Ron Paul and the 9/11 Truth

Scott Sommers · 19th January 2012, 06:59 PM

Over on another thread, one of our JREF friends commented about Dr. Ron Paul that,

Originally Posted by cjnewson88

Whether Paul is or not is very unclear. Don't get me wrong, I do like the guy, but his close relationship with Alex Jones and all his crazies is rather concerning. I've heard a few interviews with him and Alex Jones where Paul mentions the NWO by name several times, and I've seen interviews where people ask him to his face "why don't you come about the truth about 9/11?" and his response is "Because I can't handle the controversy ... I have too many things to deal with". Hardly the response of a guy who firmly believes the official story. Either he also believes it was an inside job, or he trying desperately to grab the votes of the crazies who do.

In fact, here's the video of Paul chatting with some of my friends over at We Are Change,

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

There are other videos of him giving similarly vague replies to questions from Truthers.

But Paul has a long history of hanging around with conspiracy nuts. Here he is chatting with some of his old friends at the John Birch Society,

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

and here he is with them talking about former member Larry McDonald - that is before the Russians and the Americans worked together to knock him off,

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

But it's not just that Ron Paul has a thing for Truthers and conspiracy theorists, they think he's a great guy, too. As Orphia Nay as pointed out,

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

On Remember Building 7's Facebook page they've got quite a few Ron Paul supporters.

and I have pointed out about the conspiracy group We Are Change, conspiracy nuts love Ron Paul. JREF friend Sword of Truth once speculated that Paul is a hard-core believer but fakes this because no one would vote for him him he confessed. In fact, I would I wouldn't be surprised if all those supporters of his that you hear about who have never voted before are the conspiracy theorists he's managed to mobilize.

So those are my thoughts on nutty Ron Paul. Ronny's a nut and should be avoided. Rand is just as bad, but that's another story.

cjnewson88 · 19th January 2012, 07:06 PM

Personally I'd love for Paul to get into the whitehouse and find out there really is no conspiracy. I wonder what Alex Jones would make up to explain that one.. "Oh no the NWO has finally got to Paul, he had his family threatened so now he won't step a toe out of line and expose the NWO"..

Orphia Nay · 19th January 2012, 07:08 PM

You beat me to it, Scott! I was just about to start a thread asking "Is Ron Paul a Truther?" myself.

Here he is flat out denying a belief in an inside job:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1178492.html

And again:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b8e_1198029301

I definitely think he's a nut in other ways, but I don't think he's a truthy-flavoured nut.

I think truthers and conspiritards imagine he's a truther because it suits their agenda.

And I think politics freaks do the same thing. Maybe some debunkers do too.

Let's not get carried away.

Scott Sommers · 19th January 2012, 07:20 PM

Ron will deny it whenever he's asked by journalists and during Presidential debates, but even back in the 1990s, he was speaking openly to the John Birch Society. But it's not just 9/11 that he's big on. He also speaks openly about One World conspiracies,

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

and the dangers of the UN.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Americans are a strange lot. They practice a kind of politics that is unique to their kind. There are large numbers of Americans who may not believe all this conspiracy crap themselves, but view their belief as a kind of patriotism. This leads to the idea that someone who is conspiracy paranoid is a person you can trust. While they may not be right, they're at least out their holding the fort, just in case...The most well-known writing on this is The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter which I personally don't agree with, but it's interesting.

cjnewson88 · 19th January 2012, 07:24 PM

hmm good post Orphia. I'm now leaning towards hes keen on their votes rather than their ideas.

Orphia Nay · 19th January 2012, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Ron will deny it whenever he's asked by journalists and during Presidential debates, but even back in the 1990s, he was speaking openly to the John Birch Society. But it's not just 9/11 that he's big on. He also speaks openly about One World conspiracies,

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

and the dangers of the UN.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Americans are a strange lot. They practice a kind of politics that is unique to their kind. There are large numbers of Americans who may not believe all this conspiracy crap themselves, but view their belief as a kind of patriotism. This leads to the idea that someone who is conspiracy paranoid is a person you can trust. While they may not be right, they're at least out their holding the fort, just in case...The most well-known writing on this is The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter which I personally don't agree with, but it's interesting.

I've seen no evidence that he's big on 9/11 CTs.

He may believe in other conspiracies, but that's not the question.

Orphia Nay · 19th January 2012, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by cjnewson88

hmm good post Orphia. I'm now leaning towards hes keen on their votes rather than their ideas.

Cheers, CJ!

It's quite possible he courts the CT vote.

Scott Sommers · 19th January 2012, 07:49 PM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

I've seen no evidence that he's big on 9/11 CTs.

He may believe in other conspiracies, but that's not the question.

There is no other major political figure in the USA who even talks about this. Arnold Schwarzenegger had his guards chase them away. This is the same group interviewing Paul when he said he doesn't want to go there.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Ron Paul apparently hangs around with them. I don't have the link, but there's a video taken from a hand phone where Paul is talking at a party of some sort with a group of Truthers where he makes comments about how he would support a new investigation 9/11.

He could shut this down in a second if he wanted to. He doesn't want the Truthers to stop talking to him. Ron is not a Birther and as far as I know, has never made a statement about this. Nor has he ever had strong appeal to the Birther crowd. But he does talk about 9/11 Truth - a lot.

Ron Paul M.D is also a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, as is his son Rand Paul M.D. They're a really fun bunch of guys.

Orphia Nay · 19th January 2012, 08:08 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Ron Paul apparently hangs around with them. I don't have the link, but there's a video taken from a hand phone where Paul is talking at a party of some sort with a group of Truthers where he makes comments about how he would support a new investigation 9/11.

In the Liveleak/GlennBeck video I posted, he talks about the government's "ineptness". He's quite vehement about it, but that does not translate to trutherism. This is his reason for wanting a new investigation, if he does want one.

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

But he does talk about 9/11 Truth - a lot.

I haven't seen him do this once, except to call it preposterous.

The Platypus · 19th January 2012, 08:27 PM

One of the many contradictions of 911 kooks. On one hand they rant how the US government, under a republican administration, was responsible for 911.

Yet on the other hand, their political messiah is Ron Paul, a republican congressman.

Sword_Of_Truth · 19th January 2012, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

JREF friend Sword of Truth once speculated that Paul is a hard-core believer but fakes this because no one would vote for him him he confessed.

I've said this because it's exactly what I did.

I ran for public office back when I was in full-CT mode. You can see my name 4th on a list of 5 candidates. During the campaign I stuck to the partys "mainstream" message and platform and I kept my unconventional beliefs under my hat (I've described here before on JREF my story of leaving conspiracism behind).

Ron Paul has a lot of wacky ideas, but he has more of them that he's not telling us about because he feels, as I did, that the general public isn't ready for them yet.

This is all speculation, of course. Take it with a grain of salt.

Scott Sommers · 19th January 2012, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

One of the many contradictions of 911 kooks. On one hand they rant how the US government, under a republican administration, was responsible for 911.

Yet on the other hand, their political messiah is Ron Paul, a republican congressman.

You can think of it as a contradiction, but it also makes a lot of sense historically. The Republicans are a coalition party between a group that represents Big 'C' Capital and our wacky fun-lovin' friends from Conspiracy World. Neither of these groups could win the Presidency by themselves. Figuring out how to incorporate the conspiracy nuts into the Republicans was a technical problem that was solved by Ronald Reagan, or at least during his term, leading to Republican domination of the White House since then. Conspiracy nuts today are fundamentally Republicans. All the major conspiracy figures from the Democrats following around 2006, have been run out of the party.

MaGZ · 19th January 2012, 09:05 PM

Wouldn’t it be great if we could elect Ron Paul president and declassify everything about 9/11?

MaGZ · 19th January 2012, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Ron will deny it whenever he's asked by journalists and during Presidential debates, but even back in the 1990s, he was speaking openly to the John Birch Society. But it's not just 9/11 that he's big on. He also speaks openly about One World conspiracies,

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

and the dangers of the UN.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Americans are a strange lot. They practice a kind of politics that is unique to their kind. There are large numbers of Americans who may not believe all this conspiracy crap themselves, but view their belief as a kind of patriotism. This leads to the idea that someone who is conspiracy paranoid is a person you can trust. While they may not be right, they're at least out their holding the fort, just in case...The most well-known writing on this is The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter which I personally don't agree with, but it's interesting.

The only thing wrong with the John Birch Society is that they will not acknowledge the Jews were behind the Bolshevik Revolution and the communist conspiracy. The JBS are in fact part of the conspiracy.

tsig · 19th January 2012, 09:35 PM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Cheers, CJ!

It's quite possible he courts the CT vote.

He's going for the single digit vote?

The Platypus · 19th January 2012, 09:57 PM

How can Ron Paul be a congressman and not part of the NWO or 911 being an inside job?

Scott Sommers · 19th January 2012, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth

I've said this because it's exactly what I did.

I ran for public office back when I was in full-CT mode. You can see my name 4th on a list of 5 candidates. During the campaign I stuck to the partys "mainstream" message and platform and I kept my unconventional beliefs under my hat (I've described here before on JREF my story of leaving conspiracism behind).

Ron Paul has a lot of wacky ideas, but he has more of them that he's not telling us about because he feels, as I did, that the general public isn't ready for them yet.

This is all speculation, of course. Take it with a grain of salt.

Thanks for the info. While I am a naturally-born Canadian, I hope you can excuse me for not knowing a lot about what's going on with the Socreds these days. Looking through their Wiki, this does remind me a lot of how the Ron Paul/conspiracy freaks talk about their politics.

Quote:

insists it is "neither a 'right-wing' nor a 'left-wing' political party", and that it opposes both "big business" and "big government".

Whenever I see this, the warning signs go up. These days, this is the code word for extremist. I've heard neo-Nazi skinheads say this.

Could be, though. I wouldn't be surprised if you're right. You watch those videos of him from the 1990s and he sure looks convincing. His campaign likes to talk about how consistent he is in his policies. But I am glad we'll never get the chance to find out.

Originally Posted by The Platypus

How can Ron Paul be a congressman and not part of the NWO or 911 being an inside job?

The highest ranking elected official from the John Birch Society was, as far as I can tell, Larry McDonald. McDonald was also a member of Congress. He was killed in a joint Soviet-American operation to shoot down the Korean Airlines flight KAL 007. It's quite possible the NWO is planning something like this for Paul. McDonald was a Democrat.

Cl1mh4224rd · 19th January 2012, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

I think truthers and conspiritards imagine he's a truther because it suits their agenda.

They like him because they see a lot of things he says as politically correct variations of their "hang/arrest those corrupt bastards" fantasies. They honestly believe that Ron Paul becoming President would usher in a sort of utopia. I don't know that they really believe that, or care if, he is actually a truther; they just believe that revelation of "what really happened" on 9/11 would be one result of a Paul Presidency.

But they completely ignore the fact that in order to implement his (or their) changes in 4 or 8 years, Paul would essentially have to take on dictatorial power. Or maybe they don't; maybe a semi-benevolent dictator is exactly what they want, and they believe Ron Paul is the only one who can wrest power from the rest of the corrupt government. That would be dangerous if true...

leftysergeant · 20th January 2012, 01:10 AM

I still believe that it is the white nationalists keeping Da Twoof animated in order to have more usefull idiots to disrupt public order. Ron Paul would also serve their ends in that there would be no central authority to respond to their uprising when it happens.

Of course there are the usual blocks of anarho capitalists and anarcho syndicalists looking for a way to tear everything down and rebuild it in their images. RP is just the man to help them do it.

Then there are the ones who see RP as the Messiah of legal weed. Of course, the fact tghat weed is still illegal has not kept them from indulging while they wait for their Annointed One to strike off the chains of guilt. They probably indulge enough not to notice that it takes more than just a sympathetic POTUS to bring about their millenium.

Scott Sommers · 20th January 2012, 03:28 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

I still believe that it is the white nationalists keeping Da Twoof animated in order to have more usefull idiots to disrupt public order. Ron Paul would also serve their ends in that there would be no central authority to respond to their uprising when it happens.

Of course there are the usual blocks of anarho capitalists and anarcho syndicalists looking for a way to tear everything down and rebuild it in their images. RP is just the man to help them do it.

Then there are the ones who see RP as the Messiah of legal weed. Of course, the fact tghat weed is still illegal has not kept them from indulging while they wait for their Annointed One to strike off the chains of guilt. They probably indulge enough not to notice that it takes more than just a sympathetic POTUS to bring about their millenium.

I hope your serious about this because this is something like the conclusion I've come to. I now think of Truthers as Brownshirts, as in the Nazi paramilitary force they used to disrupt German society. Or at least they want to be Brownshirts. For now, most of them are losers unable to live up to the education they've received or their legacy as White men in America. They're just waiting around for someone credible to put a gun in their hand and point them in some direction.

Reheat · 20th January 2012, 04:03 AM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

I hope your serious about this because this is something like the conclusion I've come to. I now think of Truthers as Brownshirts, as in the Nazi paramilitary force they used to disrupt German society. Or at least they want to be Brownshirts. For now, most of them are losers unable to live up to the education they've received or their legacy as White men in America. They're just waiting around for someone credible to put a gun in their hand and point them in some direction.

Good grief, get a grip! Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance even getting the nomination, let alone becoming POTUS. He's just another Ross Perot...

He's too radical, so you guys are peeing in the wind with all of this speculation. If I didn't know differently, I'd think you're twoofers...

Scott Sommers · 20th January 2012, 04:51 AM

Originally Posted by Reheat

Good grief, get a grip! Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance even getting the nomination, let alone becoming POTUS. He's just another Ross Perot...

He's too radical, so you guys are peeing in the wind with all of this speculation. If I didn't know differently, I'd think you're twoofers...

This has nothing to do with Ron Paul. He's just a figurehead right now. My point is the kind of people that Truthers are. Truthers aren't just another random sort of weird subculture. They constitute a dangerous element in society. Or is it that you don't believe there are dangerous elements in society? Or that they're only law breakers and skinheads, and all the other White boys are OK because they're only stupid?

Well, I'd say that's wrong. Truthers are a very particular kind of stupid White boy. They say there is a system now that has abandoned citizens. They say the government murders people and that there are murders who make up the government even now. Truthers have organizations and leaders, and large numbers of them communicate with each other regularly. The organized ones are pathetic losers on a dimension that's hard to imagine. They are really angry at something that doesn't exist.

I don't know if you know, but I talk with Truthers a lot. They don't know who I am because I pretend I'm one of them. I've been doing this on and off for several years now. Talking with them reminds me of something I read back in around 2002. It was a discussion of British Muslims and their reactions to 9/11. Some young Muslims teens were talking about what 9/11 had done for them as blossoming men in contemporary Britain. Before 9/11, they were scrawny also feminine figures of disdain. Now, the white boys are scared of them.

And that's what the young White Truthers are looking for. They're pathetic young White men in America. No one cares what they have to say. No one cares who they are. No one is watching them to see what they do with their lives. They're men who think think they're just as smart as any of those other White boys who have real jobs, but they're never going to get a decent job again. They are completely ignored.

Do you think I'm wrong?

And so why do you think these pathetic examples of human life are looking for less leadership out of their stupid pathetic lives than Blacks in the 60s?

Reheat · 20th January 2012, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Do you think I'm wrong?

I fully understand that they are a POTENTIALLY dangerous element. However, my point was and is that Ron Paul is not their Messiah simply because American voters would NEVER EVER vote in significant enough numbers to either select him for the Party nomination or elect him if he runs as an independent.

While you may think you understand the typical twoofer mindset, it's pretty obvious that you don't understand how American voters think.

Now, if you're thinking that Ron Paul or Joe Shmoe could become another MLK with enough influence to make significant change, that is perhaps a debatable issue, but Ron Paul or anyone else too far outside the mainstream thought stands NO CHANCE of ever being elected POTUS.

ETA: I don't even think twoofers will ever gain enough numbers or influence anything enough to even begin to be a significant movement to effect national level politics. They simply make noise, but are ineffective and will always be ineffective in accomplishing anything significant.

Scott Sommers · 20th January 2012, 05:59 AM

Originally Posted by Reheat

I fully understand that they are a POTENTIALLY dangerous element. However, my point was and is that Ron Paul is not their Messiah simply because American voters would NEVER EVER vote in significant enough numbers to either select him for the Party nomination or elect him if he runs as an independent.

While you may think you understand the typical twoofer mindset, it's pretty obvious that you don't understand how American voters think.

Now, if you're thinking that Ron Paul or Joe Shmoe could become another MLK with enough influence to make significant change, that is perhaps a debatable issue, but Ron Paul or anyone else too far outside the mainstream thought stands NO CHANCE of ever being elected POTUS.

ETA: I don't even think twoofers will ever gain enough numbers or influence anything enough to even begin to be a significant movement to effect national level politics. They simply make noise, but are ineffective and will always be ineffective in accomplishing anything significant.

I'm really confused about whether you've read my posts or not. Can you give me some quotes from my posts, so I know what you're reading. I'm having trouble responding to your points because they seem to have nothing to do with anything I'm trying to say. Honestly, I'm the worst one for skimming through a post and then posting some off the cuff remark based on the few words I remember, so don't take this the wrong way. But I really am having trouble understanding what you think is happening on this tread.

NoahFence · 20th January 2012, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Cheers, CJ!

It's quite possible he courts the CT vote.

"The CT vote"?

Not a very large segment of the population - how could it possibly matter if you get them or not?

Reheat · 20th January 2012, 06:56 AM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Cheers, CJ!

It's quite possible he courts the CT vote.

He's actually wooing the Libertarian Vote, not the CT vote as there is some crossover between the two. Also, the Tea Party vote too. Rand Paul is Tea Party.

He's being vague enough (like most politicians) in order not to alienate any of the above groups.

If he overtly supported 9/11 CT, he would be annihilated in the polls and in votes. He's simply being vague in order not to alienate any of the above groups, that's all..

Scott Sommers · 20th January 2012, 08:19 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

"The CT vote"?

Not a very large segment of the population - how could it possibly matter if you get them or not?

It's hard to say how large a segment of the population it is or whether they're distributed in such a way as win locally. Some portion of this group would have voted for Republican or even Democrat candidates or perhaps even not at all. They will be much more unified now.

Ron Paul himself is an elected member of the US congress. And as Reheat points out, there are major politicians in the US who have been elected who are just as bad as Grandpa Ron at wherever this thing he is going. In particular, his son Rand Paul is the Senator for Kentucky.

Rand also has a few strange ideas about how the world is organized. Rand too often appeals to conspiracy theory in his campaigns. He opposes the NAFTA superhighway
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.c ... _video.php
The Amero one world currency
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/ran ... conspiracy
and therefore obviously opposes the North American Union
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtMIoiPRz-4
The problem is that no major politicians in the world have ever heard of these things. In fact, the Amero doesn't exist except in the mind of Simon Fraser University professor Herb Grubel. Herb made it up, and now all the conspiracy theorists in the world just eat it for lunch...that is, all the conspiracy theorists and your honey Dr. RAND PAUL.

Originally Posted by Reheat

He's actually wooing the Libertarian Vote, not the CT vote as there is some crossover between the two. Also, the Tea Party vote too. Rand Paul is Tea Party.

He's being vague enough (like most politicians) in order not to alienate any of the above groups.

If he overtly supported 9/11 CT, he would be annihilated in the polls and in votes. He's simply being vague in order not to alienate any of the above groups, that's all..

I agree with you. He's fundamentally after the libertarian vote. It is hard to separate this from the conspiracy vote. The Libertarian Party of the USA, which Dr. Paul used to support, is completely dominated by 9/11 conspiracy theorists. My interpretation of this is different from calling this overlap. I would say that largely, there's not much difference between them, at least in the USA.

Whether Paul is simply courting the conspiracy vote is not clear to me. I have recently found out that an acquaintance of mine, a right-wing Christian, who used to support Sarah Palin, is now a big fan of Dr. Paul. And he's the furthest thing from a 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Mark6 · 20th January 2012, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

How can Ron Paul be a congressman and not part of the NWO or 911 being an inside job?

He is a chaotic good elf who accidentally and much to his own surprise found himself part of lawful evil power structure, and has been trying to reform it from within -- up until now without much success.

No, I do not actually believe that, but this seems to be a mindset you are asking about.

Orphia Nay · 20th January 2012, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Cheers, CJ!

It's quite possible he courts the CT vote.

Originally Posted by NoahFence

"The CT vote"?

Not a very large segment of the population - how could it possibly matter if you get them or not?

I doubt he courts it actively. Rather, his beliefs are so far out there that he doesn't realize he only appeals to fringe types.

Lenbrazil · 20th January 2012, 01:57 PM

Here's what a former close aide said:

There is much more information I could give you on the sheer lunacy of his foreign policy views. Let me just concentrate on one in specific. And I will state this with absolute certainty:

Ron Paul was opposed to the War in Afghanistan, and to any military reaction to the attacks of 9/11.

He did not want to vote for the resolution. He immediately stated to us staffers, me in particular, that Bush/Cheney were going to use the attacks as a precursor for “invading” Iraq. He engaged in conspiracy theories including perhaps the attacks were coordinated with the CIA, and that the Bush administration might have known about the attacks ahead of time. He expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration.

On the eve of the vote, Ron Paul was still telling us staffers that he was planning to vote “No,” on the resolution, and to be prepared for a seriously negative reaction in the District. Jackie Gloor and I, along with quiet nods of agreement from the other staffers in the District, declared our intentions to Tom Lizardo, our Chief of Staff, and to each other, that if Ron voted No, we would immediately resign.

Ron was “under the spell” of left-anarchist and Lew Rockwell associate Joe Becker at the time, who was our legislative director. Norm Singleton, another Lew Rockwell fanatic agreed with Joe. All other staffers were against Ron, Joe and Norm on this, including Lizardo. At the very last minute Ron switched his stance and voted “Yay,” much to the great relief of Jackie and I. He never explained why, but I strongly suspected that he realized it would have been political suicide; that staunchly conservative Victoria would revolt, and the Republicans there would ensure that he would not receive the nomination for the seat in 2002. Also, as much as I like to think that it was my yelling and screaming at Ron, that I would publicly resign if he voted “No,” I suspect it had a lot more to do with Jackie’s threat, for she WAS Victoria. And if Jackie bolted, all of the Victoria conservatives would immediately turn on Ron, and it wouldn’t be pretty.

http://rightwingnews.com/election-20...anti-semitism/

I think he is (or was) on the fence over this but will say what he thinks a particular audience wants to hear. Like more mainstream politicians he will sacrifice principles to get elected

Sword_Of_Truth · 20th January 2012, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Thanks for the info. While I am a naturally-born Canadian, I hope you can excuse me for not knowing a lot about what's going on with the Socreds these days. Looking through their Wiki, this does remind me a lot of how the Ron Paul/conspiracy freaks talk about their politics.

You know as much of what's going on with the socreds these days as I do. My involvement with them ended in the late 90's. There are details I described in one of my posts that aren't mentioned in the wiki that you liked to. The wiki article depicts the partys fracturing in the late 90's as a mormon vs. non-mormon thing. That's not really true. There were two members of the Socred board of directors who were in the conspiracists camp who were mormons (myself and one other) and the others had no issue with our religion as long as we supported their kookiness. The issues that split the party really were the mainstream reformers vs. the nuts and flakes.

As for Ron Paul and 9/11, we know that conspiracy theories are like a bag of Frito Lays chips. "You can never eat just one" (and then there are some people who will eat all the chips, lick out the crumbs and then eat the bag). I believed in the UN/NWO, that the bankers killed JFK, the Clinton Administration massacred the Branch Davidians and then blew up the Murrah building in OKC to provoke a confrontation with the Patriot/Militia movement. I did not believe in faked moon landings, Holocaust denial, USS Liberty or any blatantly anti-semitic crap.

I don't know that Ron Paul is into magic thermite, space beams, micro nukes or just some form of LIHOP. I strongly feel that Ron Paul believes more than he is saying. And yes, I know my gut feelings are not evidence, it's just my opinion.

madfoot · 21st January 2012, 03:16 AM

Ron Paul is not a Truther: http://www.fontcraft.com/idiotwars/?p=3996

"Paul has even rejected 9/11 conspiracy theories in a presidential debate, early in the 2008 election. But in this case, as often happens, when offered an opportunity to speak directly to his supporters and urge them not to continue to promote delusional ideas which hurt his candidacy dy association, his natural inclination to support free thought and free speech lead him into the error of appearing tolerant of their beliefs. Despite having every reason to whack them on the knuckles and send them to bed without dinner, he’s too tolerant and too nice a guy to be firm with them, even if it may well cost him the presidency again in 2012 as it did in 2008."

Also, Lenbrazil, Eric Dondero is a joke, so I wouldn't take rightwingnews.com's word for anything.

madfoot · 21st January 2012, 03:18 AM

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

I doubt he courts it actively. Rather, his beliefs are so far out there that he doesn't realize he only appeals to fringe types.

I would put this the opposite way; in this society, attracting conspiracy theorists is a necessary consequence of being outside the mainstream.

Now my question is, why is being outside the mainstream a bad thing?

Scott Sommers · 21st January 2012, 03:29 AM

I had to peek at this one and now I know why I have you on IGNORE. Here's what happened. Madfoot turns on the computer and heads to the JREF. There he/she/it sees a thread called "Ron Paul and the 9/11 Truth". Rather than read it, he/she/it assumes that he/she/it knows what's being said and posts some half-baked answer that was addressed way, way, way back at the beginning. And that's the positive interpretation. The negative one uses terms like 'reading problem', 'dyslexia', and 'illiteracy'.

Just read the thread again - or get someone who can read to tell you what it says. Then you can join in the conversation with the people whose reading skills are up to it.

Thanks anyway, though.

madfoot · 21st January 2012, 03:52 AM

You need to calm down, buddy, I wasn't talking to you.

sheeplesnshills · 21st January 2012, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by Reheat

Good grief, get a grip! Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance even getting the nomination, let alone becoming POTUS. He's just another Ross Perot...

He's too radical, so you guys are peeing in the wind with all of this speculation. If I didn't know differently, I'd think you're twoofers...

I hope you are right, but people have underestimated racist nationalists before and as the tea party have shown it doesn't take a very large minority to be able to take control of the Agenda.
Rand is a nut, but a clever one..........and they are the most dangerous of all.

Lenbrazil · 21st January 2012, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by madfoot

Ron Paul is not a Truther: http://www.fontcraft.com/idiotwars/?p=3996

"Paul has even rejected 9/11 conspiracy theories in a presidential debate, early in the 2008 election. But in this case, as often happens, when offered an opportunity to speak directly to his supporters and urge them not to continue to promote delusional ideas which hurt his candidacy dy association, his natural inclination to support free thought and free speech lead him into the error of appearing tolerant of their beliefs. Despite having every reason to whack them on the knuckles and send them to bed without dinner, he’s too tolerant and too nice a guy to be firm with them, even if it may well cost him the presidency again in 2012 as it did in 2008."

As has been noted he seems to be playing both sides of the fence. Amongs truthers he hints that he really supports them.

Quote:

Also, Lenbrazil, Eric Dondero is a joke, so I wouldn't take rightwingnews.com's word for anything.

OK we'll just take your word for it. Are you saying we wasN'T a close aide of Paul's for many years including at the time in question?

Disbelief · 21st January 2012, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Lenbrazil

OK we'll just take your word for it. Are you saying we wasN'T a close aide of Paul's for many years including at the time in question?

No he is saying that Dondero speaks badly of his hero so he can not be believed.

madfoot · 21st January 2012, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

No he is saying that Dondero speaks badly of his hero so he can not be believed.

No, I'm saying someone who was fired by an individual and ran against their congressional seat is probably a poor source.

Sword_Of_Truth · 21st January 2012, 03:51 PM

Did you actually read the article, Madfoot?

Dondero defends Paul against at least three accusations; racism, antisemitism and homophobia. And then he says "Oh, but he's nutty on 9/11". A disgruntled ex-employee out to damage his employer would probably go all negative.

19th January 2012, 07:06 PM	#2
cjnewson88 Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: The van with the big antenna Posts: 1,288	Personally I'd love for Paul to get into the whitehouse and find out there really is no conspiracy. I wonder what Alex Jones would make up to explain that one.. "Oh no the NWO has finally got to Paul, he had his family threatened so now he won't step a toe out of line and expose the NWO"..
	__________________ Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed. Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/ http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

19th January 2012, 07:08 PM	#3
Orphia Nay Penguilicious Spodmaster. Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables). Posts: 28,361	You beat me to it, Scott! I was just about to start a thread asking "Is Ron Paul a Truther?" myself. Here he is flat out denying a belief in an inside job: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1178492.html And again: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b8e_1198029301 I definitely think he's a nut in other ways, but I don't think he's a truthy-flavoured nut. I think truthers and conspiritards imagine he's a truther because it suits their agenda. And I think politics freaks do the same thing. Maybe some debunkers do too. Let's not get carried away.
	__________________ Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story. ~ The Australasian Skeptics Forum. Last edited by Orphia Nay; 19th January 2012 at 07:10 PM.

19th January 2012, 07:24 PM	#5
cjnewson88 Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: The van with the big antenna Posts: 1,288	hmm good post Orphia. I'm now leaning towards hes keen on their votes rather than their ideas.
	__________________ Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed. Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/ http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

19th January 2012, 07:32 PM	#7
Orphia Nay Penguilicious Spodmaster. Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables). Posts: 28,361	Originally Posted by cjnewson88 hmm good post Orphia. I'm now leaning towards hes keen on their votes rather than their ideas. Cheers, CJ! It's quite possible he courts the CT vote.
	__________________ Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story. ~ The Australasian Skeptics Forum.

19th January 2012, 08:08 PM	#9
Orphia Nay Penguilicious Spodmaster. Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables). Posts: 28,361	Originally Posted by Scott Sommers Ron Paul apparently hangs around with them. I don't have the link, but there's a video taken from a hand phone where Paul is talking at a party of some sort with a group of Truthers where he makes comments about how he would support a new investigation 9/11. In the Liveleak/GlennBeck video I posted, he talks about the government's "ineptness". He's quite vehement about it, but that does not translate to trutherism. This is his reason for wanting a new investigation, if he does want one. Originally Posted by Scott Sommers But he does talk about 9/11 Truth - a lot. I haven't seen him do this once, except to call it preposterous.
	__________________ Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story. ~ The Australasian Skeptics Forum.

19th January 2012, 08:27 PM	#10
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,789	One of the many contradictions of 911 kooks. On one hand they rant how the US government, under a republican administration, was responsible for 911. Yet on the other hand, their political messiah is Ron Paul, a republican congressman.
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

19th January 2012, 08:41 PM	#11
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Originally Posted by Scott Sommers JREF friend Sword of Truth once speculated that Paul is a hard-core believer but fakes this because no one would vote for him him he confessed. I've said this because it's exactly what I did. I ran for public office back when I was in full-CT mode. You can see my name 4th on a list of 5 candidates. During the campaign I stuck to the partys "mainstream" message and platform and I kept my unconventional beliefs under my hat (I've described here before on JREF my story of leaving conspiracism behind). Ron Paul has a lot of wacky ideas, but he has more of them that he's not telling us about because he feels, as I did, that the general public isn't ready for them yet. This is all speculation, of course. Take it with a grain of salt.

19th January 2012, 08:52 PM	#12
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,642	Originally Posted by The Platypus One of the many contradictions of 911 kooks. On one hand they rant how the US government, under a republican administration, was responsible for 911. Yet on the other hand, their political messiah is Ron Paul, a republican congressman. You can think of it as a contradiction, but it also makes a lot of sense historically. The Republicans are a coalition party between a group that represents Big 'C' Capital and our wacky fun-lovin' friends from Conspiracy World. Neither of these groups could win the Presidency by themselves. Figuring out how to incorporate the conspiracy nuts into the Republicans was a technical problem that was solved by Ronald Reagan, or at least during his term, leading to Republican domination of the White House since then. Conspiracy nuts today are fundamentally Republicans. All the major conspiracy figures from the Democrats following around 2006, have been run out of the party.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy

19th January 2012, 09:05 PM	#13
MaGZ Suspended Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 6,319	Wouldn’t it be great if we could elect Ron Paul president and declassify everything about 9/11?
MaGZ Suspended Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 6,319

19th January 2012, 09:35 PM	#15
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,748	Originally Posted by Orphia Nay Cheers, CJ! It's quite possible he courts the CT vote. He's going for the single digit vote?

19th January 2012, 09:57 PM	#16
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,789	How can Ron Paul be a congressman and not part of the NWO or 911 being an inside job?
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

19th January 2012, 09:58 PM	#17
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,642	Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth I've said this because it's exactly what I did. I ran for public office back when I was in full-CT mode. You can see my name 4th on a list of 5 candidates. During the campaign I stuck to the partys "mainstream" message and platform and I kept my unconventional beliefs under my hat (I've described here before on JREF my story of leaving conspiracism behind). Ron Paul has a lot of wacky ideas, but he has more of them that he's not telling us about because he feels, as I did, that the general public isn't ready for them yet. This is all speculation, of course. Take it with a grain of salt. Thanks for the info. While I am a naturally-born Canadian, I hope you can excuse me for not knowing a lot about what's going on with the Socreds these days. Looking through their Wiki, this does remind me a lot of how the Ron Paul/conspiracy freaks talk about their politics. Quote: insists it is "neither a 'right-wing' nor a 'left-wing' political party", and that it opposes both "big business" and "big government". Whenever I see this, the warning signs go up. These days, this is the code word for extremist. I've heard neo-Nazi skinheads say this. Could be, though. I wouldn't be surprised if you're right. You watch those videos of him from the 1990s and he sure looks convincing. His campaign likes to talk about how consistent he is in his policies. But I am glad we'll never get the chance to find out. Originally Posted by The Platypus How can Ron Paul be a congressman and not part of the NWO or 911 being an inside job? The highest ranking elected official from the John Birch Society was, as far as I can tell, Larry McDonald. McDonald was also a member of Congress. He was killed in a joint Soviet-American operation to shoot down the Korean Airlines flight KAL 007. It's quite possible the NWO is planning something like this for Paul. McDonald was a Democrat.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy Last edited by Scott Sommers; 19th January 2012 at 10:03 PM.

19th January 2012, 10:26 PM	#18
Cl1mh4224rd Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Pennsylvania, USA Posts: 6,618	Originally Posted by Orphia Nay I think truthers and conspiritards imagine he's a truther because it suits their agenda. They like him because they see a lot of things he says as politically correct variations of their "hang/arrest those corrupt bastards" fantasies. They honestly believe that Ron Paul becoming President would usher in a sort of utopia. I don't know that they really believe that, or care if, he is actually a truther; they just believe that revelation of "what really happened" on 9/11 would be one result of a Paul Presidency. But they completely ignore the fact that in order to implement his (or their) changes in 4 or 8 years, Paul would essentially have to take on dictatorial power. Or maybe they don't; maybe a semi-benevolent dictator is exactly what they want, and they believe Ron Paul is the only one who can wrest power from the rest of the corrupt government. That would be dangerous if true...
	Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 19th January 2012 at 10:31 PM.

20th January 2012, 01:10 AM	#19
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	I still believe that it is the white nationalists keeping Da Twoof animated in order to have more usefull idiots to disrupt public order. Ron Paul would also serve their ends in that there would be no central authority to respond to their uprising when it happens. Of course there are the usual blocks of anarho capitalists and anarcho syndicalists looking for a way to tear everything down and rebuild it in their images. RP is just the man to help them do it. Then there are the ones who see RP as the Messiah of legal weed. Of course, the fact tghat weed is still illegal has not kept them from indulging while they wait for their Annointed One to strike off the chains of guilt. They probably indulge enough not to notice that it takes more than just a sympathetic POTUS to bring about their millenium.
	__________________ No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.

20th January 2012, 03:28 AM	#20
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,642	Originally Posted by leftysergeant I still believe that it is the white nationalists keeping Da Twoof animated in order to have more usefull idiots to disrupt public order. Ron Paul would also serve their ends in that there would be no central authority to respond to their uprising when it happens. Of course there are the usual blocks of anarho capitalists and anarcho syndicalists looking for a way to tear everything down and rebuild it in their images. RP is just the man to help them do it. Then there are the ones who see RP as the Messiah of legal weed. Of course, the fact tghat weed is still illegal has not kept them from indulging while they wait for their Annointed One to strike off the chains of guilt. They probably indulge enough not to notice that it takes more than just a sympathetic POTUS to bring about their millenium. I hope your serious about this because this is something like the conclusion I've come to. I now think of Truthers as Brownshirts, as in the Nazi paramilitary force they used to disrupt German society. Or at least they want to be Brownshirts. For now, most of them are losers unable to live up to the education they've received or their legacy as White men in America. They're just waiting around for someone credible to put a gun in their hand and point them in some direction.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy

20th January 2012, 04:03 AM	#21
Reheat Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: In Space Posts: 2,030	Originally Posted by Scott Sommers I hope your serious about this because this is something like the conclusion I've come to. I now think of Truthers as Brownshirts, as in the Nazi paramilitary force they used to disrupt German society. Or at least they want to be Brownshirts. For now, most of them are losers unable to live up to the education they've received or their legacy as White men in America. They're just waiting around for someone credible to put a gun in their hand and point them in some direction. Good grief, get a grip! Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance even getting the nomination, let alone becoming POTUS. He's just another Ross Perot... He's too radical, so you guys are peeing in the wind with all of this speculation. If I didn't know differently, I'd think you're twoofers...
	__________________ Debunking the North of Citgo Theory

20th January 2012, 04:51 AM	#22
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,642	Originally Posted by Reheat Good grief, get a grip! Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance even getting the nomination, let alone becoming POTUS. He's just another Ross Perot... He's too radical, so you guys are peeing in the wind with all of this speculation. If I didn't know differently, I'd think you're twoofers... This has nothing to do with Ron Paul. He's just a figurehead right now. My point is the kind of people that Truthers are. Truthers aren't just another random sort of weird subculture. They constitute a dangerous element in society. Or is it that you don't believe there are dangerous elements in society? Or that they're only law breakers and skinheads, and all the other White boys are OK because they're only stupid? Well, I'd say that's wrong. Truthers are a very particular kind of stupid White boy. They say there is a system now that has abandoned citizens. They say the government murders people and that there are murders who make up the government even now. Truthers have organizations and leaders, and large numbers of them communicate with each other regularly. The organized ones are pathetic losers on a dimension that's hard to imagine. They are really angry at something that doesn't exist. I don't know if you know, but I talk with Truthers a lot. They don't know who I am because I pretend I'm one of them. I've been doing this on and off for several years now. Talking with them reminds me of something I read back in around 2002. It was a discussion of British Muslims and their reactions to 9/11. Some young Muslims teens were talking about what 9/11 had done for them as blossoming men in contemporary Britain. Before 9/11, they were scrawny also feminine figures of disdain. Now, the white boys are scared of them. And that's what the young White Truthers are looking for. They're pathetic young White men in America. No one cares what they have to say. No one cares who they are. No one is watching them to see what they do with their lives. They're men who think think they're just as smart as any of those other White boys who have real jobs, but they're never going to get a decent job again. They are completely ignored. Do you think I'm wrong? And so why do you think these pathetic examples of human life are looking for less leadership out of their stupid pathetic lives than Blacks in the 60s?
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy Last edited by Scott Sommers; 20th January 2012 at 04:54 AM.

20th January 2012, 05:23 AM	#23
Reheat Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: In Space Posts: 2,030	Originally Posted by Scott Sommers Do you think I'm wrong? I fully understand that they are a POTENTIALLY dangerous element. However, my point was and is that Ron Paul is not their Messiah simply because American voters would NEVER EVER vote in significant enough numbers to either select him for the Party nomination or elect him if he runs as an independent. While you may think you understand the typical twoofer mindset, it's pretty obvious that you don't understand how American voters think. Now, if you're thinking that Ron Paul or Joe Shmoe could become another MLK with enough influence to make significant change, that is perhaps a debatable issue, but Ron Paul or anyone else too far outside the mainstream thought stands NO CHANCE of ever being elected POTUS. ETA: I don't even think twoofers will ever gain enough numbers or influence anything enough to even begin to be a significant movement to effect national level politics. They simply make noise, but are ineffective and will always be ineffective in accomplishing anything significant.
	__________________ Debunking the North of Citgo Theory Last edited by Reheat; 20th January 2012 at 05:29 AM.

20th January 2012, 05:59 AM	#24
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,642	Originally Posted by Reheat I fully understand that they are a POTENTIALLY dangerous element. However, my point was and is that Ron Paul is not their Messiah simply because American voters would NEVER EVER vote in significant enough numbers to either select him for the Party nomination or elect him if he runs as an independent. While you may think you understand the typical twoofer mindset, it's pretty obvious that you don't understand how American voters think. Now, if you're thinking that Ron Paul or Joe Shmoe could become another MLK with enough influence to make significant change, that is perhaps a debatable issue, but Ron Paul or anyone else too far outside the mainstream thought stands NO CHANCE of ever being elected POTUS. ETA: I don't even think twoofers will ever gain enough numbers or influence anything enough to even begin to be a significant movement to effect national level politics. They simply make noise, but are ineffective and will always be ineffective in accomplishing anything significant. I'm really confused about whether you've read my posts or not. Can you give me some quotes from my posts, so I know what you're reading. I'm having trouble responding to your points because they seem to have nothing to do with anything I'm trying to say. Honestly, I'm the worst one for skimming through a post and then posting some off the cuff remark based on the few words I remember, so don't take this the wrong way. But I really am having trouble understanding what you think is happening on this tread.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy Last edited by Scott Sommers; 20th January 2012 at 06:00 AM.

20th January 2012, 06:03 AM	#25
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,314	Originally Posted by Orphia Nay Cheers, CJ! It's quite possible he courts the CT vote. "The CT vote"? Not a very large segment of the population - how could it possibly matter if you get them or not?
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

20th January 2012, 06:56 AM	#26
Reheat Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: In Space Posts: 2,030	Originally Posted by Orphia Nay Cheers, CJ! It's quite possible he courts the CT vote. He's actually wooing the Libertarian Vote, not the CT vote as there is some crossover between the two. Also, the Tea Party vote too. Rand Paul is Tea Party. He's being vague enough (like most politicians) in order not to alienate any of the above groups. If he overtly supported 9/11 CT, he would be annihilated in the polls and in votes. He's simply being vague in order not to alienate any of the above groups, that's all..
	__________________ Debunking the North of Citgo Theory

20th January 2012, 08:35 AM	#28
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,176	Originally Posted by The Platypus How can Ron Paul be a congressman and not part of the NWO or 911 being an inside job? He is a chaotic good elf who accidentally and much to his own surprise found himself part of lawful evil power structure, and has been trying to reform it from within -- up until now without much success. No, I do not actually believe that, but this seems to be a mindset you are asking about.
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,176	__________________ Gamemaster: "A horde of rotting zombies is shambling toward you. The sign over the door says 'Accounting'"

20th January 2012, 01:49 PM	#29
Orphia Nay Penguilicious Spodmaster. Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables). Posts: 28,361	Originally Posted by Orphia Nay Cheers, CJ! It's quite possible he courts the CT vote. Originally Posted by NoahFence "The CT vote"? Not a very large segment of the population - how could it possibly matter if you get them or not? I doubt he courts it actively. Rather, his beliefs are so far out there that he doesn't realize he only appeals to fringe types.
	__________________ Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story. ~ The Australasian Skeptics Forum.

20th January 2012, 01:57 PM	#30
Lenbrazil Muse Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: BKAC Posts: 858	Here's what a former close aide said: There is much more information I could give you on the sheer lunacy of his foreign policy views. Let me just concentrate on one in specific. And I will state this with absolute certainty: Ron Paul was opposed to the War in Afghanistan, and to any military reaction to the attacks of 9/11. He did not want to vote for the resolution. He immediately stated to us staffers, me in particular, that Bush/Cheney were going to use the attacks as a precursor for “invading” Iraq. He engaged in conspiracy theories including perhaps the attacks were coordinated with the CIA, and that the Bush administration might have known about the attacks ahead of time. He expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration. On the eve of the vote, Ron Paul was still telling us staffers that he was planning to vote “No,” on the resolution, and to be prepared for a seriously negative reaction in the District. Jackie Gloor and I, along with quiet nods of agreement from the other staffers in the District, declared our intentions to Tom Lizardo, our Chief of Staff, and to each other, that if Ron voted No, we would immediately resign. Ron was “under the spell” of left-anarchist and Lew Rockwell associate Joe Becker at the time, who was our legislative director. Norm Singleton, another Lew Rockwell fanatic agreed with Joe. All other staffers were against Ron, Joe and Norm on this, including Lizardo. At the very last minute Ron switched his stance and voted “Yay,” much to the great relief of Jackie and I. He never explained why, but I strongly suspected that he realized it would have been political suicide; that staunchly conservative Victoria would revolt, and the Republicans there would ensure that he would not receive the nomination for the seat in 2002. Also, as much as I like to think that it was my yelling and screaming at Ron, that I would publicly resign if he voted “No,” I suspect it had a lot more to do with Jackie’s threat, for she WAS Victoria. And if Jackie bolted, all of the Victoria conservatives would immediately turn on Ron, and it wouldn’t be pretty. http://rightwingnews.com/election-20...anti-semitism/ I think he is (or was) on the fence over this but will say what he thinks a particular audience wants to hear. Like more mainstream politicians he will sacrifice principles to get elected
	Last edited by Lenbrazil; 20th January 2012 at 03:22 PM. Reason: typo

20th January 2012, 02:02 PM	#31
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Originally Posted by Scott Sommers Thanks for the info. While I am a naturally-born Canadian, I hope you can excuse me for not knowing a lot about what's going on with the Socreds these days. Looking through their Wiki, this does remind me a lot of how the Ron Paul/conspiracy freaks talk about their politics. You know as much of what's going on with the socreds these days as I do. My involvement with them ended in the late 90's. There are details I described in one of my posts that aren't mentioned in the wiki that you liked to. The wiki article depicts the partys fracturing in the late 90's as a mormon vs. non-mormon thing. That's not really true. There were two members of the Socred board of directors who were in the conspiracists camp who were mormons (myself and one other) and the others had no issue with our religion as long as we supported their kookiness. The issues that split the party really were the mainstream reformers vs. the nuts and flakes. As for Ron Paul and 9/11, we know that conspiracy theories are like a bag of Frito Lays chips. "You can never eat just one" (and then there are some people who will eat all the chips, lick out the crumbs and then eat the bag). I believed in the UN/NWO, that the bankers killed JFK, the Clinton Administration massacred the Branch Davidians and then blew up the Murrah building in OKC to provoke a confrontation with the Patriot/Militia movement. I did not believe in faked moon landings, Holocaust denial, USS Liberty or any blatantly anti-semitic crap. I don't know that Ron Paul is into magic thermite, space beams, micro nukes or just some form of LIHOP. I strongly feel that Ron Paul believes more than he is saying. And yes, I know my gut feelings are not evidence, it's just my opinion.
	Last edited by Sword_Of_Truth; 20th January 2012 at 02:03 PM.

21st January 2012, 03:16 AM	#32
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355	Ron Paul is not a Truther: http://www.fontcraft.com/idiotwars/?p=3996 "Paul has even rejected 9/11 conspiracy theories in a presidential debate, early in the 2008 election. But in this case, as often happens, when offered an opportunity to speak directly to his supporters and urge them not to continue to promote delusional ideas which hurt his candidacy dy association, his natural inclination to support free thought and free speech lead him into the error of appearing tolerant of their beliefs. Despite having every reason to whack them on the knuckles and send them to bed without dinner, he’s too tolerant and too nice a guy to be firm with them, even if it may well cost him the presidency again in 2012 as it did in 2008." Also, Lenbrazil, Eric Dondero is a joke, so I wouldn't take rightwingnews.com's word for anything.
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355

21st January 2012, 03:18 AM	#33
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355	Originally Posted by Orphia Nay I doubt he courts it actively. Rather, his beliefs are so far out there that he doesn't realize he only appeals to fringe types. I would put this the opposite way; in this society, attracting conspiracy theorists is a necessary consequence of being outside the mainstream. Now my question is, why is being outside the mainstream a bad thing?
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355

21st January 2012, 03:29 AM	#34
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,642	I had to peek at this one and now I know why I have you on IGNORE. Here's what happened. Madfoot turns on the computer and heads to the JREF. There he/she/it sees a thread called "Ron Paul and the 9/11 Truth". Rather than read it, he/she/it assumes that he/she/it knows what's being said and posts some half-baked answer that was addressed way, way, way back at the beginning. And that's the positive interpretation. The negative one uses terms like 'reading problem', 'dyslexia', and 'illiteracy'. Just read the thread again - or get someone who can read to tell you what it says. Then you can join in the conversation with the people whose reading skills are up to it. Thanks anyway, though.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy Last edited by Scott Sommers; 21st January 2012 at 03:30 AM.

21st January 2012, 03:52 AM	#35
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355	You need to calm down, buddy, I wasn't talking to you.
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355

21st January 2012, 06:10 AM	#36
sheeplesnshills Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 3,706	Originally Posted by Reheat Good grief, get a grip! Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance even getting the nomination, let alone becoming POTUS. He's just another Ross Perot... He's too radical, so you guys are peeing in the wind with all of this speculation. If I didn't know differently, I'd think you're twoofers... I hope you are right, but people have underestimated racist nationalists before and as the tea party have shown it doesn't take a very large minority to be able to take control of the Agenda. Rand is a nut, but a clever one..........and they are the most dangerous of all.

21st January 2012, 06:27 AM	#37
Lenbrazil Muse Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: BKAC Posts: 858	Originally Posted by madfoot Ron Paul is not a Truther: http://www.fontcraft.com/idiotwars/?p=3996 "Paul has even rejected 9/11 conspiracy theories in a presidential debate, early in the 2008 election. But in this case, as often happens, when offered an opportunity to speak directly to his supporters and urge them not to continue to promote delusional ideas which hurt his candidacy dy association, his natural inclination to support free thought and free speech lead him into the error of appearing tolerant of their beliefs. Despite having every reason to whack them on the knuckles and send them to bed without dinner, he’s too tolerant and too nice a guy to be firm with them, even if it may well cost him the presidency again in 2012 as it did in 2008." As has been noted he seems to be playing both sides of the fence. Amongs truthers he hints that he really supports them. Quote: Also, Lenbrazil, Eric Dondero is a joke, so I wouldn't take rightwingnews.com's word for anything. OK we'll just take your word for it. Are you saying we wasN'T a close aide of Paul's for many years including at the time in question?

21st January 2012, 09:56 AM	#38
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Lenbrazil OK we'll just take your word for it. Are you saying we wasN'T a close aide of Paul's for many years including at the time in question? No he is saying that Dondero speaks badly of his hero so he can not be believed.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

21st January 2012, 02:02 PM	#39
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355	Originally Posted by Disbelief No he is saying that Dondero speaks badly of his hero so he can not be believed. No, I'm saying someone who was fired by an individual and ran against their congressional seat is probably a poor source.
madfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 355

21st January 2012, 03:51 PM	#40
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Did you actually read the article, Madfoot? Dondero defends Paul against at least three accusations; racism, antisemitism and homophobia. And then he says "Oh, but he's nutty on 9/11". A disgruntled ex-employee out to damage his employer would probably go all negative.