Ron Paul : "Michelle Bachmann hates Muslims" * Jay Leno Show 12/16 FULL INTERVIEW LINK*

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by Ixtab

 

Ron Paul's foreign policy sounds naive to me...

Actually, almost everything about Ron Paul's platform seems unrealistic. Consider the implications. He said on the tonight show that for his platform to work, he would have to end much of what the US currently does. Foreign investment? I wonder how Israel and the Jewish lobby- AIPAC - would respond to that. American military presence? Oh...I'm sure the Military industrial complex and its investors will just sit idly by while their industry is destroyed.. The IRS? The Federal reserve?? Do you know how many people are going to get screwed by Ron Paul's suggestions???

Why don't we just chalk it up now.

Ron Paul will be assassinated before he ever gets close to winning the white house. And if that happens, you can expect a major domestic backlash and the beginnings of a civil war.

If, by some miracle, or, by some nefarious plot, he wins the white house and the establishment accepts the prodigious loss, then what will America's enemies think of it? American interests are no longer being protected; or rather, they wouldn't even exist any longer, with a president who seeks to eliminate all idea of promotion of democracy and capitalism. So what will happen? Will Russia or China, not make a move into the regions vacated by the US?

We promote democracy and capitalism?

You got it wrong there, we promote violence and fascism. I expect any active member on ATS to know at least this much...

If you can't even get that right, what else might you be wrong about.

Originally posted by maddog99
Thanks for the link! I just got home and watched this!

OMFG! I LUV RON PAUL!!

I think I woke the neighbors I cheered so loud when he said that!

Gonna go donate twice more...

Once for the goose-stepping Muslim hating Bachmann...
Once for the gay-hating Muslim hating Santorum

LOVE this post!!!

reply to post by dontreally


Easy tiger.

Im not a supporter of Ron Paul, im not an American, however i follow your politics. And my statement stands, regardless of how shaky Ron Pauls foreign policy may be. Michelle Bachman is complete and utter moron, she is totaly out her depth as a statesmen, has no fundamental understanding of the world nor the cultures that occupy it and should in no way be put forward as a representative of the people.

Your views on Ron Paul are fine man, your entitled to them, i dont care but it still does not detract from the fact Michelle Bachman is a idiot on par with the likes of Anne Coulter and Sarah Pallin. Support for her or her policies is laughable in the extreme and should not be even be given the time of day.

Anyone who is devoted enough to one of the HATEFUL Abrahamic religions is completely under the influence of HATE for anyone who doesnt belong to their particular cult.

Religious cults like to play the 'good guys' but the truth is that each cult BITTERLY HATES the other cults people whether those people are good or bad. Doesnt matter. The other cult is the enemy or the devil or the 'satan' or is going to hell for all eternity.

Cult members will deny it but its the truth. They know deep down inside that they HATE the other cults. Thats what their nonsense silly little religions make the mindless zombies cult members think by default.

reply to post by eLPresidente

I expect any active member on ATS to know at least this much...

Why? Because every poster here has to subscribe to the same plot line?

You got it wrong there, we promote violence and fascism.

So many people here have a completely and thoroughly simplistic idea of how the world works, and this is my point with Ron Paul. Do we promote violence and fascism? Of course not. To say we "promote" those things would be to say America is in those countries for those reasons; which isn't the case.

Now, does America use violent and fascistic methods to promote democracy and capitalism? Yes. This would be a more accurate statement than America promoting 'violence and fascism' for the sake of violence and fascism alone.

Now, the presence of Russian and Chinese interests - two countries with a strong communistic streak, would be a problem. As bad as America is, they're still preferable - trust me on that - to Russia or China. To vacate those regions would leave a hole, which would be filled by Iran.

American foreign policy is much more complicated then the ways it's presented in the liberal and conservative grassroots media.

reply to post by HangTheTraitors
How about...no. I actually tend to like muslims on average better than I do most christians, and I count myself christian. Maybe it's just a matter of perspective, but most muslims seem to understand and live their faith a little better than most christians, who to me are always operating in a state of cognitive dissonance due to their love of war and fear of the world as compared to the christian fearlessness and peace espoused by Christ.

Gandhi said it well:

I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

Even that said, I don't hate other christians, I just acknowledge they have strayed far from their roots of christian liberty and strength in the face of adversity. Please don't paint us all with your ignorant brush.

What is insane- is continuing to do what we have been doing.

People keep saying Pauls ideas are too extreme- but in all reality, they are the most grounded to reality.

The writing is on the wall. Cant continue to let them screw us any longer, and drastic changes are needed, real changes, that should and need to be changed.

You can only change the paperwork around so much before you have to actually get in the field and get dirty.

Some brilliant scientist said something along the lines of "Insanity isnt trying to do new things, insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result".

People keep talking these assasination plots already against Paul.... well that just tells me there might be hope afterall, if he shakes them up that bad.

reply to post by dontreally


Do we not use violence to nation build with government supported corporate interests (hello Haliburton, Monsanto and the like) drooling as they wait for the cages to be opened so they can introduce their crap to the neighbors lawn?


And you say Ron is naive. The economist, medical doctor, air force veteran, and 12 term congressman.

You'd think he would know a thing or two politics.

reply to post by Praetorius

who to me are always operating in a state of cognitive dissonance due to their love of war and fear of the world

Are you referring to Muslims or Christians here? Because as a matter of fact, Muslims are the ones embroiled in internecine conflict - not Christians. Muslims are the ones in war with Jews in Israel, Copts in Egypt, Ethnic Kurds in Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Iran, and Hindus in Kashmir..Not to mention the Lebanon civil war which has left 250,000 human beings dead since the 1970's.. I think its painfully obvious that Muslims are much more warlike - and indeed - they are much more faithful to their militant-prophet archetype Mohammad, than Christians are to Christ.

Maybe you confuse Muslims for being more committed to their religion because they are relatively new to the dichotomy posed by the Christian western world. Give them some time to settle in. They will show as much ambivalence for their religion as Christians, soon enough.

And as for Muslims who do not follow Shari'a.. Ask a devout Muslim, a Shari'a law following Muslim, what he thinks of a Muslim who flouts Islamic law.

reply to post by eLPresidente

Do we not use violence to nation build with government supported corporate interests (hello Haliburton, Monsanto and the like) drooling as they wait for the cages to be opened so they can introduce their crap to the neighbors lawn?

I never said corporatism was a good thing. It's sickening that America does this. But to be sure, Ron Paul's new modality wouldn't put and end to this. American military presence has nothing to do with Monsanto in India and elsewhere. That is all thanks to international banking schemes.

And you say Ron is naive. The economist, medical doctor, air force veteran, and 12 term congressman.

Maybe he's a bit crazy. Do you deny the plausibility that there are hundreds of different interest groups who would like to see him dead? I listed a few in an earlier post. Israel lobby, Pakistan lobby (Michele Bachmann understands a thing or two; for instance, Pakistan needs to be propitiated by American foreign aid in order for them to not join ranks with other Islamist regimes.. They have a Nuke, thus, America needs to have some say in Pakistani politics) military industrial complex, pharmaceutical industry, IRS, Federal Reserve, and hundreds of other IGO's....

Hey, as long as we're safe here on our borders, everyone else can go fishing for all I care. Israel included, what with their up to four hundred Nuclear weapons, they can defend themselves against Iran just fine. And even if Iran did have a Nuke and fired it at Israel, don't you think Iran is well aware of the consequences if such an action were taken? Of course they are. Don't be so naive.

But this thread is about Bachmann hating Muslims, something that she's pretty well convinced us as being true. Having someone like her as President wouldn't be dangerous. It'd be disastrous. She expects us to believe that preemptively invading another country all over a single flipping Nuke is a good idea?

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by mayabong
Funny that after like 1500 years it wasn't till the last 10 or so that they all the sudden want to take over the world and we must kill all 1.2 BILLION of them before they get us.

backatchya. Not exactly - Islamic Terrorism - is it a new threat?
How do you think so called 'Islamic countries' came to be? At the tip of a bloody sword.

You mean like just about every other country? If we had been bombing your country since the nineties what would you do?

reply to post by dontreally


So...you agree that we promote violence and fascism, good.


Why would I deny that there are many interests out there that would love for Ron to go away? He is a threat, they are desperate but they are not stupid. Martyring him would make America an unpredictable situation, do you think 'they' like taking risks like that?

And since you agree with Ron, the revolution and our threat against all the corruption, greedy and manipulation, then maybe you should vote for him as well.

Name one person that is more capable than he is to threaten the status quo? and has proven it as well?

Bachmann is a "christian" that is unwilling to use diplomacy before war. She is a neocon and part of a clique that killed 1.5 million iraqis, and she thinks that iran is dangetous because they might one day build a bomb, whereas israel has nukes, so she is a hypocrite, and iran never claimed to wipe israel off the map, so why els would someone lie so much just to have a war?

reply to post by eLPresidente

do you think 'they' like taking risks like that? Text

Consider the alternative...Really. Just think how many billions, perhaps trillions, of lost investments there would be.

If anything were to happen to Paul, it would probably be an 'accidental' plane crash.

I just find it highly implausible that Ron Paul could succeed without the PTB interefering. If it causes civil war - maybe that's what they want? Maybe that initiate a whole slew of governmental orders they already have in place. Not to mention, fundamentally, Order out of chaos is a principle of all sociological progress.

And since you agree with Ron, the revolution and our threat against all the corruption, greedy and manipulation, then maybe you should vote for him as well.

I would, if I were American (I'm Canadian). But that doesn't mean i don't disagree with him on some issues, or hold some reservations about the feasibility of what he suggests.

But hey....He's the best bet Americans have got to get out of the status quo, which is not going anywhere good for America to begin with....

reply to post by filosophia


That's off topic, but Iranian politicians frequently attack Israel, as well as Jews (check out that new antisemitic Iranian novie "sabbath hunter") in general. And in regard to the "misquoted" statement of Ahmadinjead. The actual quote is essentially the same: "The Zionist regime occupying Jerusalem will be erased from the pages of time". What appreciable difference is there?

And also keep in mind - you regard Bachmanns opposition to building a mosque at ground zero as proof of her hating Muslims. So lets see how intellectually honest you are. If Ahmadinejad, echoing the words of the first Ayotollah, that Israel must be erased from the pages of time, wouldn't that be a threat to Israels existence? And wouldn't its recent propaganda flick, depicting an orthodox Jewish Rabbi as a warmongering, manifest destiny seeking, gentile hating, psychopath who (quoting from the film) regards only Jewish murder as murder, be ample evidence that the Iranian regime is a major threat, given its religious basis, to Israels existence?

Answer me in PM top avoid marring this thread further with off topic material.

reply to post by dontreally


He is the only presidential candidate making the establishment squirm and it shows. I don't see how anybody that is aware of the blatant control and manipulation of these establishment elitists wouldn't want to elect the very man that they're afraid of.

It doesn't matter if it's true...a candidate doesn't say this about their opponent.

Yes, I know people that support him will LOVE his comment...but you honestly don't matter to him...you are in his pocket already...he doesn't need to convince you.

Paul didn't come out of the debate looking good...his stance on Iran made him look bad to Republican voters. This isn't going to help him either.

Sure, Ron Paul supporters will say it will win him independents...but he doesn't need the independent vote right now...he needs that for the general election, not the REPUBLICAN primary.

reply to post by eLPresidente


Don't get your hopes up.

In my opinion, it is much more likely that he is killed, and a civil war is sparked, than him succeeding in everything he desires to do, and eliminating the IRS, Fed, Foreign Aid and inaugurating his Utopian libertarian vision for America.

Its hard to imagine, but perhaps he has an inkling that he is being setup as a political martyr - and again, I don't think you should assume that the elites are trying to avoid this situation. Assuming that ignores the many many endless examples of history, where chaos served the transformation of society from one form into another.

I am a sociology student. I know my history, and I also know how society is transformed from one mode into another. It always occurs (excluding very rare circumstances, like in India) through social disorder.

Originally posted by dontreally
So what will happen? Will Russia or China, not make a move into the regions vacated by the US?

Dont we have ENOUGH problems in America,to worry about this??

We cant FINANCIALLY sustain POLICING the World.

Period.