Reminder: GOP Presidential Debate Tonight on Fox News Channel at 8:00 p.m. CDT

They have a domestic problem with an organization that wants to overthrow the Phillipine gov't and install an Islamic one. These rebels/insurrectionists/"terrorists" are not following them home, they are already there.

Following the American gov't/corporate media conspiracy theory, we did not have a problem with an internal Abu Sayyaf type group on 9/11, we had a problem with 19 Muslims who were nationals of foreign nations (Saudi Arabia, UAE etc.) who conspired to enter the nation illegally. Secure our borders from these types of illegal activities and foreign bad guys can't take over 4 commercial airliners with box cutters, defeat NORAD, cause steel framed buildings to collapse, change a once free nation into a police state and provide an excuse for pre-emptive wars.

Of the "Fort Dix Six", three of them were here illegally and were able to operate businesses etc. If we are actually serious about this "War on Terror" we secure our borders, so long as this is not done, the whole thing in the Middle East is a sham and has nothing to do with the national security of the United States of America.

I believe Ron Paul understands this and will put the physical, economic and overall interests of the people of the United States of America first, rather than pandering to the globalists and international interests.

 

How many of us blame the U.N. as much as any other factor in the war in Iraq ?

 

The United States created the United Nations, has sustained the United Nations, has been the #1 benefactor of the United Nations and continues to concern itself with United Nation resolutions which should have no bearing whatsoever on the decision-making process of a Constitutional Republic. The U.S. blaming the U.N. for anything, is like a parent blaming their child for not being raised properly.

 

Press Release

Why Hasn’t Rudy Giuliani Read the 9-11 Commission Report?

May 16, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

ARLINGTON, VA – During the "First in the South" GOP debate in South Carolina last night, one thing was made clear: Rudy Giuliani does not understand how to keep America safe.

When Congressman Ron Paul, who has long served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, explained how 50 years of American interventionism in the Middle East has helped compromise our national security, Giuliani interrupted saying he had "never heard anything so absurd." This statement is particularly troubling coming from the former mayor who tries to cast himself as a security expert, since Dr. Paul's point comes directly from the bi-partisan 9-11 Commission Report.

"Rudy Giuliani has tip-toed around the issues of abortion, guns and marriage. The only issue he has left is security, and he doesn't even get that right," said campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "It is clear from his interruption that former Mayor Giuliani has not read the 9-11 Commission Report and has no clue on how to keep America safe." (Source: http://www.ronpaul2008.typepad.com/)​

 

The audience for the debate was clearly pre-screened and pre-selected to include only mainly geriatric 75 year old plus Fox News viewers who are scared of their own shadow. How else can the bizarre applause for warmongering and torture, which polls show are both clearly opposed by the majority of American people, be explained? SOURCE

Sean Hannity stated his "surprise" that Ron Paul was leading with 30% of the FOX News text-message poll vote, despite that fact that he also won the Republican debates on MSNBC-- a fact which the media under-reported and even censored.
SOURCE

Paul was responding to a question about the origins of terrorist attacks on US soil and noted the generations-long history of US involvement in Middle East politics, including a CIA-sponsored coup to overthrow Iran's leader in 1953 and regular bombing missions in Iraq over the last decade.

"I don't think i've heard that before," Giuliani said, "and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11."

Paul said he was referring to what the CIA calls "blow back" in mentioning the hostility American involvement might ferment in foreign cultures.

"They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free," Paul said. "They attack us because we're over there." SOURCE

Wolf Blitzer was just saying on CNN that Ron Paul "set Rudy Guiliani up to hit it out of the park" with his reply. What Blitzer and his "guest" failed to mention was that Rudy (and Blitzer) had to put any knowledge of recent U.S. foreign policy history momentarily in a state of suspended animation (or put on their red white and blue blinders) to even draw such a conclusion.

 

Not really.

The UN was it's normal ineffective self. If it had been an effective organization and a little less corrupt, it might have prevented the war. But I don't think they caused it in any sort of active way.

 

OK, so Iraq DID have something to do with 9/11 ?

 

If there's a real reason (other than plunder and strategic control) why we're in Iraq, no one can seem to give it and stick to it. Sometimes it is because we were attacked by terrorists, sometimes it is because of weapons of mass destruction, sometimes it's because Saddam gassed Kurds many years ago. No one seems to know. The president doesn't seem to think Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 and if he's right, then what are we doing there? The latest reason I think I heard was because if we leave now there will be chaos. That might explain why we remain but it sure doesn't explain why we went and what about going made the action a just cause.

"We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th. - George W Bush (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGRBmliKHSs)

Reporter: What did Iraq have to do with the attack on the World Trade Center.
George W Bush: Nothing. Accept for its part of and nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September 11th were ordered by Iraq. I have suggested however, that resentment and the lack of hope create the breeding grounds for terrorists who are willing to use suiciders to kill to achieve an objective. I have made that case.
(Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LwMTjeu5f4)​

 

George is right, "resentment and the lack of hope" does create a breeding ground for terrorism. So, then we should fight terrorism by spreading "resentment and the lack of hope" globally.

 

Was Carter's decision to refuse support to the shah the worst American foreign policy decision last century ?

 

The best it could be is the second worst foreign policy decision in the last century.

 

It would be helpful to remember that these were polls done by people voluntarily calling in/text messaging. They are not scientific. All this proves is that Ron Paul supporters were more active in the voting process. It may well be that Paul did the best job aside from teh obvious flub in communication (which was disastrous even if he was factually correct). But the polls don't prove that. As was pointed out, the Ron Paul campaign machine worked well to get supporters to text a vote in. That's all this proves.

 

What was the worst?

 

The use of military force in Iraq.

 

That was this century, not the last century.

And it may not be worse anyway. History will tell.

 

That would be dependent upon when one believes the foreign policy decision was made. The use of military force in Iraq may be the worst foreign policy implementation during this century.

 

It may be. It may not be. Time will tell.

 

It's on page 10 now. Closing this thread without notice since the GOP debate has been over for a couple of days now and other threads have been started in the aftermath of it.

Lady Eagle