Ron Paul’s Absurd ‘Golden Rule’

Pages: 1 2

Congressman Ron Paul showed in the January 17th Fox News debate why he would be so dangerous as president and commander-in-chief. He believes, in a twist on the Judeo-Christian Golden Rule, that our Islamist enemies are only assaulting us because we assaulted them first. Sorry, appeaser-in-chief Paul, but the Koran commands devout jihadists to use whatever means are necessary to destroy all infidels, no matter what we have done or plan to do to them.

As part of an exchange involving the appropriate response to al Qaeda and their Taliban supporters, Paul exclaimed:

My point is, if another country does to us what we do others, we’re not going to like it very much. So I would say that maybe we ought to consider a golden rule in — in foreign policy. Don’t do to other nation… what we don’t want to have them do to us.

Paul even offered the absurd analogy comparing our killing of the mass murderer Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil, where he was provided a sanctuary, to the Communist Chinese government deciding to go after a Chinese dissident seeking freedom in the United States. Newt Gingrich properly labeled this comparison “utterly irrational.”

Ron Paul may have some good ideas on reining in the power of the Federal Reserve and on the need to control federal spending. But he is clueless in dealing with our Islamist enemies. He either does not understand or refuses to believe the ideology that drives them. They want to kill us because our nation is governed on the basis of principles derived from Judeo-Christian beliefs including the true Golden Rule. They hate us because of who we are, not for any alleged harm that we’ve ever caused them.

Only three years after the United States won its independence, when there was no Jewish state for Muslims to resent, and no American troops on Muslim soil, Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, and John Adams, then U.S. Ambassador to Britain, learned from a Muslim ambassador to Britain why the Muslims were so hostile towards Americans. Jefferson and Adams were attempting to negotiate a peace treaty with the Muslim “Barbary pirates,” an exercise that ultimately proved to be futile.

As Jefferson and Adams later reported to Congress, the Muslim ambassador explained to them that Islam

Was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.

All that Ron Paul needs to do is take a look at the Koran itself, cited by that Muslim ambassador more than 200 years ago, to understand the source of the  jihadist ideology that we are still fighting today.

Here is a sample:

• “Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them.” (Koran, 2:191)

• “O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other.” (Koran 5:51)

• “Shall I tell you who, in the sight of God, deserves a yet worse retribution than these? Those [the Jews] whom God has rejected and whom He has condemned, and whom He has turned into monkeys and pigs because they worshiped the powers of evil.” (Koran 5:60)

• “I will inspire terror into the hearts of unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them.” (Koran, 8:12)

• “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”

•  “[F]ight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Christians and Jews], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Koran, 9:29)

• “When we decide to destroy a population, we send a definite order to them who have the good things in life and yet sin. So that Allah’s word is proven true against them, then we destroy them utterly.” (Koran, 17:16-17)

Islamist apologists argue that the Koran also contains verses calling for tolerance and understanding.  If the verses written while Muhammad was living in Mecca, where he and his followers were then surrounded by much stronger non-Muslim populations, constituted the entirety of the Koran, they may have had a point. However, the milder verses were superseded by the far more war-like and intolerant verses written during Muhammad’s time in Medina where he successfully launched his jihad of conquests against non-believers, especially against Jews who refused to convert to Islam. Moreover, when one examines the real meaning of jihad according to Muhammad from other primary sources such as Bukhari (the Hadith, which are oral traditions relating to the words and deeds of Muhammad), the fact is that 97% of the jihad references are about war and 3% are about so-called inner struggle.

Pages: 1 2

  • Rynosaur

    War-mongering journalists and leaders are the problem with this world. Attacking countries that don't attack us, may make sense to you, but is the true absurdity! Your war profiteering positions are the ones that lack reason and logic. How about we just bomb every country then? Let's get it over with, and destroy this country, because there is little left about it that is great.

  • Mike

    While having this discussion with a friend, he said this about the "golden rule" and its application….

    "In order for the classification of "self defense" to be legitimate it has to meet the criteria of Ad Jus Bellum. Nothing that has been done since 2001 has met that criteria set down by Christendom of Western civilization. Read Saint Augustine.

    Jus ad bellum. Study it. Learn it. It was the primary reason why the writers of the United States Constitution delegated the authority of Declaring War to the Representatives in Congress. They came form Europe where for centuries monarchs, executive magistrates who became heads too big for the body had flouted the rules of jus ad bellum"

  • fuzzywzhe

    You want to see something absurd?

    This is what Mitt Romney was saying back in 2007. He's the "credible" candidate:

  • alanweberman

    Ron Paul has a lot of loyal followers – so did Hitler.

    • Flipside


  • Rynosaur

    Even more so, this author must think he knows more about foreign policy than experts like Michael Scheuer, Gen. Wesley Clark, Lt. Col. Anthony Schaffer, Christopher Trimble, and Chalmers Johnson, which he doesn't. They all agree with Paul's policies, and have actually spent time in the field overseas. Perhaps this author should stop pretending to know what he's talking about.

  • Sara

    The Golden Rule, like the Constitution, is good in theory it seems, but much to impractical for practice.

    • Flipside

      Are you joking?

      • Sara

        That is the conclusion of this article and the conclusion of many people. Of course, they'd never say this outright. In fact, they often say the opposite, then vote opposite of what they say.

  • Sho

    I think in this country we have forgotten that we have a strong military is so that we don’t have to go to war not to push our way of life around the world. Why is it so crazy to say don’t do to other nations what we don’t want done to us? Why is it so crazy to say we only go to war when it is a legitimate war? Look at the whole Iran issue the top of Israeli intelligence said Iranis not a threat to Israel, the Israeli PM said when he spoke to the congress “we do not need American troops to defend Israel we can defend ourselves”! Yet we are really pushing for this war! Provoking Iran to take the first shot so we can spin it and say they attacked us first and we are just defending ourselves! It has nothing to do with a nuke it has everything to do with a gas pipeline deal that they are putting together that was going to go to Hallibuton (do the research)! Yet no one wants to connect the dots! Wake up already!!! China has already said they will halo Iran if attacked, Russia has navy ships off the coast of Syria ready to go. Are we crazy it would start WWIII!!!! And the only candidate that wants peace gets booed by SC? What a bunch of brainwashed fools. Remember this is the same “intelligence” that said Iraq had WMDs fool me once ok, but not twice!!! Wake up America we will not have a chance like this again for Ron Paul to start change!!!

  • WhoKilled999

    • a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing: a cult of personality surrounding the leaders.

    • Sara

      Sort of like the Cult of Big Government or the Cult of War?

  • Mozarker2

    So, you really like Jesus except for that "Love Thy Neighbor" thing.

    I'm a true Christian and I'm voting for Ron Paul.

  • KittenJuggler

    This has got to be the most anti-semetic article I have ever read. There are Muslim Americans too. Do you realize this?

  • elzhi

    'They hate us because of who we are, not for any alleged harm that we’ve ever caused them'
    – what a ridiculous assertion

  • Tim Barton

    Obviously, Joseph Klein, you are a tool. Had you properly done your research and read the Koran, you would have found contradictions to your own references. The very first quote is misrepresented by paraphrasing… It’s not even the right passage. Paragraph 2:191 reads, “Fight for the sake of God (Allah) those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love aggressors.” The paragraph you intended to quote (Koran 2:192) reads, “Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is more grievous than bloodshed. But do not fight them within the precincts of the Holy Mosque unless they attack you there; if they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they mend their ways, know that God is forgiving and merciful.” The part about “from which they drove you” should mimic exactly what Dr. Paul was trying to say. Islam is not a hateful religion.

    • Joseph Klein

      Sahih International
      2:191: "And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers."

      Note the words "wherever you overtake them" shich come before the words "and expel them from wherever they have expelled you." They would not be necessary in a purely defense-oriented verse.

      The first sentence in your own quote of Koran 2:192 says it all: "Slay them wherever you find them." And you didn't have anything to say about the other Koran references in the article.

      • Flipside

        Something is up when you quote the Koran more than a mullah.

  • Douglas Ford

    Uhhh, the golden rule still applies I think. No matter how you twist it, the principle was designed to cover all aspects of life. You can say well others don't follow that same rule, but if you are a practicing Christian, killing is wrong. I think the idea that we don't do to other countries as we don't want them to do to us is a fine principal for Dr. Paul to propose in that regards. It's funny, I see so many of my ultra conservative friends preaching how war is necessary and killing is ok "if"… But there is no "if", if you kill someone, you committed a mortal sin, and that is pretty unacceptable in my book, you know the bible. The book most of you christian's don't actually follow what it says, instead you just do what you want and justify why it was ok in that one rare circumstance that will never happen again (hypocrites). And most other religions view killing as a horrible act that should never be committed too (and in the USA our society throws people in prison if they kill someone, yet it's ok if they are marked by our government as the bad guys, which is wrong in itself, that people kill them). Killing people only causes more wars.

    I am a conservative, I view minimal government involvement as a good thing (more government equals more problems I've began to notice throughout my lifetime), and I pay over 1/3 my paycheck in taxes (money I wish I had a say in how it was used if I was funding government programs. And of course I wish I payed much less than what I do). I think we need to get back to our roots until we get our finances back on track with regards to the federal government. We can't afford X government program and that program is not 100% necessary, cut it. I do not think we need to cut social security, else the government gives me back all our money, so they need to quit threatening us with that. I think we need to stop funding all these wars on borrowed money making us appear to be a much smaller and weaker country then China (not cool).

  • Todd

    I agree lets first kill all brown people in the middle east, we have only killed about a million in the last decade.. (I feel so safe now) then all the black people in Africa, then we can work on those groups in the rest of the world… Let the bombs fly… I founders would be ashamed of what we have become…

  • lisa179

    It seems as though this author's best-case scenario would be for the U.S. to pre-emptively hunt down and take out every last Muslim based on what's written in the Koran. Sorry Joseph Klein, we don't have the money to wage these kinds of religious crusades on your behalf. We're $14 TRILLION in debt as it is now. Up until last month, we've been spending $6.7 BILLION a month on the Middle East, the majority of that in Afghanistan. I believe that Americans are ready to come home and build up our own country again. Defend our borders, rather than waging war around the world. The world is ready for Ron Paul.

    • Joseph Klein

      Typical RonPaul troll – I never laid out any such scenario nor do I advocate any pre-emptive war. But what is wrong with strong economic sanctions against Iran? Paul opposes any sanctions or even the passage in Congress of a mild resolution standing up for the rights of persecuted Iranian citizens. And as Paul admitted, he did vote for the 2001 authorization to go after al Qaeda even though there was no formal congressional declaration of war as Paul has frequently demanded.

      • lisa179

        Joseph, I am absolutely no troll and am happy to engage in conversation with you. I'll simply tell you what I took out of your article. Based on this article, you strike me as someone who likes to stir up fear. The article came across to me as excessively paranoid and even bigoted – targeting all Muslims, based on what is written in the Koran. You say you don't advocate pre-emptive war — but you quote someone in your article who suggests it's unwise for other countries to leave Muslim countries alone. I believe we've misguidedly mucked around in the Middle East for far too long, with far too many negative consequences. I think we should back off, not assume that we know what's best for every country on the planet and get our own house back in order — because it's in wild disarray and we are spending ourselves into oblivion. I believe that the biggest threat we face in the United States is not Islam, but our own mismanaged budget and the way we are dwindling our resources by meddling in everyone else's business.

  • mrbean

    Ron Paul is one of Islam's useful idiots. Islam enjoys a large and influential ally amongst non-Muslims. A new generation of “ Useful idiots” that Lenin identified living in liberal democracies who furthered the work of Communism. This new generation of Useful Idiots also live in liberal democracies but serves the cause of Islamofascism another virulent form of totalitarian ideology. Useful Idiots blame America first and sanitise Islam simply by ignoring Islam's followers atrocities against all of western civilization.

  • Frank

    You do realize that the Old Testament (which also makes up the Jewish Torah) is filled with stuff commanding that Christians do the same thing, right? This is the 21st century, if you still believe we are fighting the crusades, then hop into the nearest DeLorean and try not to crash into a building on your way to the 13th century! This religious argument has been beaten to death already and holds zero water because, as I'va lready said, the Old Testament tells Christians and Jews to kill non-believers as well.

    • Joseph Klein

      But it is the Islamist jihadists who are still acting on 13th century and older dogma that has resulted in killings of Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and less "devout" Muslims all over the world in the 21st century. Take off your rose colored glasses.

  • saywhaaa

    So i guess that "Blessed are the peacemakers" "Turn the other cheek" "Do unto others" only apply to non muslims huh?

    What a steaming pile of reaking hypocrisy.

  • CzarChazm

    I really enjoyed this explication of candidate Paul's flawed perspective on global politics using bigoted and racist straw man scenarios. I specifically applaud the use of the muslim holy book as justification for extremist behavior, as opposed to more grounded (read: boring!) associations, such as US tendancies to use the Middle East as a sandbox for military and intelligence involvement stemming from the Cold War era.

    Keeping the argument to the Koran serves two very important points. One, it immediately creates barriers to divide people into categories. And everybody knows you can't hate a group of people until you first separate them into groups in the first place! Two, by anchoring those groups to ideological differences, you create a perpetual system from which there is no need to explore the fundamental flaws of your straw man positions.

    • CzarChazm

      Of course, if what you say is true, then shouldn't all people be driven by their basic dogmatic foundatins?

      I mean, I'm a Christian. And when I see my neighbor mowing his lawn, I ask myself two very important questions: is it Sunday, and is he a homosexual? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I must follow the teachings of the Bible and end his life for the good of humanity… no? I don't do that? That's right, I don't, because I live in a stable environment. And I might argue that many people from the Middle East nations don't have a stable environment. And I might posit that extremism is an action borne from desperation in a land largely manipulated by foreign intrigue.

      But I won't stand by those thoughts. I would just be blowing smoke, and I wouldn't want those straw men to catch fire.

  • Really?

    Republican vs libertarian here fun and I get to sit back and laugh.

  • Scott McMillan

    What a shame that this lawyer Paul Klein makes such unsupported arguments about.Islam and Moslems. Incorrect citations to his record, and the balance out of context. It is clear that Attorney Klein’s heart is still very much in the Old Testament. He ignores the centuries of tolerance that Moslems have extended jews living in their lands. Lawyers like Klein give the rest of the profession a bad name.

    • Joseph Klein

      See my reply to Juan below. I quoted Ron Paul in context and linked to the transcript of the last debate. The quotes from the Koran, Thomas Jefferson and the prominent Islamic scholar Sayyid Qutb are accurate. Comments like yours expose only your ignorance.

    • Ennis

      "Tolerence"? Do I really need to tell you about the Jizya?

  • juan

    this article is anti semetic And raceist against muslims. The holy quran promotes not fighting you piece of garbage. u Should be ashamed of yourself for being a raceist.

    • Joseph Klein

      Your stupid name-calling does not change the truth. Read the Koran. Read what prominent Islamic scholars such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Sayyid Qutb whom I quoted have had to say about Islam and sharia law. Speak, as I have, with Muslims and former Muslims such as Nonie Darwish who have lived under the yoke of sharia. Or at least read what they have to say. You would be surprised what you may find if you did some research of your own instead of spouting nonsense.

  • Joe Doe

    Convince a slave that he is free and he will fight for his slavery. And ignorance is a bliss. It's as simple as that.

    Ron is far from perfect and I don't share all of his believes, but he is by far the best candidate for a role of the president for a long, long time. Even if he wins, he can't do anything by himself alone… The hope is very slim indeed.

  • TDA

    ok so why does Michael Scheuer ex CIA head of counter terrorism endorse RP ? AlsoLt. Col. Anthony Schaffer says ron pauls defense ideas are the most realistic. Also for over 100 years we had a non interventionist foreign policy until after WW2.
    Worked for all that time and we just toss the winning formula because of world pressure.
    Also the Israelis don't want our help and they said Iran is no threat to them..
    Its insanity what the other repubs are saying just nuts.

    • Ennis

      "ok so why does Michael Scheuer ex CIA head of counter terrorism endorse RP ? "
      Because like Ron paul He's a little f##ked in the head.

      "BECK: Do you really, honestly believe that we have come to a place to where those very senior people in the highest offices of the land, Congress and the White House, really will not do the right thing in the end, that they won’t see the error of their ways?

      SCHEUER: No, sir, they will not. Not — the only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States. Because it’s going to take a grassroots, bottom-up pressure, because these politicians prize their office, prize the praise of the media and the Europeans."

  • Alex Kovnat

    Here's a question for Ron Paul: If the Arabo-Islamic (Muslim) peoples are hostile to the USA because of our Imperialism, how do you explain the angry behavior of musclemen in Scandinavian countries which have no history of imperialistic behavior?

  • Joseph

    Our government usurped a democratically elected government in Iran in 1952-53 and replaced it with the Shaw, a dictatorship which subjugated it's people and committed horrible atrocities under our government's protective watch until the people finally revolted and overthrew them. Don't you think those people, might have legitimate reason to hate our government?

    During the Iraq-Iran war, with the help of Osama Bin Laden, our government subsidized BOTH countries with military aid to encourage a protracted bloodbath. Don't you think those Iraqi and Iranian people have some reason to hate our government?

    Our government occupied Muslim sacred land, controlling the Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East, destroyed the homes and crops of various peoples. Don't you think Muslims have reason to hate the occupation of their sacred lands?

    Our government gives foreign aid to Dictators who use the money to prop up their oppressive regimes. It was only after years of US subsidized abuse that the Egyptians finally overthrew their government. Don't you think the citizens of those countries have a reason to resent our government?

    Our government is currently bombing innocent people in Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, and Iran.
    We have also bombed (previous to this war) Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Yemen, and several more countries dating back as far as 1950 (all undeclared wars by the way). Don't you think the people who suffered under these attacks have reason to hate our government?

    (depending on which studies you read) Our military killed anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqi CIVILIANS during the Iraq war! Do those people have justification in hating our Government for the genocide they suffered?

    Is our government justified in killing 100,000 Iraqi civilians because of the actions of 19 hijackers (almost all of whom come from Saudi Arabia, a nation for whom we consider an ally)?

    Unless we put the actions of OUR government into perspective with how the Middle East perceives our intervention, we will never be able to minimize the resurgence of "terrorist attacks". Middle Eastern Terrorism is motivated by our actions overseas, our occupation overseas, not because we are free Christians. The Middle Eastern people just naturally conclude that Christians are dangerous because it is a Christian nation that is murdering, subjugating, occupying and blowing up their lands. Hatred of Christianity is a by-product of our actions, not the cause of theirs.

    • Ennis

      I'll repeat Saddam Hussein’s weapons mostly came from countries that would later go on to oppose the later Iraq war. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 57% came from Russia, 13% from France and 12% from China. Out of all the countries that backed Saddam only 1% of that aid came from united States The main opponents of the Iraq war supplied over 80 times as many weapons as the main advocates of the war.

      Also what the hell do you mean "During the Iraq-Iran war, with the help of Osama Bin Laden,"?

      "Our government occupied Muslim sacred land, controlling the Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East, destroyed the homes and crops of various peoples. Don't you think Muslims have reason to hate the occupation of their sacred lands? "

      What the hell are you talking about? There aren't any American troops in Israel and there weren't any American anywhere near Mecca or Medina. Also the nation of Saudi Arabia is not considered to be holy land in the Musim, Mecca and Medina are.

      "Our government gives foreign aid to Dictators who use the money to prop up their oppressive regimes. It was only after years of US subsidized abuse that the Egyptians finally overthrew their government. Don't you think the citizens of those countries have a reason to resent our government?"

      That another thing, you people always seem to act as if America is the only one that fund middle eastern regimes. What about Russia, what about China? Tell me why Islamists don't seem to go after these countries.

      "Our military killed anywhere from 100,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqi CIVILIANS during the Iraq war! Do those people have justification in hating our Government for the genocide they suffered?"
      First off the number has definitively NOT been a million, second the the military did not kill 100,000 Iraqs. Wanna know who did? The so called "Iraqi Resistence"

      "Our government is currently bombing innocent people in Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, and Iran."
      Uh I'm Sorry Iraq, Iran, libya, currently? Did you just get out of a coma or something?

      "We have also bombed (previous to this war) Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Yemen, and several more countries dating back as far as 1950 (all undeclared wars by the way). Don't you think the people who suffered under these attacks have reason to hate our government?and what about the reasons as to why there as intervention into said countries. Tell me do you think a million ethnic Albanians would be around if the United States didn't bomb yugoslavia, Hell i even remember cheering crowds when Bush went to visit one time

    • Libertyman

      Your studies you quote are faltered…not just by numbers… but by reasoning

      Any deaths occured traditionally lay at the feet of the actions of those who perpitrated the evil acts.

      For example… The totality of deaths in WW2 fall squarely at the feeet of Hitler and his allies.

      The totality of deaths caused by attempted anialation of Isreal… go squarely at the feet of the 5 nations who tried to commit genocide.

      The totallity of deaths in Afganistan go squarely at the feet of the Taliban.

      The totality for the War in Iraq and the reinstallment of hositilties go squarely at the feet of Sadam and his terrorist friends.

      To cast blame in other directions is the act of a sociopath(s). Which is today's left. Because truth is otherwise a trap for them.

      • Ennis

        What a cute comment you left, did you know though that the facts I stated are true?

        • Libertyman

          No they are not true.

          Your figures themselves lend doubt. For example there is a big difference between 100,000 and a million.

          I think the Muslim leadership told us quite clearly in Osma Bin Laden in his NY Times piece. Which seems to be quite different then yours.

          And it is irrelevant, Islam has a propaganda machine that is the envy of Adolf Hitler. It wouldn’t matter if we did not do anything… because they lie to little children and teach hate. They beleive that Jews (and Christians now) use non-beleivers blood to consume. One has just have to read the interviews of Muslims that make it to the other side. They teach little kids to hate. It is called child abuse.

          and I bet you thought the genocide of 2.5 million Christians in Sudan were the fault of the Christians themselves … long before any military intervention.

          Your thought pattern doesn’t match your timeline (or Islam’s timeline).

          BTW… would you justify Christians and Jews to commit genocide because there Holy Shrines were destroyed hmmmm. (which is a lot more prevalent).

  • Bob

    Ron Paul is right. We need to stop policing the world and worry about our own country. Do you think we will ever get out of debt? The answer is not if we are giving aide to other countries … AND THEN BORROWING MORE FOR US FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. We need a president that will stand up and fight for the rights of AMERICANS, and not try to take them away. Romney admitted he would have signed the NDAA and what do you think that and a superior military will do???? I mean holy **** people wake up. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who knows and understands the constitution.

    • Libertyman

      Bob… the reason for our debt in unconstitutional spending. 14 trillion just on the war on poverty. Surely a Ron Paul supporter is not gonna blame Constitutional spending like the military without addressing unconstitutional spending first.

      If he does (or is supporters do) his premise that he has outlined has shown him a hypocrite.

      RE: Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution

  • Jaime

    After 2 tours in Iraq at the height of fighting we were still able to find allies in the a bar province. Most of those folks were ordinary people trying to get by and survive the daily onslaught of bombs and small arms fire. Many wanted to help the coalition but were afraid of retribution. And it did happen frequently. When we invaded I never thought there was a huge WMD threat because our training was not inline with the use of wmds. I mean we trained for it but not as one should expect going into such enviroenment. Yes there were a lot of extremists from around the world fighting, but many were nationalists that wanted us out, including the foreign extremists but they worked together because we were seen as a common enemy. Ron Paul does not want to diminish national defense but all these neo conservatives want is to find or create enemies to pick a fight with. Many of these jerks wrap themselves in the American flag and send guys like me and my fellow brothers to destroy nations, dismantle governments, reinstall governments and rebuild the nations that we destroy in per suit of democracy and national defense. We need people that understand the value of HUMAN LIFE not just American life, that way we can preserve the latter.

  • shawn4films

    1 – The brave men and women of our military overwhelmingly support Ron Paul (you know how overwhelming their support of Paul is). They support Paul because of his safe and sane foreign policy. Every time you write a cowardly-war mongering-blood thirsty article like this you are greatly insulting our brave men and women of the military. Then after insulting them you point your finger for them to march off to go invade other sovereign nations for a few more decades. First you insult them, then you tell them to go die in support oil hungry empire building.

    2 – Blowback exits even five year olds understand this. If a bully on the play ground goes around hitting all the kids and taking all their toys eventually all the kids will gang up on the bully and beat him up. Since world war 2 America has behaved as a global bully. 911 was blowback from our oil hungry interference in the middle east.

    3 – Former CIA bin Laden hunter Michael Scheuer endorses Ron Paul and he says Rep. Paul has the strongest stance on national defense.

  • Andrew

    I'm sure the fact that Ron Paul receives over 2.5 times more money from the military than any other candidate combined shows that his ideas on foreign policy sure are nuts. Yes, that is sarcasm.

  • dejdt

    Very dangerous article. The writer should be ashamed to spread intolerance and hate.

    Most Muslims are moderates and will not take those verses literary, as most moderate Christians won't either with the following examples:

    “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” (1 Timothy 2:12)

    “Do not allow a sorceress to live.” (Exodus 22:18)

    “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.” (1 Peter 2:18)

    • Joseph Klein

      I never said that most Muslims take the jihadist verses literally. But enough do to be concerned. And those now ruling Iran who believe in these verses and accelerating the return of the 12th Imam getting a nuclear bomb is something any sane person should be concerned about.

  • Rbetieh

    I reserve any value judgement on this article until the Author takes the time to explain to his Audience the True interpretation of the golden rule.

  • Guest

    Why are we in such a rush to abandon our own principles under the excuse of anothers?

  • Joseph Klein

    The Just War doctrine, for starters. I found this article dealing with the Just War doctrine in the context of today's world and the reality of global terrorism very enlightening.

    Also, the choice is not between war and doing nothing. Ron Paul opposes means short of war to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat, such as any economic sanctions at all.

    • Flipside

      I am sure Anders Breivik believes this theory.

  • garrison fink

    How often is Canada attacked by Jihadists?…………………

    What a joke of an article.

  • Guest

    There is only one thing I don't understand. If as you say, the Muslim's highest order is to kill jewish people, why haven't the Iranians started with the Christian minority in their own country?

    • Guest

      I apologize. I meant if their highest order is to kill jewish and christian people, why haven't they started by killing the jewish and christian minorities in Iran? Hopefully that will clarify. Awaiting your response. Thank you.

  • Sara

    Dear author, have you read the Old Testament?

  • Daniel

    Ah, the typical Bush BS that they 'hate us because we have freedom'. Hey NeoCon- have you noticed we don't get attacked by Indonesia, even though they are Muslim? Know why? Because we don't have troops on their land. The Koran rhetoric only works because we have troops in Saudi Arabia.

  • Guy

    I think it's funny that this site bashes Ron Paul, but also put advertisements for his money bomb on their front page. Go figure…

  • 1776liberty

    The primary abhorrent aspect that most people reject with racism is being a bigot and for all you people who do not remember what that is:
    : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

    Well what we see in this article is the opinion of a bigot as it can be clearly seen there is an irrational hatred and intolerance toward Muslims. As we have seen from the past dealing with bigots it that there is no ability to reason with them as they have a closed mind and ideology that will not permit a reasonable discussion as their closed minds are already made up and no level of reason, honesty, or truth is capable of breaking through to the reasonable mind of a bigot.

    The ADL says they abhor bigots with respect to people who defame other people of the hebrew faith, the NAACP says they abhor bigots with respect to people who defame other people who are of the black race etc. etc.

    So why do people who are bigots against people of Islam considered worth paying attention too? They are not worth the effort and it is a fools game to play with an bigoted idiot as they are not interested in logic, truth, honesty, or any other human quality that respects the rights of others.

    They are uneducated and crude individuals who only seek to create conflict and division where ever they go, in what ever they do and in every word they utter.

    The level of vitriol expressed in this article is not only shameful to the author and the publishers as it is a blatantly subhuman in every aspect. It parades the disease of being a bigoted minded person as respectable when it is clearly not and should be condemned at every point by free thinking non bigoted people who believe every one has a right to exists even the bigots as even with their dysfunctional closed minds may one day have something useful to contribute to making this a better world.

    So would the author enjoy a bigotted personal attack against his racial or religious origins would he think that fair and reasonable? No I think not. What is the purpose of a bigoted statement? I sometimes has the effect of causing the people being attacked to respond to the bigot attack with even more bigoted statements and anger sometimes called blow back. Sometimes this will cause other people to create unjust opinions about the person or other innocent people of their origins, race, or religious creed that previously did not exist before. Then the bigot can say "they hate me or us because of so and so…they are bigots. When it can be reasonably seen the problem started with the original bigoted statements.

  • Jesse

    The Golden Rule in Judeo-Christianity wasn't designed to be applied only to others of the same faith, that's ridiculous. People, regardless of faith, are still just human beings, animals governed by the same drives and instincts by virtue of belonging to the same species. The drives that drive those Jihadists are the same as those that drive us. 90% of these guys don't even know what the hell 9/11 is.

    Harvard schooled lawyer, that should mean nothing after someone with commons sense reads this. It's sentiments like this that are destroying America.

  • soserious

    By Herman Goering —
    "Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood­. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorsh­ip, or a parliament­, or a communist dictatorsh­ip. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

    Courtesy of one of the head Nazi's if you didn't recognize his name. Eerily enough, your article is amazingly reminiscent. Thanks for making me embarrassed to be American because this is one of the most bigoted expressions I've heard justified by a news company logo in a long time. And I'm well traveled, having lived in Saudi Arabia, so that says something. Its good to say it so your point can be openly debated, but I hope you realize how embarrassing it is for Americans to realize such close mindedness still exists.

  • the norm

    fear of being attacked. what a joke. personally i fear that those who brought down the 3 towers that are still at-large. before we invaded afganistan, the talliban said they would turn over bin laden if the us would provide proof. it is my opinion that we were attacked by terrorists, however i question who exactly were these terrorists.

    evidence provided by the people about 911 is different from what the media tells us. you can say what ever you want about my comments but that wont change the facts provided. you want the facts, do research. i promise you, (which i never do), you will be shocked and confused and ask why.

    • Duratma_Gandhi

      Pakistan has long demanded proof, evidence for many of the terrorist attacks that groups it's fathered has showered down on India. And when the spineless Indian govt does provide proof, evidence, Pakistan asks for more proof & the source of the information. Imagine what will happen if India were to reveal the sources – the HUMINT teams inside Pakistan – simple, those intel-assets will be destroyed. With the assets being destroyed all of the material evidence will be termed fake – and we'll be back to square one.
      The Taliban demanding proof for handing over OBL is just the same tactic. I think any administration – whether it's Pakistan or Taliban or India or US or Israel will do the same thing. It will ask for proof or evidence – stall the process – and shy away from being seen as capitulating to a foreign power – it's just simple-plain politics. This will not be true in case the 2 administrations are in good relations – like the USA & UK, or USA & Japan or USA & Australia. Suppose USA had to request extradition of someone from the UK – say Anjem Choudhary – do you think UK will stall? Of course not. If the US judiciary provides the required documentation, Anjem will be on his way to the USA to face trail & be sentenced (if convicted). Suppose Anjem was in Iran or China – the story will be different. USA will have a hard time getting him to stand trial – because neither Iran nor China will be as amicable to the USA as UK is.
      You can believe what you want to – but the truth might be something far more stranger than that. Have you imagined a rogue CIA or NSA agent working in collusion with Wahabbi pay-masters from Saudi Arabia that effectively was fooled into committing the travesty of 9/11? Conspiracy is a slippery slope – and once we're sliding no one knows where grey ends & black begins. Having the likes of Black-ops and double-agents has its rewards – but it also has its disadvantages.

  • Duratma_Gandhi

    Joseph Klein would like for me to pay 40% or even 80% of my income as taxes so he can have my American brothers & sisters in the Military go half-way around the globe to kill Muslims. That's pretty much what this balderdash implies.
    Similar to how a drug-abuser or an alcoholic needs to be steadily & persistently weaned out of their addiction, rational-sensible-humans have to wean out Muslims from the lie of Islam. Killing a drug-addict or an alcoholic is not the answer; sending in cocaine-addict to kill a meth-addict is not an answer either. Force is simply not going to work.
    Here's an idea, Mr Klein. Please stop writing articles, join the Military – or better, create a Private Militia and go to Saudi Arabia & bomb the hell out of Mecca & Medina masjids? BUT for Pete's sake – please do so using your own money or others who are willing to contribute to this genocide of yours.
    I'm from India – and we've still got internal refugees (Kashmiri Pandits) that were ousted from Kashmir by barbaric beasts from the North-West of our border. I don't support those barbarians or the worse-r morons who fund them – not by a long shot no. I'm all for defense of my homeland – for the defense of Kashmir and for the extermination of barbaric beasts from among humans. My only concern is – this extermination needs to be humane, sensible, rational. We simply can't go to Kashmir & kill all Muslims – that's not what Rational Human beings do.
    Be rational, be a human, for once. You CAN NOT get rid of barbaric beasts by becoming one yourself. The "extermination" I'm talking about is not physical & doesn't use violence. It's ideological & uses thoughts.
    Please try *thinking* for a change; please don't be a radical anti-Muslim – because that's not what's going to solve anything. The opposite to radical is the moderate.
    The opposite to fanatical extermists is not another set of fanatical extremists against the former; it's the sane, non-fanatical sensible humans. You CAN NOT defeat barbarism & fanaticism by becoming one yourself; it doesn't work that way.
    For all those other morons who'll think I'm some rag-head from India – go & look at my comments on; I'm as much against Islamic ideology as the next person. Like Dr. Sina says violence is simply not an option; you'll only end up with a huge blood-letting carnage. Ideological & rational steps are the need of the hour – not military & drones.

    • Joseph Klein

      You obviously did not read my article or did not understand it. I didn't advocate for war as the only alternative. But the choice is not to do nothing and pretend the problem of an Iranian regime led by fanatics having nuclear arms at its disposal is nothing to worry about. Paul has opposed all economic sanctions, for example. Nor did I say that all Muslims are radical. I specifically referred to al Qaeda and the Iranian leaders as threats, not a billion plus Muslims (many of whom have been victimized themselves by the jihadists). Next time, follow your own advice and "try 'thinking' for a change."

      • Duratma_Gandhi

        Thanks for responding, Mr. Klein.
        "Please try *thinking* for a change" – that's not an advise; it's a request. Hope you understand & appreciate the difference.
        USSR at the peak of the Cold War had, what, no nuke missiles? How about India, my nation, for example? What about Pakistan – not one but many people have expressed concerns of (not *if* but) when Pakistani nukes will float around to Lashkar-e-Taiba or Jaish-e-Mohammed or one of the many such groups.
        This use of fear to coerce rational beings to behave like sheeple is not something new – it's neither something that's only used in the past few years / decades. More than 1500 years ago, a barbarian in Arabia used this fear-tactic to divide a diverse population [yes, a very diverse population that had some 300 Gods]. He used the fear of hell to ensure some of them went around killing others [ensuring a 20% cut on the loot for himself, of course]. He used the same to destroy the 300 idols. I don't need to tell you who this barbarian is, right?
        Now, an educated, polished set of goons, thugs clad in white-collar suits have taken over the role of the barbaric beast. They also use the same tool – fear – but their bogeyman is not some God or Hell.
        What makes you think Iran having 1 or a few nukes will lead to destruction or annihilation of the USA – when Islamic Republic of Pakistan has 100's of nukes right now. If anything there's more public support in Pakistan to use a nuke & destroy the 3 evil entities: India, Israel & USA. Compare that to the public anger in Iran against its religious fascist rulers.
        Economic sanctions, like the ones imposed on India & Pakistan, will not yield anything positive. This, in a college or school environment, is called bullying. A group of big bullies threatening a newbie freshman into behaving in a certain manner – that's the text-book definition of bullying. See where sanctions got the USA in Pakistan? Today a huge majority of Pakistanis hate Americans – and the Chinese are their best friends. Do you have any idea how much of a past USA shares with Pakistan – and how the entire ISI (Pakistani spy agency) was qualitatively improved by CIA & others? Economic sanctions are nothing but precursors to a more strong military action; and if you fail to follow it up, then economic sanctions simply are ineffective: exhibit A: India & Pakistan.
        In my humble opinion, supporting chicken-hawks is just about the most senseless thing to do – especially for those of us who actually understand & appreciate the dangers posed by Islamic ideology (& not just the radical aspects of it).
        Once again, I do appreciate the time you've taken to respond. I hope you're able to see why Dr Paul's concepts are not as wrong as some in the lame-stream media paint it. I urge you to search Youtube for "Ron Paul predictions" – where you'll see for yourself how Dr. Paul was able to identify the events of 2001 thru 2012 back in the 80's & 90's and later.

  • ghendric

    Ron Paul is telling us the same thing that ex CIA analyst Michael Scheuer has said from day one. Maybe you people should start paying attention. I think the CIA guy knows what he's talking about, don't you? Ignorance about what's going on will be the downfall of this nation.. WAKE UP!!!!!!!!

  • Sandee

    Joseph Klein–And you're signing up to serve in the U.S. military when????? So, our active duty men and women overwelmingly support Ron Paul–more so than Obama, more so than all the other Republican candidates COMBINED. I guess they don't know any better, do they? I defer to them in these matters….they've seen the situation up close and personal, and I would DARE call any of them "appeasers" or "dangerous".

  • etieseler

    Yeah, stupid Golden Rule. I should be able to go to my neighbors house and eat their food and sleep with his wife in his bed. I should also be able to take his money, and slap his kids if they say anything about how the don't want me there. BUT HELL NO HE CANT DO THAT TO ME AND MY HOUSE! I love this country very very very much, which is why I want us to remain independent, but just because I have pride for America doesn't mean America can do what ever the hell it wants and every one of the 5.5 billion people in the rest of the world must love it, or else they must die. Jesus Christ, can we not get along with people? If you actually open your eyes and ears for a moment, and take a listen to those threats that are against us, then you would hear them say: "We are going to keep killing Americans *as long as they are on our soils*". You will hear them say that they will fight till the bitter end until each and everyone on our lands are dead. Now go ahead and be-little me, but know that I love this country more than you!

  • Sandee


  • jeff

    This has to be the worst and most ignorant article I've ever read. It's obvious whoever wrote this article is a fool. Just stop for one second and attempt to use that marble rolling around in your skull. If they were here bombing us and killing our people, how would we react? We would be pissed off and probably erase them from the earth. Need I say more? To think they want to bomb and kill us because of their religion is just false. Sounds like the writer of this article is making decisions based on fear instead of morality. Grow up dick.

    • Joseph Klein

      Open your eyes and use whatever gray matter, if any, you might possess. Kuwait, a Muslim country, was attacked by Saddam Hussein in 1990. Muslim couintries joined the coalition fighting to free Kuwait and the military action was over within weeks. Bin Laden did not like the fact that Saudi Arabia rejected his offer to help defend that country and turned against the United States with declarations of war in the 1990's becasue of the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia at the government's invitation, all leading directly to 9/11. The second Iraq war came after 9/11 as well as our retaliation against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

    • Ennis

      "To think they want to bomb and kill us because of their religion is just false."

      Wow just wow

  • Osama Bin Laden

    Al Qaeda is a part of the C.I.A. We Created it. When will America Wake up.

    • Ghostwriter

      Al Qaeda are a bunch of religious fanatics who want their religion to rule over everyone else. Are we all clear on that? Good. Because OBL deserved what he got.