Monday, October 22, 2007

Thank you all.

Since I published the post two days ago about Ron Paul and aid to Israel, I've received a whole lot of page views and positive comments, both through this site and through email. Thanks, people.
I would especially like to thank Renee for her thoughtful comments and email.

I would like to thank the people who posted a link to this blog and my post on DailyPaul, LibertyPost, and ESPECIALLY LewRockwell.com. I have long wanted to be on Lew's site, but my stuff just somehow never gets through their editors - except this time. Thank you guys. It really does mean something to me.

You guys are awesome. Thank you.

A little anecdote for my readers about just how wasteful the Israel Defense Force is, both with its own money and American money.

I spent most of my IDF service as first a system administrator, and then just a useless clerk at a base that conducts training for command staff on simulators. Essentially they put up LAN networks in comfortable air-conditioned rooms and then input data from wargaming computers that simulates what these people would be getting in a real combat sit... scratch that, they basically play wargames on computers.

Anyhow, just a month or so I arrived on base, our Communications Officer decided that this was UNREALISTIC. That the officers had to be trained in conditions approaching real field conditions (nevermind here that during real combat situations brigade staff do their thing from real airconditioned rooms). So he had a genius plan:

We would order a whole bunch of M113 armored personnel carriers, in both the ordinary and the communications version (the one fitted for more fancy electronics), put them out on our lawn, and then drill holes in them and pipe LAN cables through the holes , mounting the exercise computers inside for extra realism.

This would be wasteful if it were done - it cost us millions to order and receive the M113s.

They were new (or looked new) when they arrived.

Wasting them on this would be stupid in and of itself.

But then they descended to a new level of stupid.

In the 18 months I served in that unit, the APC's were to my knowledge never used in exercises, nor were they ever fitted for LAN cables.

They rusted.

They gathered dust.

Weed grew through the tracks.

But that was basically it.

Note this: Here we took several million (possibly several dozen million, I don't know how much 15-20 M113's cost) dollars of US and Israeli taxpayer money, dumped it on our lawn and let it rot away.

If you are American or Israeli, it is likely your money paid for this.

Are you happy about it? I sure am not.

But remember, if you oppose this sort of spending, you hate Jews. And freedom.

34 Comments:

Blogger MikeK said...

Well, as a fellow Israeli libertarian (currently residing in the US, though) I quite agree with, uh, everything you said.

But I'm not totally on board with your final sentiment. One must be very cautious in the criticism of such policies. I am completely against them. But I temper my ideological disapproval so as not to feed those who really DO hate the jews. And freedom.

The total level of adversity (aka the TLA quotient. Just invented) jews have to endure internationally is such that any widespread rumor tends to have severe public opinion and sometimes even policy reprecussions.

Now I'm sounding like one of the "victim complex" jews. But here as well, the balance is very delicate. The line between "victim mentality" and cautiousness is as thin as the line between criticizing Israel's policies and subtle anti-semitism.

It's important to avoid knee jerk reactions either way (always support criticisms, or always object). The tactic of saying "but there's jew X who's against jewish policy Y!" (Such as using the Satmar hassids as justification for being against Israel's existence) is a common one (There's also the tactic of saying "only group E of jews is evil. They're not even jews at all. They're just evil." without actually having anything to identify group E except them actually all being jews. Used against zionists, bankers, movie producers, etc.).

But back to the point of the post: my experience in the Israeli education system is such: it sucks. But it has many more "escape hatches" than the US does. I was able to skip a grade and go to a mekhunanim ("gifted") program much more easily than I would have been able to do here. And the education I received was of very high quality.

But yes, the whole strike system is atrocious. In middle school I once finally went to class at the end of October because first the teachers were striking. Then the parents announced a counter strike. And this went back and forth for almost 2 months.

2:22 AM  
Blogger Allanea said...

I respect you greatly, but I disagree with you on two points.

First, I disagree with you that we need to 'moderate' our criticism of Israel's public policy, lest it inspire an anti-semite. It doesn't really matter is someone is an anti-semite or not, in my mind, the question that should be asked is: do you agree with the policy advocated? Anything else is just shooting the messenger.

Do you really believe that claiming that ending the aid is a good idea is anti-semitic? Of course not!

Is the aid a good thing and is it good for Israel? No!

Then let's advocate ending the aid.

Let us advocate the policies we actually, you know, believe in.

And second, there are two 'escape' hatches in American education that are the most important escape hatches and are simply deliberately destroyed by Israel's public education. One of those is homeschooling – a full 2 million US children are in homeschooling environments. The second is private schooling – in Israel, only about 0.1% of all children are in private schools, and Yuli Tamir is opposed to private education as a matter of principles.

Let me say it again:

By and large, the only alternative to government schooling is private schooling.

The only alternative to slavery is freedom, not another form of slavery.

2:54 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

You post on Lew Rockwell and expect me to actually respect your position? Are you on drugs or something? Lew Rockwell was against American intervention in the SECOND World War. This is the man you are backing? The man who is perfectly cool with Jewish annhilation?

As far as waste in the Israeli military; your point is? Every government in the world has waste, and so does every military. Is this anecdotal nonsequitor the "compelling reason" you have for supporting Ron Paul, who blames the "Israel lobby" as "the most powerful lobby in America of the bad sort." ???

Sad.

10:15 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

I didn't POST on Lew Rockwell.

I posted HERE.

Someone other then me linked to my article from the LRC blog.

Furthermore, the Israeli military doesn't just "have waste".

Waste constitutes at the very least EIGHTY PERCENT of the military budget.

Contemplate that.

EIGHTY PERCENT OF THE IDF FUNDING IS WASTE.

But furthermore, I never said, at any point in time, that Ron Paul's position on aid to Israel is the compelling reason to vote for him. The compelling reason to vote for Ron Paul is his position on individual liberties – the War on Drugs, gun control, the Patriot Act, educational freedom, health freedom – and the economy.

However I said it before and I said again: Opposing aid to Israel does not an anti-semite make. Israel does not depend on the aid, nor is the aid beneficial to Israel.

2:04 AM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

allanea:

Please provide actual evidence, and not anecdotal, that somehow the IDF is more wasteful than other militaries around the world.

Militaries by their very nature spend money on machines they do not use, and technology that does not get developed. Unless and until you can provide evidence that the IDF is particularly wasteful, you have literally zero legitimate point.

As far as Paul goes; his newsletter was quoted as saying that the Israeli government is the most powerful lobby in America of the bad sort. Do you agree or disagree with that statement? If you agree with that statement, do you then believe Jews control America? And if you believe that, then frankly you are buying into Hitler propoganda.

I know what Paul's stance is on civil liberties and the tax code; my point, which you seem to overlook, is that his stance on Jews and Israel makes him a disgusting candidate to support, if you are either Jewish or believe in human rights. (since supporting anti-semitism is abjectly anti-human rights)

4:15 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

One more thing, allanea:

Your quote: I have long wanted to be on Lew's site, but my stuff just somehow never gets through their editors - except this time. Thank you guys. It really does mean something to me.

You have long wanted to be associated with a man who publicly decries America's participation in World War II. In short, you are longing to be associated with someone who is cool with Hitler finishing his Final Solution.

Sad, just sad.

4:20 PM  
Blogger Lidiya said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10:56 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

Red Tulips, on your points, one after another:

1.The Israeli military spends 80% of it's official budget on 'administrative expenditures'. Only 20% of the famed IDF budget goes on 'equipping, maintaining, upgrading and training the forces'. Even if we assume this money is spent 100% efficiently, there's still 80% that goes on administrative expenditures.

But that's not what actually happens. What actually happens is that the boys in green spend 80%
on 'administrative expenditures' and THEN they spend 20% of their budget on regular stuff, including the 'technology that doesn't get developed' and 'machines that do not get used'.

The IDF has 4 times the ratio of staff officers per soldier then the US Army.

2.Ron Paul has never said, or at least according to the Wiki, has never said that the Israelis are the most powerful lobby of the bad sort, for the same reason he never said that the blacks are incredibly fleet-footed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#Newsletter_article_controversy

But to your point, AIPAC [which is not to be equated with Israel OR the Jews in general] is an extremely powerful lobby.

AIPAC's wiki page says: “In 1997, Fortune magazine asked Congressmen to rank the "25 most powerful" lobbying organizations in DC. In 2005, the National Journal did the same. Both times, AIPAC came in 2nd - ahead of, for instance, the AFL-CIO and the NRA, but behind the AARP[4]. In 2001, it came in 4th on the Fortune list. “

3.Ron Paul does not in any way, shape or form, advocate infrinting upon any rights of Jews in America or Israel based upon their ethnic and religious background. The only policy of Ron Paul that will anyhow impact Jews is the ending of aid to Israel.

You are arguing that not giving Israel money is an anti-semitic policy.

On this logic not giving Egypt money means Ron Paul hates Muslims.

And not giving the Iraqi Army money means Ron Paul hates Iraqis.

And not giving money for the Bridge to Nowhere means Ron Paul hates Alaskans.

And voting against money for his own Congressional district means Ron Paul hates Texans, right?

[I posted this above on a relative's account and deleted it upon spotting the mistake]

11:01 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

Also, where has Rockwell stated opposition to WWII?

11:02 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Allanea:

Few would dispute that AIPAC is one powerful lobby amongst many. I fail to see how anyone in their right non-antisemitic minds would say that AIPAC is "the most powerful lobby in America of THE BAD SORT."

Yes, I have a source for this quotation, which appeared in Paul's newsletter. source

Paul did not say that the Egyptian government, which receives $2 billion in aid a year, and gives back suicide bombers, is somehow the "most powerful lobby in America of the bad sort." No, this is only Israel.

It is nonsensical to the core. And it echoes the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. (the notion that Jews control the world)

Lew Rockwell explicitly said that World War II was not justified, but given I view his site as a hate site, I refuse to link to it. (feel free to search his site and find the articles - they are there)

Finally, with regards to the IDF; the mere fact that they have more administrative officers does not then mean that there is more waste. Perhaps they need more administrative officers. You will have to link to a study that actually proves the IDF is particularly wasteful to convince me that somehow aid to Israel is hurting Israel.

Somehow I doubt you can prove that, in light of the extensive and well documented waste of the PLO, and the US government's continued funding of them.

11:57 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

One more thing.

Paul equates the Arabs with the Israelis, somehow providing a moral equivalence. He does say that all aid should be cut. Yet, there is no equivalence. One side (the Arab side) is looking for a Final Solution against Jews. One side, the Arab side, enacted multiple wars of attempted annhilation. One side, the Arab side, is launching a worldwide jihad, of which Israel is but one link in the chain.

Oh, did I say jihad? My bad. Paul also said that 9/11 was due to "blowback" for American policies in the Mideast, somehow implying that it was hence deserved.

Why do you support this man again? Paul also had a known hate monger, Lew Rockwell, as his former chief of staff.

12:02 AM  
Blogger Allanea said...

Oh damn it all. I thought I linked to discussion of this newsletter article above, but it appears the link is broken. To sum it up: Ron Paul did not write the article in question, fired the person who wrote it, and issue a statement of “acceptance of responsibility.” The NYT [who are not a reliable source for anything including their own socks] have believed the story that he didn't write it, FWIW.

“Finally, with regards to the IDF; the mere fact that they have more administrative officers does not then mean that there is more waste. Perhaps they need more administrative officers.”

Let me say it again:

Only 20% of IDF spending goes towards training soldiers, maintaining the operational capability of the armed forces, and developing in purchasing new equipment. If that isn't wasteful I don't know what is.

“You will have to link to a study that actually proves the IDF is particularly wasteful”

Do you read Hebrew? The guys at kav.org.il have a wonderful database of IDF waste.

“Paul did not say that the Egyptian government, which receives $2 billion in aid a year, and gives back suicide bombers “

1.There has not been a suicide bombing attack by Egyptians on Israel in any time in recent history.
2.There has been exactly one suicide bombing in Israel in the last year and a half. Three people have been killed. It has not been performed by people backed by the Egyptians, but by the Islamic Jihad. No suicide bombings have been performed in Israel by any group backed by the Egyptians in recent times, and the Muslim Brotherhood is banned in Egypt. On the other hand, severl Egyptian police have been killed trying to block arms smuggling into Israel. Repeat, multiple Egyptian police have lost their lives protecting Israel.

“One side, the Arab side, enacted multiple wars of attempted annhilation. “

And every time they tried this, they lost.

Every time the Arab nations engaged Israel in war, we kicked their ass. We kicked their ass in such a way that if you open the encyclopedia on “PWNED”, you'll see pictures of burning Egyptian and Syrian tanks.

Now, today Israel is in fact safer then it was in any time of it's history in terms of conventional war. Out of the four main nations who fought against us in 1967 and 1973 - Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan – Egypt and Jordan now have peaceful relations with Israel and cooperate with us against terrorism, and Iraq is not in shape to attack anybody.

The only people who might attack us in a conventional war are the Syrians. In 1973, when they outnumbered the IDF, we kicked their ass. Today, the IDF outnumbers THEM.

The only people who are a threat to Israel are the terrorists. So you are telling me Israel needs US aid to beat up a bunch of punk-ass goatherds who can't even hit the right country with a mortar? [Hint: More Israelis have been killed by bricks then by Kassams].


“Oh, did I say jihad? My bad. Paul also said that 9/11 was due to "blowback" for American policies in the Mideast, somehow implying that it was hence deserved. “

No, this does not imply that the Americans are 'to blame for 9/11.'. Tha'ts spin and you know it.

The 9/11 comission report also states blowback played a major role in generating hatred towards the US.

Yes, to a large degree they do hate us for our freedom.

But they also hate us – and you – for the Shah, for Iraq I, for a lot of the sutff the US does abroad. You need to be blind and deaf to think it has no effect.

It can be argued that the benefits for the US outweigh the costs in PR that its foreign operations bring it. But it cannot be denied these exist.

And about the global Jihad:

Do you seriously believe these morons are as big a threat to the world as, say, the USSR? Ha!

2:50 AM  
Blogger Allanea said...

http://israelilibertarian.blogspot.com/2007/10/questions-for-republican-jewish.html

3:06 AM  
Blogger Allanea said...

Why does it not post my links properly I have not a clue. Tell me, do you even read my other posts?

3:09 AM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

allanea:

Perhaps you are not understanding what I wrote.

I am asking for a study that compares Israeli military spending to that of militaries around the world, and proves it somehow is more wasteful with every dollar spent than other armies around the world.

Every military has waste. To say that the IDF has waste hence proves nothing. You will have to show it has PARTICULAR waste.

As far as Egypt goes; two of the hijackers on 9/11 were Egyptians. Zawahiri, Bin Laden's #2 guy, is an Egyptian doctor. Moreove, the Egyptian government armed and trained Fatah for years. (and then later turned a blind eye towards arms shipments to Fatah) Even more than that, they teach anti-semitism in their schools and media.

So this is where our money is going with regards to Egypt. Do you see Ron Paul complaining about it? No. Instead, it's complaints about the "Israel Lobby."

As far as Paul goes, I am not impressed by his response to the "newsletter controversy."

His campaign spokesperson stated that Ron Paul took responsibility for the newsletter comments. He did not apologize.

But let's ignore Ron Paul's newsletter statement and go on to his legislative history, which further reeks of an anti-Jewish bias.

He was against last summer's resolution condemning Hezbollah during its war with Israel, and stated:

I rise in opposition to this resolution, which I sincerely believe will do more harm than good.

I do agree with the resolution's condemnation of violence. But I am convinced that when we get involved in foreign conflicts and send strong messages, such as this resolution will, it ends up expanding the war rather than diminishing the conflict, and that ultimately comes back to haunt us.

Mr. Speaker, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called non-interventionism. I do not believe we are making the United States more secure when we involve ourselves in conflicts overseas. The Constitution really doesn't authorize us to be the policemen of the world, much less to favor one side over another in foreign conflicts. It is very clear, reading this resolution objectively, that all the terrorists are on one side and all the victims and the innocents are on the other side. I find this unfair, particularly considering the significantly higher number of civilian casualties among Lebanese civilians. I would rather advocate neutrality rather than picking sides, which is what this resolution does.


What total, pathetic, disgusting, vomit-inducing moral equivalence! According to his logic, it is the same to defend yourself against terror as it is to in fact commit the terror! How can you possibly support such an individual who says such a thing?

This explains why Islamists and National Vanguard alike support him.

Finally, global jihad absolutely is as big a threat as the Soviets were; all that is necessary is a few nukes, and the world is in chaos. Hell, 9/11 did not even require nukes. They might not have the military might of the Soviets, but they need not have it. And for you to say that somehow Israel is as secure as ever ignores the massive numbers of people who have died due to the jihad against Israel, a jihad that was formed before Israel even was a nation. There is nothing that Israel has done to justify the actions taken against it, except exist. As far as America goes, it has the gaul to be the largest superpower in the world, and not Islamic. Any and everything the West has "done" against the Muslims has been done against the West by the Muslims at one time or another throughout history. It is not "blowback."

Paul does not get this, and never will.

I read your other post, which cited to Yossi Beilin, one of the most far leftist MK's in the Knesset, as well as in favor of giving away Israel until it commits suicide. Hence, I fail to see how it actually proved anything.

4:57 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

“So this is where our money is going with regards to Egypt. Do you see Ron Paul complaining about it?”


Ron Paul opposes all foreign aid, and, as we established, didn’t say anything about he Israel lobby.

“How can you possibly support such an individual who says such a thing?”

So boo-hoo. Ron Paul said that Israel wasn’t 100% in the right during Lebanon II, and that we killed too many civilians. And while I think we should have gone to war, and that Hezbullah was in the wrong, and we were in the right, we should have used more ground forces, less air power, and avoided many civilian deaths. We should have never, ever used cluster bombs against civilians. Even when terrorists like the Hez hide among civilians it is still not enough to justify using a deliberately un-selective weapon in an area full of civilians.

“And for you to say that somehow Israel is as secure as ever”

Israel is not ‘as secure as ever’. Israel is ‘more secure as ever’.

We built a farking concrete wall between us and Gaza. We are completing the wall between us and The West Bank. By these actions, we cut down on suicide bombing so much that the Israeli government is now eliminating the Transportation Security Unit.

We have made peace with the Egyptians. Sure there were Egyptians aboard the planes in 9.11. Somehow I never heard anybody claim that Mubarak was behind it.

We have made peace with the Jordanians. Their army sends officers to cross-train with ours and they shoot Palestinian terrorists. They hate Palestinians.

Now I have never said that the global Jihad is not a threat, or that I fully agree with Ron Paul’s non-interventionism.

But the Global Jihad is not an ‘existential threat’.

They are not going to come and eat us all. They want to, but they can’t.

There are two factors that contribute to the Global Jihad – their hatred of our Western Culture, and Blowback. Every day America is in Iraq, Al-Quaeda enjoys an increased recruiting rate.

Blowback from the actions of the Americans – and the Israelis, too, we did a lot that was unfair – exists. It’s real.

No, I don’t think Ron Paul’s non-interventionism is the solution to all world ills.

It’s just not ‘anti-semitism’, and is not wrong. As I mentioned, the IDF spends at least four fifth of its revenue on bullshit ‘administrative expenses’. Only 20% of it’s budget go on the normal expenses of a military,

The US military spends 309 billion on procurement, ‘operations and maintenance’, and R&D, or over 60% of it’s budget. Clearly less wasteful then we are.

But let us ignore all that.

While I support the ending of US aid to Israel, because I do believe Israel should learn not to toss all of its money on bullshit –

That said, Ron Paul does not have a perfect foreign policy. For perfection you would need to have Fred Thompson’s foreign policy, remove foreign aid, and tack it on to a Ron Paul platform.

But even taking that, Ron Paul wins. Hard.

He has an economic policy superior to any other Republican candidate.
He has a stand on civil rights superior to any other Republican candidate.
He has a stand on the Second Amendment superior to any other Republican candidate.
He has a stand on educational freedom superior to any other Republican candidate.
He has a stand on health freedom and drug laws superior to any other Republican candidate.

He is the only one who promises to issue a Presidential pardon to all the people who are in jail on worthless and unfair victimless crime offenses. On this alone I would vote for him if I were an American.

10:43 AM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Ron Paul opposes all foreign aid, and, as we established, didn’t say anything about he Israel lobby.

He didn't seem to mind it when his newsletter said the Israel lobby was the worst in the US. Took him five years to even comment on that one. Then he gave a rather unsatisfactory response.

Then there is the fact that Stormfront is contributing to his campaign. (this is a Neo-Nazi organization)

source

National Vanguard and Islamists alike are also fans.

If you are okay with Paul defining 9/11 as "blowback," which he did, then I ask you what possible rational justification could there be for 9/11? Are you okay with the commander in chief thinking that way? I sure as hell am not!

As far as you noting that the IDF has a higher number of administrative officers than the US; that proves nothing. You have not proven that the IDF does not need these administrative officers, for whatever reason. That itself is not evidence of particular waste. And anyway, in fact aid to Israel is a big bargain for the US! The US military has not one base in Israel, unlike Europe. It is far more expensive for the US government to basically provide the defense for Europe, which has the lowest army-to-population ratio in the world. It costs far more than $2.5 billion a year to maintain the American bases in Europe. In short, actually Israel is far more self reliant than most Euro states, and yet you hardly hear of the odious effect of the "Euro lobby."

As far as last summer goes; of course civilians die, thus is the nature of war. But civilians were dying because Hezbollah started a war against Israel and using the civilians as human meat shields. As such, Hezbollah was proximately liable for the war. But you do not hear that from Ron Paul! Somehow the victim, Israel, because the perpetrator. Because defending yourself against terror is the same as committing acts of terror.

Oh, I forgot to add Ron Paul's vote against a Congressional Resolution stating that Ahmadinejad incited to genocide when he said that Israel must be wiped off the map. source It is obvious where Paul stands.

As far as Egypt goes, they were arming Fatah for years after the Camp David Accords. They are doing little to prevent the arms shipments to Gaza via the Philadelphi Corredor. And most damning of all, they have done nothing to curb the amount of hate education in their schools and media. In fact, it has gotten worse. Oh yeah, and they are openly seeking an nuclear energy. I am sure it will be completely "peaceful." source

Do you hear anyone complaining about the evil of the "Egypt lobby," and the fact that essentially the US is helping Egypt build the bomb, what with its $2 billion a year in mostly military aid to Egypt? Has Ron Paul said a word about this? No.

Jordan at least does not appear to have the same history of arming the 'Palestinian' terrorists. I grant you that. But there was no "land for peace" plan with Jordan. (rather it was "water for peace") That said, you still regularly see hate in Jordan's schools and media.

Finally, you seem to be saying Israel is more secure than it ever has been. Yet you ignore last year's war, as well as the fact that Iran is seeking to create nukes. And oh yeah, yesterday six rockets were fired from Sderot. In a single day. And Israeli soldiers remain kidnapped to this very day. And suicide bombing remains a reality.

A wall was built; what of the Israelis who live beyond the wall? Do they not matter? What of the rockets that are shot over the wall? Does Sderot not matter? What of Arab Israelis who live within the boundaries of the wall? Are they not also terrorists?

The "wall" is not the ultimate solution; it has made Israel "safer," but not safe. And certainly Israel has no reason to feel complacent.

4:43 PM  
Blogger Lidiya said...

"Blowback" does not imply justification.

Should I enter Mea-Shearim kissing a male, I would likely be physically attacked. This would be “blowback” from me kissing the male in the middle of the most radical Orthodox Jewish neighborhood on the planet. And yet the act of stoning me would not be justified.

However, going into Mea-Shearim dressed like a stereotypical gay person and kissing a male is a Bad Idea™ .

A wall was built; what of the Israelis who live beyond the wall?

We need to have less Israelis living beyond the wall. Period. This has nothing to do with generic leftist whining, and if you wish, I will elaborate on that sentiment in a full-on post.

Further, you misread my statement of the Lebanon war. YES I KNOW the Hezbullah hid behind civilians, and that still doesn’t justify a lot of our tactics being needlessly unselective. We didn’t NEED to use cluster bombs, and we PROMISED America we wouldn’t use them and we lied.

This said, I see you agree with me on my main statement – that being that Ron Paul is superior on his non-foreign policy positions.

8:51 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Lidya/Allanea:

I do not think Ron Paul is superior in his domestic policy. He believes in economics for dummies. The gold standard is outdated for a reason. If you did a polling of economists across all political stripes and colors in the US, you would see they agree about the wisdom of going off the gold standard.

And yet somehow the "gold standard" is the cornerstone of his economic policy.

As far as everything else...

"Blowback" does imply justification. It implies that somehow Al Queda and the other human butcherers are acting in rational response to something the US has done. This is not only untrue, it is obscene. They are acting due to their ideology of Islamo-butchery.

I ask you this.

Why are Arab Christians not suicide bombers? Why are Africans, perhaps the most oppressed people on earth, not suicide bombers? Why are the Burmese not suicide bombers against the Chinese?

The list goes on.

Ron Paul ignores all this; he ignores the key reason for why they fight, which is that it is a religious obligation, a jihad.

As far as Israelis living in the West Bank; I view Hebron and Shechem as justifiably Israeli. Whether it can be defended or not is another question altogether. But I see no reason why it is wrong for Jews to live where they have lived since recorded history, only interrupted by Arab massacres, led by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Arafat's uncle and the founder of the PLO.

4:15 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

Consensus economics, eh?

“Blowback” does not imply justification. Let me demonstrate. Vietnam caused a lot of people around the world to protest against American policy, and even to hate America – even though America was fully justified to fight in Vietnam, in my view. American leadership, at the time, believed rightfully, that the cost in public opinion was worh it.

Today, there are still people in Japan who are angry at America about what you guys did with those Japanese cities. Yes, it was justified. Yes, the human cost would be greater if you did a ground invasion of Japan. But there is blowback after Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

And I will ask you this:

1.Why do Muslims volunteer to fight in the Israeli Army?
2.Why do Muslims volunteer to fight in the US Army?
3.Why do Muslims fight on both sides of the Iraq war? There are more Muslims fighting on our side, in absolute numbers, then there are Muslims in all of Al-Quaeda.
4.Why are Israeli-Arabs not suicide bombers?
5.Why is the development of suicide bombing in its modern form attributed to the Tamil, who are notably un-muslim and hate Muslims?

Further more, the Lebanese Christian Arabs have used suicide bombings, as have all factions of the Lebanese Civil War. As a matter of fact suicide tactics have been used extensively by the Vietnamese against the US (Remember “Siege of Firebase Gloria”?) and by the Soviets against the Germans. As a matter of fact they've been used by practically every religious and ideological group worth mentioning.

As for the gold standard, I am a free banking man.

12:30 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Allanea:

I just would like to note that you have not said anything with regards to my point that you have not proven that the military aid to Israel is not necessary. You also have failed to reply to the fact that Egypt still is tacitly supporting a jihad against Israel, after Camp David. (via its PLO support as well as state-sponsored indoctrination) You have failed to reply to the notion that Israel still needs a big military, as it is hardly "safe" at present. You also failed to reply to what I stated about the settlements in the Judea and Samaria, which are justifiably Israeli.

Thus, I will assume you agree with all I have stated with regards to those issues.

As far as the other things...

One key thing you are forgetting is that 9/11 happened prior to the Iraq War.

So what sort of "blowback" was 9/11 for? Dirty kaffirs stepping foot on infidel land in Saudi Arabia? That is supposed to be "blowback"??? That is insane! How exactly was 9/11 a "response" to anything America did in the Mideast? And when you take the time to answer that one, please note that the suffering of those in the Mideast generally is that of Muslim-on-Muslim.

You mentioned Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And yet somehow, there was no "blowback" from that, was there? Rather, after the bombs dropped, the war ended, and now Japan is a peaceful country.

You mentioned Vietnam, and yet somehow you only saw the VietCong and North Vietnamese Army fighting American troops in Vietnam. You never saw Vietnamese Americans blowing up buildings in the US.

None of these activities, which certainly can be seen as far worse than merely having a base in Saudi Arabia, resulted in "blowback" on American soil.

So I ask you...why do you think that is? Ron Paul certainly cannot explain this, can he?

Then I will answer your questions, and show you how they fit right in with the obvious reality of jihad.

1.Why do Muslims volunteer to fight in the Israeli Army?

Firstly, let's get things straight. The only Muslims who volunteer in the IDF tend to be Bedouins, and they do so because they are treated like less than shit by the 'Palestinians' and fellow Muslims in the Mideast. They know who butters their bread, so to speak, and are grateful to Israel. The very few Muslim Israeli Arabs who volunteer in the IDF do so despite the objections of their community.

2.Why do Muslims volunteer to fight in the US Army?

See above. The US has actually given Muslims in the US the opportunity to succeed, in contrast to the way they are treated by their oppressors back at home. But please note that even as that is so, it is not as if there are huge numbers of Muslims within the US army.

3.Why do Muslims fight on both sides of the Iraq war? There are more Muslims fighting on our side, in absolute numbers, then there are Muslims in all of Al-Quaeda.

4.Why are Israeli-Arabs not suicide bombers?

They are suicide bombers and those who aid suicide bombers, just not in the same numbers of 'Palestinians.' See: Ashraf Keisi, Muhammed Shaker Habashi, as well as the Balad MKs who traveled to Syria last summer during the war with Hezbollah (and were traitors to Israel).

A better question is not "why are there no Arab Israeli suicide bombers," but rather "why are there less Arab Israeli suicide bombers"? The answer is the same as why the Bedouins serve in the IDF: most Arab Israelis know who butter their bread.

5.Why is the development of suicide bombing in its modern form attributed to the Tamil, who are notably un-muslim and hate Muslims?

Huh? The 'Palestinians' began their activities prior to the Tamil Tigers even forming. And the Tamil Tigers operate exclusively in Sri Lanka, and not worldwide. So this is hardly analogous.

The bottom line is that human butchery is hurting Muslims more than it even hurts Israelis or Westerners. And the right-thinking Muslims see the ills of jihad. But the reality is that there is no other group of people who are committing such acts of violence as fundie Muslims are. If you mention the Tamil Tigers, that is laughable, as that is a limited conflict, consigned to Sri Lanka. There is no group that attacks Westerners with a goal of world conquest in the same way that the fundie Muslims act.

This does not negate the fact that many Muslims are smart and see who butters their bread and who craps on their chest. But when they are given the same message, over and over, in their schools, mosques, and media...many are taken in.

5:58 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Allanea:

Now that we have established the reality of jihad (something Ron Paul ignores), his moral relativity with regards to foreign policy, as well as his infintile domestic policy (the gold standard)...

I have to ask you, why do you still support the man?

8:48 PM  
Blogger Lidiya said...

1.What about the fact that several Egyptian police have been killed on the border, by Palestinians and in friendly fire accidents with the IDF, while enforcing the border against smugglers who resupply the PLO? Several Egyptians have already laid down their lives defending Israel. Oh wait, that doesn't fit in the “the Egyptians endorse a Jihad.”
2.Blowback for ALL US foreign policy – starting with the overthrowal of the Shah PLUS the ideology of the Shah = terrorism against the US. BOTH of these are factors.
3.“The only Muslims who volunteer in the IDF tend to be Bedouins”- Bedoins are not the only Muslim people who volunteer in the IDF.
4.I never said there are no Arab-Israeli suicide bombers. I said, and I continue to say, that Arab-Israelis as a community are not suicide bombers.
The “Arab parties” of the Knesset hold a much lower percentage of seats then the percentage of Arabs in the population. This is because the Arabs despise those morons. Most of them vote for major parties, mostly Labor and Meretz, but some vote for Likud too.
5.“There is no group that attacks Westerners with a goal of world conquest in the same way that the fundie Muslims act. “ - And this is largely correct at the moment. However,”Islam” in general is not to be equated with “the fundy muslims.”.
6.I have not stated, nor do I now state, that Israel is safe. It is much safer then it ever was, however. Never did I state it does not need a strong military. However, I suggest that it needs a much different military then it has now. Like Moshe Feiglin, I state that the military needs to be made more efficient. It needs to be made a professional, all-volunteer military, with professional armed forces. At the very least 30% of its budget needs to be eliminated completely, and the rest shifted from the funding of an inept bureaucracy and a shitload of useless officers and subcontractors to the training of troops and the purchase of needed military equipment. Specifically, Israel needs an array of heavily-armed ground attack aircraft on the mode of the SU-25 and A10, Israel needs to complete the Nautilus system which the government promised us would be online as of 2005, and Israel neeeds to improve it's economy.
7.You have NOT proved the gold standard infAntile (in fact, you have not proven yourself able to SPELL infantile). The fact it's not supported by a poll of today's economists does not mean it's infantile. You need to try much harder.

10:18 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

lidya:

I hardly need to "prove" anything regarding the gold standard, since you already have stated you are against it and favor free banking. Therefore, since you agree with me on this point, it means you disagree with Ron Paul on the point.

1.What about the fact that several Egyptian police have been killed on the border, by Palestinians and in friendly fire accidents with the IDF, while enforcing the border against smugglers who resupply the PLO? Several Egyptians have already laid down their lives defending Israel. Oh wait, that doesn't fit in the “the Egyptians endorse a Jihad.”

Right now the Egyptian government is in conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood. The Egyptian government is essentially PLO linked, and the Muslim Brotherhood's offshoot is in fact Hamas. So yes, some Egyptian officers will go after the smuggling of arms into the Territories to the extent that it also threatens Egyptian interests. Hamas at the moment threatens Egyptian interests, given it is basically the Muslim Brotherhood in Israel. You rarely hear of them stopping a flow of arms to Fatah, which is hardly a 'moderate' terrorist group. (that said, the US arms and supplies Fatah, but that is a whole other story)

2.Blowback for ALL US foreign policy – starting with the overthrowal of the Shah PLUS the ideology of the Shah = terrorism against the US. BOTH of these are factors.

Uhuh. What exactly did the US do in 1979 to justify "blowback"? Weakly support the Shah? Pathetically cower in the face of the Shah? No, the terrorism emanating from Iran is purely ideologically driven, with a goal of a global Caliphate.

3.“The only Muslims who volunteer in the IDF tend to be Bedouins”- Bedoins are not the only Muslim people who volunteer in the IDF.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said, and I quote, The very few Muslim Israeli Arabs who volunteer in the IDF do so despite the objections of their community. I read a statistic that a mere 150 Muslim Israeli Arabs volunteer in the IDF on a yearly basis. This is such a tiny number, it is a statistical anomaly. Those wh volunteer do so, as I stated, against the sentiments of their community.

4.I never said there are no Arab-Israeli suicide bombers. I said, and I continue to say, that Arab-Israelis as a community are not suicide bombers.
The “Arab parties” of the Knesset hold a much lower percentage of seats then the percentage of Arabs in the population. This is because the Arabs despise those morons. Most of them vote for major parties, mostly Labor and Meretz, but some vote for Likud too.


And yet the Arab parties contain traitors to the State of Israel, even if they do not represent all of Israeli Arabs. The majority of Arab Israeli MKs are in fact in Arab Israeli treasonous parties.

As far as the "community" of Arab Israelis; they appear to seek politically what suicide bombers seek through butchery. They are in favor of a bi-national state with the right of return. (not all feel this way, but the majority seem to)

5.“There is no group that attacks Westerners with a goal of world conquest in the same way that the fundie Muslims act. “ - And this is largely correct at the moment. However,”Islam” in general is not to be equated with “the fundy muslims.”

I do not claim to be an expert on "inherent Islam," although a reading of the Koran shows it advocates violence in a way even beyond the Torah. What matters to me is what is being preached in schools and mosques. The fact is that jihad is being preached in schools and mosques. This is a reality. You appear to be beginning to accept this reality; why again do you continue to support Ron Paul?

6. (you basically said the IDF is wasteful)

On this I generally agree. Of course the IDF has waste. THAT is not the question. The question is whether or not the IDF is particularly wasteful, i.e., so wasteful that it is less deserving of aid than other countries. You have not shown this, and continue to not show it.

As far as whether or not the draft should be elliminated; I do not claim to have enough facts either way. I do know that an unmotivated soldier is likely someone who will not make the best soldier, and I have heard of Americans with master's degrees making aliyah, and then getting an assignment sweeping steps with the IDF. More can and should be done to better utilize the talents of those within the IDF; this is totally seperate from whether aid to the IDF is constructive or destructive.

I will end this by saying that the only way that aid to the IDF is clearly destructive is that it is linked with aid to the worst of the worst; namely, the PLO, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. If all aid to those disgusting states (and in the case of the PLO, non-state) were cut off, then there would be less need for aid to the IDF, I grant you that. But you have not shown how aid to Israel, if not linked to aid to those disgusting actors, in and of itself harms Israel.

Again, why do you support Ron Paul again, given how much you appear to differ with him on substantive issues?

I forgot to add that Paul is against a woman's right to choose, on top of everything else.

10:55 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

I disagree with the Gold Standard in principle. I however support it over the current system, and see it as a stand towards free banking.

On top of this, I disagree with there being a 'right to abortion' in the sense stated in Roe v. Wade but that's an issue for a different post altogether.

On top of this, I already explained how the IDF is "particularly wasteful." The IDF spends only 20% of it's budget on equipping, maintaining, and supporting the armed forces and developing new weapons for them.

The United States spends 20% of it's budget on procuring new weapons ALONE [84 bn], and a similar sum on R&D [73 bn]
R&D. Operations and Maintenance takes 150 billion dollars.

Between them these sums comprise 307 billion dollars out of a 410 billion dollar budget.

Oh, and I suggest you explore http://www.jims-israel.org/

1:38 AM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Allanea:

I can very simply explain why the gold standard is assinine at best. There is simply not enough gold in the world to back up the US economy at the size it is at. That is the bottom line. Moreover, it is quite arbitrary to back up an economy using gold. Why gold and not silver? Platinum? Copper? I could go on, but why bother. The point is that going back to the gold standard will simply only create problems, not solve them.

Another thing, which you absolutely refuse to reckon with: the fact that the IDF has more administrative staff than the US army is not "proof" that it is more wasteful. You have not shown that the IDF does not NEED this staff. Moreover, as I already explained, and as you ignored, the IDF is a great bargain for the US, as it is an ally which is self supportive. No US bases are in Israel. The same cannot be said of Europe. The IDF may be wasteful, but all armies are. On a scale of things, I do not see how it is so much more wasteful than all the despots the US throws money at. But yet Ron Paul thinks it is worth singling out ISRAEL.

You have not replied to anything I said about jihad or "blowback," so I will assume you agree with them.

On a final note: I have shown how you disagree with Ron Paul in his stance on foreign policy, as well as the cornerstone of his domestic policy, "the gold standard."

Why do you support him again?

4:17 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

And backing an economy by government edict - literally, 'fiat' - is not arbitrary? More importantly, I see the abolition of the federal reserve as a key step towards free banking.

Furthermore, foreign policy is not a deal-breaking issue to me. Both America and Israel can survive and remain extremely wealthy even if our foreign policy is wrong, as long as it is disastrously wrong. I disagree with some of Ron Paul's stuff there and agree with others - it's arguable at worst, it's not COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLY INSANE.

I find other issues more important - gun rights, homeschooling, the war on drugs, medical regulations, free speech, the PATRIOT Act, etc. If I were a US citizen that would be enough. Even as a non-US citizen, I feel certain that if such reforms as Ron Paul promises would be implemented in the US they would permeate elsewhere - and further I plan to immigrate.

6:59 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

Oh and you continue to misrepresent my argument re: the military bureaucracy. Niiice.

7:00 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

I find other issues more important - gun rights, homeschooling, the war on drugs, medical regulations, free speech, the PATRIOT Act, etc. If I were a US citizen that would be enough.

Most Repub candidates believe in a hearty second amendment. I agree he is unique with regards to his drug policy, but that is hardly a reason in and of itself to vote for him. Medical regulations - not exactly sure how that is a federal issue. Free speech - he is hardly unique with being in favor of free speech. And there is no way he would get rid of the FCC, which actually does far more than regulate "speech" on the airwaves. As far as the PATRIOT Act, most Dems have said they are against it. That said, it is simply necessary in one form or another to both coordinate the actions between government agencies, as well as remove loopholes that terrorists have exploited. One major loophole is that Lynn Stewart, the attorney for the Blind Sheikh who committed the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, would have, pre-Patriot Act, been able to broadcast his terror message to his followers. Post-Patriot Act she was convicted for broadcasting the Sheikh's message which directly led to the death of innocents.

This is but one example, but it is an important one. The PATRIOT Act may need tweaking, but it performs a vital function.

As far as the current system; there are plusses and minuses to the federal reserve, but overall it has stabilized the currency rather well since the Great Depression. And the current system allows the economy to grow, unlike the alternative gold standard model.

Finally, given how Ron Paul calls 9/11 "blowback" and he is backed by Islamists, 9/11 "Troothers," and Neo-Nazis alike, yes, I would say his foreign policy is totally insane.

You are leaving Israel? That is sad; another Jew leaving Israel. :(

8:42 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

1.Please explain to me how the other candidates believe in a “hearty” Second Amendment to the same degree that Ron Paul does. Ron Paul is the only one who advocated a repeal of any gun law currently on the books.
2.Ron Paul has stated that he would pardon everybody who is in prison solely for victimless crimes, both drug and gun law convictions. In my view, these laws are immoral as well as (in the particular US context) unconstitutional. Prison is hell. To set even one man out of prison who shouldn't be there is an act of high moral importance. To set twenty thousand men out of prison is an act of absolutely awesome moral power. If Ron Paul manages to set 200,000 innocent men free, he'd be better then any President in recent history by that alone.
3.US medical regulations are set in a large degree by the Federal Government and especially the FDA which regulates procedures.
4.The FCC is not really necessary – q.v. here “Free to Choose”, where Friedman details the property-based system that existed before its enactment. The people do not need to own the airwaves.
5.The gold standard model is a wonderful step towards free banking.
6.I don't see it my duty as a Jew to live in Israel. I do see it my duty as a human being to support individual liberty. Further, since I intend to get married soon, to a non-Jew of all things, who wants to have children with me, it is my highest moral duty to guarantee that my child will live in the country where he will have the highest possible chances of being free. This country is the United States.

11:10 PM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

Allanea:

1. I believe gun laws are necessary; these laws do not prevent legal citizens who are not felons or mentally ill from owning a gun, however, they prevent an even wider spread of guns to illegal aliens, felons and the mentally ill. Beyond that, I believe in a right to bear arms. I think it is insane to get rid of all gun laws, and fail to see why this is justified.

2. It is hardly wise to have 20,000 people in jail suddenly out on the street lickety split. And those in jail for drug reasons are not wholly nonviolent; gangs, the mafia, and terrorists are involved in drug growing and distribution. That does not mean that I believe drug mules should face 20 years in prison, but that means reform drug laws, do not get rid of them. (and legalize marijuana)

3. So what does Ron Paul say with regards to the FDA? Get rid of it? I do not know his health policy, but if that is what he says, then what would he say to those kids who ingest poisoned medicine? No big deal?

4. The FCC is necessary for a simple reason that it regulates the science of the airwaves. Simply put, without the FCC, you would get cross signals and the "bleeding" of signals left and right. In fact, that is why the FCC was enacted. (during the radio age)

5. The gold standard is a horrible step towards free banking, given as I said, there is not enough gold in the world to back it up.

6. One day I hope to make aliyah, and so when Jews leave Israel, it saddens me. I do not believe it is a religious requirement to live in Israel, but I do think it is a moral imperative I am not fulfilling, to make the Jewish nation as strong as possible.

I once again would like to add that you have yet to reply to my comment about Ron Paul's anti-semite and mental patient backers, as well as his insane foreign policy. You also have yet to respond substantively to what I stated about the IDF. I hence assume you agree.

11:27 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

1.This is your opinion. I ask you, why giving the President authority to ban the import of firearms by type by executive order helps combat any form of crime, or how, say, 922[o] combats crime. I bet I won't see an answer.
2.It is my sincere belief that, if a person has not been convicted of a violent crime or property crime in addition to his drug offenses he should be pardoned and let out of prison. The Federal government has no authority to regulate the private consumption of any drugs. I agree with Clarence Thomas on this issue.
3.The FDA should in fact be eliminated. It's regulations are often politically motivated [think the morning-after pill hoopla], and it does not do anything that was not done before it by private agencies, the state governments, and that is not accomplished by civil suits. Further, the FDA often requires corporations to re-test medicine that is already deployed and in use abroad, costing hundreds of millions of dollars [literally] in the process. What we need to do is to devolve medical testing to independent, private standard institutes such as the ISO people and such as the very people who inspect Jewish food for kashrut. This will benefit us all in the long run, and should a corporation fuck up, they can be, should be, and likely will be sued out of existence.
4.The problems of signal bleed were present to a much lesser degree in the 1910's then is commonly believed today. IN the age of Internet and digital radio, where thousands of stations can operate where only two or three could on the same diapason if bandwidth, we need regulation less, not more, then ever before.
5.Do you know of a better step towards free banking?
6.Please explain how it is my imperative to make the Jewish nation strong?
7.Some of Ron Paul's backers are anti-semites. And some of them are patently mad. But you know what? That doesn't reflect on him whatsoever. In the same sense, if I support Ale Yarok – for whom I voted in the last elections – that doesn't make them right-wingers.
8.Moshe Feiglin supports cutting the IDF budget 30%. I agree with Moshe Feiglin. Enough said.

1:30 AM  
Blogger Red Tulips said...

1. Many Repubs would support the end of the assault weapons ban, so that is a non-issue of a question.

You are forgetting that gun laws also make it possible to prosecute those who have ILLEGAL guns, who generally have them for an illicit purpose. Yes, they do not put a stop to criminals owning guns. But as a matter of fact, states have been able to get criminals off the streets simply through going after those who own illegal guns. If a prosecutor is given a case which has only circumstantial evidence, but possession of an illegal firearm (allegedly used in the crime), then there can at least be conviction of the criminal for possession of an illegal firearm. Society is safer.

There is just no logic behind abolishing all gun laws. It makes the streets safer. Even the NRA believes in some form of gun laws.

I do not know what 922[o] is.

2. The very distribution of drugs happens through gangs, the mafia, and terrorist networks. Therefore, if someone is convicted of a drug offense, they are likely also linked to some gang or another. It is hardly wise to let out 20,000 gang members at once. That said, I do believe the drug laws should be reformed, and soft drugs like marijuana legalized.

3. The FDA also ensures the food we eat is safe and the medicines do not have poison in them. If a private governing body regulated this all, then there would not be the same public accountability that the FDA is subjected to. You mentioned the "politics" of the Plan B pill. The solution there is simple: elect a president who would legalize the Plan B pill! As far as the Orthodox Union, which inspects and certifies kosher food, that simply cannot be a government body, as that would entangle [synagogue] and state. It also hardly involves life and death matters.

4. As long as there is still the same technology of radio and television waves, there will be the concern of signal bleed without the FCC. Yes, there is the internet and satellite. They are not subjected to FCC regulation, and so your point was spurious.

5. As a matter of fact, I do know of a better step towards free banking: open up the Federal Reserve to more accountability, and lower the reserve amount that banks need to have on hand on any given day. Other than that, I am not a banking expert; all I know is that the gold standard is literally impossible to implement, as, as I said, there is not enough gold in the world to back up the US economy.

6. I view Israel as vital to the interests of the Jewish people; I guess you do not. I think all Jews have a moral duty to make Israel as strong and successful as possible because it is our homeland and heritage.

7. Many of Ron Paul's backers are anti-semites. You have to question why they back the man.

I have no problem with you saying "the IDF's budget should be cut 30%." Maybe it should! I hardly have access to the IDF's budget and see what it is being spent on. But that is a totally seperate question from whether Ron Paul should be spouting the "evil influence" of the Israel lobby. It is totally seperate from whether Americans in general should be "resentful" for the money they loan out to Israel. If Israel needs less each year for the IDF, then it is up to Israel to let that be known. It is not up to Americans to single out Israel as the one nation amongst all others to suddenly not get aid.

4:25 PM  
Blogger Allanea said...

1.Look 922[o] up, wikipedia is friend.
2.Really? Got any stats to back that up? Gang membership is a crime in and of itself in most states. More interestingly, Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who will legalize marijuana.
3.Multiple private governinng bodies – like the private governing body that governs HTML standards. That's how your computer can read stuff on my computer. Or think of the private governing body regulating safe ammunition manufacture. The reason that you can safely purchase ammunition without it making your gun explode through overloads is private self-regulation of the industry. You also may or may not know that, but Kosher inspectors used to – and in Israel, still do – inspect the slaughterhouses and food production facilities for hygiene concerns, too. That was one of the big reasons Jewish communities had less concerns about food quality.
4.I am fully aware that the Internet and satellites are not subject to FCC regulation. However, their existence increases the competition in the comm sectors, making the existence of government agencioes less necessary. Signal bleed, to whatever extent it may exist – and it's never been as huge a concern as you make it out to be – can be handled by state governments and civil suits.
5.Hard currency is impossible? That's interesting. Please provide proof of that statement. Interestingly, Ron Paul is advocating a gradual transition to the gold standard rather then immediate elimination of the Fed.
6.I view individual liberty as the single vital interest to the interests of all people.
7.Ron Paul has not been spouting anything about the influence of the Israeli lobby except for that one newsletter article. I believe – and even leftist sources agree – that he didn't write it. Ron Paul has never backed down from an opinion simply because he believes it is unpopular, and I don't see why he would do it in this instance. If he believed in the Jewish world conspiracy he'd still be spouting this crap. Further, Ron Paul supported Israel's strike on the Osirak reactor, when even the great Reagan didn't.

Ron Paul does not advocate ending aid to Israel, but he advocates ending all foreign aid. Every military which received US aid has been negatively influenced by it. I have a friend in Egypt who tells me the money their government receives is also being spent in a corrupt fashion. I have no problem believing it.

We already know farming subsidies are bad, why should we believe foreign-country-subsidies are good?

3:01 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home