Scrubbing the “Protocols of the Elders of Ron Paul”
Ron Paul lackeys forgot a cardinal rule of politics: It’s always the cover-up that gets you in the end.
That was the case when Roger L. Simon called attention to a blog post on the Campaign for Liberty’s (C4L) website promoting the sale of the viciously anti-Jewish The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The item was apparently first noted by Adam Holland earlier this month, and then picked up by Adam Taxin of the NY Jewish Culture Examiner.
The Wikipedia entry for C4L states:
Campaign for Liberty is a political organization founded by twelve-term United States Congressman Ron Paul. The Campaign for Liberty focuses on educating elected officials and the general public about constitutional issues, and currently provides a membership program. Its legal status is that of a 501(c)(4) nonprofit.[2] It is also known as C4L.
The Campaign for Liberty was announced on June 12, 2008 as a way of continuing the grassroots support involved in Ron Paul’s 2008 presidential run, and corresponded with the suspension of that campaign. Paul formally announced during the Texas Republican Convention that he had created this new organization known as the “Campaign for Liberty”.[3]
But no sooner did the story get traction than C4L began to take action.
The first response was to scrub the offending blog post from the C4L website. Commenter JoshInHB accused Roger L. Simon of slander for not verifying the information. But not only was the offending C4L blog post still available in Google cache, but I had taken a screenshot of the entire page, which we promptly added as an update to Roger’s post. The post is also available on the Internet Archive.
Over at Taxin’s Examiner post, commenter TJ Riordan claimed that while the campaignforlibery.com URL had previously belonged to Ron Paul’s C4L, they had moved to a new domain. But a quick check of the WHOIS database showed that campaignforliberty.com is still owned and maintained by C4L, which I noted in the comments of Roger’s post:
Registrant:
Campaign for Liberty5211 Port Royal Road, Suite 310
Springfield, Virginia 22151
United StatesRegistered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: CAMPAIGNFORLIBERTY.COM
Created on: 30-May-08
Expires on: 30-May-13
Last Updated on: 16-May-11Administrative Contact:
Administrator, Site frank@campaignforliberty.com
Campaign for Liberty
5211 Port Royal Road, Suite 310
Springfield, Virginia 22151
United States
+1.7038657162Technical Contact:
Administrator, Site frank@campaignforliberty.com
Campaign for Liberty
5211 Port Royal Road, Suite 310
Springfield, Virginia 22151
United States
+1.7038657162Domain servers in listed order:
DNS1.STABLETRANSIT.COM
DNS2.STABLETRANSIT.COMRegistry Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Status: clientRenewProhibited
Registry Status: clientTransferProhibited
Registry Status: clientUpdateProhibited
And then more information related to the offending blog post began to disappear.
That’s not the only article the C4L site scrubbed. Another article by another poster at the site was tossed down the memory hole. The Google cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:23mdxTyKPF4J:www.campaignforliberty.org/profile/7636/blog/2012/01/05/1985-jack-bernstein-article-explains-zionism-and-predicts-ziobanker
The poster Huntingtonsteam had several posts scrubbed. The one in the cache above links to an online copy of a 1985 book on a Zionist conspiracy. The host site is Republic Broadcasting Network, which dabbles in hatemongering.
The following post by Huntingtonsteam, also removed, hits so many conspiracies I don’t know where to begin listing them….
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:iIWgAXYNDCEJ:www.campaignforliberty.org/profile/7636/blog/2011/11/27/usa-victim-israeli-nuclear-blackmail-modern-state-israel-depicted-despi
Great googa mooga!
Has anyone read that third scrubbed entry from the cached page?
And for 3 years nobody active there could be bothered to notice it and bring it to the attention of the admins?
Agreed, Sam. How in the hell does someone have something on their website for that long, and that far off the deep-end, without noticing?
C4L knew what the page said, and what it clearly advocated (Jew hatred), yet did nothing until it became obviously something to be embarrassed about. Then, start lying.
I actually pointed that out on Roger’s thread.
This thing sat on the website apparently for 3 years. Did no visitor contact the site admin and say, “this is wrong, it needs to be taken down”?
If we assume that in 3 years someone would have complained, the fact that it stayed up is also troubling.
So, either the visitors to C4L thought this was just fine and dandy, or the management didn’t think it was bad enough to take down until the furor erupted. Or maybe some combination thereof.
Neither possibility says much good about RuPaul and the Ronulans.
Alternative theory: Nobody reads their stupid site.
Hell, I’ve identified as having libertarian politics (though, not LP) for well over a decade, and I’d never even heard of their site, let alone read it.
Anyone have traffic stats?
But I thought Ron Paul was the wave of the future?
The true internet candidate?
The man with the real grassroots support, whose followers were everywhere and did everything?
And their traffic to the site of Herr Doktor’s special organization is so low that such a thing goes unnoticed for three years?
Looks like yet another communications failure between the rhetoric the reality and the spin.
Clayton Douglas’s Free American website is totally off the wall. It’s Legalize Marijuana meets Christian Identity. It’s looney tunes. Maybe they should have done what you said in response, but I can’t seriously believe they would knowingly allowed this guy free reign.
Note: Christian Identity is an anti-semitic group which believes that Jews are the spawn of satan.
Why not? Ron Paul gave them free reign with his newsletters.
Wrong word choice? Or Freudian slip?
Just a common misspelling. sigh. I see it everywhere. Rein, reign, to, two, too, etc.
The weird thing about “Protocols…” is that if people have such an interest in publishing this “document,” how can they be so blithely unaware or at least unmoved by its history? Do they know it’s fake, hate Jews and so just put it out there to see what sticks? Don’t they understand they reveal themselves as liars and lunatics? Do lunatics care what anyone thinks?
Weird how much traction a fake document has when the equivalent of such a documented conspiracy actually exists via Hamas, Wahabbi Saudis, the Muslim Brotherhood and Sayd Qutb that are not fake statements but stuff easily found and of which they are proud of. Of course the world mostly ignores talking about this and banishes such to the realm of hate-speech and Islamophobia. Sayd Qutb is an actual and real “Protocol” guy. Read “Milestones” if you don’t believe me and then his “The America I Have Seen” to see what an utter moron he was.
My, we do have our work cut out for us.
I hear what you try to say that it’s a fake document, yet it was claimed to be recorded during a secret meeting in Russia in the late 1800′s, it struck a note with most of the world at the time as it shown elements of what had been taking place on a global scale, caused WWI, the Bolshevik uprising resulting in the holocaust of over 40+ Million Christians. Then the betrayal of Germany causing WWII, now the manipulations of the legal institutions, Media, academic and financial institutions have brought us here. Just how much of the Protocols is fiction compared to what has actually happened today.
It’s spookily accurate and worthy of an award comparable to Nostradamus, only less cryptic.
Surely it’s better to debate and disprove the book rather than simply pretending it’s a forgery then trying to delete it from the world, you cannot do that, it has been recorded and over 100 years later it’s looking more and more accurate, certainly accurate enough to cause one to wonder why Zionists go to such great trouble of inveiglement within Europe’s/ America’s and other western governments in order to behave precisely as outlined in the book of Zion.
If a forgery, why has it all come true?
“worthy of an award comparable to Nostradamus”
Yes it is exactly worthy. Unfortunately, that’s not the praise you think it is.
As a non-Jewish historian and former Federal prosecutor on Nazi war crimes cases, I know a bit about the Protocols. After the collapse of the Soviet communist government, the former KGB admitted that the their predecessors under the Czar, the CHEKA, had forged the protocols of the elders of zion. The Russian forgery was based on a french novel depicting plans for a political coup by French Catholics. The Russians changed the story line to Jews and tweaked the plot a bit. The forgery was, for many sad decades, successful in propping up Jew-hatred among those who were so inclined but needed an excuse. Now that the Russians confessed to forging the protocols, there is no excuse for the bigots to cite them. Shame on you.
Thank you, Counselor.
Mr. Loftus, thank you for that brief paragraph. And thank you for the work you’ve done.
For those who do not know of Mr. Loftus, please look at his body of work.
I was wondering when someone would bring this up. The provenance of the thing has been known for decades, without question. Since its proponents can’t convinicingly say that it’s authentic, they publish it as a “curiosity” or a “mystery” from the last century, and then ask questions such as “If it’s a forgery, why has so much of it come true?” You can always see the smug bastard looking at you with a smirk as he asks this.
Oh, and I have always objected to the term forgery, here. A forgery is an illegal, unauthorized replication of something that’s authentic. The “Protocols” are a fabrication. There never was such a meeting, let alone a record made of it.
Dr. Ron Paul did his residency at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit.
Paul supporters today make statements that are lifted from Henry Ford Sr’s revision of The Protocols, as published by Ford Sr’s Dearborn Independent as “The International Jew”. Forgetting to copyright this, “The International Jew” was translated into many languages, including German. because Ford, Sr was, at the time, the most respected businessman in the world, “The Inernational Jew” was given enormous credibility, especially by Hitler who awarded a medal to Ford, Sr.
Every time you hear or read a Paul supporter claim the Federal Reserve is “private corporation secretly owned by foreign bankers”, you can bet they have read Ford, Sr, “The International Jew”. Ford, Sr’s particular obsession was his virulent hatred of the Federal Reserve Bank.
I wrote a grad school paper on The Protocols in 2005, which led me directly to Henry Ford, Sr. It was when I started hearing/reading Paul comments in September/October 2011 that I recognized the same language. They also believe the the US enetered WW2 solely to stop the Holocaust.
if only!
A minor correction. The Czarist secret police organization was called the Okhrana. The Cheka was the security service Lenin set up immediately after the Bolshevik Revolution, the direct, organizational ancestor of the KGB. It was the Okhrana that fabricated the Protocols out of that French story written to damage Napoleon III.
Cheka was a bolshevik organization, prior to KGB. The Protocols were forged by tsarist OKHRANKA, before the revolution. All the rest is correct.
I guess you meant the Okhrana rather than the CheKa (which was the 1st Bolshevik secret police), but anyway, the book you are referencing is “The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu” by a French satirist named Maurice Joly, published in Geneva in 1864 as a pamphlet against the rule of Napoleon III (and his alleged imperialist designs). Much of the book was cribbed into the “protocols”. Click on my handle for more info.
”
If a forgery, why has it all come true?”
It has only come true in the minds of those who wanted it to be true, John.
For example, World War 1 was the peak, inside Europe, of the aristocratic reaction against the growing political freedoms of industrial society,…on both sides, do note. War came because arrogant elite leaders backed themselves into strategic corners they could not get out of without resigning, or risking “a short victorious war”,…which each nation joining in expected, all through 1915, BTW.
The reason that people hate the Jews has nothing to do with the twaddle pushed by the Tsar’s secret police, “The Protocols,….”
It has to do with the fact the Western European Jews, having been excluded from making their living on the land, turned to trading and banking just to survive. When the world-wide market networks of the industrial revolution began to grow faster in the late 18th Century, they were well-placed to participate in them. The Jewish desire to support rabbinic scholars who kept Judaism whole throughout the diaspora meant Jewish Culture developed great earnestness in academic studies, which placed them well for the world-wide intellectual networks of the industrial world.
So why the reaction against them? The world-wide networks of the continuing industrial revolution allocate scarce resources far better than the old oligarchies of agrarian society usually did. This means that as market networks grew, they have often undermined the hierarchies of agrarian cultures around the world, because allocating resources contributed vastly to the oligarchies’ power. The oligarchies in those cultures, from Imperial Russia to Imperial Germany, to Imperial France and Britain, needed someone to blame for:
1.) The decrease in their status, in the case of Britain and France.
2.) The threats from their own populations in the case of Russia and Germany, and Austria-Hungary to overthrow the ruling oligarchies.
Nowadays, it is notable that as academic hierarchies come under pressure from industrial changes to educational markets, it is in academia that we see some of the most vicious criticism of Jews and of Israel that is repeated in this country, at least outside the internet.
In each case, they simply could not accept that it was their own inability to do as well as world-wide market networks at managing resources that led to dissatisfaction with them. It just *had* to be someone’s plot. As they have ever since the Middle Ages, they turned against the group more highly involved in the networks undermining them than any other group, certainly on a per capita basis. That group was the Jews, not because they were plotting to undermine anyone, but because of their previous association with the trading and banking, and world-wide scientific activity, and, … all the other productive networks of industrial society.
Those who wish to exist as rentiers, living off the present structure of society, will always find some way to blame those who are able to create more wealth than they, while that success undermines their social and political positions as well.
Why would people at this supposed meeting be talking in phrases borrowed from earlier literary works? If I said President Obama had a secret meeting with Hamas and patched together sentences from the Hamas charter and “Milestones” you wouldn’t be the least suspicious?
C4L was founded by Ron Paul, not run by him. I am still listed – probaly – as a county coordinator, although I haven’t done anything with the group for a few years now. It is 100% run by grassroots types. Based on a meeting I attended a couple years back, the grassroots can be pretty flippin’ weird. I find that to be true with the grassroots everywhere though. People really are strange.
It doesn’t, however, change my opinion of Ron Paul; he’s still my first choice for president and the candidate who doesn’t bring “more of the same, only less” to the table.
so much for you people promoting personal responsibility…
See my earlier points.
This was apparently up on C4L for 3 years.
Did none of the Ronulans visiting that site find it objectionable enough to complain?
If they did, did the site management decide it was OK to leave up?
You need to answer those questions if you’re going to defend and continue to support RuPaul… unless, of course, you also didn’t find it objectionable, just like all the other visitors during those 3 years it was up.
And before you ask, yes, I have complained about things on websites–including PJM–in the past, and have even left sites because of complaints that were not heeded.
Ron Paul brings more crazy to the table than all the other candidates combined.
Not just “crazy,” but also “crazies.”
Seriously people – I’ve been a Roman Catholic hanging out on the internet for many years. You don’t have to be a “Ronulan” – or whatever other cute little term of belittlement you peawits care to use – to hold some pretty weird views of Catholics, Jews or, for that matter, Mormons, Muslims, etc.
Every group from Southern Baptist to some of the bottom feeders at Townhall, which site has a couple of trolls from Stormfront who regularly post, to Amanda Marcotte for a leftadian example have their share of Kooks. I’m not leaving out fellow Catholics either. Just sayin’…
I have never requested that a site pull down an objectionable or objected to a website about the content their followers post. The more free speech the merrier, and if the loons announce their presence so much the better.
I’m for Ron Paul in 2012. No apologies.
I guess in that case you have no problem with what Newtonium’s Super-PAC is doing, or Mittens’… right? The more speech the better!
And of course, you don’t care what Baracky does at Organizing For America… the more speech the better!
Or are you using a double-standard? Is it OK for RuPaul, but not OK for anyone else?
I guess free speech – liberty in general? – is too hard for you.
“I guess in that case you have no problem with what Newtonium’s Super-PAC is doing, or Mittens’… right? The more speech the better!
And of course, you don’t care what Baracky does at Organizing For America… the more speech the better!
Or are you using a double-standard? Is it OK for RuPaul, but not OK for anyone else?”
And I really don’t care what the Romney spin machine says either. I have a mind. Further, I have principles. I makes the sorting a little easier.
Right.
Here’s your principles:
1) RuPaul is always right.
2) If RuPaul is ever wrong, see rule 1.
RuPaul is a cross-dresser. I hardly ever agree with it.
I am also not a doctrinaire libertarian, which, of course, means nothing to you since you’ve made up your mind that if I support Ron Paul over your favored candidate then I must be a cRazY Ronulan Paulbot sycophant.
Suit yourself.
IMO, the real problem in American poilitics is that the same retards who keep electing the same demonrat or demonrat-lite politicians expect a different result if just one more lamestream Repugnicon candidate is elected. Yet government grows apace and liberties erode even faster.
For the real kool-aid drinking cRaZy, you should look in the mirror.
It’s the Brian Esterson Rule at work: every political movement has at least 2000 kooks. In something big like the GOP or Democrat Party, the kooks are there and they’re occasionly embarassing. If your group is small, like the Libertarian Party for example, then it’s just about all kooks. There’s no way around it.
Considering that the very definition of “kooky” is, more or less, “outside the mainstream,” then yeah — any small political group is going to be labeled as kooky.
It’s tautological, and it renders superfluous any “2,000 kooks” rule.
What it doesn’t do, however, is tell you whether the “kooks” are actually right or wrong.
There is a difference between “really strange” and “Christian identity conspiracy theorists”.
Having enough comic and film figures and busts that people visiting your home get the heebie jeebies from being watched is “really strange” if that is not your hobby.
Believing all the Jews are conspiring to off your friends, destroy your property, and drug you up in the hospital after an “accident” is somewhere between ideological sociopath and escapee from the asylum.
Hey, maybe the Jooooooooooooooos were behind putting that book on C4L in the first place, and then they also used their Mossad-supplied mind-control devices to keep the management from removing it for 3 years!
Don’t forget the Zionist Squirrel Agents (ZSA, the real acronym of the TSA), who infiltrated and rewired the servers to make it look like they were trying to scrub it in such a feeble coverup, as well as posting all those lame excuses that were quickly exploded.
Its possible for grass roots types to make a mistake. But once the mistake is discovered, the Paul campaign has a duty to immediately disavow it, and fire some of the responsible people to deter it from happening again. And if a particular site like this repeatedly makes mistakes like this, it might be time for the campaign to completely disavow it, and prohibit the site from advertising themselves as Paul supporters. Mind you, I dont think it is right for a site to be held responsible for every single blog comment, but they are responsible for honestly dealing with complaints once a problem is discovered.
Anti-Semitic Ron Paul supporters are circulating this now…
firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/27/10249298-gingrich-funder-isnt-trying-to-buy-the-presidency-aide-says
The Paulbots have almost got me convinced that your description of them is redunant.
I wouldn’t have thought so some years ago, but I’ve been hearing a lot from them in the last couple of years…
I agree.
Ive been telling my libertarian friends that I know are not antisemitic but are supporting Ron Paul (who is clearly an antisemite himself) that they and Ron paul are doing great harm to the cause/ideology they wish to promote.
Waste of breath. They won’t believe you.
“Why,” you may ask, “do you spend so much time battling Ronulans online then, CW?”
Simple. I’m not trying to convince the Ronulans that they’re misguided… that’s not possible.
What I am trying to do is highlight the myriad problems with Ronulan philosophy for the people who read but don’t comment (who probably outnumber us commenters quite handily).
So, if the problem is Ron Paul, his specific hidden beliefs, and his followers, and their dirty little secret beliefs, then why are you seeking to expose their ‘philosophy for what it is’?
I really like Ron Paul’s economic and foreign policy. Is ending all foreign aid (ad nauseum: Palestinians get more) and letting Israel do what it wants anti-semetic?
You see, because maybe Paul is an anti-semite, but what does that have to do, necessarily, with his policies?
Paul’s policies are quite different from the rest of the field and the status quo. Take Paul out of the picture, and the policies have no home except in history with long-dead conservatives and founders.
So, is your war against Paul, or his policies? You could say, “Take your philosophy of liberty, but I’m telling ya Paul’s not your guy.”
But, you don’t make any room for that.
And I’ve read anti-Paul rhetoric in the conservative blogosphere where commenters are attacking his policies more than his character (on PJ Media seems to be obsessed with the man’s dark secrets – they must be tempted by his policy, but hung up by the desire to ‘fit in’ as ‘conservatives’ – just speculation). I’ve read long-winded debates where commenters have the gall to actually defend the ultimate necessity and goodness of the Federal Reserve system, ridiculing all other proposals for dealing with finance in a free society. Like Romney’s space folly: “I’m with Ron Paul, but I’ll tell you, if a CEO came to me talking about space and the moon I’d fire him.” It’s just like how the democrats say: “It’s okay to make a little money, just give back your fair share.”
SO! Just like how YOU equate obscure grassroots loons on an open forum of what until recently has been a very marginal movement with Ron Paul’s campaign and message itself, I will do the same.
YOUR constant belittlement of the only man to propose real liberty in the realm of politics today, and his followers, can only be interpreted as an attack on the idea of liberty itself.
Look, if you are Christian and Jewish, ask yourself if you really believe in God. Would God allow his people to die and burn unless we do our part to micromanage global geopolitics?
If you think: of course not, then you probably should realize that the most important contribution we can make to God is to promote liberty within the spheres nearest us, and act as morally as possible in our own lives. Using vast sums of money, and the threat of violence is not ‘promoting liberty’, it’s a form of control. And your control of morality extends only as far as your own individual choices.
I think people are so hard on Ron Paul for all these fringe characters because of fear. They don’t like Paul’s policies because of an unsettling fear, and they find common emotional ground in their fear of Paul’s character because of fringe associations. This makes it easier to reconcile the intellectual appeal Paul might have with the utter unwillingness to get behind his candidacy.
The more people who support liberty and Paul’s policies, the less kooks will appear to have anything to do with it.
I stopped reading after about the 2nd or 3rd paragraph, so forgive me if I missed the part where you had a coherent point.
You wanna rant about RuPaul’s foreign policy? Here’s a couple of points to consider.
Point the first:
RuPaul wants to cut the defense budget.
Baracky wants to cut the defense budget.
Point the second:
RuPaul wanted troops out of Iraq.
Baracky wanted troops out of Iraq.
Those points of similarity mean that either RuPaul isn’t conservative in the Reaganesque sense, or that Baracky is.
Which is it?
CW: So tell us Oh Great One what is wrong with RPs domestic policies and then C&C them to whomever you are supporting. Which candidate has said he will cut spending by $1 trillion in his first year? Which candidate will cut out useless departments like EPA, DOE, Dept. of Educ., etc? Which candidate has expressed a willingness to prevent the dollar from either going hyper-inflationary or becoming so useless that other nations unpeg from it as the currency of trade? You are so snappy with your trite responses, how about doing some real work.
Next, tell us using chapter and verse where RP has said or HIMSELF written anything anti-semitic (which just like blacks using “racist” is becoming so tedious and overused it means little today; it is a sign that you have nothing to add to the conversation or cannot debate the facts). Then tell us which of the other candidates have put forth any policies that would help us reign in our spending. Am I anti-semitic because I think most American Jews hate America and are stealth communists? I bet I can produce more examples to support my claim than you can in claiming I’m anti-semetic. The left is where you will find rampant anti-semitism but I don’t hear you carping about it. No, you are just using it as a hammer to hit RP and his supporters because you cannot, repeat cannot hit him on any other issue. Hell most American Jews hate Israel.
Tell us Most Sainted Grand Puba that of any GOP candidate which one does not want to throw our young into battle but whom will only use our military to protect America and Americans? Choose well my friend because I work with these young men and women each day, and our war in Afghanistan and wherever else Dear Leader sends them is NOT worth it. And try not to use the word isolationist unless you can provide chapter and verse where RP has used it himelf.
See, you completely ignored my two points.
You have no answer… because any answer tears down your own ideals.
If RuPaul agrees with Baracky… and he does… then either RuPaul isn’t the absolute conservative you want him to be, or Baracky might actually be right once or twice. (I happen to believe the first of those two, by the way.)
Point the third: “Baracky may actually get it right now and then…” Is the perect explanation for Points the first and second. Hey, even a blind squirrel…
Even my nephew (tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan and wounded once) thinks we should get the hell out of Iran. I suspect most of you are little more than chickenhawks playing at Risk with our young men.
Point the fourth: Since when did being a Republican mean being for endless foreign interventions and unnecessarily bloated “defense” budgets?
News flash:
We’re not in Iran.
Here’s another.
We’re not in Iraq any more, in case you wanna try claiming it was a typo.
Your weak grasp of foreign affairs explains much.
A – It was a typo.
B – Hey, I got the tense wrong. Mea culpa. You’re the one who brought up Iraq, although you could have substituted the shithole du jour had you preferred. Baracky wanted us out (good on him!) I wanted us out, my nephew wanted to be out and Ron Paul wanted us out. Better?
I’d prefer a more substantive response from you, but then small minds are prone to resort to calling out typos and grammar errors. I ask again: When did it become mandatory to support endless interventions and unnecessarily bloated defense budgets to be a good Republican, my chickenhawk friend?
Ahh, yes, the old chickenhawk meme.
Did you know I’m handicapped? I don’t really hide it, you know.
And you still haven’t explained why supporting Baracky’s wish to cut the defense budget is “conservative.”
Jimmy Carter cut the defense budget, Reagan and Bush increased it again, Clinton cut it again. Tell me how following Carter, Clinton, and Baracky’s policies is “conservative.”
As for how keeping a strong defense is conservative, it’s simple. Reagan did it. The Founding Fathers did it too… did you know that in the early years of the American Republic (1783-1860) US Presidents sent American troops into military action almost sixty–I say again, ALMOST SIXTY times?
You Ronulans are supposed to revere the Founding Fathers… how is it that you’d rather follow the lead of the modern Democratic Party (up to about JFK, Democrats preferred a strong military, by the way) rather than the clear lead of the Founding Fathers, as shown by history?
Tell us Most Sainted Grand Puba that of any GOP candidate which one does not want to throw our young into battle but whom will only use our military to protect America and Americans? Choose well my friend because I work with these young men and women each day, and our war in Afghanistan and wherever else Dear Leader sends them is NOT worth it. And try not to use the word isolationist unless you can provide chapter and verse where RP has used it himelf.
One does not need to have him say he’s an Isolationist in so many words to know what his policies would mean.
You cannot simply say that you’ll bring all the troops home from all our overseas bases and then claim not to be an isolationist.
You cannot say Iran with the bomb is not an existential threat to the security of the United States and claim not to be an isolationist.
He has said all of this and more. Indeed, his head-in-the-sand approach to foreign affairs, his statements that he wishes Isreal didn’t exist make it clear he is both an anti-Semite and a fool.
We already have this for president, why should I wish to elect a second anti-Semitic fool to the White House?
What all of you Paulbots seem to fail to understand is that on a clear December morning in 1941 the United States was forced to shoulder the burden of Empire. We cannot safely lay it down. For us to withdraw within our borders at this juncture in history would make the Roman withdrawal from Britannia look like a sorority pillow fight.
Is the end of Western Civilization as we know it your goal then? Because if we follow the policies of a Jew-hating crank with a terminal case of cranial rectal disorder that’s where we’re headed.
Bob Dole rightly pointed out that almost none of his House colleagues have endorsed Newt Gingrich — which should tell you all you need to know about the man. How many of his colleagues have endorsed Ron Paul?
First, they could have just come clean and posted an announcement saying, “Hey, thanks for letting us know about this troubling material. We’ve now removed it.”
Yes they should have said something to that effect and it is highly suspicious that they didn’t.
Clearly, they didn’t find it troubling… until the story started getting a lot of play.
That is also highly suspicious. It suggests they acted out of a desire to cover their butts, rather than because they really feel it was wrong to have it on their website.
A lot of sites are infrequently moderated and attract kooky affiliates. That is a universal feature of the internet, not just politically oriented sites. I’ve seen a lot of nutty things on AT and Townhall for example.
The damning part of this incident was trying to scrub the record of the nut once his offensive page became widely know. Because it demonstrates that the site is moderated to some extent, the moderator realized that the page was offensive and damaging to their reputation and “the coverup” leads to conspiracy theories along the lines of they knew about it and approved of the content.
The smart thing would have been a public statement along the lines of “thanx, we didn’t know that was there and have now removed it”
For once, we agree.
However, they clearly didn’t do the smart thing, so now we’re left with speculating about why. I still think it’s mostly tail-covering.
I quit hanging out with Libertarian types years ago although I still have many libertarian ideals. What tipped it for me was when the Libertarian Party newsletter had a full page ad for a Holocaust denial conference in California featuring Wilis Carto and a host of neo-nazis to be held at a hotel in Orange County CA.
I never met so many racists and lunatics in my life. I did not want to be associated with them. Ron Paul has kept those associations and profited from them. How anybody can support him for president is beyond me and I must assume that they are sympathetic to those views.
Yeah. I really got turned off via the old libernet and libernet-d message systems in the early 1990s. There was one guy who thought it was more libertarian to let the South secede to continue practicing slavery rather than attempting to end slavery. Not interfering when someone owns another human being may be extreme pacifism (or else practical, can’t police the world of every ill) but it isn’t libertarian.
In the early 90s a surprising proportion of the Libertarians I knew wanted to scrub the Constitution and go back to the Articles of Confederation. That, together with all the Lincoln-bashing finally turned me off. It’s also what turned me off on Glen Beck (even though I’m a Mormon too)–the tortured attempts to create a consistent right vs. wrong narrative for American history. I admire Jefferson for the Declaration, and many of his writings; I despise many of his policies, particularly his attitude toward slavery. I wouldn’t call myself Jeffersonian because I don’t buy the Anti-Federalist line. Doesn’t mean I have to agree with everything the Federalists did and said. “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” It’s not necessary to divide American history into good guys and bad guys–heroes become villains, villains become heroes, but mostly heroes are still human and make mistakes. It doesn’t make their deeds any less heroic. I admire Hamilton immensely, and reckon he would’ve made a superb president. I hate the fact that he was an adulterer and so ruined his chances. Why can we not admire the admirable and despise the despicable, even when united in a single person? The simple fact is if Obama turned into a decent president I would forgive him and even vote for him. I hold out little hope for it…he hasn’t learned anything new since adolescence…but stranger things have happened. Demanding that any leader (or even hero) be perfectly consistent in all things throughout a whole lifetime will only lead to disappointment. It’s impossible, and what’s more, it’s improbable.
Off topic: EPIC Urges Appeals Court to Shed Light on Google-NSA Agreement
http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/NSA-Google_FOIA_…
Garsh … I don’t know any libertarians who are anti-Semites. What kind of “libertarians” did you all hang out with?
Cached pages? WTF?
You sound just like the Dinosaur Media reporter in 1972 who said, “I don’t understand how Nixon could have won. No one I know voted for him.”
You mean Pauline Kael. She was a film critic, not a reporter.
I’m from the UK and am aware of the Protocols of Zion, do you not wish us to be? Censorship is precisely what has brought us to this page of history, all as a knock on effect of when the Protocols first came to public view, the tragedy of course is that over a hundred years later it is ever more prescient and accurate then, as it was when the First world war kicked off. How about debating just how and why you feel it’s untrue, nobody I have met from Canada, South America, Austria, France, Germany etc have any qualms or doubts over it’s accuracy, only North Americans programmed into compliance by the media only claim its authenticity even if you claim this book to be a ‘forgery’, my what a visionary the author was!
John Thomas – If Jews were so powerful, why are they so weak, or are those pictures concentration camps figments of our imagination?
They’ve always been physically weak but that’s genetics, what’s your point?
Hence the need/desire to corrupt from within the Media, Academia, governments and financial institutions. Isn’t it better to rationally disprove what you consider a lie, than dishonesty censorship and witch-hunts?
Bill Goldberg says guess again, chump.
KRAV
MAGA,
R
Heh
I think somebody is missing a sock. Someone must have stolen one and turned it into a puppet. John Thomas, funny. Must be the guy who came up with the famous John Thomas sign in medicine or was that Throckmorten (google it)
I concur with your diagnosis, Doctor Dok.
Definitely sockpuppetitis.
Yeah, I’m not surprised that everyone you know feels “The Protcols…” is an authentic work.
When it comes to “The Protocols…” or “Loose Change” or the “we never went to the moon” people, it’s always “Groundhog Day.” It has to be disproven every morning at 8:00, and by the end of the day you believe it again.
I keep saying this thing isn’t a “forgery.” There never was a meeting in the first place, so that a record of it could be falsified. It’s a “fabrication”, a complete fantasy. Nothing of the sort ever existed, no meeting took place, no such organization ever existed. Nada. The pre-war Tsarist Russians were trying to foment more anti-Semitism, and concocted this thing in their efforts. You and every other gullible kook for the last 100 years has believed it.
You are confused.
Nobody has a problem with people knowing about the Protocols.
In fact most people would be quite happy if everyone knew a lot more about them, particularly their history.
The same with nobody being upset that they can walk into most bookstores and find copies of Mein Kampf, The Little Red Book, Rules for Radicals, and similar works.
We understand that the more people know about such evil the less likely they are to be subverted by it, and so you can find many people selling such books while making clear what they are, and why they are so bad.
What people are commenting about is the nature of those who are taken in by such books, and the connection between them and a particular candidate.
If in fact you are so proud of believing in such nonsense then you should be pleased that you have so effectively communicated that pride, as well as your endorsement of those beliefs, to others. Likewise those who believe such things and support Ron Paul should be pleased that others really do understand what they mean to say, as well as understanding Ron Paul’s acceptance of their support.
Hmmmmm, I thought smearing a person, because of the actions of some nut on a website was a tactic of the left?
You disappoint me sir.
I thought Republicans/Conservatives didn’t believe in collectivism?
But one must ask the question; are Neoconservatives really conservatives? or just trotskyites in Republican Clothing?
it’s sad to see so-called conservatives playing the game of the frankfort school of political correctness. it shows where the conservative movement went horribly wrong.
I support Israel, but this sort of nonsense is idiotic at best.
-Patrick
He is a candidate for president, not just ‘somebody’.
These were not just random comments on the internet, or newletter. These were sites he set up and in some cases profited from in order to gain political support. As such he has an obligation to oversee, or appoint responsible people to oversee, the material published therin. He neglected to do so. Worse he is not taking any responsibility for his negligence.
Paul supporters need to grow up. This is not a childrens game or a libertarian debating society. Everything matters when you are considered for this office. He cant even take responsibility for his own website.
Judging from what I’ve seen of Ronulans just in this election cycle, I’d say those two are indistinguishable one from the other.
now censoring comments? Hmmmm
I guess you missed this part of the guidelines between the article and the comments:
In my experience, it takes between 30 seconds and 5 minutes for a comment with no links or one link to appear. Comments with 2 or more links gets sent for moderator review because most spammers use multiple links.
When are you children finally going to grow up. Maybe you get paid by AIPAC, the Mossad, or the RNC to post this crap but it is getting old, stale, and silly. I realize that when you were in college it was propably the thing to do for losers, attend one of these leftist rallies and chant racist, racist racist or anti-Semite, anti-Semite, anti-Semite in the hopes that some liberal girl who normally wouldn’t give you the time of day will now take her pants off for you.
We are now in the real world. Do you actually have any real proof that Ron Paul did something that caused harm to somebody where his motivation was due to a hatred of the person’s race or relgion. If not then crawl back under your rocks.
Another sock, it seems.
Naw, Mak.
Mossad’s checks stopped clearing, so now I’m doing it for free.
(Hint: Throwing around the idea that accusations of anti-semitism are “fake” ala “any opposition is racism” doesn’t work when you get caught pushing the Protocols.
Because there’s, well, no excuse for that that isn’t anti-semitism. That’s kinda the definitional thing about the Protocols.
Their entire modus for existing is anti-semitic. Literally. Seriously.)
There were checks? Why wasn’t I told? I never got any money…
Seriously, the paranoia of some people is amazing. Imagine the thinking: “No intelligent person could objectively disagree with me, and these people are obviously intelligent. The Jews must be buying them off.” It never ceases to amaze me how bone stupid people can be, especially when they are able to feed and clothe themselves, and at the same time advocate silliness like this. You have to wonder.
Still no proof that Paul has actually done anyhting I see. The bone stupid people are you.
No the people we have to wonder about are those that let others think for them like you. I see you still don’t have anyhting concrete to show Ron Paul’s “anti-semitsm”. Please just show one instance.
Why bother?
Even if someone came up with video evidence of RuPaul saying “I am an anti-Semite,” you’d just claim it was made up by the Mossad, or the Trilateral Commission, or the Fed, or the friggin’ Gallifreyans!
You cannot be convinced, because you’ve not made a logical, rational decision to follow RuPaul as your Secular Savior, you’ve made an emotional decision, and thus you can’t be argued out of it.
Because your mind is not open to contrary evidence, you might as well go back to C4L where everyone agrees that RuPaul is the Second Coming.
Soooo, what is it about Ron Paul that attracts so many nutjobs?
Birds of a feather, perhaps?
Anyone attacking the Fed or talking about banking issues is going to have some anti-semites crawl out of the woodwork to suppport them. OWS saw the same thing happen.
Though I must say, it seems quite hypocritical to see conservatives so eager to scream bigot on such flimsey evidence. So, were all those progressives right about all the equally flimsey (or much less flimsey) accusations they’ve made over the years?
Well I’d agree about the flimsy evidence part if this was the only example of rampant anti-semitism amoungst some of Ron Paul supporters. But it isn’t. Over the years I’ve read about other incidences of anti-semitism involving Ron Paul supporters and I’ve never read about Ron Paul coming out and denouncing them and their repellent opinions of Jews. After a while one gets the idea that he isn’t all that upset with being associated with anti-semitism.
I really like the blog ad for… you guessed it… Ron Paul 2012!
So, if I post something anti-semetic right now, that means Patrick Poole hates jews, yes? And that if he removes the post, he is guilty of covering up his jew hatred?
Do I have that about right?
You did read the part about leaving the stuff up for 3 years, didn’t you? Because that little detail is left out of your clever attempt at cultural equivalence.
Yeah, it’s pretty clear that John didn’t even bother to read the article because I addressed that very point:
Maybe so, that it “sure makes them look guilty”, but the fact is that the scrubbing may have simply been the overreaction of some Ron Paul follower not wanting to be the one, or the one’s who caused their favored candidate to take this hit. Also, it very well may be that they saw no problem with the Protocols, and are only culpable themselves in allowing it to remain promoted on the site, perhaps not thinking it would ever become an issue, or some other far less romantic reason – a site moderator’s character flaw, or ignorance. Perhaps, nobody complained about it because nobody understood what it was, and those who did didn’t care. Perhaps, they really believed it was simply a freedom of speech issue to leave it up (note: this doesn’t negate the “overreaction” scenario either), and perhaps people DID complain about it. It seems that many assumptions have been made in order to make this guilt-by-association more sticky. As far as I would even allow myself is that this may indeed indicate the type of people who support Ron Paul, but I would say it is far more inimical to try to put this in Dr. Paul’s lap.
Benjamin Netanyahu Prime Minister of Israel agrees with Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_ECgLpwPg4
I’ll be voting for Ron Paul, and I just cancelled my PJTV subscription.
Don’t let the door hit ya on the way out!
Don’t forget to purchase your copy of Protocols from C4L!
I’m pretty surprised at the hostility directed toward libertarians here. Perhaps I’ve misjudged pjmedia.
Well the hostility is to anti-semites. So unless you’re an anti-semite then you’ve no reason to be insulted. Kind of sad your conflating anti-semitism with libertarians.
I happen to consider myself a small-l libertarian.
However, RuPaul isn’t contesting for the Libertarian Party nomination, he is contesting for the Republican Party nomination.
Therefore, he seems to have declared himself a Republican, not a Libertarian.
So, would the “hate” here be anti-Republican as opposed to anti-Libertarian?
Seems you Ronulans gotta get your terms straight.
And, Tblakely is absolutely correct… we’re expressing distaste for anti-Semitism. If you feel that we’re expressing distaste for you, perhaps some soul-searching is in order?
Disingenuous at best. While expressing your distaste for anti-semitism – the older I get, the amorphous the defintion becomes – you seem to be happily smearing Paul and all of his supporters with the accusation of anti-semitism.
My soul, at least on that account, is clean.
If you’d care to discuss issues instead of endless smear tactics, I’d have a lot more respect for you.
Sorry, I believe in at least trying to stay on topic. The topic of this thread is the anti-Semitic book featured on RuPaul’s website for 3 years before it was removed after the issue came to light.
Now, please show me the comment on this thread where I’ve smeared any specific Ronulan as anti-Semitic. Look long and hard, because you can’t find one… because I haven’t.
If you think I’m calling you, personally, an anti-Semite, perhaps you’re oversensitive on that issue… and you need to find out why.
And if any established* commenter here thinks I am calling a specific Ronulan anti-Semitic, please speak up! I’ll gladly apologize if it’s proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
* I say established because I don’t want anyone creating sock puppets just to show up and say, “you’re calling X an anti-Semite.” Show me that you’ve been here for more than the last week first.
BS. We’ve been way off topic for hours – days – now. Seems you like to play stupid games. I’ve likely been posting here longer than you. I asked you a question. Now man up or shut up.
And you haven’t shown me in which comment in this thread I accused you or any other Ronulan of anti-Semitism.
You made the accusation, now prove it, apologize, or be proven a liar.
Oh, for pity’s sake.
“Go back to C4L and buy a copy of Protocols.”
>to the extent that I and my wife could not get served in restaurants.
“Sounds like something Ronulans would do.”
And since you insist on being a putz, show me in my post where I accused you of calling any SPECIFIC Ronulan an anti-semite.
You do know the defintion of disingenuous, right?
I’ll give you a pass on answering my other question. Later, hater.
Well, using your own logic, if Protocols isn’t an anti-Semitic book, then telling someone to buy a copy isn’t itself anti-Semitic, is it?
There are also legitimate uses that such a book can be used for that are not in and of themselves anti-Semitic… or are you accusing everyone who read Mein Kampf in order to better understand history of being a Nazi?
As for the restaurant thing, do you have any proof, any at all of DonM’s ethnicity? I sure as heck don’t, I even went and looked at his own blog and check the “About” page and didn’t find any clues. For all you or I know, he could be a Catholic Hispanic… and if that’s the case, where’s your evidence that my comment is accusing anyone of being an anti-Semite?
You’re sinking down deeper into the hole you’ve been digging for yourself. I recommend stopping before you dig all the way through to China (for the record, that’s a well known figure of speech, which is how it is used here, and is not to be taken literally or as evidence of anti-Chinese bias).
Oops, apologies for forgetting to close the bold tag.
Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
(For those not versed in Latin, that’s an admission that I did something wrong.)
I was a big L Libertarian until I moved from California to Texas-Ron Paul’s district. The folks there were RP supporters, and racist/antisemitic, to the extent that I and my wife could not get served in restaurants. They were quite honest about it, and figured that any reasonable person would know that they were right. That was when I became an “R”.
Sounds like something Ronulans would do.
That’s why I said above that Ronulans have not made a logical decision to support RuPaul, they’ve made an emotional decision. It’s essentially a religion to them, and they can’t be convinced that they are wrong. That’s why I frequently call RuPaul their Secular Savior.
Hmm, sounds like bs to me about not being served in restaurants. If crap like that happened, the lame stream media would be all over it since it reinforces their bigotry. Plus it assumes everybody in a restaurant in Ron Paul’s district is a supporter.
I smell BS. What, you walked into a restaurant and announced that Mr & Mrs Goldstein were in attendance and needed to be served?
Yeah, that’s likely.
If you weren’t served I’d suspect it was your state of previous residence rather than your ethnic heritage. I know a few Texans who believe Californians and and/or Yankees should be shot on sight.
CW: Did you similarly get your panties in a twist regarding Dear Leader and Rev.(?) Wright. In fact I would like to read your denunciation of Zero for going to that church. I want to hear you conflate his going to a racist church and that all his followers are loony racist. How about Mooches senior thesis where she describes the whites at college as closet racists. How about that as clear evidence of her racism; will you denounce her?
Clearly you are unhinged in your postings here. For someone to come unglued like you have demonstrated here is a sign you have issues. Not Ron Paul. Oh and your use of RuPaul is further suggestive of your bigotry (projection perhaps) and the fact that your elevator does not go up to the top floor.
As for your points, what??? You cannot debate or you would have responded like a mature adult with all his facilities. You did not because you can not.
Thanks. You just proved my point.
You cannot answer my points about RuPaul and Baracky agreeing on even two points of their policies, so you’ve devolved into ad hominem arguments.
You absolutely cannot accept that on at least some of the issues, RuPaul is just as far left as Baracky is, despite the evidence that they’re in absolute agreement on at least two issues. So you attempt to shoot the messenger.
Keep it up, tho. Your rants just show that you’re the unhinged one, not me.
Feds Using Mobile X-Ray Vans On U.S. Streets
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsJbAXnZ-Z8&fe…
It looks as though neo-cons are as big a race baiters as the libtards. Paul should stifle speech to appease the PC neo-cons, else he’s a flaming racist.
And would ya say the same thing if–note, I said IF–PJM was selling Klan books?
Or would you use that as proof of the racism of the neo-cons?
I suspect the latter.
Now take the sock off your hand and go back to C4L.
One important thing about The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is that regardless of who really wrote it (most likely the Russian secret police,) it contains the greatest piece of futurism ever written. IOW, that which is contained in the Protocols has come to pass or is in the process of happening. I would recommend at least reading them once before totally dismissing them. I guarantee most people commenting at this site have never read the Protocols. The commentators here have been programmed in manner that results in hysteria and closed-mindedness. True ignorance in the traditional meaning of the word.
I should also point out that I don’t support Ron Paul and don’t care for libertarianism. So my comments have nothing to do with supporting Ron Paul. Doing away with government is the devolution of man/womyn-kind.
If I wanna read futurism that’s likely to come true, I’ll read the book of Revelation or a good commentary on it(and have, several times).
If I wanna read fantastic futurism, I’ll read Chung Kuo, a near-future sci-fi series where China takes over the world and builds a huge city on every continent. Of course, maybe that’s not so far-fetched after all…
I think at this point it’s worth asking if how often anyone complains about offensive posts like these on ANY site.
BTW, my only reason to support Paul is that he actually talks about the constitution. All the other candidates could use a lesson from Paul on that point. The office of President is not American Idol, nor is it a four year term as dictator with a free hand to do whatever you want.
What is incredible is the fact that in this year 2012, the jewish people have to defend themselves from all these fabrications and totally false charges.