The ‘Ron Paul lunatic fringe’

Ron Paul (Guardian)I have an online acquaintance, Steve Gresh, whose Facebook page never fails to provoke and entertain. This is a man who is leveraging the power of Facebook for all its worth.

Steve, who has posted comments and arguments here, is a Paulite. Today he’s reveling in being part of the “Ron Paul Lunatic Fringe.”

In one of his Facebook page’s many threads is one on Sarah Palin. During the conversation, Steve said this (emphasis mine):

Thanks for the link to Palin’s bio on the CFR web site. She definitely supports the CFR’s interventionist foreign policy. Disagreeing with that policy is the main reason why Ron Paul was labeled as a lunatic. Perhaps the American public will finally realize that non-interventionism is a good idea when we’re finally so bankrupt that we can’t afford it anymore.

Really? Disagreeing with the Council on Foreign Relations’ views on intervention is what got Ron Paul labeled as part of the lunatic fringe?

I don’t think so.

George Will sounds like Steve Gresh (and, yes, Ron Paul) in talking about war, the responsibility of Congress and the limits of Executive power. (He even uses the term “monarchical doctrine”!)  And there’s his devastating takedown of Wilsonian internationalism. I can’t find the links now, but I recall (far) more than one or two columns from Mr. Will ridiculing Bush’s interventionist conceit.

We interventionists think Will is a crank, and wrong, but nobody has accused him of being part of a lunatic fringe.

William F. Buckley Jr. became a non-interventionist, for Pete’s sake!

All kinds of sensible, non-lunatic fringe people are non-interventionists. Not to mention liberals and other socialists.

What got Ron Paul labeled as part of the lunatic fringe is his belief in non-existent conspiracies like the North American Union and imputing non-existent power and influence onto think tank entities like the CFR. You know, connecting dots that aren’t there. Or the idea of viable Republican candidates dropping out in response to orders from CFR “headquarters.” Who would believe that?

Anyone obsessed with conspiracies and secret societies is going to be tagged with the Lunatic Fringe label (or my personal favorite, the Tinfoil Hat Brigade). Period.

Ron Paul is no exception.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “The ‘Ron Paul lunatic fringe’”

  1. I have to disagree that Ron Paul, himself, believes that actual Republican candidates follow orders from groups like the CFR. I agree that RP supporters hurt our cause when they spew notions such as those. It is not fringe to believe that groups like the Israeli lobby, the CFR and the IMF are not acting in the best interest of the American people. It is also not fringe to believe that following our traditions and our constitution, both which advocate or lead toward non-intervention, as a guide back to a stronger nation, dollar and national defense. Indeed, those that attempt to silence the constitutionality of debates should be thrown out of office at the first possibly election for violating their oath of office.

    The fact is, interventionists as you describe yourself, simply don’t have the constitution behind you. You have the UN which has been used as an instrument to create & justify undeclared wars since the 50s. You have the notion of “spreading democracy” but no constitutional authority to do so. And you have the media that helps dispel the notion that spreading democracy can also be done by simply setting a good example and having other countries want to emulate us as an equally good strategy, certainly one that makes better financial sense.

    Interventionists are not conservatives. They love the empire too much. All of which comes at too great a cost of blood & treasure to be a real conservative.

    -TP

    Like

    1. Thomas:

      You say

      It is not fringe to believe that groups like the Israeli lobby, the CFR and the IMF are not acting in the best interest of the American people.

      I say

      It is certainly not fringe to disagree with these groups in their belief that they are, in fact, acting in the best interest of the American people. I think you’re wrong, but I don’t, as a result of that disagreement, think you’re fringe. However…

      I do think it’s fringe to look at every position advanced by these people as proof that they are acting as tools of some foreign power. And I think it’s incredibly damaging both to honest debate and to your own cause to do so. I have been in thousands of online discussions where you couldn’t tell the difference between anti-American radicals, eurocentrists, paleocons, Paulites, neo-fascists or left-wing or right-wing pacifists. At the back of every argument they offered was the heartfelt notion of a Dark Grand Zionist Conspiracy. If you were pro Iraq War, you weren’t simply wrong (or even imperialistic), you were a Jew-lover.

      I think this is sick.

      You say

      It is also not fringe to believe that following our traditions and our constitution, both which advocate or lead toward non-intervention, as a guide back to a stronger nation, dollar and national defense. Indeed, those that attempt to silence the constitutionality of debates should be thrown out of office at the first possibly election for violating their oath of office.

      The fact is, interventionists as you describe yourself, simply don’t have the constitution behind you. You have the UN which has been used as an instrument to create & justify undeclared wars since the 50s. You have the notion of “spreading democracy” but no constitutional authority to do so. And you have the media that helps dispel the notion that spreading democracy can also be done by simply setting a good example and having other countries want to emulate us as an equally good strategy, certainly one that makes better financial sense.

      I say

      In what way do our traditions and Constitution “advocate or lead toward non-intervention”?

      What is the basis of your claim that interventionists “don’t have the constitution” behind us? or your belief that right wing interventionists like John Bolton have any more respect for the U.N. than you do? or that the goal of spreading democracy requires non-existent constitutional authority?

      chas

      Like

  2. I actually got here from Gresh’s facebook page where you left this site in a comment ;) Very clever.

    I agree that Ron Paul spent far too much time talking about those conspiracy theories. Really, it did far more harm than good. It was hard to talk to other paul-ites after the campaign because all they wanted to talk about was the CFR, the supposed NAU, et al.

    On the other hand, really, i think steve has a point. There was that one debate, forgive me if i do not remember the date, where the republicans literally laughed at him while he described blowback in our foreign policy. They threw all of the nationalist bullshit at him “so YOU blame americans for 9/11?” Of course, we all know he was correct, but they still refused to even hear it. These are dangerous people. People who refuse to even hear alternative viewpoints because they are either A. absolutely convinced that they are right, or B. knowingly wrong and dont care.

    Either way, people in our society grow up thinking america is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and we have a “moral obligation” to flex our muscles every once in a while and pull some poor helpless country swiftly out of anarchy, poverty, and genocide.

    It is an unfortunate situation.

    DICTATOR’S NOTE: Congratulations, Mike. You’re the first person to cuss on my blog…chas

    Like

  3. I have to agree. Anyone who thinks that there is anyone with any power whatsoever in the CFR is bonkers. The CFR has as much power as the boy scouts! If the CFR ever receives any powerful members, then MAYBE they’ll have a case. But as an average American (that means being more intelligent than most Americans) I choose happy thoughts! The best laugh comes from the North American Union! Don’t you think that if it was important it would at least be covered on the news! Duh! Lets keep things straight, there is nobody outside of our government that has power to influence anyone in our politics. Do us all a favor and stop thinking inconceivable thoughts and join the down to earth mainstream! These guys probably think our “debt” matters too, lol.

    Like

  4. Obviously, the CFR has no control over who our president is. It would be lunacy to think that there are any connections among campaign financing for presidential candidates, ownership of the Federal Reserve, membership in the Council on Foreign Relations, an interventionist foreign policy, and taxpayer bailouts for the same banks that contribute to both Republicans’ and Democrats’ campaigns.

    McCain, Obama, the Federal Reserve, the CFR, and TARP

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-04-15-obamainside_N.htm

    Yet Obama’s 20 largest sources of money, grouped by employers, are executives from major corporations and law firms with a Washington lobbying presence — including Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and Google, according to the center. Clinton’s and McCain’s top donors include executives from some of the same companies, such as Goldman Sachs and Citigroup.

    http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00006424

    John McCain (R)
    Top Contributors

    Merrill Lynch $361,620
    Citigroup Inc $304,051
    Morgan Stanley $263,277
    Goldman Sachs $229,695
    JPMorgan Chase & Co $216,057
    US Government $200,555
    AT&T Inc $185,063
    Credit Suisse Group $178,053
    UBS AG $174,429
    PricewaterhouseCoopers $166,970
    Blank Rome LLP $161,826
    US Army $161,570
    Wachovia Corp $160,107
    Bank of America $150,076
    Greenberg Traurig LLP $143,637
    Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $139,146
    US Dept of Defense $130,925
    FedEx Corp $125,904
    Lehman Brothers $122,057
    Zurich Financial Services $114,250

    http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

    Barack Obama (D)
    Top Contributors

    University of California $1,069,898
    Goldman Sachs $884,907
    Harvard University $732,150
    Microsoft Corp $714,358
    Google Inc $704,649
    JPMorgan Chase & Co $600,210
    Citigroup Inc $586,866
    National Amusements Inc $566,409
    Time Warner $517,748
    Sidley Austin LLP $496,445
    UBS AG $484,369
    Stanford University $482,199
    Skadden, Arps et al $473,424
    Wilmerhale Llp $471,729
    Columbia University $427,766
    Morgan Stanley $425,502
    Latham & Watkins $425,324
    IBM Corp $416,946
    University of Chicago $416,055
    Lehman Brothers $410,974

    Who owns the Federal Reserve?

    http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/2008/05/who-owns-federal-reserve.html

    Chart 1 reveals the linear connection between the Rothschilds and the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn,Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was drafted, who directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914. These firms had their principal officers appointed to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Advisory Council in 1914. In 1914 a few families (blood or business related) owning controlling stock in existing banks (such as in New York City) caused those banks to purchase controlling shares in the Federal Reserve regional banks. Examination of the charts and text in the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976 and the current stockholders list of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks show this same family control.

    – Published 1983

    The J. Henry Schroder Banking Company chart encompasses the entire history of the twentieth century, embracing as it does the program (Belgium Relief Commission) which provisioned Germany from 1915-1918 and dissuaded Germany from seeking peace in 1916; financing Hitler in 1933 so as to make a Second World War possible; backing the Presidential campaign of Herbert Hoover ; and even at the present time, having two of its major executives of its subsidiary firm, Bechtel Corporation, serving as Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration.

    The head of the Bank of England since 1973, Sir Gordon Richardson, Governor of the Bank of England (controlled by the House of Rothschild) was chairman of J. Henry Schroder Wagg and Company of London from 1963-72, and director of J. Henry Schroder,New York and Schroder Banking Corporation,New York,as well as Lloyd’s Bank of London, and Rolls Royce. He maintains a residence on Sutton Place in New York City, and as head of “The London Connection,” can be said to be the single most influential banker in the world.

    – Published 1976

    The David Rockefeller chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York,Standard Oil of Indiana,General Motors and Allied Chemical Corportion (Eugene Meyer family) and Equitable Life (J. P. Morgan).

    This chart shows the interlocks between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York J. Henry Schroder Banking Corp., J. Henry Schroder Trust Co., Rockefeller Center, Inc., Equitable Life Assurance Society ( J.P. Morgan), and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

    This chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Brown Brothers Harriman,Sun Life Assurance Co. (N.M. Rothschild and Sons), and the Rockefeller Foundation.

    ** Source: Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence. Staff Report,Committee on Banking,Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, August 1976.

    http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/shadow/cfrintro.htm

    “The money to found the CFR came in part from J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, Otto Kahn, Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg”.

    The story of the British connection to the Council on Foreign Relations may be traced back to George Peabody, J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, Nicholas M. Butler and Col. Edward House — all who may be described a British loyalists. A Secret Society was established by Cecil Rhodes in connection with Rothschild, Morgan, Carnegie, and Rockefeller. A small highly secret group called the Round Table directed operations.

    In summary, the Federal Reserve System, the League of Nations and the Council on Foreign Relations had both common origins and creators. Last, but not least, the CFR was of British — not U.S. origin.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations

    Several of Rockefeller’s sons joined the council when they came of age; David Rockefeller joined the council as its youngest-ever director in 1949 and subsequently became chairman of the board from 1970 to 1985; today he serves as honorary chairman.[23] The major philanthropic organization he founded with his brothers in 1940, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, has also provided funding to the Council, from 1953 to at least 1980.

    Economist John Kenneth Galbraith resigned in 1970, objecting to the Council’s policy of allowing government officials to conduct twice-a-year off-the-record briefings with business officials in its Corporation Service.[17] The Council says that it has never sought to serve as a receptacle for government policy papers that cannot be shared with the public, and they do not encourage government officials who are members to do so. The Council says that discussions at its headquarters remain confidential, not because they share or discuss secret information, but because the system allows members to test new ideas with other members.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Assets_Relief_Program

    The banks agreeing to receive equity investments from the Treasury include Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp. (including Merrill Lynch), Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., Bank of New York Mellon and State Street Corp.[11][12][13] The Bank of New York Mellon is to serve as master custodian overseeing the fund.

    Like

    1. Steve:

      So do you think there is a multi-generational European bankers’ conspiracy—in force to this day—which seeks to control the finances of the U.S.?

      Like

  5. David Rockefeller is John D. Rockefeller’s grandson:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

    The Rothschild banking family owns and controls many of the largest banks in Europe and other corporations throughout the world:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_England

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_Austria

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_France

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_Germany

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_Naples

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_banking_family_of_Switzerland

    Considering that the existence of the Federal Reserve System is a violation of the U.S. Constitution (an illegal action) and that the decisions made by those who own and control the Fed are also illegal actions (made without any accountability to or oversight by our elected representatives in Congress)*, this definition of “conspiracy” is applicable:

    Conspiracy:

    Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.

    * Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states:

    The Congress shall have Power …
    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures

    When most people die, they leave some money and property to their heirs. When the Rockefellers and Rothschilds die, they leave central banks that control the currencies of many nations and corporations that profit from government spending/taxation/regulation to restrict competition to their heirs.

    What a racket! It’s organized crime. And, just like the mobsters who use violence to operate their black market enterprises, these criminals use the force and guns of the military and police who work for governments to collect taxes and operate their various moneymaking enterprises.

    Like

  6. Here are some relevant quotations and The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (sponsored by Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]):

    “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws”
    – Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild

    “The few who understand the system will either be so interested from its profits or so dependant on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class.”
    – Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

    “Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States”
    – Senator Barry Goldwater

    “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.”
    – Thomas Jefferson, US President

    The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (sponsored by Rep. Ronald Paul [R-TX]):

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2755

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s