Occupiers?

Listen below and you'll hear it from the man himself - American is responsible for 9-11.  Disgraceful.

Libertarians Just don't Get It

For all of their good intentions, Libertarians are about 200 years past relevance when it comes to homeland security. For most of them, their position is for America to become once again an isolationist nation. They seem to believe that if we drop our support for Israel, the mad Muslims will leave us alone.  They blame us for 9-11, and stick their heads in the sand concerning the realities of Islam.

The fact of the matter is, in today's day and age where travel by air is common place, travel by sea faster than when our Founding Fathers were around, in a day where the motor vehicle replace the horse drawn cart, and in an era where information is shared globally at the speed of an electron, it is no longer wise nor prudent to close our doors.  Yet somehow, the Libertarians don't see this.

Their defacto leader, Ron Paul, opened his mouth recently and has shown once more how Libertarianism is not the answer to America's problems. From Jihad Watch:

Ron Paul: "Those who hate us and would like to kill us, they are motivated by our invasion of their land"

I'm tired of the Rick Perry firestorm. Time for a Ron Paul firestorm. Another Clueless Presidential Candidate Alert: "Ron Paul says U.S. intervention motivated 9/11 attacks," by Josh Hafner for the Des Moines Register, August 27:

    WINTERSET, Ia. – Two weeks away from the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, presidential candidate and Texas Rep. Ron Paul says that U.S. intervention in the Middle East is a main motivation behind terrorist hostilities toward America, and that Islam is not a threat to the nation.

    At a campaign stop on Saturday in Winterset, one man asked Paul how terrorist groups would react if the U.S. removed its military presence in Middle Eastern nations, a move the candidate advocates.

    “Which enemy are you worried that will attack our national security?” Paul asked.

    “If you’re looking for specifics, I’m talking about Islam. Radical Islam,” the man answered.

    “I don’t see Islam as our enemy,” Paul said. “I see that motivation is occupation and those who hate us and would like to kill us, they are motivated by our invasion of their land, the support of their dictators that they hate.” Read it all

More Troubling Information Concerning Ron Paul

Russian network host boasts of 'money bomb' for Ron Paul

Yesterday we raised over $1 million for the campaign'
Posted: August 17, 2011
9:55 pm Eastern

By F. Michael Maloof
© 2011 WND


WASHINGTON – A commentator on Russia Today, a Russian government-funded television news network that now is known as RT, has boasted of a $1 million "money bomb" on behalf of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, a candidate for the GOP's nomination to be president, raising a whole host of questions about just what has happened.

That's because while the commentator happens to be an American, and legally could donate to Paul's presidential campaign, foreign entities such as RT are prohibited.

For some reason, the mere thought of a Russian news station raising money for Ron Paul sends goose bumps up my back.

"I'd like to end tonight on a note of some good news," said Adam Kokesh, a former U.S. Marine who has a segment on RT called "Adam vs. The Man."

"We have some good news from the front lines of the Ron Paul 'LOVEaluation' with our money bomb on June 5.

"Yesterday we raised over $1 million for the Ron Paul campaign. And I'm starting to figure out what electable means, because electable or non-electable is really a code word for 'if this person wins, I'm not gonna be able to get as much money from the government,'" he said.

The comments came on his June 6 program on RT, which is a Russian state-funded, multilingual television news network that, in effect, has endorsed the candidacy of Paul.

Perhaps my unease comes from the fact that RT is tied to Russian intelligence.  Not only that, but the whole issue of legality comes into question.

But contributions from RT, which observers say is tied to Russia's intelligence services, would raise legal questions, given that the Russian media outlet is a foreign entity and, in effect, an instrument of the Russian government. Support for Paul from RT is due to the congressman's opposition to U.S. involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The revelation of RT backing for Paul occurred just after the Iowa Straw Poll on Aug. 12, which showed Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., as the winner with 4,823 or 28.6 percent of the vote. She was followed by Paul in an almost statistical dead heat for second place with 4,671 or 27.7 percent of the vote and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty coming in a distant third with 2,293, or 13.6 percent. He dropped out of the race the next day.

News outlets in the United States reported Bachmann's win but few reported on Paul's showing of being a close second to her.  Read It All

What I really want to know is, why is the Russian government pushing for the election of Ron Paul?  What is Paul's relationship with them?  Could it be because Paul has vowed to turn America into an isolationist nation, leaving Russia free to do with the world what it wants?

"Oh," you may be saying, "this is the new Russia.  The Cold War ended years ago! Russia is our ally!" If that's what you believe, then I have a bridge you might be interested in purchasing...

Worried about Paul

I'm worried about Ron Paul.   On economic issues, I support him 100%, but on foreign policy, he has no understanding of real world issues.  I do agree that we should pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, but we should keep Israel as a close ally.  As the only true democratic state in the middle east, it would be foolhardy to leave them to their fate.  As well, his comments about Iran not being a threat is grossly ignorant.  Iran has stated over and over again that it wants to destroy Israel and the "Great Satan" - us. Even though everyone with common sense knows what's going on, Iran continues to lie about its nuclear weapons program - which they're very close to completing.  They're even working on their "delivery system" - new rockets.  The jihadists in the middle east do not hate us because of our support for Israel.  If anyone would be honest with themselves, its ideologically based (Islam vs. the Free World).  Removing our support from Israel will not encourage the Islamic countries to "like" us. Thus I believe that if Ron Paul becomes president, world events will create a grave danger to a nation that has its eyes blinded by choice. 

Compound this with Mr. Paul's statement that he is going "all in," I believe that he will split the vote, just like Ross Perot did in the mid 90's.  It was because of Mr. Perot's presidential run that Clinton was re-elected. Clinton only received 49% of the votes, with Perot and Nader taking votes that, if gone to Dole (who had 40%), would of given Dole the victory.  With politics as they are today, Paul will most certainly take more than just 9%, and even though Obama is quite unpopular, he could easily take the re-election as a result.

I just wish Libertarians would stop smoking their dope (which Paul is not opposed to legalizing) and come to realize that its more than just economics which strengthens a country.  Morality and strong alliances with fellow democratic/republic societies are as equally important. 

It's The Rape Victim's Fault

There are times when one is inundated with absurdities. This is one of those times. While reviewing recent news, many stories have screamed for attention. Quite a few seemed worthwhile for commentary. Yet with so many choices, what was I to do?

The world seems to be in the midst of a mini ice age, yet we are told that dogs create as large a carbon footprint as a sports car - thus bad. Then we have news of Hawaii pulling out all the stops to honor BO with two holidays and a desire to create a state park from his birthplace (the problem is, no one knows for certain where he was born). From there, we have reports of a Danish cartoonist who was attacked by a member of the Religion of Peace(TM) who had to slam a panic button and run into a panic room to survive. Then of course, Jordan and the PA are trying to steal the Dead Sea Scrolls. Yet through all of this, one story has demanded my full attention - Ron Paul stating that America is to blame for her terrorist woes.



I wrote about this a little while back here, but I figured that I needed to add a little more to this "discussion." What Ron Paul and his supporters are basically stating is that: "it's the rape victim's fault."

A while back, while involved with a local Tea Party Movement, one day a week there was a gathering of people who came together during lunch to discuss the Constitution. During the last meeting I attended, an astonishing claim was made stating that it was America's fault that we were attacked. They said that as a result of our foreign policies, we have encouraged Islamic terrorists to attack us. With all due respect, that's a load of bull. Local Senate candidate Chick Heileson also holds these claims close to his heart.

People such as Paul and Heileson are the "diplomatic equivalent" to those who blame the victim for the crimes committed against them. They do not even bother to take into consideration the fact that the perpetrator is already infested with hate and corrupted by evil. A cursory examination of Islam reveals it's true intent, and even a cursory glance at CAIR (a supposedly "moderate" Muslim organization) reveals the truth. I ask you to go to CAIR Watch and read the statements made by it's own leadership. They support Hamas as well as other terrorist organizations, support the murder of jews in Israel, and some are even loath to confess that those who were slaughtered on 9-11 were innocent.

As I've written before, Islam has at it's basic philosophical core a doctrine of world domination. The Crusades were actually a response to Islamic invasion - an invasion that almost dominated all of Europe. Indeed, ever since Islam's inception, the world has been under siege.

Yet we have people such as Paul who are content to blame the United States for the terrorist attacks upon her. They want to remove all diplomatic support from Israel, and remove our alliances with other nations. They truly believe, in their honest but misguided hearts, that if America intentionally blinds itself to world events, it will remain safe. They have forgotten that Islam holds America as "the great Satan." Perhaps they have not forgotten this. Perhaps they have chosen to place the blame on America for that perception.

While at that last meeting, I attempted to confront the speaker about this. I tried to bring up the facts of Islamic militantism and was soundly cut off and was told once more that "Islam is a religion of peace which is being hijacked." The speaker, Chris Stevens, would not allow any further discussion on the topic. It is obvious that Mr. Stevens is willfully unaware of the basics of Islamic history. Unfortunately, many professed conservatives share these same views.

Young ladies spend quite a large amount of time finding the perfect outfit, dieting and exercising to keep fit, and using the perfect combination of makeup to accent their features. When doing this, none of them do so with the intention of inciting others to sexually assault them. When a rapist assaults them, is it ultimately the woman's fault (as many Islamists claim)?

The same can be said for America. We are the world's only true bastion of freedom - we (currently) have the freedoms of expression, speech, and religion. We boldly stand for the rights of others to enjoy these freedoms. We resist oppression and open our arms to all. We entered into two World Wars to keep millions free, yet as Islamists, those who hold to Ron Paul's viewpoints state that our very stance on freedom and our involvement in the world is the reason we are attacked.

Let me ask you this: If you saw a woman being attacked, would you stand back and blame her for what was being done or would you intervene? Can you honestly say, with today's world chaos, that as champions of liberty we should turn our backs to the plight of others? Should we allow Islam to reign supreme, and hold to the blind assumption that if we do nothing, we will remain safe? Will our inaction protect our daughters as we watch the daughters of others being raped?

Ron Paul, Chick Heileson, Chris Stevens, whose side are you really on?