…

God Bless,
Evan

Citing that they “disagree with Ron Paul on issues of foreign policy”, the Republican Jewish Coalition Candidates Forum has excluded Ron Paul from their debate in Washington, DC on October 16. This according to Jim Perry, President of “Jews for Ron Paul”. Of course the greater majority of Jews are opposed to Ron Paul receiving any attention from the public thus the Jewish media has not reported on many of his successful showings in Straw polls across the nation.

And why does the RJC disagree with Ron Paul on issues of foreign policy? Ron Paul simply stands for American interests in the formation of foreign policy in the Middle East and elsewhere and speaks the truth regarding the root cause of terrorism, the U.S. support of Israel and the hatred among the Muslim people which that support has brought toward America. Ron Paul is vocal in his belief that fighting wars in the Middle East will not do anything to stop terrorism and that a new foreign policy in the Middle East, one that is not nearly as pro-Israel as it is today, will be the only way to defeat terrorism.

Ron Paul can be classified as a patriot. What can be said about the candidates that have been invited to participate? Certainly the Jewish group holding this debate do not see any change in America’s pro-Israel policy should Sam Brownback, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Fred Thompson, or Mike Huckabee be elected president, as these candidates who were invited must not disagree with the RJC’s pro-Zionist views regarding America’s support of Israel or they would have been excluded, as Ron Paul was. Some, including us here at natallnews, would consider the candidates pandering to these pro-Israel Jews as traitors.

Nazi is a racist word because it’s a negative social word applied against a people who defined themselves by race. The word Nazi comes from NSDAP and it’s political platform mentions race.

The program of the NSDAP

4. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/document/nca_vol4/1708-ps.htm

So Nazi is a racist word as the NSDAP does mention race. It is a racist epithet much like the Black N word. The White N word (nazi) does not describe all White race people, and it is used as a racial epithet.

Calling a Black a N is the same as calling a White an N. Both are racial derogatory labels.

Nazi is a racist word because the NSDAP did identify as a racial group.

Since the Black and White N words both address race and both are public derogatory names now in any court of law, it is in fact racist and possibly even illegal to even utter the word Nazi.

Calling somebody a Nazi is a racist action.

No. It’s not. It may be provocative, pejorative, and incorrect (depending on the person described), but it’s not racist. Racism means “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” Nazis were adherents of the National Socialist Party of Germany in the 1930’s and 40’s. At best, calling someone a Nazi is “Partyist”. Don’t get me wrong, it can also be stupid and incorrect, but not racist.

The Jewish element at the Mises.org accusde Guiliani of being supported by Nazis. It’s Jewish racism against Whites is it not?

Again, probably not. I don’t know if Lew Rockwell is Jewish (having never had reason to check or care). But even if he is, accusing Guiliani supporters of engaging in “a mindless display of Nazi-like nationalism” is not accusing all white people of such actions, just Guiliani’s supporters at that event.

But semantics aside, I would agree that evaluations of groups based on a single label are prone to error. Especially so as the group in question gets larger.

Last time I checked “the principles upon which this nation was founded upon” were universally open to interpretation, and are done so on a daily basis, I’ve seen them cited as justification for conservatism, fascism, communism, and libertarianism, to name but a few ideologies that have laid claim to “the principles upon which this nation was founded upon”, the truth of the matter is it’s an emotive statement, which is shorthand for “I am a patriot, disagree with me, and you are a traitor to your nation”.

In reality “the principles upon which this nation was founded upon” were principals very much grounded in the 18th century, by men who had no notion of what the 21st century would bring, and their comments, and actions were not meant to be viewed in any other context apart from the time they were made in.

That is not to argue that those principals were right, or wrong, merely to point to the obvious fact that they justify only what they were meant to justify then, and not what people wish them to justify today.

The founding fathers were not commentating on the state of racism, anti-racism, the political campaigns of Ron Paul, or any of the other candidates, in 2007, nor would they have been able to.

To state that “the principles upon which this nation was founded upon” were “universally applicable regardless of race, ethnicity religion, or gender” is as erroneous as the statement that they are in some way related to the issues of modern immigration, the “war on terror”, or any other contemporary issues.

Francis Playfair

Tarran did not publish Ron Paul’s comments concerning those particular Mises statements. Libertarians don’t necessarily hold all the views of any particular Mises book, critical thinking was not addressed, instead a broad based prejudice that all of what Mises wrote and who he was, including Mises own mistakes, was what Ron Paul ascribed to. To accurately judge Ron Paul’s view on Mises we have to proceed direct quote by direct quote — to do so otherwise would involve prejudice.

To the particular poster who claimed Ron Paul was supported by nazis, I would read this Ron Paul on Blowback http://www.mises.org/story/2588 comparing Guiliani supporters to Nazis.

[quote]“After Guiliani spoke, the red-state fascists in the audience all started whooping up the bloodlust that the politicians have been encouraging for the last six years –a mindless display of Nazi-like nationalism that would cause the founding fathers to shudder with fear of what we’ve become. These people are frantic about terrorism and extremism abroad, but they need to take a good hard look in the mirror.”

http://www.mises.org/story/2588/quote

Jews calling Guiliani supporters Nazis. So how does that relate to Ron Paul? Is not calling every White, regardless of who they support a “nazi” itself a racial collective act? Is not calling Nazi a racist act in and of itself?

The Jewish element at the Mises.org accusde Guiliani of being supported by Nazis. It’s Jewish racism against Whites is it not?

Last time I checked “the principles upon which this nation was founded upon” are universally applicable regardless of race, ethnicity religion, or gender.

Which is exactly the way it should be.

What I detest, is the inference by pedantic morons, as to what my political, religious, or racial beliefs are, or should be, based upon their ignorant inculcated predispositions.

I support Dr. Paul, simply because there is no man consistently proven time and again to be of a more noble or moral character.

Dr. Paul is the only candidate, that truly represents what is the best interest of our nation and our people, and is in my opinion the only “choice” to lead this nation down the path of a seemingly very difficult future.

So what do we make of those who have a problem with a man, such as Dr. Paul, who believes in the rights of free men to self-determination and to live their lives as they choose, without the interference of government?

I will leave that answer up to the reader to freely determine on their own, as I believe the answer is obvious.

Being called a “RACIST” in 2007 America is just a standard daily fact of life.

Who’s calling whom a “RACIST” – LaRaza – “THE RACE” accuses some regular Americans of being evil “racists” for desiring to enforce laws against illegal immigration. Yep that’s right LaRaza – THE RACE accuses others of being “RACISTS”.

LaRaza is by it’s very name an explicitly RACIST organization, same goes with the Black Congressional Caucus, Black Entertainment Television the list is endless and there is a huge double standard.

So does anyone care about smears against Ron Paul supporters for being “RACISTS”?

If you are getting all bent out of shape about this, you probably also believed the MSM coverage of the Duke Rape crisis.

Let’s get over this and get on.

If I were to dig up all the nasty people who support Obama and Hillary, it would fill volumes. This is just a tiny part of who supports Ron Paul, and they support him for good reasons if you look at their video.

Enough said! Drop it already. No one is listening.

/ignore