Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Ron Paul

Ron Paul

Ratings: (0)|Views: 37|Likes:
Published by Eye ON Citrus
Ron Paul tried to explain how invading countries can incite foreign adversaries, but the brain less wonders at the forum booed, instead of listening. Ignorance is Bliss.
Ron Paul tried to explain how invading countries can incite foreign adversaries, but the brain less wonders at the forum booed, instead of listening. Ignorance is Bliss.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, History
Published by: Eye ON Citrus on Sep 13, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/14/2011

pdf

text

original

 
Ignoring the facts, establishment media smears Congressman as “defending Al-Qaeda”
Paul Joseph Watson
 Infowars.comTuesday, September 13, 2011The establishment media is once again attempting to smear Ron Paul as anti-Americanfollowing Paul’s simple observation during the debate last night that foreignoccupations increase the risk of terrorist attacks, when in reality the TexanCongressman’s views are endorsed by US military personnel more than any otherRepublican candidate.“Republican Presidential Candidate Rep. Ron Paul was booed at last night’s CNN/TeaParty debate while explaining his view on why America was attacked on September 11,2001,”reports ABC News. 
 
The corporate media instantly seized on the boos, made by a gaggle of neo-con “TeaParty” members, as a tool through which to portray Paul as un-American,  with oneacerbic headlineeven asking whether the Congressman was defending Al-Qaeda.
 
It’s a common smear to equate not supporting foreign occupations as anti-American oragainst conservative principles, despite the fact that the founding fathers consistently  warned against becoming involved in foreign entanglements.But like a lot of the myths circulated by the establishment about Ron Paul, reality reflects a very different picture.Given the fact that Ron Paul has received more money in donations from active duty military personnel than all of the other Republican candidates combined 
 
and morethan Barack Obama himself, his views on foreign occupations are supported by the very U.S. troops that neo-cons constantly invoke to support maintaining such foreignoccupations.Paul’s contention that the troops should be brought home from Afghanistan and Iraq,and that US bases around the world should be closed, is supported by those very sametroops.“Paul’s campaign told Politifact that Paul raised $34,480 from people in the military,compared with $19,849 for Obama and $13,848 for the other GOP presidentialcandidates,reports USA Today . 
 
“The Center for Responsive Politics says $11,350 of Paul’s military donations comefrom people who work for the Army. In the 2008 campaign, the center found thatindividuals employed by the Army, Navy and Air Force were Paul’s top three sources of campaign donations.”But it’s not just military service people who are growing tired of America’s unaffordableforeign empire. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, conservatives in general arelosing their appetite for war.Only 15 per cent of of likely U.S. Voters think the situation in Afghanistan will improveover the next six months, while more voters than ever before – 59 per cent – now wantan immediate troop withdrawalor a firm timetable to be set for ending the occupation.
 
Republicans are more pessimistic than Democrats about the future course of operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq.The 59 per cent figure represents a significant swing from less than two years ago inSeptember 2009, when just 39 per cent wanted the troops pulled out of Afghanistan.Crucially, a slim majority of Republicans now want the troops brought home from Afghanistan, 43 per cent to 42 per cent. Wars launched during the administration of George W. Bush have now become Obama’s wars. Indeed, there are more troopsdeployed under Obama 
 
than there were at any time under Bush.In addition, a mere 13 per cent of Republicans support US military intervention inLibya to topple Colonel Gaddafi.The myth that Republican candidates must not deviate from the neo-con dogma of supporting America’s unsustainable foreign occupations and the ludicrous policy of pre-emptive warfare in order to be electable is disappearing fast.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->