Posted by James OstrowskiLying RudyWed May 16, 2007 02:05Please Note: It is not Ron Paul's role to be a "9/11 Truth" candidate. Considering the massive damage he's been inflicting on the Ruling Elite and their minions, for truthers, tolerating the absurd "blowback" argument is a small price to pay. In this case Ron Paul must fight the enemy - and beat them at their own game - in terms the sheeple can accept and understand.
Posted by James Ostrowski
May 16, 2007 12:28 AM
Here's the New York Times transcript which shows that Ron Paul never said we "invited" the attacks.
MR. GOLER: Congressman Paul, I believe you are the only man on the stage who opposes the war in Iraq, who would bring the troops home as quickly as -- almost immediately, sir. Are you out of step with your party? Is your party out of step with the rest of the world? If either of those is the case, why are you seeking its nomination?
REP. PAUL: Well, I think the party has lost its way, because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated a noninterventionist foreign policy.
Senator Robert Taft didn't even want to be in NATO. George Bush won the election in the year 2000 campaigning on a humble foreign policy -- no nation-building, no policing of the world. Republicans were elected to end the Korean War. The Republicans were elected to end the Vietnam War. There's a strong tradition of being anti-war in the Republican party. It is the constitutional position. It is the advice of the Founders to follow a non-interventionist foreign policy, stay out of entangling alliances, be friends with countries, negotiate and talk with them and trade with them.
Just think of the tremendous improvement -- relationships with Vietnam. We lost 60,000 men. We came home in defeat. Now we go over there and invest in Vietnam. So there's a lot of merit to the advice of the Founders and following the Constitution.
And my argument is that we shouldn't go to war so carelessly. (Bell rings.) When we do, the wars don't end.
MR. GOLER: Congressman, you don't think that changed with the 9/11 attacks, sir?
REP. PAUL: What changed?
MR. GOLER: The non-interventionist policies.
REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.
We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)
MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?
REP. PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.
MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)
And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that. (Applause.)
MR. GOLER: Congressman?
REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.
They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there. I mean, what would we think if we were -- if other foreign countries were doing that to us?
- Lively Debate: GOP presidential hopefuls trade barbs Fox News, Tue May 15 22:21
- GOP Debate II: Fox Goes After Ron Paul RON PAUL REVOLUTION, Wed May 16 01:59
- RON PAUL AND SEAN HANNITY *GET IN TO IT!* AFTER DEBATE YOUTUBE, Wed May 16 01:48
- Lying Rudy Posted by James Ostrowski, Wed May 16 02:05
- Rudy Giuliani Vs. Ron Paul, and Reality The Nation, Wed May 16 01:37
- [mohavecountyminutemen] presidential debates waboinspector, Wed May 16 00:15
- Richard Viguerie Responds to Presidential Debate: Richard Viguerie, Tue May 15 22:40
- Rate the candidates: Republicans MSNBC, Tue May 15 22:47
Main Page - Tuesday, 05/16/07
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
APFN MESSAGEBOARD ARCHIVES