Ron Paul photographed with neo-Nazis Disowns Extremists but does Not Disavow The Support

I just love it when a picture CAN say a thousand words. Really gave me a laugh. Great catch, I applaud.

Ha,ha,ha,ha, thanks Joe, I'll try to remember that.

Absolutely.

If this is evidence, your logic is broken. But we already knew that a long time ago, didn't we?

The use of fallacy is proof of nothing but your wanton ignorance.

LOL.

I like how there's only two people that care enough to downvote. They've stopped responding to reasonable counter points to their insane arguments.

The soundness of my arguments aside, at least I don't take smiling photographs with known neo-Nazis.

Nice.....+^

"Hmmm, would you rather be photographed with some alleged racists that no one has even heard of and no one cares about, or would you rather be photographed with a world leader who was accused of murdering tens and thousands of his own of people."

Ah, here you go with the squirming, worming and rationalizations, I so aptly predicted.

First of all, I notice the weasel style of your semantics, such as “photographed with some alleged racists…”

You are attempting to make this sound as though Paul was just coming back from some errand and was simply “accidentally” caught in the photograph, nice try weasel. He was posing with them, he was smiling, and he fucking knows them personally, next.

There is nothing "alleged" about the people in that photograph, they are fucking neo-Nazis, nice try weasel, next.

“no one has even heard of and no one cares about,…” how well the people in the photograph are known or not known to the general public is beside the point, the point is was that Paul knew who the hell they were, and their association -including Paul's own- with David Duke, I guess you're going to try to tell me that nobody knows who the hell David Duke is either, nice try weasel, next.

“Would you rather be photographed with a world leader who was accused of murdering tens and thousands of his own of people.” Heads of state shake hands and do photo ops, I could just as easily show you the famous photo of Donny Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein, but the people in this photo are not heads of state-at least not yet- just a couple of neo- Nazis, again who Paul knows personally.

Holy shit, you really crack me up, you're like one of those fucking libertarians, who will attempt to rationalize anything in order to… hey, wait a minute, you're not LIKE a fucking libertarian, you ARE a fucking libertarian! Gee I almost forgot, the worming and squirming, the rationalizations, the general weaselness, yep, it's all making sense now.

I can tell you don't like the question because you dodged it lol

Alleged racist that no one has heard of or even cares about or alleged murderer of his own people: who would you rather be photgraphed with?

Oh and Ron Paul hires and works with Jews but you ignore that too...

"Worming squirming" and you're the first to worm and squirm on his response. LOL

I know wikipedia is down, but please go study what kinds of fallacies there, are and get back to us.

"Alleged racist that no one has heard of or even cares about or alleged murderer of his own people: who would you rather be photographed with?"

Hemm...This ranks right up there with the old-so, are you still beating your wife?-joke,
the question of course cannot be answered as either or, because the premise is in-congruent.

All I can say, is that heads of states do photo ops, regardless of what they are "alleged" of,
it is established procedure, Paul, on the other hand, knows these people, and either could have chosen not to take the photo with them, or expressed a deep regret at having been in such a photograph to the media, he chose to do neither. Nice try weasel.

The fact is that I don't know if Gaddafi really murdered tens of thousands of his own people, just as I don't know who these people are photographed with Ron Paul and who or what they believe in and nor do I care.

But this is what "they" say. So based on what "they" say, who would you rather be photographed with, a murderer or a racist?

It's an easy question don't dodge it.

Yeah, totally "valid" point. Its not like Obama agreed to support NATO (though the legality of that offered support is a bit questionable) in removing that very same world leader who was accused of murdering tens of thousands of his own people.

Newsflash! It is a world leader. When you, as a world leader, meet with another world leader in times of relative peace between the two nations, the typical expectation is that you are going to be civil with one another even if one of the world leaders is a murderous douche bag. Meeting with another world leader in the manner portrayed in the photograph supplied by yourself does not so much speak out about our world leaders personal views, who he sides with on complex issues, or who he takes support from but instead shows that he is attempting to be civil in a political game.

If Ron Paul were to be elected, he'd be expected by the international community, as well as a fair portion of the national community, to play ball like this even if the world leader he is meeting with is another murderous douche bag. And guess what, pictures like this would be taken of Ron Paul as well. The difference with Ron Paul in the picture provided in the original post is that Ron Paul is not acting as a political liaison to an asshole of a world leader, instead he is showing the kind of people whom he willingly, and personally, accepts support from, and in doing so it also shows us what kind of views Ron Paul has on issues such as racism.

"Oh and Ron Paul hires and works with Jews but you ignore that too..."

Well, so did Hitler, you know those High energy, Mesmerizing speeches that he gave, he was trained in voice and theatrical expression by a coach, who was a Jew, also, his personal astrologer was Jewish, Nazis -much like libertarians- will associate and utilize just about anyone to further their agenda, once that agenda is complete, they abandon and or have them killed, so I'm not ignoring anything, weasel.

So it's better to be photographed with a mass murderer then.

Ok glad we cleared that up.

See how silly this all is?

"The fact is that I don't know if Gaddafi really murdered tens of thousands of his own people,"

I will assume you do not live in a cave since you have Internet access, (unless it's one hell of a nice cave) but the general consensus was that Qaddafi murdered many of his own people, to me it really doesn't matter if a leader murders 10 people or 10,000 or 10 million, the point that is undeniable is many of his own people he had killed, so if you're claiming that you "don't know" any of this suggest a denial or break with reality, what's next, are you going to deny the Holocaust did not take place simply because YOU were not there, do you realize how idiotic Your rationalization sounds?

"But this is what "they" say. So based on what "they" say, who would you rather be photographed with, a murderer or a racist?"

"It's an easy question don't dodge it."

It is not an easy question, it's a loaded question, and you know it, no one's trying to "dodge it" my simple answer is neither, but you keep trying to compare the actions of what takes place between heads of state-such as photo ops which are pretty standard procedure- and a congressman, who is not a head of state and chose to actually pose smiling with his neo-Nazi associates, the conditions surrounding the photos is in no way synonymous, stop trying to make them so, weasel.

Bravo, could not have said it any better myself, I've always had a problem hitting my head against the brick wall of denial and stupidity, excellent post! +^

This fellow in the picture Eric Dondero, shares an amazing resemblance with Ernst Rohm, one of Hitler's oldest and closest comrades and head of the SA, before being murdered on orders from Hitler-Himmler convinced Hitler that Rohm was planning on starting a coup, which was a lie, but Hitler believed him-on the night of the Long knives.

Actually there is no mystery here, and it certainly can "add up" want to know more?

Thanks for the input, I would like to know about those states though.

Thank you.

In my many postings, I have stated that I am a realist, I attempt to identify-no matter how unpleasant-what's something actually is, not what it might be, or could be, but what something actually is, and in the case of Ron Paul, there is overwhelming objective evidence that he is a racist, and also is (and certainly has been) affiliated with neo-Nazis in the past, on that single substantiated evidence alone, Is this someone we want as president? I think not.

Perhaps the most annoying yet relevant aspect of Paul's "supporters" is there continued vehement denial of these verifiable facts, it would seem as though to "believers" in this political and human abomination of a man, absolutely nothing which is said, regardless of how factual, makes any difference, they simply want to believe.

I also do not credit Paul's popularity with the mainstream media, I see it as a much more grassroots effort which has been so far very successful, ironically in spite of the lack of support from the mainstream media, your comment that "I guess you can sell anything if you package and market it right." is absolutely correct, something Joseph Goebel's, Hitler's minister of propaganda demonstrated very effectively.

As far as Obama is concerned, and all the mainstream media attention that he receives, again you're exactly right, in reality, it is a soap opera, it is a dog and pony show designed to give the masses the illusion that they have participatory democracy, they don't, every four years a token gesture "choice" (Coke or Pepsi) is given to the masses to decide who their next "leader" will be, the fact of the matter is that Obama is a plutocrat, and plutocrats always act in the interest of plutocracy, to maintain it, that is their sole primary function, and Obama is no different.

Assuming that what I'm saying is true, that we do not live in a democracy, but a plutocracy, (Actually a plutocratic republic with a few democratic elements) the answer to resolving this crisis is actually pretty simple, those that are a part of, and support the system of plutocracy, must be eliminated, either through violent revolution, and or imprisonment, the wealthy will never relinquish their stolen wealth, no more than a pirate or mobster would freely give back their ill-gotten goods in order to help others, history is shown that it must be taken, by force, if there is to be any hope of social equilibrium.

Bills with earmarks towards Improving the condition of the 99% of humanity will not be coming anytime soon, ultimately, as unpleasant as it is, the relatively small percentage of those who are the controllers, sometimes referred to as the 1%, are basically sociopaths, (their attitudes and actions very clearly defining that clinical definition) and are not responsive to rehabilitation, counseling, or treatment, but must be locked away where they can no longer pose a threat to the welfare of humanity.

This is not an opinion, but simply an observation based on objective verifiable reality, the classic modus operandi of sociopathic governance (greed, self-centeredness, and a general lack of empathy for the plight your fellow human being) cannot sustain a village, town, city, or nation, it is ultimately cannibalistic and genocidal in nature, and libertarianism, is simply another expression, of that very dysfunctional and genocidal sociopathic philosophy.

As always, I remain, V