View Full Version : The 9/11 Truther question was meant to trap Paul on the issue of the 1st Amendment

01-14-2008, 02:15 AM
In the recent FOX News S.C. Debate, Dr. Paul was asked about 9/11 truthers by moderator Carl Cameron: "Sir, would you ask them to cease that rhetoric tonight on your behalf?"

Do you believe this question was asked with the hopes that Paul would contradict himself on his beliefs in the 1st Amendment? That he would somehow say something that would paint him as someone who doesn't believe in freedom of speech?

I feel they tried to trap him with that question.


01-14-2008, 02:20 AM
Interesting theory.

I think the question was also a "divide and conquer" tactic but I also think you are spot on. It's the question that keeps on giving.

You're right though. It did seem odd that even after Ron Paul answered the question and was moving on, the moderator pushed "would you ask them to cease that rhetoric tonight on your behalf?". If he had said yes (which we all knew he wouldn't) they could have caught him on national tv contradicting himself. I guess they don't realize that he actually believes in something.

Sorry FOX...hate to break it to ya but...
Ron Paul is smarter than you.

01-14-2008, 02:20 AM

01-14-2008, 02:36 AM
I think it was a trp they tried the bait and switch tactic with him. He whalloped them hard for it though.

01-14-2008, 02:39 AM
They are just doing their propaganda thing.

pretty girls=cars=sex

lunatic fringe=rp=truthers

So we can do our propaganda thing.


01-14-2008, 02:41 AM
No. Not really that complicated. They simply wanted to make a fool out of him by making his supporters appear like a bunch of nutjobs.

01-14-2008, 02:42 AM
No. Not really that complicated. They simply wanted to make a fool out of him by making his supporters appear like a bunch of nutjobs.

Just before invading Iran.


Dave Pedersen
01-14-2008, 02:49 AM
No. Paul could have "fallen" for that and not contradicted his profession of adherence to the first amendment. Anyone can request people not say something. It remains a request.

Carl was informing the sheep of a falsehood. Carl was telling people that Ron Paul supporters are truthers. This is only partly true but Carl gives the viewers the impression every rally for Ron Paul is filled and charged with people who think 9/11 was an inside job. Carl was painting a picture that people were led to imagine that if you attend a Ron Paul rally it will be dominated by the single issue of 9/11.

Interviewers do this all the time. They don't want an answer they want to paint an image in people's minds. Ron Paul can waste time contesting the assertion after which Carl can reinforce the assertion with particular anecdotal evidence hand picked to reinforce the validity of his question or Ron Paul can let Carl get away clean with planting the false impression and be satisfied with the only crumb remaining.

Questions paint pictures. Even if the picture is only marginally true the response will fail if it contests the premise.

01-14-2008, 02:55 AM
No it was exactly what it was, a very stupid question meant on painting him as sympathetic to trutherism.

01-14-2008, 07:45 AM
I think it was just meant to be an embarassing question, to try to make him look more fringe, get him to be alientaed from the republican base.

I really think you guys are putting a lot of intelligence where it was not warranted, I am not sure they were so complex as to try to trap him. I think RP should have responded to them with 1st amendment rights argument, being that they are journalists.
Though it must be really hard for RP to be up there with everyone else getting these normal questions and he's getting the off the wall b.s. questions all the time.

01-14-2008, 07:49 AM
an addedum to fox's intelligence question:
just because one might do something that turns out to be smart, that doesn't mean they knew what they were doing.
In other words guessing and getting a right answer is not the same as being intelligent enough to KNOW the right answer.
I don't think they had the intelligence to try this as a trap.

01-14-2008, 08:01 AM
It wasn't a trap. It was a legitimate question concerning the sanity of some of his supporters.:rolleyes: