[wideawake]

The non patriots are those (especially those on this board) who without research or evidence trash the patriotism of people merely because they don't agree with them.

LOL!

The point of disagreement is the question of whether or not the US is responsible for 9/11.

If someone says that it is, they are not an American patriot.

This is not some slight disagreement unrelated to patriotism.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

i was wondering if you were going to show up on any of these threads again in light of the @$$ kicking you took over the supposed "David Duke endoursment" last week.

In light of your depleted credibility on that issue, i don't see why anybody on this board should accept anything that you have to say on the subject of Ron Paul's run for the Republican Nomination.

That said, now we examine the newest piece of drivel to come from your keyboard.

The point of disagreement is the question of whether or not the US is responsible for 9/11.

In light of Ron Paul's vote For the authorisation of force against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, it is apparent that he knows who is responsible for 9/11.

Your paltry attempt to parse the argument so as to make Paul's argument into a case of explaining motivation=justification isn't fooling anyone except the most hardcore Paulitrolls on this board, and those who presume to understand the Middle East, yet can't even explain the differences between Suni and Shiite.

So, do you also question the patriotism of the head of the CIA bin Laudin desk and the 9/11 commission, both of which Paul cited in his response ~among them, a Vietnam war Medal of Honor winner~?

The rest of your argument falls with the false premise that you have presented.