Posted on 05/28/2013 2:36:07 PM PDT by neverdem
Erroneous reading of current history, not, IMO, dishonest.
Which is exactly what The Won and his puppeteers wanted.
That’s just a dishonest evaluation of Buchanan, IMO.
It’s a 100% honest evaluation of Buchanan. It’s time people start calling him on the stuff he says. I don’t know if he is ignorant about history, or if he deliberately lies about historical facts, but he’s perpetuating falsehoods to promote his own left wing, anti-U.S., anti-Catholics, anti-Western, anti-Jewish point of view. Sorry, I am not afraid to call him on it.
Anti-Catholic?
That there’s funny, I don’t care who ya are!
Thanks for the link.
I think someone who was okay with the kidnap and assignation of Pope Pius XII, and a force that wanted to rid Europe of Catholicism qualifies as anti-Catholic. Especially for someone who was raised Catholic.
I know one thing... old pat would like it if he lived in 1938 Germany.
LLS
You’re entitled to your opinion. But where are the facts? It is obvious you don’t like Buchanan’s position of putting America first and staying out of local wars.
In fact, this current civil war in Syria is actually helping the U.S. Among other things, it's distracting Iran and Syria with their proxy war there. It's sucking all the energy of the Middle East into Syria.
I do, however, doubt Buchanan's claims that President Obama is such a hero in that regard. First of all, the President may get us into that war soon. Secondly, how come Buchanan gives him a pass on Libya? We had no reason to invade Libya. We only aided Al Qaeda by doing it. We were giving money to Gadaffi immediately before that.
It seems like Buchanan isn't always for putting the U.S. first and staying out of local wars first. He's quite the neocon when it suits his purpose. Maybe people should call him miniMcCain.
Lord Balfour, in a letter to Baron Rothschild, declared that His Majesty’s government now looked with favor upon the creation on these same lands of a national homeland for the Jewish people... Vladimir Lenin discovered the Sykes-Picot treaty in the czar’s archives and published it, so the world might see what the Great War was truly all about.... it was out of the implementation of Sykes-Picot that so much Arab hostility and hatred would come — and from which today’s Middle East emerged.Too bad he didn't manage to work in the Illuminati, the CFR, and Protocols of the Elders of Sion.
:’)
/bingo
You have to find another source for info. Buchanan was against the war in Libya.
See:It’s Their War, Not Ours by Patrick J. Buchanan, March 08, 2011
In my readings of Buchanan, he has been unfailing in his defense of traditional Catholic orthodoxy. I’d like to see where he attacks traditional Catholicism.
I think he would have made a decent president
Pat Buchanan’s goal for the past fifty years has been the preservation of American freedom and power.
Jewish Virtual Library: Sykes-Picot Agreement -- (in official terminology, the 1916 Asia Minor Agreement)... between the British and French governments pertaining to the partition of the Ottoman Empire among the Allied Powers... Russia was also privy to the discussions and consented to the terms. The agreement became official in an exchange of notes among the three Allied Powers on April 26 and May 23, 1916. In a subsequent stage Italy, too, gave her consent and the notes, which had been exchanged between April 10 and September 27, 1917, and were confirmed in the Treaty of St. Jean de Maurienne... Sir Edward Grey, the British foreign secretary ... "Our primary and vital object," he emphasized, "is not to secure a new sphere of British influence, but to get the Arabs on our side." ...In the years that followed, the Sykes-Picot Agreement became the target of bitter criticism, both in France and in England. Lloyd George referred to it as an "egregious" and a "foolish" document. He was particularly indignant that Palestine was inconsiderately mutilated... The true progenitor of the Sykes-Picot Agreement was the McMahon-Hussein correspondence. From this point of view Arab criticism is even less justified. The two negotiations showed meticulous consideration for Arab interests and blended it with healthy realism. The power vacuum created by the destruction of the Ottoman Empire had to be filled by a new authority; the alternative was chaos... During the discussions Sykes and Picot took note that the Jews throughout the world have "a conscientious and sentimental interest" in the future of the country. Zionist aspirations were passed over. This lapse was severely criticized by William R. Hall, head of the Intelligence Department of the British Admiralty. He pointed out that the Jews have "a strong material, and a very strong political interest in the future of the country and that in the Brown area the question of Zionism… [ought] to be considered." ...The agreement was officially abrogated by the Allies at the San Remo Conference in April 1920, when the Mandate for Palestine was conferred upon Britain.
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.