-19 votes

What do Truthers really think of Ron Paul?

This is not a thread about if Truthers are right or wrong in any theory. Let us avoid that debate.

Many of us 'discovered' Ron Paul during a 2007/8 debate when Paul went toe to toe with Rudy Giuliani debating the cause of 9/11. Paul plainly stated that it was our foreign policy that caused 9/11.

It is obvious that Ron does not subscribe to Truther Theory. Ron was so certain Bin Laden was behind the attacks, he voted to authorize the use of force to bring him to justice.

What do Truthers really think of Ron Paul? I've been shown nothing but contempt for being 'a 9/11 denier', do they hold the same contempt for Ron Paul?

Before you reply that Ron supports re-opening the 9/11 investigation, he does so "because I think the ineptness was probably hidden, because there was a tremendous amount of ineptness. And that's generally what government investigations do - they hide the inefficiencies and ineptness of government." (from YouTube)

So... why are Truthers here? Paul doesn't support your theories. Does your contempt of me extend to contempt for Ron Paul?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

A real investigation?

By that, you mean looking for proof that the towers where brought down with thermite? Sorry, that isn't the type Ron Paul advocates.

A real investigation

would include looking at all possibilities.

Again, how should we categorize you?

Me? A fantastic analyst with mad logic skills

All possibilities? Should we consider aliens?

Ron never suggested that we need to find out if thermite or remote controlled planes brought down the towers. His investigation would reveal the incompetence of government before and after the event.

Remember - Paul doesn't believe it was a false flag... it was blow-back that is being used as a false flag would - to grow the grip of government.

I find it bizarre that you

I find it bizarre that you think we are the bullies when we are the ones who are ridiculed and often fired for speaking out. For those in academia, it is career suicide to be an outspoken truther, sometimes even sometimes when we have tenure. The establishment mercilessly paints us as irrational and kooky.

Was there evidence

of alien contribution?

"His investigation would reveal the incompetence of government before and after the event."

That's plenty for me.

An investigation for ineptness would

be a good thing... because it would be an investigation... which is worlds better than no investigation, which is what "we have" now.

Ineptness during the event likely contributed to more deaths. Ineptness in the first "investigation" (so-called; epic fail) caused further emotional harm to the families of the victims, and it also caused harm (substantial) to government credibility and to people's confidence in their government (hence the existence of "truthers"). I imagine that is what Ron Paul is concerned about.

So let me flip the question to you, sir:

Do you think Ron Paul's support of an investigation for ineptness is a bad idea? If so, why are you here, and how can you support him?

I know you post in anger. This is unfortunate. Your last question is, as a result, of no constructive purpose or use. It is silly, and you know the answer already. (I do similar things sometimes when angry, too, so I understand. This isn't easy to deal with for any of us.)

What would the Founders do?

Sure - I agree with Ron - uncover ineptness

I am not posting out of anger. I'm tired of Ron Paul being associated with Truther theory. Truthers tend to use bully tactics - nobody wants to take you guys on... which just emboldens you more.

My point is that Ron doesn't agree with Truthers - so why is it such a prevalent subject here? I can see why you all would support Paul - one of very few politicians that can be trusted/believed... but why don't you believe him when he says 9/11 was blow back? That is the crux of my question. When such vitriol is spewed on me and others that don't believe 9/11 theories, do you hold the same for Paul?

I see.

I can't speak for others, but I know I don't agree with *every* opinion, theory, or "microphilosophy" of the Dr.'s. But as I'm sure most of us do agree, he's one of our best hopes for leadership in our shared pursuit of justice, liberty, and so on.

I see what you're saying, however. Dunno. We do tend to give our heroes more slack than we do our contemporaries... and someone put forth the idea that RP is playing it "safe". Who knows if he is or isn't? Even politicians occasionally meet with "untimely deaths" due to their beliefs.

What would the Founders do?

It's obvious Bill Gillingham that you haven't seen this video

Ron Paul clearly knows much more than he lets on but it is not politically expedient for him to take this on. If you cannot hear his words or read his body language that's your misfortune.

For the record I think Kyley from We Are Change was an ass ambushing Ron like this. He isn't the savior of the world and to set Ron up like this with a soft peddled question and then BLAM with the 911 question was lowdown and cheap.

Ron Paul tells 9/11 Truther why he won't come out about the "truth" over 911

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

Yep that was the exact video I was going to post as well

I think Dr. Paul knows he needs to teach people how to walk before they can run. To go from 'asleep' to 'truther' is a huge step. There are many in-between steps that the average 'asleep' person needs to take before they can understand how something like this could actually be true. Dr. Paul doesn't want to turn people off to his message (that will lead them down the rabbit hole to truth).

Ron Paul is secretly a Truther? So, it wasn't Blow-Back?

So - Ron Paul... unafraid to speak the truth, uses body language when discussing 9/11? Come on! Ron Paul is secretly a Truther? That is why he voted for authorization to go after Bin Laden? that is why he still references 9/11 as blow back?

Looks like a brush-off to me.


You sure aren't playing with a full deck Bill.He was caught off guard and his body language and words prove it. He knows.
Peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

And you can squeak all you want about truthers but there isn't a damned thing you can ever do to stop it here or anywhere so get over it.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul


Well - I would expect such from a Truther. You always see what you want to see.

Then Ron is lying about blow-back and 9/11? Right?

Ha Ha Ha

No Ron is being politically shrewd peabrain.



"How many others like you do you know in your own neighborhood, among your own friends? If you're like me, it is not many. On the Daily Paul, you are free to educate, speculate, and constructively criticize the world you live in, from (yes) chem trails to 911, to the Federal Reserve, the one party system, the corporate controlled media, and even the C4L."

~ written by the site owner Michael Nystrom

It's a big club Bill and you ain't in it yet with your wish to stifle free speech,thought and discussion.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

Nanothermite in the dust isn't a theory


Ron Paul told me that he doesn't believe the 911 Commission report and he thinks there's something 'fishy' about 9-11. We talked about it in 2010 after his debate for the 14th Congressional seat.

We aren't debating theories

It is a theory, and a debunked theory at that.

For Ron to say a very generic 'something fishy' sounds like a brush-off to me. Anyway, the video in the original post says nothing of the sort - just references to ineptness of government.

Forgot to thank you

for that link.
I really liked the way that the OP was taken apart in the comments.

Did I mention that you are trying too hard?