All Out War On Ron
Paul - World Affairs Brief
Commentary And Insights On A Troubled World
By Joel Skousen
Editor - World Affairs Brief
5-19-7

In the first GOP debate, Ron Paul came out of nowhere to capture the growing pro-Constitutional and anti-war sentiment of the viewers. His poll numbers doubled the others and had to be suppressed. In the second debate this week Fox News hosts were gunning for him, jabbing with questions tainted by skepticism and innuendo about his "being out of step with the Republican party." When Paul dared utter that American interventionist foreign policy was in large part responsible for 9/11, they allowed Rudolph Giuliani to jump into the debate out of turn to denounce him. The denunciations have been non-stop ever since, even threatening to deny Paul a place in any future debates.

As Andrew Sullivan, perennial GOP critic said of Paul's rising star, "They're scared, aren't they? The Internet polls show real support for him [Paul]. Fox News' own internet poll placed him a close second, with 25 percent of the votes from Fox News viewers [actually Paul was running first with 30%, well into the polling]. We have a real phenomenon here -- because someone has to stand up for what conservatism once stood for."

Presidential candidate Ron Paul merely uttered the mildest form of criticism -- that US incessant interference in the Middle East provided a major provocation for terrorists--a conclusion backed up by the establishment's own 9/11 Commission! Yet Rudolph Giuliani had the gall to say, "I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11."

During the debate, Paul specifically said that terrorists attacked the United States "because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [intervening]." Fox News White House correspondent Wendell Goler jumped on this opportunity to make Paul look extreme: "Are you suggesting we invited the 9-11 attack?"

Paul replied: "No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there..." He then recounted Reagan's decision to pull out of Middle East intervention after the Beruit bombing of Marines, that "we don't understand Middle East politics."

"I think Reagan was right," Paul said. "We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (some applause.)Then Giuliani jumps in and is given time to rebut (improperly--magically his microphone is live, while all others are off): "Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11 [Giuliani never misses an opportunity to say 'I was there' though he never admits having known the WTC were going to collapse and having failed to pull his first responders out of the buildings in time to save their lives.], that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause and cheers.) Then he demands that Ron Paul renounce his statement (even greater applause from the pro-Bush audience), but, Ron Paul sticks to his assertions.

As Pat Buchanan said, "After the debate, on Fox News' Hannity and Colmes, came one of those delicious moments on live television. As Michael Steele, GOP spokesman, was saying that Paul should probably be cut out of future debates, the running tally of votes by Fox News viewers was showing Ron Paul, with 30 percent, the winner of the debate. Brother Hannity seemed startled and perplexed by the votes being text-messaged in the thousands to Fox News saying Paul won, Romney was second, Rudy third and McCain far down the track at 4 percent.

Doug Kendall thinks there is a smear campaign against Paul: "By now, it is painfully obvious to most people in the freedom movement that Republican presidential hopeful, Ron Paul, has been targeted for elimination--by his own Party. The politically-connected elite within the Republican Party, along with allied organizations and operatives, are working overtime to make sure that Ron Paul is burned at the stake for daring to speak the truth and defy the Good Ol' Boy system.

"In all honesty, Dr. Paul should have known that he would be set up in the second debate--after he scored so high in poll after poll, following the first debate--and after he made it clear that he would not tow the neo-con, police-state, Giuliani-style 'war' on terror line.

"Everyone from Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, so-called "conservative" news websites and columnists, and even local talk radio shows have done everything in their power to define Ron Paul as a 'nut-job,' 'dope,' and 'moron,' calling for his removal from the debates because his views are supposedly 'dangerous' for the country."

Alex wallenwein adds more: "After the debate, Ron Paul appears as a guest on Fox News' Hannity and Colmes show. Hannity goes wild on Paul and Paul again refuses to back down, but can't hardly get a word in sideways between Hannity's irate rants.

"The following day, Paul is interviewed by Wolf Blitzer on CNN and is asked whether he will take the opportunity to back away from his statements. Ron Paul retorts that it is Rudy Giuliani who needs to apologize to him for unjustifiably blowing his top on him and insinuating that he is 'un-American.' Ron affirms that he is indeed an American because Americans have the right to disagree with bad policy, and America's foreign interventionism in the Middle East is bad policy and therefore can and should be challenged.

"Fox News anchor, John Gibson, recently stated that the second presidential debate got a little 'spicy' after 'Paul suggested that the US actually had a hand in the terrorist attacks.' He even went so far as to attempt to link Paul to the 911 Truth crowd and Rosie O'Donnell--whose picture they flashed, twice, during the five-minute segment, along with the tagline, 'ROSIE O'DONNELL STRONGLY BELIEVES IN 9/11 Conspiracy THEORIES.'

Gibson said that the 911 Truth movement has infected people like Rosie O'Donnell, and one in three Democrats, and many other Americans evidently, including Congressman Ron Paul. To make matters worse, he brought columnist and Fox News contributor, Michele Malkin, into the segment and said he would have expected to hear something like this from the Democrat debates.

In perfect neo-con style, Malkin stated, 'Ron Paul really has no business being on stage as a representative of Republicans,' apparently because of the 911 Truth movement 'virus.'

Paul Joseph Watson explains what Malkin means: "Malkin defines 9/11 truth as a 'virus' and repeats the term over and over to ensure Fox's geriatric 80-plus viewers don't forget it. Malkin resorts to the usual fodder of smearing 9/11 truth as a leftist fringe movement, despite the fact that we are routinely shunned and attacked by the liberal media, both mainstream and alternative. Gibson and Malkin then recoil at the temerity of the suggestion that bombing third world countries breeds hatred and characterize it as a tin-foil hat Conspiracy theory! Of course, those poor people in the Middle East love being bombed and to suggest otherwise is unpatriotic!

"Malkin cites Popular Mechanics, the Hearst Publishing yellow journalism rag that is edited by a tabloid TV critic as her bastion of credibility for standing up to 9/11 truthers, despite the fact that the magazine's 9/11 hit piece has been debunked over and over and is the target of Professor David Ray Griffin's new book , Debunking 9/11 Debunking.

The Giuliani Setup: One of my subscribers is a producer and explained that the debate was clearly rigged, judging by the tainted questions asked of Ron Paul and the favorable "opportunities" given to the top candidates. He also noted that the attack on Paul showed some signs of collusion by Fox because Giuliani's microphone was turned on so that he could rebut Paul. How did Giuliani get an open mic? The microphones of non speakers are always in the off position when their turn is over so as to not feed in noise to the system. His was left on when Paul was speaking. I think Fox was just waiting for something Paul would say that would give Giuliani a chance to respond and denounce.

Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media tends to agree: "Fox News has a reputation as a conservative news channel and many Republicans rely on it for news and information. But its handling of this debate raises serious questions about the channel's commitment to being 'fair and balanced.' It seems to be emerging as an arm of the Giuliani-for-president campaign. Honest conservatives should demand better coverage."

Ron Paul's rising star has to be shot down before it gets out of hand and now they have the issue to use against him. This intolerance for dissent is telling about how rigid and unprincipled the media has become. Patriotism has become so sacrosanct that the media will brook no opposition at all without inferring treason--mindless patriotism is essential toward herding the masses into more war and globalist intervention.

DISTORTIONS: Now they've got Ron Paul where they want him. They will brand him as some kind of "Holocaust Denier." They will continue to denigrate and distort his position and trumpet it to the world. He won't be given enough time to refute the charges. Remember, it takes lots of time to recite the small bits of evidence pointing to US involvement in 9/11, and even if people had the will to listen (which they do not) it's impossible to do on TV when you are only given some 30 seconds to respond. The distortions have already begun. Justin Raimondo of anti-war.com summarizes:

Several media figures mischaracterized a response that Rep. Ron Paul gave at the Republican debate, with some asserting that Paul had 'blamed' the United States for the 9-11 terrorist attacks and others simply accepting Rudy Giuliani's misrepresentation of Paul's statement that the United States had 'invited the attack.' In fact, Paul did not blame the United States for the 9-11 attacks or say that the United States had 'invited' the attacks. He said the attacks were a response to U.S. actions in the Middle East and stressed the importance of understanding the motivations of those who want to attack the United States. Moreover, the media largely ignored Paul's further comments on those remarks after the debate, including his assertion that 'Americans didn't do anything to cause' the attacks [referring to ordinary Americans, and not the leaders, who Paul privately knows were complicit].

"During a post debate interview, Fox News host Sean Hannity asked Paul: 'Are you suggesting that our policies are causing the hatred of people that would cause them to want to kill us?' Paul responded: 'I think it contributes significantly to it, and this is exactly what our CIA tells us.'Yet when describing the confrontation between Paul and Giuliani during the debate, numerous media figures claimed that Paul 'blamed' the United States for 9-11 or said that the United States was 'responsible' for the attacks, and they made no mention of his subsequent clarification. In addition, some not only accepted Giuliani's interpretation of what Paul said but praised Giuliani's response."

The "kick him out" club is growing. The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party Saul Anuzis said Wednesday that he will try to bar Ron Paul from future GOP presidential debates because of remarks the Texas congressman made that suggested the Sept. 11 attacks were the fault of U.S. foreign policy. Go here to sign a counter petition to ensure Ron Paul stays in the debates:

http://www.petitiononline.com/RPRNC08/petition.html


While most of the establishment world is crowing that "this was Giuliani's night" the internet crowd hardly agrees. Justin Raimondo has a few choice comments about Rudolph "the Thug" Giuliani: "In response to Ron Paul's reasonable and informed contention that our interventionist foreign policy created the 'blowback' that gave rise to Al Qaeda, and 9/11, Rudy Giuliani burbled 'I don't think I've ever heard that!'

"Of course he hasn't heard it: he's so busy pandering to the worst instincts of red-state fascists Republicans, calling for a national ID card, and drooling at the thought of torture that he has no time for a reality-based assessment of American foreign policy. That bullying would-be Mafia don, who looks and acts like someone out of 'The Sopranos,' demanded that Ron Paul 'withdraw his remarks and tell us he didn't mean it.' Paul's answer, 'I believe the CIA is correct when it warns us about blowback. We overthrew the Iranian government in 1953 and their taking the hostages was the reaction. This dynamic persists and we ignore it at our risk. They're not attacking us because we're rich and free, they're attacking us because we're over there [overthrowing governments].'

"As even the dumbos [Bush cheerleaders] over at FreeRepublic.com acknowledge, Rep. Paul is factually correct. Bin Laden's fatwa gave his reasons for the attack, and the savaging of Iraq -- pre-invasion -- is front-and -center.."

RON PAUL IS THE TALK OF THE TOWN: Paul is being interviewed constantly as the media keeps trying to vilify his position. I'm not sure its working. But, this uproar isn't going away. They will build upon it and distort it until Ron Paul is transformed into an "unpatriotic extremist." Think how they would crucify your editor and the other millions of Americans who are convinced that US government involvement was much more than mere provocation.

Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted.

Cite source as Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief


http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com


editor@worldaffairsbrief.com


Disclaimer

Email This Article




MainPage

http://www.rense.com



This Site Served by TheHostPros