Backstabbing Republicans Publish Open Letter To Iran Undermining Negotiations

[Brett85]

True. But if a host on FOX News says "Senator Paul, you are the only candidate who has not met with John Bolton for foreign policy advice. Many view him as an important expert on Middle East policy. What is your opinion on Mr. Bolton and his views?"

What will Rand say? Because what any sane human being should say is that John Bolton's view of the world is not rooted in the reality of the situation. Doesn't Rand like to call his policy "rational libertarianism" or something?

He could say something like, "I like John Bolton's willingness to be tough with the United Nations and his willingness to stand up for American sovereignty." Because even though we strongly disagree with him and others like him on foreign intervention, there's actually some common ground on issues like the United Nations and U.S sovereignty.

 

[Chieppa1]

He could say something like, "I like John Bolton's willingness to be tough with the United Nations and his willingness to stand up for American sovereignty." Because even though we strongly disagree with him and others like him on foreign intervention, there's actually some common ground on issues like the United Nations and U.S sovereignty.

Just curious. What was Bolton's stance on the Libyan war?

 

[AuH20]

Who would Rand Paul pick as his State Department head? Any ideas?

 

[Brett85]

Just curious. What was Bolton's stance on the Libyan war?

He supported it. I can't really think of any war that he's opposed, except for military action against Assad, but only because he thought that Obama wouldn't go all out in bombing Assad, and that no response is better than a weak response.

 

[Chieppa1]

Who would Rand Paul pick as his State Department head? Any ideas?

Dennis Kucinich. Kidding. Seriously I have no idea. I hate politics at this point. Just nominate Hulk Hogan and the American population (and Jack Hunter) will give you the highest approval rating ever.

 

[Chieppa1]

He supported it. I can't really think of any war that he's opposed, except for military action against Assad, but only because he thought that Obama wouldn't go all out in bombing Assad, and that no response is better than a weak response.

Well that war was approved by the United Nations not the Congress. So Bolton is for American sovereignty unless outside influence is asking us to go to war for them. Then, he's all in.

 

[Brett85]

Rand talks about this at about the 2: 20 mark of this video. The interview was on the Today Show.

https://www.facebook.com/SenatorRandPaul

 

[Brett85]

Well that war was approved by the United Nations not the Congress. So Bolton is for American sovereignty unless outside influence is asking us to go to war for them. Then, he's all in.

True.

 

[Chieppa1]

True.

I'm just over the election already. I'll do my part to get Rand elected because just his executive order power is enough for me to be happy if he wins. But I can't run around going to sold out shows at Webster Hall to hear him speak the truth like his father.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

It wasn't symbolic. It had tangible results. It wasn't happenstance that Tom Cotton did an M.I.C. gig afterward. The money will not flow from this avenue to Rand. It won't gain him "brownie points."

Moderating on foreign policy (or anything else) is not about gaining brownie points with the establishment (it's not as if Rand thinks Haliburton is going to help fund his campaign now ). Those guys are not going to be fooled. It's about influencing news coverage. Now, you might think: but surely the media magnates are not going to be fooled either, so where's the pay-off? Well, the media cannot fabricate facts so easily (i.e. without discrediting themselves), and without certain facts they cannot spin certain narratives. The idea is to deny them the facts required to spin certain hostile narratives. In other words, the idea is not so much to get positive coverage but to take a dagger out of their hands (this has worked remarkably well when you compare the media's coverage of Rand's foreign policy versus Ron's). And, of course, the ultimate purpose of any act of compromise/moderation is to influence public opinion - specifically, to soften up that "Aw, well, I really like Ron Paul....except he's crazy on foreign policy."

It will flow to the neocons. That's "aiding and abetting" in my book.

MIC's gonna MIC, regardless of what Rand does.

Rand signing the letter didn't cause them to have more money nor change the way they dole it out.

Winning is everything. Gotcha.

More like: winning is a necessary prerequisite to anything.

By way of analogy; is keeping your heart beating all there is to life?

No, of course not, but it's a necessary prerequisite to achieving anything else.

 

[AuH20]

MIC's gonna MIC, regardless of what Rand does.

Correct. It don't matter. This is so beyond the common man's comprehension.

".... Agent Tanner interrupted. “Conspiracy? Come on Don. Are you saying, Conspiracy at the highest levels? You fellow that line or track and you’ll be seeing a team of doctors all dressed in little white coats, crowded in a little padded room, asking you funny questions. Perhaps you can get a room next to this Pearson character you’ve been telling me about."

Agent Kendrick looked Tanner ‘square on’ and stated flatly. “Don. It’s gun running financed by drug running, covert government ops, off the books.” He threw his hands in the air." "High-impact, high quality military weapons from our stock pile. US weapons going across international borders to hot spots scattered throughout the world. The Middle East, Central America, and Mexico are the hottest spots at the moment. As an example, US weapons account for over two thirds of the weapons found at crime scenes in Mexico—that’s just one example. I believe it’s an ongoing operation patterned much like the old Iran-Contra program of the eighties and the CIA-Cuban projects of the fifties and sixties. These US weapons are showing up in the middle east in record numbers, on both sides of the conflict.

"Some of that profit, as we know today, was being kicked back into political contributions and organized crime figures here in the United States and other countries. It was an international operation for profit and to finance and push minor conflicts into major wars. It’s been ongoing for many years in one form or another. They use people like Will as Shields, castaways. That’s what I believe. And that’s what that file, that Pearson file there indicates. This guy Pearson, Will, has been programed somewhere to forget various past operations and other events of his youth. But now with his advancing age the programing appears to be warring off. His dreams are based on real memories. He’s starting to remember things he should have forgotten. His memories are becoming to detailed to be fabrications.

"To me it looks like some in high places are getting nervous about what this guy might have storied inside, and they are about to launch counter measures."
It’s those highly classified secrets, embedded within those national security files that’s the key. It’s their methods and procedures and the fear of being compromised and what it would lead into, that they are so worried about? Those secrets are the keys to determine if this Pearson character and the events he describes to Doctor Yancey are real or just the imaginations and ramblings of an old, perhaps senile, old man.

If that report and the details embedded within that file are true, then it appears we, the United States government and our foreign policy, play a major roll in instigating the conflicts, which start the wars. It appears we manipulate and escalate that conflict. We supply weapons to both sides at premium, black market prices. We open the doors to the World Wide Arms race. We coddle the International weapons market. It’s Special Ops ‘black operation’ controlled and ran --off the books --by the National Security Council; the White House and its political appointees. It’s their secret army--their Praetorian Guard.

"If you believe what’s in that file, this Will Pearson, in one form or another, has played in that game for a very long time. I’m sure he’s played in more than one sand box, “Perhaps today, some in high places, gathered around that sacred flagpole in DC are still playing the weapons game--still playing both ends against the middle. Perhaps that’s why we can’t get out of Afghanistan, Iraq, or the Middle East. Perhaps that’s why we are constantly bogged down in international ‘brush wars’. Wars that go nowhere except into political rhetoric. It’s little wars in Central America, like Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, and the flashing hot spots of the Middle East, and the Drug War just to name a few. They drain our resources” That Pearson file is the tip of the iceberg. It’s a hard peek into another world; a secret world that few are allowed to see or even allowed to know of its existence. I’m sure there are hundreds of other ‘Pearson files’ locked away out there somewhere; files we at the Bureau will never be allowed to see, let alone John Q citizen." taken from the book Deep Cover Shallow Graves by Robert Plumlee, former CIA asset and pilot

 

[orenbus]

 

[paleocon1]

Considering that every single Act of Usurper-in-Chief barry is in fact illegal and illegitimate I believe it to be a Good Thing when he is thwarted for any reason.

 

[ChiefJustice]

Ron Paul was an icon and a hero to me for standing up against the establishment. He accepted being chastised in order to speak the truth and NEVER pander, even if it meant he couldn't win over his party.

Rand Paul has slowly betrayed the Liberty movement. Sure there are other issues but foreign policy is a HUGE issue that affects us economically as well. People keep saying, "it was technically right". But in truth it was a condescending, detrimental letter written by a pack of lying neocons who want us at war or militarily intervening in the Middle East. Hell I came out of it having more respect for Jeff Flake's decision to not sign it.

He may try to win brownie points with the establishment that libertarians want gone, but he has lost many people who would have supported him fully instead of a bunch of GOP hacks who, in the end, don't give a shit about him.

If Rand Paul has to cozy up so much with the Republican establishment, who is to say he won't do their bidding if he ever did become President?

Rand is not a true leader of the Liberty Movement and that has been clear for a while. He has betrayed us, and to think I was all about voting for him just a few years ago. I bet he never wins the nomination and he'll blend in with the establishment, having compromised his supposed libertarian-esque beliefs. And for what?!

 

[Slave Mentality]

Ron Paul was an icon and a hero to me for standing up against the establishment. He accepted being chastised in order to speak the truth and NEVER pander, even if it meant he couldn't win over his party.

Rand Paul has slowly betrayed the Liberty movement. Sure there are other issues but foreign policy is a HUGE issue that affects us economically as well. People keep saying, "it was technically right". But in truth it was a condescending, detrimental letter written by a pack of lying neocons who want us at war or militarily intervening in the Middle East.

He may try to win brownie points with the establishment that libertarians want gone, but he has lost many people who would have supported him fully instead of a bunch of GOP hacks who, in the end, don't give a shit about him.

If Rand Paul has to cozy up so much with the Republican establishment, who is to say he won't do their bidding if he ever did become President?

Rand is not a true leader of the Liberty Movement and that has been clear for a while. He has betrayed us, and to think I was all about voting for him just a few years ago. I bet he never wins the nomination and he'll blend in with the establishment, having compromised his supposed libertarian-esque beliefs. And for what?!

I fear we may never see another Ron Paul in our lifetimes. It is very unfortunate, but I feel the same as you about his boy. This dying idea of personal liberty is a long game and it looks like Rand is in it for the short gains so far.

 

[dannno]

If Rand Paul has to cozy up so much with the Republican establishment, who is to say he won't do their bidding if he ever did become President?

That sounds like an opinion, mine is different.

Rand is not a true leader of the Liberty Movement and that has been clear for a while. He has betrayed us, and to think I was all about voting for him just a few years ago. I bet he never wins the nomination and he'll blend in with the establishment, having compromised his supposed libertarian-esque beliefs. And for what?!

He isn't the leader of the liberty movement, he is a member of the liberty movement working toward liberty. He has the best chance of anybody to affect real change. So that means he is probably the most successful member of the liberty movement at the moment. That doesn't make him a leader or a standard bearer like his father. There are plenty of people in the liberty movement who see how this is all playing out and that is why many of us continue to support him.

 

[specsaregood]

Ron Paul was an icon and a hero to me for standing up against the establishment.

Please quote me one thing from the letter in question that Ron Paul would disagree with.

 

[AuH20]

Rand Paul could go back home and make a comfortable living as an ophthalmologist, but he decided to be a senator and give it the Ole college try.

 

[JK/SEA]

''…and here is the first thing I would do if I were President of the United States, I wouldn’t let Congress leave town until we fix this. I would literally use the military to keep them in if I had to.”

---Sen. Lindsey Graham

 

[cajuncocoa]

Ron Paul was an icon and a hero to me for standing up against the establishment. He accepted being chastised in order to speak the truth and NEVER pander, even if it meant he couldn't win over his party.

Rand Paul has slowly betrayed the Liberty movement. Sure there are other issues but foreign policy is a HUGE issue that affects us economically as well. People keep saying, "it was technically right". But in truth it was a condescending, detrimental letter written by a pack of lying neocons who want us at war or militarily intervening in the Middle East. Hell I came out of it having more respect for Jeff Flake's decision to not sign it.

He may try to win brownie points with the establishment that libertarians want gone, but he has lost many people who would have supported him fully instead of a bunch of GOP hacks who, in the end, don't give a shit about him.

If Rand Paul has to cozy up so much with the Republican establishment, who is to say he won't do their bidding if he ever did become President?

Rand is not a true leader of the Liberty Movement and that has been clear for a while. He has betrayed us, and to think I was all about voting for him just a few years ago. I bet he never wins the nomination and he'll blend in with the establishment, having compromised his supposed libertarian-esque beliefs. And for what?!

Apparently there were some crystal balls on sale somewhere and I missed out on the deal. But those who were lucky enough to have scored one know that everything will return to normal once Rand is elected. This pandering business is only something he loathes to do while trying to secure the nomination. Once he has it in hand, he will turn back into Liberty Champion Rand....just watch and see, it will all work out in the end! At least that's what I heard. I didn't get a crystal ball of my own.