Who was right - Greg Knapp or Ron Paul?

[OneLife33]

OK, I listened to a Ron Paul interview by Greg Knapp of KMCO and Greg made some significant contradictions to statements by Ron Paul on two issues. I am hoping that someone can point me to some good resources to understand who is right on each of these issues. I really don't know for sure and talk show hosts like to do this kind of trickery. I'd like to be able to confidently defend Dr. Paul on these specific points when asked about them. Here's a link to that interview:

http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com/2011/06/07/ron-paul-with-kcmos-greg-knapp-672011/

The first issue Dr. Paul stated something along the lines of "Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before we went to war with them" and Knapp says that is not true, Al Qaeda was there. Which view is more correct?

The next issue was Dr. Paul mentioned that a report came out and said Iran was not pursuing nukes and Knapp said they were two months away from getting nukes.

Thanks in advance for any input on this.

 

[JTWilliams]

I'd like many people to comment on this debate. The fact is (and I'm no geopolitics insider, but a student of political science), many of these issues are common sense. Greg Knapp, to me, sounds like a Hannity protoge. So the war on terror, to such neocons, is like a religion. IF any al-Qaeda existed in Iraq before the invasion, they were likely ALLIED to US intelligence, like the al-qaeda in Libya today! I recall a known terrorist group (name?) that operated out of eastern Iraq (prob. Kurdish territory) that would strike out at the Iranians! The PKK still works with US intel/military, despite terror designations, against both Turkey and Iran. Ansar al-Islam was the primary supposed link between al-Qaeda and Sadaam Hussein, but (unsurprisingly) the Muslim fundamentalists were always opposed to the secular Hussein. Also, review the statements of whistleblowers like Susan Lindauer and Sibel Edmonds! Edmonds translated arab language intel for the FBI; Lindauer was an US intelligence asset who worked back channels with the Iraqis! The US government used the Patriot Act to gag and punish these whistleblowers. But the bottom line is, as Ron Paul said, any al-qaeda in Iraq previous to the invasion was almost certainly allied to US, as enemies of Saddam. Plus, the name AL-QAEDA is basically just a catch-all term that our govt and media use to demonize any group opposed to occupation and state-terror!

The second argument was very interesting, about the Iranian nuclear program. Indeed, the US National Intelligence Estimate, which accounts for some 17 separate agencies, UNANIMOUSLY agreed that there is no evidence of a clandestine nuclear program in Iran! When Dr. Paul told this to the host, Knapp cited some Israeli claim that the Iranian program was just months away! These claims have been out there for years, that the mullahs are on the verge of having nukes. So Greg Knapp disregards US intelligence (he doesn't support OUR TROOPS?), and instead cites baseless Mossad leaks- and make no mistake, those "leaks" are not for the CIA, they are for American public opinion, and war-on-terror enthusiasts here in the states! Ron Paul should have called the host on this, instead of arguing that Iran has the right to have their own nukes (which I agree with him).

I am JT, the podcast is my website, and I have hoped to have some dialogue on this particular interview! Love to hear what anyone has to say...

 

[OneLife33]

Thanks JT for the info and links. Knapp reminded me of Hannity as well. Seems that with such a subjective definition and use of Al Qeada, Knapp can make his claims and have cover. It gets old. At least I see right past their propaganda now.

By the way, I listen to your podcast all the time. I find it very valueable. Having a one stop shop for all the Ron and Rand Paul audio is awesome. Thanks so much for running the podcast.

 

[JTWilliams]

It pleases me to know that you enjoy the podcast, as there are now well over 1000 "hardcore subscribers" who update every day. Obviously, I hear from a relative few of you, so it's always great to exchange thoughts on some of the interviews and other content. If you post your thoughts on the podcast homepage, I'll usually respond in short order.

Knapp is so typical of the radio industry. Hannity has lots of listeners, like Rush, Laura Ingraham, etc, and they all become a homogenized echo chamber! If you listen to mainline conservative radio, and turn off the thinking process, pretty soon you'll repeat opinions that aren't even your own. That's Ron Paul's challenge: to get those former GW Bush voters to shun neoconservative conventional wisdom (not an easy task). Did you notice that Knapp, after challenging Dr. Paul on the al-qaeda in Iraq issue, himself moved the discussion along instead of debating the Congressman? I was struck by that exchange as well, so I'm glad you brought it up. I just wish the two had hashed out the disagreements on the air.