Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
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
1/19/2012 1:43:01 PM
Hello Friends,

Many times in this thread and elsewhere I discussed Ron Paul's racism, Antisemitism and anti Israel policies, pro Palestinian stance and beliefs. There have been many videos posted here and all over the net attesting and proving these claims and I must say not manufactured videos that the ronbots and his super PACS produce but simple interviews with Paul and in his own words showing and proving exactly where he stands and what his beliefs and opinions are.

Front Page Magazine in the below article raises the question of why the racist and antisemitic ronbots come out like locusts whenever an article not complimentary or a down right negative article is published about Paul with their hate filled rhetoric.

This only happens with the Paul supporters and especially with the die hard ronbots. No other candidate has hate mongering comments on articles not favorable to their favorite candidate. The vile comments are the specialty of Ron Paul supporters and the question why does he attract these people. The simplistic answers are like he's not responsible for his supporters views and other nonsensical replies cos that doesn't answer the question why they support him and why he attracts them. In my opinion the reasons are obvious and it amazes me that the non ronbot Paul supporters are willing to be a part of this.

The below article gives a few examples of the hate comments that follow negative articles on their guru and in the following post the article in question that brought out these racists in droves.

Shalom,

Peter

Racists For Ron Paul

Posted by Bio ↓ on Jan 19th, 2012

Yesterday, FrontPage Magazine featured an article by Joseph Klein critical of Congressman Ron Paul’s proposal that the US use the “Golden Rule” in dealing with radical Islamists. As usual, Ron Paul followers descended on the article, unloading a wealth of hateful invective and anti-Semitic comments. A typical occurrence with such articles, the following selection of comments from the piece reflect a dark and disturbing sector of the Ron Paul movement. (Note: comments have not been edited for spelling or grammar.)

***

“Why don’t you quote some scripture from the jewish talmud, like any non jew is subhuman and is on earth to be a jew slave. You are either a fool or are being paid by your jewish masters to write this filth. I am amerian, I do not pledge alegience to israel and I don’t care what happens to them just like I don’t care what happens to the arab country”

“LOL – I never can figure out how all the obvious fascists ended up Zionists?”

“This ‘journalist’ reminds me of the Jews who chose to spare Barabas over Christ. Sad, really…”

“Surprise surprise, another Zionist hit job against Dr. Paul from the loons at FPM. You Israel-firsters are getting pretty desperate, aren’t you? Anyone who doesn’t bend over and kiss Bibi’s rear isn’t a worthy puppet for you people, huh? What a disgraceful, treasonous lot you are. You are the primary reason why anti-Semitism still exists in the world, and you owe all the Jews of upstanding character (i.e., anti-Zionist) in the world a giant debt for the trouble you’ve caused them. Indeed, Jews would be a lot better off in the long run if Israel were erased from the pages of time.”

“Joseph Kleim is such a bad man that he believes even the Golden Rule is an object that belongs to the Jews, and is something to not only use for evil but to prevent other people from having. Really, Joseph? The Golden Rule is Jews’ intellectual property? You are wicked.”

“bloodthirsty AIPAC Neocon war profiteers”

“Interesting Perspective. We give Israel over 5 Billion a year in foreign aid. Some of it not just financial but hardware. I am sure Israel would never start a smear and fear campaign to ensure they keep getting our tax payer dollars. www.jewwatch.com

“A ‘twist on the Judeo-Christian Golden Rule’?! You are the person whom Jesus was referring to when he said (to paraphrase): ‘Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.’ Or, ‘But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken.’ Daft is not a good enough word for you Mr. Klein – you are Shylock. Take your pound of flesh.”

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
1/19/2012 1:45:51 PM

Hello Friends,

Here's the article mentioned in the previous post and was the cause for the racist, sntisemitic and anti Israel ronbots to come out and show who and what they are all about. Remember the question raised was why does Paul attract these people along with the Nazis, KKK and other lunatic hate filled groups?

The article discusses Ron Paul's "Golden Rule" he mentioned in the last debate that wasn't received all that well which doesn't and didn't surprise the majority of the viewers and participants in the audience.

Shalom,

Peter

Ron Paul’s Absurd ‘Golden Rule’

Posted by Bio ↓ on Jan 18th, 2012

Congressman Ron Paul showed in the January 17th Fox News debate why he would be so dangerous as president and commander-in-chief. He believes, in a twist on the Judeo-Christian Golden Rule, that our Islamist enemies are only assaulting us because we assaulted them first. Sorry, appeaser-in-chief Paul, but the Koran commands devout jihadists to use whatever means are necessary to destroy all infidels, no matter what we have done or plan to do to them.

As part of an exchange involving the appropriate response to al Qaeda and their Taliban supporters, Paul exclaimed:

My point is, if another country does to us what we do others, we’re not going to like it very much. So I would say that maybe we ought to consider a golden rule in — in foreign policy. Don’t do to other nation… what we don’t want to have them do to us.

Paul even offered the absurd analogy comparing our killing of the mass murderer Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil, where he was provided a sanctuary, to the Communist Chinese government deciding to go after a Chinese dissident seeking freedom in the United States. Newt Gingrich properly labeled this comparison “utterly irrational.”

Ron Paul may have some good ideas on reining in the power of the Federal Reserve and on the need to control federal spending. But he is clueless in dealing with our Islamist enemies. He either does not understand or refuses to believe the ideology that drives them. They want to kill us because our nation is governed on the basis of principles derived from Judeo-Christian beliefs including the true Golden Rule. They hate us because of who we are, not for any alleged harm that we’ve ever caused them.

Only three years after the United States won its independence, when there was no Jewish state for Muslims to resent, and no American troops on Muslim soil, Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then U.S. Ambassador to Britain, learned from a Muslim ambassador to Britain why the Muslims were so hostile towards Americans. Jefferson and Adams were attempting to negotiate a peace treaty with the Muslim “Barbary pirates,” an exercise that ultimately proved to be futile.

As Jefferson and Adams later reported to Congress, the Muslim ambassador explained to them that Islam

Was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.

All that Ron Paul needs to do is take a look at the Koran itself, cited by that Muslim ambassador more than 200 years ago, to understand the source of the jihadist ideology that we are still fighting today.

Here is a sample:

• “Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them.” (Koran, 2:191)

• “O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other.” (Koran 5:51)

• “Shall I tell you who, in the sight of God, deserves a yet worse retribution than these? Those [the Jews] whom God has rejected and whom He has condemned, and whom He has turned into monkeys and pigs because they worshiped the powers of evil.” (Koran 5:60)

• “I will inspire terror into the hearts of unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them.” (Koran, 8:12)

• “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”

• “[F]ight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Christians and Jews], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Koran, 9:29)

• “When we decide to destroy a population, we send a definite order to them who have the good things in life and yet sin. So that Allah’s word is proven true against them, then we destroy them utterly.” (Koran, 17:16-17)

Islamist apologists argue that the Koran also contains verses calling for tolerance and understanding. If the verses written while Muhammad was living in Mecca, where he and his followers were then surrounded by much stronger non-Muslim populations, constituted the entirety of the Koran, they may have had a point. However, the milder verses were superseded by the far more war-like and intolerant verses written during Muhammad’s time in Medina where he successfully launched his jihad of conquests against non-believers, especially against Jews who refused to convert to Islam. Moreover, when one examines the real meaning of jihad according to Muhammad from other primary sources such as Bukhari (the Hadith, which are oral traditions relating to the words and deeds of Muhammad), the fact is that 97% of the jihad references are about war and 3% are about so-called inner struggle.

Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian author, educator, and the leading Islamic scholar who was a member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s and ’60s, wrote:

It may happen that the enemies of Islam may consider it expedient not to take any action against Islam, if Islam leaves them alone in their geographical boundaries to continue the lordship of some men over others and does not extend its message and its declaration of universal freedom within their domain. But Islam cannot agree to this unless they submit to its authority by paying Jizyah, which will be guarantee that they have opened their doors for the preaching of Islam

Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and traditions to release human beings from their poisonous influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom.

Those who say that Islamic Jihaad was merely for the defense of the “homeland of Islam” diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life.

This is the ideology that inspired Osama bin Laden and his replacement as the current leader of al Qaeda, Ayman Zawahiri. A “die or submit” ideology is the antithesis of the Golden Rule that is so central to Judeo-Christian beliefs. If Iran, al Qaeda or other jihadists were ever armed with nuclear bombs, we would face an existential threat. Yet Ron Paul believes that the solution is to simply pretend the threat only exists because of our own foreign policy.

In my previous article on Ron Paul’s dangerous foreign policy views, I discussed Paul’s perverted moral equivalency version of the Golden Rule in dealing with the Iranian theocracy. Referring to the U.S.-Iranian conflict and justifying Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons (which he simultaneously denies is happening), Paul said during the August 11, 2011 GOP presidential debate in Iowa:

It’s been going on and on because we just plain don’t mind our own business. That’s our problem…Why wouldn’t it be natural that they might want a weapon? Internationally, they’d be given more respect.

Again, to be charitable, Paul is way out in left field. The fanatics ruling Iran today do not believe in the Golden Rule as we understand it in the West. They believe instead in a “golden age” when the big Satan (the United States) and the little Satan (Israel) will be destroyed. This will hasten the arrival of the 12th Imam, otherwise known as the Mahdi, whom Iran’s rulers look to as Islam’s messianic savior.

For example, Ayatollah Khamenei linked Israel and the United States together as the mortal enemies of the 12th Imam and declared through a spokesman in August 2009:

We have to train honest forces that can stop the obstacles that may hinder the coming of the Mahdi like the United States and Israel.

The spokesman described Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, as “a direct representative” of the Mahdi and said following his orders is like “obeying the guided one.

Ron Paul is on a fool’s gold mission in believing that applying the Golden Rule in dealing with our Islamist enemies will lead to any result other than the killing of many more innocent Americans.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

About

Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
1/20/2012 2:07:29 AM
Peter you may recall a several days ago there was much speculation of which group Obama would side with in regard to the XL Keystone pipeline. Would it be the environmentalists or the unions. If he sided with the environmentalists then the unions would be upset with him because it would mean a huge loss for union jobs. Well, evidently he's made his decision and again we all loose. Here is an excellent article by Alan Caruba in today's Canada Free Press.

The Obama administration policies also meant that billions in tax revenue have been lost

Obama’s Keystone Debacle

- Alan Caruba Thursday, January 19, 2012

Future historians may conclude that President Obama’s decision to reject a permit for the building of the XL Keystone pipeline was a key factor in his defeat for a second term in 2012.

One can only hope that, in the course of the campaign, Republicans will focus public attention on the deliberate “no energy” policies of the Obama administration that have thwarted the creation of jobs, the generation of electrical power for homes and businesses, as well as fueling our transportation needs.

The Obama administration policies also meant that billions in tax revenue have been lost. Tapping U.S. energy reserves of coal, natural gas, and oil would also be a major step toward greater national security, freeing the nation from dependence on foreign oil.

The Obama administration policies also meant that billions in tax revenue have been lost. Tapping U.S. energy reserves of coal, natural gas, and oil would also be a major step toward greater national security, freeing the nation from dependence on foreign oil.

In a recent article posted on The Heritage Foundation’s website, Rob Bluey reported that “oil and natural gas is down by more than forty percent (40%) compared to ten years ago.”

“Under the Obama administration, 2010 had the lowest number of onshore leases issued since 1984. The Obama administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011.”

Following the President’s announcement regarding Keystone, the president of the Institute for Energy Research, Thomas Pyle, said that “Tens of thousands of American jobs died today because of the president’s rejection of the Keystone EL pipeline permit. For more than two years, the administration has delayed, hoping to get past 2012 without having to reveal the president’s true anti-job, anti-energy agenda. Because of today’s announcement, Americans will continue to send $70 billion overseas every day to purchase foreign oil.”

The secret President Obama wants to keep from Americans is that the price of domestic oil is always cheaper than foreign oil. Oil industry expert, Seldon B. Graham, Jr. says that this price deferential is “never reported by the media. The media only reports Wall Street speculators’ guesses of oil prices six months in the future…the U.S. price is always lower than the OPEC price.”

In February 2011, a CNS News article reported that “A new study says drilling on Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf could make Alaska the eighth largest oil resource province in the world—ahead of Nigeria, Libya, Russia and Norway.”

In announcing the decision on the Keystone pipeline, the President boasted that, under his administration, “domestic oil and natural gas production is up”, but Bluey pointed out that “The vast majority of America’s new oil and gas production is happening on private lands in states like North Dakota, Alaska, and Texas.” Private, not public lands. One result is that North Dakota’s unemployment rate is 3.4 percent, the lowest in the nation.

Who favored the president’s decision?

An environmental organization, Green for All, hailed the decision. Its CEO, Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, said, “This project would have helped Big Oil and their allies get richer at the expense of American workers and permanently damaged our environment.” How does it help to kill 20,000 jobs and an estimated 100,000 related to the pipeline?

The Sierra Club, another environmental organization, claimed that the pipeline would bring “toxic, highly corrosive tar sands crude from Alberta, Canada to refineries and ports in Texas.” If it was corrosive, it could not be transported by a pipeline, but ethanol which is mandated for use in gasoline is so corrosive it cannot be transported by pipeline and requires fleets of trucks instead. Echoing Green for all, the Sierra Club said, “Thank President Obama for standing up to Big Oil and rejecting the Keystone XL oil pipeline.”

Friends of the Earth, another environmental organization, branded Big Oil as “one of the most profitable and most unscrupulous industries on the planet.” Profits equal dividends for investors in oil companies. Profits equal jobs for thousands of Americans. Profits ensure that more oil can be discovered and extracted…except on federal lands and offshore because of present administration policies.

By contrast, James M. Taylor, a Senior Fellow for Environmental Policy of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank, said, “The Obama administration has confirmed the fears of everyday Americans that it is more interested in paying off environmental extremists and other far-left groups than it is in laying the foundation for a growing economy.”

“The Obama administration’s decision to block construction of the Keystone XL pipeline demonstrates as poignantly as a slap in the face that President Obama is either completely out of touch with the American people or is callously indifferent about our ongoing economic woes,” said Taylor. “I suspect that in the November elections voters will severely punish President Obama for this foolish decision.”

I suspect Taylor is right!

© Alan Caruba, 2012

+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
1/20/2012 8:42:15 AM
Hi Evelyn,

This article is another excellent article by Alan Caruba. The whole debate around the Keystone pipeline was ridiculous to begin with since it should have been a no brainer. The approval of this pipe line should never have been in question and the fact that it was should be the major question here.

It goes way beyond the Greens and Unions as Caruba says.We've seen B Hussein's agenda against offshore drilling by American companies and support of offshore drilling by foreign countries. China will be offshore drilling in waters that he denied American companies the license to drill. He gives loans to South American countries to drill (who don't need the loans) but his puppet master George Soros has large investments in.

It all boils down to an agenda where B Hussein maintains the status quo and keep America dependent on buying oil from OPEC countries rather then using our own resources and those of neighboring countries to become independent and supply all our energy needs from the borders of North America. Needless to say that all energy prices will go down drastically.

In my opinion this is part and parcel of B Hussein's Islamic agenda.

As an aside. Take a look at the Green groups and organizations that approve of B Hussein's decision and you'll find that the majority of them are George Soros funded groups and organizations. The puppet master in action once again.

Shalom,

Peter


Quote:
Peter you may recall a several days ago there was much speculation of which group Obama would side with in regard to the XL Keystone pipeline. Would it be the environmentalists or the unions. If he sided with the environmentalists then the unions would be upset with him because it would mean a huge loss for union jobs. Well, evidently he's made his decision and again we all loose. Here is an excellent article by Alan Caruba in today's Canada Free Press.

The Obama administration policies also meant that billions in tax revenue have been lost

Obama’s Keystone Debacle

- Alan Caruba Thursday, January 19, 2012

Future historians may conclude that President Obama’s decision to reject a permit for the building of the XL Keystone pipeline was a key factor in his defeat for a second term in 2012.

One can only hope that, in the course of the campaign, Republicans will focus public attention on the deliberate “no energy” policies of the Obama administration that have thwarted the creation of jobs, the generation of electrical power for homes and businesses, as well as fueling our transportation needs.

The Obama administration policies also meant that billions in tax revenue have been lost. Tapping U.S. energy reserves of coal, natural gas, and oil would also be a major step toward greater national security, freeing the nation from dependence on foreign oil.

The Obama administration policies also meant that billions in tax revenue have been lost. Tapping U.S. energy reserves of coal, natural gas, and oil would also be a major step toward greater national security, freeing the nation from dependence on foreign oil.

In a recent article posted on The Heritage Foundation’s website, Rob Bluey reported that “oil and natural gas is down by more than forty percent (40%) compared to ten years ago.”

“Under the Obama administration, 2010 had the lowest number of onshore leases issued since 1984. The Obama administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011.”

Following the President’s announcement regarding Keystone, the president of the Institute for Energy Research, Thomas Pyle, said that “Tens of thousands of American jobs died today because of the president’s rejection of the Keystone EL pipeline permit. For more than two years, the administration has delayed, hoping to get past 2012 without having to reveal the president’s true anti-job, anti-energy agenda. Because of today’s announcement, Americans will continue to send $70 billion overseas every day to purchase foreign oil.”

The secret President Obama wants to keep from Americans is that the price of domestic oil is always cheaper than foreign oil. Oil industry expert, Seldon B. Graham, Jr. says that this price deferential is “never reported by the media. The media only reports Wall Street speculators’ guesses of oil prices six months in the future…the U.S. price is always lower than the OPEC price.”

In February 2011, a CNS News article reported that “A new study says drilling on Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf could make Alaska the eighth largest oil resource province in the world—ahead of Nigeria, Libya, Russia and Norway.”

In announcing the decision on the Keystone pipeline, the President boasted that, under his administration, “domestic oil and natural gas production is up”, but Bluey pointed out that “The vast majority of America’s new oil and gas production is happening on private lands in states like North Dakota, Alaska, and Texas.” Private, not public lands. One result is that North Dakota’s unemployment rate is 3.4 percent, the lowest in the nation.

Who favored the president’s decision?

An environmental organization, Green for All, hailed the decision. Its CEO, Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, said, “This project would have helped Big Oil and their allies get richer at the expense of American workers and permanently damaged our environment.” How does it help to kill 20,000 jobs and an estimated 100,000 related to the pipeline?

The Sierra Club, another environmental organization, claimed that the pipeline would bring “toxic, highly corrosive tar sands crude from Alberta, Canada to refineries and ports in Texas.” If it was corrosive, it could not be transported by a pipeline, but ethanol which is mandated for use in gasoline is so corrosive it cannot be transported by pipeline and requires fleets of trucks instead. Echoing Green for all, the Sierra Club said, “Thank President Obama for standing up to Big Oil and rejecting the Keystone XL oil pipeline.”

Friends of the Earth, another environmental organization, branded Big Oil as “one of the most profitable and most unscrupulous industries on the planet.” Profits equal dividends for investors in oil companies. Profits equal jobs for thousands of Americans. Profits ensure that more oil can be discovered and extracted…except on federal lands and offshore because of present administration policies.

By contrast, James M. Taylor, a Senior Fellow for Environmental Policy of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank, said, “The Obama administration has confirmed the fears of everyday Americans that it is more interested in paying off environmental extremists and other far-left groups than it is in laying the foundation for a growing economy.”

“The Obama administration’s decision to block construction of the Keystone XL pipeline demonstrates as poignantly as a slap in the face that President Obama is either completely out of touch with the American people or is callously indifferent about our ongoing economic woes,” said Taylor. “I suspect that in the November elections voters will severely punish President Obama for this foolish decision.”

I suspect Taylor is right!

© Alan Caruba, 2012

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
1/20/2012 8:45:43 AM
Hello Friends,

In last nights debate we saw how far the liberal progressive MSM will go in order to besmirch a GOP candidate.

They succeeded in causing Herman Caine's suspension of his presidential run in this manner but I guess they met a different breed when they tried it on Gingrich. True he has a marital history but I wonder when personal issues will stop being a factor for mudslinging and nefarious attempts to besmirch candidates.

The time element is interesting isn't it? Two days before the S.C. primary and one day before the final debate prior to the primary. I am curious to know who's behind this aside from the disgusting MSM. It certainly would benefit Romney and confirm a S.C. win for him if the attack works but it can also be MSM's attempt to save their savior the fraud and great pretender B Hussein from possibly having to face Newt Gingrich in the debates should he win the GOP nomination. No one doubts his prowess as a debater and he's far better then B Hussein who is a tongue tied nincompoop without his teleprompter.

The South Carolina results will be very interesting and I'm curious who'll win there. The suspension of Huntsman's and Perry's campaign for the GOP nomination this week should make it an interesting primary.

Below is a video with the opening questions of the debate moderator and Gingrich's scathing replies. Well done Newt.

Shalom,

Peter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SI8TirsEU9g


Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!