RE: Joseph Farah Attacks Ron Paul

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Leo/FightNWO-Resisting World Government
Date: Jun 15, 2007 12:08 PM


WND blows for the most part...minus a few good reads. After reading what the Republican Liberty Caucus Of Texas has to say, scroll down & read the worldnet daily article by Joseph Farah.

Leo/fightnwo
----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
Thanks: Republican Liberty Caucus Of Texas
Date: Jun 15, 2007 8:48 AM


I recently posted a bulletin about Joseph Farah betraying conservatives and supporting Fred Thompson even though he said he did not know much about him. In his most recent article he's shown his true colors, he's not just a sellout he's taken it upon himself to be Ron Paul's enemy.

The traitors email address is:
jfarah@worldnetdaily.com

Please take the time to let him know what you think about his attacks on Ron Paul


Mr. Farah,

I am a life long Conservative and I thought World Net Daily was a source to be trusted but now I know that your publication is not what it appears to be. You have shown a callus disregard for the truth and exposed yourself to be either lazy or you are simply trying to deceive your readers. In a recent article you endorsed Fred Thompson yet admitted you didn't know that much about him. Does that mean you did not know he sponsored and voted for McCain/Feingold ? If you have any journalistic integrity you would explain why you failed to mention that to your readers. Or is that the part about Thompson you didn't know? It took me about two minutes of searching on the Internet to find that out.
Now you have resorted to attacking Ron Paul. The most incredible thing you said was:

"Let me tell you something else that disturbed me about Paul's position on amnesty for illegal aliens.
In the most recent debate, he implied amnesty wouldn't be such a bad idea if we could stop attracting illegal aliens with welfare-state programs.

This demonstrates, again, a fundamental misunderstanding of why illegal immigration is so threatening to our country.

Hardened criminals come to the U.S. illegally.

Terrorists come to the U.S. illegally.

Drunk drivers come to the U.S. illegally.

Millions of low-skilled workers come to the U.S. illegally and transform our culture.

I listen to the last debate again and Ron Paul didn't even come close to implying that amnesty was a good idea.

Ron Paul: "I voted for the 700 mile fence though that was the weakest reason but for other reasons, to enforce the law is important and border security is important. "We've talked about amnesty which I'm positively opposed to, One thing we have not talked about is if you subsidized something you get more of it. We subsidize illegal immigration we reward it by easy citizenship either by birthright or amnesty. We force our states and local communities to pay for their health care & education why wouldn't they bring their families? Because of our economic conditions we do need workers but if we had a truly free market economy,the illegal immigrants would not be the scapegoats."

You seem to be putting a lot of effort into attacking Ron Paul but you failed to mention some other things about Fred Thompson that most true conservatives would be disturbed by. Like the fact that Fred Thompson somehow managed to avoid the draft during Vietnam, Ron Paul served honorably as a Flight Surgeon. Fred Thompson made huge amounts of money from being a lobbyist. One British company alone Equitas Ltd paid him $760,000. Fred Thompson also had the reputation in the Senate as being lazy.
Contrast that with Ron Paul who has never been a lobbyist, He has never voted to raise congressional pay. He has never taken a government-paid junket. He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program. He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

You dismiss a man of impeccable character for Fred Thompson. I know who you are now Mr. Farah , a fear mongering Neo-con. You joyfully spread Bush's propaganda about the Iraq War . I don't usually quote a Democratic, but in the words of FDR, I'm not going to fear, fear itself anymore.

Here's links to some real journalists who actually did their job.

Thompson Will Take On Outsider Role After Playing Access Man

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061102078.html


Thompson and the 'Laziness' Issue

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18999838/site/newsweek/


Of Tulips and Fred Thompson
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19140623/site/newsweek/page/0/

I used to post links to WND articles in support and considered myself a loyal reader. But that ends now. I know you are a Judas among true conservatives, and I will spread that fact about you and WND to as many people as I can.

Phil Pepin

This was in response to this article:

Why Ron Paul is disqualified
Posted: June 15, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56177



Why Ron Paul is disqualified

---

Posted: June 15, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

For a long time, I have considered Ron Paul to be among a small handful of principled members of the U.S. Congress.

I respect the fact that he reveres the Constitution and takes it seriously.

He and I were virtually alone on the national stage in calling on Congress to debate a declaration of war before invading Iraq. Had we done so back then, it would be a little more difficult for people like John Edwards and Hillary Clinton to dismiss so cavalierly their previous votes to authorize combat.

If I were in Congress, my voting record would be closest to the voting record of Ron Paul – no question about it.

But I want to be clear about why I oppose Ron Paul's bid to become president.

The main reason is this: He is clueless about the nature of the threat we face from Islamo-fascism. He is clueless about the nature of the conflict in the Middle East, a subject I have studied intensely for 30 years.

Paul actually blames American interventionism in the Middle East for our problems with Islamo-fascism and the attacks of Sept. 11. In the May 15 Republican debate in South Carolina, Paul said it was America's history of interventionism in the Middle East that sparked our problems with terrorism.

"They attack us because we've been over there," he said. "We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think [Ronald] Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics."

Paul called this "blowback." He illustrated his point by blaming the 1979 Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini revolution on CIA involvement in installing the shah 26 years earlier, not on U.S. undermining of the shah in his last days in power.

While I am not a defender of the way the war in Iraq has been waged by President Bush, Paul essentially calls for running up the white flag of surrender to an enemy that seeks America's destruction. It is a wholly untenable position he shares with people like Rosie O'Donnell and Bill Maher.

He also flirts with many of those who believe 9-11 wasn't really an attack by Islamo-fascists at all but an inside job by the U.S. government. While I take a backseat to no one in my distrust of government, these conspiracy theorists Paul courts are, quite simply, doing the propaganda work of America's fiercest enemies.

America has made many foreign policy mistakes in my lifetime. We have indeed intervened militarily too often. I have preached non-interventionism many times. However, America is under siege from Islamo-fascist enemies. We've been attacked – the worst ever in our history. This is no time to back down or even to appear to be weak.

It would be disastrous if we cut and run now as Ron Paul suggests.

Let me tell you something else that disturbed me about Paul's position on amnesty for illegal aliens.

In the most recent debate, he implied amnesty wouldn't be such a bad idea if we could stop attracting illegal aliens with welfare-state programs.

This demonstrates, again, a fundamental misunderstanding of why illegal immigration is so threatening to our country.

Hardened criminals come to the U.S. illegally.

Terrorists come to the U.S. illegally.

Drunk drivers come to the U.S. illegally.

Millions of low-skilled workers come to the U.S. illegally and transform our culture.

Yes, I would like to dismantle the welfare state, too. But it would still be no substitute for securing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws.

The defense of the country is a paramount issue in a presidential election. It is the most important responsibility of the executive branch of government. Yet, Paul's positions on the key defense and security issues of the day are closer to those of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry than Ronald Reagan.

That's why, for me, he's disqualified – even if he had the support necessary to win, which he doesn't and never will.

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. His latest book is "Stop The Presses: The Inside Story of the New Media Revolution." He also edits the online intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes his sources developed over 30 years in the news business.