It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Putting an END to the 'Ron Paul is racist' claims right here and now. Who will challenge me?

page: 24
401
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


There is nothing in that video that says Ron wrote that trash. What a waste of time.




posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 




I watched the video you posted and wrote down what Paul said about the newsletters.

"I also put out a political type of business investment newsletter, it sort of covered all these areas, and it covered alot of what about what was going on in Washington and financial events and especially some of the monetary events, since I had been especially interested in monetary policy, had been on the banking committee and Im still very interested in that subject. This newsletter dealt with that. It has to do with the value of the dollar, the pros and cons of the gold standard, and of course the disadvantages of the all the high taxes and spending that our government seems to continue to do. "

Im looking through this over and over, and I still cant find that part where he defends racism.




Watch this, Anonymous reads the letters :
www.youtube.com...


Apparently, Anonymous also supports Paul.






Him during a Dallas Morning News interview from 1996 :


Can you link the newsletter that is being discussed in this interview? Paul says the quotes were taken out of context, and I would like to see it myself.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 05:06 AM
link   
Need to make the first picture viral. The MSM was always going to get dirty at some point on this, and this is the best glimmer of hope they have for trying to dent RP.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 05:35 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Why is it many are ready to discount Ron Paul over some newsletters that he may or may not have written? His actions have not done anything to suggest that openly discriminates and does everything within in his power to deter blacks in any way.


If the posters saying that Ron Paul is such a racist and should not be elected, then where is there zeal for uncovering the racist agenda of the other candidates?


Mitt Romney
Part of the Mormon religion, a religion that does allow black people to reach the highest level of clergy. It wasn't long ago that Mormon's saw blacks as children of Cain and would have no chance of redemption.

Michelle Bachman
She just put her signature on a sign that said blacks would be better off in slavery than under Obama. Her views on homosexuality are damn well homophobic. And obviously her faith would interfere with her ability to have clear and unbias views on the country's direction.

Newt Gingrich
I almost think this guy hates everybody. Do I really need to go into this guy because obviously he has tendencies that aren't fair to women and pretty much hates poor people?

Herman Cain
Has his sexist tendencies. People got on his case when he said that "racism doesn't hold African Americans back".



I can't remember a single major candidate that did have some sort of bias against some sort of race or ethnicity. So far, the newsletter thing is the first thing I have heard about Ron Paul that I do think is bad. He may not have written the letters, but his name was on them. Maybe he should had better editing and proof-reading. Maybe he should have checked on his writers. Maybe he could have handled it better.

The fact of the matter is, his voting past does not imply racist tendencies. His many speeches do not contain any racist ideology. If actions speak louder than words, then I would say he is not a racist. If he he is racist, he doesn't let it get in the way of his medical practice or his job in Congress. People should just move on.

When everyday in this country, people are worried about having a roof over their heads, or being able to heat their homes, or put food on the table, it seems that most people want to argue some nonsense about newsletters 20 years ago.

Maybe if we all put our heads together, we can actually figure out how to put people we can all agree on in positions of political office. I think sometimes we choose the wrong avenues in which to direct our focus and energy. We spend too much time on "why is it it wrong or bad" rather than "how can we improve things or make things better".



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by clarkness
 


Because on the rest of the douchewads running's stances are obvious and have been very well covered. This slam job ongoing against Paul is to expose something he tried to keep hidden!

Besides Bachman, Paul, Romney, Gingrich and whoever else the new "Flavour of the week" is will all burn themselves and sink themselves! At least Obama continues to remain on message while all the aforementioned offer is more of the same which is simply unsustainable.

What we need is definitely not these mainstays who are more concerned with image then substance. We need a return to sanity in this nation whereas facts and common sense dictated the policy and not chasing phantoms and perceived threats like what's been going on as of late.

From Moderator seagull :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
No, more of the same isn't an option. Maintaining the status quo is what got us into this mess in the first place. ...and not just here in the States, either. Chickens are coming home to roost all over the place.

We may not agree on the particulars...and I suspect we won't on many issues. But on this we are agreed...the same ol', same ol', just doesn't work any more.
-------------

I wish more people would just abandon the talking points and the corrupt political parties on all sides because for us to begin this new era of Reconstruction we must abandon ideals and ideaologies that clearly do not work for anyone.

This new Era of Nationalism is something you can most definitely agree that we do need! Without some new radical idea and plan we are sunk! Couple this with the nationalization of The Federal Reserve in a mere 55 weeks will be the first steps in getting our monetary, financial, political house in order!

Our nation is bleeding now and does not need anyone stabbing her more. What we need is for everyone to come united under the banner of The United States Of America for our nation and for outsiders to unify under their national banner because this infighting is costing us everything but playing right into the hands of those we stand firmly against!

edit on 23-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 




Can one of the Ron Paul supporters explain this? Thank you.

That quote is hilarious though. What the hell is 'semi-criminal' supposed to mean?

Smh.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Q2IN2Y
 


They won't and can't because they see, End The Fed and legalize marijuana and that's it. They cannot see that he's not for the protection of liberty as his stated goal is in total lockstep with The GOP and that is to declaw, declip and defang Govt to be nothing more then a rubber stamper.

No real plan!

Our nation has been stabbed but they don't want to bust out the first aid kit, they want to throw salt on the wound.
edit on 23-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Paul in under the thumb of The SCUM and Dr. King was not hence why King got 3 in his chest!


That doesnt change the FACT of what you said.

You clearly are speaking for Dr. King,when you said he would "spit" on him.

That goes against ANYTHING Dr. King has done,or accomplished.

You AGENDA is old. Your mockery of Dr. Paul,and of DR. King,is wrong.

You are trapped in your little world of conspiracy,and want EVERYONE to swallow your version of YOUR pill.

I for one am tired of it.


No, TheImmaculateD1 is a troll that is serving his masters. This is an organized disinfo operation whereby members were ordered to go onto websites and post this drivel ad nauseum, despite any proof to the contrary. These people don't care about repudiation, apologies, rebuttals, interviews, videos, life actions, etc. What they truly care about is being racist themselves while pointing the finger of racism at someone else as a means to justify their outright hate.

Frankly, I can't believe that a mod hasn't stripped the majority of these posts. It's obvious that these people do not wish to debate, only hate.

My question for Springer since he was on here earlier is this: "WHY CAN'T WE HAVE THE IGNORE FUNCTION BACK?" I'm really tired of reading outright lies that continue to be perpetrated. I think TheImmaculateD1 is doing this now out of spite. They have zero credibility and resorting to calling Ron Paul supporters "idiots" is going to get them in hot water. They keep pushing the envelope and it's only time when they say something really dumb and get themselves banned.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Can we rename this thread to 'Ron Paul haters get owned REPEATEDLY'?



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


Disinfo operation is correct as you are the one passing off lies as truth and my stance and purpose on ATS is to be an Anti Disinformation (knowingly passing off a lie as truth) and Anti Misinformation (passing off a lie as truth while knowing its a lie) Agent as I do shadow and backchannel work and have been doing that for the last 10+ years so this is not a case of "oneupmanship" but is a case of disproving the purpose of this thread and that is to derail the lies and blatant disinformaiton that's being purported as a fact when at least 20 people here (myself included) have shot down and continue to shoot down each and every lie about Paul and the only reason why you want the ignore button back is to remain blinded by the mistruths and lies you are posting here.

I've listed proof of RP racism via at least 2 dozen different sources yet you continue to ignore the facts!

It's like I said which to this minute remain unaddressed and that is if these newsletters would've never existed then the purpose for this claim would have no weight but the fact they exist and you continue to conveniently ignore the truth even when a litany of facts exist to the contrary you want to simply talk yap on people by resorting to name calling and to continually employ little kid games.

The truth hurts don't it!



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Thanks for bringing actual facts to the thread. I have been researching and keeping up with this thread and I now think Paul did know about, endorse and defend what was in his Newsletters. Frightening, really. Thanks again!


Paul seems to not be able to handle this criticism very well. If he's going to play with the big boys, he's going to have to endure at LEAST as much criticism and public scandal as Obama did without removing his mic, taking his ball and going home.

Toughen up, Paul. You've got a long road ahead.... You're not going to reach your goal by refusing to answer these issues HONESTLY.

.
edit on 12/23/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


So, BH, in what way has Paul NOT responded or dealt with this issue HONESTLY? Please explain, and don't try and pass off an edited CNN interview as evidence.

So, TheImmaculateD1, how come only you can present "facts" and all we have posted is basically garbage in your opinion? Please explain.

You detract from REAL issues which is why the people who support Ron Paul know better than to believe this garbage. It is a blip on the radar and will fade away. Only people with hate in their hearts and who can't forgive will try to keep this alive.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


Instead of being the adult during the CNN interview he threw a temper tantrum and got hostile and ripped his mic off and left because he was being forced to confront a question he knew he was guilty of. He should've been the adult and addressed the q but he threw a fit and slammed down the mic proves he has something to hide!

Remember when 43 was being questioned by Helen Thomas and he got testy with her for asking about The Iraq War?
www.youtube.com...

Same deal!

A POLITICIAN DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SCRUTINIZE THE PRESS! NEITHER DO THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE SELECTIVE IN WHAT Q'S THEY ANSWER!

By going against this means you are against The 1st Amendment Right to Freedom Of The Press as you want to defend The Constitution to the death but conveniently ignore the press' right to get testy with politician whereas if you want to vehemently defend the 2nd all the time but to continually ignore the other 26 means when it don't suit your agenda means you do not support the Constitution but stand against it time and time again by denying the press the right to challenge our leaders. Remember, the press does not answer to politicians or Govt but is the exact opposite! Hitler silenced the press and look at where it got them.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 23-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


if the next cnn interview with ron paul (if there is one) asks the same question, you''ll have to excuse me if i find it a bit obvious lol
he explains it.
people who don't want to believe he has any excuse, ignore the answer and then claim he didn't answer it.
he explains it again.
and again.
and again.
then cnn interviews him and asks it.
he answers it.
and again
and again
and again
and again
and again
and again...
then cnn interviews him again and ask the same question again (don't they read?)
and he just says, eh, i'm done with this.

edit on 23-12-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


Instead of being the adult during the CNN interview he threw a temper tantrum and got hostile and ripped his mic off and left because he was being forced to confront a question he knew he was guilty of. He should've been the adult and addressed the q but he threw a fit and slammed down the mic proves he has something to hide!


You know that was edited to make it appear that way, right? I watched the video, he never threw a tantrum nor did he slam down the mic. That is an outright lie.


A POLITICIAN DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SCRUTINIZE THE PRESS! NEITHER DO THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE SELECTIVE IN WHAT Q'S THEY ANSWER!


That's true, but Paul HAS answered these allegations time and again. There was even a special CNN show dedicated to it back in 2008. Where were you? Or is it more convenient to your cause to ignore the facts. Do you honestly expect Dr. Paul to keep addressing the issue every time he is asked, when it was already dealt with years ago and should have been dropped? Or, to you, if he refuses to answer one time, then he's guilty no matter what he's said in the past? I simply don't follow that logic.


By going against this means you are against The 1st Amendment Right to Freedom Of The Press as you want to defend The Constitution to the death but conveniently ignore the press' right to get testy with politician whereas if you want to vehemently defend the 2nd all the time but to continually ignore the other 26 means when it don't suit your agenda means you do not support the Constitution but stand against it time and time again by denying the press the right to challenge our leaders. Remember, the press does not answer to politicians or Govt but is the exact opposite! Hitler silenced the press and look at where it got them.


Do you live your life by making wild assumptions? Look, this isn't debating. This is basically you telling ATS your opinion and anyone else that has a different opinion supported by facts can go "F" off.

Now you're bringing up Hitler? I think you're probably an intelligent individual that's why I'm scratching my head wondering why you don't click on ONE link that anyone has provided which clearly shows Ron Paul in his own words addressing this issue and taking responsibility for it. That's more than you would ever get from most politicians, but Paul isn't most politicians.

By the way, he's at 52% in Iowa. Woot!



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled[rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

They above is a copy and pasted version from dictionary.com.

I see no evidence that he believes white people are the superior race and I do not see anything to prove to me that he has an intolerance and even discriminates against other ethnicities or races. He has not actively done anything to stop the advancement or interfere with the culture of any ethnicity or race. He is not part of any organization that stops the progress of certain ethnic groups. If I compare the situation at hand, I see nothing to say that he in in fact a racist. Race is not an issue when it comes to protecting the freedoms and liberties guaranteed to us by the Constitution. He does not say give this to some and not others, he wants it for all human beings living under the United States flag.

Racist is apparently a word you are just throwing around without knowing the true definition. Show me where he supposedly setting any ethnicity back or hindering them in any way. I do not consider him a racist, maybe a bit ignorant on the content of his newsletter articles, but considering the ignorance of many of the politions, Democrat and Republican, I still consider him a better option than the status quo right now.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


Look at his arrogance. That is a temper tantrum. A vote for him is a vote against The Constitution because his plan to limit The Federal's ability is to turn over said power to the states and that would then give the states the right to deny you rights guaranteed in The Constitution. See how declawing Govt would backfire.

That would make a state Govenor the right over the Federal in matters pertaining to Federal.
edit on 23-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


Look at his arrogance. That is a temper tantrum.


he's been very patient with the press. very few politicians have had to endure being asked the same inflammatory question that many times. human beings should not be submitted to being asked the same inflammatory thing over and over and over again, once they've answered it a few times, that should be enough. it almost verges on torture interrogation.

as regards your edit, the states are still bound by the constitution.


edit on 23-12-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by SheopleNation
reply to post by StarPeace
 


If you take away the conspiracy line, then you got an Obama supporter like you. Actually, put the conspiracy line back, and make the conspiracy about how the rich want to hold the poor down. LOL! Nice job exposing your own kind guy. Now go bow down to your hypocrite hero Obama while he bombs Lybia.
~SheopleNation


Oh wait I thought I was a Fox News blind sheep...according to some here.
Far from a obama supporter.

Great try though. Honey.
Now go back to supporting your hero for the legal drugs.

Oh technically you are one of the sheep on this site.

edit on 23-12-2011 by StarPeace because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2011 by StarPeace because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
401
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join