"Ron Paul Is Sole Dissenter From Resolution Supporting Iranian Protests"

[galtgulch]

<<<"Ron Paul Is Sole Dissenter From Resolution Supporting Iranian Protests

Posted June 19th, 2009 by pawnstorm12

Ron Paul Is Sole Dissenter From Resolution Supporting Iranian Protests

By Eric Kleefeld - June 19, 2009, 1:53PM

The House voted 405-1 today for a resolution in support of the Iranian dissidents and condemning the ruling government. And the one man who opposed it was...Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX).

Paul said in his floor speech that he was in "reluctant opposition" to the resolution -- that he of course condemns violence by governments against their citizens. On the other hand, he also doesn't think the American government should act as a judge of every country overseas, and pointed out that we don't condemn countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt that don't even have real elections.

"It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made," Paul said. "I have admired President Obama's cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly."

Paul's statement:

I rise in reluctant opposition to H Res 560, which condemns the Iranian government for its recent actions during the unrest in that country. While I never condone violence, much less the violence that governments are only too willing to mete out to their own citizens, I am always very cautious about "condemning" the actions of governments overseas. As an elected member of the United States House of Representatives, I have always questioned our constitutional authority to sit in judgment of the actions of foreign governments of which we are not representatives. I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.

Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people, but when is the last time we condemned Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the many other countries where unlike in Iran there is no opportunity to exercise any substantial vote on political leadership? It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made. I have admired President Obama's cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly.

I adhere to the foreign policy of our Founders, who advised that we not interfere in the internal affairs of countries overseas. I believe that is the best policy for the United States, for our national security and for our prosperity. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all similar meddling resolutions.

STORY HERE...

http://tpmdc.talkingpoint...">>>

[Chris Grieb]

This is one of the reasons why I am can not be a blind supporter of Dr. Paul. Ayn Rand would have supported the opposition in Iran. I have frequently thought that there is a great deal of Anti-semitism in Libertarian circles so I suspect that the idea of a H bomb over Tel Aviv puts a gleam in some people's eyes which the Iranians want to use.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Chris Grieb

[BaalChatzaf]

<<<"Ron Paul Is Sole Dissenter From Resolution Supporting Iranian Protests

Posted June 19th, 2009 by pawnstorm12

Ron Paul Is Sole Dissenter From Resolution Supporting Iranian Protests

By Eric Kleefeld - June 19, 2009, 1:53PM

The House voted 405-1 today for a resolution in support of the Iranian dissidents and condemning the ruling government. And the one man who opposed it was...Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX).

Paul said in his floor speech that he was in "reluctant opposition" to the resolution -- that he of course condemns violence by governments against their citizens. On the other hand, he also doesn't think the American government should act as a judge of every country overseas, and pointed out that we don't condemn countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt that don't even have real elections.

"It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made," Paul said. "I have admired President Obama's cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly."

Paul's statement:

I rise in reluctant opposition to H Res 560, which condemns the Iranian government for its recent actions during the unrest in that country. While I never condone violence, much less the violence that governments are only too willing to mete out to their own citizens, I am always very cautious about "condemning" the actions of governments overseas. As an elected member of the United States House of Representatives, I have always questioned our constitutional authority to sit in judgment of the actions of foreign governments of which we are not representatives. I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.

Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people, but when is the last time we condemned Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the many other countries where unlike in Iran there is no opportunity to exercise any substantial vote on political leadership? It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made. I have admired President Obama's cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly.

I adhere to the foreign policy of our Founders, who advised that we not interfere in the internal affairs of countries overseas. I believe that is the best policy for the United States, for our national security and for our prosperity. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all similar meddling resolutions.

STORY HERE...

http://tpmdc.talkingpoint...">>>

Had Ron Paul lived in the late 30s he would have looked the other way even knowing what the Nazis were doing. Brave, brave Ron Paul. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. No! That is not right. See evil and just plain ignore it. That is more like it.

Ron Paul, by my reckoning, is an unspeakable abomination.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Chris Grieb]

Ba'al; We are in agreement on this one. Ron Paul's morality is that of the people who watched Viola Luzzio get stabbed to death in New York City and didn't even call the police.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Chris Grieb

[Brant Gaede]

Let's see: If we were to also condemn some other countries then he'd support the resolution? No. That doesn't stop him from using that to condemn, not the Iranian totalitarians but the U.S. Congress.

He seems to be confusing the foreign policy of the Founders with Washington's farewell speech. The U.S. has always interfered abroad to the extent it was able to in its perceived self-interests.

Take him out with a stick.

--Brant

[kiaer.ts]

What is it about anarchism, anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories that makes them go so well together?

[Brant Gaede]

What is it about anarchism, anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories that makes them go so well together?

Do they? If they do I'd have to say irrationality and violation of Occam's razor.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

What is it about anarchism, anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories that makes them go so well together?

The Elders of Zion fit right in with the Bilderberger's, the Free Masons and all the other sinister groups who run the world from behind the scenes.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Chris Grieb]

Aren't the Elders, the Free Masons and the Bilderbergers all the same people?

[Reidy]

No, but they're all controlled by the Illuminati, and they in turn by the Insiders.

[jordanz]

More knee-jerking from "L"ibertarians. Ron Paul is completely wrong on this. Worse for me, the Cato Institute has come out for "moderation". If only Cato would get rid of their dovish foreign policy wing, I could support them again.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/06/16/...silent-on-iran/

[kiaer.ts]

If Congress has no authority to pass a resolution, a mere statement of policy, neither establishing law nor expropriating money, then Paul has no authority himself to express his own druthers, and to put his own words, "Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people," into the record.

He should have abstained and either remained silent or said at most that Congress has no right to pass resolutions, period.

His moralizing on the subject of not moralizing is self-serving hypocitical grandstanding. His complaint, "who are we to know?" shows his unfitness for office, and his moral cravenness.

[Chris Grieb]

Ted; Very well put.

Jordan; Thanks for your good thoughts.

Gulch; No defense of your hero. Some of us have said some strong things about the most "honest" man in Congress. Your position seem to be very close to Dr. Paul in respect to the people of Iran. Why did you post the speech if you don't want to defend it.

[kiaer.ts]

What is it about anarchism, anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories that makes them go so well together?

Do they? If they do I'd have to say irrationality and violation of Occam's razor.

--Brant

My father, a mere Catholic high school graduate, explained it insightfully. Conspiracy theorists are skeptical when faced with overwhelming evidence ("I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.") yet credulous when it comes to the most absurd accusations. ("Whether the [WTC bombing] was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.")

[James Heaps-Nelson]

We have to give the Iranian protesters our unqualified moral support. Paul's position is treason to freedom. It is a grubby kind of moral equivalence that hates the US government so much that he is willing to show a mulish contrariness on one of the few occasions our Congress manages to do something right.

Jim

[ginny]

All right, James!! I, too, would use the word "treason." No one is asking for America to interfere. But to not verbally acknowledge the heroism of the protest against tyranny is despicable. I didn't realize any politician could sink so low. Zeig Heil!

Ginny

[kiaer.ts]

Fox News interviewed a street protester in L.A. who tried to explain to the interviewer that the street protests are not in favor of Mousavi, but are in protest against the regime, that they would have voted for anyone who was not Ahmedinejad. The interviewer didn't get his point, and cut him off. That street protester has a better grasp of the situation than Obama, Paul, the congress, and 98% of the chattering class.

[James Heaps-Nelson]

If we needed a reminder of the sheer evil of the Iranian government:

http://www.wfafi.org/wfafistatement4.htm

Edited June 21, 2009 by James Heaps-Nelson

[galtgulch]

Ted; Very well put.

Jordan; Thanks for your good thoughts.

Gulch; No defense of your hero. Some of us have said some strong things about the most "honest" man in Congress. Your position seem to be very close to Dr. Paul in respect to the people of Iran. Why did you post the speech if you don't want to defend it.

Et al,

As an advocate of individual freedom I sympathize with anyone who finds himself or herself stuck in any kind of dictatorship. The Founders came so close to ensuring the liberty of individuals. Despite having a written Constitution which tried to explicitly limit its powers the government has engaged in egregious power grabs which have grown like weeds. Now that a few of us know just what has gone wrong it is up to us, if we care to do anything about it, to find a way to enlighten our fellow citizens.

Ron Paul is a hero to his supporters. I find things to cheer about him, such as his devotion to the Constitution and his courage in standing up so many times as the sole opponent of a bill which seeks powers not authorized in Article 1 Section 8. He is not totally consistent and I have profound disagreements with his positions in foreign affairs, the rights of a woman to terminate her pregnancy and his bill to declare an unborn to be a "person" from the moment of conception!, to mention a few. His failure to grasp the significance of the Theory of Evolution is an embarrassment as his religiosity in general.

So I would not consider him to be a hero of mine. However he has ignited a pro freedom movement in which educating oneself by reading in the realms of economics, sound money, foreign policy, Constitution, Civil Liberties, Education freedom is understood. His book The Revolution: A Manifesto has a reading list which includes works by Rand, Rothbard, Sennholz, Paterson, etc. Here is a link to it:

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/edu/reading-list.php

Each topic listed also has a lengthly list of books worth reading as well.

So I support the movement.

Whether Ron Paul was correct in his vote on the Congressional resolution is not important. There is a danger that the U.S. might be blamed by the leaders of Iran which might help them hold power over the demonstrators. They might blame us no matter what we do. I am not aware of the thinking of those who voted for the other guy who is also in the establishment there. I gather that even the supreme leader is chosen by a still more secret gang of thugs. I fear that there will be more bloodshed in coming days and beyond. There are private militias who are thought to be worse than the Gestapo. It is inspiring to see these people stand up to the leadership but I doubt that those in power will give it up. I do think they cheated despite their denials. The results were announced two hours after the polls closed and there is no way that 40 million paper ballots were counted at all. It is a farce.

Reminds me of Tiananmen Square. Even the British opened fire on the protesters in India.

Here there is talk of the right wing nuts fearing Obama will take their guns.

Our only hope to restore the Republic is the ballot box and in order for that to happen there has to be a movement in which what we know is passed on to millions and tens of millions.

www.campaignforliberty.com 20Jun 10PM 162,976; 21 Jun 5AM 163,120 So between 10PM last evening and 5AM this morning 144 new members have joined the Cause. The Cause is simply to restore our Constitutional Republic. It will be doable once our numbers are in the tens of millions. We all read the books and tell others about the existence of our movement. I like to think of it as follows: Each of us has to reach ten who need to reach nine who need to reach eight, etc.

160K, 320K, 640K, 1.2M, 2.4M, 5M, 10M, 20M, 40M, 80M, 160M

I read a review in Jacob Hornberger's Freedom Daily entitled Hamilton's Curse. Although Hamilton was one of the Founders he did not share Jefferson's belief that the path to prosperity was through individual freedom and a limited government. Instead Hamilton was a believer in what we have come to know as statism and he even wanted to establish a monarchy here. He thought government would be the source of all things good and despite the fact that he was killed in a duel with Aaron Burr in 1805 it is his vision, not Jeffersons, which has materialized.

All of the actions by the government which have eroded our freedom as individuals can be reversed once enough of us understand. The odds of this being achieved is greater than the odds of success faced by George Washington and his fellow compatriots. Despite our differences and so many on the receiving end of government largesse our numbers will continue to grow. I only wish 70 percent of our population were below 30 years of age as in Iran.

gulch

Edited June 21, 2009 by galtgulch

[Selene]

Ba'al; We are in agreement on this one. Ron Paul's morality is that of the people who watched Viola Luzzio get stabbed to death in New York City and didn't even call the police.

"Viola Fauver Gregg Liuzzo (April 11, 1925 – March 25, 1965) was a civil rights activist from the U.S. state of Michigan and mother of five, who was murdered by Ku Klux Klan members after the 1965 Selma to Montgomery marches in Alabama. One of the Klansmen in the car from which the shots were fired was a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) informant.[1] Liuzzo's name is one of those inscribed on a civil rights memorial in the state capital. She died at the age of 39.?

I think you meant Kitty Genovese:

Kitty Genovese, picture from The New York Times article: "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police"

Born Catherine Susan Genovese

July 7, 1935(1935-07-07)

Brooklyn,[1] New York, USA

Died March 13, 1964 (aged 28)

Kew Gardens, NY,[2] USA

Cause of death Murder by stabbing

Resting place Lakeview Cemetery

New Canaan, Connecticut

[show location on an interactive map] 41°08′34″N 73°29′01″W / 41.14278°N 73.48361°W / 41.14278; -73.48361

Nationality American

Employer Ev's Eleventh Hour Club

Hollis, New York, USA

Known for Sensational New York Times article about the murder

Title Manager

Catherine Susan Genovese (July 7, 1935[1]–March 13, 1964), commonly known as Kitty Genovese, was a New York City woman who was stabbed to death near her home in the Kew Gardens section of Queens, New York on March 13, 1964.[3] Genovese was buried in a family grave at Lakeview Cemetery in New Canaan, Connecticut.

The circumstances of her murder and the supposed lack of reaction of numerous neighbors were reported by a newspaper article published two weeks later; the common portrayal of neighbors being fully aware, but completely nonresponsive has later been criticized as inaccurate. Nonetheless, it prompted investigation into the social psychological phenomenon that has become known as the bystander effect (seldom: "Genovese syndrome")[4] and especially diffusion of responsibility.

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

This was within 5 miles of where I lived and rocked the city.

Adam

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ron Paul's voice is A voice, not THE voice.

As A voice, it is refreshing to hear his pro-capitalism and pro-constitution statements. As THE voice, his foreign policy scares the bejeezus out of me.

His lack of common sense at times does not annul the good he has done in the cause for freedom and free markets.

Just don't let him ever direct our military and fight against our enemies.

Despite the calm veneer, look at how Iran's leaders are exploding the country right now with fraud and violence, especially the hardline government's vicous attacks on its citizens. Look at the brutality. Does anyone doubt they would do these things against other countries if they ever got nuclear power? Ron Paul, for one, apparently doesn't think they would.

In my view, Ron Paul is right where he belongs, as a MEMBER of Congress, not as a LEADER.

Michael

[Backlighting]

Well said Michael. I agree totally.

[galtgulch]

Ron Paul's voice is A voice, not THE voice.

As A voice, it is refreshing to hear his pro-capitalism and pro-constitution statements. As THE voice, his foreign policy scares the bejeezus out of me.

His lack of common sense at times does not annul the good he has done in the cause for freedom and free markets.

Just don't let him ever direct our military and fight against our enemies.

Despite the calm veneer, look at how Iran's leaders are exploding the country right now with fraud and violence, especially the hardline government's vicous attacks on its citizens. Look at the brutality. Does anyone doubt they would do these things against other countries if they ever got nuclear power? Ron Paul, for one, apparently doesn't think they would.

In my view, Ron Paul is right where he belongs, as a MEMBER of Congress, not as a LEADER.

Michael

Michael,

On the other hand it looks as if you are confident in Obama in the realm of foreign policy compared to Ron Paul's noninterventionist policy and his adherence to the Constitution when it comes to declaring war.

Something tells me that given Obama's domestic agenda in which his way out of a bankrupt country is to spend even more and to more than double the money supply, that you would rather see Ron Paul as President.

Not to mention all the other power grabs Obama is up to at the Federal Reserve, energy and health and who knows what else is "on his plate." Ron Paul happens to be correct in all those areas you all will no doubt agree.

HR1207 the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 now has 237 cosponsors on its way to being veto proof thanks in part to the efforts of the growing campaign for liberty members who simply write and petition their congressmen and continue to do so.

If Ron Paul policy of nonintervention had been in place in 1953 Iran would have been spared the dictatorship of the Shah, Saddam Hussein would never have been in power in Iraq, we would not have 826 plus military bases and troops in over 130 countries around the world and as a consequence the World Trade Towers would still be standing.

Michael aren't you terrified by the domestic actions of our Leader, Obama?

www.campaignforliberty.com 21 Jun 6AM 163,127

gulch

[Chris Grieb]

Ba'al; We are in agreement on this one. Ron Paul's morality is that of the people who watched Viola Luzzio get stabbed to death in New York City and didn't even call the police.

"Viola Fauver Gregg Liuzzo (April 11, 1925 – March 25, 1965) was a civil rights activist from the U.S. state of Michigan and mother of five, who was murdered by Ku Klux Klan members after the 1965 Selma to Montgomery marches in Alabama. One of the Klansmen in the car from which the shots were fired was a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) informant.[1] Liuzzo's name is one of those inscribed on a civil rights memorial in the state capital. She died at the age of 39.?

I think you meant Kitty Genovese:

Kitty Genovese, picture from The New York Times article: "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police"

Born Catherine Susan Genovese

July 7, 1935(1935-07-07)

Brooklyn,[1] New York, USA

Died March 13, 1964 (aged 28)

Kew Gardens, NY,[2] USA

Cause of death Murder by stabbing

Resting place Lakeview Cemetery

New Canaan, Connecticut

[show location on an interactive map] 41°08′34″N 73°29′01″W / 41.14278°N 73.48361°W / 41.14278; -73.48361

Nationality American

Employer Ev's Eleventh Hour Club

Hollis, New York, USA

Known for Sensational New York Times article about the murder

Title Manager

Catherine Susan Genovese (July 7, 1935[1]–March 13, 1964), commonly known as Kitty Genovese, was a New York City woman who was stabbed to death near her home in the Kew Gardens section of Queens, New York on March 13, 1964.[3] Genovese was buried in a family grave at Lakeview Cemetery in New Canaan, Connecticut.

The circumstances of her murder and the supposed lack of reaction of numerous neighbors were reported by a newspaper article published two weeks later; the common portrayal of neighbors being fully aware, but completely nonresponsive has later been criticized as inaccurate. Nonetheless, it prompted investigation into the social psychological phenomenon that has become known as the bystander effect (seldom: "Genovese syndrome")[4] and especially diffusion of responsibility.

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

This was within 5 miles of where I lived and rocked the city.

Adam

Ba'al; Thanks for the correction. I meant Kitty Genovese.

[Chris Grieb]

Ron Paul's voice is A voice, not THE voice.

As A voice, it is refreshing to hear his pro-capitalism and pro-constitution statements. As THE voice, his foreign policy scares the bejeezus out of me.

His lack of common sense at times does not annul the good he has done in the cause for freedom and free markets.

Just don't let him ever direct our military and fight against our enemies.

Despite the calm veneer, look at how Iran's leaders are exploding the country right now with fraud and violence, especially the hardline government's vicous attacks on its citizens. Look at the brutality. Does anyone doubt they would do these things against other countries if they ever got nuclear power? Ron Paul, for one, apparently doesn't think they would.

In my view, Ron Paul is right where he belongs, as a MEMBER of Congress, not as a LEADER.

Michael

Michael,

On the other hand it looks as if you are confident in Obama in the realm of foreign policy compared to Ron Paul's noninterventionist policy and his adherence to the Constitution when it comes to declaring war.

Something tells me that given Obama's domestic agenda in which his way out of a bankrupt country is to spend even more and to more than double the money supply, that you would rather see Ron Paul as President.

Not to mention all the other power grabs Obama is up to at the Federal Reserve, energy and health and who knows what else is "on his plate." Ron Paul happens to be correct in all those areas you all will no doubt agree.

HR1207 the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 now has 237 cosponsors on its way to being veto proof thanks in part to the efforts of the growing campaign for liberty members who simply write and petition their congressmen and continue to do so.

If Ron Paul policy of nonintervention had been in place in 1953 Iran would have been spared the dictatorship of the Shah, Saddam Hussein would never have been in power in Iraq, we would not have 826 plus military bases and troops in over 130 countries around the world and as a consequence the World Trade Towers would still be standing.

Michael aren't you terrified by the domestic actions of our Leader, Obama?

www.campaignforliberty.com 21 Jun 6AM 163,127

gulch

Gulch; You don't get it. You posted Ron Paul's vote against the resolution indicating to me that you agree with him. On this issue Ron Paul is a piece of S_. He should be ashamed and so should you. These comments will mean nothing to you. Death to Mullahs!