Search
Home  |   About  |   Q & A  |   Archives  |   Credits  |   Contact  |  
« Fred Responds to Mickey
Democrats — If We Can’t Get Our Way, We’ll Change the Rules »

Ron Paul Blames America for 9-11 Attacks

I’ve been openly supportive of Rep. Ron Paul’s (R-TX) campaign for President.

I was willing to overlook his strong opposition to the war because of his positions on immigration (especially where he stands on “anchor babies [against]), taxation, and government spending. I applaud much of his restrictive views on the legitimate scope of Federal power.

But after watching last night’s GOP debates, I’m done supporting this man in way or fashion. In fact, I’ll actively work against him — not just in this campaign, but any additional re-election campaigns he might pursue here in Texas.

Why the sudden shift?

Because until last night I had no idea that Paul had joined the “blame America for 9-11″ crowd. When asked about his comments on non-interventionist policies, he responded:

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

Ron Paul is a fucking idiot. They didn’t attack us because we are “over there”. They attacked us because we’re not them. And it’s the same reason that they’ll continue to attack us even after we’ve left Iraq. Because they hate us; because we’re not them.

The moderator then asked “Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attacks?”, and Paul said,

I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it.

Uh huh. Let’s listen to and try to reason with these barbaric animals. That’ll work. As long as you’re willing to concede dhimmitude.

Iowahawk gets it:

They hate us for who we are, what we are, and everything we represent. Unless we’re willing to push the self-destruct button on America, there’s not a damn thing we can do to turn off their hatred, and it’s silly AND dangerous to think otherwise.

Much kudos and respect to Mayor Giuliani for sticking his foot up Ron’s ass, though.

_____________

I’m not quite as mad as Ace — but close:

Fuck Ron Paul.

If I ever see this cocksucker in person, I’ll take a swing at him.

Giuliani called him out and invited him to withdraw the remark. He refused.

Brave maverick?

It’s pretty easy to vote against everything when you’ve decided to not actually be part of an actual working, governing majority.

The minority party always has the most fun because it gets to do nothing but posture. Ron Paul has made a career of being a minority party of one.

Posted by Robbie Cooper on Wednesday, May 16th, 2007 | Trackback |

25 Responses to “Ron Paul Blames America for 9-11 Attacks”

Ron Paul is CORRECT. It’s Giuliani that just doesn’t get it.

Just read Osama bin Lden’s 1996 & 1998 fatwas. he spells it out: America is our enemy because America is meddling on Middle Eastern affairs.

Left by Gene on May 16th, 2007 at 8:50 am

Our country is lost as long as people in the US are unwilling to question the motives of their government and the consequences of their actions. And yes, we do bear some responsibility for what happend on 9-11 because we allowed our government to occupy and intimidate other countries. No one appointed the United States to be the world’s police. We are not physically or financially capable of stopping the violence in our own country, much less the rest of the world. Ron Paul was right - how would YOU feel if China set up shop in Washington, DC?

Left by Dena on May 16th, 2007 at 9:03 am

When is that idiot, Ron Paul’s seat, up for reelection? How did he get elected in the first place in Texas of all places? He should not be allowed in any more debates.

Furthermore, to all the tin foil hat nutcase George Soros bought and paid for Democratic Party sheep, we’ve got your number. We know you were the ones who fixed the Fox News poll last night and we also know you’re the ones who flooded C-Span this morning citing the virtues of Ron Paul and claiming you were a Republican. Assholes.

Left by dianne on May 16th, 2007 at 9:06 am

If Muslims hate us for our freedoms, why are there absolutely no attacks on the United States by Muslim terrorists prior to 1948?

We were more free then than we are now. And they were even less modern. So if they hate us for our freedom, they should have hated us EVEN MORE then.

It’s funny, but I can’t find anything in the history books about the Coolidge and Harding administrations having to fight off Islamic terrorists.

Left by Fluffy on May 16th, 2007 at 9:07 am

Diane, you’re wrong. The Democrats hate Paul even more than you do.

You might not like it, but there is still a substantial quasi-libertarian element in the Republican party. Those people tend to be political obsessives and have not had a candidate to support in quite some time. Paul is getting votes in online polls and the like because his supporters [though limited in number] are actually paying attention. The broad middle of the party - natural supporters of McCain and Guiliani - aren’t, and probably won’t be for a while.

And always remember - the libertarians are the actual right wing. Not social collectivists like that pinhead Brownback, and not pseudoDemocrats like McCain and Guiliani. Paul is so far to the right that you are really not distinguishable from Michael Moore from his vantage point. So spare me the George Soros crap.

Left by Fluffy on May 16th, 2007 at 9:12 am

Why did not terrorist attack New Zealand, Switzerland, Sweden etc. See the way we reacted on 9-11 to defend America, imagine what middle eastern people be thinking for years.

Left by Anon on May 16th, 2007 at 9:32 am

As long as Israel exists, we will be targets of terrorists. Inasmuch as it is not likely that Israel will disappear from the map in the near future, terrorism will not disappear either.

I stand by my statement on the polls. I don’t know one Republican who thought Ron Paul was the winner last night. Guiliani said it all for me.

Left by dianne on May 16th, 2007 at 12:27 pm

“If Muslims hate us for our freedoms, why are there absolutely no attacks on the United States by Muslim terrorists prior to 1948?”

Fluffy, are you aware of why the words ‘The Shores of Tripoli’ are in the Marine Corps hymn?

It’s because back in the early 1800s Islamic fanatics were capturing American merchant ships in the Mediterranean. They would steal the ship and its cargo, and murder or enslave the crew. This they justified on the basis that their faith requires them to subjugate infidels.

The Pasha of Tripoli demanded protection payments from President Jefferson in 1801. When President Jefferson refused the Pasha declared war on the United States.

President Jefferson sent the Navy and Marines to subdue Tripoli and other Isamic states engaged in piracy.

A state of war existed between these Islamic states and the United States through about 1830.

Left by Jim Howard on May 16th, 2007 at 1:26 pm

Jim-

Around the same time, Americans were also enslaving Muslims and others with the justification that they were not Christians.

But, hell, if it makes your point go ahead and use it.

Left by Preston on May 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pm

preston,

you’re hilarious. us americans are a barbaric bunch, aren’t we?

Left by adam on May 16th, 2007 at 6:53 pm

Ok, so we are not THEM…. but neither are Germans, Austrians, Swiss, and Russians, yet you dont really hear about Al Qaeda attacking those people. With our foreign policy, we obviousely touched a nerve among them and that is most likely why they dont like us. they dont care about Austrians or Germans, but at least they leave them alone. We need to change out foreign policy. Stop supporting Israel or any other country in the middle east. Stop Supporting every other country that has not supported us in the war. In cutting back on foreign aid, we will save enough money to pay for the war.

Left by chris on May 16th, 2007 at 7:38 pm

Ron Paul? Is that you?

Left by Robbie on May 16th, 2007 at 7:53 pm

Why hello.

Left by Joe on May 16th, 2007 at 8:01 pm

Holy shit, I thought conservatives had long since abandoned the idiotic, tired “THE TERRORISTS HATE OUR FREEDOM” bullshit long ago.

Left by John Jarzemsky on May 16th, 2007 at 9:55 pm

John-
Why would they give up a belief that permits us to permit any act conceivable in the name of fighting al Qaeda? Pre-emptively invade a country unrelated to the September 11 attacks? Suspend habeas corpus? Extraordinary renditions facilitating torture? All American as George Washington thanks to the belief that al Qaeda hates us for loving baseball, apple pie, and mom.

Left by Preston on May 17th, 2007 at 4:12 am

i’ve never heard of al qaeda playing or watching baseball, only casing shea stadium. i wasn’t aware that apple pie was considered such a delicasy by jihadists. oh that’s right; they’re gonna take hostages at tastycake next to kill 2 birds with one stone.
wahabist feelings for mom include: don’t let me see you or cover up, make my dinner, give me children, and the ever popular “i’ll tell you when to talk”!
saying al qaeda hates us for our freedom is a bit simple for me too. i prefer to say that al qaeda hates us because historically western cultures develop while cultures that comprise their origins fall behind. it’s natural for losers to embrace the suffering of winners.

i nominate preston to negotiate with our misunderstood brothers in al quaeda and to help bring their noble cause into the modern era!

Left by adam on May 18th, 2007 at 2:42 pm

That’s hilarious, Adam. Of course if I were President I would be working to destroy al Qaeda- not run a recruitment center in Iraq for them.

Rather than holding hands on walks in the garden I would be forcing Saudi Arabia to discontinue its support for pro-al Qaeda Madrasahs. I’d tell them if they want to call us their ally they better start acting like one.

Left by Preston on May 18th, 2007 at 2:52 pm

He didn’t blame America for the attacks; he merely said that our foreign policy actions in the past have given folks like Osama B political capital. It’s the same as when Hitler used the harsh terms of the Versailles Treaty to gather political support for the Nazis. This is not the same as saying that America deserved the attacks. The man blames Osama B and voted to go after him, but that does not mean that he isn’t right to look at why such a islamofascist nutjob has the political capital that he does.

Left by Andrew on May 21st, 2007 at 2:27 am

America,” said author Michael Scheuer, who used to head the CIA’s bin Laden unit. “Our foreign policy is doing the opposite.” A Giuliani campaign official could not confirm whether he had read any of the books on Paul’s list. Since an assortment of lunatics on the right fringe were incensed by Paul’s insinuations after last week’s Republican pukefest debate, I’ll look forward to more sputtering indignation from over there in short order.

Left by Brains and Eggs on May 24th, 2007 at 7:55 pm

So what do you suggest? We wipe out all Islamic Muslims? Sounds that way reading many posts here. In your ignorance you must have missed Congressman Paul’s suggestion that even the private sector and a true free and open market would be much more capable of eliminating the Jihadist Terrorists, then what we refer to now as “Military Intelligence”. If all out war on countries where many innocent citizens become collateral damage is acceptable to you, then why would putting an open bounty on them and allowing professional mercenaries to conduct their “business” with far fewer casualties, more repellent to us? Do you fail to understand how much more effeciency our “war chest” could have purchased? For than several hundred trillion dollars…..let’s see, how much per head would that come to? A well-armed, free citizenry is a great deterrant to criminals. Guiliani? Hillary? I prefer to set a much higher standard of character in the leadership I choose to represent me. I find sacrificing my principles and lowering my standards repellent. I am voting for Ron Paul, and honored to do it.

Left by Valerie on July 2nd, 2007 at 8:59 pm

Chris Peden is running a strong campaign for the Republican nomination to Texas CD 14, the seat Ron Paul currently holds in the US Congress.

Go to http://www.chrispeden.org to help retire Ron Paul from the US Congress.

Left by Onzelo Markum on November 1st, 2007 at 5:23 am

Peden will only cause the republicans to lose a seat. He was also dumb enough to support the marriage amendment.

Left by Dean on January 11th, 2008 at 2:11 pm

As Jack Nicholson put it “… you (Americans) can’t handle the truth”.

First of all, how and why would Giuliani have ANY REAL IDEA why 9/11 happened? Has he interviewed a lot of Muslim Extremists? Because he was there when the buildings fell down, he knows that the United States did absolutely NOTHING to bring the horror of 9/11 on itself?

I think the morons are #1 Giuliani and #2 all the drooling (we are the greatest people in the world … no matter what we do to anyone else) idiots who applauded his simple minded “I know all about it” remark.

Ron Paul won’t get elected because his message is the truth and nothing but the truth. And, America the (once) beautiful is occupied by folks whose knuckles still drag on the ground. They do NOTHING but search for someone to blame for everything.

Left by tellsthetruth on January 17th, 2008 at 3:24 am

Ron Paul will not be elected because he has run an ineffective campaign that started off with him putting his foot in his mouth.

Left by Lyle P Logan on February 21st, 2008 at 6:10 pm

To Robbie Cooper, who exactly do you mean when you say “barbaric animals?” All Muslim’s in general? Because if you’re going to say that then you might as well expand it to all religious people, Christians, Muslims, and Jews. I’m a Christian so I wouldn’t agree with you if that was your opinion. However, if I were to use as harsh a term as “barbaric animals” it would be to all religious fanatics who would justify acts of atrocities in the name of whatever God they worship. Modern-day terrorists are very similar to the Crusaders of the Middle Ages not only because religion is their driving force but in their narrowness of mind. They may have bigger weapons than the Crusaders, but their society is nonetheless stuck in the Middle Ages. I’m not a supporter of Ron Paul, but I have to admire him for allowing for some responsibility on our part for 9-11. There’s obviously a reason why America was picked out for terrorist-attacks over other Western countries though that doesn’t change the fact that we cannot passively stand by in the face of it. However, acknowledging our own errors is absolutely imperative because it is what separates us from them!! Their narrow-minded cultures will not allow for anything but conformist opinions about America, Western Culture, etc. We, on the other hand, come from a free society that condones a more thorough and rational analysis of our actions as well as those of others (even when it puts us in a bad light). You undermine this American tradition with your use of propaganda and outrage to promote blind hatred against these people and with your unwillingness to even want to know the facts. If Americans, in general, are making this shift towards a more conformist society then how much longer till democracy is so undermined that we are reduced to a militaristic society like that of our enemies? Don’t grow so blind with panic and rage that you lose sight of what you’re trying to protect!

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1003-09.htm

This article written 9/29/2001 “The Algebra of Infinite Justice” by Arundhati Roy, an Indian writer and activist, puts the war on terror into perspective.

Here’s an excerpt that I found particularly interesting:
“In America there has been rough talk of “bombing Afghanistan back to the stone age”. Someone please break the news that Afghanistan is already there. And if it’s any consolation, America played no small part in helping it on its way. The American people may be a little fuzzy about where exactly Afghanistan is (we hear reports that there’s a run on maps of the country), but the US government and Afghanistan are old friends.
In 1979, after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI (Inter Services Intelligence) launched the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA. Their purpose was to harness the energy of Afghan resistance to the Soviets and expand it into a holy war, an Islamic jihad, which would turn Muslim countries within the Soviet Union against the communist regime and eventually destabilize it. When it began, it was meant to be the Soviet Union’s Vietnam. It turned out to be much more than that. Over the years, through the ISI, the CIA funded and recruited almost 100,000 radical mojahedin from 40 Islamic countries as soldiers for America’s proxy war. The rank and file of the mojahedin were unaware that their jihad was actually being fought on behalf of Uncle Sam. (The irony is that America was equally unaware that it was financing a future war against itself.)”

Left by Anu on September 11th, 2008 at 8:45 am

Got something you want to say?

Quicktags:


Notes:

You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.

If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.

Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.

And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.