Republican Presidential Nomination

Ron Paul: "I Agree With Those Two Basic Fundamental Premises of Zionism"

|

The first thing I noticed as I approached the hotel where Ron Paul's Meredith, New Hampshire, town hall happened yesterday was a line of bearded men, mostly young, wearing what struck these eyes as the traditional regalia of the Hasidim. They were hoisting signs reading things such as "Don't Support 'Israel'" and "Authentic Rabbis Always Opposed Zionism and the State of Israel."

When I chatted with a couple of them, they claimed neither support nor opposition to Paul per se; they just said they like to appear near big political events for press attention for their cause. They had just arrived from that morning's Concord debate, and would be heading to a Romney event in Exeter later. Political stances based on whether or not the Jewish people are properly out of exile in Biblical terms and thus ready to reclaim the Holy Land are usually not apt to catch fire in America, even piggybacking on to the Republican primary. If you are intrigued by their ideas and would like to read their literature, have at it.

Some of the protesters came in to watch Paul's beyond-packed event; and in the Q-and-A Paul was asked (not by one of them) about his position on Israel.

Paul's answer, in part: "I would want to maintain very close relations with Israel, I want to be a good friend of Israel. I also want to respect them…I do not think the U.S. should undermine their sovereignty in any way. The establishment of Israel came about in a movement called Zionism, and Zionism had two basic principles, one was independence and self-reliance, and I agree with those two basic fundamental premises of Zionism.

"I also don't think we should tell them what to do. If they want to have a peace treaty with their neighbor and think they can work it out, they shouldn't have to ask us for permission…they shouldn't have to ask us permission to defend their borders, that should be their business. I also…believe I should not take money from anybody here and send money to Israel….

"The benefit to Israel, first you give money, that implies we own you, and second is if you cut out all foreign aid, Israel comes out ahead because their neighbors get about five times as much assistance than Israel gets….We should be friends, we should trade with them, I would encourage them to become the Hong Kong of the Middle East…have a really affluent society.. to control them…and hold them back, I think that is not necessary….Netanyahu was before Congress this year…he said we do not need American troops to defend our country…Israel can take care of itself and i think we should respect that."

Whether that's an accurate and complete assessment of Zionism's "fundamental principles" is arguable, but this was an interesting laying out of a foreign policy of friendship rather than vassalhood that should be a perfectly acceptable model for our foreign relations with any other nation.

More on that Paul Town Hall yesterday, and it's still not too late to pre-order my forthcoming book about Paul, Ron Paul's Revolution.

NEXT: Obama's Chief of Staff Hits the Bricks, Snowbilly Endorses Newt, Muslim Man Charged With Plotting to Blow Up Florida: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I always thought this was the proper way to cut the umbilical with Israel.

    Isreal’s such a big boy now, it doesn’t need the USA’s assistance. Congratulations Israel, you’re all grown up now! Whose-ah big boy?

    This provides a convenient excuse to wash our hands of that entire clusterfuck.

    I doubt the media will go for it.

    1. Israel: Wearing Big Boy Pants!

  2. Israel comes out ahead because their neighbors get about five times as much assistance than Israel gets

    Great point!

    1. It would be a great point if he were running for world dictator instead of president. Israel gets a shitload more US aid (2.4 billion) than Syria (zero), Iran (zero), Lebanon (zero), or Egypt (1.7 billion). We send less than a billion to whatever they’re calling the West bank/Gaza.

      Also, Paul seems to miss the point. We’re giving Egypt foreign aid so they’ll do what we want– not attack Israel.

      1. Something to consider, the support for Israel is to keep conflict going. Why, because the US financial elite years ago realized that the Middle East countries were not going to cooperate (read bend over)so they needed a way to play the middle, and use Israel toward this end. Sure there are those who for religious reasons support Israel, but these people are also played as tools.

        1. Consider that until recently Israel was the only democracy in the middle east, and is still the only one that recognizes some semblance rights for its citizens (and it does a pretty shitty job of that with its Arab citizens). We have supported Israel because they’re more like us than their neighbors. They’re our strongest ally in the region.

          1. That word (ally) does not mean what you think it does.

            1. Please, do correct me.

              Do you think they blew up our spy ship 40 years ago, or something?

              1. Why yes! We Do!

      2. “Also, Paul seems to miss the point. We’re giving Egypt foreign aid so they’ll do what we want– not attack Israel.”

        I see.
        Are we giving Israel foreign aid so they won’t attack Egypt?

        1. We’re giving Israel foreign aid so they can support a larger military, deterring attack.

          I’m not defending that as a good idea. However Paul saying “Hay Israel let me help you by stopping all foreign aid” is laughable on its face.

          1. It’s a damn good idea. If Israel (or any other country) wants some type of support from the U.S., they should do it the old-fashioned way: trade.

            1. Israel and the US do trade… a lot. Actually we have an 800 million dollar yearly trade deficit with Israel. So should we only give them 800 million dollars in foreign aid?

              1. HOLY SHIT, that’s only for January. We have a 7.8 Billion dollar annual trade deficit with Israel.

                And you want to stop defending the gold mine! Let them get genocided to cut our debt? That’s cold. Kidding. Sorry.

                1. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 11:26PM|#
                  “HOLY SHIT, that’s only for January. We have a 7.8 Billion dollar annual trade deficit with Israel.”

                  How much is cheery-picking paying these days? Enough to support brain-dead ignoramuses?

                  1. NO YOU ARE STUPID YOU STUPID FACE!

                    1. Oh Sevo no, he rolled out the capslock on you. Dude, are you okay? Speak to us Sevo, speak to us!

                    2. Irony is a lost art.

                2. A trade deficit is significantly different from a handout, not just because it’s non-coercive but also because it involves a roughly equal exchange of currency for goods. I don’t see how that’s relevant here, from either perspective.

          2. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 10:26PM|#
            ‘We’re giving EGYPT* foreign aid so they can support a larger military, deterring attack.’

            FIFY, bozo. Unsupported claims, are, well, bullshit.

            1. So your claim is also bullshit?

              We aid both Israel and Egypt to bring them closer together by being our mutual friend and interest. We can, by threatening to remove said aid, influence to some degree their decisions. We use that influence to encourage trade and increase profits for US corporations, and via taxes, government revenues.

              Ron Paul thinks it isn’t worth it. I’m not so sure.

              1. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 11:52PM|#
                “So your claim is also bullshit?”
                Not my ‘claim’, bozo, and I’m sure the difference is beyond your comprehension.

                1. Google “US Israel trade deficit” and prove me wrong.

                  I double dog dare you.

                  1. if we quit meddling and allow some long-standing peace agreement to actually be reached in the region without outside interference, which decreases the use of a local treaty, and let some peace develop, it helps commerce and raise living standard of locals of various middle eastern countries.

                    then living standard rises, so will the citizenry of those regions, and people demand a more suitable government for their rising living standards and commerce. it’s the only way. bombing them back to the stone ages only increases the stranglehold of superstition and religion in their daily lives. one has to look no further than the dark ages of europe to see a trend.

                    letting them develop peace independently is the only way long-term wise. it is not to say it will be without struggles.

              2. Ron Paul thinks it isn’t worth it. I’m not so sure.

                Nowhere have I read Paul argue against trade with Israel, which is not the same as “aid”. If aid was cut off, it would still be in both our interests to trade with each other.

                1. And if government aid were axed, I have no doubt that Jews the world over would contribute privately to sustain it. This is exactly how things should be.

                  Israel was formed in the first place under pressure from a worldwide Jewish lobby, and donations from Jews living in the U.S. and U.K.

  3. He’s clearly speaking in code.

    1. Yes. It’s the most anti-Semitic thing I’ve ever heard.

  4. Inbf TEH NEWZLETTERZ!!11!11!!!!

    1. Dead. Stephanopoulos killed them, the arrogant bastard.

  5. I always thought Zionism had something to do with computers.

  6. Sign up for the Ron Paul Music Bomb and invite all your friends! http://www.facebook.com/events/259729074095040

  7. I like how the Rick Santorum Money Bomb Ad is placed at the end of the article, before the comments.

    One thing you can say about reason.com visitors, they really LOVE Santorum.

  8. I could see Adolf Hitler saying the exact same fucking thing…. except with a phlegmy accent.

    1. Well, Hitler was dead before there was an Israel.

      1. Israel sprang from his corpse as a fungus.

        1. Colorful, but dumb.

  9. “…second is if you cut out all foreign aid, Israel comes out ahead because their neighbors get about five times as much assistance than Israel gets…

    Ron, if you really think that, you’re a very ignorant man. If you don’t think that, why do you say things you know aren’t true?

    1. Why not? They can at any point, “go rouge” and go after Israel. Or more likely, they can (or already do) clandestinely sponsor attacks against Israel. In either case they’d be doing it with all the money, resources and weapons given to them by the US.

      1. I’m not sure you thought your response through.

        Why does Ron Paul want to be best friends with TERRORIST STATES?

        1. but we are ALREADY friends with them. Saudi Arabia? Hello? Egypt and Libya? before the failed “Arab-spring” (which the administration and neocons don’t want to admit) and now after with a Muslim-brotherhood controlled Egypt and Al-Queda controlled Libya?

          1. so, we could still remain “friends” but at least we could just stop giving them money and resources

            1. You misunderstand. Your comment suggesting that Israel’s neighbors are simply terrorist Muslims waiting to wipe Israel off the map is completely at odds with Ron Paul’s “Be friendly, trade, make friends with people who hate us only because we fuck with them” analysis.

            2. And how do you conduct a free trade agreement without giving another nation money or resources?

              1. A free trade agreement is anything but free trade though. In principle, he’d like to abolish all “free trade agreements” since none are needed for any free trade between private citizens of different nations.

                And free trade between citizens does not mean trading weapons, government issued aid and resources.

                1. well, ok private companies can still trade in weapons. Still a heck of a lot better than government committing billions of money and military aid.

                  1. Free trade causes a country to increase its resources, right? You claim that Israel’s neighbors will use their resources trying to destroy Israel. Therefore free trade will cause more resources to be used trying to destroy Israel. Do you get it?

                    1. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 11:41PM|#
                      “Free trade causes a country to increase its resources, right?”
                      Oh, well, not “cause”, but…

                      “You claim that Israel’s neighbors will use their resources trying to destroy Israel. Therefore free trade will cause more resources to be used trying to destroy Israel. Do you get it?”
                      Well, no. And neither do you.

                2. Ok so somehow when Ron Paul is elected president He’ll dissolve all world governments and Libertopia will spring from the ashes?

                  You’ve got to differentiate between what can happen and what should happen. We’re never going to agree on the latter.

                  1. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 11:38PM|#
                    “Ok so somehow when Ron Paul is elected president He’ll dissolve all world governments and Libertopia will spring from the ashes?”
                    Uh, care to put that in English?

                    “You’ve got to differentiate between what can happen and what should happen. We’re never going to agree on the latter.”
                    I’ll bet you thought there was a coherent thought in that statement, didn’t you?
                    Posting in English really helps.

              2. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 11:20PM|#
                “And how do you conduct a free trade agreement without giving another nation money or resources?”
                Uh, trade with them? Just a suggestion to someone who is obviously a bit confused.

                1. Trade is literally exchanging resources or money for money for resources. You would not voluntarily exchange said resources or money unless you were better off afterword. Therefore free trade increases a country’s resources or money.

                  Econ 102

                  1. Stupid 102:
                    “And how do you conduct a free trade agreement without *giving* another nation money or resources?”
                    See that “giving” in there, dipshit? See that?
                    I was wondering how stupid you are and now it’s obvious.

                    1. Give is both a synonym for “exchange” and “donate”. I understand your confusion.

                    2. Give is most certainly not a synonym for exchange. Crack a dictionary you FACTPWNED cunt.

              3. Re: The Derider,

                And how do you conduct a free trade agreement without giving another nation money or resources?

                Nations don’t trade. Only people trade.

                And foreign aid is not trade by any stretch of the imagination. It is a forced wealth transfer.

      2. But that’s exactly the point – if we hadn’t equipped their armies by giving them “aid”, what exactly would they be going to war with Israel with? Old soviet stuff?

        And honestly, all we have to do is stop selling them replacement parts.

    2. Because the fans eat it up!

    3. Re: Anal Vaneman,

      Ron, if you really think that, you’re a very ignorant man.

      Presumably you know something he doesn’t. What is it?

      1. Just the implication you know something Ron Paul doesn’t is enough for the professionally snarky.

  10. I think it would be good for him to mention more often that he was one of the small handful in Congress who voted against condemning Israel for their strikes against Iraqi nuclear facilities in 1981.

    1. I’m not an expert on his legislative history, but didn’t he vote against every “congressional condemnation” or whatever?
      “Dr. No”, right?

      1. Sure, and his point would be that under the fluid ideology of most Congresspeople, they’ll swap allies and in so doing actively support many of the same authoritarian forces that later attack their own citizens rights and sometimes even the US. US support of corrupt regimes in Afpak, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. has hurt us, yet the same full-throated defenders of the war in Iraq would have been condemning aggression against it under the exact same pretense of nuclear buildup.

        His ideology has led him IMO to make correct decisions regarding that bombing, nation-building in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq, etc. He should highlight that.

  11. The correct term for the ideology that supports the existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East is “Tzionism”. The word “Zion” in Hebrew means “penis” or “gun”. Yes, the Hebrew word for “penis” is the same word for “gun”, make of that what you will.

    Hopefully this knowledge will bring as big a smile to your face as it did mine.

    1. No, the word for penis is “zayin” not “zion”. Neither of those means gun, except maybe as slang.

      1. And the Hebrew letter tzadik is commonly transliterated as ‘Z’, hence “Zion” instead of “Tzion”.

        1. And the Hebrew letter tzadik is commonly transliterated as ‘Z’, hence “Zion” instead of “Tzion”.

          It’s commonly, but incorrectly transliterated as “Z”. /z/ is a voiced alveolar fricative, where as the Hebrew letter tzaddi is a voiceless alveolar affricate.

          By the way, I remembered it wrong. zayin in biblical Hebrew meant “sword”. I confused sword with gun. Oh well, we all know that the pen[is] mightier than both the sword and gun anyway.

          1. And Tzadik is the guy from Tony Toni Ton?.

            JOOTZ

          2. I have a question about this “Penis Mightier”. Does it really work? Because I’ve tried a lot of products…

        2. it’s tsadi not tzadik. Tzadik is ‘righteous’

          alef bet vet gimel daled heh vav zayin chet tet yod kaf khaf lamed mem nun samech ayin peh feh tzadi qof resh shin sin tav

          I still remember my alef-bet!

          But you are right. It should be Tziyon instead of Zion.

      2. No, the word for penis is “zayin” not “zion”.

        Yes, but think of it pronounced with an American accent.

    2. First of all its not “penis”, but rather “fuck”. Moreover, in Hebrew these two words are spelled differently. The meaning of “Zion”, which should actually be spelled something like “Tzion”, is Israel. The word “fuck” should be spelled “Zion”. Anyhow, in Hebrew they’re pronounced and spelled differently. So cut the nonsense.

  12. The fact that Ron Paul understands Zionism correctly and supports its principals is the reason I can support him, in spite of many of his supporters who do not understand and have knee-jerk blame Israel attitudes.

    1. I think the issue is that there seems to be two meanings or at least connotations, similar to the definition of “liberal”: the classical version (Jefferson et. al. were called liberal), accurate to the meaning of the root word and the current more popular usage

  13. Man, this just makes me want to join the Zionist Club even more. Where do I sign up?

  14. If Ron Paul said “As Commander in Chief I will unilaterally disarm all US nuclear weapons” I would vote for him. Honestly. until then I don’t buy his pacifist shit.

    1. The Derider|1.9.12 @ 11:35PM|#
      “If Ron Paul said “As Commander in Chief I will unilaterally disarm all US nuclear weapons” I would vote for him. Honestly. until then I don’t buy his pacifist shit.”

      And if you had a brain cell, that might mean something.

    2. Pacifist? Where did I miss that? Or is our 11 year old visitor just pulling things out of his diaper?

      1. He criticizes Obama for using drone strikes to fight Al-Qaeda because of the immoral civilian casualties. Civilian casualties are inevitable with the use of nuclear weapons. Why wouldn’t he disarm?

        1. re: The Derider,

          He criticizes Obama for using drone strikes to fight Al-Qaeda because of the immoral civilian casualties. Civilian casualties are inevitable with the use of nuclear weapons. Why wouldn’t he disarm?

          What a great argument. Why don’t you get rid of your car? You might lose control and kill a few pedestrians.

          Oh, you say you’re a careful, non-violent driver? Yeah, same thing with Paul.

          Idiot.

    3. Sure, if you want to surrender to China and the rest of the nuclear world. I don’t like nukes, but not having them would be like having a knife when the other big boys have guns.

  15. I’m not sure what purpose this title, or even moreso this entire story serve.

    But I would like to add one more thing: Doherty, you’re a punk-ass bitch who’s desperate to be on TV. Have a nice time saying Ron Paul “isn’t as libertarian” as you, as if you understand one bit what it’s like to struggle for something instead of sitting in your tower commenting on it. You and Gillespie both need to understand how our current welfare state, and the state of the world in general, do not make open borders a practical reality, and simply because someone does not advocate for the impractical idea of “open borders” (read Borjas) does not mean they’re not libertarian. You pseudo-revolutionaries are doing more harm to the cause than good when you advocate such things.

    1. Wait. I thought the author was that blond guy with the skinny nose who looks like a girl. Doherty, I read a good chunk of your book, but it was boring. Make this one shorter. Stop trying to be “even-handed” about Ron Paul. He’s the man and everyone knows that. Your book should show that. It doesn’t need to be endless praise, but has there really been another American politician like him …ever??

    2. You and Gillespie both need to understand

      Joshie my lad, I’ve taught public speaking and communication and one of the first things I cover is that when you define your audience’s needs, as by using the phrase “you need”, you immediately lose them. Because it’s rude, condescending and presumptuous.

      Please accept this lesson as my free gift to you. Door’s over there.

      1. Also, if communicating to people about things they have allegedly done or are doing wrong, it helps to have any evidence at all they have done or are doing those wrong things.

        1. Well, that too, of course. Heh.

  16. Political stances based on whether or not the Jewish people are properly out of exile in Biblical terms and thus ready to reclaim the Holy Land are usually not apt to catch fire in America,

    Are you sure? Isn’t that the basis of evangelical Christians’ support of Israel.

    1. It is, but it fails to resonate outside that segment of the electorate.

    2. Are you sure? Isn’t that the basis of evangelical Christians’ support of Israel.

      Not quite. The dispensationalist Christians believe that it’s imperative to fight Israel’s enemies and get as many Jews as possible “back” to Israel, so that Christ can come back and “rapture” (a word that does not appear in the Bible) all Christians prior to the Great Tribulation, which the dispensationalists believe will wipe out two-thirds of the Jews in Israel. That last detail is (understandably) seldom mentioned by the CUFI idiots when they speak/write about the need to Stand With Israel. http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north188.html

  17. Derider. If you love Israel so much, why don’t you move there? We absolutely do not need to be sending billions of dollars overseas to prop up governments we “agree” with. Remember what happened in Libya? Egypt? We were propping up hated dicatorships. That only compounds the hatred for the US when we are helping people oppress their citizens. I don’t get why Republicans don’t see this.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.