YAF National Board Expels Ron Paul From Advisory Board

Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) , a conservative libertarian group founded in 1960 at the estate of William F. Buckley, expelled Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Republican, from their advisory board on Saturday. The organization released the following statement on Saturday afternoon:

The National Board of Young Americans for Freedom (YAF)—America's oldest conservative-libertarian activist group—has, per curium, voted to purge Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) from YAF’s National Advisory Board.

YAF’s concern with Rep. Paul stems from his delusional and disturbing alliance with the fringe Anti-War movement.

“It is a sad day in American history when a one-time conservative-libertarian stalwart has fallen more out of touch with America’s needs for national security than the current feeble and appeasing administration,” said YAF’s Senior National Director Jordan Marks.

“Who would have ever thought that we would see the day when YAF was more aligned with the Obama administration than a formerly conservative Republican congressman? Rep. Paul's refusal to support our nation’s military and national security interests border on treason, aside from his failure to uphold his oath to the United States Constitution and defend our country and citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Marks continued.

YAF National Chairman Michael Jones issued the following statement on this issue:

SNIP “Freedom and prosperity cannot peacefully exist alongside radical Islam. It is unfortunate that Ron Paul--a member of the U.S. Congress-- does not understand this. Surely, our enemies do.”

Published on The New Republic (http://www.tnr.com)

Angry White Man
The bigoted past of Ron Paul.
James Kirchick
January 8, 2008 | 12:00 am
.If you are a critic of the Bush administration, chances are that, at some point over the past six months, Ron Paul has said something that appealed to you. Paul describes himself as a libertarian, but, since his presidential campaign took off earlier this year, the Republican congressman has attracted donations and plaudits from across the ideological spectrum. Antiwar conservatives, disaffected centrists, even young liberal activists have all flocked to Paul, hailing him as a throwback to an earlier age, when politicians were less mealy-mouthed and American government was more modest in its ambitions, both at home and abroad. In The New York Times Magazine, conservative writer Christopher Caldwell gushed that Paul is a “formidable stander on constitutional principle,” while The Nation wrote of “his full-throated rejection of the imperial project in Iraq.” Former TNR editor Andrew Sullivan endorsed Paul for the GOP nomination, and ABC’s Jake Tapper described the candidate as “the one true straight-talker in this race.” Even The Wall Street Journal, the newspaper of the elite bankers whom Paul detests, recently advised other Republican presidential contenders not to “dismiss the passion he’s tapped.”

Most voters had never heard of Paul before he launched his quixotic bid for the Republican nomination. But the Texan has been active in politics for decades. And, long before he was the darling of antiwar activists on the left and right, Paul was in the newsletter business. In the age before blogs, newsletters occupied a prominent place in right-wing political discourse. With the pages of mainstream political magazines typically off-limits to their views (National Review editor William F. Buckley having famously denounced the John Birch Society), hardline conservatives resorted to putting out their own, less glossy publications. These were often paranoid and rambling—dominated by talk of international banking conspiracies, the Trilateral Commission’s plans for world government, and warnings about coming Armageddon—but some of them had wide and devoted audiences. And a few of the most prominent bore the name of Ron Paul.

Paul’s newsletters have carried different titles over the years—Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report—but they generally seem to have been published on a monthly basis since at least 1978. (Paul, an OB-GYN and former U.S. Air Force surgeon, was first elected to Congress in 1976.) During some periods, the newsletters were published by the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, a nonprofit Paul founded in 1976; at other times, they were published by Ron Paul & Associates, a now-defunct entity in which Paul owned a minority stake, according to his campaign spokesman. The Freedom Report claimed to have over 100,000 readers in 1984. At one point, Ron Paul & Associates also put out a monthly publication called The Ron Paul Investment Letter.

The Freedom Report’s online archives only go back to 1999, but I was curious to see older editions of Paul’s newsletters, in part because of a controversy dating to 1996, when Charles “Lefty” Morris, a Democrat running against Paul for a House seat, released excerpts stating that “opinion polls consistently show only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions,” that “if you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be,” and that black representative Barbara Jordan is “the archetypical half-educated victimologist” whose “race and sex protect her from criticism.” At the time, Paul’s campaign said that Morris had quoted the newsletter out of context. Later, in 2001, Paul would claim that someone else had written the controversial passages. (Few of the newsletters contain actual bylines.) Caldwell, writing in the Times Magazine last year, said he found Paul’s explanation believable, “since the style diverges widely from his own.”

Finding the pre-1999 newsletters was no easy task, but I was able to track many of them down at the libraries of the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society. Of course, with few bylines, it is difficult to know whether any particular article was written by Paul himself. Some of the earlier newsletters are signed by him, though the vast majority of the editions I saw contain no bylines at all. Complicating matters, many of the unbylined newsletters were written in the first person, implying that Paul was the author.

But, whoever actually wrote them, the newsletters I saw all had one thing in common: They were published under a banner containing Paul’s name, and the articles (except for one special edition of a newsletter that contained the byline of another writer) seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him—and reflected his views. What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays. In short, they suggest that Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing—but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics.

To understand Paul’s philosophy, the best place to start is probably the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Auburn, Alabama. The institute is named for a libertarian Austrian economist, but it was founded by a man named Lew Rockwell, who also served as Paul’s congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982. Paul has had a long and prominent association with the institute, teaching at its seminars and serving as a “distinguished counselor.” The institute has also published his books.

The politics of the organization are complicated—its philosophy derives largely from the work of the late Murray Rothbard, a Bronx-born son of Jewish immigrants from Poland and a self-described “anarcho-capitalist” who viewed the state as nothing more than “a criminal gang”—but one aspect of the institute’s worldview stands out as particularly disturbing: its attachment to the Confederacy. Thomas E. Woods Jr., a member of the institute’s senior faculty, is a founder of the League of the South, a secessionist group, and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, a pro-Confederate, revisionist tract published in 2004. Paul enthusiastically blurbed Woods’s book, saying that it “heroically rescues real history from the politically correct memory hole.” Thomas DiLorenzo, another senior faculty member and author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, refers to the Civil War as the “War for Southern Independence” and attacks “Lincoln cultists”; Paul endorsed the book on MSNBC last month in a debate over whether the Civil War was necessary (Paul thinks it was not). In April 1995, the institute hosted a conference on secession at which Paul spoke; previewing the event, Rockwell wrote to supporters, “We’ll explore what causes [secession] and how to promote it.” Paul’s newsletters have themselves repeatedly expressed sympathy for the general concept of secession. In 1992, for instance, the Survival Report argued that “the right of secession should be ingrained in a free society” and that “there is nothing wrong with loosely banding together small units of government. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, we too should consider it.”

The people surrounding the von Mises Institute—including Paul—may describe themselves as libertarians, but they are nothing like the urbane libertarians who staff the Cato Institute or the libertines at Reason magazine. Instead, they represent a strain of right-wing libertarianism that views the Civil War as a catastrophic turning point in American history—the moment when a tyrannical federal government established its supremacy over the states. As one prominent Washington libertarian told me, “There are too many libertarians in this country ... who, because they are attracted to the great books of Mises, ... find their way to the Mises Institute and then are told that a defense of the Confederacy is part of libertarian thought.”

Paul’s alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report, published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with “‘civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.” It also denounced “the media” for believing that “America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.” To be fair, the newsletter did praise Asian merchants in Los Angeles, but only because they had the gumption to resist political correctness and fight back. Koreans were “the only people to act like real Americans,” it explained, “mainly because they have not yet been assimilated into our rotten liberal culture, which admonishes whites faced by raging blacks to lie back and think of England.”

This “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” was hardly the first time one of Paul’s publications had raised these topics. As early as December 1989, a section of his Investment Letter, titled “What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author—presumably Paul—wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”

Such views on race also inflected the newsletters’ commentary on foreign affairs. South Africa’s transition to multiracial democracy was portrayed as a “destruction of civilization” that was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”; and, in March 1994, a month before Nelson Mandela was elected president, one item warned of an impending “South African Holocaust.”

Martin Luther King Jr. earned special ire from Paul’s newsletters, which attacked the civil rights leader frequently, often to justify opposition to the federal holiday named after him. (“What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!” one newsletter complained in 1990. “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”) In the early 1990s, newsletters attacked the “X-Rated Martin Luther King” as a “world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,” “seduced underage girls and boys,” and “made a pass at” fellow civil rights leader Ralph Abernathy. One newsletter ridiculed black activists who wanted to rename New York City after King, suggesting that “Welfaria,” “Zooville,” “Rapetown,” “Dirtburg,” and “Lazyopolis” were better alternatives. The same year, King was described as “a comsymp, if not an actual party member, and the man who replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration.”

While bashing King, the newsletters had kind words for the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. In a passage titled “The Duke’s Victory,” a newsletter celebrated Duke’s 44 percent showing in the 1990 Louisiana Senate primary. “Duke lost the election,” it said, “but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment.” In 1991, a newsletter asked, “Is David Duke’s new prominence, despite his losing the gubernatorial election, good for anti-big government forces?” The conclusion was that “our priority should be to take the anti-government, anti-tax, anti-crime, anti-welfare loafers, anti-race privilege, anti-foreign meddling message of Duke, and enclose it in a more consistent package of freedom.” Duke is now returning the favor, telling me that, while he will not formally endorse any candidate, he has made information about Ron Paul available on his website.

Like blacks, gays earn plenty of animus in Paul’s newsletters. They frequently quoted Paul’s “old colleague,” Representative William Dannemeyer—who advocated quarantining people with AIDS—praising him for “speak[ing] out fearlessly despite the organized power of the gay lobby.” In 1990, one newsletter mentioned a reporter from a gay magazine “who certainly had an axe to grind, and that’s not easy with a limp wrist.” In an item titled, “The Pink House?” the author of a newsletter—again, presumably Paul—complained about President George H.W. Bush’s decision to sign a hate crimes bill and invite “the heads of homosexual lobbying groups to the White House for the ceremony,” adding, “I miss the closet.” “Homosexuals,” it said, “not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.” When Marvin Liebman, a founder of the conservative Young Americans for Freedom and a longtime political activist, announced that he was gay in the pages of National Review, a Paul newsletter implored, “Bring Back the Closet!” Surprisingly, one item expressed ambivalence about the contentious issue of gays in the military, but ultimately concluded, “Homosexuals, if admitted, should be put in a special category and not allowed in close physical contact with heterosexuals.”

The newsletters were particularly obsessed with AIDS, “a politically protected disease thanks to payola and the influence of the homosexual lobby,” and used it as a rhetorical club to beat gay people in general. In 1990, one newsletter approvingly quoted “a well-known Libertarian editor” as saying, “The ACT-UP slogan, on stickers plastered all over Manhattan, is ‘Silence = Death.’ But shouldn’t it be ‘Sodomy = Death’?” Readers were warned to avoid blood transfusions because gays were trying to “poison the blood supply.” “Am I the only one sick of hearing about the ‘rights’ of AIDS carriers?” a newsletter asked in 1990. That same year, citing a Christian-right fringe publication, an item suggested that “the AIDS patient” should not be allowed to eat in restaurants and that “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva,” which is false. Paul’s newsletters advertised a book, Surviving the AIDS Plague—also based upon the casual-transmission thesis—and defended “parents who worry about sending their healthy kids to school with AIDS victims.” Commenting on a rise in AIDS infections, one newsletter said that “gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense,” adding: “[T]hese men don’t really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners.” Also, “they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick.”

The rhetoric when it came to Jews was little better. The newsletters display an obsession with Israel; no other country is mentioned more often in the editions I saw, or with more vitriol. A 1987 issue of Paul’s Investment Letter called Israel “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and a 1990 newsletter discussed the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.” Of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a newsletter said, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.”

Paul’s newsletters didn’t just contain bigotry. They also contained paranoia—specifically, the brand of anti-government paranoia that festered among right-wing militia groups during the 1980s and ’90s. Indeed, the newsletters seemed to hint that armed revolution against the federal government would be justified. In January 1995, three months before right-wing militants bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, a newsletter listed “Ten Militia Commandments,” describing “the 1,500 local militias now training to defend liberty” as “one of the most encouraging developments in America.” It warned militia members that they were “possibly under BATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms] or other totalitarian federal surveillance” and printed bits of advice from the Sons of Liberty, an anti-government militia based in Alabama—among them, “You can’t kill a Hydra by cutting off its head,” “Keep the group size down,” “Keep quiet and you’re harder to find,” “Leave no clues,” “Avoid the phone as much as possible,” and “Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

The newsletters are chock-full of shopworn conspiracies, reflecting Paul’s obsession with the “industrial-banking-political elite” and promoting his distrust of a federally regulated monetary system utilizing paper bills. They contain frequent and bristling references to the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and the Council on Foreign Relations—organizations that conspiracy theorists have long accused of seeking world domination. In 1978, a newsletter blamed David Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission, and “fascist-oriented, international banking and business interests” for the Panama Canal Treaty, which it called “one of the saddest events in the history of the United States.” A 1988 newsletter cited a doctor who believed that AIDS was created in a World Health Organization laboratory in Fort Detrick, Maryland. In addition, Ron Paul & Associates sold a video about Waco produced by “patriotic Indiana lawyer Linda Thompson”—as one of the newsletters called her—who maintained that Waco was a conspiracy to kill ATF agents who had previously worked for President Clinton as bodyguards. As with many of the more outlandish theories the newsletters cited over the years, the video received a qualified endorsement: “I can’t vouch for every single judgment by the narrator, but the film does show the depths of government perfidy, and the national police’s tricks and crimes,” the newsletter said, adding, “Send your check for $24.95 to our Houston office, or charge the tape to your credit card at 1-800-RON-PAUL.”

When I asked Jesse Benton, Paul’s campaign spokesman, about the newsletters, he said that, over the years, Paul had granted “various levels of approval” to what appeared in his publications—ranging from “no approval” to instances where he “actually wrote it himself.” After I read Benton some of the more offensive passages, he said, “A lot of [the newsletters] he did not see. Most of the incendiary stuff, no.” He added that he was surprised to hear about the insults hurled at Martin Luther King, because “Ron thinks Martin Luther King is a hero.”

In other words, Paul’s campaign wants to depict its candidate as a naïve, absentee overseer, with minimal knowledge of what his underlings were doing on his behalf. This portrayal might be more believable if extremist views had cropped up in the newsletters only sporadically—or if the newsletters had just been published for a short time. But it is difficult to imagine how Paul could allow material consistently saturated in racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and conspiracy-mongering to be printed under his name for so long if he did not share these views. In that respect, whether or not Paul personally wrote the most offensive passages is almost beside the point. If he disagreed with what was being written under his name, you would think that at some point—over the course of decades—he would have done something about it.

What’s more, Paul’s connections to extremism go beyond the newsletters. He has given extensive interviews to the magazine of the John Birch Society, and has frequently been a guest of Alex Jones, a radio host and perhaps the most famous conspiracy theorist in America. Jones—whose recent documentary, Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement, details the plans of George Pataki, David Rockefeller, and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, among others, to exterminate most of humanity and develop themselves into “superhuman” computer hybrids able to “travel throughout the cosmos”—estimates that Paul has appeared on his radio program about 40 times over the past twelve years.

Then there is Gary North, who has worked on Paul’s congressional staff. North is a central figure in Christian Reconstructionism, which advocates the implementation of Biblical law in modern society. Christian Reconstructionists share common ground with libertarians, since both groups dislike the central government. North has advocated the execution of women who have abortions and people who curse their parents. In a 1986 book, North argued for stoning as a form of capital punishment—because “the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost.” North is perhaps best known for Gary North’s Remnant Review, a “Christian and pro free-market” newsletter. In a 1983 letter Paul wrote on behalf of an organization called the Committee to Stop the Bail-Out of Multinational Banks (known by the acronym CSBOMB), he bragged, “Perhaps you already read in Gary North’s Remnant Review about my exposes of government abuse.”

Ron Paul is not going to be president. But, as his campaign has gathered steam, he has found himself increasingly permitted inside the boundaries of respectable debate. He sat for an extensive interview with Tim Russert recently. He has raised almost $20 million in just three months, much of it online. And he received nearly three times as many votes as erstwhile front-runner Rudy Giuliani in last week’s Iowa caucus. All the while he has generally been portrayed by the media as principled and serious, while garnering praise for being a “straight-talker.”

From his newsletters, however, a different picture of Paul emerges—that of someone who is either himself deeply embittered or, for a long time, allowed others to write bitterly on his behalf. His adversaries are often described in harsh terms: Barbara Jordan is called “Barbara Morondon,” Eleanor Holmes Norton is a “black pinko,” Donna Shalala is a “short lesbian,” Ron Brown is a “racial victimologist,” and Roberta Achtenberg, the first openly gay public official confirmed by the United States Senate, is a “far-left, normal-hating lesbian activist.” Maybe such outbursts mean Ron Paul really is a straight-talker. Or maybe they just mean he is a man filled with hate.

Corrections: This article originally stated that The Nation praised Ron Paul’s “full-throated rejection of the imperial project in Iraq.” The magazine did not praise Paul’s position, but merely described it. The piece also originally misidentified ABC’s Jake Tapper as Jack. In addition, Paul was a surgeon in the Air Force, not the Army, as the piece originally stated. It also stated that David Duke competed in the 1990 Louisiana Republican Senate primary. In fact, he was a Republican candidate in an open primary. The article has been corrected.

James Kirchick is an assistant editor at The New Republic.
.

Source URL: http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/angry-white-man
</html

http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2008a/012508/012508zb.htm

Column This week’s stories | Home Page
Issue Date: January 25, 2008

Ron Paul is the mutineer candidate

By COLMAN McCARTHY

— AP photo/The Brazosport Facts
/Dan Dalstra

Republican presidential hopeful Rep. Ron Paul reacts to a crowd waiting for him Dec. 16 at Western Seafood in Freeport, Texas, minutes after support reenacted the Boston Tea Party. Behind Paul is Dr. Richard Hardoin.
Your guess is as good or as wild as mine on why all that money has been heaved at Ron Paul. In December, $8 million poured in to the Republican candidate’s presidential campaign — setting a one-day record that topped a single-day gob of $4.2 million in November.

Before getting to whose checkbooks are opening, it’s certain whose are not: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Lockheed Martin and assorted weapons hustlers, the National Abortion Rights Action League and the double-parked fixers on K Street and Wall Street.

Paul, a 10-term congressman from southeast Texas and a pure-blood Constitution-heeding libertarian, favors relations with Cuba, so he attracts trade-minded capitalists. He vows to abolish the Internal Revenue Service, which stirs both serious-minded tax critics and the ranting-agin-the-gummint zanies. Dr. Paul is a buy with the antiwar Left because he opposed the Iraq invasion and wants the troops home immediately. And get ’em back from Korea, Japan and Europe while we’re at it. Home-schoolers cheer when he pledges to close the Department of Education. An obstetrician who opposes abortion, Dr. Paul has the pro-lifers aboard. Enviros are gleeful when he says “all subsidies and special benefits to energy companies should be ended.” Deficit worriers fist-pump in coiled passion when he calls for an end to profligate spending.

Then there’s my crowd: those pleased to take nourishment from whichever unconventional politician is dispensing mouthfuls of candor. I met Ron Paul when he arrived in Washington in the mid-’70s. Likable, he was unscripted, not a temporizer and assuredly apart from the usual dross that Texas sends to Congress: Think Tom Delay, Dick Armey, John Tower, Phil Gramm. I found Ron Paul oddly sensible and sensibly odd.

This was well before the Gingrich-Rove virus would infect Republican politics, a time when you could appreciate Republican members of Congress such as Mark Hatfield, Jim Leach, John Heinz, Charles Mathias, Connie Morella and John Danforth, and not apologize.

Now Ron Paul is going it largely alone, earning scant regard from the self-smitten monoculture Republican candidates he routinely out-thinks in the debates. As the Baptist Reverend Huckabee and the Mormon Romney preach rote antiterrorism sermons, Dr. Paul, claiming no direct line to a deity, impiously states that the jihadists “attack us because we’ve been over there. We’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it.” His foreign policy views call on the United States to “mind its own business and stay out of the internal affairs of other nations” and return to being a country not an empire.

For putting dialogue before demonizing, and topping it off with noninterventionism, Dr. Paul is routinely mocked by Rudolph Giuliani, Mr. 9/11, and scorned by John McCain, Mr. Sanctimony.

Days before the most recent debate, Jan. 10 in South Carolina, The New Republic recycled a long-dormant story defaming Mr. Paul as a bigot. Screeds titled the “Ron Paul Newsletter” from the 1980s and ’90s contained rants against gays, blacks and Jews. In an eight-minute CNN interview hours before the debate, Mr. Paul denounced and repudiated the documents, saying he paid no attention to them at the time and adding, credibly, that he did not write the newsletters or know who did.

While it can be argued that Dr. Paul should have been more diligent in condemning the newsletter rants, as he now rightly acknowledges, it’s true also that he can’t control the slews of crackpots, from Civil War revisionists and UFO sighters to white supremacists and assorted full-moon ravers, who drool at his libertarianism and sign on. Dr. Paul states, and I believe him, that no record exists of his ever uttering either the words or the sentiments found in the befouled newsletters. It is important that voters in his district believe him too. Otherwise they would never keep reelecting him.

The New Republic story — old hat and long discredited in southeast Texas but new to the country at large — has no legs. FOX News, which staged the South Carolina debate, never bothered to ask Paul about it.

One of my favorite stories about the congressman is his vote against awarding a congressional medal in honor of Rosa Parks. As eyebrows rose — what, you don’t like the sainted troublemaker? — Mr. Paul explained that he was all for the medal. But instead of using tax money to pay for it, he proposed that members of Congress kick in $100 of their personal money, as he would be the first to do. He had no takers.

Campaigning on, Mr. Paul tells audiences that he has trouble figuring out how to spend all the money he gets. I’ve an idea: Put aside a few grand to strike a medal in honor of his candidacy. Call it the Ron Paul Medal of Mettle.

Colman McCarthy teaches peace studies at four universities and three high schools in the Washington area.

National Catholic Reporter, January 25, 2008

This Week’s Stories | Home Page | Top of Page
Copyright © The National Catholic Reporter Publishing Company, 115 E. Armour Blvd., Kansas City, MO 64111
All rights reserved.
TEL: 816-531-0538 FAX: 1-816-968-2280 Send comments about this Web site to: webkeeper@ncronline.org

Groups that either voted democrat or are “libertarian” in their claims, support Ron Paul or Socialism openly, to include CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY candidate, Adam kokesh, and their appearance together at anti-war rallies::

http://www.workers.org/2007/us/dc-1011/index.html

ANTI-WAR MARCHES OF NEW TYPE
Washington, D.C.: Protest hits FEMA, ICE
By LeiLani Dowell

Published Oct 4, 2007 2:28 AM
Two months of anti-war activity culminated at the end of September in dynamic encampments to stop war at home and abroad and militant, anti-imperialist and anti-racist demonstrations in both Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.

Speakers and performers at the rally all drew clear links between the war in Iraq and the war at home, including a

labor delegation with Brenda Stokely of the Million Worker March Movement,
http://www.millionworkermarch.org/Million_Worker_March_Movement/Our_Mission.html
OUR DEMANDS
•We Seek Universal single-care health care from cradle to grave that ends the stranglehold of greedy insurance companies and secures health care as a right of all people in America.

•A national living wage that lifts people permanently out of poverty.

•Protection and enhancement of Social Security immune to privatization.

•Guaranteed pensions that sustain a decent life for all working people.

•The cancellation of all corporate “free” trade agreements, including NAFTA, MAI and FTAA.

•An end to privatization, contracting out, deregulation and the pitting of workers against each other across national boundaries in a mad race to the bottom.

•For workers’ right to organize and for a repeal of Taft Hartley and all anti-labor legislation.

•Funding public education in a crash program to restore our decaying and abandoned schools with state of the art school facilities in every community.

•Funding a vast army of teachers to end functional illiteracy in America and unleash the talent and potential of our abandoned children and adults.

•Launching a national training program in skills and capacities that will enlist our people in rebuilding our country and putting an end to both the criminalization of poverty and the prison-industrial complex.

•Rebuilding our decaying inner cities with clean, modern and affordable housing and eliminating homelessness in America with guaranteed housing and jobs for all.

•Progressive taxation that increases taxation on corporations and the rich while providing relief for the working class and poor.

•An end to the poisoning of the atmosphere, soil, water and food supply with a national emergency program to restore the environment, end global warming and preserve our endangered eco-system.

•Creating efficient, modern and free mass transit in every city and town.

•Repeal of the Patriot Act, Anti-Terrorism Act and all such repressive legislation.

•Slash the military budget and recover the trillions of dollars stolen from our labor to enrich the corporations that profit from war.

•Open the books on the secret budgets of the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies in the service of corporations and banks and the pursuit of imperial war on the poor everywhere.

•Extend democracy to our economic structure so that all decisions affecting the lives of our citizens are made by working people who produce all value through their labor.

•An aggressive enforcement of all civil rights and a national education campaign and mobilization against all racist and discriminatory acts in the work place and in our communities.

•Amnesty for all undocumented workers

•Increase in federal funding for the Arts in public schools

•For a democratic media that allow labor and all voices to be heard and oppose monopolization and union busting of media workers.

Charles Jenkins and Larry Adams of the New York City Labor Against the War, and members of District Council 37;
http://nyclaw01.wordpress.com/
About NYCLAW
Labor activists in NYC and elsewhere who oppose war response to events of Sept. 11, 2001.

Defining NYCLAW Principles (December 5, 2005)

1. Uncompromising opposition to bipartisan U.S. wars of empire – not only in Iraq – but in Afghanistan, Palestine & everywhere else; i.e.: Out Now! Based on right of national self-determination, not necessarily on political agreement with all who resist. Thus, Palestinian self-determination – i.e., right of return – is central.

2. War abroad cannot be separated from the war at home on workers, people of color, immigrants, Arab/Muslims, civil liberties – Katrina.

3. Independence from Democratic Party.

4. Working class has unique resistance is the key to an effective antiwar movement.

• Basra oil workers

• G.I.s

• Rank and file U.S. trade unionists

• Unorganized workers

5. Reject sectarianism, turf, Peaceocracy, self-promotion, worship of politicians or celebrities. Support honest, principled, democratic, united, bottom-up antiwar action.

NYCLAW Co-Conveners

Larry Adams Former President, NPMHU Local 300

Michael Letwin Former President, UAW Local 2325/Assn. of Legal Aid Attorneys

Brenda Stokely Former President, AFSCME DC 1707; N.E. Regional Coordinator, Million Worker March Movement

political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal, via a recorded greeting from death row;
http://www.freemumia.com/
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1330

Malik Rahim, Common Ground Collective;
http://www.commongroundrelief.org/

Medea Benjamin, Code Pink;
http://www.codepinkalert.org/

Bernadette Ellorin and Christine Hilo, BAYAN USA;
http://bayanusa.org/
THE ORGANIZATION

Founded on the determination and strength of the majority of oppressed classes, BAYAN is an alliance composed mainly of organizations of workers and peasants. Various sectors also account for many of our allied organization mass membership.

BAYAN counts on its members’ individual personages who serve in its leading bodies. The local chapter in the municipal, provincial or regional level is the basic unit of BAYAN.

The highest policy-making body is the National Congress. In between congresses, the National Council meets twice a year or whenever necessary. The National Executive Committee, through its various departments and the Popular Struggles Commission, ensures the implementation of BAYAN’s General Program of Action and other policies and directives laid down by the Congress and National Council. The National Secretariat, headed by the Secretary-General takes care of BAYAN’s day to day operation.

Larry Hamm, People’s Organization for Progress;
http://www.njpop.org/

People’s Organization for Progress
The People’s Organization for Progress (POP) works to empower the grassroots community and fights for its needs. P.O.P. speaks out about issues such as poverty, racism, unemployment, education, housing, drugs, crime and community deterioration as well as important local, national and international issues.

P.O.P. supports self-help and other efforts to improve conditions in our community. However our ultimate goal is the complete elimination of all forms of racial, social and economic inequality and injustice. If you want to have a stronger voice in the affairs of our community then you should join the People’s Organization for Progress.

The People’s Organization for Progress has a statewide campaign to mobilize and demonstrate against police brutality and racial violence.

POP meets each Thursday, 6:30 PM, Abyssinian Baptist Church, 224 West Kinney Street, Newark, NJ. You’re invited to join us.

and David Swanson, After Downing Street.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/about

After Downing Street is a nonpartisan coalition of over 200 veterans groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that has worked since May 2005 to pressure both Congress and the media in order to hold Bush, Cheney, and their aides accountable for crimes and abuses of power. The coalition takes its name from the emergence in May and June of 2005 of several documents that quickly came to be known as the Downing Street Memos.

Also speaking were

Ardeshir Ommani of the Stop the War On Iran Campaign and American Iranian Friendship Committee;
http://stopwaroniran.org/
Stop the war on Iran before it starts!
March 2005
In Farsi En Español
Sign the statement View signers
It is with grave concern that we observe the growing threat of a new U.S. war—this time against the people of Iran.
The media is filled with reports of an alleged nuclear threat posed by Iran and the assumed need for the U.S. to take military action. These reports recall the “Weapons of Mass Destruction” stories issued in the months leading up to the war on Iraq.
In the lead up to the illegal invasion of Iraq, the Bush Administration asserted that Iraq possessed massive stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and that it was capable of launching an attack - nuclear, chemical and biological - on the U.S. within 45 minutes.
President Bush said that the U.S. had to attack immediately, and could not “wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.” We all know now that this propaganda campaign was a complete fabrication created to justify a war of aggression.

American Iranian Friendship Committee
http://www.iranaifc.com/about_us.php
Everything about us The American-Iranian Friendship Committee (AIFC) was formed in 2004 for the purpose of promoting trust, mutual understanding and peace between Americans, on one hand, and Iranians living in Iran and abroad, on the other. Prompted by concern for the consequences of an on-going anti-Iranian U.S. foreign policy, the AIFC takes steps towards creating an atmosphere that can strengthen healthy dialogue and make friendship possible between the people of the two nations. We invite all democratic-minded individuals to join the committee and help in our efforts at building a movement for promoting peace, ending the unjust sanctions, and preventing a U.S.-NATO war on Iran.

Ignacio Meneses, National Network on Cuba;
http://www.cubasolidarity.com/
ABOUT THE NATIONAL NETWORK ON CUBA (NNOC)
Thanks for your interest in the National Network on Cuba. The U.S.-based NNOC is the umbrella organization for several dozen separate organizations that advocate for the end of Washington’s hostility towards Cuba, including activist solidarity groups in various major cities. The NNOC itself doesn’t have a paid staff or office, but runs this website and a mailing list, and holds two meetings a year to draw everyone together.
Membership is essentially for organizations and their members, but associate membership for individuals is available. Use our response form to get further information.
We encourage you to get involved in the effort to reverse U.S. policy towards Cuba, including defending your own right to travel there. Your questions and comments are welcome.
In this section you’ll find three things: our Principles and Goals, a geographical list of member groups, and further information about this site in the right collum.
Thank you again for your interest. We look forward to working together with you.
Solidarity,
Louis Head,
Sobukwe Shakura,
Bambose Shango
Nalda Vigezzi,
NNOC Co-chairs

Walter Sinche, May 1st Immigrant Rights Coalition;
http://www.immigrantsolidarity.org/
http://www.may1.info/

Press Conference:
12:30pm-1:30pm
Thursday, March 18th
757 3rd Ave between 47th and 48th St.
In front of the offices of Senator Charles Schumer
In Response to Current Calls for Immigration Reform:
NEW YORK CITY’S MAY 1ST COALITION DEMANDS LEGALIZATION FOR ALL IMMIGRANTS NOW!
ANNOUNCES PARTICIPATION IN THE MARCH 21ST NATIONAL ACTION FOR
IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS IN WASHINGTON DC

Rosita Romero, Dominican Women’s Development Center;
http://www.dwdc.org/

About Us
The Dominican Women’s Development Center (DWDC/El Centro) was founded in 1988. It was created by a group of young, Dominican women who identified the need to create a membership, service organization that would help organize low-income women and that would provide them with culturally competent social services. The central mission of El Centro is to contribute to the empowerment of Dominican/Latina, other women and our families who reside in Washington Heights/Inwood and other New York City communities. Our mission is to aid in the growth and development of our self-esteem, by affirming our identity and solidarity through multicultural and holistic social services, and educational, economic and cultural development programs. The Center is committed to the organizing of women to actively participate in the elimination of gender inequality and the promotion of social justice.

Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Hip Hop Caucus;
Mission
The Hip Hop Caucus Education Fund’s mission is to foster civic engagement among young people of color on issues of social and economic justice, human rights, the environment, and international peace, so they can attain increased opportunities for themselves and their communities. We focus on meeting young people where they are, by linking cultural expression with social and political experience.

Adam Kokesh, Iraq Veterans Against the War;

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&q=Adam+Kokesh%2c+Iraq+Veterans+Against+the+War

Ann Wright, retired U.S. Army veteran and 16-year diplomat who resigned in opposition to the Iraq war;
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&q=Ann+Wright%2c+retired+U.S.+Army+veteran

Victor Toro, Chilean leader of MIR being threatened with deportation;
Chile’s MIR: The Revolutionary Left Movement
Urban Guerrillas Declare War on the Pinochet Dictatorship
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&q=Chilean+leader+of+MIR

Debra Sweet of World Can’t Wait;
http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php/about-mainmenu-2/about-world-cant-wait-mainmenu-215

Mission Statement of World Can’t Wait
Monday, 18 May 2009 01:03
The World Can’t Wait organizes people living in the United States to repudiate and stop the fascist direction initiated by the Bush Regime, including: the murderous, unjust and illegitimate occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan; the global “war of terror” of torture, rendition and spying; and the culture of bigotry, intolerance and greed. This direction cannot and will not be reversed by leaders who tell us to seek common ground with fascists, religious fanatics, and empire. It can only be possible by the people building a community of resistance - an independent mass movement of people - acting in the interests of humanity to stop, and demand prosecution, of these crimes.

and Teresita Jacinto Oliva of Mexicanos Sin Fronteras.
http://www.mexicanossinfronteras.org/
Mexicans without borders (translation)
Our Mission:
Our mission is to improve the quality of life for low-income communities, promoting and protecting human rights, civil and political rights of workers, immigrants and their families. We stand for equality, social justice and economic, and environmental protection.
Our Principles:
Liberty, Equality, Diversity, Community, Voluntary Work and Sacrifice, Obeying, Solidarity, Autonomy, Democracy, Justice and Peace.
We are a network of migrant communities autonomous area located in the states of Virginia, Maryland, Delaware and the United States capital, Washington DC
The SPS is an individual membership.
SPS members are mostly families and migrant workers from Central and South America and Mexico, and our mission is to promote and defend human rights, labor and civil liberties of all migrants, to promote the welfare of our families and the contribution our communities, integration into the community and preserve our cultural identity.

. Our work is developed through volunteer work on projects such as the autonomous organization of communities and working committees, activities and information campaigns, assistance, education, English classes, food distribution, medical care, and cultural activities.
Our struggle is focused against the causes of migration, social justice and economic exclusion and exploitation, against racism and intolerance, protection of nature and the union of the worker @ s
We fight for the constitutional recognition of rights and culture of immigrants through a comprehensive legal reform to legalize the status of all undocumented workers in terms of justice and dignity.
L We strive for that in Mexico the law is reformed national population under a constitutional reform in Congress, guaranteeing respect for all rights and physical and moral integrity of foreign migrants.
We fight against exclusion and for the constitutional recognition of all rights for all Mexicans living abroad
Our commitment is to promote a genuine democratic transition and social and economic justice in Mexico, and defend the sovereignty and resources of our country.
We sympathize with movimientosde civil society, peace, justice, and freedom in Mexico and worldwide.
We are members of local coalitions, regional and national with whom we join in defending our rights, to progress and we have formalized a partnership with others.
Nuestra agenda: Our agenda:
Derechos de los migrantes y Reforma Migratoria Justa, humana y digna. Rights of migrants and Fair Immigration Reform, humane and dignified manner.
Southern border: the legal protection and respect for the rights and physical and moral integrity of foreign migrants in Mexico.
Transición a la democracia en México: Todos los derechos para todos Transition to democracy in Mexico: All rights for all
No neocolonialismo.No globalization and war.
5> For a culture of liberation.

Continuing the short, punchy talks were

Jared Ball, and Sara “Echo” Steiner, Green Party members;

Charlotte Kates of Al-Awda New York, the Palestine Right to Return Coalition;

Pam Africa, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal;

political prisoner Leonard Peltier, via a statement; Sonia Umanzon of the FMLN (Faribundo Martí National Liberation Front);

Katrina survivors Ivey Parker and Christine Gavin-Lathan;

Mohammad Awdallah, U.S. Popular Palestine Conference Network;

Ricardo Prado of the Colombian political party Democratic Pole;

Tyneisha Bowens of FIST—Fight Imperialism, Stand Together;

Larry Holmes, Teresa Gutierrez and Sara Flounders for TONC and the International Action Center;

Omowale Clay, December 12 Movement and Friends of Zimbabwe;

and Milton St. Germaine, New England Human Rights Organization for Haiti.

Vietnam was lost????

This is important for one significant reason: 1968 was the TET offensive, the last gasp of the North Vietnamese, a large offensive where the American people were told by a media that the war was un-winnable. But was this the case?

General Vo Nguyen Giap, the leader of the North Vietnamese Army during the war, had these comments to make concerning the efforts of anti-war protesters like John Kerry, Jane Fonda, and VVAW, which Jane Fonda was the co-founder with John Kerry; this article is reprinted from NEWSMAX:

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/1/110432.shtml

Gen. Giap Thanks Kerry & Co. for Anti-war Protests

Celebrating the 29th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, the North Vietnamese general who led his forces to victory said Friday he was grateful to leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, one of whom was presidential candidate John Kerry.

“I would like to thank them,” said Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, now 93, without mentioning Kerry by name. “Any forces that wish to impose their will on other nations will surely fail,” he added.

Reuters, which first reported Giap’s comments, suggested that the former enemy general was mindful of Kerry’s role in leading some of the highest-profile anti-war protests of the entire Vietnam War. Before the British wire service quoted Gen. Giap, it noted:

“The Vietnam War, known in Vietnam as the American War, has become a hot issue in the U.S. presidential race with Democrat John Kerry drawing attention to his service and President Bush’s Republicans disparaging Kerry’s later anti-war stand.”

North Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin, who served under Gen. Giap on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, received South Vietnam’s unconditional surrender on April 30, 1975.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after his retirement, Col. Tin explicitly credited leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, saying they were “essential to our strategy.”

“Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement,” Col. Tin told the Journal. Visits to Hanoi by Kerry anti-war allies Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and others, he said, “gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses.”

“We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war,” the North Vietnamese military man explained.

Kerry did much the same thing in widely covered speeches such as the one he delivered to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April 1971. “Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a will to win,” Col. Tin concluded.

These are not insignificant statements. These North Vietnamese military men are crediting the American Anti-War movement with being the reason they held out in time of war. The obvious conflict in this statement of theirs is, if there was NO ANTI-WAR movement in the US, these North Vietnamese military men would have NOT been optimistic about the outcome of the war. They would have been approaching the US in an attitude of military weakness, not military strength.

This is undeniable. In fact, there are some more direct quotes from General Giap on this very subject.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/10/222651.shtml

Gen. Giap: Kerry’s Group Helped Hanoi Defeat U.S.

The North Vietnamese general in charge of the military campaign that finally drove the U.S. out of South Vietnam in 1975 credited a group led by Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry with helping him achieve victory.

In his 1985 memoir about the war, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap wrote that if it weren’t for organizations like Kerry’s Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the U.S. - according to Fox News Channel war historian Oliver North.

That’s why, he predicted on Tuesday, the Vietnam War issue “is going to blow up in Kerry’s face.”

“People are going to remember Gen. Giap saying if it weren’t for these guys [Kerry’s group], we would have lost,” North told radio host Sean Hannity.

“The Vietnam Veterans Against the War encouraged people to desert, encouraged people to mutiny - some used what they wrote to justify fragging officers,” noted the former Marine lieutenant colonel, who earned two purple hearts in Vietnam.

“John Kerry has blood of American soldiers on his hands,” North said.

The TET offensive of 1968 has been claimed to be a disaster for American forces, but is this the case?

Here is a short synopsis of just what happened during the TET Offensive of 1968:

Myth: The Tet Offensive Was a Communist Victory The 1968 Tet offensive was a total and complete miltary disaster for the North Vietnamese Communists no matter how you look at it. If you measure victory by territory gained or enemy killed, the North Vietnamese Army and the Viet Cong failed dismally in their attacks.

The NVA and VC had counted on a “People’s Uprising” to carry them to victory, however there was no such uprising. They did exactly what the American military wanted them to do. They massed in large formations that were incredibly vulnerable to the awesome fire support the U.S. Military was able to bring to bear on them in a coordinated and devastating manner.

The NVA and VC attacked only ARVN installations with the exception of the US Embassy in Saigon. Despite reports to the contrary by all major television news networks and the print media, the VC sapper team of 15 men never entered the chancery building and all 15 VC were dead within 6 hours of the attack. They caused no damage to any property and managed to kill 4 US Army MPs, and one Marine guard. The South Vietnamese Police tasked with guarding the Embassy fled at the first sound of gunfire.

The NVA/VC launched major attacks on Saigon, Hue, Quang Tri City, Da Nang, Nha Trang, Qui Nhon, Kontum City, Ban Me Thout, My Tho, Can Tho, and Ben Tre. With the exception of the old imperial city of Hue, the NVA/VC were forced to retreat within 24 hours of the beginning of the offensive. In the process they suffered devastating losses among the southern VC cadres. Using the southern VC as the spearhead of these attacks was an intentional device on the part of the North Vietnamese politcal leadership. They did not want to share power with the southerners after the war, so they sent them out to what was inevitable slaughter. The NVA mainforce battalions were held in “reserve” according to Vo Nguyen Giap, in order to “exploit any breakthroughs”.

In the first week of the attack the NVA/VC lost 32,204 confirmed killed, and 5,803 captured. US losses were 1,015 KIA, while ARVN losses were 2,819 killed. ARVN losses were higher because the NVA/VC, reluctant to enter into a set-piece battle with US forces, attacked targets defended almost exclusively by South Vietnamese troops.

Casualties among the people whom the NVA/VC claimed to be “liberating” were in excess of 7,000, with an additional 5,000 tortured and murdered by the NVA/VC in Hue and elsewhere. In Hue alone, allied forces discovered over 2,800 burial sites containing the mutilated bodies of local Vietnamese teachers, doctors, and political leaders.

http://www.11thcavnam.com/education/myth_the_tet_offensive_was_a_com.htm

And that is the point of this letter. The actions of John Kerry and the anti-war protesters caused American men and women to be killed in war time in Vietnam, the very war where they insisted we withdraw and claim we were at fault and it was all our fault; where Americans were all war criminals and “baby-killers”. And it was a war we were winning.

(THE BLOOD ON KERRY’S HANDS, Jim Bancroft, 2004)

HUH??
Ron Paul’s connection to anti-war types is clearly historically accurate, especially recently with the traitor ADAM KOKESH::

From: “” <>
To: ronpaul-769@meetup.com
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 7:33:49 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [ronpaul-769] Adam Kokesh Needs Your Urgent Help!

Read all about it:

http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/066220-2010-03-15-adam-kokesh-needs-your-help.htm

Make some phone calls for Adam if you have the time - please?

Thank you for whatever you can do to help,

Ed
****************

Getting wind of that e-mail is what woke me up to the Libertarian takeoer of the Connecticut Tea Party::

************************

THIS E-MAIL IS ABOUT PETER SCHIFF, the Connecticut candidate for Senate.

http://omgili.com/kokesh-rand-schiff#

In the last two weeks, I have been working on keeping New Mexico voters aware of an EX-Marine named Adam Kokesh who is running for the national Congressional seat in the Farmington New Mexico area.
http://kokeshforcongress.com/

Kokesh is a member of IVAW, (Iraq Veterans Against the War). He openly marched in demonstrations against his country after returning from Iraq. He was arrested for bringing an illegal weapon to a college campus and having it stolen from his car, and then had a Military trial and lost a stripe for it since he brought it back illegally from Iraq.
http://www.holidaydmitri.com/kokesh.html

Kokesh went to an Army base and openly stood in a Chow Hall and videotaped himself calling on the troops to desert in time of War and posted in online and on the IVAW blog under his own name.
http://www.ivaw.org/node/787

Kokesh also led a demonstration in DC in front of a recruiting station where his public stated goal was to prevent any recruiting from going on that day. Kokesh’s accomplices that day berated several Blue Star Mothers, (Mothers of Soldiers/Marines/Airmen/Sailors serving in time of war) and told them their sons should die in Iraq.
http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=25&sid=1368458
First hand witness accounts here :
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1988355/posts
Video taken by the Left Wing protesters is found here:
http://vimeo.com/2561824
http://www.dc-sds.org/ (see the bottom of the page)

They did this in the presence of Kokesh and with his approval. After this verbal abuse, the protestors broke the windows of the recruiting station. Kokesh left the scene and participated in a die in. He also led IVAW members through the streets of DC wearing uniforms of our military service while he still had reserve time to finish before his time of Military obligations were over.

He was asked about this by a Marine officer who wanted to determine why he did what he did and were the allegations true. Kokesh admitted this was true and told the Major to GO F__ HIMSELF in his e-mail response. He ALSO posted that e-mail exchange online on the IVAW website.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/09/17/adam-kokesh-when-injustice-becomes-law-resistance-becomes-duty/
http://www.ivaw.org/node/639

A website was created in the last 2 weeks to expose this fraud in an attempt to derail his candidacy in New Mexico. That website is found here:
http://americanpatriotsagainstkokesh.wordpress.com/
Please go there to see the information we have gathered, to include photographs and videos of him at these events.

Since investigating this man, I have repeatedly found references to Peter Schiff next to Adam Kokesh. I realize that Schiff was a Ron Paul supporter, but I was unaware until the last few days just how much Ron Paul was connected to both of them.

I agreed to support our endorsement of Peter Schiff for the sole reason that I thought a RINO like Rob Simmons was bad for our nation. However, I must completely remove my support knowing now that Schiff’s associations, even by proxy, are with an organization that openly supports a traitor, Adam Kokesh.

The words of Navy SEAL Commander, Capt Larry Baily speak it well for me. The details of this letter written by Capt Baily are verifiable by anyone who desires to look:
http://gatheringofeaglesnc.org/blog1.php/2010/02/24/an-open-letter-on-adam-kokesh

Peter Schiff is joined at the hip of Adam Kokesh and the Ron Paul political types. I find that form of governing to be an abomination, one that I will choose a RINO over any day before I vote for someone who openly supports treason, either directly or by proxy. Schiff’s association with Ron Paul and Kokesh are undeniable, for they attended the same events and are on the same videos from these events and have appeared together on Judge Napolitano’s Webcast TV show together endorsing each other through their presence and associations.
http://bytestyle.tv/content/freedom-watch-23-judge-napolitano-ron-paul-peter-schiff-adam-kokesh-more

I will openly oppose anyone who supports Peter Schiff from this day forward for these reasons. This is not a joke nor is it intended to be a threat, but I guarantee you, any organization that endorses Peter Schiff will be exposed for endorsing the traitor, Adam Kokesh, either by direct action or by proxy.

As one of the original founders of the Hartford Tea Party, I wish no ill will nor do I desire to see a split, but this is an issue where I must draw the line. This is not a negotiable issue for me. This is about treason and the supporting of a traitor through association.

Peter Schiff’s association with Ron Paul bothered me because Ron Paul is someone who once had great ideas but has most recently joined hands with 9/11 truthers. He is also a believer in aliens and UFO’s, something I find to be in interesting topic and fun to watch on movies but logically absurd. To know fully, and with video evidence and open plain stated testimony by the men themselves available, association with any of Ron Paul’s people is an association with the suborning of treason by it’s connection to Adam Kokesh.

If necessary, I will resign from the Tea Party but I will refuse to be silent if the endorsement for Peter Schiff goes forward.

Please consider my words. Think real hard. We all know our nation is at stake, but I will NOT support anyone who supports treason in any form or ignore it for political expediency.

James Bancroft

RON PAUL DOESN’T HAVE AN ANTI-SEMITIC BONE IN HIS BODY?? WHY DOES HE ATTRACT HE PEOPLE THAT DO, THEN????

( Taken below from the letter I wrote explaining why I left the Hartford Tea Party )

On July 15, 2009, Peter Schiff was one of the search terms along with Adam Kokesh for this Ron Paul appearance on Judge Napolitano’s web broadcast. If they are not known to each other or do not have common values and goals, why are they jointly

advertised with each other?
That link can be found here:
http://bytestyle.tv/content/freedom-watch-23-judge-napolitano-ron-paul-peter-schiff-adam-kokesh-more

On the following website, videos of Peter Schiff, with search tags that include Adam Kokesh, Ron Paul, Rand Paul and Chris Dodd (someone Schiff has openly opposed, one of the reasons I originally supported him), additional videos also show a hatred of Israel and Jewish interests, calling SarahPalin a Zionist Neocon Warmonger, that Ron Paul is the Tea Party leader-Not Sarah Palin (Neither were leaders, it was street level persons such as myself that made things happen), :
http://www.barackobamavideos.net/keyword/kokesh/page/5

Mentioned specifically on this page are two Schiff videos. Here are the descriptions and links to those videos, along with the search tags for those videos:

Peter schiff – (8.13.09)(0)
http://www.barackobamavideos.net/peter-schiff-8-13-09
Posted on February 10th, 2010 | Categorized as Barrack Obama | Tagged as 1207, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, Adam, Audit, Bankrupt, Business, Chris, Christopher, Collapse, Commodities, Congress, Connecticut, Constitution, Debt, Deception, Deficit, DEPRESSION, Dodd, Economics, ECONOMY, Election, Fannie, FED, Foreclosure, Fox, Freddie, Germond, Harris, HR, IOUSA, Jake, Jaynee, Kokesh, Mac, Mae, OBAMA, Paul, Peter, Predicted, Rand, Restore, Rj, Ron, Schiff, Senate, Spending, The, Towne, US Peter Schiff discussing health care and insurance on Fox Business. Donate to his campaign today! TAGS Peter Schiff Connecticut Senate 2010 2009 US Economy Ron Paul Rand Adam Kokesh RJ Harris Jake Towne Jaynee Germond Congress Election Economics Chris Christopher Dodd 2006 2007 2008 Collapse Predicted Fannie Mae Freddie Mac Bankrupt Depression Deficit Spending [...]

Peter schiff – (8.19.09)(0)
http://www.barackobamavideos.net/peter-schiff-8-19-09
Posted on February 10th, 2010 | Categorized as Barrack Obama | Tagged as 1207, Adan, Alex, Audit, Ben, Bernanke, Brown, Chris, Christopher, Congress, Deal, Debt, Deception, Deficit, DEPRESSION, Dodd, FED, Federal, Germond, Global, Gordon, Harris, HR, Infowars, Jake, Jaynee, Joker, Jones, Kokesh, New, OBAMA, Paul, Peter, Planet, Prison, Recession, RESERVE, Retake, Rj, Ron, Schiff, Spending, Towne Donate to his campaign! TAGS Peter Schiff Ron Paul Adan Kokesh RJ Harris Jake Towne Jaynee Germond Retake Congress Chris Christopher Dodd Obama Joker Deception Depression Recession Deficit Spending Debt Global New Deal Gordon Brown Alex Jones Infowars Prison Planet HR 1207 Audit FED Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke Alan Greenspan Constitution Michael Badnarik Connecticut [...]

Notice that in the second video, one of the search tags is INFOWARS. INFOWARS is an Alex Jones supported group, one of the

leading 9/11 truthers who believe, among the many theories proposed by truthers, stories such as that the World Trade Centers were attacked by radio controlled airplanes that had the passengers removed before the collision, and also that explosive charges were placed in the building that caused the actual collapse after the collision and resultant fire. These people are Ron Paul suporters and openly support Peter Schiff and Adam Kokesh.

Remember: You are known by the company you keep, and by those who promote you and by those who wish you ill.

In this video, hosted on that same site http://www.barackobamavideos.net/keyword/kokesh/page/5 , the title is ISRAEL’S

HYPOCRASY
http://www.barackobamavideos.net/israels-hypocracy

The search tags for that video are as follows: Posted on February 10th, 2010 | Categorized as Barrack Obama | Tagged as 10, 2012,

Adam, Alex, Barack, Beck, Best, Bowl, Brees, Brett, Bush, Campaign, Celente, Commercial, Commercials;, Doritos, Drew, Ever, Favre, For, Gaza, Gerald, Glenn, Hand, Illustrated, Israel, Jay, Jones, Judge, Kokesh, Latifah, Leno, Liberty, Motorola, Napolitano, New, Notes, OBAMA, Order, Palestine, Palestinian, Palin, Paul, Peter, Polamalu, Queen, Rand, Reggie, Ron, Sarah, Schiff, Special,
Sports, Super, Superbowl, Swimsuit, Top, Troy, World, Zionism, Zionist
Israel’s hypocracy MEGA info BOMB blogs.myspace.com FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material.

Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 USC section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Ron Paul Peter Schiff Adam Kokesh [...]

It is crystal clear that this individual website is hosted by Anti-semitic persons who hold disparaging views of Jews. Notice also that one of the search terms is GAZA, indicating that this website is favorable of the Palistinian cause, despite the obvious facts of the Palistinians creating homicidal bombers to kill Jews using retarded persons as suicide bombers and also firing over 1000 home made rockets into Israel in the last 2 years. This website thinks that is not worth mentioning, but Israel’s Hypocrasy (sic) is the issue.

While again, a single reference to these issues does prove a movement, I understand that, a logical thinking person would distance themselves from people such as this once this is known unless you hold these views yourself, or if your friends hold these views and you do not want to distance yourself from your friends.

For the record, and for his credit concerning his connections to Ron Paul and Adam Kokesh, Peter Schiff has denounced the 9/11 theories surrounding a conspiracy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL7RYFLgLhI

A nerw Internet search reveals the following about Ron paul and 9/11:

An organization called Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth video taped an inpromtu appearance with Ron Paul and recorded some of his comments. They can be found here:
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/19/trutheriness-and-ron-paul/

While Ron Paul has said on TV shows such as Glen Beck that he dismisses the major theories, he openly says there is a coverup of what went on yet refuses to elaborate on just what is covered up. The 9/11 Comission clearly showed that intelligence failures happened because of Clinton era laws that prevented our inteligence agancies from communicating with each other.

On the website CONSPIRACY PLANET, information about Ron Paul and issues similar to this can be found:
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=90

Ron Paul has publically said that the CIA has accomplished a coup against America and needs to be taken out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dECSYm5bSM

A direct quote from this conference is as such:
(January 20, 2010) House Rep. Ron Paul says the CIA has in effect carried out a “coup” against the US government, and the intelligence agency needs to be “taken out.”

Speaking to an audience of like-minded libertarians at a Campaign for Liberty regional conference in Atlanta this past weekend, the Texas Republican said: “There’s been a coup, have you heard? It’s the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They’re the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries...”

I did an Internet search to see if Peter Schiff attended this conference, and found that almost every video of this event where Ron Paul made such a statement, Peter Schiff’s name was one of the main search tags:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Peter+Schiff+Atlanta+Campaign+for+Liberty&num=20&hl=en&newwindow=1&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=bYWjS8zdBqWDlAfJp4WODA&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=5&ved=0CCcQqwQwBA

One one video, the single specific description for the video reads as such:
RANDPAUL2010
INFOWARS.COM
CAMPAIGNFORLIBERTY.COM
SCHIFFFORSENATE.COM
Category: News & Politics
Tags: ron paul 2pac alex jones debra medina peter schiff gerald celente marc faber max keiser jim rogers dollar hyperinflation wall street gold federal reserve bernanke geithner bailout stimulus obama healthcare palin scott brown fox news msnbc cnbc mike church perry hutchison spending tea party glenn beck rand paul dr. mercola campaign for liberty atlanta regional conference woods mises rockwell climategate monckton jesse ventura conspiracy theory new world order

This video can be found at the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uwPn5C2SPo

And here is one prominant website that supports the 9/11 conspiracy theories, calling for a RON PAUL PROVISIONAL ARMY to

take over after we investigate the 9/11 events:
http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

Among the other kooky connections to Ron Paul, is a UFO COnnection. I have yet to find the original article, but numerous articles repeat the belief of Ron Paul’s that UFO’s are real. Some of the Ron Paul sites have soeone trying to mock this belief, but the Ron

Paul site, DailyPaul.com says this:
http://dailypaul.com/node/125999

This has been repeated again in San Francisco, not known to support conservatives or Libertarians anyways, but associated with

Ron Paul out there were UFO enthusiasts mentioned in this article:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2007/08/ron_pauls_ufo_sighter_friends.php

How is it that the kookiest ideas are surrounding Ron Paul?
Ron Paul, UFO disclosure, etc... simply nothing more than a pacifier — a distraction!
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message462483/pg1

You are known by the company you keep. By who likes you and who dislikes you. To see repeatedly in these searches the names of 9/11 truther groups such as INFOWARS and RON PAUL and ALEX JONES, ADAM KOKESH connected immediately to Peter

Schiff can only bring someone to an immediate conslusion: he is either silent of their excesses for his own political expediency but welcomes their support, or he is totally ignorant of Ron Paul and his supporters. Peter Schiff is surely NOT ignorant of Ron Paul.

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.