See other Ron Paul Articles
Title: GLENN BECK: RON PAUL SUPPORTERS ISLAMO-FASCISTS
Source:
http://www.vloggingtheapocalypse.com/
URL Source: http://www.vloggingtheapocalypse.co ... AUL_SUPPORTERS_ISLAMO_FASCISTS
Published: Nov 17, 2007
Author: Glenn Beck
Post Date: 2007-11-17 10:00:04 by robin
Ping List: *Ron Paul for President 2008* Subscribe to *Ron Paul for President 2008*
Keywords: None
Views: 4009
Comments: 204
Subscribe to *Ron Paul for President 2008*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-69) not displayed.
.
.
.
#70. To: scrapper2, buckeye (#68)
And keep this phrase in mind re our honorable Congress ... Amen Corner. Who was it coined the phrase? Oh yeah, PJB. And AIPAC, ADL, Abe Rosenthal ... etc ad nauseam made mince meat of him and relegated him to the fringe of Republican influence. Pat, right on the Israel lobby, right on La Raza, "Right From the Beginning" ... if only we knew then (almost two decades ago) what we know now. .
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
I only meant that we give the average Arab more reason to hate us because of our support for governments like the Sauds. Funny thing, it Osama bin Laden and the other fundy nuts that want oppressive laws like those found in SA.
"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has." - William S Burroughs
I don't think I'm missing anything at all. I'm interested in eliminating all types of foreign interference withing our government, not just the Zionist lobby. I would suggest to you that due to Mr. Trofimov's tribal membership, he writes with a purpose and with a particular slant. Are you denying that the CIA participated in the hostage crisis? What is your specific objection to the basic facts I'm citing here? With regards to the "complex" B.C.C.I affair you forget to include the name of Israeli Iran-Contra merchant . . . You asked for examples of Saudi involvement in our government and I gave them to you. I'm confident that you can provide all of us with a long list of Jewish and Israeli interference. The Saudis are just one of our nation's creepy clients. What's your beef? I think we should disengage with the entire region. I hope those are Ron Paul's intentions. I would start the disengagement by cutting weapons sales off completely to the region. As for the madras - so what? - you think these schools cause hatred for us? It's part of the radicalization of the Islamic world, yes. I especially object to the Saudi mosque construction here in the United States. We've had hundreds going up around the country since the 1979 grand mosque incident. If you have not already read Drs. Mearsheimer's and Walt's book "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy" I suggest you do. Read pages 141 - 146 wherein the 2 scholars make it very clear that Saudi Arabia specifically, the oil industry, and the Arab lobbies are modest if not trivial influences on our nation's foreign policies. Trivial? I would hardly call the past 35 years of our petrodollar based economy trivial. "Real Insiders: A pro-Israel lobby and an F.B.I. sting" Once again, you asked for a list of Saudi interferences, and I gave them to you. You dispute them, fine but the longstanding and close ties between the American Establishment and the Saudis is of public record. You come up with Israeli counter-examples, and I say no doubt. Let's eliminate both.
well I think youve missed something important here.. they are linked..you need to peel back a few layers.. the Saudis and the Israelis .. and throw in the Turks as well all linked for the same reason.. have you ever researched the Saudi royal family? .. that might be a place to start I failed to mention the Saudi connection to 9/11.. google PTECH & PROMIS & the Saudis..
Just ask the Axis.
No doubt, Zipporah. The truly radical Islamists point this out every day, from what I understand. They identify the royal Sauds with Zionism. All the more reason to back out of the region and let nature run its course. If Americans want to donate their money and blood Lincoln-brigade style, they can join either side. They may not be welcome to come home, though. We have our own interests — and borders to defend.
I agree.. I edited my post and you may not have seen my reference to PTECH & PROMIS and the Saudis.. The Turks too had a hand in all this.. read what Indira Singh had to say on this.. very disturbing.
Thanks for the pointers. I don't know where to start looking for information on these terms, plus the Singh commentary, but I'll search for them when I get a chance.
Let me get you some links.. 911citizenswatch.org/?p=436 - PTECH, 9/11, and USA-SAUDI TERROR - Part I www.madcowprod.com/mc4522004.html - "Can you say BCCI? . The tale begins almost right after the 9/11 attack, when, in October of 2001, handful of ex-Ptech employees alerted the FBI to evidence indicating that the firm had Saudi terror connections. Saudi terrorists, Saudi money, and JP Morgan Chase Almost a year later the Boston FBI had still done nothing about it. They had, in fact, shut down their cursory investigation and taken no action. Thus Ptech was still operating at the highest levels of American society in the Spring of 2002, when the firm showed up hustling business at the door of Wall Street’s JP Morgan Chase. The question is “why?” On its surface, the answer appears to be “money.” Lots and lots of Saudi money. Indira Singh, who later became a whistleblower, was an unwitting eyewitness to the “train wreck.” “I invited Ptech to come down and give a presentation and a customized demo to JP Morgan Chase,” states Singh, who was a consultant to the bank on “risk architecture,” an arcane software specialty which calculates enterprise risk. In one of the story’s many ironic twists, Singh was at the time designing a system to help JP Morgan Chase detect terrorist money laundering. When Ptech showed up, Singh quickly realized that she was witnessing her worst fears about compromised security come true. “Within half an hour on the premises, I knew something was up,” she says. “They had almost immediately raised about six of my red flags, to the point where I walked over to my desk and picked up the phone, and began making phone calls.” She talked with a respected industry figure who had once worked at Ptech. “He was shocked to learn that I had invited Ptech on the premises. He told me the company belonged to Yasin Qadi.” In the course of what would otherwise have been just another day at the bank, Indira Singh made the amazing discovery that the firm in front of her at the moment was owned by Saudis, including Yasin Qadi, with suspected as well as proven ties to the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attack. All this left her feeling more than a little surprised."
Are you denying that the CIA participated in the hostage crisis? What is your specific objection to the basic facts I'm citing here? You asked for examples of Saudi involvement in our government and I gave them to you. I'm confident that you can provide all of us with a long list of Jewish and Israeli interference. It's part of the radicalization of the Islamic world, yes. I especially object to the Saudi mosque construction here in the United States. We've had hundreds going up around the country since the 1979 grand mosque incident. Trivial? I would hardly call the past 35 years of our petrodollar based economy trivial. Once again, you asked for a list of Saudi interferences, and I gave them to you. You dispute them, fine but the longstanding and close ties between the American Establishment and the Saudis is of public record. You come up with Israeli counter-examples, and I say no doubt. Let's eliminate both. Your initial harangue against the Saudis' so-called interference in our national affairs in message #47 and #32 said nothing about eliminating all lobby groups including the "leviathan" one ie. the Israel Lobby. This is the first I've read of your desire to eliminate all lobby groups. I would agree with you that would be a fine goal. But I'd also qualify that goal by saying that we should start with the biggest and most influential one first ie. AIPAC. Would you agree? With regards to some of your new points about the Saudis - I disagree with most of them particularly the ones regarding the start of AQ linked to the Mosque hi- jacking and the Saudis insisting that OPEC use the greenback and the Saudis funding the construction of mosques stateside. a. AQ had its beginnings vis-a-vis our meddling in the Soviet -Afghan War. - Brezinski and Carter gave the go-ahead to the CIA to train the mujahideen to fight the Russians. OBL himself was trained in that stupid CIA project and it was in Afghanistan that OBL suddenly realized how the Muslims were being used as proxy fighters/as pawns in the Cold War that existed between the Soviets and America. AQ's formation was an unintended consequence of the CIA training of and financial aid to the mujahideen. Zbigniew Brezinski brags about the project. He told an interviewer in 1998 that the U.S. began funnelling aid to the mujahideen terrorists six months before the Soviet Union intervened, with the intention of drawing the Soviets into their own Vietnam. Robin Cook, who was Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom from 1997 to 2001, is quoted as saying on 07/08/05: "Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west." Our government created the monster called AQ and that monster has come back to bite its master. b. As for the Saudis insisting that oil industry use petro dollars - I think you have things switched around regarding who benefits from this system. It's in America's interests that all OPEC oil purchases continue to be denominated in US dollars and in fact this dollar hegemony over global oil markets was a result of an agreement between the USA and Saudi Arabia in the 1970's. In fact, Saudi Arabia at an OPEC meeting this past week prevented discussions about formally switching to a basket of currencies due to the diminishing value of the greenback. Get it? Saudi Arabia argued on our nation's behalf. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are experiencing record high inflation rates due to their sticking to the US $ peg. However, Israel looked out for itself recently - Israel demanded that US foreign aid be sent to it in Euros not US dollars. Nice. Here's a decent article describing our US dollar dominence and how we extracted an agreement from OPEC in the 70's to use peg their oil sales to the greenback. www.atimes.com/global- econ/DD11Dj01.html "US dollar hegemony has got to go" By Henry C K Liu 04/11/02 c. As for mosques being built in the USA - so what? Last I heard freedom of religion is a guaranteed right stateside. Ours is a tolerant pluristic society. Are you worried about those eeeevil "Islamofacsists" in our midst who might congregate in mosques funded by the Saudis? I have no doubt there are a number of FBI divisions specifically assigned to monitoring what goes on in the mosques here so you can sleep better that no AQ are hiding there. d. As to the madras and spread of Wahabiism - it was at the direction of the Carter Admin that Saudi Arabia fuel the Afghan Islamic fundie screed. But like our CIA arming and training the mujahideen, the Saudis funding the madras came back to bite us and them. The Saudi Princes are illegitimate rulers in the eyes of fundie Islamists, btw. From a BBC article on the beginnings of "Jihad": ..."Bernard Haykel, professor of Near East studies at Princeton, believes the Saudis set in motion a process over which they lost control. The Saudis' funding of militant Islam reached a new pitch in the 1980s when, with the United States and others, they bankrolled the jihad against Soviet troops occupying Afghanistan. The Afghan war was the crucible from which emerged al-Qaeda. "The genie came out of the bottle," says Professor Haykel, "and the Saudis could no longer put it back in." ... e. Btw, I have never disputed that there is a long standing relationship between Saudi Arabia and our government. What I have said is that the pluses of that relationship out weighed any minuses. Ideally it would be great if our economy was not oil based because then we would not need to involve ourselves with OPEC and the Saudis. But until be can become self-reliant in energy we will continue to need the assistence of the House of Saud. However, I believe are in the driver's seat with regards to the Saudis and they play a beneficial role by running interference for us at OPEC. That is not the case with Israel. Israel is a financial parasite and a political burden of enormous proportions and its lobby groups and individuals have negative influences on our nation's ME foreign policy.
Shill for the Saudis much? Carlyle Grp maybe?
What North American Union? DAnconia55 is Glen. Final Authority is Beck.
It's a false dilemma. We don't have to choose which, since we can eliminate both by electing a non-interventionist, Constitutional candidate who is focused on the needs of the American people first and foremost. Brezinski and Carter gave the go-ahead to the CIA to train the mujahideen to fight the Russians. I'm familiar with that. It does not contradict my point of view at all. In fact, it supports my point of view that western involvement in Arab dictatorships encourages extremism. We should disengage, specifically because our role has thus far been to prop up the house of Saud instead of letting the Arab people decide their own destiny there. I will not agree with you that the extremism would not have existed without Establishment ties. From Indonesia and Afghanistan to Kososvo and Chechnya, the factions were there. CFR think tankers simply realized that they had a natural ally in the pro-Islamic fighters. What I have said is that the pluses of that relationship out weighed any minuses. Leaving the individual Arabs out of this, I see the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States as having been dominated by the Establishment. As a strong critic of the Establishment's tendencies toward global government and the sacrifice of American sovereignty and cultural integrity on the altars of international commerce, I would be willing to concede that much of what I continue to think of as an unhealthy relationship has been brought on by our own reliance on the Council on Foreign Relations and before that, the Round Table Club. With military disengagement with the region, we could rethink our ties to factions within Saudi Arabia. I suspect that the Saudis are going to face one crisis after another regardless of what we do next. As those problems mount, I would like to see the American involvement in them reduced or eliminated so that we have fewer chances of incurring additional blow back.
One of us is seriously confused. I presume you are being facetious with this paragraph, my friend?
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
The House of Saud had zero to do with 9/11. It's a false canard that is used as a distraction from the real culprits. That the majority of 9/11 terrorists had Saudi citizenship does not mean that the Saudi government sponsored 9/11. The Saudi intel agencies can barely keep the Princes safe - they are in a word incompetent and completely incapable to help plot 9/11. That Saudi family members were allowed to fly out after 9/11 means what exactly? It merely illustrates a well known fact of life in DC -the Saudi Family has pull with the White House as it always has for eons. Big deal. Did you know that the Saudi government actually argued that redacted passages of the 9/11 Commission report be allowed to see the light of day to the general public because they were concerned about what the redaction implied. Their requests fell on deaf ears with the Bush Admin and the 9/11 Commission. Furthermore regarding the Ptech thingie - like the guy wrongly dragged through the mud for allegedly sending anthrax through the mail - big todo about nothing. Here's a 2003 article about Ptech: masshightech.bizjournals....es/2003/08/25/newscolumn2. html?page=1 "Ware-Withal: Wrongly suspected Ptech, CEO bounce back slowly" If you feel that there were "insiders" to 9/11 event, a more fruitful focus might be on an Israeli-run private telecom company called Comverse Infosys per the 4 part series of Carl Cameron: www.informationc learinghouse.info/article7545.htm "Israel Is Spying In And On The U.S.?" parts 1-4
I presume you are being facetious with this paragraph, my friend? Yes and no. That there are mosques in the USA is a function of our immigration policies. What do you expect to happen when Muslims are allowed to immigrate here? Do you think new Muslim-Americans are suddenly going to convert to Catholicism and pray to Allah in churches? Get real. But truthfully speaking, I don't feel any more threatened by mosques than I am by synogogues or by Hindu temples appearing in American cities. Why should I? Or more importantly - why are you concerned?
I realize we have freedom of religion here, for Americans. When foreign Saudis spend millions building mosques here, it's a cultural invasion. Ron Paul would permit this, and I am supporting Ron Paul. It is also one aspect of his campaign that I disagree with. Then again, I'm no professed multiculturalist.
b. I'm familiar with that. It does not contradict my point of view at all. In fact, it supports my point of view that western involvement in Arab dictatorships encourages extremism. c. As a strong critic of the Establishment's tendencies toward global government and the sacrifice of American sovereignty and cultural integrity on the altars of international commerce, I would be willing to concede that much of what I continue to think of as an unhealthy relationship has been brought on by our own reliance on the Council on Foreign Relations and before that, the Round Table Club. d. With military disengagement with the region, we could rethink our ties to factions within Saudi Arabia. a. It's not a false dilemna. It's called being realistic. Electing a constitutionalist President Paul is just one step on a long road ahead of us to set our nation straight constitutionally speaking. Changes are not going to happen overnight. There's still Congress that needs to be cleaned out of all its incumbent sold out bought out punks so constitutionalists can be installed in their places. Therefore eliminating ALL lobby groups is not going to happen right away. Eliminating the biggest one regarding our mis-directed current foreign policy would be a realist goal for starters. And in that regard, the Israel Lobby would be my pick as being the most noxious one to our nation's interests. Would you agree? b. Whatever. You say white and I say black. At least I recognize that you and I disagree. You pretend that my arguments support your position. They do not. The Israel-Palestinian situation and our blind faith backing of Israel's war crimes is the single most attraction of Muslims to AQ. The major hatred for America is not our supporting Mubarrek, the Saudi princes, the King of Jordan. If we became fair peace brokers in the Israeli-Palestinian situation, it would diminish 60% of the Muslim hatred directed at America today. c. I don't understand what point you are trying to make. You have 1 sentence that ran 6 lines. Whatever floats your boat. d. We can disengage from propping the Saudis AFTER we figure out a cheap fossil fuel alternative for running our industries and cars. Until then, the Saudis are a necessary vice to keep our economy from running into the gutter overnight.
Are you sure we don't have as much or more oil than the Saudis do? Lindsey Williams says that we have enough to last more than 200 years in Alaska, but it's being held under wraps to prop up our securities deal with OPEC. I'm against America's involvement in the United Nations and I would not support a presidential candidate who promised to pressure Israel regarding the Palestinian issue. For me, disengagement is not about retreating from Islamic anger. It's about maintaining our own territorial boundaries and cultural integrity.
Article not found .. the bizjournals one.. at any rate, so b/c an article cites Ptech as being 'clean' that means it's so? Please.. get on the clue bus..
b. I'm against America's involvement in the United Nations and I would not support a presidential candidate who promised to pressure Israel regarding the Palestinian issue. For me, disengagement is not about retreating from Islamic anger. It's about maintaining our own territorial boundaries and cultural integrity. a. Is Lindsey Williams an oil expert? Is Lindsey a geological engineer? I'm not an oil expert but I doubt there's 200 years of oil resources in Alaska or if there is vast quantities it would be expensive to extricate much like the oil from the tar sands of Alberta. The beauty of the ME oil resources is that it is so inexpensive to get and use. It almost literally spouts out of the sands. b. I could care less whether we're in the UN or not. It's not a biggy issue to me apart from the fact that US tax dollars are wasted in the support of Third World thugs and thieves. With regards to Israel, I could care less whether it survives or dies on the vine. America's survival is not contingent on what happens to Israel. Countries need to defend themselves to survive and earn nationhood longevity. African nations have come and gone as long as they could or could not support themselves financially and defend their sovereignity. So it should be for Israel. However it would be in Israel's interest of survival to back off to 1967 borders and make strong neighbors of the Palestinians peoples. In the near future the population explosion of Muslims in nearby nation states will over run the Israelis. It's a demographic fact of life. No walls or tanks or rockets will prevent Israel from being swamped in the future by very very angry Muslim tribes. We made a mistake of supporting a UN resolution to create Israel out of thin air. We shouldn't double that mistake by giving Israel a false sense of security that it can do whatever war crimes it wants to the Palestinians and Lebanese and we will support it forever. We will not support Israel forever especially if it is over run by Muslim hordes. Americans will not knowingly put American soldiers in harm's way to protect and defend Israel regardless of what our political punks yammer to the media and especially if 40 Million Mexican illegals get US citizenship and play a dominent role in future US elections. Mexicans identify with the down-trodden brown skinned Palestinians not the Israelis. So if Israel wants to survive, it needs to redress the wrongs it has committed over the years against the Palestinians. The Muslim wrath against the Israelis regarding its ill-treatment and land thievery of Palestinian land is well founded. I don't see that we would "retreat" from Muslim anger by trying to honestly broker a fair resolution to the unfair situation that exists today. But if we can't be fair and honest brokers for peace, then we should bow out completely from the Israeli-Palestinian crisis and let other powers intervene. The Israeli-Palestinian situation has nothing to do with "maintaining our own territorial boundaries and cultural integrity" that I can see.
b. at any rate, so b/c an article cites Ptech as being 'clean' that means it's so? Please.. get on the clue bus.. a. Here's the biz journal url - hope it works this time round - you may need to cut and paste the url: http://masshightech.bizjournals.com/masshightech/stories/2003/08/25/newscolumn2. html?page=1 "Ware-Withal: Wrongly suspected Ptech, CEO bounce back slowly" b. As I said, the Saudis are incapable of doing anything except what the US tells them to do. They are not the sharpest knives in the ME intel drawer. I don't think they are capable of putting together a 9/11 insider intel company. The Saudi are fat greedy illegitimate rulers. They have more than enough $ from oil. All they care about is leading their decadent life styles and ruling over their unhappy people. The Saudis are not so sophisticated that they are into plotting 9/11 events or front companies. How would they benefit from 9/11? It makes no sense whatsoever. There's only one ME nation that would benefit from 9/11. Buy a clue yourself and look into Comverse Infosys and the nation that fronts it.
It does make perfect sense.. if you connect the dots.. what has more than one 9/11 whistleblower mentioned? Drugs and illegal arm sales.. it's about $$$ for some and a few other things for that matter.. If you research the names.. who they are .. what groups they're connected with.. the muslim brotherhood and the CIA.. read about all the whisteblowers the ones w/connections to 9/11 and the picture will become more clear. And I dont have to buy myself a clue Im not a dolt I already know about Infosys issue for quite some time.
Williams says it costs us $3/barrel to get in Alaska. Even if he's wrong, we've cut back on our oil refineries and exploration here, and every CFR member politician opposes drilling in ANWR, in the Everglades, and on California's coastline. This puts OPEC at a distinct advantage. It puts Saudi Arabia at a distinct advantage. Their purchases of our treasury securities, even if not secretly quid pro quo, only serve to prop up our increasingly socialist and interventionist system of government. I could care less whether we're in the UN or not. It's not a biggy issue to me apart from the fact that US tax dollars are wasted in the support of Third World thugs and thieves. It's a huge issue for American nationalists. We typically supply foreign aid directly to our favorite dictators rather than going through the UN. These are separate issues. Our sovereignty is diminished by pressures to adhere to international court rulings and treaties signed with the UN, as well as to send our troops to war. UN resolutions were invoked as we bombed Serbia and invaded Iraq, for example. We occupy Kosovo because of NATO agreements. The list of problems caused by our participation in international organizations is long and dreary, but it adds up to lost American freedoms. We made a mistake of supporting a UN resolution to create Israel out of thin air. We shouldn't double that mistake by giving Israel a false sense of security that it can do whatever war crimes it wants to the Palestinians and Lebanese and we will support it forever. Participation in the UN a problem? In any case, I have no objections to the actions the Allies took in the former Ottoman empire and Palestine, as these steps proved strategic during WWII and the Cold War. In 1973, we could have walked away from Israel and never gone back as far as I'm concerned. Certainly I agree that we do not need to take another action to ensure its survival at this time. A hundred years of manipulating the region's boundaries and cultures have caused us more than enough trouble. But the most serious aspects of it were from the Nazis and the Soviets. Now that those threats are diminished, we can walk away. I don't expect you to agree with me, I'm just letting you know where I stand. The Muslim wrath against the Israelis regarding its ill-treatment and land thievery of Palestinian land is well founded But if we can't be fair and honest brokers for peace, then we should bow out completely from the Israeli-Palestinian crisis and let other powers intervene. As of 1973, it works for me. In fact, we're more likely to get along with our former Russian rivals in the region if we disengage militarily with all of these countries. The Israeli-Palestinian situation has nothing to do with "maintaining our own territorial boundaries and cultural integrity" that I can see. None of this does, which is why we should disengage militarily with all nations in the region and go back to talking and trading. I am confident that nature will run its course with us or without us.
a. I very much doubt that low $3 figure for getting oil from ANWAR. I've read that Saudi Arabia's old oil wells are damaged due to over pumping and infiltration of salt water. So the House of Saud may soon outgrow its usefulness for cheap oil in the near future anyways. The CFR needs to work with public opinion and even if oil were 2 cents per gallon off the cpoast of California and ANWAR, there's no politician stateside who is going to buck public opinion regarding protection of our ecology and coastline. Sorry I don't buy that CFR machination at all. b. We control the UN through our permanent Security Council along with the UK. We entered Kosovo because we wanted to - BillyJeff needed a distraction from Monicagate. We use the UN for cover when it suits us and we act pre-emptively when it suits us. I don't see the UN having any effect on our sovereign rights or choices. It's simply a gang bang of the US taxpayer that's all, a mandated waste of our tax dollars on thugocracies, a not so subtle Marxist re- distribution of wealth from have countries to non-have Third World rulers' pockets. c. If you refer to the Balfour Declaration as raison d'etre for Israel's formal creation in 1948 - come on, that was the Zionists' bribe requirement ofBritain to excert their considerable influence stateside to get America involved in WWI. The 1948 UN resolution was a result of Europe's guilt. Truman got on the same page at the last minute due to Zionist pressure - future votes hung in the balance after all. d. We would not have had a problem with Russia in the 1950's if we had not allied ourselve with "Uncle Joe" and had let the Naziis and Commies duke it out to point of death in Russia. FDR could have prevented Pearl Harbor - he wanted us in WWII and we sold out 20 Million Eastern Europeans in the end to good old Uncle Joe whose power and influence grew substantially due to our WWII alliance with him. There would have been no "Cold War" if we had let Stalin go down in flames along with Hitler in WWII. WWII was NOT a good war imo. Nor was WWI or Korea or Vietnam or Kosovo or Iraq. American lives have been wasted for lies the past 200 years.
Lots of what if's and maybes in there. We've done what we've done, and we should learn from it. What I've learned from it is that we should now take a good opportunity to walk away from the Mideast while we've got it. I'll believe we need their oil when we've pumped the last drum out of the ground on our own soil.
Just my two cents before turning in. Here's a bit I posted "over there", quite a while back. No nation that enforces sharia can be "modern". Agreed, and virtually every ME nation, given the opportunity of Whorge's imposition of "democracy" on them, will choose sharia, IMO. There is only one sensible policy with reference to the God forsaken ME: 1) Cease the ill conceived "crusade", SAP. 2) Listen to the advice of Srdja Trifkovic, Chronicles Magazine contributor, who urges quarantine of the ME nations, i.e, strengthen the security of our borders, severely and very selectively limit immigration of Muslims to our county, and strengthen our weakened C.I.A. Anything less and we will go the way of Great Britain and the rest of Europe that has failed too long to impose such logic, thus placing them in very precarious positions. ============================================================================== While searching for (and failing to find) Trifkovic's fine article on this topic, I found and offer this by Jim Pinkerton. I found it thought provoking. Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
Glenn Beck is a Judeo-FASCIST. That's why he has a show on TelAvivision.
Register to vote for Ron Paul NOW.
Hear hear.
I'll believe we need their oil when we've pumped the last drum out of the ground on our own soil. I like RP's position which is trade with all, be friendly in our dealings with everyone, AND MIND OUR OWN BUSINESS and put our own house in order which cries for attention - say bridges anyone? With regards to ME oil, realistically in the short term ( the next 10 years) we need their black gold. We should expect to pay more $ for it and why not? It's their only resource - it's non renewable and we've been buying it on the cheap for many many years to boost our economy and life style. Fair is fair. However, in the interim I think we should re-direct all the $ we have given to MIC and the DOD the past 60 years and focus it on research at our fine universities to developing petro substitutes ( realistic ones not corn I'm sorry) and fuel efficient auto engine designs as well as construction of nuclear power plants. Frankly, Anwar and CA coast drilling will be so tied up in the courts we'd never see any positive outcome in our life time even if we assume there's vast quantities of cheap oil deposits in both areas ( I'm doubtful). A multi-pronged investment in becoming self-sufficient and independent of ME oil within the next 10 years is the way to go in my opinion.
Our immigration levels of Muslims are pawltry as compared to the Europeans. Our cheap labor has been from Mexico by the millions. The Europeans have used labor from Muslim nations who were in some cases former colonies. Also we have done a much better effort to assimilate the Muslim immigrants we have taken in than the Europeans have. Fyi the Iranians for example are the most upwardly mobile of all immigrant groups we have taken in the past 30 years. I don't fear the religion of Islam whatsoever. Muslims don't try to convert me. They have their beliefs and I have mine. The fundie Christo nutters are far more annoying for evangelizing. And the Jews are far more aggressive with regards to having Christianity wiped off the historical place marks of our nation by submitting legal court challenges and intimidating municipal departments regarding a their interpretation of separation between church and state. What MSM has Americans all worked up about ( and falsely so I believe) relates to the small subset of Islamics - the fundies. Every religion has the same extremist minority. Mainstream Islam itself calls for tolerance and acceptance. In fact prior to Israel being established, the ME Muslims were far more tolerant of Jews than the Christians in Europe were. As for cultural social concerns, I think you have more to fear from La Raza and its illegal Hispanic foot soldiers who want to claim southern border states for Azetlan. When you call gov't departments your choice of language is English and Spanish not English and Farsi.
My summary reaction to your posts would be to crown you King of American Multiculturalists. Personally, I don't fear rogue elephants whatsoever, but then we keep elephants pretty well contained and controlled. Jews don't convert. Muslims most certainly do. Have you noticed where they are most active? In our prisons and with the most alienated members of our turmoil torn society. Has it occurred to you that the most significant conversion successes are with those that are least assimilated and ready made for conversion to a violent and aggressive "religion"? There's quite a difference between being "annoyed" by "fundis", Mormons or Jehovah's witnesses and being converted Muslim style. BTW, try not to get "converted" by them, "uncoversion" is not in their vocabulary. We had, if you'll recall, no sooner imposed Bush's "democracy" on Afghanistan when some poor bastard was threatened with death for attempting to convert and marry a Christian girl. Stoning and murder of innocents are what they carry in their conversion kits, not tracts. Their stonyhearted god of rules and their heavenly reward of virgins is alien to our historical Judeo-Christian republic. Their cultures are antithetical to all of western civilization. Their concept of tolerance is Dhimmitude. Islam means "Submission", and before you give me a sanitized Islamic definition of allow me to provide one recent illustration of Muslim tolerance and assimilation (examples abound). In Nov., 2004 a brutal murder shocked Holland and the world. On a busy Amsterdam street, in broad daylight, a prominent film maker named Theo van Gogh was shot, stabbed and mutilated in front of dozens of witnesses. A young Muslim radical was arrested. What was described as a ritual slaughter set off alarm bells throughout Europe and the United States, where millions of devout Muslims live as minorities in secular society. For the Dutch who have prided themselves for centuries on a tradition of tolerance, it was a painful awakening, the prospect of a homegrown jihad in the world's most liberal state. Preventative medicine is the way to go not, "feel good", unreal anticipation of some future reasoning with the unreasonable. One may feel comfortable and unthreatened at the moment in Paris, TX, .... Paris, France or London, England is quite another Finally, why introduce the invasion of our southern border into the discussion? Only the elitists now in control of a (hopefully temporary) helpless and bewildered American fail to see the phenomena as our most significant threat. Epilogue: Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
b. Finally, why introduce the invasion of our southern border into the discussion? a. Because I am not threatened by different ethnicities or cultures, does that make me "King of Multiculturalists?" Let's be clear on this matter so you don't go around labelling me something I am not, based on your limited ( a couple of days posting here) knowledge of my political positions. I'm very much pro-melting pot as opposed to multi-culturalism. I'm very much pro-legal immigration that matches America's economic/professional needs to immigration candidates. Ergo, if we are in need of experienced M.D.'s, I would take a Pakistani or Iranian M.D. over a Catholic bartender from Ireland. I could care less about "religious beliefs". I care about skills that our nation needs at any given time that cannot be supplied by Americans already here. So are we clear on where I stand? b. You introduced the concept of "threat" to our cultural social fabric first with your linked article to the "carnage and culture blogspot". I was merely responding to your expressed concerns. And what "threatens" our nation currently is not the prospect of Sharia Law but rather it is racist anti- American organizations like La Raza and its millions of illegal Hispanic foot soldiers(who appear to have zero interest in assimilating into American culture even if they were made legal overnight) as well as the US politicians who pander to this group of law breakers. My point is if you are going to stay up at night worrying about "ciulture and carnage" at least wring your hands about something that is real and under your nose and not something that is a neocon- manufactured fear mongering "Islamofascist" concept. P.S. Re: your fears about Sharia Law use in the West - it's my understanding that it would be used much like Orthodox Judaic Law is currently used - to resolve family legal disputes and it would only be applied if all parties consent. Fyi, in Canada for example one of the most vocal supporters of Sharia Law implementation in one of the provinces was the Jewish community.
Eeek. Sharia Law! Oh my! Good Grief- it gets more and more embarassing each passing day to be identified as an American. Pretty soon the dictionary is going to have an entry for coward in the dictionary like "as in as cowardly as an American."
Because I am not threatened by different ethnicities or cultures, does that make me "King of Multiculturalists?" Your statement comes pretty close to the definition of a multiculturalist. What part of Balkanization do you not understand? re your fears about Sharia Law use in the West - it's my understanding that it would be used much like Orthodox Judaic Law is currently used - to resolve family legal disputes and it would only be applied if all parties consent. As far as I know, Rabbis do not prescribe wife beatings, stonings or honor killings. You introduced the concept of "threat" to our cultural social fabric first with your linked article to the "carnage and culture blogspot". I've been here a little more than a couple of days but you're the first I've encountered who posts inferences, interpretations, or conlusions as opposed to quotes from links. Mexican, Hispanic, La Raza nor anything similar is mentioned in my link. I'm very much pro-melting pot as opposed to multi-culturalism. If we're to adopt your open door policy toward Muslims we better make it a damned high temperature melting pot. ============================================================================= My point was crystal clear. Muslims present a challenge to western civilized precepts previously unencountered in our nations relatively short history. We are talking here about a people pitifully stuck in the sixth century. I do not accept the progaganda term of Islamo-facists or other froth mouthed jingoistic terms. My stance is simple ... live and let live, but, most certainly do not encourage the infection and disruption of trying to mix the oil and water (no pun intended) of the ME and the U.S.. More bluntly, let them drown in their own oil and vomit. Also, from the same previous link: Tocqueville wrote: I studied the Kuran a great deal...... I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world, and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion infinitely more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself. [Quoted by Trifkovic, page 208] I leave it to my fellow posters to ponder who is the rather "odd" man out here.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
I'm weary of this slurry of slop cultures the PTB are allowing into our country. I'm even more weary of the culturally tolerant crew who have become steeped in political correctness. I wonder if they have taken a good look at the EU for a glimpse of what is to come our way? I'm guessing they have and frankly either want the same for us or are too cowardly to raise a bitch.
I don't know if you're into Health Freedom, but it's in dire jeopardy - on the fast-track now that the North American Union is OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT POLICY in Amerika...wait till you see the EU's CODEX...coming to your home soon.
What North American Union? What North American Union? What's Health Freedom, FOH? I'm well aware of the NAU, and I'm here to tell you some among us think it's a peachy-keen idea. Those folks need a severe beating.
I leave it to my fellow posters to ponder who is the rather "odd" man out here. Your comments are self-revealing. Yes, unfortunately I may be the "odd" man out and your 'tude is likely far more common and embraced by the majority of my fellow 'merikans - ergo that's why our nation has been so easily misled into wars based on lies to bully all those "savages out there" and why our military savagery has caused us to be disgraced on the international stage.
That's totalitarian thinking, to think anybody needs a severe beating merely because of a belief -- even if it is a mistaken belief.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Comments (111 - 204) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestKeep this quote in your mind when you consider negative influence of a lobby group:
#71. To: Rupert_Pupkin, scrapper2 (#66)
#72. To: scrapper2, iconoclast (#68)
(Edited)
For all your dust-up about the Saudis, you are either purposely or naively missing the elephant in the room...
#73. To: scrapper2, buckeye (#68)
(Edited)
#74. To: robin (#50)
she said all the Marines know, they know everything
I've already said too much.
#75. To: Zipporah (#73)
#76. To: buckeye (#75)
#77. To: Zipporah (#76)
#78. To: buckeye (#77)
#79. To: buckeye, iconoclast (#72)
I don't think I'm missing anything at all. I'm interested in eliminating all types of foreign interference withing our government, not just the Zionist lobby.
#80. To: scrapper2 (#79)
Don't wait - send Ron Paul 2008 some FRNs right NOW!
#81. To: FormerLurker (#3)
I wonder if Glen Beck is DAnconia55 or Final Authority over at ElPee?
#82. To: scrapper2 (#79)
But I'd also qualify that goal by saying that we should start with the biggest and most influential one first ie. AIPAC. Would you agree?
#83. To: scrapper2 (#79)
As for mosques being built in the USA - so what? Last I heard freedom of religion is a guaranteed right stateside. Ours is a tolerant pluristic society. Are you worried about those eeeevil "Islamofacsists" in our midst who might congregate in mosques funded by the Saudis? I have no doubt there are a number of FBI divisions specifically assigned to monitoring what goes on in the mosques here so you can sleep better that no AQ are hiding there.
#84. To: Zipporah (#78)
#85. To: iconoclast (#83)
One of us is seriously confused.
#86. To: iconoclast, scrapper2 (#83)
I presume you are being facetious with this paragraph, my friend?
#87. To: buckeye (#82)
a. It's a false dilemma. We don't have to choose which, since we can eliminate both by electing a non-interventionist, Constitutional candidate who is focused on the needs of the American people first and foremost.
#88. To: scrapper2 (#87)
We can disengage from propping the Saudis AFTER we figure out a cheap fossil fuel alternative for running our industries and cars.
#89. To: scrapper2 (#84)
#90. To: buckeye (#88)
a. Are you sure we don't have as much or more oil than the Saudis do? Lindsey Williams says that we have enough to last more than 200 years in Alaska, but it's being held under wraps to prop up our securities deal with OPEC.
#91. To: Zipporah (#89)
a. Article not found .. the bizjournals one..
#92. To: scrapper2 (#91)
(Edited)
#93. To: scrapper2 (#90)
The beauty of the ME oil resources is that it is so inexpensive to get and use.
#94. To: buckeye (#93)
#95. To: scrapper2 (#94)
#96. To: buckeye, scrapper2, Zipporah (#93)
#97. To: iconoclast (#96)
(Edited)
#98. To: iconoclast (#96)
#99. To: buckeye (#95)
Lots of what if's and maybes in there. We've done what we've done, and we should learn from it. What I've learned from it is that we should now take a good opportunity to walk away from the Mideast while we've got it.
#100. To: iconoclast (#96)
(Edited)
#101. To: buckeye, scrapper2, Zipporah, wbales (#100)
I don't fear the religion of Islam whatsoever. Muslims don't try to convert me.
#102. To: iconoclast, buckeye, Zipporah, wbales (#101)
(Edited)
a. My summary reaction to your posts would be to crown you King of American Multiculturalists.
#103. To: scrapper2 (#102)
#104. To: scrapper2, buckeye, Zipporah, wbales (#102)
#105. To: iconoclast (#104)
More bluntly, let them drown in their own oil and vomit.
#106. To: Jethro Tull, robin, christine, Pinguinite, Zipporah, TwentyTwelve, Original_Intent, buckey, lodwick (#105)
Don't wait - send Ron Paul 2008 some FRNs right NOW!
#107. To: All (#106)
Don't wait - send Ron Paul 2008 some FRNs right NOW!
#108. To: FOH (#106)
#109. To: iconoclast, buckeye, Zipporah, wbales, Burkeman1 (#104)
More bluntly, let them drown in their own oil and vomit.
#110. To: Jethro Tull (#108)
Those folks need a severe beating.
.
.
.