Jewish News org Criticizes a 1992 remark by Paul about Israel

[Exponent]

JTA: GOP hopeful's slur recalled

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency (www.jta.org) criticized Ron Paul for a remark he reportedly made in '92 describing "Israel's government as the most powerful "bad" lobby in Washington". They mention that he said that Zionists stifle criticism (which seems to have at least a bit of credence, given the nature of this article attempting to stifle any criticism he has by convincing people to ignore him).

They also bring up the racist comments that are coming up. Both the Israel-related comments, as well as the racist ones, seem to be coming from the same Houston Chronicle article from over a decade ago.



-------- Ron Paul Media Matters --------

*** Please read forum guidelines before posting ***
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=658

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

A team member on a blog of mine linked to this blog calling Paul a racist and jew-hater.

I read somewhere that Paul denies writing that article, but we need something more. Has anyone seen a statement of some sort from the campaign?

My response to my fellow blogger was:

Ron Paul must be threatening someone's sweet ride. As Rush Limbaugh always used to say, you can tell you're winning an argument with a liberal when they call you a bigot.

I'm outta here.

[kylejack]

He is going to have to come forward and renounce this stuff. Its only going to get worse the more he's noticed. The Texas Monthly article is insufficient.

[Razmear]

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41822

Snip:

Ron Paul Race Smear Erased?

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com

Internet information claiming that presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) is a racist – and made derogatory comments about African Americans - has been making the rounds within the blogosphere. But sources close to the editorial group that published the newsletter (or newsletters) that supposedly carried the comments claim that Ron Paul never had anything to do with them, and wasn’t even aware of them.

These sources say that editorial operation in question was a fairly large one, and profitable for its time - focused in large part on measures that one could take to generate a lifestyle independent of government influence and intervention.

The publication, or publications, comprised a business venture to which Ron Paul lent his name. Headquarters were “60 miles away” from Ron Paul’s personal Texas offices. At the time that the publications were being disseminated, primarily in the 1980s, Ron Paul was involved in numerous activities including Libertarian politics. He eventually ran for U.S. president as a Libertarian.

“This was a big operation,” says one source. “And Ron Paul was a busy man. He was doctor, a politician and free-market commentator. A publication had to go out at a certain time and Ron Paul often was not around to oversee the lay out, printing or mailing. Many times he did not participate in the composition, either.”

This source and others add that publications utilized guest writers and editors on a regular basis. Often these guest writers and editors would write a “Ron Paul” column, under which the derogatory comments might have been issued.

Says one source, “Ron Paul didn’t know about those comments, or know they were written under his name until much later when they were brought to his attention. There were several issues that went out with comments that he would not ordinarily make. He was angry when he saw them.”

Ron Paul has said that he did not write the comments in question, but, nonetheless, has taken "moral" responsibility for them.


<continued at link above>

[Iris]

He is going to have to come forward and renounce this stuff. Its only going to get worse the more he's noticed. The Texas Monthly article is insufficient.

I agree with this, and I think the sooner he gets that out of the way, the more distance he puts between this nonsesnse and the primaries. JMO.

[Exponent]

Here is a decent defense, and a reference to an admission of being initially wrong (at least to a degree) in an initial criticism of Ron Paul's statement:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...ager_ron_.html

Still just other people's discussion of the topic, but there was a mention of asking his campaign for clarification. If they receive clarification, they might publicly make a useful statement on it.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Funny. All of these neo-cons are scared of Ron Paul, so they go on their useless pc attacks. "he said this in 1992" "he impied this when he did that" my god. No wonder why we're heading towards a military dictatorship, many Americans are clueless.

[johngr]

That "anti-semitic" $#@! ain't going to work anymore with anyone Dr. Paul's message would appeal to, in fact, I think it will have the opposite of the intended effect. If they have any sense at all, they will stop using it.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

It's like saying.... "Bill Clinton said this while having sex with his wife!" ha

[jon_perez]

If it's Ron Paul smearing time, then that means he's finally appeared on the radar!

[Galactic Lord Xenu]

The comment about Israel is spot-on, supporting Israel is a strong point for many votes from jews. And no, I don't mean to be anti-semitic, it's the truth.

[TheDuke]

Why is it when you say the truth about Israel and the jews, you are anti-semetic... maybe they should start wondering why the truth about their country and themselves is always negative

I think I better start running now

[FSUSeminolesR#1]

They control the content so they can bend it anyway they want. Think about it, weve not had so much trouble in the Middle East until the past 10-15 years. As a boy growing up in the 70s and 80s, I dont recall us being so hated by so many nations throughout the world. The jew in my mind is responsible for the down fall of America. If they love their damn "Holy Land" so much, why dont they all head on over. Truth be known, they could care less about the so called holy land. Those MFers got it too good here in the USA. Theyve practically ruined this country. We had best take it back before its to

Let me just say, THESE ARE MY VIEWS. They are in no way Dr. Paul's views or anyone else affiliated with Dr. Paul. Im just 100% behind Dr. Paul as a presidential candidate.

[Bradley in DC]

Hmmm, criticizing an organizaiton (AIPAC) with a history of members convicted for spying against the US for a government (Israel) with a history of convicted spys against our country as an example of a "bad" lobbying force is not anti-semetic. Challenging treason is patriot.

[Brandybuck]

You can support Israel without the use of foreign aid.

[winston84]

I really don't think there is anything to address here, the more time spent on this nonsense, the more power these Zionists will hold. The campaign has better and more constructive things to concern itself with than replying to some obscure article.

After all, Israel does indeed have the most anti-American and destructive lobby in Washington. Thats just the damn truth.

I also wouldn't worry too much about getting their vote. Firstly "the proportion of the population [that is Jewish in America] has been about 2 to 3% since 1900" (Wikipedia) Kinda makes you wonder how they are so proportionally over represented here in America. Not only that 3 out of 4 Jews vote for Democrats anyways.