3 votes

Rand Paul Signs Warmongering AIPAC Letter

Rand's fillibuster said was wonderful but then he immediatly follows up with calling for a social engineering federal ban on abortion and by signing this cringing pro-Israel letter.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

There's nothing wrong with

There's nothing wrong with this letter. It doesn't advocate pre-emptive war or intervention of any kind.

so rand does not want to give the un more power


Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016

I would think of the letter in this way:

Rand probably isn't a fan of the U.N., so he wouldn't much care for the idea of a U.N. dispute process over any event really.

He probably also thinks that the Palestinian/Israeli issue is really none of our business and we should actually step back and let them sort it out.

I could see this letter passing Rand's desk, and him skimming and signing it.

Rand's platform plank to cut foreign aid (including to Israel) and support or lack of support for Israel most likely had nothing to do with his decision.

After reading the letter, I have no problem with him signing that letter, at least from an ideological point of view.

It would be wrong among NORMAL

Americans to advocate that UN recognaze the right of American Indians to have their own state and bypass US government and American people in achieving such a statehood.

Surely, there are plenty of socilaist-progressives, populists, and anti-Semites who would encourage the NEW WORLD ORDER - UN - to make unilateral actions.

P.S. Even anarchists accept arbitration. The owner of the land, British Empire, delegated that authority to UN. In 1947, UN decided on two states. Palestinian land was absorbed by Egypt & Jordan instead. Jordan was an artificial British creation itself. Only in 1967, Jordan and Egypt lost the land in a war to Israel. According to UN own rules, Israel has the right to annex the land. UN changes its rules as it goes, though, thus terminating its role as independent arbitration.

"The owner of the land,

"The owner of the land, British Empire ... "

I would like to see some evidence dirt is owned.


I wonder If I steal the land next, like the British, and the Ottomans did, is it then my rightful property?

Is he arguing Might = Right?

Good luck, I'm glad I don't have to deal with this one, it looks like its gonna get frustrating.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com

"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard


British did fight the war to take it from the Ottoman Empire. Just ask Turks.

Perhaps different

Perhaps different questions:

Presuming ownership is merely a bundle of rights possessed by an entity to exclude the use of a thing ...

Who or what type of entity can possess a bundle of rights to exclude?

What things can be excluded from use?

How is exclusion possession justly acquired?

What constitutes evidence of exclusion possession?

If you stick

with reason, then you have only three choices to solve a group demand conflict (note: Israeli-Palestinian conflict is NOT about individual rights) - 1) accept the judgment of wise-central planners (NWO, king, majority vote, etc.); 2) negotiate a deal; 3) win a war.

Palestinians rejected 1) & 2) and lost 3), so reasonable action is closed to them. Terrorism and asking NWO to interfere is their only hope.

Those who believe in miracles can pray or spend days typing idle posts siding with a particular GROUP to vent their emotions.

In order to have a coherent

In order to have a coherent conversation using reason, I will attempt to transpose your reply unto the questions. Please correct any errors:

1. Who or what type of entity can possess a bundle of rights to exclude? A) Wise overlords, B) Any party who consents, and C) The biggest dick.

2. What things can be excluded from use? A) Anything decreed by wise overlords, B) Anything consenting parties agree to exclude from a third party victim, and C) Anything the biggest dick gets a hard-on for.

3. How is exclusion possession justly acquired? A) Declaration by wise overlords, B) Valid contracts which exclude a third party victim, and C) Anything the biggest dick pisses on.

4. What constitutes evidence of exclusion possession? A) A fancy title, B) A signed agreement, and C) The biggest balls.

the worm's in need of a napkin and a set of kneepads


Good Title to this thread

Good Title to this thread topic. You're learning how to rattle cages to get the debate going and drive comments. I learned a lot from the comment section.

Shouldn't Sign Anything

Best to stay away from all these blanket statement letters written by interest groups. Write your own statement if you feel it necessary to chime in.

Warmongering is inaccurate in title. Please correct.

although it is far too pro-Zionist for my taste. Rand is walking one heck of a tightrope, throwing AIPAC one chunk of meat after another as it sniffs and growls and decides to stay friendly to Ron Paul's son. Nice kitty nice kitty...I still think he has an end game. RP didn't spend 30 years in politics to not have a deep understanding of master-level play, to impart to Rand.

To all you skeptics, just watch.

Here is full letter:


Dear Mr. President:

We applaud your decision to travel to Israel so early in your second term as president. Your upcoming trip will offer you the opportunity to meet with the leaders of Israel’s new government and to reaffirm the unshakeable bond between our two nations. In your meetings in Jerusalem and Ramallah later this month, we hope that you will reaffirm your commitment to working closely with the new government of Israel.

As you may know, in May 2011, the Senate passed S.Res.185: a resolution reaffirming the commitment of the United States to a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The bipartisan resolution was cosponsored by 90 Senators. Palestinian efforts to bypass direct negotiations with Israel by taking unilateral steps for international recognition are, in our view, unacceptable. When you meet with Palestinian leaders, you should make clear that the pathway for peace is through unconditional direct negotiations between both the Israelis and Palestinians and that the United States vigorously opposes any Palestinian efforts to circumvent direct negotiations.

It is important to re-emphasize that the United States will not tolerate efforts to isolate or delegitimize Israel. During your first term, you and your administration actively stood by Israel at the UN and other agencies to try to block such efforts. It is critical that you now make clear that our relationship with Palestinians will be jeopardized by seeking action against Israel at the International Criminal Court.

We encourage you to also stress the importance of the Palestinian Authority’s close security cooperation with Israel. If peace is to be possible, the Palestinian Authority also needs to confront the recent surge in violence on the West Bank, cease all anti-Israel incitement and renounce Hamas until it unequivocally meets the three Quartet requirements.

We believe that by espousing these principles during your historic trip, you will reaffirm the United States’ commitment to enhancing Israeli security, improving the prospect for peace with the Palestinians and furthering our own interests in this troubled region of the world.

We are strongly committed to the restart of the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. However, we also recognize that the violence and chaos that have sprung up in Syria, North Africa, Egypt, including insecurity along the Sinai Peninsula, and Yemen are not related to the peace process.

As you pursue peace in the Middle East in the long-run, we hope that your agenda will identify policy solutions to address the urgent and important threats facing Israel and the United States today. We also hope that you will reiterate the United States’ support for Israel, her right to defend herself, and the Iron Dome project. In such a tumultuous region of the world, and during such challenging times, a strong relationship between our two countries has never been more important. Israel has challenging times ahead. Israel needs our unwavering commitment now more than ever.

Release the Sandy Hook video.

we shouldn't be saying what we 'will or will not stand for' in

their negotiations. We should be staying out of it.

I know already Rand isn't following those principled lines. I am not yet sure what he IS doing, though.

Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesnt want to hear -RonPaul

This thread is propaganda, it's all propaganda to tear down Pau

Atkinson you are taking this way out of context! I think you are a troll just trying to tear down the liberty movement. Read the letter! It has nothing to do with abortion! Anti abortion means you are pro life! So who cares!

And the Israel thing... who cares it has nothing to do with sending money to them!

You need to know something of

You need to know something of how to play the game of three level chess.

Our Zionist Occupied Government (ZOG) control everything. You have to use a wealth of knowledge and well played strategy to out maneuver those control freaks in that cesspool they call the establishment. Makes me vomit at what we have to put up with. You must be very careful with the words that come out of your mouths, lest you be absolutely squired by the main stream media making our chances of ever achieving anything null and void.

I’ll give you an example of the the game that must be played;

Example of failure to execute:

“Upset that Republican Carl Paladino disavowed portions of the speeches he made at two Brooklyn synagogues on Sunday, Rabbi Yehuda Levin on Wednesday withdrew his support for the candidate.

“If he continues on this path, not only can’t I vote for him, but I will call on all religious people to write in ‘morality’ or something like that [on the ballot],” said Rabbi Levin in a phone interview.”

My words of advice for all US patriots running for major public office; Make sure you do your obligatory Israel Lobby/ADL ass licking statements just like many current Congress people have done. You will not get on TV for name recognition advertising if you don’t.

It is preferable to say good things about Israel for the ADL and the Israel Lobby when you're a candidate running for high public office. Embellish everything you can think of like a lap dog. Go over the top with your Israeli ass licking statements. You can always turn your back on them in your own way after you are elected into the office and become an America firster. You must also be prepared never to say anything disparaging “in the Zionist peoples mind” that would offend them. Work the system doing an end run around them and play it smart.

You seem to be pretending that it's all some legitimate game

What's up with that? What's the score? What inning is it?

Which humans are the all stars and which are minor leaguers?

Can we get some kind of one-world commissioner in there to regulate things?

How about trophies? Who gets the trophies?

Oh, wait. Silly me, it's all about p-e-r-p-e-t-u-a-l warfare. No end to the season. No playoffs. Only polished skulls as trophies.

Game, not necessarily

Game, not necessarily legitimate, but a real game none the less. You should read our Contra-Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion Manifesto.

Sorry I misspoke, that's

Sorry I misspoke, that's still classified information.

Sort of like this; Saturday

Sort of like this;
Saturday Night Live - Dress Rehearsal C-Span Chuck Hagel Hearings

Read the letter

I am failing to see the problem here. They are saying that Israel and Palestine should talk to each other and work it out.

also, a "social engineering" ban on abortion? What does that mean.
Did the founding father's stutter when they said that LIFE was an unalienable right?

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

Very disappointing

I know Rand has to pick his battles, but this is one where I think he could've held firm and not signed.

All the Pro-Liberty

rhetoric goes out the door when one doesn't follow the founding father's advice when it comes to entangling alliances. Just plain treasonous!

"All the pro-liberty rhetoric goes out the door" = rhetoric

Why does it go out the door? Because you say so?

You're entitled to that opinion. Or, you could see Rand's move as disappointing but "tactical."

Sometimes, you opt to play the game. It's fair of you to criticize Rand for this, but you ought to consider this basic fact: everyone compromises in some way. Ron Paul chose to work within the Republican Party because he knew it was the only realistic way to get elected and have influence on the agenda. Ron Paul could've protested the immoral and unconstitutional tax laws of this country, but he didn't (see his interviews where he salutes people who do so out of "civil disobedience").

We are all faced with these dilemmas. Do I comply for the sake of expediency/my family/my welfare? Do I go along in order to influence the agenda from the inside? Or do I resist, and if so, how?

Again, I disagree with Rand signing this letter. And I get those who are more outspoken in their disagreement. We all must decide for ourselves how to answer the questions in the above paragraph, and we're all free to evaluate our elected officials' decisions in that regard.

But we have to put context into the equation when doing so. Saying everything "goes out the door" over something like this is setting a standard that, in my opinion, almost no one could live up to--and no one who managed to live up to it would be able to gain influence to effect change.

Yours truly,


Oh my God, no!!!

He signed a letter supporting negotiations, and then he thinks life starts at conception. I can't believe that war mongering statist!!

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

He's not going to make headway against Statists playing "Dr. No"

I appreciate Ron Paul's almost-universal "no" vote during his time in the House.

I also recognize that is a major part of why it was so difficult for him to win a following above 10% anywhere in the DemoPublican landscape.

You SHOULD understand that, by definition, fully HALF the population has an IQ below average which means they can't easily think their way out of a paper bag, much less a propaganda state. Of those with IQs above average, probably half are coopted by their beliefs, emotions, demons, personal greed, moral depravity, and social peer groups to be Statists/Totalitarians. Plenty of 'smart' people have backed every brutal dictator and tyrant in history. That means we have at best ... maybe 25% potential representation in the population as a whole and much, much less in the current corporate/bankster controlled party leadership.

You SHOULD understand that IF the US Constitution came up for vote in today's "Amerika" it would be voted down by a landslide.

Against that backdrop, to expect Rand Paul to be effective in opposing The War on Freedom while never voting yes on anything is not being realistic. More than half the population of registered Republicans will automatically and immediately discount him entirely if he doesn't show up on certain issues. Take comfort in the fact that probably none of these issues are on the front line of what he would have the power to address effectively either as Senator nor as President. They are - effectively - red herrings from the real front line: the War on the Constitution and rule of law. Don't be duped nor pulled out of focus.

Bill of Rights /Amendment X: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Do you need a politician or judge to "interpret" those 28