Posted on 11/13/2007 1:10:40 PM PST by SJackson
Daniel Sieradski, November 9, 2007
Ron Paul has a Jewish problem.
Last month, the dark horse Republican candidate was barred from the Republican Jewish Coalition’s Candidate’s Forum due to his stance against providing further foreign aid to Israel.
Typical of his view, at an event on September 11 of this year at Johns Hopkins’ School of Advanced International Studies, Paul argued for withdrawing from the Middle East, telling his audience that “Israel is quite capable of taking care of itself” — though interestingly adding that US policy has “hurt Israel tremendously.” Paul also downplayed the threat Iran poses to Israel, saying that even if Iran does develop nuclear arms, that it would not be a serious danger to Israel, which, he added, possesses roughly 300 nuclear weapons of its own.
Paul’s position towards Israel is not innately anti-Jewish, nor is it necessarily even anti-Israel — particularly with such a caveat about America impeding Israel’s interests. Such a statement lends weight, for example, to Zionist extremists who wish to terminate Israel’s Herodian dependence on the US, such as the members of Zionists for Ron Paul, a group run by American expatriates now living as religious settlers in the West Bank.
Nor is it a particularly uncommon position, especially within paleoconservative circles. Pat Buchanan led the charge in March of 2003, writing in The American Conservative that neoconservatives participating in and advising the Bush administration were steering the United States into wars that were not in America’s interests, but rather Israel’s.
Now fed up with the neocon’s wars abroad and the diminishing of civil liberties at home, many conservatives are rallying behind Paul, whom they view as the only Republican candidate who isn’t in the pocket of the Israel lobby. They have helped him become an Internet sensation — the Republican Howard Dean, if you will — who in the last quarter raised over $5 million, outpacing more mainstream candidates like John McCain.
Even with his hardline protectionist stance, Paul has managed to garner the support of Jewish Republicans and Libertarians alike, some of whom have banded together to form an ad hoc coalition called Jews for Ron Paul, which condemned the RJC’s decision to bar the Congressman from their Candidate’s Forum.
Yet, much to his Jewish supporters’ chagrin, Congressman Paul’s willingness to stand up to the neocons has also had the effect of making Paul a popular candidate among those from whom Presidential candidates would typically not desire support: Bona fide antisemites.
Indeed, Ron Paul has become the most popular candidate among right-wing extremists, including white separatists, neo-Nazis, and conspiracy theorists who believe that “the Zionists” were behind 9/11. This group includes Frank Weltner, creator of the antisemitic website JewWatch.com, who in a YouTube video, accuses the “Zionist-controlled media” of attacking Paul’s candidacy. Paul has also received favorable coverage from the Vanguard News Network, a White Nationalist news organ, members of Stormfront, an online neo-Nazi community, as well as the National Alliance, the “mainstream” White Nationalist group featured prominently in Marc Levin’s 2005 film Protocols of Zion.
Of course, Congressman Paul cannot be held accountable for the views of his extremist supporters, unless he publicly acquiesces to those views. Yet, when his extremist supporters begin providing a substantial amount of campaign funds, things get a bit dicier. And that’s Paul’s biggest problem.
According to the Lone Star Times, White Nationalists have become a noticeable source of financial contributions to the Paul campaign. Indeed, even Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, and one of the most notorious neo-Nazis in America, has personally contributed $500 to Paul’s campaign.
Though it’s true that Paul’s campaign has no control over who sends them money in advance, once it becomes apparent that a neo-Nazi leader is sending money, any sensible politician who does not wish to be identified with neo-Nazism should send the money back. Not so for Ron Paul, however, whose campaign is still making up its mind as to whether or not to return Black’s money.
Paul’s spokesman Jesse Benton told the Lone Star Times:
At this time, I cannot say that we will be rejecting Mr. Black’s contribution, but I will bring the matter to the attention of our campaign director again, and expect some sort of decision to be made in coming days.
Frankly, this is a no-brainer. Any other candidate would unequivocally reject that money as soon as its donor’s identity was known. That Paul’s campaign needs time to think about it is shocking.
Also of concern is the fact that Paul’s campaign has ignored my repeated attempts to interview the Congressman for JTA, the Jewish newswire service by which I am employed. I had intended to write a story about the Congressman, and to provide him with the opportunity to distance himself from his extremist supporters, to clarify his position on Israel, and to state his case to the Jewish community. Yet, after three weeks of repeated telephone calls, two chats with his Deputy Communications Director, and several left voicemail messages, I have yet to receive a callback to schedule an interview.
Which leads me to conclude the following about the Congressman from Texas: Ron Paul will take money from Nazis. But he won’t take telephone calls from Jews.
UPDATE: The Ron Paul campaign finally contacted the JTA.
[This essay was cross-posted at Orthodox Anarchist. Daniel Sieradski responds to comments here and explains his own Libertarian take on Paul here.]
http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capital/2007/11/12/does-ron-paul-have-a-jewish-problem
Interesting piece today from the Jewish Telegraph Agency by Daniel Sieradski about the neo-Nazi types who have been attracted to the Ron Paul campaign. (As part of his libertarian agenda, Paul wants to cut off air to Israel--and other countries, too, it should be added.) Sieradski notes that there's nothing to indicate Paul himself is antisemetic in the least but his campaign hasn't said if it will return contributions from White Nationalists. The great test of any movement is how it will deal with the crazies who are, for whatever reason, attracted to its cause. Organized labor purged the Communists; William F. Buckley drove the John Birchers out of the mainstream conservative movement. Now it's the Libertarians turn. By inclination, I'm sure the Freedom Lovin' Paul campaign doesn't want to trounce on anyone's rights. But do they really need to accept money from antisemites? See more here from the Lone Star Times.
I'm not a Libertarian but I like Ron Paul and his campaign and I think efforts to discredit him like what Rudy Giuliani said at the presidential debate aren't fair. But this seems like a valid criticism.
What non-Democrat candidate doesn’t have a Jewish problem?
I read this story earlier today and understood that much of Paul’s supposed jewish problem is that he won’t return the phone calls of this reporter.
Ron Paul can take donations from whomever he wishes to take donations from, he also should have his feet held to the fire for accepting them, which is a completely valid criticism.
Paul wants to cut off air to Israel?......That would be a bit difficult...............
Ron Paul doesn’t have a Jewish problem... he has a solution, a final solution.
RP is a nut bag. His supporters are loons and idiots and a 5th column of libs trying to scuttle the conservative movement by pretending to be conservatives supporting the midget.
Ron Paul has Paulistinian belt bomber supporters.
Enough said.
Another John Bircher Paul-bot...
If no Jew votes for Ron Paul, it will drop his maximum possible vote in a nationwide election from 5% to 4.9%. And that’s being very, very generous.
“”Does Ron Paul Have a Jewish Problem?””
Well, if he advocated ending aid “to” Israel but not “to” Egypt, maybe.
But he’s not advocating that.
I think Paul is a secret tool of the Russians, South Africans and Canadians, given his support for return to the gold standard...why not??
>>>>Marc Levin’s 2005 film Protocols of Zion. <<<<
That’s pretty Kafkaesque, considering the Jewish-sounding last name.
Seriously, though, that’s why I’m glad the second amendment is here. I might not be able to stop every Jew-hating idiot who tries to kick in my door, but I will leave life with the enormous pleasure that I’ve just taken three or four of them with me.
I would be a lot happier with Ron Paul if he had a stance against providing further foreign aid to the United Nations, an organization that hates the USA, instead of a nation that believes in democracy.
So does his ally--the president of Iran.
Posting this on a website that won’t condemn user comments calling for turning Mecca and Medina into glass parking lots takes the wind out of your sails regarding trying to antagonize the libertarian members of FR. There are thousands of Democrat machinery monkeys who would love nothing more than to force every Republican candidate to return campaign donation funds from every Christian minister received.
So before you go off on the nazi campaign contributions, consider what a legislative response to your concerns would regard, and how it would be twisted under a Clinton administration.
That being said, Paul is going to sink in the next few weeks, his celebrity lifecycle probably peaked on Sunday’s tv interviews.
I don’t believe Ron Paul hates Jews like many of his supporters do (just go to any ron paul forum-its sickening). But he should distance himself from the truthers, nazis, white supremacists, etc
“Paul wants to cut off (US) aid to Israel?......”
So do at least 15% of the Jewish Knesset members, for decidedly realistic reasons.
Jim, you must know Jennifer Coffey from SAS?
Fer Shure!....Israel can do a lot of “cutting off” on their own! As Syria and Saddam before them found out!............
Then prepare to be a lot happier. Ron Paul advocates America's complete withdrawal from the United Nations, the eviction of the entire UN apparatus from America, and the revocation of all treaties implemented under UN auspices (in addition to most other MULTIlateral treaties). He has been advocating this for at least a decade, and IIRC, dropped a bunch of stinkies in Congress regarding eviction of the UN (much to the consternation of his mostly global-collectivism-pushing colleagues).
The single greatest threat to Israel, and one of the greatest threats to America and humanity writ large, is indeed the United Nations.
It’s no secret...
He’s a tool, period...
Not really, he just wants to keep them warm...
For 10,000 years...
No, it's the relationships, others have brought the issue up. Medved has been highly critical of his relationship with Willis Carto and neonazi support as well, to the extent of writing Paul a public letter requesting he disclaim this support, which he hasn't done. This really is a no brainer for a political candidate. Obviously a problem for Paul, I can only presume because like truthers, he want's the support.
Wow. The guy has a lot going for him.
First the support of the Muslims. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1914466/posts
Now the support of the neo-Nazi’s and anti-semites. (Is that redundant?)
The sad thing is, I have heard several Christians saying they would support him in the primary.
Unbelievable.
I don't either, though he's clearly tolerant of their beliefs and accepting of their support. Unfortunately this isn't a new story. IMO the KKK damaged to this country in the late 19th and 20th century. Through most of that period they were marginal in terms of membership, their actions facilitated by those accepting of their ideology in their midst. I think that's Paul's attitude toward white supremecists. Truthers too, another group a politician doesn't need to be associated with.
The author of this article is a nutjob himself, if it weren’t for Sieradski the mentally confused “socialist libertarian” attacking Ron Paul, on any other day the admin mods would have yanked this thread.
Secondly, support from http://www.jews4ronpaul.org/advisors.html and http://www.rlc.org/?p=NatComm and http://www.njrlc.com/default.html means Ron Paul is going to bring in at a minimum 10% of the New Jersey Republican primary votes.
Since your post directly follows Jim Robinson's, bitch to him. Personally I'm sick of Ron Pauls nutball supporters telling me what and where I can post. I couldn't care less about your opinion.
So before you go off on the nazi campaign contributions, consider what a legislative response to your concerns would regard, and how it would be twisted under a Clinton administration.
I have, it doesn't take a legislative response, it takes a letter. Something Ron Paul hasn't the balls to write because it would cost him support.
Here's how Ronald Reagan handled it.
Mr. Nathaniel J. Friedman
August 23, 1980 Dear Mr. Friedman:
Just a line to thank you very much for your letter to the editor of the Los Angeles Times. It was kind and generous of you to do this, and I am most grateful.
It wasn’t until I left the South and was in New York that I learned the Klan had endorsed me. I immediately made it plain in a press conference that I do not want such an endorsement and that I repudiate it and everything the Klan stands for. I guess Mr. Young didn’t pay much attention to that.
Again, my heartfelt thanks.
Best regards,
Ron-----------------
April 30, 1984
Dear Morris:
While in China, I have been distressed to learn that some individuals back home have questioned whether my views on the Ku Klux Klan have somehow changed since 1980. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In 1980, I said that I have no tolerance for what the Klan represents, and would have nothing to do with any groups of that type. If anything, my feelings on this subject have only grown stronger. The politics of racial hatred and religious bigotry practiced by the Klan and others have no place in this country, and are destructive of the values for which America has always stood. Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse.
I firmly believe that there is no room for partisanship on this question. Democrats and Republicans alike must be resolute in disassociating ourselves from any group or individual whose political philosophy consists only of racial or religious intolerance, whose arguments are supported only by intimidation or threats of violence.
We must, and will, continue our unified rejection of such elements of hate in our political life, for while there are many issues which divide us, it is fundamental principles such as this which will always draw us together.
Sincerely,
Ronald Reagan[The Honorable Morris B. Abram, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1121 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20425]
How about Ron Paul adapts Reagan's approach, something like this.
I have been distressed to learn that I have been receiving support from various hate groups and that my columns have appeared in their print publications. The latter will end immediately. I do not want such support and that I repudiate it and everything the Klan stands for have no tolerance for what these groups represent, and would have nothing to do with any groups of that type. The politics of racial hatred and religious bigotry have no place in this country, and are destructive of the values for which America has always stood. Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse.I firmly believe that there is no room for partisanship on this question. Democrats and Republicans alike must be resolute in disassociating ourselves from any group or individual whose political philosophy consists only of racial or religious intolerance, whose arguments are supported only by intimidation or threats of violence.
We must, and will, continue our unified rejection of such elements of hate in our political life, for while there are many issues which divide us, it is fundamental principles such as this which will always draw us together.
Paul hasn't done it because he doesn't believe it.
As to returning Don Black's (neonazi founder of Stormfront, felon) check, campaigns return checks every day. Heck, Alex Jones gave Paul $2,300, later got a $1,300 refund. Paul knows how to return money.
It is truly disturbing. You have someone like Aaron Zelman, founder of JPFO, supporting Paul. Yet who exactly would be arming themselves to the teeth if Zelman’s vision of unencumbered 2nd amendment rights were to be enacted in a Paul presidency?
Of course it has hurt Israel tremendously - foreign aid damages the recipient, no matter what nation it is. It stifles domestic industries, gravely distorts the marketplace, and damages the long-term viability of the recipient economy.
"For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!"The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem.
I know an Israeli who points out that the IDF wastes more money every year than it receives in foreign aid from the US. Not surprising considering how deeply socialist the nation of Israel is.
I would be a lot happier with Ron Paul if he had a stance against providing further foreign aid to the United Nations, an organization that hates the USA, instead of a nation that believes in democracy.
He does, in fact - he has introduced bills and amendments on repeated occasions to get the United States out of the United Nations.
Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. PAUL:
SEC. 801. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used for any United States contribution to the United Nations or any affiliated agency of the United Nations.
Rep. Paul: ... It would defund the United Nations. It would take away the dues that we pay the United Nations as well as the amount of money that we are paying to pay our back dues."
Maybe if Aaron Zelman is supporting Ron Paul, you should consider the possibility that you don't have a clear understanding of the details.
I'll agree with you on that one.
Well, Ron Paul is on the right track in connection with getting rid of the UN. But his stance on Israel makes no sense because Israel is one of the few countries that practices free enterprise and thus is enjoying some degree of economic success, especially in contrast to the Palestinians. The Palestinians have received billions in aid over the years but still live in refugee camps for the convenience of their corrupt leaders. Ron Paul should put his tin hat position on aid to Israel on the back burner instead of attracting anti-Jew whackos, with a weakly thought out policy, IMO.
Not taken by itself, perhaps.
It's of no concern to me at all who the Republican Liberty Caucus, national or New Jersey. I like the JPFO, the fact that Aaron Zelman supports Paul is completely irrelevant to me. I suppose I could post a list of Jews and the candidates they support, but it's irrelevant.
Jews4RonPaul (post 22,24,35, an 80 member group founded by a Progressive Democrat bounced from the Libertarian Party under a cloud to bash the Republican Jewish Coalition, founded by a self described Jewish Unitarian Universalist Transhumanist Quaker is a joke.
There's was only one thing for Paul to do here, reject the support and condemn the ideology. Frankly while there's time for damage control, at this point his sincerity is open to question.
Moreover, Paul is not merely an isolationist, but he opposes every attempt to go after or even condemn Islamists or terrorists in America.
The author of this piece you posted is a gay “New Jewish” “socialist libertarian” in his own words. So you need to be careful what you post.
Secondly, JTA had a interview and article up within hours of this blog post, apparently this article you posted was put online AFTER he knew Ron Paul was having an interview with a different JTA writer, possibly out of spite.
Read the JTA article here:
http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/article/20071112jewsforronpaul.html
Bingo! Paul didn’t intentionally cause the Nazis to start supporting him but once you find out you are the posterboy for: 1. Nazis 2. Anti-Semites 3. Anti-Military/Anti-War protestors 3. Code Pink Republicans 4. Pat Buchanan 5. Osama Bin Laden 6. Ahmedinejad
.....you got to at least step up and declare yourself independent of your ‘supporters’ and send back their money as a modest token of your sincerity.
Thats the least of Ron Paul’s “problems”
Garbage in, garbage out.
Don’t confuse them with the facts. I don’t think many of them are capable of even reading.
Don't you have some more American men and/or women stationed in Iraq to yell "go f*** yourself" at, troll?
"There are just so gosh-darned MANY of them!"
I have been on the Daily Paul quite a bit and I not seen one thing positive about truthers or any antisemitic posts. In fact, I can’t remember the truthers, neo nazis, white supremists being even mentioned.
Well thats good, hopefully the truthers and nazis will just go away. I never went to the daily paul but it looks truther and nazi-free right now.
Sometimes, the most uniquely satisfying approach is to simply allow the poor, dumb brutes to hang themselves. ;)
LOL
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.