Posted on 12/20/2007 8:13:19 AM PST by .cnI redruM
American Thinker has extensively covered the troubling links between Ron Paul's campaign and neo-Nazis. For our trouble we were blasted by some critics, and subjected to a torrent of abusive letters from Ron Paul supporters.
But now, an apparently genuine Neo-Nazi, Bill White, Commander of the American National Socialist Workers Party is fed up with the campaign's mild distancing and disavowal, and claims on a neo-Nazi website, the Vanguard News Network, that he has attended meetings with Paul at both a Thai restaurant in Arlington, and in his official office.
Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has picked-up the story from the Lone Star Times and further assembled links to corroborating evidence, and offers a redirect link to the website on which White writes:
Comrades:
I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn't see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul's extensive involvement in white nationalism.
Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.
I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.
For his spokesman to call white racialism a "small ideology" and claim white activists are "wasting their money" trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.
I don't know that it is necessarily good for Paul to "expose" this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous - and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.
Bill White, Commander American National Socialist Workers Party
I suppose there a slight chance this is all an elaborate hoax, but it doesn't look that way. If Paul believes White is lying, he should sue. And testify under oath.
The Ron Paul Campaign and its Neo-Nazi Supporters
The Odd Alliance Supporting Ron Paul
Paul keeps Supremicist's Donation
Has Ron Paul taken money and favors from Nazis or is Bill White trying to make himself look a lot more important and well connected than he really is? Hmm...
Everyone has been brainwashed over time to think that Naziism is a right wing ideology - it's not.
The Nazis are National Socialists.
Brace yourselves, the Paul Qaeda are coming...
The politics of personal destruction continue.
Anything to prevent real change and keep the corruption going.
If you looked at the donations made to any candidate, I’m positive you’d find some unscrupulous donaters. Does that mean they’re in cahoots?
Lighten up Frances
What is obvious is that Paul has cultivated relationships with individuals in this movement over the years and has built up their hopes that he would openly sympathize with them.
Ron Paul has done the same thing with the 9/11 Truthers - he has appeared on Alex Jones' show several times and made some very ambiguous statements about 9/11 and its background that has built up the hopes of Truthers that he would openly sympathize with them.
Paul knows that members of the weird fringes of US society have as much disposable income as the average normal American, and he fills a vacuum for them.
Ron Paul is the candidate of almost every nutbar organization in the US - from anarchists to neo-Nazis to goldbugs to tax protestors to pacifists - because he dabbles in the rhetoric of each of these groups without ever making an explicit commitment to the cause.
That is a very damning indicator of his character.
It does come out, in most everything he says. You don’t have to read too deep between the lines to see it.
I agree that Paul is no white supremacist but it appears that he isn’t immune to the corrupting influence of power. He’s figured out that no comment is too far over the line that his followers won’t repeat it without thought.
Joe Sobran and Jared Taylor operate on the "respectable" level of such organizations - they are very carefully never to explictly couch things in terms of race. They also move in circles with which Paul is comfortable.
Sobran's newsletter and Taylor's American Renaissance periodical are always very carefully worded and professionally written to preserve that veneer, while White's organization is unapologetically militant.
It's a very multilayered little world.
Everyone has been brainwashed over time to think that Naziism is a right wing ideology - it’s not.
The Nazis are National Socialists.
The answer is: both.
As a known harsh critic of Paul on FR, I can independently vouch for Borges that he actually is not a fan of Ron Paul.
No, it's not. What is a damning indicator of a lack of character is engaging in guilt by association, claiming that meeting with a person or talking with a person means agreement on all issues, and then demanding rituaulized apology and self-abasement from anyone found to have deviated from political correctness.
American public discourse used to be free and robust. Now, it is cowardly and conformist.
Okay wideawake, I trust your opinion.
Thanks for rising to my defense. I am indeed not a fan. Well I like some of his early work but he lost me when he sold out his punk roots and released that dance pop album.
The European definition of "right wing" is different from the American definition.
Most people who are considered "right wing" in Europe are either considered a mixture of left wing and crazy by Americans.
All socialism - National or otherwise - is necessarily left wing to Americans, because advocacy of the free market is a non-negotiable aspect of the American right.
Trust and empower the govermnent to protect you from poverty and/or desease vs trust empower the government to protect you from military enemies. The end result is the same, an empowered government and a powerless people.
My apologies. I dislike Paul and have a tough time understanding how anyone can defend him anymore.
Bump for reference.
Bill White is a loonie tune. Paul is nuts, but he’s not that crazy.
The primary issue is not the meeting or the talking (although in itself that is problematic) but taking money from them.
A person of integrity would refuse to take a penny for his campaign from someone whose ideology was fundamentally opposed to his principles.
So Ron Paul is either compromising his principles by going on the take from neo-nazis or - more disturbingly - he is acting in accordance with his principles.
And, of course, no normal person ever has a desire to even meet with a neo-Nazi except to confront or berate him.
Get out of the 80s, cripple. This isn’t the Reagan era anymore.
The vocoder was the last straw.
Absolutely. But no where near the level of unsavories who are donating to the Paul campaign, as well as participating in at least questionable campaign tactics (i.e. vandalizing public property with banners/stickers/posters)
Let’s not forget that a sizable number of Klan Pinkos support him as well.
The press first reacts by insinuating that Ron Paul is slandering evangelicals with the remark. And now the press is reporting that white supremacists are feeling betrayed by their closet candidate.
It is truly amazing to watch what can only be described as the hysterical reaction to a man whose viewpoint is no more complicated than that the Constitution should be respected.
I'm not a Paul fan, but something about this smells fishy.
The European definition of “right wing” is different from the American definition.
Most people who are considered “right wing” in Europe are either considered a mixture of left wing and crazy by Americans.
All socialism - National or otherwise - is necessarily left wing to Americans, because advocacy of the free market is a non-negotiable aspect of the American right.
Paul is opposed to the US Constitution. His claim of supporting it is a lie he and his boosters love to tell themselves.
Just what kind of “favors” would a neo-Nazi have that would be worthwhile?
To call Ron Paul a Nazi is to be totally ignorant of either the political philosophy of National Socialism or the Ron Paul’s libertarian philosophy, or both. The two philosophies are utterly unreconcilable. The same observation applies to “white supremacy”, which is less of a political philosophy than an evil addled notion. Ron Paul clearly is not a Nazi or a white supremist.
More importantly, is the question of whether Ron Paul is an anti-Semite or a racist? I suppose it depends on how one defines the terms. Liberals frequently equate an opposition to affirmative action to racism. Some Zionists equate anti-Semitism to the failure to yield unqualified support to Israel. (Some also equate it to believing the Gospel accounts of the Passion of the Christ.)
It’s pathetic that Ron Paul’s opposition must resort to the logical fallacy of guilt by association. The opposition should focus on the wonderful outcomes of interventionalist foreign policy, nation building, social engineering, the war on drugs, the continued strength the US dollar and the economy, etc. to counter Ron Paul. Giuliani should also explain why “freedom is all about authority”, rather than Paul’s old-fashioned believe that freedom is about individual liberty.
But, I suppose it’s too much to ask for an honest debate of ideas.
“If Paul believes White is lying, he should sue. And testify under oath.”
Ron Paul is a public figure. He can’t sue. If public figures could successfully sue over lies and distortions, there would be more courts trying libel cases than Starbucks coffeeshops.
This is nothing more than a mean-spirited smear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_White_(neo-nazi)
This Communist/anarchist nutjob is NOT even a member of an actual white-sheeter organization, he created his own one-man organization that he calls in July 2006. As if he would actually have been invited to such a luncheon even if it existed. Yet because he’s saying something that anti-Paul people want to hear his BS forum post being circulated as news.
All these blogs will now cross-link each other, turning a lie into truth.
??? Can you cite some examples?
Nowhere in the article or in the poster's comments do I see anyone calling Ron Paul a Nazi. The article questions the wisdom of apparently meeting more than once with a known neo-Nazi in addition to taking campaign donations while denying any relationship.
That is a valid question which only the Ron Paul campaign can address. The longer the campaign continues under these circumstances the more these questions will haunt him.
If the Paul campaign sees no problem with the situation it should say so unambiguously. Thus far, it has failed to do so.
Remember the trouble Trent Lott had over his regular meetings with the Conservative Citizens Council in Mississippi?
Number 2 in their Statement of Principles is, “We believe the United States is a European country and that Americans are part of the European people. ... We also oppose all efforts to mix the races of mankind ...”
No doubt the CCC is racist, but that doesn’t mean that Trent Lott is a Klansman.
WHY would a NAZI “expose” a guy who was ostensibly supportive of their agenda, knowing it would torpedo his chances of getting nominated or taken seriously.
Not that I am a supporter of Paul’s - I’m not.
If you look at Ron Paul's rhetoric and the various opinion pieces he has written over the years, he reveals an attitude toward the Constitution of extreme minimalism.
He draws on the writings of the Anti-Federalists - the original opponents of the US Constitution who agitated against its ratification - and more importantly employs their ideas as his criteria.
He also employs the ideas and rhetoric of the anti-Constitution, so-called "states' rights" movement that led this country into Civil War.
He even approvingly quotes Lysander Spooner - an advocate of abolishing the Constitution wholesale.
The Constitution was drafted and ratified by Federalists who believed that America needed a strong and unified national government as opposed to the disorganized and ineffective confederation. It was a serious enterprise.
To Ron Paul the Constitution appears to be some kind of game, a document which he parses whimsically to suit his impulses. His complete flip-flop on the issue of immigration is just one piece of evidence in this matter. His ambiguous stance on abortion is another.
I'll tell you why.
Bill White the neo-Nazi is a true believer. he actually believes his own rhetoric and believes that most white people in America feel the same way as he does about race - but that they are afraid to admit their opinions to others or even themselves.
Bill White believes that he himself is one of the few people who actually has the courage to publicly embrace racialism, and that he himself is therefore a person of historical importance - a person that the children of the revolution will one day remember as a hero and a leader in the struggle.
Bill White likely believes that Ron Paul's flirtation with Jared Taylor, Joe Sobran and by extension White himself, is responsible for Ron Paul's fundraising successes. He feels as if his hard work on behalf on the Paul campaign is the reason why Ron paul is still in the race.
Moreover, he believes that Paul would have drawn even more votes and support if he had openly declared allegiance to Bill White's agenda - that the slumbering white masses of America would have awakened to the siren call.
Simultaneously, of course, the goldbugs in Paul's campaign feel that they are the key factor in Ron Paul's successes and that he would be more successful if he called for the outright abolition of the dollar.
And the Truthers in the Paul campaign believe they are responsible for his success and that he would be more successful if openly declared a suspicion of the official story and called for a new investigation of 9/11.
This is how true believers think - they honestly feel that everyone else would agree with them if their story just got out there.
Bill White thinks he is helping. He believes that Ron Paul's decision to ignore his neo-Nazi supporters in public is a big tactical mistake.
Your case for a strong central state and dismissing the Anti-Federalists and their inordinate obsession individual liberties is persuasive. I, for one, welcome our statist masters and despise those “states righters” who attempt to curb the power of Washington.
Deathmonger, your strawmen are of increasingly shoddy workmanship and inferior material. I suspect that you are now subcontracting your posts out to a Chinese Paulestinian.
The Constitution calls for a strong federal government, not a single central state.
and dismissing the Anti-Federalists and their inordinate obsession individual liberties is persuasive.
Another propagandistic strawman. The Anti-Federalists' overriding concern was not individual liberties, but local prerogatives and a desire to use the confederate system to continue the lucrative-to-some practice of using a single state's status to submarine measures that were useful to the whole nation.
The ideology of "states' rights" is fundamentally flawed, as the very name itself shows, because states do not have rights.
They have powers.
Individuals have rights, not governments.
And if you are discussing masters, you should be very comfortable with the "states' rights" movement, since its primary impulse was to insure that millions of human beings remained chattel property in bondage to a caste of masters.
The states and local governments were afraid of an erosion of local control of local issues by an ever-encroaching central government, and subsequent history bears out their fears. The Constitution was sold as a federal system where the central government had strictly delineated powers, and the 10th Amendment reserved all other powers to the states. Of course, the 10th Amendment has since been ignored.
Of course, you use the leftist/statist argument that everybody concerned with federalism (i.e. keeping central government within its Constitutionally-delineated bounds) is a slavery advocate.
Is it true that the American National Socialist Workers Party is supporting Obama over Edwards?
Control of which "local issues" exactly?
The Constitution was sold as a federal system where the central government had strictly delineated powers, and the 10th Amendment reserved all other powers to the states.
Or to the people.
The states are not the sole reservoir of undelegated power.
Of course, the 10th Amendment has since been ignored.
A common claim which is never substantiated except by special pleading.
Yawn. In other words, anyone who disagrees with your idiosyncratic opinions is a leftist/statist.
The fact is that the staunchest opponents of a robust federal government were those who were most concerned about preserving slavery.
The only time in our history that states rose up to break the Union was in direct response to an anticipated (not a substantive, but an anticipated) threat to slavery.
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.