>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > It is not just Israel that has working spynets in the US. It is
> > EVERYONE!!! They need them, the US and its policies can not be
> > trusted.
> > ----
> > wanna narrow this down a bit?
>
> > It is not just Israel
> > ---
> > no, israel just happens to be the largest, most effective lobby in DC
> > a lobby that can destroy any voice in opposition to israel
>
> > the US and its policies can not be trusted.
> > ---
> > but somehow the israelis can trust the US to protect them?
>
> > On Oct 3, 2:06 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <
markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Painol,
>
> > > It is not just Israel that has working spynets in the US. It is
> > > EVERYONE!!! They need them, the US and its policies can not be
> > > trusted.
>
> > > On Oct 3, 10:57 am, plainolamerican <
plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I cannot think of any time in our history, where we "intervened" and
> > > > there
> > > > wasn't an argument for the protection of our sovereignty, including
> > > > Viet
> > > > Nam
> > > > ---
> > > > are you implying that communism was a direct threat to our
> > > > sovereignty?
> > > > if so, then wouldn't you say that socialism is a direct threat?
>
> > > > You may in fact disagree with the logic, (and like most
> > > > Moonbats, not comprehend the Truman Doctrine
> > > > ----
> > > > Truman:
> > > > I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own
> > > > destinies in their own way.
> > > > Speech to a joint session of the US Congress (12 March 1947),
> > > > outlining what became known as The Truman Doctrine.
>
> > > > All the president is, is a glorified public relations man who spends
> > > > his time flattering, kissing, and kicking people to get them to do
> > > > what they are supposed to do anyway.
>
> > > > Had ten minutes conversation with Henry Morgenthau about Jewish
> > > > ship in Palistine. Told him I would talk to Gen[eral] Marshall about
> > > > it. He'd no business, whatever to call me. The Jews have no sense of
> > > > proportion nor do they have any judgement on world affairs. Henry
> > > > brought a thousand Jews to New York on a supposedly temporary basis
> > > > and they stayed. When the country went backward — and Republican in
> > > > the election of 1946, this incident loomed large on the DP [Displaced
> > > > Person] program. The Jews, I find are very, very selfish. They care
> > > > not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks
> > > > get murdered or mistreated as DP as long as the Jews get special
> > > > treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political
> > > > neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or
> > > > mistreatment to the under dog. Put an underdog on top and it makes no
> > > > difference whether his name is Russian, Jewish, Negro, Management,
> > > > Labor, Mormon, Baptist he goes haywire. I've found very, very few who
> > > > remember their past condition when prosperity comes.
>
> > > > On Oct 3, 11:08 am, Keith In Köln <
keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Hey PlainOl',
>
> > > > > Israel is a conundrum, and not a good example of other hot spots in
> > the
> > > > > world, albeit they are right in the middle of several issues.
>
> > > > > To the point, if any Nation does any act that would threaten the
> > sovereignty
> > > > > of the United States, then I think we have the right to intervene.
> > Thus,
> > > > > when there are those who are not identified with a Nation-State, but
> > are
> > > > > devout on seeing Islam return to its glory of the 11th and 12th
> > centuries,
> > > > > then yes, I think we have every right to intervene. So was the case
> > with
> > > > > Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq (which we believed was a potential threat
> > in
> > > > > 2003) and Pakistan just last year, when we violated Pakistan's
> > soveriegnty
> > > > > to go in and emasculate Osama bin Laden.
>
> > > > > I cannot think of any time in our history, where we "intervened" and
> > there
> > > > > wasn't an argument for the protection of our sovereignty, including
> > Viet
> > > > > Nam, and Iraq. You may in fact disagree with the logic, (and like
> > most
> > > > > Moonbats, not comprehend the Truman Doctrine with the case of Viet
> > Nam)
> > > > > and/or be intent on revising contemporary history, but again, I can
> > think of
> > > > > no incidents. (Maybe the Spanish American War....)
>
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:04 PM, plainolamerican
> > > > > <
plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > > would we as a Nation have a right to interfere
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > yes ... even to the extent of dismantling their government, if
> > > > > > necessary
> > > > > > but, remember, this is not about controlling resources or
> > protecting
> > > > > > one foreign government from another
>
> > > > > > backatcha:
> > > > > > If the US stops providing military support to israel and their
> > enemies
> > > > > > attack them should we interfere?
> > > > > > remember, israel has spied on us, killed our soldiers, corrupted
> > our
> > > > > > politicians and promotes socialism in our nation
>
> > > > > > On Oct 3, 9:50 am, Keith In Köln <
keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hey PlainOl', (And Michael, Bruce, and all other Ron Paul
> > Supporters
> > > > > > here
> > > > > > > in PF!)
>
> > > > > > > I have a question, I think it's rather simple. I am going to
> > give a
> > > > > > > hypothetical:
>
> > > > > > > "If Mexico decides to revert back to 19th or early 20th century
> > > > > > technology,
> > > > > > > and the Nation chooses to dump all of its sewers, waste streams
> > both
> > > > > > > residential and commercial, (which would potentially include
> > chemical
> > > > > > waste
> > > > > > > and toxins, leachates, etc.) into a system that is untreated,
> > and the
> > > > > > > stream of waste is dumped into the Gulf of Mexico, where the
> > Nation of
> > > > > > > Mexico builds a pipe in international waters to divert this
> > stream away
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > its coast, where eventually, it is going to end up on American
> > beaches
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > shorelines, would we as a Nation have a right to interfere, or
> > to stop
> > > > > > such
> > > > > > > a waste stream?"
>
> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 4:20 PM, plainolamerican
> > > > > > > <
plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Beginning in the early part of the twentieth century, people
> > like
> > > > > > > > Woodrow Wilson began supposing that we had the right and duty
> > to be
> > > > > > > > the world's keepers, and they have proceeded to mess things up
> > around
> > > > > > > > the world ever since.
> > > > > > > > ----
> > > > > > > > spot on!
>
> > > > > > > > those who think the US should interfere in the internal affairs
> > of
> > > > > > > > other nations and fund their militaries should fight and fund
> > their
> > > > > > > > own charities without US tax dollars and soldiers
>
> > > > > > > > you're either an American or something else
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 1, 10:05 am, MJ <
micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > The Cult of Reagan, and Other Neocon Folliesby Thomas E.
> > Woods, Jr.
> > > > > > > > > Some time agoThe American Spectator's Jeffrey Lord claimed
> > Ron Paul's
> > > > > > > > foreign policy of nonintervention was "liberal," and that
> > conservatives
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > supposed to be hawkish on foreign policy. Now to some extent,
> > no one
> > > > > > really
> > > > > > > > cares about these labels,
>
