Ron Paul says our unfairness to Palestinians led to 9/11 attacks

Ron Paul says our unfairness to Palestinians led to 9/11 attacks
Ron Paul on foreign policy CNN Tea Party Debate 9/12/2011
Noam Chomsky on Ron Paul’s 9/11 Theories: “What He Said Is Completely Uncontroversial”
Ron Paul spot on in last night’s debate with 911 motivation (see following youtube) vs neoconned Rick Santorum:
9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal
 Former CIA Bin Laden unit head Mike Scheuer on C-SPAN’s ‘Washington Journal’ this past Saturday (what he said near end about Al Qaida bankrupting US was spot on as well):
 Neoconned Rick Santorum mentioned ‘Neoconned Newt’ Gingrich in his response to Ron Paul at the CNN Tea Party debate linked above:

Newt Gingrich: Propagandist for Israel
Ron Paul stands tall at GOP debate
Rock Star Welcome for Ron Paul at the California Republican Party Convention (in which he had the most votes!):


10 Responses to “Ron Paul says our unfairness to Palestinians led to 9/11 attacks”

  • Patriot says:

    Forwarded here from comment posted at bottom of:

    Steve wrote:

    Submitted on 2011/09/14 at 8:00 am

    Directly asked on the factual reality of Ron Paul in his statements to the causation of 9/11, Mr. Thomas Friedman delivered gobblegook. He did not answer directly nor indirectly. He obfuscated the entire issue.

    What could you expect, Why have Mr. Friedman deliver that answer? What can you expect from such a blatantly biased individual.

    The underpinnings, causation of 9/11, according to the CIA and Osama bin :Laden, was America’s complete and utter support of Israel despite the entire history of violations toward the Palestinian people, and the hegemony of the United States interfering with the nations in the Arab world. We provide Israel with military weaponry, have provided economic assistance to develop settlements in Palestinian lands, we support brutal leadership in Arab countries simply for their facade of peace with Israel.

    The support of Israel has cost the United States half its National debt, thousands of American Life, and their AIPAC lobby in the United States is an unregistered agent for the benefit of a foreign power, not the American People.

    Contortion of facts, twisted of the truth and outright lies from CNN. CNN, and Anderson Cooper, Why are you such propagandists to promote such lies to the American People?

    Fox is extreme right, and CNN is far right. Yes, CNN is liberal compared to Fox, but that is like saying Saddam Hussein is a humanitarian, compared to Osama bin Laden.

    He attended Hebrew school five days a week until his Bar Mitzvah, then St. Louis Park High School where he wrote articles for his school’s newspaper.. He became enamored of Israel after a visit there in December 1968, and he spent all three of his high school summers living on Kibbutz Hahotrim, near Haifa. He has characterized his high school years as “one big celebration of Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War.”

  • Jim David says:

    I had the pleasure of attending President Jimmy Carter’s quarterly breakfast this morning at the Carter Center. I was able to spend some time, one on one with the former president, discussing the Middle East situation and, in particular, the Israeli-Palestinian situation and the U.N. vote later this month. He corrected me when I mentioned his latest article, below, that I read it in the New York Times. He gave me a big smile and said, ” The article really appeared in the International Harold Tribune and the N.Y Times on line published as such.

    After the U.N. Vote on Palestine –

    I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
    After the U.N. Vote on Palestine
    Published: September 13, 2011

    In September 1978, Anwar Sadat and Menachim Begin signed the Camp David Accords, following four Arab-Israeli wars in which Egypt had provided the overwhelming military force that threatened the existence of Israel.
    The Egyptian Parliament and the Israeli Knesset overwhelmingly approved the agreement, which called for honoring all aspects of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242. One of its key provisions was the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security.” The accords called for the withdrawal of Israeli military and political forces from the occupied territories and the granting of “full autonomy” to the Palestinians.
    Six months later, a peace treaty between the two nations was adopted, which provided for Israeli withdrawal from the Egyptian Sinai, Israel’s use of the Suez Canal and full diplomatic relations.
    Since then, the terms of the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel have prevailed, but the key provisions of the Camp David Accords have been ignored. Following the death of Sadat, President Hosni Mubarak did not press for Palestinian rights, though most of the Egyptian people have continued to insist that Israel honor these commitments. The primary subject of concern is the continued occupation by Israel of the West Bank and East Jerusalem and the building of Israeli settlements on confiscated Palestinian land.
    President Barack Obama acknowledged the centrality of this issue in a major speech in Cairo in March 2009, when he called for a freeze on all settlement activity. Later, in May 2009, President Obama declared that the prevailing borders before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war — adjusted to account for some Israeli settlements near Jerusalem — should be the basis of a peace agreement.
    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected both proposals, continued building settlements, and raised unacceptable new demands for a permanent military presence in the Jordan River valley and recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state” (about 25 percent of Israeli citizens are non-Jewish).
    The U.S. has basically withdrawn from active participation in the peace process. The Palestinians and other Arabs have interpreted U.S. policy as acquiescing on the occupation and biased against them.
    Declaring that they are left with no alternative, Palestinians plan to request recognition of a Palestinian state later this month in the U.N. Security Council and General Assembly. In Egypt, militants have overrun the Israeli embassy and forced the evacuation of the ambassador.
    With the reasonable assumptions that Palestinian statehood is widely recognized despite a U.S. veto in the Security Council, what are the options for the future?
    With leadership from Europe, there will be an opportunity for the United States and other members of the International Quartet (Russia, the European Union and the United Nations) to put forward a comprehensive peace proposal based on the fully compatible U.S. official policy, previous U.N. resolutions and the Quartet’s previous demands. There is little doubt that the Arab Peace Proposal could be modified to comply.
    This can be followed by the full engagement of the United States and/or the United Nations in a mediation effort with direct or indirect talks — whichever is more effective — between Israel and the Palestinians. Subsequently, the same approach can be taken to resolve the issue of the Golan Heights with Syria.
    The Palestinians will have to refrain from violence, accept Israel’s right to exist in peace within the 1967 borders (modified through negotiations with land swaps), a long-term presence of either U.N. or NATO peacekeeping forces within Palestine, and the right of return of its people to its own lands (with perhaps a token number to Israel). Israelis would, in the process, accept the same borders and peacekeeping presence.
    The result can lead to peace for Israel and all its neighbors. The United States would regain its leadership role in the region, based on its commitment to freedom, democracy and justice, and a major cause of widespread animosity toward America within the Arab world would be eliminated.
    The alternative to this new international effort will be an expansion of hopelessness, animosity, and probable violence.
    Jimmy Carter, 39th president of the United States, is founder of the Carter Center, which works to advance peace and health worldwide.

  • Jim David says:

    The support of Israel’s occupation has cost the United States more than anyone will ever imagine. Here is an artcle written a few years ago by Turki al=Faisal, chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research & Islamic Studies in Riyadh.

    Failed favoritism toward Israel
    By Turki al-Faisal, Published: June 10
    Riyadh, SAUDI ARABIA

    President Obama gave a rousing call to action in his controversial speech last month, admonishing Arab governments to embrace democracy and provide freedom to their populations. We in Saudi Arabia, although not cited, took his call seriously. We noted, however, that he conspicuously failed to demand the same rights to self-determination for Palestinians — despite the occupation of their territory by the region’s strongest military power.

    Soon after, Obama again called into question America’s claim to be a beacon of human rights by allowing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to set the terms of the agenda on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Even more depressing than the sight of Congress applauding the denial of basic human rights to the Palestinian people was America turning its back on its stated ideals.

    Despite the consternation and criticism that greeted the president’s words about the 1967 borders, he offered no substantive change to U.S. policy. America’s bottom line is still that negotiations should take place with the aim of reaching a two-state solution, with the starting point for the division of Israeli and Palestinian territory at the borders in existence before the 1967 Six-Day War.

    Obama is correct that the 1967 lines are the only realistic starting point for talks and, thus, for achieving peace. The notion that Palestinians would accept any other terms is simply unrealistic. AlthoughNetanyahu rejected the suggestions, stating “We can’t go back to those indefensible lines, and we’re going to have a long-term military presence along the Jordan [River],” both sides have long accepted the 1967 lines as a starting point. In 2008, Ehud Olmert, then Israeli prime minister, told the Knesset: “We must give up Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem and return to the core of the territory that is the State of Israel prior to 1967, with minor corrections dictated by the reality created since then.” Last November, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Netanyahu declared in a joint statement that “the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.”

    One conclusion can be drawn from recent events: that any peace plans co-authored by the United States and Israel would be untenable and that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will remain intractable as long as U.S. policy is unduly beholden to Israel. Despite his differences with Netanyahu, Obama is stymied in his efforts to play a constructive role. On the eve of an election year, his administration will no doubt bow to pressure from special interests and a Republican-dominated Congress, and back away from forcing Israel to accept concrete terms that would bring Palestinians to the negotiating table.

    But U.S. domestic politics and Israeli intransigence cannot be allowed to stand in the way of Palestinians’ right to a future with a decent quality of life and opportunities similar to those living in unoccupied countries. Thus, in the absence of productive negotiations, the time has come for Palestinians to bypass the United States and Israel and to seek direct international endorsement of statehood at the United Nations. They will be fully supported in doing so by Saudi Arabia, other Arab nations and the vast majority of the international community — all those who favor a just outcome to this stalemate and a stable Middle East.

    Obama has criticized this plan as Palestinian “efforts to delegitimize Israel” and suggested that these “symbolic actions to isolate” Israel would end in failure. But why should Palestinians not be granted the same rights the United Nations accorded to the state of Israel at its creation in 1947? The president must realize that the Arab world will no longer allow Palestinians to be delegitimized by Israeli actions to restrict their movements, choke off their economy and destroy their homes. Saudi Arabia will not stand by while Washington and Israel bicker endlessly about their intentions, fail to advance their plans and then seek to undermine a legitimate Palestinian presence on the international stage.

    As the main political and financial supporter of the Palestinian quest for self-determination, Saudi Arabia holds an especially strong position. The kingdom’s wealth, steady growth and stability have made it the bulwark of the Middle East. As the cradle of Islam, it is able to symbolically unite most Muslims worldwide. In September, the kingdom will use its considerable diplomatic might to support the Palestinians in their quest for international recognition. American leaders have long called Israel an “indispensable” ally. They will soon learn that there are other players in the region — not least the Arab street — who are as, if not more, “indispensable.” The game of favoritism toward Israel has not proven wise for Washington, and soon it will be shown to be an even greater folly.

    Commentators have long speculated about the demise of Saudi Arabia as a regional powerhouse. They have been sorely disappointed. Similarly, history will prove wrong those who imagine that the future of Palestine will be determined by the United States and Israel. There will be disastrous consequences for U.S.-Saudi relations if the United States vetoes U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state. It would mark a nadir in the decades-long relationship as well as irrevocably damage the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and America’s reputation among Arab nations. The ideological distance between the Muslim world and the West in general would widen — and opportunities for friendship and cooperation between the two could vanish.

    We Arabs used to say no to peace, and we got our comeuppance in 1967. In 2002 King Abdullah offered what has become the Arab Peace Initiative. Based on U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, it calls for an end to the conflict based on land for peace. The Israelis withdraw from all occupied lands, including East Jerusalem, reach a mutually agreed solution to the Palestinian refugees and recognize the Palestinian state. In return, they will get full diplomatic recognition from the Arab world and all the Muslim states, an end to hostilities and normal relations with all these states.

    Now, it is the Israelis who are saying no. I’d hate to be around when they face their comeuppance.

    The writer is chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research & Islamic Studies in Riyadh. He was Saudi intelligence chief from 1977 to 2001 and ambassador to the United States from 2004 to 2006.

    Prince Turki al-Faisal on Charlie Rose

  • Patriot says:

    General (Ret) James (Jim) David who posted the above comment was excellent with his call on Phil Tourney’s ‘Your Voice Counts’ radio program (which can be heard via as James Morris was guest hosting) about the illegal Israel settlement building:

    Israel to build new houses in annexed East Jerusalem (can also see the illegal Israeli settlements in the ‘Miral’ film –

    Talking about the Israel Lobby with Brig. Gen. James David on the Liberty Hour as General David is mentioned on the cover of former Republican Paul Findley’s ‘They Dare to Speak Out’ book about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC and similar) on the US political system and media
    Talking about the Israel Lobby with Brig. Gen. James Davidon the Liberty Hour. The Lobby’s power blocked President Carter from speaking at the Democratic National Convention

    Passionate Attachment to Israel (by General James David):

    Scroll down to George Washington’s ‘Farewell Address’ (warning US to avoid passionate attachments and entangling alliances for foreign nations like we have with Israel which is taking US down as conveyed via as well) to read via the link at bottom of

    Paul Findley says it all in the following article:

    The High Cost of Subservience to Israel:

  • Patriot says:

    Rachel Maddow interviews Former President Jimmy Carter

    Jimmy Carter was spot on as well with the following response on C-SPAN:

    President Carter talks about AIPAC and Israel on C-SPAN

    President Carter, Mearsheimer and WaIt and The Israel Lobby

    9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal (Israel 1st neocon advocate John McCain mentioned):

    Former CIA Bin Laden unit head Mike Scheuer on C-SPAN’s ‘Washington Journal’ (call and his response included as what he said near end about Al Qaida bankrupting US was spot on as well):

    Israel prepared to stay in West Bank at all costs

    Can see the illegal Israeli West Bank settlements in the recently released ‘Miral’ film:

  • Jeanne says:

    Ron Paul is one of a very few who is willing to tell Americans the truth about why the Muslim world hates America as he did in the last debate. After the 9/11 attack, President Bush lied to each and every American when he stated that they hate us because they hate freedom. Ron Paul explained the 3 reasons OBL gave for his attack:

    US taxpayer support for Israeli occupation and settlements in Palestine
    Sanctions against Iraq
    US troops in the holy land of Saudi Arabia

    The latter 2 causes are gone but our support of the Israeli theft of Palestinian land and water and the imprisonment of Palestinians into cantons continues unabated.

    OBL warned the US in his 1998 interview with John Miller of ABC — anyone doubting that we were warned can google this interview.

  • Patriot says:

    Exactly right, Jeanne.. Look what former CIA Bin Laden unit head Mike Scheuer had to say about US getting attacked ‘because we are Americans’ via the following youtube:

    911 Motive & Media Betrayal:

    The war for Israel neocons had Bush use 9/11 as the reason to invade Iraq as well (based on their ‘A Clean Break’ via when there was no connection whatsoever between Iraq and Al Qaeda!

  • Patriot says:

    US set to dash Palestine’s great expectations (for AIPAC!)

    Palestate Bid (­How can Palestinians benefit from the UN General Assembly vote?)

  • Patriot says:

    Netanyahu: US easily manipulated

    Can see the illegal Israeli settlements in the recently released ‘Miral’ film via

Leave a Reply