Talking to people about RP's position on Bin Laden

[FriedChicken]

Has RP issued a statement to clarify exactly what he meant? Or is the only information/defense he's given been in interviews?

Please post whatever interviews and statements he's given on the topic. I'm trying to compile best responses for when this issue is brought up.

[pipewerKz]

hxxp://www.unelected.org/president-paul-would-have-killed-bin-laden-earlier

"Had HR 3076 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.r.03076:), been passed by the United States Congress in October of 2001, trillions of dollars and thousands of lives would not have been lost in the search for Osama bin Laden."


September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 – Authorizes and requests the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to commission privately armed and equipped persons and entities to seize outside of the United States the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, including any similar planned acts against the United States in the future. Authorizes the President to place a bounty, from amounts appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, dead or alive, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001.

Check out the first link, there is some more. I'm sure there are plenty other options but it seems lately he has been talking about letting Pakistan handle the issue which all of a sudden everyone seems to have a problem with.

[Thargok]

I'm sorry why does this even matter? Are you honestly telling me that people care more about bin Laden than the general state of the economy, gas prices and unemployment?

If you are engaging people and the topic is going to bin Laden, I think you missed your mark. Not saying that Ron is wrong on the issue, but this is maybe 10th or higher issue in terms or importance. A President with high unemployment has never been re-elected in the modern era, and you are talking about bin Laden...

[dannno]

I'm sorry why does this even matter? Are you honestly telling me that people care more about bin Laden than the general state of the economy, gas prices and unemployment?

If you are engaging people and the topic is going to bin Laden, I think you missed your mark. Not saying that Ron is wrong on the issue, but this is maybe 10th or higher issue in terms or importance. A President with high unemployment has never been re-elected in the modern era, and you are talking about bin Laden...

If it's an important issue to them, there's not much the OP can do about that.

[FriedChicken]

Letting Pakistan handle the issue isn't going to be popular. I think it best to stay closer to the "Ron would have done it sooner and cheaper" talking points.

[Travlyr]

Just give them a copy of "Liberty Defined" to read. Ron Paul clearly lays out his principled stands in his latest book.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

You're just not going to win many people over when they're in the middle of their end-zone dance celebrating bin Laden's death. Ron Paul is essentially saying he would not have killed bin Laden in the situation that arose; and Paul said it right after his death. It's like loudly proclaiming "well, I wouldn't have dropped those bombs" in Times Square after Japan surrendered. No one wants to hear it at that point.

[FriedChicken]

I'm sorry why does this even matter? Are you honestly telling me that people care more about bin Laden than the general state of the economy, gas prices and unemployment?

If you are engaging people and the topic is going to bin Laden, I think you missed your mark. Not saying that Ron is wrong on the issue, but this is maybe 10th or higher issue in terms or importance. A President with high unemployment has never been re-elected in the modern era, and you are talking about bin Laden...

I've been contacting people via the freedom connector network through FreedomWorks and have come across tons of undecided primary voters open to Ron Paul.
Opposition is hitting hard on the Bin Laden topic and have talked to one person, sounds like he watches fox news quite a bit, say that he voted for Ron Paul in the primary but his "Bin Laden statements have him scratching his head".

Its obvious that the opposition is successfully turning people against RP or at the minimum causing them to be less enthusiastic.
I didn't bring it up, the guy I contacted did. So apparently its a more important issue than you realize.

And my messages do not include much info about RP but more about my personal beliefs and extend a willingness to work with them for the liberty cause on any issue we agree upon and I make a reference to being a RP supporter.
I also make a reference to not letting "different ideas about who is best for our country" to stand in the way of us making a difference in our community through common ground we share.

The idea is get people to have an open view towards Paul and not fall for any RP smears they come across - even if they like somebody else more.

[Eric21ND]

I just posted a RP video on another forum and this is one of the first responses I got. I haven't responded, because quite frankly, I don't know how.

"He looked pretty bad saying he would call the Pres. of Pakistan to get Bin Laden, and this is coming from a fan."

[hazek]

Of course he looked weak.

It's just his damn lack of communicating skills. The first thing he should have done is make it absolutely and abundantly clear that were he president getting OBL instead of losing focus in Afghanistan and Iraq would have been his first priority after 9/11 and that he voted to authorize Bush to go after him into Afghanistan. Not mentioning that was fail nr.1.

Second his London/Montreal analogy although decent for the thinking man was pretty bad for the Joe sixpacks out there and he should have said that we are a nation of law and we can't go around the world telling people to follow the law and spreading democracy while trampling on their lawful sovereignty especially when they've helped us catch bad guys in the past.

But of course he failed, and then he failed again a couple of interviews when he had time to prepare. I love the man to death but he just fails with these short controversial soundbites more than half the time and people unfortunately vote in majority with their emotions and not reason. So I'm not surprised at all you got that kind of a comment.r

[notsure]

President Paul Would Have Killed Bin Laden Earlier
Posted by ADmin on May 15th, 2011
http://www.unelected.org/president-paul-would-have-killed-bin-laden-earlier


The Founding Fathers of the United States included a passage in the Constitution, which allowed for a solution to problems like the ones the US faced after the attacks on 9/11. Rather than invading multiple countries in search of a ragtag crew of air pirates, Letters of Marque and Reprisal would have allowed for the President to pursue the individuals responsible for the attack in a precise manner.

After the attacks on 9/11, Congressman Ron Paul introduced a bill in the Congress, which would have specified the scope for a mission to take down the terrorists responsible for the attacks on 9/11. First and foremost, the proposal was Constitutional and secondly, it was highly targeted and wouldn’t have resulted in thousands of Americans being killed senselessly. Had Congressman Ron Paul’s proposal for letters of Marque and Reprisal, HR 3076, been passed by the United States Congress in October of 2001, trillions of dollars and thousands of lives would not have been lost in the search for Osama bin Laden.

September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 – Authorizes and requests the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to commission privately armed and equipped persons and entities to seize outside of the United States the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, including any similar planned acts against the United States in the future. Authorizes the President to place a bounty, from amounts appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, dead or alive, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001.

As early as 2007, Ron Paul predicted that Pakistan harbored Osama bin Laden and in a speech on the floor of Congress, stated,

The foolishness of our foreign policy has us spending money in Pakistan, a military dictatorship with nuclear weapons, which is harboring Osama Bin Laden. The irony that taxpayers are paying to help protect Osama Bin Laden is astounding.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPFgWUA6wAQ&feature=player_embedded
It goes without saying that President Paul would have killed Osama bin Laden far quicker and with more finesse than both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

To claim that the mission to kill bin Laden was successful is tantamount to suggesting that getting an ‘A’ on a test after attempting it every day for 10 years deserves a pat on the back. It doesn’t deserve a pat on the back, no, it deserves a punch in the face. The decade long mission only served to expose the incompetence of the United States to the international community. Invading over 3 countries, killing over one hundred thousand innocent civilians, losing thousands of soldiers, and squandering trillions of dollars for a single man hiding in compound, in a nation which had been given billions of taxpayer dollars, was not worth it. The aforementioned were only the foreign consequences of the mission to kill bin Laden. Domestic consequences of the War on Terror include the passage of the PATRIOT Act, which violates the 4th and 5th Amendments, the inception of the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA, torture at Guantanamo Bay, and other gross violations of civil liberties.

Sure, the end goal was achieved, but it was achieved with the dexterity of a heavily armed 5 year old child.

Both in foreign policy and economics, progressives believe that throwing massive sums of money and human bodies at problems solves them. Progressives cannot solve problems, but only enlarge them because neither the Constitution nor logic fit into their socialist philosophy. The only American, Constitutional solution for finding bin Laden after 9/11 was offered by true conservatives like Ron Paul.

Just think of the precedent that the U.S. is setting by invading a sovereign nation. Now that we've set and enforced those type of procedures, other countries might copy us and use our methods as justification. We are not setting a good example for America or Liberty. With today's technology, we could have informed Pakistan and ensured Obama's capture.

[sailingaway]

He did a TX straighttalk right after OBL was nabbed that made it very clear he was glad the guy was gone, but no one was asking him if there was no other way to do it as they did on the radio show.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

It is RIDICULOUS that some people are blaming RP for this BS, he doesn't've to say anything wrong for media to spin it, no matter how he says something, there's always going to be ways in which something will be twisted around & made to look like something bad; these so called "supporters" & their negative attitude towards Ron isn't going to help overall morale & momentum of our movement. He did NOT say anything wrong, some people just need to stop being so god-damn negative.

As I've said in an earlier thread on the issue, 9/11 & OBL has become a very emotional issue so we ought to try and put an emotional spin on it along with cold-facts like he would've gotten him a decade ago when we had the chance to do so but didn't & that would've saved the lives of thousands of our troops, thousands of ME civillians as well as trillions of dollars. Further, as he's said, Pakistan has handed over 15 terrorists to us in the past so why can't they be trusted anymore? This'll only escalate the relationship with Pakistan & make the "war on terror" even more messy. Further, it has to be mentioned that Obama gave Laden as EASY WAY OUT, a couple of bullets & he's dead; while Ron would've wanted him to have stood in an American court begging for mercy & then rot in jail for the rest of his life, that would've been more painful to Laden than dying instantaneously with a couple of bullets. Moreover, we could've interrogated him & eked out information about the local terrorist network as well as their future plans.