Posted on 06/22/2008 4:23:15 AM PDT by tlb
Representative Ron Paul says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi removed a section from a bill passed by Congress which would have barred the U.S. from going to war with Iran without a congressional vote, claiming she did so at the behest of the leadership of Israel and AIPAC.
Paul, a former Republican presidential contender who formally removed himself from the party’s nomination race last week, makes the allegation on C-SPAN during a recently held foreign policy conference in Virginia.
Paul says Pelosi’s first act as House Speaker in 2006 was to “deliberately” remove a portion of a legislative spending bill which said the United States “can't go to war with Iran without getting approval from Congress.”
“She [Pelosi] removed it deliberately,” Paul says. “And then, the astounding thing is, when asked why, she said the leadership in Israel asked her to. That was in the newspaper, that was in 'The Washington Post,' that she was asked by AIPAC and others not to do that."
According to John Nichols, who covered the story about Pelosi’s capitulation at the time for “The Nation,” Pelosi was "under pressure from some conservative members of her caucus, and from lobbyists associated with neoconservative groups that want war with Iran, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).”
Paul's allegation is corroborated by 'The Asia Times', which in another article published at the time says AIPAC was strongly against attaching "a provision to a Pentagon spending bill that would require President Bush to get congressional approval before attacking Iran. AIPAC was strongly against it because it viewed the legislation as taking the military option 'off the table.' The provision was killed."
The article also cites Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, as saying [Pelosi's] decision was due to AIPAC.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
she wasn’t speaker until 2007.
This stinks at many levels.
I can see Poloser inserting a clause to ban us from invading Iran, power hungry dolt that she is, but why would Israel care enough ask for it to be removed?
If Poloser really did this and then un-did it, did it happen and why should we care if it didn’t get into the bill?
Ron Paul seems to have drank the same kool aid his supporters have.
She was elected as their candidate by the Democratic Caucus on November 16 of 2006, and formally elected by the House on January 3 of 2007.
“Paul, a former Republican presidential contender “ He was never a contender.
He was never a liar or a cheat either like 95% OF CONGRESS
I believe he was a contender just like Duncun Hunter but niether got the press they deserved because they are not liars and cheats.
He went farther than Hunter, Thompson, Giuliani, Romney, Tancredo ever did. And he raised more money than all of them too.
* GUFFAWS *
And, over there, another nugget, and then another, and then another, and then we discover these aren't really "nuggets of gold" but just more brown stuff, and they've both left a very long trail over the years. I suspect that Kucinich used to read Paul's newsletter back before the Internet.
And yeah, where is Pat?
Means this is not "news" ~ just a reitration of the same old story those guys peddle.
Kucinich throws reps from Nancy Pelosi and AIPAC out of his office
haha true and a lot of people thought Giuliani stood a good chance.
“that both Kucinich and Paul are anti-semites.”
What an idiotic conclusion.
That's antisemitism.
-Eric "Dondero" Rittberg, former Paul Texas aide (1997-2003)
And Dondero hates Ron Paul (see what else he wrote about Paul with that quote from the above link). Also he announced that he was running against Paul on Redstate last year (quitting when a better candidate named Chris Peden came along). You can read that screed here:
http://www.nysun.com/blogs/latest-politics/2007/05/former-ron-paul-campaign-manager.html
Just wanted to point that out. I ain't the biggest fan of Paul because of some of his foreign policy views, though I love his domestic stances, but he was a heck of a lot better than most of the republican candidates that ran, including the one we ended up with, John McCain.
Give me one example where Ron Paul said that “everything is the fault of the Jews”
You missed the news on the newsletters didn’t you?
Do you mean the liberal media, far left, SPLC-style interpretation of the RP newsletters? Have you actually read any of these newsletters yourself? Since you brought up this smear, show some examples.
We had several threads on the matter right here in FR. The concensus of opinion was that your boy is an anti-semite.
“We had several threads on the matter right here in FR. The concensus of opinion was that your boy is an anti-semite.”
Sorry, but a thread isn’t a source.
You have been here before, right?
BTW, when a candidate like Ron Paul pops up and everything he says has to be reinterpreted by his followers that suggests several things ~ that he's not coherent, not well wrapped, and quite possibly not in tune with what his followers believe him to be.
We see the same thing going on with Obamasama.
“BTW, when a candidate like Ron Paul pops up and everything he says has to be reinterpreted by his followers that suggests several things ~ that he’s not coherent, not well wrapped, and quite possibly not in tune with what his followers believe him to be.”
So, what you’re saying is he’s sort of like the man in DC who was fired for using the word “niggardly”?
Those who would rather smear and engage in juvenile name-calling are not worth the effort of explaining anything.
RP is not an anti-semite, but since it is pretty much impossible to prove a negative, why waste the time?
Oh, BTW you never did answer my earlier question.
Have you EVER read any of the RP newsletters yourself?
Well, I remember a day when the Republican party had positions like Ron Paul's....Small, Responsible Government...pro-life...pro-RKBA...pro-border-security...etc...
It's sad that you can't remember what it meant to be a Republican, rideharddiefast. I'll let Dr. Paul explain:
"I represent what Republicanism used to be. I represent the group that wanted to get rid of the Department of Education, the part of the Republican Party that used to be non-interventionist overseas. That was the tradition, the Robert Taft wing of the party. There was a time when Republicans defended individual liberty and the Constitution and decreased spending."
ROTFLOL!
While some FReepers have taken the time to obtain the documents, I wasn't aware of muawiyah being one of them.
Besides, I'd hate to be held responsible for all that was ever published in one of my publications!
Agreed.
Israel conspiracy story or a stand by Constitutional Dictums?
I don’t have a problem with attacking Iran, I do want to see it done Constitutionally, the CINC has plenary power to act, no matter what the House says (the war powers act for example, has never been challenged it will lose in court).
“But” the Congress should at least respect their role in the Constitution, mainly declaring and paying for wars, they should not just wink and nod or look the other way.
Even though the Commander in Chief is not bound by such a law in the short term.
Consensus means -0- ,nothing, de nada, if that were the guiding principle of decision making, then Global Warming and man being the locus of it, is a “true”.
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.