Ron Paul '90s newsletters rant against blacks, gays

[Snorri1234]

It leads me to believe that the fooking liberal cunts have had the best of you, and you have no comeback.

Well to be honest it's not like the damn liberal cunts here have comebacks either. Most of them are pansy ass little high school kids who think they have the answer to all of life's problems with their vast years of experience. Oh I forgot, they read Marx or heard some liberal pissy sermon in a classroom from some geek who teaches since he can't do anything in the real world. Go on liberals, make more victims out of people so you can justify taking other people's money for the common good. I'm sure someone somewhere had something go wrong in their life so we need a trillion dollar program to take care of it.

Wow......

SNORRI SEES THE LIGHT!!!!!!!!

It's all so clear to me now.

[heavycola]

order was restored to Los Angeles after the 1992 riots when blacks went "to pick up their welfare checks

The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are

I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming

Sounds ok to me...a little crass, but the residents of norse-land give it the thumbs-up.

What??? This is the "leik totalz wacist" comment?? This is not only true, but a brave statement to have made.

You will hopefully grow out of this. And maybe the sycophancy, too.

It was not a brave statement; it was factually incorrect and purposefully inflammatory.

Morality is genetic? Give me a fucking break. You it does you no credit at all. And then you, nappy rash, get piqued when someone says all catholics are paedophiles. If black people are criminal animals, and white people are honest, hard-working and honourable, then why can't catholics be nonces? Don't tell me you've never been felt up by the priests during one of your loony masses. The guy wears a dress, for f*ck's sake.

here is another statement:
It is not limp-wristed to decry racial discrimination, which is what this is, no matter how much you infantilise the language. I believe discrimination on the grounds of race is wrong not because i actually conform to some unimaginative stereotype you may have decided upon, or because the guardian tells me so, but because I understand that socio-economic factors and history have much larger roles to play than genetics. It is clear neither of you have a fucking clue what you are talking about.

[Napoleon Ier]

order was restored to Los Angeles after the 1992 riots when blacks went "to pick up their welfare checks

The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are

I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming

Sounds ok to me...a little crass, but the residents of norse-land give it the thumbs-up.

What??? This is the "leik totalz wacist" comment?? This is not only true, but a brave statement to have made.

You will hopefully grow out of this. And maybe the sycophancy, too.

It was not a brave statement; it was factually incorrect and purposefully inflammatory.

Morality is genetic? Give me a fucking break. You it does you no credit at all. And then you, nappy rash, get piqued when someone says all catholics are paedophiles. If black people are criminal animals, and white people are honest, hard-working and honourable, then why can't catholics be nonces? Don't tell me you've never been felt up by the priests during one of your loony masses. The guy wears a dress, for f*ck's sake.

here is another statement:
It is not limp-wristed to decry racial discrimination, which is what this is, no matter how much you infantilise the language. I believe discrimination on the grounds of race is wrong not because i actually conform to some unimaginative stereotype you may have decided upon, or because the guardian tells me so, but because I understand that socio-economic factors and history have much larger roles to play than genetics. It is clear neither of you have a fucking clue what you are talking about.

Where am I sycophantic? This from someone that stands to attention and licks clean its boots as soon as the system tells him to is it?
Furthermore, I have justified Dr. Paul's comments without resorting to ethno-differentialist or racist doctrine.

1. Read
2. Think
3. Post

The order is important.

[Guiscard]

This from someone that stands to attention and licks clean its boots as soon as the system tells him to is it?.

You're gonna have to provide some sort of evidence to back up shit like that, nappy.

[Dancing Mustard]

This from someone that stands to attention and licks clean its boots as soon as the system tells him to is it?.

You're gonna have to provide some sort of evidence to back up shit like that, nappy.

Don't hold your breath waiting for it...

[Napoleon Ier]

This from someone that stands to attention and licks clean its boots as soon as the system tells him to is it?.

You're gonna have to provide some sort of evidence to back up shit like that, nappy.

Does youtube count

[Snorri1234]

Does it suprise anyone that one side in this debate seems to attract people with the debate skills and intelligence of rabid monkeys?

I mean, why is it that I've never seen a post about "those neonazi-loving, gay-hating arseholes" but I am amazed to read about how everyone disagreeing with some comments immediately are "limp-wristed metrosexual liberals who worship Marx and are gay" and that there are actually people agreeing with that.

I mean, that post back there by bradleybadly doesn't resemble an argument in the slightest. It reminds me all the other bullshit rhetoric and demonization of the opposition done by way too many "patriots". It resembles religion in an eery way, as reason doesn't come into it anywhere. When you start calling other people gay and communists instead of actually listening to them, you're not actually helping your side of the argument.

[Napoleon Ier]

OMFG1111Snori sed leik monkeys n tahts racist n big-oh-ted

[Snorri1234]

OMFG1111Snori sed leik monkeys n tahts racist n big-oh-ted

See?

[Guiscard]

OMFG1111Snori sed leik monkeys n tahts racist n big-oh-ted

You've really mastered that style of humour, haven't you...

Reminds me of the time Luns mastered sarcasm. Wonderful.

[Dancing Mustard]

why is it that I've never seen a post about "those neonazi-loving, gay-hating arseholes" but I am amazed to read about how everyone disagreeing with some comments immediately are "limp-wristed metrosexual liberals who worship Marx and are gay" and that there are actually people agreeing with that.

Simple enough answer: It's because the right-wingers in this debate find themselves (once again) out-argued and without logical rebutals to back up their opinions. Resorting to baseless aspersions about our sexuality and backgrounds is all they have left to defend themselves with.

In other words, we win. Again.

[Napoleon Ier]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

[Guiscard]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

He didn't just state that, though, did he. It is the next step that counts, the step you make too. And you know it.

[Napoleon Ier]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

He didn't just state that, though, did he. It is the next step that counts, the step you make too. And you know it.

What do you find racist about calling th totality of the criminals animals? Was that comment referenced just to the negroes? No! So all you have is a "gut feeeling" that Ron Paul "may" be vaguely prejudiced.

[Snorri1234]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

No he didn't only state that the majority of rioters were black.

order was restored to Los Angeles after the 1992 riots when blacks went "to pick up their welfare checks

The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are

I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming

And besides, what is the point in stating that the majority of criminals are black? Does he think we don't already know that?

[Guiscard]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

He didn't just state that, though, did he. It is the next step that counts, the step you make too. And you know it.

What do you find racist about calling th totality of the criminals animals? Was that comment referenced just to the negroes? No! So all you have is a "gut feeeling" that Ron Paul "may" be vaguely prejudiced.

He said "order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."

[Napoleon Ier]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

No he didn't only state that the majority of rioters were black.

order was restored to Los Angeles after the 1992 riots when blacks went "to pick up their welfare checks

The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are

I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming

And besides, what is the point in stating that the majority of criminals are black? Does he think we don't already know that?

You've taken a few out of context extracts. Maybe he's making a point using that fact as evidence, I don't know. Furthermore, he's saying that whenthese lack people took their welfare checks, they were appeased : that isn't implying all blacks are inferior, only that a certain ethnic sub-strata has resorted to these criminal methods. For all you know, he could have gone on to state that we should give them more welfare. Unlikely but possible. So only your pro-active leftist imagination brought up on a diet of bigoted, yes, bigoted hatred of Southern American caucasians, has prompted these comments. And its pathetic and irritating.

[Guiscard]

No, you really don't. You're claiming Ron Paul is racist because he stated hat the majority of rioters were black, a simple evidence. This is fallacious logical extension. Just its so bleeding obvious to people with two braincells to rub together we're also ridiculing you, and you're whinging because unable to understand our rebuttals, you are confronted with our righteous anger for your calomnious accusations about an upright and moral citizen.

No he didn't only state that the majority of rioters were black.

order was restored to Los Angeles after the 1992 riots when blacks went "to pick up their welfare checks

The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are

I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming

And besides, what is the point in stating that the majority of criminals are black? Does he think we don't already know that?

You've taken a few out of context extracts. Maybe he's making a point using that fact as evidence, I don't know. Furthermore, he's saying that whenthese lack people took their welfare checks, they were appeased : that isn't implying all blacks are inferior, only that a certain ethnic sub-strata has resorted to these criminal methods. For all you know, he could have gone on to state that we should give them more welfare. Unlikely but possible. So only your pro-active leftist imagination brought up on a diet of bigoted, yes, bigoted hatred of Southern American caucasians, has prompted these comments. And its pathetic and irritating.

I do know, Nappy, I've read the newsletter. It is painfully obvious what he was saying. If you'd read into at all you'd realise he has actually denied these statements, said he never write them, that they are blatantly racist and were published under his name but not with his knowledge.

Which is equally as dodgy.

[Dancing Mustard]

Yep, I'm sure Nappy is right, everything we're quoting Big Ron on must be out of context. Here, look at this litle selection of quotes... how could we possibly imagine that they could ever have been used to endorse racial stereotyping:

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal,"

"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."

"By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government" and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.

Ha! Why the very idea that the man is a dirty great racist is laughable.

[Snorri1234]

You've taken a few out of context extracts. Maybe he's making a point using that fact as evidence, I don't know.

What possible point could he make that everyone not already knows?
Here's the full bit:
"The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible."

Furthermore, he's saying that whenthese lack people took their welfare checks, they were appeased

Noooo, the letter was very clearly saying that "the" blacks all live on welfare.

So only your pro-active leftist imagination brought up on a diet of bigoted, yes, bigoted hatred of Southern American caucasians, has prompted these comments. And its pathetic and irritating.

Wtf, even Ron Paul is not denying that it's racist. He is denying that he wrote it.

But can you actually debate without flinging insults at others for at least five minutes?

[Napoleon Ier]

You've taken a few out of context extracts. Maybe he's making a point using that fact as evidence, I don't know.

What possible point could he make that everyone not already knows?
Here's the full bit:
"The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible."

Furthermore, he's saying that whenthese lack people took their welfare checks, they were appeased

Noooo, the letter was very clearly saying that "the" blacks all live on welfare.

So only your pro-active leftist imagination brought up on a diet of bigoted, yes, bigoted hatred of Southern American caucasians, has prompted these comments. And its pathetic and irritating.

Wtf, even Ron Paul is not denying that it's racist. He is denying that he wrote it.

But can you actually debate without flinging insults at others for at least five minutes?

The point he's making is that they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible.

Those comments, written by Paul or not, are not racist. At best, they show a fear of young blacks : justified by the huge crime rates of 90s America.

[Dancing Mustard]

The point he's making is that they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible.

Is there any proof for any of those assertions? Or are they just the work of fevered imaginations?

Column B you say? Well thank you very much...

Those comments ... show a fear of young blacks : justified by the huge crime rates of 90s America.

No they don't, they show that he's making sweeping assertions about the lifestyle of underpriveliged blacks in America, assertions which are completely unbacked by proof.

Spin it as much as you like, it's not Ronny saying he's 'fearful', it's him saying that Black people in the USA are racist, hate-filled, willful criminals. Seriously, it's right there in the quoted text.

[Napoleon Ier]

I think that the crime rate and studies of ethnically ghettoised gangs are more than enough justification. Allogenous populaces always have this self-reclusionnary defense mechanism, it is an observational evidence. remember, this is 90s America, it was a different era.

[Dancing Mustard]

I think that the crime rate and studies of ethnically ghettoised gangs are more than enough justification

To assert that they "are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible"

I think not...

[Napoleon Ier]

I think that the crime rate and studies of ethnically ghettoised gangs are more than enough justification

To assert that they "are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible"

I think not...

That is not applied to all blacks though. To the extent he applies to the ghettoised criminal sub-strata, I find that comment more than acceptable and correct, just as a similar comment is appropriate about the Klan whith races reversed.