out by the Holder DOJ.

Except that they weren't random black people, they are NBPP members brandishing weapons.

And really... the comparison between a cop and a Black Panther standing there with a baton...

It doesn't matter if they weren't preventing people from going in. They're actual, bona fide racist, brandishing a weapon in front of polling station... where the first Black (half Black actually) president was in the process of being elected.

The inverse situation would not fly, and I'll wager anything that you'd be amongst the first of those who'd condemn the act.

 

Which is amazing as redneck is not a race.