In ad for newsletter, Ron Paul forecast "race war"

In ad for newsletter, Ron Paul forecast "race war"

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A direct-mail solicitation for Ron Paul's political and investment newsletters two decades ago warned of a "coming race war in our big cities" and of a "federal-homosexual cover-up" to play down the impact of AIDS.

The eight-page letter, which appears to carry Paul's signature at the end, also warns that the U.S. government's redesign of currency to include different colors - a move aimed at thwarting counterfeiters - actually was part of a plot to allow the government to track Americans using the "new money."

The letter urges readers to subscribe to Paul's newsletters so that he could "tell you how you can save yourself and your family" from an overbearing government.

I'm all for Ron Paul, but this report will not do his run for the office of P.O.T.U.S. any good at all.

Maybe he is just a little bit crazy, but IMO, I still think he is the best chance we have to turn the U.S.A. around.

I want to know....

What do my fellow ATSer's think about this?

reply to post by mikemck1976

What do my fellow ATSer's think about this?

We think you should use the ATS search tool. And stop reading MSM "news" because it's not "news" anymore, considering the letter was debunked countless times over the past 2 decades. This is the MSM, who hates Paul, trying to smear his campaign.

reply to post by mikemck1976


Turn the USA back around...?

What, back towards legal lynchings?

Where are we supposed to be going, when we "turn around"?

Originally posted by TwilightSporkle
reply to post by mikemck1976

 

Turn the USA back around...?

What, back towards legal lynchings?

Where are we supposed to be going, when we "turn around"?

Please provide links and quotes citing where Ron Paul has advocated legal lynchings etc etc....

Ill hold my breath

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


Please show me where I said he did. I'll hold my breath. Don't worry, you made one thing up, I'm sure you can make another one up.

No. The OP's post shows a Ron paul newsletter warning of "race war." On top of the other fun stuff found in those newsletters... under Ron Paul's name and management. I have no idea if Paul wants there to be legal lynching. But it seems to me that he's not exactly a shining beacon of racial equality.

Rather, I was asking the OP exactly how far back he wants this country to turn. There was once a time when lynching was legal. Even advertised in newspapers beforehand, no less. And it wasn't that long ago, as history goes - 20th century. How far back is "back" enough for this desire to "turn around"?

reply to post by TwilightSporkle


Considering you say this is what will happen...

It seems you think he advocates thes actions...if not, then why would you make to jump to the idea that we would turn back to that point in history?

And not back just just power to states rights and minimizing federal influence....


I see you are new to ATS, so you should be made aware, when making accusations


The burden of proof is on you

Originally posted by Rockpuck


We think you should use the ATS search tool. And stop reading MSM "news" because it's not "news" anymore, considering the letter was debunked countless times over the past 2 decades. This is the MSM, who hates Paul, trying to smear his campaign.

Bumping for Search Function!

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by TwilightSporkle

 

Considering you say this is what will happen...

Quote me saying "this will happen," please. Since any fool can look at my posts here so far and see i've said no such thing, I think you'll have to resort to making stuff up. For a third time.

It seems you think he advocates thes actions...if not, then why would you make to jump to the idea that we would turn back to that point in history?

We're talking on a subject of race relations. The OP waved his campaign flag and praised Ron Paul as the man most likely to "turn the USA around." from a race relations standpoint, "turning the USA around" is kind of a bad thing, y'know? There was this whole thing about that in the resent past, something about "civil rights"? Yeah, used to be a little dangerous to be brown in some pretty big swaths of the country.

OP didn't say where we were supposed to be "turning around" to so I asked.

And not back just just power to states rights and minimizing federal influence....

Ah yes. State's rights. Didn't George Wallace have a position on state's rights? or am I thinking of South Carolina's declaration of secession? Funny how often "State's rights" are invoked on subjects like this, isn't it?

I see you are new to ATS, so you should be made aware, when making accusations


The burden of proof is on you

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

Then maybe you should stop making accusations.

reply to post by Rockpuck


I use search before I post anything, everytime. Nothing came up on this subject. So I'm sorry if I missed it. There is alot of Ron Paul threads here one ATS.

I'm only human.

Also, I have only used the MSM as a source for my threads twice as far as I can remember, and so what if I did.

Is it your job to call someone out on such a little matter?

IMO that was just childish on your part sir.

But, if there is a thread on this subject, there is a right way to tell a fellow ATSer that. That way is...

"That is a interesting subject, but someone beat you to it." and you post a link to that thread instead of acting like a jackass that has no respect for a fellow ATSer.

Don't you have any manners sir?

I'm starting to dislike ATS more and more each day because of people like you. It shouldn't have to be this way sir.

(I think that there is something in the ATS T&C about that. I thought I would point that out to you, since we are pointing out each others mistakes and all.)

Also, I sent a Alert to the mods to have them remove this thread, also about your lack of manners, because like you said, there is already a thread on this subject, and as I said before, if i missed it I'm sorry.

mikemck1976

In RockPuck's defense there has been about 50 threads about that on here lately, but anyway.. no biggie.. happens like 1000x a day here.

Regarding your OP, this stuff has been debunked 10,000,000 times by RP. He didn't write these things. Yes, he may have profited ( how much.. dunno.. prob not a lot ) but if you have ever listened to a word this guy has said EVER you would know that this obviously is a smear campaign on its last leg for the MSM.

This is THEIR ONLY AMMUNITION. A DEBUNKED ( OVER THE COURSE OF 20 YEARS ) newsletter that is just really getting annoying. Then you have people like Dr. Sanjay Gupta weighing in on the issue.. calling Dr. Paul out... I mean Sanjay f'in Gupta? LOL I love the media and these pundits.. great theater.

Originally posted by TwilightSporkle
How far back is "back" enough for this desire to "turn around"?

Don't know how far you want to go back,but as Long as it smears Ron Paul,I am sure you are fine with it ,Foxy......

BTW,glad to make your acquaintance. It seems like I know you already.......

reply to post by sonnny1


When Ron Paul was 3 years old he picked his nose.

ZOMG!!!!!

Vote for Obama!!!!!

reply to post by Rockpuck


As someone who got a tic-tac stuck up my nose when I was four, that might actually make me MORE likely to vote for Paul.

Anyone wanna help me for NasalPAC?

I read an article that I am trying to find again. It was an amazing article written by a professional ghost writer. He explains how newsletters work back in that time era, he explains how ghost writers works, and he gives a bit of a history lesson as well. One of the things he does is explains what else was happening at that same time period as these news letters were coming out. He claimed that as bad as some of these sentences may look on the surface, that they are taken out of context. When placed in their proper context, they do not even appear racist.

That is the first thing I thought about when I saw this "race war" thing.

Would it make a difference to anyone if I were to tell you that many of these newsletters came out around the time of the Riots in LA?

So why does that matter? Well the LA Riots in many ways was a race war. It was spawned off from the Verdict handed down in the trail of Police Officers who were video taped beating a Black man repeatedly named Rodney King.


During these Riots many Blacks were attacking people simply based on Race. Not just attacking whites, but Asians, Mexicans, Latinos of all kinds and ANYONE who was not Black. As a perfect example, does anyone remember Reginald Denny?




I guess my point is, before people jump all over these one liners and sound bytes, maybe we should do some research. Not just about WHO wrote these newsletters, but also about what the context and political/social climate of the time was as well. Just watch the newscast I posted of the Reginald Denny beating. Listen for the very last question and answer. "Why was he beaten?" "He's white".

So "Race War"? Well at that time period many people thought it was a very real possibility.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by mikemck1976

 

What do my fellow ATSer's think about this?

We think you should use the ATS search tool. And stop reading MSM "news" because it's not "news" anymore, considering the letter was debunked countless times over the past 2 decades. This is the MSM, who hates Paul, trying to smear his campaign.

ABOUT ATS: General ATS discussion etiquette

1) Be polite. Above all, we take pride in the fact that AboveTopSecret.com is renowned as a destination for civil and polite discussion of nearly anything. Treat your fellow ATS members with respect, and your time here will be rewarding.

I thought I would remind you...
Just in case you forgot.

I just didn't get the feeling that you way you responded to my thread was "polite" or showed "your fellow ATS member with respect."

Thanks, and have yourself a Merry Christmas!
Mikemck1976

yeah, the MSM hates Ron Paul so much that he's literally been on at least one of the 3 major corporate news networks seemingly every single day for the last 3 years.

reply to post by David9176


Really?? Fascinating.. usually they use him as the "we all think this, but this crazy guy is saying....."

My David, how your political views have changed over the years.. Perhaps you prefer the oppressive regime at hand, so long as they continue the handouts why would the people object?

reply to post by MrWendal

Thank you for your post. It is nice to see someone that adds to the content of a thread instead of posting snide remarks.

The reason I made this thread was to learn something about this subject from my fellow ATSer's, because I knew nothing of this ad, the whole thing was new to me, and learn something I have.

I was in High School in a little town named Hinton in WVa when all that went down. As crazy as this sounds, we had our own little riot there over it. My best freind was shot in the gut and almost died. He had to have most of his small intestine removed.

So yes, I do know alot about that time, and I do see how someone would be worried about a race war happening and it almost did in our little town.

Nice post.
Star for you!

reply to post by mikemck1976


Ron Paul did not write these news letters.

As you thread OP saw the 7,000 posters or so there support Paul.

These letters were provided by James Kirchick, a contributing editor for The New Republic.

Domestically, the TNR as of 2011 supports a largely neo-liberal stance on fiscal and social issues, according to former editor Franklin Foer, who stated that it "invented the modern usage of the term 'liberal', .....

As of 2004, however, some, like Anne Kossedd and Steven Randall, contend that it is not as liberal as it was before 1974.

The magazine's outlook is associated with the Democratic Leadership Council and "New Democrats" such as former President Bill Clinton and Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman, who received the magazine's endorsement in the 2004 Democratic primary; so did Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton in 2008.....

Moreover, TNR is strongly in favor of universal health care.

On certain high-profile social issues, such as its support of same-sex marriage, TNR could be considered more progressive than the mainstream of the Democratic Party establishment.

And

Support for Israel has been another strong theme in The New Republic.
According to Martin Peretz, owner of TNR,
"Support for Israel is deep down an expression of America's best view of itself."According to CUNY journalism professor, Eric Alterman,

“Nothing has been as consistent about the past 34 years of TNR as the magazine's devotion to Peretz's own understanding of what is good for Israel…It is really not too much to say that almost all of Peretz's political beliefs are subordinate to his commitment to Israel's best interests, and these interests as Peretz defines them almost always involve more war."

WIKI

Please read that part in red several times, then let's talk about a motive.