Ron Paul blames America for 9/11, GOP debate, Monday, September 12, 2011, Whose side is Paul on?, Left wing propaganda
“With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?”
“You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires, an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.
For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country” when the guns begin to shoot;
An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
An’ Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool — you bet that Tommy
sees!”…Rudyard Kipling, “Tommy”
“Militant Islam derives from Islam but is a misanthropic, misogynist, triumphalist, millenarian, anti-modern, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, terroristic, jihadistic, and suicidal version of it. Fortunately, it appeals to only about 10 percent to 15 percent of Muslims, meaning that a substantial majority would prefer a more moderate version.”…Daniel Pipes
If you want politically correct, go somewhere else.
The US defeated Nazi Germany and Japan and then helped rebuild the countries.
In 1990 Saudi Arabia asked for US troops to help stop the invasion of Kuwait and ultimately protect the Saudis.
The French, Germans and Russians were in bed with Saddam Hussein. I believe that the US invasion of Iraq could have been avoided if the United Nations had done it’s job.
I could have blasted Ron Paul in late 2008 when he stated that he would be laughed out of Congress if he challenged Obama’s eligibility. I did not let Mr. Constitution have it then. He was behaving like the rest of the sheep.
I agree with Glenn Beck, some of the statements made by Ron Paul make sense. However, Paul crossed over the line when he blamed America for 9/11. It was irresponsible and wrong!
Ron Paul mentioned the Saudis when he spoke of American Military Bases. His speech sounded more like left wing propaganda and employed selective references. Here are some facts regarding the Saudis.
From Daniel Pipes, winter of 2002/2003.
“DanielPipes.org looks at the Middle East, Islam, terrorism, U.S.
foreign policy, and related topics from the perspective of an American
with a Ph.D. in medieval Middle East history who now heads a
current-affairs think tank, the Middle East Forum.”
“The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations”
“Consider two symbolic moments in the U.S.-Saudi relationship involving
a visit by one leader to the other’s country. In November 1990,
President George H.W. Bush went to the Persian Gulf region with his
wife and top congressional leaders at Thanksgiving time to visit the
400,000 troops gathered in Saudi Arabia, whom he sent there to protect
that country from an Iraqi invasion. When the Saudi authorities
learned that the President intended to say grace before a festive
Thanksgiving dinner, they remonstrated; Saudi Arabia knows only one
religion, they said, and that is Islam. Bush acceded, and he and his
entourage instead celebrated the holiday on the U.S.S. Durham, an
amphibious cargo ship sitting in international waters.
In April 2002, as Crown Prince Abdallah of Saudi Arabia, the country’s
effective ruler, was about to travel across Texas to visit President
George W. Bush, an advance group talked to the airport manager in Waco
(the airport serving the President’s ranch in Crawford) “and told him
they did not want any females on the ramp and also said there should
not be any females talking to the airplane.” The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) at Waco complied with this request and passed it
to three other FAA stations on the crown prince’s route, which also
complied. Then, when queried about this matter, both the FAA and the
State Department joined the Saudi foreign minister in flat-out denying
that there ever was a Saudi request for male-only controllers.
The import of these incidents is clear enough: Official Americans in
Saudi Arabia bend to Saudi customs, and official Americans in the
United States do so as well. And it’s not just a matter of travel
etiquette; one finds parallel American obsequiousness concerning such
issues as energy, security, religion and personal status. The Saudis
routinely set the terms of this bilateral relationship. For decades,
U.S. government agencies have engaged in a consistent pattern of
deference to Saudi wishes, making so many unwonted and unnecessary
concessions that one gets the impression that a switch has taken
place, with both sides forgetting which of them is the great power and
which the minor one. I shall first document this claim, then offer an
explanation for it, and conclude with a policy recommendation.”
“Starting in 1991, the U.S. military required its female personnel
based in Saudi Arabia to wear black, head-to-foot abayas. (This makes
Saudi Arabia the only country in the world where U.S. military
personnel are expected to wear a religiously-mandated garment.)
Further, the women had to ride in the back seat of vehicles and be
accompanied by a man when off base.”
“The pattern of Saudi fathers abducting children from the United States
to Saudi Arabia, and then keeping them there with the full agreement
of the Saudi authorities, affects at least 92 children of U.S. mothers
and Saudi fathers, perhaps many more. In each of these heartbreaking
cases, the State Department has behaved with weakness bordering on
sycophancy. To be specific, it has accepted the Saudi law that gives
the father near-absolute control over the movement and activities of
his children and wife (or wives). The department has made no real
efforts to signal its displeasure to the Saudi authorities over these
cases, much less made vigorous efforts to free the children held
against their American families’ wishes.”
“In Saudi Arabia, the U.S. government submits to restrictions on
Christian practices that it would find totally unacceptable anywhere
else in the world-starting with the U.S. president’s not celebrating
Thanksgiving in the Kingdom, as mentioned above. The hundreds of
thousands of American troops in Saudi Arabia in December 1990 were not
permitted to hold formal Christmas services at their bases on Saudi
soil; all that was allowed to them were “C-word morale services” held
in places where they would be invisible to the outside world, such as
tents and mess halls. The goal was for no Saudi to be made to suffer
the knowledge that Christians were at prayer.”
“With Jews, the issue is not freedom of religious practice in Saudi
Arabia; it is simply gaining entry to the Kingdom. In several
instances over many years, agencies of the U.S. government have
excluded Jewish Americans from positions in Saudi Arabia. Hunter
explains that a protocol prohibiting Jews being assigned to the
Kingdom was signed by the U.S. Embassy in Jeddah and the Saudi
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as a result of which the State Department
avoids sending Jewish employees to reside in Saudi Arabia. Select
senior diplomats of Jewish origin may briefly visit the country on
official business but “no low or mid-level Jewish-American diplomat
was permitted to be stationed/reside in Kingdom” during Hunter’s
“Mail to U.S. military and official government personnel enters the
Kingdom on U.S. military craft, and American officials in Saudi Arabia
follow Saudi wishes by seizing and disposing of Christmas trees and
decorations and other symbols of the holiday. They seize and destroy
Christmas cards sent to (the mostly non-official) Americans who
receive their mail through a Saudi postal box, and even tear from the
envelope U.S. stamps portraying religious scenes.”