Hunting Nazis: Anonymous snares Ron Paul in Operation Blitzkrieg

reply to post by TheOneElectric


This, I'd like to see these documents personally. Most of the Paul supporters will just say it's all fake. It doesn't matter anyway, the guy is not going to win.

I find it interesting that when Anon claims to take down a child pornography site no one questions whether they actually did or not. However as soon as they find something in regards to Ron Paul they become the least trustworthy people in the world. Like I said I like Ron Paul, but the double standards upheld by his supporters really need to stop.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
I find it interesting that when Anon claims to take down a child pornography site no one questions whether they actually did or not. However as soon as they find something in regards to Ron Paul they become the least trustworthy people in the world. Like I said I like Ron Paul, but the double standards upheld by his supporters really need to stop.

stopping child porn = good
calling ron paul racist = debunked media smear

maybe that has something to do with the distrust.

reply to post by filosophia


I never said child porn was good. However, one could argue that neo-Nazis are bad. This wasn't an operation to attack Ron Paul. It was an operation to hack neo-Nazi websites that has been ongoing since last year. They just so happened to turn up references to Ron and Rand Paul in their latest target. Are you saying that they should have kept this information hidden simply because it paints Ron Paul in a bad light?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
I find it interesting that when Anon claims to take down a child pornography site no one questions whether they actually did or not. However as soon as they find something in regards to Ron Paul they become the least trustworthy people in the world. Like I said I like Ron Paul, but the double standards upheld by his supporters really need to stop.

It never will stop. This isn't about Ron Paul, it's about an idea. It could anybody else as long as he spouted the same lines. So to them you are personally attacking their ideals.

Everyone has a devil they dance with.

I have liberals I regularly talk to. Some think Obama is the best thing ever, others practically vomit Marx all over the table. Depending, I nod my head or call them retarded, and get on with what I am actually there to discuss with them.

A lot of white supremacists are devout Constitutionalists. Most want a smaller government and for it to have less role in the lives of the citizens. Some (though I can't wager a guess as to how many) even separate their view of government from their opinions of superiority (IE - they don't want a government to declare them as being superior - that is fairly self-evident to them and the idea they need a government to sanction it is just insulting).

So, in that respect, I don't think it's fair to call Ron Paul a racist because of some of the people he talks to.

I would say this is a fairly toxic idea to spread, too. Subliminally, when you attack people for socializing with people you don't support or agree with 100%; you are saying: "It is only okay for you to talk and converse with people who are the same as you."

Which stifles the exchange of ideas, the freedom of society, and leads to a fragmented and hostile set of ideologies.

And, really, I agree with what Paul has said regarding domestic policy (not really with him on foreign policy - but at least he has a foreign policy, even if it is isolationism). He's not said anything that indicates he is for instating racist tendencies in government.

That's his position, and I really couldn't care less if he does or doesn't consider himself superior to another person because of their skin color. So long as he keeps that out of the political office he would head as President.

But, there again, I'm a personal supremacist... I'm better than everybody; their refusal to acknowledge this fact is just further testament to the inferiority of their mental faculties. So, I've gotten used to people falsely believing themselves to be relevant... much less superior.

First of all, even if he was a racist, how does that discredit his message? He is the only one that votes the says he votes. Obama spends 20 years going to a racist church and he's president. I'm tired of this double standard that its ok for one ethnic group to get away with pure racism; Black Panthers at polling sites, taxes on tanning beds, etc and the other side does anything that could be remotely close to racist and the media has a field day. Did you start any threads on Obama or Eric Holder being racist? If not then you truly aren't concerned about racism.
As far as RP being racist, if he is, who cares. Everyone has a right to feel the way they feel about anyone they want. Gay marriage and abortion is against his core belief but he isn't trying to legislate based on it. As long as he believes in personal freedom, a country based on sound money and a country that doesn't meddle in the affairs of others, thats really all I care about.

reply to post by wardk28


But how many Ron Paul supporters are also upholding a double standard? How many of them made a big deal about Obama going to a racist church, but now that Ron Paul is being accused of being racist racism is no longer a big deal?

If 'Anonymous' found a report saying Obama was a 'Racist' and in the same situation how would people take it? would it be a clear 'Media Attack' to smear the reelection of Obama so the next Puppet could be installed?

Understand i don't support Obama, and i don't support Ron Paul, i don't support any Candidate or Political Party,

i think this Blind Worship of Ron Paul, is what got Obama Elected, remember the 'Change' people followed blindly, anyone but Bush, Change, Etc,

none of us truly know if Ron Paul is a racist or not, because none of us 'Know' Ron Paul,

why is 'Ron Paul' above Conspiracy?

I just wish Anon would hack into the Holder's email and get the truth about F&F. And yes Antonia, it's a double standard. Kind of like, I can talk bad about my family but don't YOU dare. When I noticed that Anon was starting to put Paul in the cross hairs so to speak, I knew it/they would no longer be the ATS's knight in shining armor, come to expose lies and corruption. Anon would magically become the evil illuminati/TPTB. I personally think that Anon has some connection with Julian Assange.

reply to post by Darth_Prime

why is 'Ron Paul' above Conspiracy?

Exactly. Many people will point to Paul's consistent record as a politician as proof that he's on the level. Yet, at the same time many of these same people are the ones that believe in a centuries long conspiracy to enact a New World Order. So what would stop them from having a sleeper agent agent masquerade as a politician for a few decades?

reply to post by Xcalibur254


The reason behind that is Obama stumped on being the Great Uniter. He couldn't have believed that because when he had chances to show America that racism will not be tolerated, he chose to ignore it. Imagine the KKK in 2008 threating voters as they went in to vote. The point is why do you care if someone doesn't like you because of your color? I meet people that don't like me because I'm white. No one will ever change that kind of hate. As long as your rights,my rights or anyone's rights are not infinged or violated, then I really don't care. Obama has been guilty of this on more than a few occasions. If Ron Paul were to become president, as minute a chance that is, then he will be called out on this as well and get a lot more attention because of this PC society we live in. As for RP supporters, well the same can be said about Obama supporters. No matter what, they will do no wrong. There again, why do you care about what others think?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Darth_Prime

 

why is 'Ron Paul' above Conspiracy?

Exactly. Many people will point to Paul's consistent record as a politician as proof that he's on the level. Yet, at the same time many of these same people are the ones that believe in a centuries long conspiracy to enact a New World Order. So what would stop them from having a sleeper agent agent masquerade as a politician for a few decades?

Indeed, Indeed, i do concur,


if one accepts the 'Political Conspiracy', one must accept that anyone who has an End Game of being the president, may be 'Compromised'

reply to post by Xcalibur254

But how many Ron Paul supporters are also upholding a double standard? How many of them made a big deal about Obama going to a racist church, but now that Ron Paul is being accused of being racist racism is no longer a big deal?

Considering that Obama has backed a number of policies that almost exclusively benefit racial minorities... one could make the argument that he is a racist in behavior (even if his verbiage attempts to claim otherwise).

Honestly, though; the issue with Obama's past and present affiliations has little to do with racism and more to do with the style of government and economy Wright and others professed and instilled within Obama, and regularly discussed with him. Those policies were the focus of their discussion.

Now, I will stand corrected if Ron Paul is having discussions with a few of these white supremacists about whites being superior (and he's in agreement). But that's not what I see, here.

Further; I am not seeing A3P=Nazi or Neo-Nazi.

Nazis are socialists in the context of fascism (the government owns businesses on behalf of the people for their own benefit... if you drink the juice). This A3P group doesn't really equate to that, though they are white supremacists.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

It's kind of like trying to label a Baptist as a Methodist for being a Protestant.

A3P's stated political goals are very similar to how Ron Paul stands. Now, if Paul were also meeting with, say, a socialist neo-nazi party on a regular basis - then there might be some reason to suspect he was meeting for white-supremacist reasons as opposed to political alignment.

But I just don't really see the connection, here.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Darth_Prime

 

why is 'Ron Paul' above Conspiracy?

Exactly. Many people will point to Paul's consistent record as a politician as proof that he's on the level. Yet, at the same time many of these same people are the ones that believe in a centuries long conspiracy to enact a New World Order. So what would stop them from having a sleeper agent agent masquerade as a politician for a few decades?

Why Ron Paul? Because stuff is hitting the fan for EVERYONE. Obama was a fad, a trend, if your favorite singer or actor supported him, then impressionableI young voters supported him. Ron Paul supporters can intelligently discuss his beliefs , and are not seduced by the "American Idol" image that elected Obama.

reply to post by Unknown Soldier

Anyone can be Anonymous, in fact you and I are Anonymous in this very web site. Anyone can make a blog, video, forum post under the Banner of Anonymous. What you are saying is a logical fallacy. This itself is a fringe excuse. I could assume you are a CIA agent planting disinfo by assumption. Its pretty silly. Sure the PTB can be Anonymous too isn't it neat? But the proof is in the pudding. It's like when a criminal gets arrested and the police find drug paraphernalia on his person and he claims he did not know how it got there it was planted lol.

I understand that we are all Anonymous to some extent but there is clearly some sort of leadership behind the movement. Where are their objectives comming from? It is my understanding that "Anonymous" is a group of hackers. Am I wrong?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254

... the "hacktivists" that stand for truth and justice over at Anonymous?

please show me how anon is for truth or justice.
im not for ron paul,
but just like him, anon, are just more inside job pawns.

This has been posted three times, never with anymore credible info or sources.

We don't know if it's credible, on top of that we don't know what the context was, or the variables. So until there is more info it is incredible jumping to conclusions and sensationalism.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by filosophia

 

I never said child porn was good. However, one could argue that neo-Nazis are bad. This wasn't an operation to attack Ron Paul. It was an operation to hack neo-Nazi websites that has been ongoing since last year. They just so happened to turn up references to Ron and Rand Paul in their latest target. Are you saying that they should have kept this information hidden simply because it paints Ron Paul in a bad light?

wow maybe you should reread my post because your a bit off. I said stopping child porn is good, i never accused you of saying child porn was good. Nor did i say anything about keeping anything secret, i said it was a debunked media smear to call ron paul is racist.

Originally posted by Aim64C

A lot of white supremacists are devout Constitutionalists. Most want a smaller government and for it to have less role in the lives of the citizens. Some (though I can't wager a guess as to how many) even separate their view of government from their opinions of superiority (IE - they don't want a government to declare them as being superior - that is fairly self-evident to them and the idea they need a government to sanction it is just insulting).

Actually, the chairman of the American Third Position (the neo-nazi group in question) William Daniel Johnson, has long supported an ammendment to the constitution which would deport most non-whites from the United States. The fact that this person or a group spearheaded by this person has access to a potential serious presidential candidate it seriously disturbing to me.