Ron Paul warns of staged terrorist attacks on Alex Jones' (Prison Planet) radio show

[motivez]

Republican presidential candidate, Rep. Ron Paul, said the country is in "great danger" of the U.S. government staging a terrorist attack or a Gulf of Tonkin style provocation, as the war in Iraq continues to deteriorate.

The Texas congressman offered no specifics nor mentioned President Bush by name, but he clearly insinuated that the administration would not be above staging an incident to revive flagging support.

"We're in danger in many ways," Paul said on the Alex Jones radio show. "The attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that's in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment which endangers our troops and our national defense."

Paul was asked to respond to comments by anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan that the U.S. is in danger of a staged terror attack or a provocation of an enemy similar to the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 before the Vietnam War.

During the radio interview, Paul said the government was conducting "an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq."

The comments come as several prominent terrorism experts have warned the U.S. is facing an increased risk of attack this summer. Earlier this week, in an interview with the Chicago Tribune, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said he had a "gut feeling" the U.S. would be attacked again.

The remark angered some Democrats, who criticized Chertoff for being too vague. And some pundits seized on his remarks, saying the vague warnings were meant only to revive flagging support for the war in Iraq and Bush’s larger war against terrorism.

The Crypt's Blog - Politico.com

Well, this is sort of a sad update on a candidacy that I thought might have a chance to break into the mainstream.

Going on a show like this and lending credibility to someone like Alex Jones credibility really hurts the legitimacy of his candidacy IMO..

He's already on the fringes of what society thinks these days about various economic / government issues, and instead of making an effort to appear on venues where he can set the record straight and show the practicality of his views.. he goes on a show like this, further alienating him from what most of America believes.

I've been told that many of his supporters are nutjob conspiracy theorists who believe what Alex Jones tells them, and going on this show was a way to rally his supporters.. but lets look at the bigger picture here.. Chances are these guys aren't going to be voting in Republican primaries to begin with, so why is he spending his time doing something that can be used so easily against him?

The rest of his response was pretty decent actually, but the fact is that this will be played against him. It's not a very smart campaign move. Is he in it to win it or in it to make some kind of point?

Audio: http://prisonplanet.com/audio/130707paul.mp3

[Thorgrim]

Well he's right about the Iran thing, right wingers use that country as the whipping boy for everything

[Dumpy Dooby]

Funny that they quoted "great danger" but not the more important part, "U.S. government staging a terrorist attack." Did you listen to interview? Can you actually verify that's what he said? I haven't listened to it yet, but I find the article to be rather suspicious.

[thomez]

Alex Jones goes on a long rant, asking questions that he does not give Ron Paul a chance to answer. The final question that he asks is basically "Do you think we are in danger of another Gulf of Tonkin like attack?" and Ron Paul replies "Yes, I think we are in great danger...."

Listening to it and listening to Ron Paul quite a bit, it seems to me that he was answering the final question asked of him, not using the word "yes" to mean that he was agreeing with the entire rant or any other specific part thereof, like the very beginning where Jones talks about Sheehan saying the US could stage a terror attack

[Dumpy Dooby]

Yeah, I listened to it last night after I posted in this thread. I didn't hear where Paul says anything remotely close to what this thread is suggesting.

[Dumpy Dooby]

My response to his blog (assuming the response gets approved )

I find it to be rather curious that you elected to quote "great danger" but not "the U.S. government staging a terrorist attack."

Ron Paul, never once, said that he fears we're in danger of the government staging a terrorist attack on its own people. Your intellectual dishonesty is obesely pathetic.

The author of this article is nothing more than a propagandist. He's just smearing the name of a candidate with whom he doesn't agree. He's a pathetic little worm.

[motivez]

In response to Alex Jones' opening dialogue, he responds with "I think we're in great danger."

Of course if you're prone to wishful thinking about a candidate like Paul you're going to ignore the context of the question and the rest of the dialogue, that's expected.

There's more to it than whether or not his answer really meant what the article said it did, though, it's the fact that he even spent time on a venue like this.. and when you take his answer with the rest of what Jones had to say initially it looks really, really bad.

Is it fair? Maybe not.

[Donkey®]

Still no chance.

[lew]

Complete article is bullshit.


David Freddoso on Ron Paul on National Review Online

Robbing Paul of the Truth
Outing a misleading headline.

By David Freddoso

Think what you will of libertarian Texas congressman Ron Paul, but I’m crying foul over this post to the Politico’s “Crypt” blog: “Ron Paul warns of staged terror attack.” Paul simply did not say that the government is planning a fake terror attack, and to say otherwise is journalistic malpractice.

Robbing Paul of the Truth 07/15

Economics in Reverse 07/09

My first reaction to the Politico headline — most people’s reaction, I’m sure — was that Paul should not be elected or defeated, but institutionalized. Then I read what is actually posted there, and I saw no quote from Paul about a “staged terrorist attack.” I did see a summary by Politico blogger Dan Reilly that says Paul “clearly insinuated that the administration would not be above staging an incident to revive flagging support.”

So I listened to the interview, trying to find what Reilly describes. And I listened to it again. And again. And I heard nothing of the sort.

What I did hear was an unhinged radio host ask Paul a wide-ranging, minute-long, wacky question about terrorism, Bush the “dictator,” and neo-cons that ended with “How much danger are we in of some new Gulf of Tonkin provocation?” Paul begins his answer with, ”Well, I think we’re in great danger of it — we’re in danger in many ways.” But as he continues, Paul says nothing about a staged terror attack or the Gulf of Tonkin. Rather, he goes into his usual schtick, complaining about the “great danger” involved in the loss of “civil liberties” and the evils of U.S. Iraq policy. Then he speaks to the likelihood of a real terrorist attack — not a staged attack:

“I would say that we’re in much greater danger than we’ve been, even four or five years ago, whether it’s overseas or even by terrorists here at home, because I just think the policies are seriously flawed.”

So he’s talking about Iraq as possibly making us more vulnerable to terrorism. Call him wrong or even crazy, but this is just standard Ron Paul. It is nothing like a black-helicopter accusation that the government is planning a phony terror attack. If you actually listen to the exchange, the closest Paul comes to saying anything like what’s in the Politico summary comes when he faults the administration’s Iran policy:

“Right now there is an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that’s gone wrong in Iraq. And we’re quite concerned, many of us, that the attack will be on Iran and that will confuse things and jeopardize so many more of our troops.”

Call Ron Paul nutty if you like — and certainly this media appearance gives reasons for doing so (he almost predicts an economic collapse later in the interview). But when he says he sees the Bush administration trying to justify war with Iran (which is itself worthy of a headline), that’s just not the same thing as saying that the government plans to stage a terrorist attack to boost its flagging approval ratings. It’s not even close.

Paul is a barely relevant figure who has no chance in the election anyway, but you don’t need to like him to see the danger of this kind of sloppy headline-writing and summarizing. Careless reporters caused riots in the Middle East when they did a similar number on Pope Benedict XVI and his citation of Emperor Paleologus. The pope had actually given a very thoughtful and academic speech about Islamic-Christian relations, but thanks to the journalists, all hell broke loose. Other examples of this dangerous silliness abound.

The media has other problems besides its liberal bias, such as the need for quick sound-bites, inaccurate summaries, and headlines that often come at the expense of getting things right.

[Dumpy Dooby]

My favorite Ron Paul smear was this one:

Texas congressional candidate Ron Paul's 1992 political newsletter highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues.

Under the headline of "Terrorist Update, " for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions"- Ron Paul

"we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."- Ron Paul

"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." -Ron Paul

It's hard to believe that people actually believe he said that.

[AVengeance]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

My favorite Ron Paul smear was this one:

Texas congressional candidate Ron Paul's 1992 political newsletter highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues.

Under the headline of "Terrorist Update, " for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions"- Ron Paul

"we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."- Ron Paul

"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." -Ron Paul

It's hard to believe that people actually believe he said that.

Copy/paste from ThinkProgress? Every place I see any of these quotes, I see all of them. Good thing I'm voting on the issues rather than sound bytes of a particular candidate.