Support of Israel...
Submitted by christopher X on Mon, 11/12/2007 - 14:24I am a Christian who supports Israel. But I also agree with Ron Paul on this Topic. Just like countries that may need "humanitarian" support, it is not right for the Federal government to "steal" from us in a tax and support them. Ron Paul says that if the tax money was left in our hands instead of the federal government taking it from us and deciding what to do with it, that we could do with the fruits of our labor as we please. Whether it is helping people of other countries survive droughts, or if it is supporting Israels right to exist in it's own land.The Christians that support Israel, like me, can figure out that we can support Israel without the intrusion of the government. Christians do not need a middle man (the federal government) to take our money and support Israel. We can support them by ourselves or in a united fund run by Christians. This actually is the only way that makes any sense anyway. For we know that the government would take alot of the money and do hideous things with it, and say that they are supporting Israel with it, like alot of the candidates are saying right now. It makes sense in bussiness, and in Charities, that the fewer the "middle men", the more efficient the bussiness or Charity is and the more dollars are used for the intended purpose. So I do not know why Ron Paul's stance on this subject should be of any alarm to Christians who want to support Israel. Just the opposite in fact, we could do with our money as we want instead of watching the federal government take our money and do things with it that we would never approve of.
Food for thought...
Why is it so hard to believe that Israel could be better funded and supported through the private sector? Personally, I think that government support actually hinders Israel's ability to grow and prosper. Why should Israel have to rely on U.S. aid money with all the proverbial strings attached to it.
I think that Ron Paul feels the same way on this issue. He would most likely be the first person to reach into his wallet and kick in $100.
Sadly, the MSM is quick to play on the "you're anti-Israel" if you don't believe in our tax dollars being used to support Israel. The same applies if you don't vote for the pork-bloated SCHIP bill--in that case "you're against healthcare for children."
"Free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions." Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions of 1798
Christian duty to support Israel
The reason we have to support Israel is the "Temple." You know the one that the tel-evangelists like the inimitable Reverend Pat Robertson tells us has been fortold by the prophets. And you throw in some earthquakes, hurricanes, tonados, a couple of scary deseases like the "bird flu" and if that doesn't do the trick you get Rick Warren to help you stir up the "last days" scenario with apocalptic predictions of Global Warming. Ooo, that will really get them coming to church. Wow, I know if I were a "doom and gloom" Christian pronosticator I too would join up at club CFR to see how to mix and match politcal control with Bible Prophesy. Now when the Christian believers are read passages such as: "There will be wars and rumors of wars," they know that the "end Times" are just around the corner. You can almost hear them recite the litany: "Hey let God handle it. Why oppose evil when we Christians all know that once the 'Temple' is built in Jerusalum, Presto! We're out of here!" Don't you see it's all written down in the pages of the Old Testament and spelled out in the New Testament. So we just gotta' help 'em. It's our Christian duty. But, no, don't ask me to support a radical like Ron Paul for President. Brother Pat says we still gotta' fight them there darned Moslem Islamo-facists otherwise the, you know, the Temple, won't be built, and I'm anxious to get to heaven and tell the Lord I was on His side 'cause I had all my Christian bumper stickers right next to my Rudy For President one." Gosh it's so much fun being a Christian. And so easy too. Hardly have to do anything but go to church and give up a little money. Besides, that Economist doctor I heard on TV says that our money is made out of thin air!" Imagine that! Wonder if that's Bible Prophesy too?"
archtoplee
Awesome!
Hit the nail on the head. Now we just need to realize giving our money to Pakistan, the Saudis and Paletstine are equally stupid.
"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain
Ha ha!
Ha ha!
From George Washington's farewell address...
"So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation."
I think that our support to Israel harms both us and Israel. If you follow the Israeli press, you will see that a lot of thoughtful people over there have come to similar conclusions. It not only distorts the U.S. position in the world, but also the natural position of Israel among its neighbors.
I believe that this is one reason why the mainstream press has warmed to Ron Paul lately - some Jews are realizing that election of Dr. Paul might not be detrimental at all to Israel, and, in fact, might be quite beneficial.
maybe during the diversion
maybe during the diversion ,the military could pay that scumbag Frank Luntz a visit
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is ,as a last resort ,to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
I don't understand!
Why do Christians claim to support Israel? It drives me nuts, my grandmother was like this. Please show me a bible verse showing that it is the Christian duty! And if there is one, it make's a lot of sense because who wrote the bible? Jewish men! For some reason, preachers like to talk about the 'Christian' duty to support Israel. It's all propaganda. The Israelis have displaced millions of people from their homes, use terrorists tactics against unarmed people, violated human rights laws, and preemptively attacked other countries. Look, I'm far from being anti-semitic, supporting Israel is support of terrorism, not Jesus.
Re: Davy Crockett
Thank you for that Davy Crockett story. Just like Davy said in the story, it also brought some tears down my face as well as getting a little choked up.
I'm always thankful and appreciative when I could be around Ron Paul
supporters, whether it's online or a real world rally like last saturday at Philly.
The quality and integrity and good old common sense of Paul supporters comes from a genuine realization of truth and justice.
As far as this christian who supports Israel: Brother, reread your constitution,
get some books on the founders ( Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Washington),
and most importantly, your video assignment is to go to youtube and watch and listen, as carefully as you can, to as many ron paul videos as you can.
And as Paul would say about those who believe in supporting others through appropriations and entitlements:
"The people aren’t entitled to somebody else’s productive effort. The government has nothing. It only has what it takes from someone else. So it can’t provide anything without taking it through taxation or thru the inflationary process.
Entitlements undermine what the concept of free markets and the principles of what America are all about.
And it’s not humanitarian, although it’s motivated by humanitarian instincts.
The people who do suffer and have needs either have to be taken care of by themselves, their family, friends, church or local government. This can work but people have lost their confidence so they say the government is the dispenser of entitlements. They are the safety net and they resort to entitlements not realizing they will undermine the whole system that produced the wealth that takes care of so many. The whole concept of entitlements participates in the deficit financing, in creating inflation, and the destruction of the productive capacity of the economy.”
Good luck to you Christopher x
Davy Crockett
Not Yours To Give
Col. David Crockett
US Representative from Tennessee
One day in the House of Representatives a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:
"Mr. Speaker--I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has not the power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member on this floor knows it.
We have the right as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I ever heard that the government was in arrears to him.
"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:
"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.
"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.
"I began: 'Well friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates and---
"Yes I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine, I shall not vote for you again."
"This was a sockdolger...I begged him tell me what was the matter.
"Well Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting you or wounding you.'
"I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest.
But an understanding of the constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the honest he is.'
"'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake. Though I live in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by fire in Georgetown. Is that true?
"Well my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just the same as I did.'
"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.
What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he.
If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give at all; and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. 'No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.'
"'Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have Thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.'
"The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from necessity of giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.'
"'So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.'
"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:
"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.'
"He laughingly replied; 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'
"If I don't, said I, 'I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.'
"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. 'This Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.
"'Well I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."
"'My name is Bunce.'
"'Not Horatio Bunce?'
"'Yes
"'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'
"It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence, and for a heart brim-full and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him, before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
"At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.
"Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before."
"I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the word - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me.
"In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:
"Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."
"I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
"And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.'
"He came up to the stand and said:
"Fellow-citizens - it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.'
"He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.'
"I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.'
"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. "There is one thing which I will call your attention, "you remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $20,000 when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
(Originally published in "The Life of Colonel David Crockett," by Edward Sylvester Ellis.)
Great story
This should be mandatory reading in history classes. I first read about this in 2001 and was reminded of it when Wolf Blitzer interviewed RP about his voting no on so many issues. Ron Paul's answer to voting no on this is that it wasn't right for him to spend the taxpayers money and that he would donate his money personally if everyone else did the same. Of course they voted to spend "the peoples" money and not their own.
Nice story if true.
Wouldn’t Crockett be surprised to see the US budget today with its bloated Pentagon spending, the fully corrupt military/ industrial complex and their corporate welfare/queens. This is no longer a problem of government handouts as a kind of pseudo-charity. The GOP and many Democrats have turned to terror in order to milk the last bit of wealth out of the American people. And it’s working.
Love that piece
Thanx for posting that, that is why the US has no business subsidising Israel, or Japan, or Romania or any place. It's not the government's job ! It's carrot-stick diplomacy, it's the flip-side of warring and intervention, and the sooner the US gets out of that business the better.
Go Ron Paul !
If the truth be known.
Israel is not what OUR msm portrays it to be. I will not get into a debate about them, I know it could turn into a very hot topic. Israel does some pretty dispicable things over there in that part of thw world and they bring many of their problems upon themselves. They are not the " true christian nation" that msm would have you believe.
commoners everywhere are tired
You are sick of where our leaders are leading us and you support Dr. Paul. You can understand Robertson's followers being sick of him, right? Can you also fathom Sharpton's followers being tired of him? Do you really think that all the 1 billion muslims support jihad? So how come when it comes to Israel and/or the jews they are treated as one cohesive unit and Ron Paul's statements are ignored? What makes you think that the jews aren't fed up with their own good old boys club msm leaders? I see jewish names like ashenberg,cohen,eiselstein, etc. coming up as donors. They are Americans of jewish descent but Americans first- Americans who support Ron Pauls' positions! Why shouldn't they? What makes you think Paul is so off -base with how the average jewish person thinks? Even many who support Israel probably don't like the U.S. dictating their foreign policy anymore than proudly mexican Mexican-Americans like theU.S. telling Mexico what to do. Individuals. Everyones brain is different-even jews.
everyone has a different
view of the countries we provide financial support to.
I don't want MY taxes, or any money that should go to MY country, to go to ANY country that promotes ethnic cleansing, genocide, human rights violations etc.
I don't agree with financial support to Israel, but I also don't agree with financial support to any other country while we have homeless vets, bridges collapsing from disrepair, and Katrina victims still living in toxic trailers. Israel in particular is not a 3rd world country - they have advanced technology, high literacy, good healthcare. They have no need for our financial support.
I say, America FIRST. Then, when we become a prosperous & healthy nation once again (eg under a Ron Paul presidency).. AND... IF we have budget surpluses... then and only then should we consider helping POOR countries (again, not allies that have no need for our money).
These are the entanglements our forefathers cautioned against.
So no foreign aid to anyone - that's what will benefit AMERICANS the most.
Witness the POWER of an IDEA - the MASSIVE Ron Paul Rallies! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgsg7a-Ok8Q
Support
"I don't want MY taxes, or any money that should go to MY country, to go to ANY country that promotes ethnic cleansing, genocide, human rights violations etc."
So, what I hear you saying is that you don't want to give money to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Egypt, etc. I agree.
Israel is hardly an "ethnic cleaning nation." They allow Arabs and Muslims to live and even VOTE in their country. Good luck getting that same respect as a Jew in Saudi Arabia.
You really need to do some reading and get off the whackjob websites.
There is no reason to attack
There is no reason to get defensive and attack me personally. I am well-read and I have done considerable research for many years.
I will defend my argument that American money should go to Americans, First and Foremost. As long as we have 40+ million Americans without healthcare, people losing their jobs and their homes left & right, veterans without adequate healthcare etc, there is absolutely no excuse for our money to go to ANY other country.
We should stop ALL foreign aid including to Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, countries in Central and South America, etc.
Israeli human rights organizations have serious concerns over the human rights violations in their country - ethnic cleansing, torture etc. But that is not the topic for this forum... those issues are covered all over the web & on other forums.
As far as Saudi Arabia - they have their own issues, as all countries do. I don't know why you consider them a role model to be compared to.
We should just stop giving money to all other countries and, along with having more money to take care of our own, we could avoid being resented for supporting one side or another.
Keep the money here. America First.
Witness the POWER of an IDEA - the MASSIVE Ron Paul Rallies! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgsg7a-Ok8Q
lets count the number of
lets count the number of country's that have invaded another country in the middle east in the last 10 years.
#1 USA
#2 Israel
#3 Turkey
(i dont think im missing anyone)
lets see #2&3 both get massive support from #1. so i think we agree we should not give support to either.
I am not saying that any other country in the middle east is better then Israel
I think they are all bad with Israel bing the best of them
Isreal is an EXTREMELY socialist country with a draft, and while you are drafted they pull now punches, the gov OWNS YOU you are their property, it is actually illegal for Israeli solders jay walk because you could damage government property. (this is from an Israeli who fully supported this)
Could not have said it better.
Let's take care of the U.S. first. We have a lot of issues to work out. When the dollar is strong again, then we can spread the wealth like we always have.
Restore the Republic! RP2008
on topic response...
With that said, we should stick to the topic at hand and what unifies us all – Ron Paul. And despite coming from a wide range of backgrounds and beliefs, we all stand together in support of Ron Paul as President.
And the shadow's so bright, it takes the sun out of the day.
off topic response but...
I work in the field of marketing. One of the standard things we do is get consumer feedback so that we can adjust our marketing and or public relations for a given brand. This ensures that people from a wide range of backgrounds all buy into the same message or campaign.
The Israeli lobby also has a "communications manual". It's put out by the Wexner Foundation (with help from Luntz Research). One such manual was leaked online. Although it's from 2003, it is a testament to how, through marketing and media, the goals of a campaign, no matter the cause, can be achieved:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/fsywsc
And the shadow's so bright, it takes the sun out of the day.
interesting
in regards to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, reading "solve" exactly like it appears here - in quotation marks - was truly disturbing.
I know the Arab nations perpetuate war, as well, by denying refuge to the political casualties of this ongoing conflict. Perhaps a secular nation with an open-door immigration policy for the world's Jewry would be a solution. As it is now, the militaristic leaders who determine Israeli foreign policy do little to promote the rights of the Jewish people. Israel is not a safe haven.
Canada Loves Ron Paul
Canada Loves Ron Paul
Divert a few bombs from Iraq
Divert a few bombs from Iraq to Isreal ,and this mess would be over,
darn is that the FBI at my door?
LOL
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is ,as a last resort ,to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
Please check these links out
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/wdoor.html
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/rel-christians.html
http://www.ifamericansknew.org
http://www.ifamericansknew.org
Wow!
That was eye opening. I am not well educated on this issue and this site has an incredible amount of information. Thanks for posting these links!
The foreign aid we send
The foreign aid we send Israel is all spent on the military, but there exists a stipulation that the money is spent on US companies. We finance war for Israel, and it actually hurts her economy as well as enraging her neighbors. Foreign aid to Israel is a Cold War anachronism. It is a remnant of mercantilistic foreign policy based on securing supply routes and Soviet containment.
Canada Loves Ron Paul
Canada Loves Ron Paul
Get Ron Paul in Playboy
Lets get Ron Paul in Playboy's January's Interview. We must hurry. With a very good 3 million plus circulation, I think its time Playboy interviews the good Doctor don't you?
Please help with an email request to Playboy. Ask them to interview "the most radical Politician to run for the White House in 100 years.---thats why supporters call it a Love Revolution."
As you may know, Playboy's readership is pro-civil rights and pro-free market. Even though Christie Hefner who runs the magazine is liberal, they recognize that their readership runs more libertarian than liberal or even conservative. Lets introduce a whole new audience to Dr. Ron Paul's pearls of wisdom.
Email Playboy here:
admin@playboy.com
Entitle it "Please Interview" or "Interview Request". Please include your full name and cell #, city & state --- thus showing you are a real person.
FYI Playboy has interviewed these two Presidential Candidates...
Latest issue... Gov. Bill Richardson in Playboy interview http://www.playboy.com/magazine/interview/
Past issue...Fred Thompson in Playboy Interview
http://www.playboy.com/magazine/features/fred-thompson/fred-...
Invest in Liberty, one Apartment deal at a time with me. Get a check each month as a passive investor, just ask me how.
Get Ron Paul on Playboy? Why?
Sometimes in our enthusiasm for giving someone with brilliant ideas like Dr. Paul a larger audience we resort to ideas that are akin to the square peg in the round hole scenario. They're idiotic! Playboy is purchased for lookin at the pretty girls not for elaborating on Foreign Policy, the Gold Standard or discussing the Culture War on the minds and souls of Americans. Why in the world would you think that Ron Paul would grant those promoters of counter culture an interview? Wake up and smell the coffee cooking. Real warriors for freedom don't beg hat in hand to have the best champion of True American Christian values interviewed by a bunch of nihilists at Playboy. Ever hear the saying: "The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend"? Just because the Governor of New Mexico, a Gig Gov Bozo for Club CFR, is interviewed, doesn't convert into instant votes for Paul. The clowns that buy playboy will likely not even vote, or if they do they'll vote for Hellary.
archtoplee
There is no place in the bible that mandates Christian support..
In the New Testament there is no place that tells Christians to support Isreal with guns, bombs etc.. Not one verse.. In fact the bible calls Christians the new Jerusalem.. It is in the Body of Christ.. Not in a Temple.. nor in Palastine but in the people which make up the Christian faithful.
This is why I do not support Isreal as a nation.. Christians should support every nation and every person.. even thier enemies.. People that hit you, steal from you etc..Jesus did not attack the people who took him in the Garden?? He did not try to attack Rome.... He let them take him, Torture him and kill him.. and I bet if he could have..he would have told them he loved them... oh yeh he did.. "Forgive them for they know not what they have done"..
Most of the conservitive base have it all wrong...compleatly backwards.. Pasters have not done their jobs..sad really..
Ron Paul is right on!
Christians support Ron Paul
There are alot of Christians who support Ron Paul and Israel. They do not need to divide people.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EZEKIEL33/
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.