Tucker Carlson & Truthers

[HaddEnuff]

Truthers are people with a particular belief -- you seem to refer to them as if their sole function was promoting 9/11 truth.

This is spin I thought you could only get from mainstream media. Well done.

Can't he work with liberty minded freedom loving americans like AJ and JV without asking that they incorporate ALL of their beliefs into the movement?

As I've stated (and you clearly ignored) you need to correspond with Dr. Paul for the answers you seek and quit badgering the Liberty-loving people on this forum.

I routinely run into people that think Paul is associated with 9/11 truth, and dislike him for that reason.

Yes, the dumbed-down are everywhere and probably wouldn't make the most productive members of this movement anyway (sans 9/11 Truth).
You do realize that you don't have to join the CFL to be for liberty?

 

[GoSlash27]

In fact....
You know, I have a position that's even more controversial than that of the 'truthers'. I wholeheartedly believe that there should be a penalty for willful violation of the Constitution; that such behavior is criminal. It should be at least as severe as treason, sedition, or espionage (which at the time of this writing warrants death).
Moreover, I firmly believe that our Republic is doomed if we do not rectify this oversight, as at the moment we're relying solely on the "goodwill" and "personal assurance" of POLITICIANS to secure our freedom.

Is that position radical? You betcha. I probably can't get elected dog-catcher as a result of it. But I bet more of you agree with me than not and I won't back down from it.

My advice is to lay off the truthers. They're not popular, but last I checked we weren't exactly 'Miss Congeniality' ourselves.

 

[tremendoustie]

I would counsel you to review what Goldwater had to say about this. It's not enough to merely get yourself elected if you're not going to stand up for your own values.

As Ron Paul Republicans, we're very vocal but arguably lonely as well. I accept that, as I will not compromise my principles just to gain a wider stage. I think it's foolish and wrong-headed to demand that of the truthers.
I submit that your attitude of "water down the message in order to get power from the bad guys" is exactly what led the Republican party to where it is today.
Do we want a "popular, electable" movement or do we want to stand up for what America's supposed to be? Look around you and do the math; we're right but the electorate doesn't see it that way.
Our course of action is education and welcoming everybody to our cause we can get on board, even if they disagree on minor points. I welcome all compatriots with open arms.

/just sayin'.

I welcome them as well! And people who are 9/11 truthers have done many great things for this movement! But, 9/11 truth itself is not part of the message. It is not "watering down the message" for 9/11 truth to not be included as part of the CFL message -- the purpose of the CFL has never been for 9/11 truth, it is for liberty and constitutional government. Also, I am not suggesting that 9/11 truthers abandon their beliefs -- they should work hard to promote 9/11 truth. I am only asking that they do so outside of the CFL. The CFL is a tool for liberty and constitutional government -- there are other tools for the promotion of 9/11 truth.

Let's not hinder the tool we have for liberty and constitutional government loading it down with all our other personal beliefs (especially if they are controversial and divisive). Our other beliefs can be promoted elsewhere.

 

[mCsenget]

I think Tucker left BECAUSE they were chanting '9/11 was an inside job'.

After I heard them chanting that, I cut my ties with the truth movement. I will no longer speak about 9/11 to anyone, because the movement is an EMBARRASSMENT to Ron Paul supporters. They are the reason why Ron was a fringe candidate, and its only now that I see it.

My country is more important then what happened during 9/11. When we have power, there will be truth, until then, it is counter-productive to associate Ron Paul to the truth movement, you fucking idiots.

How dare they ride the coat-tails of our movement to push their WIDELY unpopular movement. That kind of shit belongs at their own rally. Leave Ron Paul and us OUT OF IT!

you said it, man.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

I welcome them as well! And people who are 9/11 truthers have done many great things for this movement! But, 9/11 truth itself is not part of the message. It is not "watering down the message" for 9/11 truth to not be included as part of the CFL message -- the purpose of the CFL has never been for 9/11 truth, it is for liberty and constitutional government. Also, I am not suggesting that 9/11 truthers abandon their beliefs -- they should work hard to promote 9/11 truth. I am only asking that they do so outside of the CFL. The CFL is a tool for liberty and constitutional government -- there are other tools for the promotion of 9/11 truth.

Let's not hinder the tool we have for liberty and constitutional government loading it down with all our other personal beliefs (especially if they are controversial and divisive). Our other beliefs can be promoted elsewhere.

+2008

Sacrifice that which divides and embrace that which unites. We will win that much sooner.

Rhetoric Matters !!!

m - is a 911 Doubter

 

[GoSlash27]

Let's not hinder the tool we have for liberty and constitutional government loading it down with all our other personal beliefs (especially if they are controversial and divisive). Our other beliefs can be promoted elsewhere.

I'm not sure exactly which policies fit within the C4L and which are just "personal opinion".
No doubt a majority (including myself) would insist that "9/11 was an inside job" is not part of our collective position, but that transparency of government is.

You know, we now have the dubious honor of hosting the only "convention" this cycle that *didn't* muzzle their protestors?
We had one protestor (don't know if you knew) who stood outside with a 4x8 RP sign with "SUCKS" spray painted on it. Rather than shouting him down, trying to take his sign, or calling in the riot cops to set up a "free speech" zone for him, we embraced him, told him that we disagreed with him but would fight for his right to say his say, and left him in peace.

Would you muzzle our *supporters* just to get ahead? :o And how many of our other core tenets would you leave on the cutting room floor?

 

[tremendoustie]

I'm not sure exactly which policies fit within the C4L and which are just "personal opinion".
No doubt a majority (including myself) would insist that "9/11 was an inside job" is not part of our collective position, but that transparency of government is.

You know, we now have the dubious honor of hosting the only "convention" this cycle that *didn't* muzzle their protestors?
We had one protestor (don't know if you knew) who stood outside with a 4x8 RP sign with "SUCKS" spray painted on it. Rather than shouting him down, trying to take his sign, or calling in the riot cops to set up a "free speech" zone for him, we embraced him, told him that we disagreed with him but would fight for his right to say his say, and left him in peace.

Would you muzzle our *supporters* just to get ahead? :o

No, I do not support using force to prevent the speech of those of us who believe in 9/11 truth. What I am hoping is that since they love freedom and consitutional government (and would like to see a full 9/11 investigation), they will be willing to use their freedom wisely, and do all they can to not hinder the liberty movement, since it is in all of our best interests. I have personal beliefs as well, which I refrain from promoting alongside the CFL or at CFL events for just that reason.

As for principles that are central to the CFL, I think this is a reasonable statement: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/mission/

 

[HaddEnuff]

I welcome them as well! And people who are 9/11 truthers have done many great things for this movement! But, 9/11 truth itself is not part of the message.

Then stop trying to make it one.

It is not "watering down the message" for 9/11 truth to not be included as part of the CFL message -- the purpose of the CFL has never been for 9/11 truth, it is for liberty and constitutional government.

You and the mainstream media are the only ones trying to make it out to be.
You just don't get it if you honestly believe the mainstream media is EVER going to accept the Ron Paul movement. 9/11 just happens to be its last best excuse to ridicule it.
Until you realize that you're probably not going to be comfortable in this movement.

Let's not hinder the tool we have for liberty and constitutional government loading it down with all our other personal beliefs (especially if they are controversial and divisive).

You mean like the fed, the IRS, non-intervention, etc.
Wake up, this entire movement is meant to be divisive. It's very purpose is to break away from the status quo.
I really have to ask, why are you here if you don't understand this?
I'm beginning to think you're not for Ron Paul or liberty or the CFL at all but perhaps nothing more than a provocateur.
Please prove me wrong.

 

[Ninja Homer]

A question for the Anti-Truther Patrol:

If I ask, "Why hasn't Osama bin Laden been put on a most wanted list, and why has he not been indicted?", would that make me a Truther?

To me that's just healthy questioning of a lying government.

If you think that makes a person a Truther, then watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LamnqSDy3c

edit: quoting the video:

Ron Paul: "He (Ventura) did ask 2 questions, about, "Why hasn't Osama bin Laden been put on a most wanted list, and why has he not been indicted?" Don't you think those are pretty reasonable questions?"

Glenn Beck: "I do think those are reasonable. Absolutely, I do think so."

Ron Paul: "I agreed with that, and I think he had a moderate tone, so you might argue I've toned him down a bit."

If Jesse Ventura's questions make him a Truther (and me), then it also makes Ron Paul a Truther as well as Glenn Beck.

There are 2 kinds of Truthers: the kind that absolutely believe 9/11 was an inside job without enough solid proof to back their claim, and the kind that absolutely believe the 9/11 report, also without enough solid proof to back their claim. Most people are somewhere in the middle; "9/11 skeptics" or "9/11 questioners" would be a much more fitting term. Don't be so quick to throw people in a box labeled "Truther", or you may be kicking needed supporters out of the movement.

However, I agree that people shouldn't mix campaigning for 9/11 Truth and campaigning for liberty. Put the 2 together, and it waters down both movements.

ps - I haven't read the whole thread... I have more important stuff to do, but thought I'd add my 2 bits.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Then stop trying to make it one.


You and the mainstream media are the only ones trying to make it out to be.
You just don't get it if you honestly believe the mainstream media is EVER going to accept the Ron Paul movement. 9/11 just happens to be its last best excuse to ridicule it.
Until you realize that you're probably not going to be comfortable in this movement.


You mean like the fed, the IRS, non-intervention, etc.
Wake up, this entire movement is meant to be divisive. It's very purpose is to break away from the status quo.
I really have to ask, why are you here if you don't understand this?
I'm beginning to think you're not for Ron Paul or liberty or the CFL at all but perhaps nothing more than a provocateur.
Please prove me wrong.

The truthers are entitled to have their own beliefs, but it's an issue when they try and bring it to the forefront of Ron's rallies. If they were to recall the Ron Paul website, there was NOTHING on it about a 911 truth movement. They need to stop associating it with him and with us.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

A question for the Anti-Truther Patrol:

If I ask, "Why hasn't Osama bin Laden been put on a most wanted list, and why has he not been indicted?", would that make me a Truther?

To me that's just healthy questioning of a lying government.

If you think that makes a person a Truther, then watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LamnqSDy3c

If Jesse Ventura's questions make him a Truther (and me), then it also makes Ron Paul a Truther as well as Glenn Beck.

There are 2 kinds of Truthers: the kind that absolutely believe 9/11 was an inside job without enough solid proof to back their claim, and the kind that absolutely believe the 9/11 report, also without enough solid proof to back their claim. Most people are somewhere in the middle; "9/11 skeptics" or "9/11 questioners" would be a much more fitting term. Don't be so quick to throw people in a box labeled "Truther", or you may be kicking needed supporters out of the movement.

However, I agree that people shouldn't mix campaigning for 9/11 Truth and campaigning for liberty. Put the 2 together, and it waters down both movements.

ps - I haven't read the whole thread... I have more important stuff to do, but thought I'd add my 2 bits.

No...it's a valid question. What's not valid is "911 was an inside job!!!!" In fact, I wouldn't have even brought it up in that manner. If it was to be mentioned I'd say "Full transparency in all investigations." That's perfectly fair and reasonable.

 

[tremendoustie]

Then stop trying to make it one.


You and the mainstream media are the only ones trying to make it out to be.
You just don't get it if you honestly believe the mainstream media is EVER going to accept the Ron Paul movement. 9/11 just happens to be its last best excuse to ridicule it.
Until you realize that you're probably not going to be comfortable in this movement.

I'm very comfortable in this movement, more so than any other movement I've been a part of. We don't need to unnecessarily give them tools to ridicule us. If they ridicule us let it at least be for the principles we are standing up for. It would be a shame for us to marginalize ourselves for beliefs which are not even the ones we're trying to advance.

You mean like the fed, the IRS, non-intervention, etc.
Wake up, this entire movement is meant to be divisive. It's very purpose is to break away from the status quo.

No, its very purpose is to promote liberty and constitutional government. Breaking from the status quo is not a purpose. If all I want to do is break from the status quo and be divisive I can go run around the neighborhood in my underwear, or heck, become a communist. Let's be aware of what our goals are, and then do our best to achieve them. 9/11 truth is not a goal of the CFL.

I really have to ask, why are you here if you don't understand this?
I'm beginning to think you're not for Ron Paul or liberty or the CFL at all but perhaps nothing more than a provocateur.
Please prove me wrong.

 

[tremendoustie]

Truthers are people with a particular belief -- you seem to refer to them as if their sole function was promoting 9/11 truth. Can't he work with liberty minded freedom loving americans like AJ and JV without asking that they incorporate ALL of their beliefs into the movement? As I say, I work for liberty within the CFL, and work for my other beliefs elsewhere. This is because liberty is very important to me, and I would hate to hinder the effort by hanging people up on my other ideas.

This is spin I thought you could only get from mainstream media. Well done.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I'm saying truthers are people with a particular belief, NOT that their sole function is promoting 9/11. Are you disagreeing with me? You seem very angry, and I'm not sure why.

You were saying that involving AJ, JV, etc in this movement implied that 9/11 truth would be promoted within it. I was just saying that these people could choose to focus on the core issues of the CFL when promoting the CFL, that's all.

As I've stated (and you clearly ignored) you need to correspond with Dr. Paul for the answers you seek and quit badgering the Liberty-loving people on this forum.

Huh? What would Dr. Paul tell me? I agree that he should keep going on AJ, etc, and promote the CFL wherever liberty loving Americans can be found. I'm just asking that people focus on promoting the ideas of the CFL when associating themselves with the CFL. Is that really unreasonable? I certainly don't mean to badger anyone.

Yes, the dumbed-down are everywhere and probably wouldn't make the most productive members of this movement anyway (sans 9/11 Truth).
You do realize that you don't have to join the CFL to be for liberty?

We're trying to convince everyone to support liberty and constitutional government, including those who believe in 9/11 truth and those who don't. We cannot succeed without attracting the mainstream. I'm just saying we shouldn't shoot ourselves in the foot by making people think they must agree with you about 9/11 to join the movement, or agree with me about climate change, or agree with uncle benny about the proper usage of dental floss in order to support the movement. We should be clear about the message, lest we unnecessarily turn people off.

If you want to promote 9/11 truth, and I want to promote the idea that global warming is caused by the sun, and uncle benny wants to hold presentations on proper dental hygine, we should all do these things outside of the CFL. This is because none of these things is the purpose of the CFL, and it can only serve to turn non 9/11 truthers, those who believe global warming is manmade, and the British off to the movement . Ok, sorry bad joke on that last one, I meant those opposed to dental floss.

 

[SeanEdwards]

You know, we now have the dubious honor of hosting the only "convention" this cycle that *didn't* muzzle their protestors?
We had one protestor (don't know if you knew) who stood outside with a 4x8 RP sign with "SUCKS" spray painted on it. Rather than shouting him down, trying to take his sign, or calling in the riot cops to set up a "free speech" zone for him, we embraced him, told him that we disagreed with him but would fight for his right to say his say, and left him in peace.

Would you muzzle our *supporters* just to get ahead? :o And how many of our other core tenets would you leave on the cutting room floor?

This is a very interesting point for discussion.

There's been other threads talking about the controlling actions of the GOP at their convention, and it's very interesting to contrast that situation with the CFL's internal divisions about whether to squelch 9/11 truth and other ideas at CFL events.

While we may all find the actions of the GOP goons at their convention to be offensive, an argument can be made that their rigid control of their party can be a source of political effectiveness. I don't think anybody can deny that the GOP organization has been a successful political party in this country for a long time. Some of the stuff they are doing must be working.

I think it is interesting for us to think about ways that we can organize our own movement so that we can remain true to our liberty principles, while also benefitting from the force multiplying effect of disciplined group cooperation.

Discipline and liberty seem to be contradictory in some ways, and this may be the main reason the libertarian "party" has never achieved any political power, despite representing a fairly popular ideology.

So my challenge to all you readers at RPF is to think about how our movement can be disciplined and still preserve the individual liberty of it's members.

 

[Printo]

I think most of the people on this board & in this movement can agree to the fact that there needs to be further investigation into who in the government is responsible for allowing this gigantic tragedy to occur. Who is the incompetent one in the government that didnt do their job? How come no one was fired for this? These are all fair questions to ask. I dont associate those views with the 911 Truther movement & neither do most people.

Most people view the 911 Truther movement as a bunch of conspiracy theorists who think 911 was an inside job. It is these individuals who vocalize their beliefs on the subject matter that are hurting this movement. It hurts us when at Ron Paul events you hear these chants or see Truther gear. When people dont know much about our movement and are interested in seeing what its about see this, they are immediately turned off.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

I think most of the people on this board & in this movement can agree to the fact that there needs to be further investigation into who in the government is responsible for allowing this gigantic tragedy to occur. Who is the incompetent one in the government that didnt do their job? How come no one was fired for this? These are all fair questions to ask. I dont associate those views with the 911 Truther movement & neither do most people.

Most people view the 911 Truther movement as a bunch of conspiracy theorists who think 911 was an inside job. It is these individuals who vocalize their beliefs on the subject matter that are hurting this movement. It hurts us when at Ron Paul events you hear these chants or see Truther gear. When people dont know much about our movement and are interested in seeing what its about see this, they are immediately turned off.

No, I think most people here there should be full transparency in ANY investigation. I think the sane one's here don't believe we need to try and piece together pieces that don't fit to make it seem like the government did it.

 

[walt]

Go to 911 Truther Meetup groups & post your messages on 911 Truther message boards. Do not post your conspiracy theories on this board, do not talk about it in the chat room, do not talk about it at events, do not mention them in the same conversation. Just be quiet.

with all due respect, you have no right to tell anyone what to do. It's for the moment still a free country.

 

[Printo]

No, I think most people here there should be full transparency in ANY investigation. I think the sane one's here don't believe we need to try and piece together pieces that don't fit to make it seem like the government did it.

Most people on the outside looking in at the Revolution view the 911 Truth movement as a bunch of conspiracy theorists.

 

[Defining Obscene]

I didn't know the rules of Fight Club applied to 9/11.


I understand the frustration of them trying to "hijack" the rally, but barring discussion is exactly what the government and media wants. Until we can sit down and have a candid discussion without name calling and ad hominem attacks, there is nothing credible about the establishment, and we should obey none of it.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

I didn't know the rules of Fight Club applied to 9/11.


I understand the frustration of them trying to "hijack" the rally, but barring discussion is exactly what the government and media wants. Until we can sit down and have a candid discussion without name calling and ad hominem attacks, there is nothing credible about the establishment, and we should obey none of it.

They can discuss conspiracy theories over on the truthers board. This forum doesn't mention anything about 9/11 or conspiracy theories.