Thursday, November 29, 2007

CNN shafts Ron Paul despite crowds of supporters

Orlando, Florida--November 28, 2007--Entering the CNN Republican “debate” Giuliani reportedly commented to Ron Paul, "Gee, you have a lot of supporters."

Ron Paul replied, "This is only the beginning."

Outside Ron Paul supporters filled several blocks. The supporters were described as a mix of "classy rich-looking people and hippy-looking people and people from all walks of life."

The police commented that the Ron Paul people were the best crowd they ever dealt with. People were constantly thanking them for their service. The 160 anti-war protesters who came to protest the Republicans found ONLY fellow anti-war Ron Paul activists.

Dr. Paul commented, "The freedom message brings people together."

Dr. Paul’s Abraham Lincoln persona has drawn hundreds of energetic volunteers to leave it all behind to become traveling vagabonds working for the Ron Paul presidential campaign across America, sleeping on the floors of people they met over the Internet.

The Florida Ron Paul meetup groups rented a park next to the debate hall as well as the Paladium Theatre, where 800 Ron Paul supporters watched the televised debate.

New York Times blogger, Marc Santora writes, "By land, by air and by sea, the disciples of Ron Paul converged on the debate hall here in St. Petersburg, Fla., in the hours before the debate here tonight. There were two planes circling overhead, one flying a Ron Paul banner another with lights spelling out his name Goodyear Blimp-style. A ship circling in the bay just outside the hall was festooned with Ron Paul paraphernalia blaring martial music. In the park, just beyond the security fences erected around The Mahaffey Theater, the Paulites outfitted a group that was decidedly young and decidedly loyal with shirts and stickers and other assorted Paul gear."

Bloggers reported that no other candidates even had people holding signs.

Ron Paul wasn't planning to run for president, but the American people pushed him to run and spontaneously organized behind him. Ron Paul said to his loyal fans at the Paladium Theatre following the debate, "You've cured my skepticism."

But make no mistake about it. CNN crucified Ron Paul on live television.

A Zionist provocateur referred to Dr. Paul’s supporters as “Paulestinians,” but that is exactly what I was thinking when I was watching CNN. They gave Ron Paul the Palestinian treatment. The moderator was even calling him “Ron” instead of by his title.

After CNN's online poll before the debate with Ron Paul getting 95% on the online votes, they managed to avoid asking him a question for 35 minutes. The only time Dr. Paul was addressed personally was with leading questions designed to trip him up or else a personal attack. He was never given more than 90 seconds to talk at a time even though he was the only candidate with anything of substance to say.

A commentator noted, “It was painful to watch CNN give the questions Paul is strongest on (taxes, monetary policy, saving Social Security) to everyone else … Meanwhile, they asked Paul if he believes in conspiracies and what he’ll do when he loses."

Another commentator wrote, "I thought it was really entertaining to hear McCain trying to say the troops were panting “Let us win” in front of the man whose call to bring the troops home has raised him more money from the military than any of the other candidates. Ron Paul is very much top-tier with his fundraising and astounding support and yet he got very little attention. It was cute seeing the other candidates trying to ape his policies, though. "

"It is private property and they have the right to be biased," replied Congressman Ron Paul.

Salon is one of the few media outlets that did not downplay the significance of Ron Paul's mass popularity. "With his millions raised in online fund-raising and devoted base, we expect greater attention to be paid to what he has to say here tonight."

Ron Paul debate highlights

This ad was shown during the CNN Republican debate, towards the end.

Monday, November 19, 2007

The day I became a Republican

I just registered Republican for the first time in my life. I suppose it had to happen. I gave up on the Democrats in 1985 after I heard a rally in Ann Arbor where the woman at the mike blamed the Republicans for warmongering, said there would be money for decent public schools if the money wasn't being wasted for war and "interventions" all over ther world, and claimed that her reason for doing so was that so, at the end of the day, she could tell her children, "I tried."

I tried? That's all the Democrats have to offer? I was fourteen.

"That's terrifying," I admitted to myself.

Not to forget the 1.2 million people, the majority children under the age of five, who died because of Clinton's "sanctions regime" denying Iraq the right to chlorine to purify their water.

I shake my head, I fight back the tears. I can't think of anything to say about the Clintons.

I knew a woman who personally tried to talk to Hillary Clinton about the people dying in Iraq dying because of our foreign policy. Hillary gave her the "500,000 children's deaths are worth it for the sake of the US" type blather. The relief worker actually said to me she had to restrain herself from strangling Hillary Clinton. She had been to Iraq. With her own arms, she had picked up dying children from the side of the road. How many more children did you kill, Hillary Clinton? With your style of "permissiveness" towards your husband???

I heard a very loud thunderbolt the night the US first bombed Iraq, and I sat up in bed. I thought, "My country is going to hell." There must be some reason they are killing those people. They must know something that Bush doesn't want us to know. It must be Islam. Clearly Bush is with the anti-Christ. Whatever he is trying to destroy is probably what we need to study. So here I am suddenly a Muslim and I can't have sex unless I can get a guy to marry me. Shit!

Well that was a long time ago but the children in Iraq have not stopped dying by the thousands every month. The Bush administration has stopped charitable donations from being allowed to reach the children in Iraq due to pressure from Jewish special interest groups that somehow feel "safer" with the maximum of orphan starvation deaths in the Middle East.

OK so now I'm a Republican. I always knew I was a Republican. I have to admit I could never stomach late term abortion and the idea that anyone could defend it made me give up on Marxism and the Democrats. I have to admit it was too much for me.

And let me tell you why Americans should realize that Muslims are their natural allies.

I felt so betrayed by the Democrats. When I was fourteen years old, I told my parents I was sleeping over at my friend's house, and I hitched a ride to DC for my first peace march, with my friend's mother who had gone to peace marches in the 60s. My friend Susan told me she never realized her mother was cool before then. I was awed by the billowing leg hair and the contact lenses in rest stations. It totally changed my life.

But, somehow Susan, someone whom I smoked pot in my car with in our high school parking lot, became a Zionist. An ethnic nationalist. Trying to find some reason to live?? She betrayed everything I thought I knew about peace activists. I turned my back on the Democratic Party.

Growing up in Ann Arbor, Michigan, there was always peer pressure to adhere to the Democratic Party. The Klugers across the street were voting Democrat and my best friend Sharon told me that it was because the Democratic Party was concerned for minorities and the poor. My parents were voting for Reagan. I felt sick with shame. It was a weird childhood.

OK so now I'm a Republican like my father before me. People always assume I'm a Republican anyway. My husband and I had the weirdest experience at the Al-Awda convention in New York when we first met. No one under 65 would even greet us. I couldn't figure it out. Was my skirt too long? Did I look too heterosexual? I'm just here to support the Palestinians! We tried to engage with "End the Occupation," asking them what did they mean by that - the 1969 border or the 1948 border...well never mind, I got a pile of Rachel Corrie posters for free.

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Muslims discover Ron Paul

After the Republican debate on Tuesday evening in Dearborn, Mich., a reporter from the Arab-American News asked Ron Paul what he thought of the term “Islamic fascism.”

“It’s a false term to make people think we’re fighting Hitler,” Paul responded. “It’s war propaganda designed to generate fear so that the war has to be spread.”

The call has gone out to all the Muslim Americans to hurry up and register to vote Republican so that they can vote in the Republican Primary to support Ron Paul, the anti-interventionist, non-isolationist candidate for President of the United States. Muslims are opening their wallets and joining as well.

An anonymous Ron Paul supporter posted the following message on the internet: "Muslims and Americans have an unique window of opportunity for the 2008 election. There is a candidate running as a Republican that would work to completely cut off the funding to Israel, remove ALL US troops from Arab lands, and repeal the Patriot Act. He's a Republican with Libertarian views named Ron Paul. Ron Paul's policies ranging from monetary to foreign are top notch.

"Till now Muslims and Americans have not had an American Presidential candidate that really suited their best interests. This election is unique in that we have a man running as a Republican that speaks the truth. Much of the our foreign policy in the Middle East has been influenced heavily by AIPAC, the pro-Israeli lobby, to the detriment of Muslims in the Middle East. As American Muslims, we are blessed to live in the US where we have the freedom to let our policymakers know how we feel about foreign policy; we may not have the power of an influential lobby but we do have the right to vote and every single vote counts. We know the current policies in the Middle East are failing, not only making it less safe in the world but hurting and killing innocent Muslims, which our media callously calls collateral damage. It is our duty as Muslims to follow the truth regardless of how futile it may seem. Ron Paul is the only candidate that does not seem to be swayed by the influential lobbies that the other candidates are catering to."

Unlike the Green Party, Ron Paul stood up in Congress in 2006 and opposed a resolution that sided with Israel in the Lebanon-Israel conflict. He stated the following.

Ron Paul: "Mr. Speaker, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called non-interventionism. I do not believe we are making the United States more secure when we involve ourselves in conflicts overseas. The Constitution really doesn't authorize us to be the policemen of the world, much less to favor one side over another in foreign conflicts. It is very clear, reading this resolution objectively, that all the terrorists are on one side and all the victims and the innocents are on the other side. I find this unfair, particularly considering the significantly higher number of civilian casualties among Lebanese civilians. I would rather advocate neutrality rather than picking sides, which is what this resolution does."

Ron Paul has already sponsored a bill to overturn the Patriot Act, which, as originally proposed, sanctions the unregulated use of wiretaps and random searches sans warrants, the monitoring of private internet usage, and many other civil liberty infringements. He is one of the few members of Congress from either of the major houses that is speaking rationally about these issues.

There are so many passionate activists in America who are anti-neocon. They are generally very cynical about working within the system (like voting) but they do a lot of courageous work and even get themselves arrested protesting. Anti-Zionist protesters, like the Zionists, are having problem increasing their number to become effective, because their slogans do not resonate with most Americans. It's not that people don't care about the issues. Peace activists' hearts are for the most part in the right place but they are doing a very bad job of marketing their ideas because they are stuck in this outdated leftist rut. How can we help them be more effective and how can we get them to join the Ron Paul voter sign-up campaign?

Although I am getting more positive comments, I am also getting a lot of negative comments on general frustration with politicians and the unwillingness to believe that supporting a particular candidate will make a difference. But whether Ron Paul wins or loses, is a great way to meet your neighbors who are against the war and organize the community on a grassroots level. If something like Katrina ever happened to us, knowing our neighbors could mean the difference between life and death to our families.

The common thread I've been reading lately about leftists and Jews is that they are having trouble getting more than a dozen people to come to their stuff (whether anti-Zionist or Zionist). It's not happening with the anti-Israel movement because "protest Zionist imperialism" is not a catchy slogan. By contrast, there are over 400 RP activists against war taxes in Boston alone. Every day the list of passionate anti-war activists grows. Very few of them agree with every single RP position, they just want to get the Lobby out of the way and pull the troops out of Iraq.

One reason it's working is because of the software. They made the site almost like a dating site, where you can make friends with people in or near your zip code. They made it very easy to get together with new people to join the activism. You can't beat technology, may as well use it. Or at least copy their tactics. If it's really important to you to use leftist slogans to protest the war, then create your own page to recruit more protesters. But I think in terms of creating a grassroots movement it's better to work with the mainstream sentiment rather than against it. If you could end US funding of Israel simply by changing slogans, it would be worth it.

I really think the divestment movement was stupid for focusing on anti-Zionist arguments and thus losing the ballot vote. If they had made a pro-America argument against investing city funds in any foreign country they would have won by a landslide. And Somerville would be divesting from Israel. Stupid stupid stupid! All these morally superior types believed it was more important to educate people than to win. We don't have time. Even if you got 90% of Americans to agree that Zionism is wrong, that is not a program. Making "belief" statements about how we would "prefer" the world to be is not going to result in change. Only community organizing will. That means working with people on their level, even if it's kindergarten level.

In the event that RP actually won the election and got the Hamas treatment, his supporters are fully in support of the Right to Bear Arms. It would be interesting to see what followed.

If anti-war protesters want to continue to focus on the genocidal machinations of the global zionist-imperialist military, industrial, financial, political, neoliberal, media complex, they have to be willing to meet with anyone any time to hear what ideas people have to address this, which is our primary responsibility - even if they are Republicans.

If you ever saw RP in an interview it cannot be said that he avoids discussing vital issues. He is someone who is willing to make a statement and stick by it even when no one agrees with him. I don't "believe" in electoral politics but it's not that much sweat off my brow to go and vote to end war. I think it is selfish and dangerous for anti-war activists to be so arrogant and so narrow-minded as to not be able to work with their own neighbors to end the war in whatever way they can, just because it involves using American Liberty arguments instead of their personal pet slogans. Use the arguments that work with Americans, or else you just condemned America to fight wars for the next century. You can still keep going to protests. You could probably get a bunch of Libertarians to start coming to your protests if you would just be "nice."

watch this CNN clip -

I think the fact that NO Jewish group will let Ron Paul speak at their convention, not even peace Jews, is evidence enough that he is the only person to put in charge as commander-in-chief. And, even if he loses, making all these contacts with local anti-interventionists is priceless. If you want to expand the peace movement so that it overlaps with the freedom movement like ripples in a pond, you have to respect the fact that people might agree with you, but for different reasons.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Why not Ron Paul?

Does America have a future? At this point, there is nothing more important than pulling our troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and everywhere. Unfortunately we don't have a lot of choices here. You want Rudy Giuliani, who dressed up as a woman and marched in the gay pride parade, and who has been profiteering off 9/11, or you want Hillary, who strongly supported the genocidal sanctions against Iraqi children while she was First Lady? Both of them have promised AIPAC to bomb Iran. Also, Obama is influenced by AIPAC. Cynthia McKinney might run as a Green, but her chances of winning are slim because the Green Party has no money and has very few active volunteers. Ron Paul actually has a fighting chance to stop the wars because he has a strong base of support among the Young Republicans who are very enthusiastic, friendly, and remarkably sane. He wins every debate because he makes a "self-interest" argument for ending the wars which works with Americans. Even Jay Leno respected him.

Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist and a non-interventionist. Everybody disagrees with him about something. The leftists hate him because he's anti-abortion. But again, we have to put aside our personal opinions and stop the war immediately or lose our democracy. We only have one chance. The only thing that can unite Americans is the Constitution (as flawed a document as it is - but it's better than the lawlessness of Bush). Not a single Jewish organization supports Ron Paul for president.

Ron Paul approaches the Constitution almost like an Islamic jurist. He did not say he didn't think universal health care might be a good idea. He said it's not in the Constitution that the US government has the role of providing health care. If you want to do it, then you have to amend the Constitution. If you allow Congress to do things that the Constitution doesn't allow, then we no longer have a constitutional democracy. They can declare war without an act of Congress, they can cancel your currency value, they can put you in jail without evidence, etc.

I have never come across him saying anything racist. He did say, "I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty."

That is certainly true. Boston's bizarre busing system destroyed neighborhoods which had closely knit communities that worked together on a local level to organize social programs like Boy Scouts, now we have a welfare state where you have to enter a lottery to get your kids into a decent school, and they waste a lot of gas busing kids across town when there is a school walking distance from their house. Nobody attends Boy Scouts anymore, and neighborhood crime is rampant. The situation for blacks and whites has worsened since the 1960s because our economy is going down the drain due to our foreign policy. He has a rational argument for his views.

The current drug policy in the United States is completely irrational. The CIA invades a country, forces them to grow drugs, then the CIA brings it into the country and sells it to the police, who then sell it to the drug mafia, and then we spend billions of dollars putting people in jail for non-violent crimes. By decriminalizing drugs, and dismantling the CIA, as Paul proposes, you will have far fewer social problems created by criminal mafias and gangs because something like cocaine would no longer be profitable. And our tax money would no longer pay for these drug wars. That was also the approach in the early days of Islam. Because there was nothing specifically in the Quran outlawing any plant, there was no criminal offense for hashish, qat, or opium, and often they were prescribed by doctors as medicines. Avincenna talks a lot about the medieval Muslim uses of what we now consider to be "illegal" drugs. The drug wars have cost US taxpayers billions of dollars and have not improved anything. So it's useful to look at how America used to deal with these issues. Did you know that George Washington grew marijuana on the White House lawn? Farmers used to pay their taxes with hemp. The laws changed in the 1940s due to pressure from special interest groups. The herbicide (genocide of plant species) led to great dust storms, the ruination of farmers, and the Great Depression.

I am aware of "states rights" connection with the American history of slavery, however in this day and age, states rights gives you protection from Bush. And it also protects people. Because as long as, for example, gay marriage is a states issue, then every state can decide if it does or doesn't want to have gay marriage. If you gave the Feds the authority to make that decision, a special interest lobby could convince the federal government to legalize or outlaw gay marriage for the entire country. So there are pros and cons to Ron Paul's positions.

Affirmative action has not succeeded in addressing inequalities in society. What most average black and white people want is more money to live. Ron Paul would decrease the individual burden on average people to sustain an empire with their taxes and we'd have less poverty. Dr. Paul is a moral person so I'm sure that minorities could work with him to end poverty in ways that conform to the Constitution. In Roxbury here, the black community has been having a lot of meetings to figure out what to do because even though they succeeded in getting federal funding for all kinds of stuff, the crime in the neighborhood is just getting worse and worse. So, the socialist approach isn't working and Ron Paul's approach - locally based government, is what the black community is doing anyway, out of necessity. The #1 concern for black youth right now is not wanting to get killed in Iraq. Paul has a young black following.

Bottom line, we have to stop the war. Ron Paul is approachable. He is neither a criminal nor insane. As long as you can make an argument from the point of view of the Constitution you can get by. Sort of like when you are dealing with the Taliban, you have to make your argument based on Quran/Hadith and they will listen.

About immigration, I think it's a non-issue for those who immigrated here legally. I suspect that the anti-Mexican rhetoric is playing to popular sentiment, yet with his "small government" proposal, we'd have less of a police state working night and day to bust into the homes of the Mexicans, so they still might be better off with Ron Paul, and also, fewer Mexicans would join the US military and kill Muslims in order to get a green card, if there was no war. Ideally, the US should have a less predatorial relationship with Mexico so that their country would not be so impoverished that their young people would all have to leave home.

Some people feel that they don't want to support Ron Paul because they disagree with this or that. However, what we have right now is Bush and a government that has descended into lawlessness. In fact, the US is bankrupt. So either we give in to complete tyranny, or we stick to the Constitution. I don't see any other choice. There is no other candidate who has indicated willingness to uphold the Constitution when it comes to declaring wars, detainee rights, and our personal freedoms.

To learn more about Ron Paul, watch this CNN clip
To help Ron Paul, visit - -

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Cornering the Jewish Lobby

W&M's worst fault is giving too much power to AIPAC. The real problem is the micro-management of American society by local Jewish groups that are coordinated under an umbrella organization, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations. This is how they get liberal Jews and conservative Jews, who despise each other, to work together to divert American tax money towards Israel, get Homeland Security money diverted to their synagogue, get people who disagree with them imprisoned without charges, etc. They are united by their disloyalty to the United States, their contempt for the Constitution, and their disregard for the human rights of others.

Some groups and individuals to watch include: - David Horowitz
Jihad Watch - Robert Spencer
The David Project/The Israel Project - Charles Jacobs - psycho-gossip newsfeed
Debbie Schlussel

Benador Associates
JCRC - Nancy Kaufman
Israel on Campus Coalition
Investors Business Daily
SITE Institute - Rita Katz
Investigative Project - Steve Emerson
Terror Free Oil - Joe Kaufman

The stuff brewed up by these freaks ends up in the press releases that feed most US news sources, including NPR.

Some tips for how to track/confront them:

Go to media updates given by any of the above groups and report on their discussions. That will give you a source to quote for the fake news articles that will appear in various newspapers based on the media update, often given in a synagogue.

Participate in interfaith events, especially Christian/Jewish. They often turn into Muslim-bashing events.

Target their guys - reply with counter-accusation

Start your own Quran-Bible study group

Nakba commemorations (Deir Yassin Day)

Attend holocaust services and mention the Nakba

Talk to target friendly audiences like Ukranians, Armenians, Greeks, Cubans, Native Americans, and the Irish about Palestine, Zionist colonizers, and our tax money.

It is essential for more people in particular, I think, to start attending Hillel meetings, where connections between students and neocon subversives are made through enticing them with internships and lucrative futures in lobbying.

for more info visit - Ethnic Ashkenazim Against Zionist Israel