Are White Nationalists influencing the Ron Paul campaign?

[Richard Masters]

Not quite the same as a "sixteen ninjas" scenario, but just as extreme and beside the point. "What if you had no choice but to be around a white supremacist?" Well, when I have no choice, I have no choice; I can live. But when I do have a choice, I distance myself whenever possible.

Ron Paul, likewise, had a choice. He decided that, as long as he gets some money out of it, it's OK to accept the support of white supremacists. Hey, he certainly has every right to make that choice - no question there. But I disagree with his choice, and consider it just another reason in the long list of reasons I can't support him.

So you disagree with him, but you don't have a logical reason why it is wrong; Only your prejudice.

 

[Checkmite]

Well, there's no "logical reason" why I would prefer not to have a candidate who believes we all need to be saved from the New World Order, either; but I do, and Ron Paul is, unfortunately, such a candidate.

 

[volatile]

Coming to this thread late, but I just thought this might be of interest. (LINK IS SFW BUT THE SITE IT IS HOSTED ON, SUICIDEGIRLS.COM, IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO DO YOU ANY FAVOURS IF YOUR BOSS TRAWLS YOUR BROWSING HISTORY)

Not the most highbrow of news sites, but a poster over at SG has compiled some (linked and evidenced) racist snippets from the Ron Paul Report, a newsletter RP circulated in the early 90s that was apparently very popular in the Survivalist crowd. A direct link to the quotes at the Austin Chronicle might be of use to those of you with filtering.

 

[Richard Masters]

A little late.

Coming to this thread late, but I just thought this might be of interest. (LINK IS SFW BUT THE SITE IT IS HOSTED ON, SUICIDEGIRLS.COM, IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO DO YOU ANY FAVOURS IF YOUR BOSS TRAWLS YOUR BROWSING HISTORY)

Not the most highbrow of news sites, but a poster over at SG has compiled some (linked and evidenced) racist snippets from the Ron Paul Report, a newsletter RP circulated in the early 90s that was apparently very popular in the Survivalist crowd. A direct link to the quotes at the Austin Chronicle might be of use to those of you with filtering.

Yes, you are a little late:


In races against Hillary Clinton or Obama, Ron Paul receives more votes from black voters than other Republicans.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-re...ighest-polling-republican-among-black-voters/

Ron Paul admires Muhammad Ali,

Muhammad Ali's 65th birthday.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/rec...002Fmcrmx002Fmh20070117-38.xmlElementm12m0m0m

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 58. I saw Muhammad Ali as a man of great courage, and I admired him for this, not because of the courage that it took to get in a ring and fight men bigger than he, but because of his stance in 1967.

In 1967, he was 25 years old. He was the heavyweight champion of the world, and for religious beliefs, he practiced what Martin Luther King made popular, civil disobedience, because he disagreed with the war. I thought his comments were rather astute at the time and were not complex, but he merely said, I have no quarrel with the Viet-Cong. He said the Viet-Cong never called him a name, and because of his religious convictions, he said he did not want to serve in the military. He stood firm, a man of principle, and I really admired this as a quality.

He is known, of course, for his athletic skills and his humanitarian concerns, and these are rightly mentioned in a resolution like this. But I do want to emphasize this because, to me, it was so important and had such impact, in reality, what Muhammad Ali did eventually led to getting rid of the draft, and yet we as a people and we as a Congress still do not have the conviction that Muhammad Ali had, because we still have the selective service; we say, let us not draft now, but when the conditions are right, we will bring back the draft and bring back those same problems that we had in the 1960s.

I see what Muhammad Ali did as being very great. He deserves this recognition, but we should also praise him for being a man of principle and willing to give up his title for 3 years at the age of 25 at the prime of his career. How many of us give up something to stand on principle? He was a man of principle. He believed it and he stood firm, so even those who may disagree with his position may say at least he stood up for what he believed in. He suffered the consequences and fortunately was eventually vindicated.​

[admires] Rosa Parks,

Wolf Blitzer CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVwuYKGIn38

and denounces racism.

PBS Special
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP1kVMEtP_U

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html

Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individual who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups.

Conservatives and libertarians should fight back and challenge the myth that collectivist liberals care more about racism. Modern liberalism, however well intentioned, is a byproduct of the same collectivist thinking that characterizes racism. The continued insistence on group thinking only inflames racial tensions.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity. In a free market, businesses that discriminate lose customers, goodwill, and valuable employees – while rational businesses flourish by choosing the most qualified employees and selling to all willing buyers. More importantly, in a free society every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Rather than looking to government to correct what is essentially a sin of the heart, we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism.​

 

[volatile]

Oh, that's alright then.

Guess David Duke and all the people at Stormfront who are so firmly behind him must be missing something...

 

[Richard Masters]

Oh, that's alright then.

Guess David Duke and all the people at Stormfront who are so firmly behind him must be missing something...

They may be attracted to Ron Paul's stance on affirmative action.

There are many different reasons why someone may support a candidate.

 

[volatile]

The Ron Paul Report quotes Ron Paul as saying "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal". That sounds quite racist to me; doesn't it to you? Read the whole article, too - it even quotes the Journal of Historical Review and encourages people to sign up for subscriptions!

Here's a question for you - if someone, particularly a politician running a Presidential campaign, is racist in private and against racism in public, which of those two positions would more likely represent his real views?

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying he isn't racist, the just conclusion is thus that he's stupid. If organisations whose only reason for existing is to seek a racially segregated society praise you, might that not concern you somewhat? If organisations like the John Birch Society, who believe that The Civil Rights Movement was a conspiracy against white America, invited you for dinner, might you not decline? If someone like the leader of the Patriot Network invites you to support their cause (have you read their website? They think the Federal government is The AntiChrist fercrissakes!), might you not decline?

Ron Paul is either racist, stupid, or both.

 

[volatile]

They may be attracted to Ron Paul's stance on affirmative action.

There are many different reasons why someone may support a candidate.

And there are many reasons why someone wouldn't. Me, I like to look at the full picture before throwing my support wholeheartedly towards someone - do you think it's OK to support a racist candidate, for example, because you like their stance on foreign policy?

 

[Mister Agenda]

The Ron Paul Report quotes Ron Paul as saying "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal". That sounds quite racist to me; doesn't it to you? Read the whole article, too - it even quotes the Journal of Historical Review and encourages people to sign up for subscriptions!

Here's a question for you - if someone, particularly a politician running a Presidential campaign, is racist in private and against racism in public, which of those two positions would more likely represent his real views?

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying he isn't racist, the just conclusion is thus that he's stupid. If organisations whose only reason for existing is to seek a racially segregated society praise you, might that not concern you somewhat? If organisations like the John Birch Society, who believe that The Civil Rights Movement was a conspiracy against white America, invited you for dinner, might you not decline? If someone like the leader of the Patriot Network invites you to support their cause (have you read their website? They think the Federal government is The AntiChrist fercrissakes!), might you not decline?

Ron Paul is either racist, stupid, or both.

I don't believe he's racist, I do believe his diavowal of those writings as being by a staffer who was fired over it. I may have to concede stupid though, as he should have personally reviewed whatever was going out under his name, even if he was traveling at the time. A slight mitigating factor is I doubt he was considering running for president in 07 at the time.

 

[volatile]

I don't believe he's racist, I do believe his diavowal of those writings as being by a staffer who was fired over it. I may have to concede stupid though, as he should have personally reviewed whatever was going out under his name, even if he was traveling at the time. A slight mitigating factor is I doubt he was considering running for president in 07 at the time.

That, my friend, is bordering on the delusional. You're an apologist in a way that borders on cultish.

You seriously believe that Ron Paul never read, wrote, or endorsed any of the Ron Paul Reports? Even if that's true, that makes him massively incompetent.

 

[volatile]

You'll also note, of course, that RP has not issued denials or retractions of any of these, and indeed has refused to release the full back-run of the RPR because, and I quote, "Paul says voters may not understand his "tongue-in-cheek, academic" writings."

 

[Patejdl]

Well, there's no "logical reason" why I would prefer not to have a candidate who believes we all need to be saved from the New World Order, either; but I do, and Ron Paul is, unfortunately, such a candidate.

Where on earth did you see Ron Paul saying that he wants to save the world from new world order??

Let's say that people who beleive in globalism really want to work toward this new world order goal. Now there is this question if globalism is really a natural force bringing people together. What if new world order is really being worked on and RP beleives that it is a bad idea. So by saying what you said you either don't beleive that people with influence are really working toward globalism (or even smaller goals) or you think that globalism is a good thing. I don't know.

A little boring but very true and real story. You know I had this luck of having an old ex girlfriend who's mom married an old scottish gent who was an old mason (yes a freemason). While she was for 2 weeks off to scotland I spent nice 2 weeks with her daughter at their house. I was also there when they returned and while I was in kitchen I heard their quite long conversation in the living room. When I was listening to their conversation, comfortably sitting in the kitchen preparing tea I did not really know what they were talking about because I had a lack of info that time on these things. But somehow I knew I wasn't really supposed to hear that. I quitely waited for them to leave the room and went back to my girlfriend's room and while drinking tea I told her what I have heard. We just laughed it off and went watching TV downstairs. Her mom and that gent were sitting there and the gent had made weird comments on the size of my forehead (yeah it's big.. not grotesquely.. more of charismatic type..hehe) and asked me if I have someone jewish in my family. I smiled at him and told yeah. He then turned to my ex girlfirned and smiled at her and told her "goody". Now fast forward 3 years and I'm meeting my ex at the entrance exams at the univeristy. We have a little cup of tea and we start talking. After a few minutes of talking she tells me she doesn't live with her mom and step-dad anymore because she became an crazy, influental and very very rich person in politics here. She then asked me if I remembered what I've told her about the "secret" conversation and that what they were talking about was the reason why a nobody suddenly becomes an advisor and then a person with wealth that is over 30 mil $ worth. I was like whoa and it made perfect sense.

When they were in scotland she was initiated to a scottish freemason lounge and some people there gave her an option to become one of the advisors for that time our country's very very controversial and corrupt prime minister. Now it is not important to say how her mom became very very rich because of all that, and how I've heard about her from other sources (non of them knew about this freemason thing).

I'm not saying this is an direct evidence of existence of a new world order. This is just to prove the existence of powerful certain groups influencing even little things throughout the world. It doesn't have to be as big as a new world order. But you know when people talk about that we're all comming together, that we will in future become one more homogenous group of people, no borders, maybe even one super mix language (look for such attempts in current modern history), such people really talk about globalism and indirectly about a new world order. Even communists had such ideas. Many many ideologies are comming to basicaly same conclusions. So beleiving in a new world order/globalism is nothing crazy. And beleiving that there is an option that some people are secretly conspiring for new world order/globalism just looses all that Alex Jones mumbo jumbo fear propaganda spirit.

Now money time. So money problem is only emotional. The money seems dirty to you. The money seems like he's connecting himself with them, sharing ideas, working toward the same goal. Well the truth is that it's really irrational.

If I had a good goal I would deny money that was stolen, counterfeit.

If I had a good goal and racists gave me the money with saying (and this is important) that by taking money I have to work on their goals then I would tell them I there's no way I would do anything like that for them. If even after that they give me the money cause they are liberty liking people I would have no problems accepting them. They KNOW I won't do anything for them.

If I had a good goal and this time it would be Al-qaeda wanting me to do something bad for them then I would say the same thing as to the racists. But I would consider taking the money because of personal risks. I woudln't want to get assassinated you know.

Does anyone feel like I do on these things??

 

[volatile]

Just an aside but "she was initiated to a scottish freemason lounge" must be wrong - Freemasonry is only for men.

 

[Mister Agenda]

That, my friend, is bordering on the delusional. You're an apologist in a way that borders on cultish.

You seriously believe that Ron Paul never read, wrote, or endorsed any of the Ron Paul Reports? Even if that's true, that makes him massively incompetent.

That, my friend, is bordering on the hyperbolic.

I don't think he read the particular ones in question in advance, no. I've followed his career for years, and it just doesn't sound like him. Neither does it sound like him to lie about it. People do act out of character sometimes, and you could be right. Or you could be wrong. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but I don't see how yours is so better informed than mine that mine is 'cultish' in comparison. I tend to take people at their word about what they mean unless I have a very good reason to think otherwise, and it has served me very well.

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

 

[leftysergeant]

RP does actively court the racist vote, and does a dreadful job of covering his tracks when doing so. We just can't have that sort of slovenly operator with his hands on our defenses.

This link may not be safe for work, but it does show how transparent his sleaziness is.

http://suicidegirls.com/boards/Current+Events/223225

 

[Mister Agenda]

Thanks for the warning, Lefty, I hope to have a working home PC tomorrow so I can follow the link.

 

[Patejdl]

Just an aside but "she was initiated to a scottish freemason lounge" must be wrong - Freemasonry is only for men.

Actually I guess you missed just by a few clicks the most important link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_Freemasonry

I've already done my piece of research that basicaly explains the possibilites behind the fact that my ex's mom was initiated. As starting data I only had pieces of the conversation in my head. I clearly remembered things being said about an "initiating ritual".

The type/form of her masonic membership is not important or interesting at all. What is the biggest issue here is that why did she say that "they" gave her the oppurtunity for the job.

I didn't go futher than this because I really don't want to become any kind of a knowledgeable man on freemasonry. Especially after meeting once a woman that was a "sister" in a local freemasonic lodge. She was into black-magic. So some of the "freemasonnetes" are really funny.

Back to RP.

Rp a racist. Hmm well I could be wrong but I think alot of those quotes are not being interpreted in the right way and are over-exaggerated. Am I an racist when I say that blacks have a lousy culture, they should never have been brought to America and that the africa should have been left alone giving them time to evolve?? These are my real opinions. Am I an racist or do I just have a different opinion on what would be most moral way to treat them?? I have 2 friends of black skin, and I respect every inteligent person of any colour/ethnicity/race/subculture??

I do not think RP's opinions even when explained in the most hateful way are manifestations of the real "dangerous" racism which sparks the hatred in all of you people against Ron Paul. The real dangerous racism does not acknowledge even the inteligent people of different color as equal human beings. Only this real racism should spark your emotions.

 

[leftysergeant]

I find them repugnant as well, but that doesn't mean I can't associate with them. Would you refuse to get help from a racist person in order to save someone who is drowning?

That he actively courts them, doesn't denounce them, and allows such vermin to associate with him in any way gives the white nationalists a slight patina of social acceptability far beyond what the mutts deserve. This is a diservice to the country.

RP's association with Stormfront should be held as much against him as Rudy's association with Bernie Kerick is held against him.

 

[HereticHulk]

I expect RP or the people around him to know not to let rabid dogs that close to the candidate.

The old cooot is not fit to govern. no attention to details that might get him killed. Supposed these two terrorist slimeballs had been Muslims with an interest in offing him, instead of white nationalists with the intent to use him to advance their RaHoWa.

And now that the idiot knows who they were, why has he not denounced them and their ill-gotten money?

This is exactly what the 'terrorists' want! They want people to live in fear. Terror(ism)

If people act the way you are implying they should then the supposed 'terrorists' have already won!

 

[HereticHulk]

That he actively courts them, doesn't denounce them, and allows such vermin to associate with him in any way gives the white nationalists a slight patina of social acceptability far beyond what the mutts deserve. This is a diservice to the country.

RP's association with Stormfront should be held as much against him as Rudy's association with Bernie Kerick is held against him.

He has denounced them on National TV.

If RP gave the money back this guy would spen dit towards his agenda of hate. So how would giving the money back help anything!?