Posted on 05/22/2007 8:33:09 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
Ron Paul Recruits Anonymous to Attack Rudy's Foreign Policy
May 22, 2007 3:37 PM
ABC's Z. Byron Wolf reports: Presidential candidate and Libertarian Republican Rep. Ron Paul will enlist the help of Mr. Anonymous --Michael Scheuer, an author critical of Presidents in both parties and the former head of the CIA's Osama Bin Laden unit -- to argue that America's Mayor needs to bone up on his recent history.
It's been a week since the Fox News presidential debate and Ron Paul is still playing up his tiff with Rudy Giuliani that night over whether US Foreign Policy, specifically the first Gulf war, led in some way to 9/11. Paul said it's common sense. Giuliani said the notion that US Foreign policy with regard to the Middle East generally, and Iraq specifically, led to 9/11 is poppycock.
Paul and Scheuer are going to have a Thursday event at the National Press Club Thursday to, facetiously, "educate former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Foreign Policy."
"They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think (Ronald) Reagan was right," Paul said. "We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting?"
Giuliani said Paul was being absurd.
"That's really an extraordinary statement," Giuliani said. "That's really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of Sept. 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I have ever heard that before and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11. I would ask the congressman withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that."
Paul, however, dug up a passage from the 9/11 Commission Report the next day that backed his claim and shot off a press release the next day wondering if Giuliani had even read the report. So goes the report: "His (Bin Laden) rhetoric selectively draws from multiple sources-Islam, history, and the region's political and economic malaise. He also stresses grievances against the United States widely shared in the Muslim world. He inveighed against the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam's holiest sites. He spoke of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of sanctions imposed after the Gulf War...."
Giuliani has not backed down. He told Sean Hannity on Sunday that Paul's "statement that really shocked me."
"I never thought I'd hear something like that at a Republican debate. I actually didn't expect it at a Democratic debate. It was sort of the kind of thing that I remember like the Saudi prince saying, you know, the one who gave us $10 million, said American foreign policy had something to do with it, that had to be changed."
"I mean, it seemed like it was so off the wall," Giuliani added. "And there are so many of these conspiracy theories about September 11, to hear one coming from a Republican was very, very disappointing. So I thought I just had to step in, nobody else seemed to be doing it. And I seemed to — I had to step in, somebody had to correct this."
Hmmm... A true conservative and the resident subject matter expert on bin laden smacking down Rudy in public.
I wonder if Rudy will be in drag...
Our next Commander in Chief? A bastion of conservatism? The voice of the GOP???
If you want to see real conservative leadership, check this out: Educating Rudy
When Ron Paul is beating you up, you got issues Ruby!
Ron Paul and, to a lesser extent, Tom Tancredo, are the only true conservatives running. Everybody else is a fraud!
Anonymous recruits Anonymous for major political mileage. Hosts of Americans say “Who”?
ABC wrote the story with “Anonymous” instead of Scheuer in order to belittle him.
What the hell happened to this site? I’m not a particular fan of Giuliani, but I don’t remember this site as being full of open supporters of sedition and treason in the past.
It’s the 1% crowd.
Was your comment designed to get the thread pulled or something. Quite nice...
Gee I guess Jimmy Carter was a Foreign Policy genius/true conservative in pulling the plug on the Shaw and letting what ever fill the vacuum...because that the same logic of Paul's Foreign Policy ...
Sounds inspiring.
I bet "Pseudocon Sean" Hannity already has that bumper sticker on his car...
Hey! Maybe it’s this Anonymous guy who’s been spamming all the online polls for Ron Paul! Clever!
No - my comment was an open question.
Last I knew, someone blaming the US for 9-11, wanting to surrender to the enemy in Iraq, and so on was just about everything that this site wasn’t about.
Frankly, I think that blaming America for 9-11 and demanding American surrender is utterly treasonous and, if we had any balls, it would be dealt with as such.
During the Civil War, one pro-Southern Congressman was exiled from the country. Perhaps we should exile Ron Paul to Iran, given his own sympathies with the murderers of Americans he should get along just fine there.
Ron Paul is an idiot. Tom Tancredo is a conservative.
Go Ron Go !!! Can't wait until Thursday's Press Party!!! Yahoo!!! Go Ron Go !!!
Go Ron Go !!! Can't wait until Thursday's Press Party!!! Yahoo!!! Go Ron Go !!!
Sorry about the double posting... Internet Explorer hiccupped : (
Jimmy had so much confidence in the benevolent power of government that he thought we could dictate to Iran to implement human rights reforms without any repercussions for the Shah (not "shaw"). Jimmy had NO intention of removing the shah, and conservatives have been pointing out for 25 years that Jimmy was completely surprised by the overthrow of the shah.
That mindset is the exact opposite of Ron Paul.
Jimmy pressured the Shah to relax freedom of speech, to allow more freedom for political dissidents, and blocked exports of tear gas and rubber bullets to Iran; Jimmy was also implicated by some commentators in a scandal involving Jimmy Carter demanding financial favours from the Shah.
Despite these movements to increase civil liberties in Iran, Jimmy still called the shah a "wise and valuable leader."
Ron Paul believes that we should not interfere with the internal relations of another state, not force it into our version of a Western Democracy...
Guiliani must be aware that the Saudi prince who attempted to donate $10 million after 9/11 is a first cousin to other Saudi royals whom are known to have financially supported Bin Laden in the years before 9/11. It was Sheuer’s era CIA report, at least the redacted versions, that concluded that information too.
Guiliani just keeps digging the hole.
Ron Paul is in this for the long haul. He is forcing Rudy to play rope a dope.
He said that they hate us because of our policies, not "because of our freedom", as morons like Rudy have stated.
We're not surrendering, but the IED war is UNWINNABLE, and the less of our boys we lose there, the better.
Is it because he's NOT a cross-dressing liberal who has no understanding of international relations, of blowback?
Giuliani is also a paid consultant for the government of Saudi Arabia... and FOX News. That was a fair debate...
Guess they should have been watching their hero on CSPAN earlier. He was suggesting that the changes in the law to Martial Law and Posse Comitatus statuates were the precursors to a military take over of the government. He needs to be in a white jacket, not the White House.
Well, great, he voted for the war against the Taliban. So did every single other member of Congress - except for Barbara Lee.
BFD.
His comments were utterly and completely false and they feed the morale of our enemies. Indeed, his words - and they spread abroad, thanks to the internet - have worked to raise up the spirits of our enemies and, in so doing, will surely cost more American lives. Ron Paul, and everyone else who opposes the war and - in so doing mobilizes our enemies - has American blood on his hands.
In any case, the comments had nothing to do with why they hate us. They hate us because Islam and the West have been at war for a thousand years and, without other sruggles, Islam is free to resume it’s battle with us. The idea that they “hate us” because we were “bombing Iraq for ten years” is beyond absurd. I doubt if it would make the Jihadists’ top 1000 greivence list.
How about the 9-11 idiot conspiracy theory that Rudy is babbling about, that 9-11 is our fault because our women have rights?
Attempting to dismiss alternate Foreign Policy recommendations, on those grounds, is a cop-out designed to be an "argument ender" hiding behind Patriotism.
What exactly do you not accept in the CIA's numerous reportings of regional Blowback in the Middle East?
Sorry, but you honestly don’t know anything about the history of this forum, and your questions make it plainly obvious you don’t know much about the struggles inside the US intelligence and military community for the last few decades. FR in it’s short existence has a pretty consistent history of criticising US foreign policy during the Bush years, and the Clinton years, and the Bush years.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who has made an effort to bring forth long standing underlying issues regarding US international policies to the American people, so that at a minimum, the US citizenry can be informed of the larger realities and perceptions of realities that are countering US policy objectives as currently pursued.
Guiliani is openly saying “the truth, you can’t handle the truth”. Best yet, Guiliani is projecting his own insecurities, without the “Mr. Security” vapors, he doesn’t have much left to run on.
What the heck are you talking about? That’s not a ‘conspriacy theory’ - that’s a core component of Islamist hatred of the West, particularly in a contemporary sense. I’d recommend that you study the writings of al-Qaeda’s spirutal father, Sayyid Qutb, to get an idea of the source of Islamist rage against the West.
In short - my view is that a large pecentage of Islamists (like Nazis) are deeply repressed homosexuals who’ve turned outwardly violent. But that’s just a theory. But, in general, someone who writes into their will demanding that women not be allowed at their funeral, as Mohammad Atta did, probably has some serious issues in that area.
Yeah, and as discussed here, Paul Wolfowitz said that occupation of the Arabia Peninsula encouraged Al Qaeda recruiting. What is your point?
On Chomsky - Chomsky is straddling the fence between saying we deserved it and we didn't deserve it; Chomsky's like that -- using weasel words so people don't know what the hell he's talking about.
On Ward Churchill - the "fake Indian" stated multiple times that we deserved it.
Absolute nonsense. I’m well aware of the history and have, to various degrees, been engaged in these issues since long before this forum was around.
Free Republic started off as a gathering place for some of the more fringe anti-Clinton elements, a lot of whom were wackjob paleoconservatives and libertarians. Later, it became a more Republican forum. Now, over the last few years (over my tenure here as a poster rather than lurker, in fact), it’s come increasingly to be dominated by nuts - either Constitution Party weirdos, Pauliacs, BorderBots, etc, who hold views which are at obvious and utter variance with reality on any number of issues and whose divisive, factional tendencies have caused deep harm to the Republican Party.
In large measure, I would attribute the decline of this place to the migration of people to other conservative blogs and, in turn, the takeover of this place by people seemingly too illiterate to read roadsigns, let along write blogs.
I pointed out his vote on Afghanistan because people are fraudulently claiming that he thought we deserved it, which he did not.
His comments were not false, but the official explanation of the 9/11 Commission Report, bin Laden expert Michael Scheuer, and thousands of other experts.
I doubt his comments give comfort to the enemies.
al-Qaida is praying we don't leave Iraq, because as soon as we do, the Sunni Tribes and the Kurdish Peshmerga are going to massacre al-Qaida.
It's actually in the TOP THREE of the grievances, right after (1) US troops in Saudi and (2) the occupation of Palestine. Read his declaration of wars on us, or is it that they just hate "freedom".
I think it doesn't jive with your NeoConservative drag queen's platform.
NeoCons need to ask themselves: WWBD - What would Benito (Giuliani) Do?
Anyone who uses the world “Palestine” in the context you just used it... Well, it’s an automatic tip-off as to where their sympathies lay.
And, no, his explanation is totally at variance with that of the 9-11 Commission Report. I have a copy sitting about two feet from me. I’ve read the whole thing. Have you? Or are you waiting for the illustrated edition?
Beyond that - the rest of your post is the sort of utter nonsense which I’d expect to be spilled from Kossaks and other traitors, but which I’ve always come to places like this to avoid.
Al-Qaeda doesn’t give a damn if they lose some of their operatives in Iraq. It’s all a matter of image and public relations.
Right now, the best weapons that al-Qaeda have for killing Americans are people like Ron Paul and Nancy Pelosi - the only people who can win this war for the enemy.
The American Army cannot be defeated on the battlefield. It can only be defeated if America is stabbed in the back by people like Ron Paul, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. Every vote cast for such people is of greater utility for the terrorists than a bullet.
I don’t think Benito Giuliani would want to read it anyway, because that would just make the terrorist win :)
You talk about Islamists being repressed homosexuals -- there is nothing "repressed" about it if you've been to Iraq and see the outwardly homosexual relationships between arab men. It's little talked about in the Western Media, but Arab culture accepts it.
Perhaps a large percentage of NeoConservatives are gay, since Michael Savage is a repressed self-hating homosexual and Benito Giuliani likes to dress in drag...
Oh, shut up. Like I said - I’m not a Giuliani supporter - but the “drag” thing was for a skit.
Republicans can and will nominate someone quite socially conservative (not Rudy) and a patriot as well (not paleoPaulie). Isolationism died at Pearl Harbor and again on 9-11. We ain't going back.
PaleoPaulie actually tries to defend himself by associating himself with the despicable antiwar antiAmericanism of the Vietnam War era suggesting that we should have foregone the war and went straight to trade with the slave masters of Vietnamese communism.
PaleoPaulie has no morals whatsoever on matters of foreign policy and military. While I credit him to some extent as a pro-lifer in a vacuum, and while it is necessary that our candidate be reliably pro-life, it is also necessary that our candidate not give aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war (declared or not). PaleoPaulie is an idjit, and an antiAmerican, antiwar idjit at that.
who said I was voting for Rudy? You just assume any one that dare question your hero is going to? There are other people running. I just love how you guys take a comedy skit and blow it up into being some one’s lifestyle. Conspiracy and inuendo seems to be all that Paul and his followers have to offer. If the only thing you have to make your boy look good is the hurling of insults, you’ve not only lost the debate, you were never in it. Paul will disappear from the scene soon enough like the fringe candidate he is, hopefully he takes the lot of you with him.
You must be very proud that the Report is sitting in front of you; I have read it. So what are these discrepancies you speak of?
Great -- So now I'm a liberal because I don't support left-wing Wilsonian Ideology.
The image of Sunni tribesmen slaughtering al-qaida operatives in Iraq probably won't help the PR or the recruiting effort buddy. What does help their PR is photos of American soldiers juxtaposed with dead Arabs; that sells.
Yes; we are an omnipotent superpower that can only lose if we don't put our mind to it. Have you ever served? Ever been to Iraq? The IED was is unwinnable -- and therefore the war is unwinnable.
The US Army cannot be defeated on the battlefield if we define the battlefield on OUR terms. The Army can definitely lose battles in 4th Generation warfare. How much territory can we hold in Iraq? Why is it when we launched the surge, the Mahdi Army disappeared. We are not supermen. You might have a better perspective if you have served -- have you?
He's giving conservative platitudes right now so he can have the option to run for '08.
You can't throw the word treason around all the time -- it loses its meaning. Save it for when it's actually the case; it's like liberals when they call everybody that disagrees with them a fascist.
"A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!"
It ultimately means that the Osama Bin Laden's of the world (or any other thug nation) have veto power over any foreign policy, alliance or friendship we may want...
To chose isolationism because of danger the of dealing with the world, making choices and taking sides, does indeed prepare you for a master... unless you make yourself small enough and irrelevant enough to go unnoticed and unmolested...
As small as the world is getting these days ... that's pretty small, irrelevant...and subservient
Jeane Kirkpatrick
Whether paleoPaulie is willing to admit it or not, conservatism is not isolationism and it is not internationalism. Conservatism is a policy of unilateralism and interventionism. Other nations who want in are welcome without strings. Treason does not lose its meaning when applied to those who give aid and comfort to the enemies of our nation in time of war. You know, to those like paleoPaulie. BTW, Giuliani may be a drag queen and won't be nominated but he kicked paleoPaulie's sorry patoot and nothing is going to change that, even if paleoPaulie, George McGovern, Noam Chomsky, Ramsay Clark, INTERNATIONAL ANSWER, the New Republic, Jimmuh Cahtuh, and The Nation and the People's World and you disagree.
As my late great Irish grandmother (from Cork) used to say : Show me your friends and I will tell you what you are. Most of our grandmothers used to say that and they were right!
Exactly. Thank you. God bless you and yours.
“Giuliani has not backed down. He told Sean Hannity on Sunday that Paul’s “statement that really shocked me.””
I’m not a big Paul fan, but I just had to take a minute to LMAO at the above from Rudy. If that statement doesn’t show how clueless Giuliani is with Foreign Policy is, then not much of anything could (LOLOLOLOLOL).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.