On the surface, this makes Ron Paul look like he earnestly wants to combat terrorism and build a foreign policy that addresses the root causes of suicide terrorism. However if you have researched the role of Mossad and how they infiltrate dissident groups like al Qaeda and Hamas, you will discover that many acts of suicide terrorism are false flag attacks in which the alleged perpetrators are patsies. The only way to fight terrorism and prevent it from occurring is to understand the concept of false flag terrorism as practised by Mossad and Israel and not 'fall for it'. Because by not reacting in the way Israel intends you to behave in response to this terrorism i.e. being tricked into thinking these acts have been committed and masterminded by Muslim fundamentalists or whichever group the Israelis have targeted to be the 'bad guys', you are taking away the secondary gain aspect of doing such false flags, removing the motivation for the perpetrators to continue doing these acts. While America remains ignorant about the true nature of these terrorist acts and responds to them as the puppet leaders manipulate them to do, then the false flags will continue to occur. It's a case of America saying, "Huh, I know what you've been doing; what you're up to and I'm not going to fall for the same trick again." Unfortunately at present the vast majority of the American public are in the dark about Israeli false flag terrorism and that is why America is highly vulnerable to another attack (see Israel's desired goal of America attacking Iran). Back to Ron Paul: in light of the fact that 9/11 was a false flag and not an act of suicide terrorism, his appointment of an academic who specializes in suicide terrorism and promotes the events of 9/11 as an act of suicide terrorism, further reinforcing the false mythology of 9/11 in the public's mind, his actions are not so benign, and can only be interpreted as an attempt to defend his position that 9/11 was caused by bad American foreign policy, a stance that is increasingly becoming less defensible as further information about the Mossad links to 9/11 are coming out. In other words, he is trying to save face and using such appointees to hold up a false belief which he has promoted to the public and on which he has based much of his campaign platform on. It doesn't matter how many advisors he attaches to the campaign, a lie is a lie and cannot be shored up. And that is why Ron Paul's campaign is doomed for failure. He ran his campaign on the premise that he was the only principled candidate and that was a false premise. He is a gatekeeper like nearly all of the rest except Nader, Gravel, McKinney, Weldon and a handful of others and cannot claim the higher moral ground in the face of the cowardice he has shown. There are parallels between his campaign and Alex Jones' venture to promote himself as one of the few truthtellers and this is probably why the two are drawn to each other and indirectly or directly promote each other. Don't get me wrong, Ron Paul is not a monster; in fact he is in many ways 'much better' than the majority of the frontrunners, but he is no savior, no paragon of virtue, no beacon of truth and his supporters need to get past the cult-like aura that has been created around him and view him realistically, warts and all. It may not change their minds about voting for him, but it will give them a better understanding that the Ron Paul campaign is only part of the very big picture and that they as people looking for a savior, can be easily manipulated.
excellent comment... if you haven't already, start your own website..
Post a Comment