Skip to comments.Ron Paul: 9/11 prompted "glee" in Bush administration
Posted on 12/09/2011 10:14:48 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said Thursday evening that Bush administration officials were gleeful after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because it gave them a pretext to invade Iraq.
"Just think of what happened after 9/11. Immediately before there was any assessment there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq," the Texas Republican told a group of mostly young backers in Iowa. He went on to suggest officials are now setting the stage for an invasion of Iran.
Paul, who was tied for second in this week's CBS News/New York Times poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers, is making a strong push in the Hawkeye state in hopes of scoring an upset victory in the first-in-the-nation January 3 caucuses. Paul volunteers have been working to convince Paul's mostly young supporters - many of whom will be on holiday break from college when the caucuses take place - to be sure to make it to their caucus site.
Paul's libertarian views - on the foreign policy front, he wants to dramatically reduce the U.S. military presence abroad and end all foreign aid - put him at odds with many Republican voters. A poll from Gallup this week found that 62 percent of Republican and Republican-leaning independent voters see Paul as an unacceptable nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I hope you are right
“I’m a truth-seeker, hear out everybody, read both sides of an issue, don’t swallow propaganda......”
And yet, you’re a Paulbot that starts off every other sentence with “Only Ron Paul” and “Ron Paul is the only....”
“Whether Bush II was ‘gleeful’ to have a 9/11 as a reason to go in and actually do it is for historians, foreign policy wonks, and cable news talking heads to debate, not me.”
The only ones who were gleeful on 9/11 were the Islamists that Ron Paul and his Code Pinko allies support.
And you are an intellectually lazy, ad hominem-slinging, slanderer, but I try not to hold that against you. I've just guessed it's all you are capable of -- a cognitive deficit that doesn't allow to think, but instead focuses purely on the emotion of "hating Ron Paul". It's so vicious and all-pervasive, it's almost personal and certainly blinding - -especially in thinking that you are impressing anyone with your "brilliance" on this issue. You've offered no facts to counter what the facts -- you are just like a monkey slinging poo --very impressive I'm sure to a 2nd grader.
You’re right. It is personal. It’s very, very personal. See, I have a serious problem with subhumans like RuPaul who call this magnificent country “imperialist”, as if it were the Soviet Union or the Third Reich. I have loads of problems with people who accept endorsements from Code Pinko and Stormfront. You know what else ? I resent the fact that your hero voted to repeal DADT and refuses to support a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage from the evil and unconstitutional homosexual agenda. I’m leaving something out....Oh yeah, I resent how RuPaul loads earmark after earmark on bills he knows will pass and then votes “no” to look cool for his cultists.
Is that enough fact for you ?
He is just another old career politician who has a pet issue he likes to talk about but dares not actually fix the issue lest he doesn’t have it to talk about or raise money on any more.
Yep. Just like other GOPers on issues like abortion.
He's polling a lot better than your male cheerleader of a candidate, isn't he?
And the military plans invasions almost everywhere. That's their freaking job.
This wasn't just another theoretical scenario. Bush wanted a reason to go into Iraq -- rightly or wrongly -- even before 9/11.
And http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/ are a bunch of COMMUNISTS.
I already knew the info on that page from other sources and it was accurate. "The Committee for Liberation of Iraq" was real, and the roster and timing are accurate. Take your pick of sources on it here.
"None of this means taht Bush was happy about 9/11."
Agreed. I think that RP's point was that they were happy to have an excuse to do what they already wanted to do re Iraq even though it had nothing to do with 9/11, was valid. But Ron Paul's choice of words -- "gleeful" -- was stupid. Then again, the press always look for the most outrageous quote they can get from Ron Paul for a headline, and he always inadvertently gives them one.
Actually, Dr. Demento’s point was to make absolutely sure that everyone knew he hates this country.
Let’s see how he polls when the Paulbots aren’t spamming polls, as we all know they do.
I’ll take a patriotic Aggie yell-leader over a leftist, America-blaming, Code Pink Infowars fan any day.
An obvious, intense dislike of Israel and utter ignorance of Islamic teachiings and goals are NOT “rough edges” that will “smooth out” - they are a profound danger to our country.
And that little goblin wants the GOP nomination? Not likely. The first GOP candidate that wouldn't get my vote.
I know what ya mean.
Seriously, I read a lot of Solzhenitsyn, Huxley, and Orwell when I was young -- I'm aware of how black can get turned into white, up into down, wrong into right, just by giving in to group-think instead of thinking for yourself. But the latter too has its price.
Group think is one thing I'll never be accused of.
Thanks again for the links.
What you said!
Just be advised, some are more concerned with silencing others for whatever reasons, rather than doing research and actually examining facts. However, I will say a better definition or wording should have been used to describe intentions of those involved prior to 911.
The man is a fruitcake, believes we are responsible for 9/11, believes the Bush administration allowed this to happen so they could invade Iraq, that they were gleeful and ecstatic that 3,000 Americans were killed, happy along with the military that so many were dead, so we could lie our way in to the war.
The man is crazy, literally certifiable when he goes on like this, and so is someone like you (you should be grown up enough to know better) who supports him in his insanity.
Sorry, they are crazy.
I have no idea what little voices in your head were telling you all of this Lakeshark but you didn't get this from listening to him.
He has never said that "we are responsible for 9/11" -- the US government isn't "we" -- I don't make those decisions and nor do you. He has said flawed foreign policy created blow-back which led to 9/11 -- and even the 9/11 Report and the Bush Administration believed that blowback theory enough to shutdown our base in Saudi Arabia right afterward. All true.
He believes the Bush administration allowed this to happen so they could invade Iraq, that they were gleeful and ecstatic that 3,000 Americans were killed, happy along with the military that so many were dead, so we could lie our way in to the war.
He never ever said that "the Bush Admin allowed this to happen" -- that's a lie-- or that "they were happy 3,000 were dead or happy along with the military that so many were dead" -- he said (agreed poor choice of words) that the Administration was "gleeful" that they now had a reason that they could use to do what they wanted to do all along -- go into Iraq. The rest you are just making up for effect.
What part of our policies led to 9/11 don't you understand? That's the liberal mantra, that's the same crap we heard from them for 6 years, hell, we still hear it, and you and your fruitcake candidate still push the meme.
If you want to believe in "blowback theory" go right ahead, but that's the kind of crap that oozes out of liberal crevices, the kind of crap they say is tasty and "real", the kind of asinine thought processes that are ruining our country.
Frankly, to believe that kind of crap means you are certifiable and should post on DU or KOS rather than FR.......actually you probably do......what's your screen name?
I will second that.
How is Rumsfelds memoir ?
I started Cheney’s a month ago and then got busy with other things and am ready to start where I left off.
Definitely not trust RuPaul ~ UGH
Goes for me, too.
And I’m not a Perry supporter.
My last post should have read:
Goes for me, too.
And Im not even a Perry supporter.
I agree 100%.
I don't hate them, but I hate their anti-American and anti-military views.
The more I hear about Rpaul (and I’ve really tried not to hear/read much), the more I hold him in utter abhorrence. He’s nuts, he’s mental, he’s odious, he’s a hypocrite, he’s anti-Semitic, he’s pro-fag, he’s attracted to dung in the shape of humans, etc.
“Hes nuts, hes mental, hes odious, hes a hypocrite, hes anti-Semitic, hes pro-fag, hes attracted to dung in the shape of humans, etc.”
You know it, buddy!
Did they all take drugs? Are they all living with their parents in the basement?
I just watched the interview with him on CBS, plus his latest madness about how gleeful everyone was that they could invade Iraq.
The Paul bots say it was a "poor choice of words". I say it's a window into the poor man's shriveled mind. He's truly a fruitcake, anyone who doesn't think he's the crazy uncle in the attic needs to self commit to a loony bin.
Good people don’t swallow the crap RPaul dishes out.
I meant that he likes Stormfront peeps, Maxine Waters, Code Pinkos etc - human shaped dung.
Good post. Sometimes it’s difficult to get through to the lumberheads who just, “Don’t want to hear it”, regardless of facts or circumstances.
By "personal Liberty" I assume you mean legalized drugs and prostitution and the homo agenda writ large? Since these are all official Libertarian Party platform issues and RPaul is on board at least with the drugs and fag "rights".
There's a difference - a vast gulf of difference - between "liberty" and "license".
What a disgusting little troll this man is....
Oh, ya know I’m just joshin’. You’ve been a favorite of mine around here for a few years now, despite our differences. Hope you and your family are having a great Xmas season.
"Blowback is the espionage term for unintended consequences of a covert operation" It's not "a Liberal term" or "a Conservative term" -- it's an espionage term. Period.
What do you and your crew live in some fairyland version of America where we have perfectly omniscient, see-all, know-all little foreign policy wonks who see every possible consequence over all time and who never screw up and who never make mistakes that come back to haunt them -- or haunt us? Life doesn't work like that and you'd know that if you were a grown up. Our guys -- even the good ones- screw up, too. Life is messy, get over it.
Just when we were having a nice thread, the gay-obsessed guy has to show up. Do you have nothing better to do on a Friday night?
I guess this shows exactly why Alex Jones has such a big man-crush on Ron Paul.
25 years ago, we had Ronald Reagan, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope.
If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.
Or you can get raw with these strings.
How about this gamechanger from America's Got Talent (which they SHOULD have won).
Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Broken Sorrow is far and away the best of NBS.
This is obscene. Shame on Paul. Bravo, Ari.
You could read it in their faces, even if you didn’t believe anything else.
Goodbye, Rep. Paul.
How well or how badly he is polling is not a defense...
Good luck, I've known several Paul bots on this board, and one thing is for certain, they, including you, are simply nuts.
Just like their crazy uncle of a candidate.
“And you are an intellectually lazy, ad hominem-slinging, slanderer, but I try not to hold that against you. I’ve just guessed it’s all you are capable of — a cognitive deficit that doesn’t allow to think, but instead focuses purely on the emotion of “hating Ron Paul”. It’s so vicious and all-pervasive, it’s almost personal and certainly blinding - -especially in thinking that you are impressing anyone with your “brilliance” on this issue. You’ve offered no facts to counter what the facts — you are just like a monkey slinging poo —very impressive I’m sure to a 2nd grader.”
Good retort. Sorry to be late to the lynch mob: family commitments.
“And that little goblin wants the GOP nomination? Not likely. The first GOP candidate that wouldn’t get my vote.”
Re-examine your premises.
I realize that the few of you who are putting me on the griddle regarding Dr. Paul’s stances are doing that due to the tag line I added the other day out of a feeling of utter desperation!
I was, and am, extremely agitated that our nation, when a true rounded conservative is needed, has to settle for one of the several hacks that call themselves Republicans. Unfortunately today there are several types of Republicans: Conservative, Moderate (they stand for nothing), left and crazy left.
It is a dirty shame that I, along with many of you here, have had to live under 12 presidents who fall into the useless moderate and the left and only one in my lifetime that was worthy: RWR.
That being said, indications are that the current despotic, pathetic excuse for an adult that presently occupies the White Hut, will be replaced by a Republicrat who stands for nothing. What we will be subjected to will be a continuum of FED, EPA, DOE, social experimenting, political correctness and, yes, gorebal warming junk science treachery.
Our nation is in worse shape than at any time in its history. We have, literally, a war going on on our southern border that is unabated. While this nation suffers we have troops stationed in 143 countries. That part is unacceptable. Israel and Taiwan are our only two, true allies. In forsaking either, Mr. Paul is dead wrong. Even though these allies are of extreme importance no US troops are stationed there. Nor is there a sophisticated missile defense system installed in either ally. The reason for that is patently clear: any installation in Israel would infuriate islam (religion of peace), and in Taiwan it would infuriate those money lenders who truly wish us death and destruction.
Paul’s position on the above certainly needs some moderating in respect to the two allies, but those troops and installations in the over 100 spots in the world need to be closed.
Dr. Paul is the only candidate, other than Michelle Bachmann, who has stated publicly that the above mentioned tentacles of our monstrous central socialist government be eliminated. Romney and Gingrich both are globalists who would put the aspirations of a collective gaggle of nations ahead of the security and economic well-being of America.
Find us a candidate who cares. Find us one that will take the drastic action needed to tame and slash this monster ruining our lives and our economy that we call the government.
I’ll wait, albeit not patiently, for either the right candidate to ride in, or for the next revolution to begin.
Rand Paul is part of his father’s campaign.
It undermines his credibility on any issue.
It also explains his odd attacks against Newt Gingrich. (Or Cain, Perry, Bachmann, etc., when they were leading.)
Ron Paul is not just nuts; he’s dangerous.
Rand Paul needs to lose standing especially if his dad runs 3rd party. After all, he is part of his father’s campaign.
Sorry to be late to the Official Ron Paul Supporter Lynch Mob thread.
I won’t bother with defending the “glee” comment made by Rep. Paul. I don’t happen to agree with it.
It just tends to reinforce my belief that Rep. Paul intends to run as a third party candidate in the general election. Neo-cons....who wouldn’t vote for him in a million years anyway...were not the intended audience. You see if Rep. Paul intends to run at all successfully in the general election, he’s going to have to cobble together a coalition that includes folks well outside of traditional gop mainstream.
See-BS, they of the superscripted memos, is a news source of choice of the left. I think he’s trying to attract those on the left that are themselves heartily sick of barky’s foreign policy adventures. He’ll need them if he intends to put together a fringe coalition, which is probably about the only way he could come close to winning. Barky, mittens, and Newt are going to do what they can to win the center. But there are plenty of disparate groups that are being left in the cold by those three candidates. Let’s look at a few of them....
Christian social conservatives. Ron Paul has been working hard to position himself with these folks. Lessee what other choices the Christian social conservatives have to pick from at this point: Barky? Mittens the Mormon? Newt of marital fidelity fame?
Gunnies. Let’s see who they could support. Massachusetts gun control mittens? Fast and furious barky? Newt of gun free school zones and gun bans for those convicted of misdemeanors?
You get the idea. Every ideologue has as many votes as you and I have: one. It’s clearly an unorthodox strategy, but I think that’s where this is going.
My premise is that this was a very stupid thing to say. If he thinks the GOP is evil why is he wasting money in IA?