Ron Paul: Israel Created Hamas! 1/9/2009

reply to post by wdkirk

---

If nothing was meant to be inferred from your doggy tale, then it's quite off topic and you shouldn't have posted it in an "Israel created Hamas" thread; however, I think it's quite clear that you were using a poorly fitting metaphor in an attempt to draw a comparison to the current Israel/Hamas situation.

[edit on 1/10/09 by redmage]

reply to post by Retseh

---

Fallen to the Nazi??? Don't you get it yet? the Nazi have regrouped and are under a new flag!!!
People, Nazi are very much alive and well to this very day..
The Nazi where never defeated as so many people feel they where..
But this is off topic.. but had to get that out..

Great job as usual by Dr. Paul, but he doesn’t go far enough IMO. As many have capably pointed out, the Western intelligence agencies creation of radical Islamist groups goes far beyond using them as a cat’s paw against a (then) current enemy. They have continued to be used as a convenient enemy with which to frighten the dumbed down masses into giving up freedoms. Recently we saw them used in Mumbai to give excuse to a long planned takeover of Pakistan, an action that would complete the encirclement of Iran. Too bad that Iran won’t just accept a central bank. Like Saddam wouldn’t.

Al-CIAda, Hamas, etc. are not former pets gone feral. They are trained attack dogs that the West continues to use to terrorize the world into submission. This is nothing new. History is replete with examples of tyrants creating enemies that they use to bend the people to their will. Crack a book.

Oh, and the pathetic ad-hominem attacks on Dr. Paul only reveal an utter lack of ability to address the issues he brings up. It’s the issues, stupid.

reply to post by resistor

---

Well said resistor! Very well said!
Your right about when you say they are attack dogs.. And they have not gone feral. I am bold enough to say.. this is all part of the plan..

And those to attack Dr. Paul.. Take a step back, and try again..

Use a little logic here. Party "I" creates party "H" in order to do what???? To wreak havoc behind enemy lines and disrupt the lives of party "P" and take apart party "P's" "PLO"...

In other words when all of those peace accords and meetings were being held way back when the Israelis had no intentions on honoring them. The fact is that Jimmy Carter (who is a pacifist) thought the opposite of others in his position and called for a true 2 state solution. This is when the Israelis started arming the Iranians and the whole hostage crisis bloomed. In other words all of it from the TOP down has been lies.

The moment Regan took office the hostages were freed and the USA/Israel relationship went back to what it had been before Carter took office. Keep in mind that it was Carter who wanted the USA to practice CONSERVATION. Why do you think he wanted that? Because he realized that the entire Mideast had been sliced up by American and British oil companies and we were causing wars there.

So now we get to today and let us argue from both points being that A) Israel is making it happen on purpose or B) Hamas is making it happen on purpose...
Possibilities:
1) Since Israel made Hamas to start with, then it is that Hamas is simply doing what a special operations group does for their true leader?
2) Hamas went rogue because Israel stopped paying them and their families and are smacking back?

As it stands the highest probability is that ISRAEL is at the center of this. They create the problem, call attention to the problem and then solve the problem. All along the actual Israeli problem is that they want the entire territory but can't justify a true extermination so they do it all incrementally and manufacture their own enemies as they go. If they simply "wipe em' out" they will not be able to hide behind Hamas. Now they may have to get rid of Hamas as well.

It is difficult for you to stomach since it makes all of the supposed good guys like USA GBR IDF into the biggest "mad dog" sort of liars and killers going.

[edit on 10-1-2009 by Alpha_Magnum]

oh yes it truly does
whoever controls them most likely still has control over them

Pretend for a moment that someone in the USA asked us, for the record, who's side we thought was the honorable one. Do you realize how that one loaded question would play into the famous Bush pontification that goes...
YOU ARE EITHER WITH US OR YOU ARE WITH THE TERRORISTS!!!
Here is one of the reasons that George Washington would have us stay out of these situations. This is who Ron Paul was talking about. Since we are now in it up to our eyes the question above will be asked at some point. Since the Bill of Rights seems to have been shelved for a more drastic system of Fascism I can see that affirming the Palestinian position will be frowned upon. We are riding the lightning!

Here is the House Resolution PDF for those that want to see what our government is doing while the USA is in a depression of their own making!

HR GAZA
[edit on 10-1-2009 by Alpha_Magnum]

[edit on 10-1-2009 by Alpha_Magnum]

True.

Every diplomat needs to be able to flatter, distort, manipulate and inveigle.

Somehow I doubt those are abilities Dr. Paul's supporters are looking for.

I believe that all the current diplomats that you are mentioning are LIARS. If our national intentions are to continue living a lie than yes RP is not the man for that since he tells the truth and is a committed husband and father.

If I'm reading your post correctly you want a diplomacy policy built to flatter, distort, manipulate and inveigle and that is simply a policy of LIARS TELLING LIES.


[edit on 10-1-2009 by Alpha_Magnum]

Well if you're right, and they are, don't count on people like Ron Paul to deal with them.

He's the oh so modern version of Neville Chamberlain. Plausible, likeable, and intelligent - but when the poop hits the fan his weakness of character will get you all killed.

No, you are not reading my post correctly. I was defending Dr. Paul, saying that he was not like a diplomat because he is honest.
I disagree with many of Dr. Paul's policies, but I love the fact that he is honest and sincere.

You're right that I'm saying the job of a diplomat is to "flatter, distort, manipulate and inveigle". I am not saying that is how it should be, just that that's the way politics tends to be. I'd much prefer honesty, and in my personal life I've found honesty and sincerity work best.

And, by the way, I did not mention any current diplomats. I am still hoping there are some who are honest; I just doubt any honest ones would keep their jobs in the current political climate.


As a footnote, I have been enjoying reading your posts in several threads. I star them in the hope others will learn something from you.

The man that led the Revolutionary Army, signer of the Declaration of Independence, author of The Proclamation of Neutrality, eight years as President of the United States of America named George Washington said in his farewell address:
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Pro-Israelis will see nothing other than:

1). Israel has the nation now, and the past has nothing to do with the present.
2). They will argue that their past has been full of persecution, even though they don't want anyone else bringing up their own persecution.
3). HAMAS won't stop killing Israeli while refusing to ask or care as to why they continue to attack.
4). 1 million Palestinians aren't worth a fingernail of a jew, as quoted by past PM.
5). HAMAS started it, even though they enabled HAMAS to operate in the Arafat era.
6). Jews are more intellectually viable than arabs.
7). Whatever the mainstream media says about the conflict must be true.
8). Opportunism is our right.
9). MASSAD's logline is "War by Deception."
10). We are the chosen people.

Pro-Palestinians or (fair people) see nothing other than:

1). Controlled and structured genocide.
2). Hypocrisy in motion
3). Heartless opportunism
4). An ugly effect to a sinister cause.
5). Worldwide rhetoric and propaganda
6). War by Deception
7). Chosen people don't get blank check.

Do the math. I doubt that either side will ever switch for whatever reasons.

My bottom line is you can't arbitrarily control the lives of another people to the point of prisoning them without an expected backlash.

I ask everyone who may read this... If a group of people came into your town, moved all the people with your hair color to the dumps and surrounded it with soldiers and restricted your freedoms and basic living needs... what would you do?

Also, your mother, brother, father, and most of your cousins have already been killed either directly or indirectly by your controllers... What would you do then?

That's all I'm saying.

Pray for PEACE!

AAC

reply to post by Kailassa

---

Sorry Kailassa,
What you said was, "Every diplomat needs to be able to flatter, distort, manipulate and inveigle." People should be honest, courteous, reasonable and fair especially if they represent the USA. All of the characteristics you listed are negative for any diplomat. Our essential problem is that we are dishonest here at home and abroad and that is no small problem.

Now, if you stated what you did in your rebuttal the first time I would not have questioned your post By current diplomats I am referring to essentially all of the diplomats working to advance the corrupt agendas of the once great USA. Naturally in order to replace them with honest people the entire existing government would have to go as well. While we are doing that I wonder where these "Honest" replacements would come from?

Thank you for reading my posts and rating them. I'm sure you realize the basic summation that I am pointing to in my posts; The industrial revolution has been a blessing and a curse to us all. As the industrial revolution tapers off we humans will be facing again all of the problems our predecessors faced on the way up but none the less we are going down.

PAX

BILL TITLE: Recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, reaffirming the United States’ strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process

5 people voted against this bill...including one Republican...and that was Ron Paul. Kucinich, Moore, Rahall, and Waters were the others. All the rest were for the bill, voted present, or did not vote at all.


Vote is here:
www.campaignforliberty.com...


Edit: This is the vote that this video is from i believe.

[edit on 10-1-2009 by David9176]

i am glad you said that. this is exactly what i have been thinking for some time - i wouldn't be surprised if OBL is still on the cia payroll. Maybe he hasn't been caught because they don't want to bring him in just yet - why prosecute one of your own especially when he is just following orders.

I believe that the ending argument should be what exactly is the problem is the conditioned perspective of what patriotism truly is.

patriotism does NOT mean being pro-govt.
It means being pro-people

also what they don't get is being pro-govt is being anti-people

being pro-war causes blowback
blowback causes recursive blowback
which creates an excuse for FISA and the patriot act
and sooooooooo many other bills

troops aren't fighting for your freedom
they are actually depleting it
their foreign presence is pro-war which equals money out of YOUR pocket..... as well as many deaths if you care about that

as ron paul says: "I would need a full-time staff to keep up with all the bills introduced on a daily basis"

wake up ppl