Ron Paul and Islam

[Created4]

I don't read WND.com, but this was link was posted on Facebook:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=351761

I never heard of Molotov Mitchell, but this dude is very talented. Check out the video. This should be on Youtube.

[Created4]

I did find it on Youtube:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3N0s_Ibau4

[Miss Annie]

This is one of my all time Favorites! It opened my eyes to the importance of Ron Paul's foreign policy on Israel!

[Number19]

Awesome; this is my first exposure to Molotov.

[moderate libertarian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3N0s_Ibau4


The guy in the video is American or Israeli and why does he oppose freedom for Palestinians in Gaza? He sounds like religious fanatic and fascist who opooses freedom for all unless I'm missing something?



For the record Ron Paul and Israel
From a recent thread:

Ron Paul says we should not take sides in Israel's wars and we get blowback for supporting Israel. He goes on to say Palestinians are living in concentration camp like conditions and mostly unarmed facing a strong Israeli military. Ron Paul says American weapons and funds are being used in Israel's killing of Palestinians and US has moral responsibility.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08gTWqWrI4M


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFaSzU9XF5o

[Perry]

Sort of makes you wonder whether the U.S. has been blessing Israel or cursing her.

[Created4]

The guy in the video is American or Israeli and why does he oppose freedom for Palestinians in Gaza? He sounds like religious fanatic and fascist who opooses freedom for all unless I'm missing something?

He is not running for office. He is ENDORSING Ron Paul as someone who is pro-Israel (which most Americans are). He uses logic to convince other pro-Israel people that Ron Paul is the only logical choice in this election, and that Ron Paul would actually be GOOD for Israel. His videos appear on WND, a pro-war neocon site. This is positive.

[moderate libertarian]

He is not running for office. He is ENDORSING Ron Paul as someone who is pro-Israel (which most Americans are). He uses logic to convince other pro-Israel people that Ron Paul is the only logical choice in this election, and that Ron Paul would actually be GOOD for Israel. His videos appear on WND, a pro-war neocon site. This is positive.

Well it's a misleading shtik on his part to deliberately confuse issue of basic liberty and human rights of people under Israeli occupation (who happen to be both muslims and christians of arab race) with religious divide between him (a Christian zionist presumably) and Islam (a religion of over a bilion people). This is religious fanaticism to justify supporting Israeli occupation and oppression of Palestinian muslims and christians. Not a positive voice for Ron Paul.

[Created4]

Well it's a misleading shtik on his part to deliberately confuse issue of basic liberty and human rights of people under Israeli occupation (who happen to be both muslims and christians of arab race) with religious divide between him (a Christian zionist presumably) and Islam (a religion of over a bilion people). This is religious fanaticism to justify supporting Israeli occupation and oppression of Palestinian muslims and christians. Not a positive voice for Ron Paul.

Ah, I see. So he should go vote for someone else using your logic. Maybe you forget that the President of the United States is the president of ALL people, regardless of their religious beliefs and "fanaticism." This entire forum is made up of people who love and support Ron Paul even though they don't agree with him on all the issues Ron Paul stands for. That's because under a truly free society people have the freedom to believe different things, and Ron Paul stands for Liberty, even for those he doesn't agree with. I found this link on the Republican Jewish Coalition Facebook page. They have excluded Ron Paul from their debate, and their FB page has been invaded by Ron Paul supporters. This was one of the links posted. This is good. To get Ron Paul elected we need votes, not people criticizing other Ron Paul supporters.

[moderate libertarian]

Ah, I see. So he should go vote for someone else using your logic. Maybe you forget that the President of the United States is the president of ALL people, regardless of their religious beliefs and "fanaticism." This entire forum is made up of people who love and support Ron Paul even though they don't agree with him on all the issues Ron Paul stands for. That's because under a truly free society people have the freedom to believe different things, and Ron Paul stands for Liberty, even for those he doesn't agree with. I found this link on the Republican Jewish Coalition Facebook page. They have excluded Ron Paul from their debate, and their FB page has been invaded by Ron Paul supporters. This was one of the links posted. This is good. To get Ron Paul elected we need votes, not people criticizing other Ron Paul supporters.

No, I think big tent policy is pragmatic but there are certain fundamental principles that should not be up for sale. No Ron Paul "preacher" should be esposuing support for denying liberty to any group of people imo. Yes people would have different beliefs in a truly free society but would you promote as a Ron Paul "preacher" someone who says something crazy like Christian zionists see jews to be slaughtered unless the converted to Christianity after second coming, as an example?

There are diverse opinions in a free society but threshold for being a public advocate would be based on some basic ideas of liberty.

[moderate libertarian]

Sort of makes you wonder whether the U.S. has been blessing Israel or cursing her.

Agreed.

http://images.sodahead.com/blogs/000261745/Bless-Israel-1266303523_xlarge.jpeg


US is on verge of economic collapse from costs of wars/blowbacks / funding perpetual welfare states and fast becoming a security centric police state like Israel.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?334480-85-year-old-woman-may-sue-TSA-after-being-strip-searched-at-JFK-Airport


Our money goes to Israel and Israel has come to America in some ways.

[pcosmar]

1Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:

2And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

3And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

That has nothing to do with the State of Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
http://www.apfn.org/thewinds/library/khazars.html

[John F Kennedy III]

No, I think big tent policy is pragmatic but there are certain fundamental principles that should not be up for sale. No Ron Paul "preacher" should be esposuing support for denying liberty to any group of people imo. Yes people would have different beliefs in a truly free society but would you promote as a Ron Paul "preacher" someone who says something crazy like Christian zionists see jews to be slaughtered unless the converted to Christianity after second coming, as an example?

There are diverse opinions in a free society but threshold for being a public advocate would be based on some basic ideas of liberty.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

[Created4]

No, I think big tent policy is pragmatic but there are certain fundamental principles that should not be up for sale.

This is a supporter, not a politician, so how can it be a "big tent policy?" It is a Jew talking to other Jews and convincing them to support Ron Paul. You are espousing your own views here trying to make it something it is not.


No Ron Paul "preacher" should be esposuing support for denying liberty to any group of people imo. Yes people would have different beliefs in a truly free society but would you promote as a Ron Paul "preacher" someone who says something crazy like Christian zionists see jews to be slaughtered unless the converted to Christianity after second coming, as an example?

Where do you see this in his video? Again, you are projecting your own views/prejudice here.


There are diverse opinions in a free society but threshold for being a public advocate would be based on some basic ideas of liberty.

How do you define "public advocate"? Sounds like you want to restrict free speech. That's not liberty. That's neocon ideology: "Everyone has liberty except those we deem wrong."

[DamianTV]

I know this is pretty well unrelated to the topic, but I recently came across a bit of information as to where the name "Israel" came from, and more a less wondering if there is truth to it. Accordingly, and taken with a grain of salt, the name "Israel" is a merger of three groups, those of Isis, Ra, and El. Hence, IsisRaEl or IsRaEl.

So, before anyone wants to -Rep me on that statement, Im trying to learn myself the Real History so that I can understand the real reasons and motivations as to why the US acts as if Israel can do no wrong.

[moderate libertarian]

This is a supporter, not a politician, so how can it be a "big tent policy?" It is a Jew talking to other Jews and convincing them to support Ron Paul. You are espousing your own views here trying to make it something it is not.

I stand corrected , he is a supporter and I incorrectly elevated this person.
He claimed in the video that he was a Christian which led me to assume he maybe a christian zionist. That if true adds a certain level of hypocrisy I couldn't resisit to comment on.



Where do you see this in his video? Again, you are projecting your own views/prejudice here.

How do you define "public advocate"? Sounds like you want to restrict free speech. That's not liberty. That's neocon ideology: "Everyone has liberty except those we deem wrong."

I did see a "clash of civilization" pro Israel, anti Palestinian minndset based on religious fanaticism that pushed US to Iraq blunder not too long ago, I may have some prejudice against such mindset and quite a few prec-conceived notions. But I'm open to be corrected with objective, rational argument where my view is wrong.

I absoultely do not want to restrict free speech, just exercising my free speech in response to what I thought was a distorted view in support of a fascist foreign welfare regime. And I'm also speaking as an individual.

[vechorik]

This covers it all, saves money, makes sense:
--------
Ron Paul's War:

Dr. Paul supports using "letters of marque and reprisal."

These are, in effect, licenses to private parties to carry out acts of war. We used them against the Barbary pirates. Almost immediately after the attack on the World Trade Center, Dr. Paul introduced in the 107th Congress H.R. 2076, called the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, authorizing holders of the letters to go after bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders and seize them and their property. He also voted to give President Bush authority to use the military to go after Al Qaeda, but he has been pressing for letters of marque ever since.

Dr. Paul’s bill would have covered not only past attacks but any “planned future air piratical aggressions and depredations” against us. It would have given the president discretion to pay up to $40 billion in what were, in effect, bounties for the “capture, alive or dead, 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.”

Dr. Paul said that one thing he wanted as to avoid a trillion dollar expedition when there was a simpler, constitutional approach of bringing the war to our enemy.