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.

 

Ron Paul Flips out over Accusations he Believed 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 03:46 AM
link   
Ron Paul

I think Huffington Post is going a bit far saying he 'flipped" out.

Not quite sure what to think of this-if Dr.Paul is trying to keep his true beliefs about 9/11 covered up or if he really thinks the only conspiracy is the one we were fed by MSM and the Us Government.




posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 03:55 AM
link   
thats a pretty irritated response for Ron Paul. He probably just getting fed up with the constant attempts a character assassination though and wanted to stop this before a new set of rumors spread about him.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by monkofmimir
 


although he did do well.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:04 AM
link   
"Ron Paul stands for what he has always stand for. He doesn't backtrack" - this is the mantra heard on here.

And here he is backtracking. Yet, I suspect the reaction on here won't be "Oh, look, he does backtrack", it'll be "Of course he's backtracking, he needs to prepare for presidency".



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by fiflad
 


How is Paul "backtracking"?

He probably got irritated over the fact it was a blatant attack against him by the media as usual. Ron Paul is on record with his thoughts about this truther issue. This was asked and answered during the debates in 2007.



SO can you explain where this so called backtracking is exactly? Sounds to me like Paul denounced the idea now just like he did in 2007. I dont call that backtracking, I call that being consistent.

And may I ask how you came to such a conclusion based on a 43 second clip? I am sure the interview probably lasted longer than that, so where is the rest of it?
edit on 2-1-2012 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:23 AM
link   
LOL.

i love it.

They wouldn't be talking if they weren't scared to death of RP.

Keep it coming same-sters!

yup that's your new nickname


Anyway, if mitt or newt did this is would be viewed as being "stern" and standing up for themselves! but since it's Dr.paul it's "flips out".

He's not going away guys, get use to talk of freedom!



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Well folks, there it is... I was going to vote for him too! He seemed so rational, dignified and yet down to earth... believable. But not anymore IMO.

Since 9/11 I have said firmly that: any politician running for office (especially for president,) who stands up and says "9/11 is NOT an inside job" is just as filthy and "evil" as those who carried it out. I don't care about anything else they have to say.

Ignorance instead of vileness perhaps, but even so, such a massive display of such ignorance as well as a lack of conviction for the truth of the matter makes for a poor candidate indeed.

I understand Ron Paul may not be privy to such information... of course. However, if his reaction to the topic is "waitwaitwait, blah blah..." NO. That is not acceptable. Not in the face of such works as Debunking 9/11 Debunking. Our president needs to be empirical, critical, and independant.

Lost my vote... and no one but him had it! Shame....
edit on 2-1-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: typos



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:33 AM
link   
they saved what they think to be their best tool for last, to try and persuade the less intelligently fortunate.

eventually the 9/11 lie would HAVE to be used everyway it could until it's all dried up, then when the truth finally comes out mostly everyone who took part will be dead and the new controllers will take off where they left it with a new false flag to maintain it all like before.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aqualung2012
Since 9/11 I have said firmly that: any politician running for office (especially for president,) who stands up and says "9/11 is NOT an inside job" is just as filthy and "evil" as those who carried it out. I don't care about anything else they have to say.


Of course they are all going to tell the truth - what do you want them to say?

If they spread truther lies like "No planes hit the buildings, mini nukes were used, beam weapons from outer space were used, explosives were installed when the buildings were built, silent explosives were used etc etc etc." they would be laughed at for believing silly stories whilst ignoring the facts.
edit on 2-1-2012 by spoor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by spoor
Of course they are all going to tell the truth - what do you want them to say?

If they spread truther lies like "No planes hit the buildings, mini nukes were used, beam weapons from outer space were used, explosives were installed when the buildings were built, silent explosives were used etc etc etc." they would be laughed at for believing silly stories whilst ignoring the facts.
edit on 2-1-2012 by spoor because: (no reason given)


I don't ask that he touch upon every ridiculous claim. But the glaring questions and factual events and circumstances put forth AT LEAST by Dr. David Ray Griffin's book Debunking 9/11 Debunking stand firm to this day, unanswered by the PTB.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:11 AM
link   
His reaction is understandable after the "admit you're a racist" interview. He wanted to put a stop to this before it got out of hand.

I have followed Ron Paul for several years and have never heard him say that 9/11 was an inside job. I have heard him say he believes the attack was by Islamic militants. This accusation was apparently started by a disgruntled ex-staffer that was fired during RP's last campaign.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Ron Paul will never, ever, ever be PResident of the United States.


The Electoral College would NEVER pick him. He wouldn't make them any money.
Even if 99% of the American public picked him, he would NOT be PResident. The American people don't pick PResidents.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 07:50 AM
link   
You know whats funny is, the only way they can fault him for getting mad over being called a conspiracy theorist is if they lend credibility to 911 truth which they won't!



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
I don't buy into the argument that he knows the truth but does not speak about it since that flies in the face of his claim to honesty. As another poster stated he is not evil just ignorant. Fortunately or unfortunately, not sure which, what posters on the internet say does not make or break a candidate so this will actually help him get votes from the masses who refuse to investigate these kinds of issues. Ron Paul seemed more into conspiracies earlier in his career but seemed to back off for some reason. I think Ron Paul needs to learn a bit as to why so many young people support him, so until he supports 911 truth i may have to turn up the heat on him. I dont hate him nor will i even stop supporting him per se, but he should look into this if he wants to save some of his voters.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Pervius
 
You DO know the electoral college has only differed from the popular vote in TWO elections in american history, right? One of those being Florida 2000 election where the supreme court stepped in to stop the recounting that gave the electoral votes to Bush to allow him to win the electoral count?

While it's a concern, I will NOT call it a valid one as it does not square with history. It's supposition and effectively little more than scaremongering until we see something resembling evidence. Vote fraud and tampering with the balloting, etc., directly is a much more realistic issue requiring diligence on our parts.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 
You are aware that Paul supports an independent reinvestigation of 9/11, yes? So you're willing to throw that aside, on top of everything that - frankly, as far as I can tell - we absolutely NEED someone like Paul in the presidency for...because he may not agree with your views? Whether it's because to do so would burn any chance of doing anything useful for us ever again, or whether it's because he doesn't even need to look that far to see the government's responsibility for the events of that day?

Ignorant, man. Very ignorant.
edit on 1/2/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aqualung2012


I understand Ron Paul may not be privy to such information... of course. However, if his reaction to the topic is "waitwaitwait, blah blah..." NO. That is not acceptable. Not in the face of such works as Debunking 9/11 Debunking. Our president needs to be empirical, critical, and independant.

Lost my vote... and no one but him had it! Shame....
edit on 2-1-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: typos


You have to use a little bit of Grey Matter on this topic, as a Card Carrying Truther, let me help you out.

There are "hot" topics that no election seeking Politican will touch with a 10 foot pole.

911 is such a topic.

Any inkling that a politican has doubts of the events on 911 will quickly be turned into support for the acts,
to encouarging the acts, to eventually , said politican was actually flying one of the planes.

If any Politican will investigate 911 further , it would be RP.

But Aqualung, he has to be elected first , before he can upset any Status Quo apple carts.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
This is the pic that originally accompanied the article when it was on the front page of HP:




Any kind of snide pic/remark the media can get in there, they do. All the backhanded Ron Paul put-downs and attempts to cut him down in the media are way too obvious. Along with the hyperbole of this being a "flip out."
edit on 1/2/2012 by DiabolusFireDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Perplexedandconfused
 


I've seen Ron Paul throw little fits like this before...it makes him look like a crazy old man...not presidential at all.

And too bad if he is fed up about being asked something...you are trying to be President Of The United States...you are going to be asked some frustrating questions...over and over and over....handle it.

Can you imagine Ron Paul reacting this way with a foreign leader...throwing a fit like a child about something because he doesn't like the question???


In my experience, people only get annoyed by a question when there is some truth behind the answer that they don't want revealed.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I dont believe he is acting like a child but he does get upset more from this question than anything else so i agree he could handle it better which he does sort of by spinning it and bringing bush's stupidity as a reason to not believe but that is not what the truth movement believes is the only cause. However you can't deny that he is treated more unfairly than the other candidates. I never heard them ask if romney believed in conspiracy theories while they are too busy plastering his face on the front page. I don't agree with ron paul's assessment of 9/11 but as a truther I can say for sure that ron paul is not one, so for the media to imply he is just makes me support him even more. As usual the smear attempts from the media will backfire. The only way they can successfully derail paul is to give credibility to 911 truth which would be suicide for them so as usual ron paul will walk away unscathed.







 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join