September 13


In tonight’s Republican debate, Ron Paul was challenged on his foreign policy stance – specifically, an article he wrote for the tenth anniversary of 9/11. The article in question was called “Ask the Right Questions and Face the Truth“. In it, Dr Paul illuminates both the causes and effects of 9/11 – that is, both why it happened, and what it has done to the US. It goes all the way back to Iran in the 1950s with Mossadegh, and the middle eastern intervention continued right up through 2001. After the tragedy, we invaded an Iraq that even Bush himself admitted had nothing to do with 9/11. US militarism now extends to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya as well, and that’s just the “short list” of declared action. The endless wars have been accompanied by blatant disregard for and losses of civil liberties, many of which the populace begged for in its initial, frantic response to the events of that day.

Those that claim to (or want to) have an intellectual acumen will impartially read the whole of Dr Paul’s article and study the supporting evidence before coming to a conclusion. Anyone care to explain why he’s wrong?

Some in the crowd booed when he said “this whole idea that the WHOLE Muslim world is responsible for this and they’re attacking us because we’re free and prosperous, that is just not true”. So… the WHOLE Muslim world IS responsible for this? Of course that’s ridiculous. What’s left to boo? People don’t really still believe the myth that they attack us “because we’re free”, do they? That’s an obsolete catchphrase supported by absolutely zero fact. It is well-established at this point that “insurgents” (we called them Freedom Fighters during the Soviet-Afghan War) resist the US because we occupy their lands and are seen as imperialists. We’ve been intervening in middle eastern affairs for over 60 years now. The CIA itself recognizes that this creates what’s called “blowback”. This is NOT a matter of opinion.

Ironically, Ron Paul himself receives some blowback because he has the courage to tell the truth, even when it’s unpopular. Dr Paul was booed because he forces America to look in the mirror, and it doesn’t always like what it sees. Paradigms and worldviews are challenged, and many times, the truth hurts. But only by embracing that truth can we heal.

As a moral people, we need to recognize when good policies are good, and when bad policies are bad. America is exceptional, it is the most prosperous country in the history of the world, but it is not infallible – in fact, far from it. Ron Paul is the only candidate on that stage who’s not afraid to call a spade a spade, and we should be open to honest discussion about this issue from a brilliant man who has studied it in-depth – not dismissive and closed-minded, as some of the crowd members at the debate were tonight. There is a reason Ron Paul receives the greatest amount of military contributions – those who have been there, and seen it, know what is really going on. Not only is it patriotic to face reality and question with boldness… it is decidedly UN-patriotic NOT to.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Copyright © 2014. All rights reserved.

Posted September 13, 2011 by calenfretts in category "9/11", "politics", "religion", "war


  1. By Skekzyz on

    The other bad policy is the “War” right here at home. The war on some people who use some drugs. Face reality, prohibition of personal choices is national socialistic.

    Good use of government and laws: prohibiting actions by a “person” from harming others directly.
    Bad use of govenment and laws: prohibiting actions by a “person” which can only harm said person directly.

    Good use of government and laws: recognizing that all life has a right to exist of it’s own accord, and that humans have free will.
    Bad use of government and laws: allowing life, or the building blocks thereof to be patented, to be owned by a “person”.

    Good use of government and laws: recognizing that humans have unalienable rights granted to them by their creator.
    Bad use of government and laws: defining non-human entities as “persons” and attempting to bestow upon said “persons” the same rights that human beings have unalienably.

  2. By Tom Fretts on

    To Skekzyz, to which non-human entities do you refer when you write, “Bad use of government and laws: defining non-human entities as “persons” and attempting to bestow upon said “persons” the same rights that human beings have unalienably.” ? Just wondering.

Comments are closed.