Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
1/10/2012 2:33:26 PM
Ghani when I see someone post their hatred for the USA, as you just did, it makes me VERY angry and I always wonder why idiots like you, choose to stay here and why they don't go find a country more to their liking, a country that is perfect in every way. This country may have it's faults, but it's still the best country in the world, why else do you think we have a problem with illegal's coming in?
Since there are other US bashing threads here you could have chosen to post in, why didn't you join one of those? Why did you choose this one that is anything but?

Quote:
Check your history dating back to 1492 and prior WHICH IS WRITTEN IN BLOOD and stop spreading lies about the president and really explain what happened to the Natives whom Columbus found here and what about Slavery?By the way the many weapons that are sold in the world market(black Market at that) today are made in America,which makes America the number 1 weapon of mass destruction seller .WERE THERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS-DESTRUCTION IN IRAQ TO GO TO WAR OVER AND DESTROY THOSE PEOPLE AND THAN TALK ABOUT RECONSTRUCTION AFTER CAUSING OVER 4,000 US soldiers to die for nothing and not to mention the Iraqis and by the way it wasn't O.HUSSEIN?By the way who buys and use more drugs,has more of its citizens in jails,why are women raped every so many minutes a day not to mention rape,murder,sexual abuse and list goes on and on...

+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
1/10/2012 2:37:32 PM
Hello Friends,

A couple of months ago I posted an article about a new group called Americans Elect. This is an effort to draft a third party candidate online with a convention and online voting. Now the dangers of voter fraud in this case in my opinion is a given but the whole idea is under suspicion of being a B Hussein attempt to insure his victory in the upcoming elections.

Aaron Klein found as you'll see in the below article that there are connections to B Hussein in Americans Elect heirachy and this just might be another dirty tricks campaign of the Democrats and the fraud and great pretender B Hussein.

I can easily comment more on this issue but the truth is that the article is full of FACTS that can't be disputed and make this whole effort suspect to begin with. As an aside and one not mentioned by Aaron Klein is the possibility that this online effort will nominate the kook Ron Paul (it appears that the leaders have a clause that allows them to bypass the online voters and nominate a candidate of their choice) and Ron Paul would be a perfect conduit for them to split the conservative vote by doing so as I wrote about yesterday. AND, Paul after losing the GOP nomination would be a very willing candidate and accomplice.

The article is interesting and Aaron Klein backs up what he says with facts as opposed to others who aren't so meticulous in their "reporting".

Shalom,

Peter



Is this how Obama win will be guaranteed? Group with ties to president engaged in massive 3rd party drive.

image

By Aaron Klein

A mysteriously funded, highly organized effort to secure the ballot for a third party candidate in this year’s election has ties to President Obama and top Democrats, KleinOnline has learned.

The group, calling itself Americans Elect, or AE, seems designed to appear like a massive, grassroots effort involving millions of citizens acting to draft a third party candidate.

However, the organization’s voting process has been called into question while there are concerns AE’s bylaws may allow the group’s own board members to bypass votes and nominate their own candidate.

AE describes itself as “a non-partisan, non-profit organization founded by Americans from across the political spectrum who are worried that our nation’s deep political divisions keep big problems from being solved.”

AE seeks to hold its own nominating convention on the Internet this June to select an independent presidential and vice-presidential candidate. The group says any registered voter can sign up to participate in the June convention.

AE has reportedly raised more than $22 million so far and has already been certified to be placed on the ballot in 12 states now, including California.

To getting on state ballots, AE evidenced mass organizing skills. The group says it collected over 2 million signatures nationwide in its effort to get on state ballots.

KleinOnline found that two of AE’s board members, Kellen Arno and Michael Arno, were paid by the group for helping to run the massive signature gathering drive via their firm, Arno Political Consultants.

Arno’s firm, APC, has previously reportedly been accused of forging signatures and collecting signatures using fraud.

In 2004, APC was accused of forging signatures on a petition to legalize slot machines in Miami-Dade and Broward counties.

The next year, Boston’s Fox 25 News ran a feature interviewing paid signature collectors hired by APC through subcontractors. The interviewees said they were trained on how to trick people into signing a petition using fraud, including by switching the actual petition text after each signature was collected.

In 2007, APC reportedly hired JSM, Inc. who in turn hired independent contractors who gave snacks and food to homeless people in exchange for signing petitions and registering to vote.

Then 2009, APC gathered signatures to put the Ohio Casino Initiative on the November 3, 2009 ballot, but a subsequent review reportedly found the overall validity of the signatures were certified at just under 51%.

AE, meanwhile, was reportedly originally associated with another group that sought an independent candidate. That organization, calling itself Unity08, eventually suspended operations citing organizing and fundraising issues.

Unity08 said it did not back any particular candidate, but two of its founders launched their own national effort to draft New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to run for president

The Irregular Times documented how AE and Unity 08 shared the same Washington D.C. address. Previously, Unity08 shared its address with the Draft Bloomberg Committee.

Irregular Times also found that the founders of Unity08 “registered the domain name draftmichaelbloomberg.com in 2007 at a time when Unity08 was insisting that it had no candidates in mind.”

Mysterious funding

AE’s funding has been called into question.

In late 2010, AE changed its tax status from a tax-exempt group to what is known as a 501(c)(4), or social-welfare organization, which is not required to show its donor list.

Capital Weekly reported that prior to the change, in the second and third quarters of 2010, AE’s more than $1.5 million in funding came from one person – venture capitalist, Unity08 activist and Obama donor, Peter Ackerman.

Ackerman reportedly gave AE a total of at least $5 million in seed money. Many of AE’s other donors are unknown.

AE officials have defended their secretive donor collection practices.

“We have to be able to raise significant amounts of money to be able to take on the status quo,” Kahlil Byrd, AE’s chief executive officer, told Mother Jones last November.

Byrd said that if his group were compelled to disclose its donors, there would be “a chilling effect…on people’s willingness to participate in this process.”

Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center, two campaign finance watchdogs, requested in September the IRS investigate Americans Elect’s charging they may be violating nonprofit status by function like a political party.

Voting issues

Finances are not the only source of controversy.

Mother Jones reported that AE’s Internet voting system has been called into question.

Pamela Smith, president of VerifiedVoting.org, a voters’ advocacy group, argued AE’s reliance on Internet voting is insecure and difficult to audit.

“If you allow it to be used in public elections without assurance that the results are verifiably accurate, that is an extraordinary and unnecessary risk to democracy,” she says.

Regardless of the results, there are concerns that current guidelines reportedly allow AE to anoint its own candidate.

Salon.com reporter Justin Elliott noted candidates chosen by voters must be approved by a Candidate Certification Committee, which according to the group’s bylaws consist of AE’s board members.

The Committee, according to the bylaws obtained by Salon, will need to certify a “balanced ticket obligation” consisting og candidates who are “responsive to the vast majority of citizens while remaining independent of special interests and the partisan interests of either major political party.”

In response, AE official Darry Sragow told Salon’s Elliot that his group’s guidelines are subject to change.

Sragow went on to defend AE’s board, even likening them to the Founding Fathers.

“While we don’t mean to put the board in the company of the Founding Fathers, we’d point out that nobody picked the Founding Fathers, either,” Sragow stated.

“They took it upon themselves to turn a popular dream into a shared reality. And they, too, had debates over how much control should be centralized. They knew that too much power in the hands of too few isn’t real democracy, but that power too diffuse is anarchy.”

Obama backers

KleinOnline reviewed AE’s board, finding multiple ties to Obama while some Republicans also graced the committee.

Besides Ackerman, an Obama donor who gave money to help start AE, the advisory board includes Lawrence Lessig, an Obama technology adviser.

Lessig has been mentioned as a future candidate to head the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC. He is an activist for reduced legal restrictions on copyright material and advised Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign.

AE’s CEO, Kahlil Byrd, has drawn scrutiny from conservatives because he formerly served as Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick’s Communications Director. Patrick’s chief strategist was top Obama strategist David Axelrod.

AE board member W. Bowman Cutter is senior adviser to the Podesta Group lobbying and public relations firm, which was founded by John Podesta, who directed Obama’s transition into the White House in 2008.

Podesta is director of the Center for American Progress, which is reportedly highly influential in helping to craft White House policy.

A Time magazine article profiled the influence of Podesta’s Center for American Progress in the formation of the Obama administration, stating that “not since the Heritage Foundation helped guide Ronald Reagan’s transition in 1981 has a single outside group held so much sway.”

Meanwhile, AE’s board also includes former John McCain aide Mark McKinnon, Will Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute, former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman, Larry Diamond of the Hoover Institute, and former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair.

AE also has ties to Hillary Clinton supporters.

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, who is a prominent Hillary Clinton backer, is on the board, as is Doug Schoen, a former pollster and adviser to Bill Clinton.

Schoen was recently in the news after he teamed up with Jimmy Carter​’s former aid Patrick to publish an editorial in the Wall Street Journal last month, entitled “The Hillary Moment,” in which they called for Clinton to throw her hat into the ring for the presidency.

The two wrote another piece at Politico.com calling for Democratic voters nationally — particularly in New Hampshire — to organize a write-in campaign for Clinton.

With research by Brenda J. Elliott



Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
1/10/2012 3:46:25 PM
Hello Friends,

I just finished reading the below article and I must say that it was a bit of a surprise to me. In the past the author wrote how much he likes many of the kook Ron Paul's ideas but after reading the title of the article and the article itself I was surprised to read why he can't cast his vote in Paul's favor. I must admit much of what the author says I've written in my threads for quite a while now but it's refreshing to hear it from a man that claims there is much "to love" in Ron Paul (misplaced love in my opinion).

It's an interesting and factual article and well worth reading.

Shalom,

Peter

ELECTION 2012

Ron Paul’s Saul Alinsky?

Exclusive: Joel Richardson reveals 'scholar' candidate relies on for foreign policy



By Joel Richardson

Let me begin by making it very clear there are a lot of reasons to love Ron Paul.

He is a man with incredibly refreshing principles, ideas, qualities and character. There have actually been a couple of occasions where after listening to Paul, I have come close to joining the Ron Paul revolution.

But despite the allure of Paul’s constitutional convictions, his perspectives on United States foreign policy, radical Islam and the nation of Israel are an absolute deal breaker. Paul’s emphatic trademark claim that the present rise of Islamic terrorism globally is the result of “blowback” from American actions abroad is nothing less than ridiculous and an absolute insult to my intelligence.

According to Paul, radical Muslims are not radical because they have drunk deeply from the trough of an expansionist, racist and murderous ideology, but rather because American actions abroad have brought about the natural response of resistance. And just so that none of his supporters accuse me of misrepresenting him, here is what Paul himself infamously declared during the Republican presidential debate in South Carolina in 2008, concerning 9/11:

Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attacked us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.

How is Paul’s position any different from Jeremiah Wright’s claim that 9/11 was simply a case of “America’s chickens … coming home to roost”? Paul may say it in a far less shrill manner than Wright, but his position is virtually identical. More specifically, on Paul’s own website, in an article titled, “Foreign Occupation Leads to More Terror,” Paul clearly lays out his position:

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the Sept. 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life. Neither is it our religion, or our wealth. Rather, it is primarily occupation. …

But where did Paul get this idea? We learn exactly from whom in the next paragraph:

Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It.” In fact, of 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95 percent were in response to foreign occupation.

It is essential to take note of the fact that the primary support for Paul’s belief concerning blowback comes from Robert Pape. The problem for Paul here is that by most accounts, Pape is an agenda-driven pseudo-scholar whose works and “studies” have been thoroughly debunked by several other scholars. I appeal to all supporters of Paul to read the following articles debunking Robert Pape’s, and thus Ron Paul’s, claims:

But not only are Pape’s claims based on manufactured data, he has also been caught red-handed conspiring with the Hamas-linked group Council on American-Islamic Relations.

How many Ron Paul supporters can honestly say that they feel comfortable knowing that this is the man Paul looks to as one of his primary guides concerning foreign policy?

But beyond all of the high-minded analysis of data, I prefer to simply couch the discussion in terms that anyone can understand. Paul argues that if it had not been for our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, we would have lost far fewer soldiers and we would all be far safer today. Let me ask this question: Would far fewer police officers be injured or killed each year if they all simply remained in their police stations and avoided ever engaging criminals? Of course they would. But would this make us all safer? Of course not. This is not hard to understand.

Evil exists, and there are times when it must be resisted. Freedom requires both responsibility and sacrifice. To cast the radical Islamic terrorists as the victims and the American people as those who deserve blame, which Paul has done, is simply asinine and downright disgusting. Ron Paul’s soothing grandfather-like persona may be far more palatable to most than Jeremiah Wright’s obnoxious rage-filled rants, but his habit of victim-blaming is no less repulsive and should be rejected by all genuine American patriots.

“Why shouldn’t Iran have nukes?” – Ron Paul

“Death to Israel!” –Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Finally – a few things about Paul’s stance on Israel and his Pollyannaish views concerning radical Islam.

To support his radical isolationist foreign policy, Paul has gone to some absurd lengths to deny the systemic evil of radical Islamism. Following his reliance on Pape’s debunked claims, according to Paul, the primary reason Israel is experiencing such resistance from the surrounding Muslim peoples is because of the Israeli “occupation.” I have heard this same claim made a thousand times by left-wing pro-Palestinian propagandists. Must I hear it from a so-called conservative as well?

But let’s think through the claim logically. Israel was officially established as a nation in 1948. But according to Islamic sacred tradition, it was roughly 1,300 years before when Muhammad himself, the founder of Islam, declared the following prophecy:

The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.

It is worth noting that this “prophecy” is listed as an eternal command within the actual charter of Hamas. But this vision of a last-days slaughter and wholesale genocide of the Jewish people was not “revealed” at a time the Jews were “occupying” anyone. There wasn’t even a Jewish state at the time. So what inspired Muhammad from the very early days of Islam to call for an eventual genocide of the Jewish people? If it wasn’t blowback, then what caused it?

There is much to love about Ron Paul, but until he is willing to acknowledge the very real reality of evil in this world, and the equally real need at times to confront it, he can kiss my vote goodbye. Too many Americans are looking desperately for a hero, and I’m sorry to say that Ron Paul is not the man.

See Joel Richardson’s 4-DVD set “The Return Is Near: Strategic Insights into the Most Important Moment in History.


Joel Richardson is the author of “Islamic Antichrist,” published by WND books, and “Why we Left Islam” and is the co-author with Walid Shoebat of “God’s War on Terror.” His blog is www.Joelstrumpet.com.


Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5807
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
1/10/2012 10:29:29 PM
Just a quote from the recommended DVD Set site :

Quote:
Birth pangs in the news and the coming global earthquake

As massive earthquakes continue to shake the nations, few believers are aware that the Bible predicts a massive cataclysmic coming earthquake that will level every nation of the earth. When will this happen and what is the major event that will bring this about? By reviewing data from the United States Geological Survey, Joel also shows how massive earthquakes are rapidly increasing in frequency, pointing to the soon coming of Jesus the Messiah.

First I heard of a Massive Global Earthquake coming, have you heard about?

Anyways I find the guys article a great read and it probably sells some books and dvds too. But to use as fodder to disclaim Ron Paul is a nut is pushing it... really pushing it just choose which nut to believe I guess.

With 40% of registered voters identifying as independents, it doesn't look well for either party in my view and the third party is looking more viable everyday. I would not be so fast as to say people are happy in this duopoly.



Quote:
Hello Friends,

I just finished reading the below article and I must say that it was a bit of a surprise to me. In the past the author wrote how much he likes many of the kook Ron Paul's ideas but after reading the title of the article and the article itself I was surprised to read why he can't cast his vote in Paul's favor. I must admit much of what the author says I've written in my threads for quite a while now but it's refreshing to hear it from a man that claims there is much "to love" in Ron Paul (misplaced love in my opinion).

It's an interesting and factual article and well worth reading.

Shalom,

Peter

ELECTION 2012

Ron Paul’s Saul Alinsky?

Exclusive: Joel Richardson reveals 'scholar' candidate relies on for foreign policy



By Joel Richardson

Let me begin by making it very clear there are a lot of reasons to love Ron Paul.

He is a man with incredibly refreshing principles, ideas, qualities and character. There have actually been a couple of occasions where after listening to Paul, I have come close to joining the Ron Paul revolution.

But despite the allure of Paul’s constitutional convictions, his perspectives on United States foreign policy, radical Islam and the nation of Israel are an absolute deal breaker. Paul’s emphatic trademark claim that the present rise of Islamic terrorism globally is the result of “blowback” from American actions abroad is nothing less than ridiculous and an absolute insult to my intelligence.

According to Paul, radical Muslims are not radical because they have drunk deeply from the trough of an expansionist, racist and murderous ideology, but rather because American actions abroad have brought about the natural response of resistance. And just so that none of his supporters accuse me of misrepresenting him, here is what Paul himself infamously declared during the Republican presidential debate in South Carolina in 2008, concerning 9/11:

Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attacked us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.

How is Paul’s position any different from Jeremiah Wright’s claim that 9/11 was simply a case of “America’s chickens … coming home to roost”? Paul may say it in a far less shrill manner than Wright, but his position is virtually identical. More specifically, on Paul’s own website, in an article titled, “Foreign Occupation Leads to More Terror,” Paul clearly lays out his position:

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the Sept. 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life. Neither is it our religion, or our wealth. Rather, it is primarily occupation. …

But where did Paul get this idea? We learn exactly from whom in the next paragraph:

Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It.” In fact, of 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95 percent were in response to foreign occupation.

It is essential to take note of the fact that the primary support for Paul’s belief concerning blowback comes from Robert Pape. The problem for Paul here is that by most accounts, Pape is an agenda-driven pseudo-scholar whose works and “studies” have been thoroughly debunked by several other scholars. I appeal to all supporters of Paul to read the following articles debunking Robert Pape’s, and thus Ron Paul’s, claims:

But not only are Pape’s claims based on manufactured data, he has also been caught red-handed conspiring with the Hamas-linked group Council on American-Islamic Relations.

How many Ron Paul supporters can honestly say that they feel comfortable knowing that this is the man Paul looks to as one of his primary guides concerning foreign policy?

But beyond all of the high-minded analysis of data, I prefer to simply couch the discussion in terms that anyone can understand. Paul argues that if it had not been for our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, we would have lost far fewer soldiers and we would all be far safer today. Let me ask this question: Would far fewer police officers be injured or killed each year if they all simply remained in their police stations and avoided ever engaging criminals? Of course they would. But would this make us all safer? Of course not. This is not hard to understand.

Evil exists, and there are times when it must be resisted. Freedom requires both responsibility and sacrifice. To cast the radical Islamic terrorists as the victims and the American people as those who deserve blame, which Paul has done, is simply asinine and downright disgusting. Ron Paul’s soothing grandfather-like persona may be far more palatable to most than Jeremiah Wright’s obnoxious rage-filled rants, but his habit of victim-blaming is no less repulsive and should be rejected by all genuine American patriots.

“Why shouldn’t Iran have nukes?” – Ron Paul

“Death to Israel!” –Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Finally – a few things about Paul’s stance on Israel and his Pollyannaish views concerning radical Islam.

To support his radical isolationist foreign policy, Paul has gone to some absurd lengths to deny the systemic evil of radical Islamism. Following his reliance on Pape’s debunked claims, according to Paul, the primary reason Israel is experiencing such resistance from the surrounding Muslim peoples is because of the Israeli “occupation.” I have heard this same claim made a thousand times by left-wing pro-Palestinian propagandists. Must I hear it from a so-called conservative as well?

But let’s think through the claim logically. Israel was officially established as a nation in 1948. But according to Islamic sacred tradition, it was roughly 1,300 years before when Muhammad himself, the founder of Islam, declared the following prophecy:

The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.

It is worth noting that this “prophecy” is listed as an eternal command within the actual charter of Hamas. But this vision of a last-days slaughter and wholesale genocide of the Jewish people was not “revealed” at a time the Jews were “occupying” anyone. There wasn’t even a Jewish state at the time. So what inspired Muhammad from the very early days of Islam to call for an eventual genocide of the Jewish people? If it wasn’t blowback, then what caused it?

There is much to love about Ron Paul, but until he is willing to acknowledge the very real reality of evil in this world, and the equally real need at times to confront it, he can kiss my vote goodbye. Too many Americans are looking desperately for a hero, and I’m sorry to say that Ron Paul is not the man.

See Joel Richardson’s 4-DVD set “The Return Is Near: Strategic Insights into the Most Important Moment in History.


Joel Richardson is the author of “Islamic Antichrist,” published by WND books, and “Why we Left Islam” and is the co-author with Walid Shoebat of “God’s War on Terror.” His blog is www.Joelstrumpet.com.


May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
1/11/2012 9:04:33 AM
You know Jim it's interesting that you reply to his article with a quote from a "recommended" DVD set a product that he's apparently interested in selling. A normal marketing device as you know with articles on different subjects. If the author had written "related" DVD's it would have something to do with the article but he didn't and it's just simple advertising. As to your question, no I've never heard of his claim for global earth quakes but in order to answer properly one would have to watch the videos which neither of us have. Sorta sounds like a different version of the "end times" prophecies. But rather then quote an unrelated DVD replying to the issues and points raised in what you said is is a "great read" would have been a more logical thing to do.

Now back to the article itself. Here's a guy that says
Quote:
Let me begin by making it very clear there are a lot of reasons to love Ron Paul.

He is a man with incredibly refreshing principles, ideas, qualities and character. There have actually been a couple of occasions where after listening to Paul, I have come close to joining the Ron Paul revolution.
something I'm sure you agree with and I totally disagree with (I find he has no endearing qualities and the only positives about him are his fiscal policies, smaller government and fight against the FED everything else is totally negative and kooky, IMO). Basically Richardson likes/loves Ron Paul and thought of getting on his bandwagon until he considered everything else he stands for and believes in which not only cancelled his positive stances it put him on the impossible to vote for list.

If the author was alone in thinking as he does it might be considered the exception to the rule and not the rule but when you read articles all over the net from different respected conservative sources you find that the majority agree with the author of this article.

Especially with the danger of a third party. I see you're in love with the word duopoly and if you read the previous articles above and on previous pages you'll see that there is a possibility that B Hussein and his supporters are behind all the rhetoric about a third party knowing that it'll insure his reelection. Add to that some of the so called conservatives who are advocating that as well and he'll win by a landslide (B Hussein). The numbers from the Rasmussen poll on this subject paints the picture in a way that is easily understandable. See the article I posted on the results of the Rasmussen poll. The numbers don't lie and if it happens I wonder if you and all the other third party advocates will feel like so many Americans that voted for B Hussein feel today?

Back to the article, it elaborates very well all the negatives about Ron Paul that the majority of the respected conservative writers agree with. Aside from Jones and other conspiracy theorists I've yet to find much support if any from the many respected conservative sources on the internet.

My dislike for almost everything the kook Ron Paul stands for is ongoing (for years) and all my reasons are stated in this thread and others. I don't need the articles and videos to support my opinions and beliefs they are ironclad and unchangeable but rather to possibly change the opinions and minds of fence sitter supporters of the kook Ron Paul.

BTW Jim, you don't need fodder to claim Ron Paul is a nut all you have to do is listen to him, he does the job very well all on his own. And, when you yourself write
Quote:
But to use as fodder to disclaim Ron Paul is a nut is pushing it... really pushing it just choose which nut to believe I guess.
it puts everything you're saying into a tailspin. If as you say the author is a nut (not cos of his article but unrelated DVDs) in the same sentence you're saying Ron Paul is a nut (which I totally agree with :) ). How can you justify supporting and voting for someone you admit is a nut??? Doesn't sound very logical or sensible to me.

Shalom,

Peter


Quote:
Just a quote from the recommended DVD Set site :

Quote:
Birth pangs in the news and the coming global earthquake

As massive earthquakes continue to shake the nations, few believers are aware that the Bible predicts a massive cataclysmic coming earthquake that will level every nation of the earth. When will this happen and what is the major event that will bring this about? By reviewing data from the United States Geological Survey, Joel also shows how massive earthquakes are rapidly increasing in frequency, pointing to the soon coming of Jesus the Messiah.

First I heard of a Massive Global Earthquake coming, have you heard about?

Anyways I find the guys article a great read and it probably sells some books and dvds too. But to use as fodder to disclaim Ron Paul is a nut is pushing it... really pushing it just choose which nut to believe I guess.

With 40% of registered voters identifying as independents, it doesn't look well for either party in my view and the third party is looking more viable everyday. I would not be so fast as to say people are happy in this duopoly.



Quote:
Hello Friends,

I just finished reading the below article and I must say that it was a bit of a surprise to me. In the past the author wrote how much he likes many of the kook Ron Paul's ideas but after reading the title of the article and the article itself I was surprised to read why he can't cast his vote in Paul's favor. I must admit much of what the author says I've written in my threads for quite a while now but it's refreshing to hear it from a man that claims there is much "to love" in Ron Paul (misplaced love in my opinion).

It's an interesting and factual article and well worth reading.

Shalom,

Peter

ELECTION 2012

Ron Paul’s Saul Alinsky?

Exclusive: Joel Richardson reveals 'scholar' candidate relies on for foreign policy



By Joel Richardson

Let me begin by making it very clear there are a lot of reasons to love Ron Paul.

He is a man with incredibly refreshing principles, ideas, qualities and character. There have actually been a couple of occasions where after listening to Paul, I have come close to joining the Ron Paul revolution.

But despite the allure of Paul’s constitutional convictions, his perspectives on United States foreign policy, radical Islam and the nation of Israel are an absolute deal breaker. Paul’s emphatic trademark claim that the present rise of Islamic terrorism globally is the result of “blowback” from American actions abroad is nothing less than ridiculous and an absolute insult to my intelligence.

According to Paul, radical Muslims are not radical because they have drunk deeply from the trough of an expansionist, racist and murderous ideology, but rather because American actions abroad have brought about the natural response of resistance. And just so that none of his supporters accuse me of misrepresenting him, here is what Paul himself infamously declared during the Republican presidential debate in South Carolina in 2008, concerning 9/11:

Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attacked us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.

How is Paul’s position any different from Jeremiah Wright’s claim that 9/11 was simply a case of “America’s chickens … coming home to roost”? Paul may say it in a far less shrill manner than Wright, but his position is virtually identical. More specifically, on Paul’s own website, in an article titled, “Foreign Occupation Leads to More Terror,” Paul clearly lays out his position:

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the Sept. 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life. Neither is it our religion, or our wealth. Rather, it is primarily occupation. …

But where did Paul get this idea? We learn exactly from whom in the next paragraph:

Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It.” In fact, of 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95 percent were in response to foreign occupation.

It is essential to take note of the fact that the primary support for Paul’s belief concerning blowback comes from Robert Pape. The problem for Paul here is that by most accounts, Pape is an agenda-driven pseudo-scholar whose works and “studies” have been thoroughly debunked by several other scholars. I appeal to all supporters of Paul to read the following articles debunking Robert Pape’s, and thus Ron Paul’s, claims:

But not only are Pape’s claims based on manufactured data, he has also been caught red-handed conspiring with the Hamas-linked group Council on American-Islamic Relations.

How many Ron Paul supporters can honestly say that they feel comfortable knowing that this is the man Paul looks to as one of his primary guides concerning foreign policy?

But beyond all of the high-minded analysis of data, I prefer to simply couch the discussion in terms that anyone can understand. Paul argues that if it had not been for our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, we would have lost far fewer soldiers and we would all be far safer today. Let me ask this question: Would far fewer police officers be injured or killed each year if they all simply remained in their police stations and avoided ever engaging criminals? Of course they would. But would this make us all safer? Of course not. This is not hard to understand.

Evil exists, and there are times when it must be resisted. Freedom requires both responsibility and sacrifice. To cast the radical Islamic terrorists as the victims and the American people as those who deserve blame, which Paul has done, is simply asinine and downright disgusting. Ron Paul’s soothing grandfather-like persona may be far more palatable to most than Jeremiah Wright’s obnoxious rage-filled rants, but his habit of victim-blaming is no less repulsive and should be rejected by all genuine American patriots.

“Why shouldn’t Iran have nukes?” – Ron Paul

“Death to Israel!” –Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Finally – a few things about Paul’s stance on Israel and his Pollyannaish views concerning radical Islam.

To support his radical isolationist foreign policy, Paul has gone to some absurd lengths to deny the systemic evil of radical Islamism. Following his reliance on Pape’s debunked claims, according to Paul, the primary reason Israel is experiencing such resistance from the surrounding Muslim peoples is because of the Israeli “occupation.” I have heard this same claim made a thousand times by left-wing pro-Palestinian propagandists. Must I hear it from a so-called conservative as well?

But let’s think through the claim logically. Israel was officially established as a nation in 1948. But according to Islamic sacred tradition, it was roughly 1,300 years before when Muhammad himself, the founder of Islam, declared the following prophecy:

The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.

It is worth noting that this “prophecy” is listed as an eternal command within the actual charter of Hamas. But this vision of a last-days slaughter and wholesale genocide of the Jewish people was not “revealed” at a time the Jews were “occupying” anyone. There wasn’t even a Jewish state at the time. So what inspired Muhammad from the very early days of Islam to call for an eventual genocide of the Jewish people? If it wasn’t blowback, then what caused it?

There is much to love about Ron Paul, but until he is willing to acknowledge the very real reality of evil in this world, and the equally real need at times to confront it, he can kiss my vote goodbye. Too many Americans are looking desperately for a hero, and I’m sorry to say that Ron Paul is not the man.

See Joel Richardson’s 4-DVD set “The Return Is Near: Strategic Insights into the Most Important Moment in History.


Joel Richardson is the author of “Islamic Antichrist,” published by WND books, and “Why we Left Islam” and is the co-author with Walid Shoebat of “God’s War on Terror.” His blog is www.Joelstrumpet.com.


Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!