By Matt Parrott | 29 Comments | 
Print
Ben Stein Drops the A Bomb
Ben Stein
Larry King hosted a discussion between Ben Stein and Ron Paul on Monday that was ostensibly about the airline security fiasco. The discussion quickly turned into a heated debate between Stein and Paul about the root cause of the terrorist attack. Paul exhorted Stein to “think like a scientist” and try to figure out the real motivation behind these attacks. Stein tried to parrot the party line platitudes about them being enemies of America and bad people and stuff until he could no longer tolerate this sacrilege taking place right out in the open on his media . . .
Ron Paul insisted that “We’re the occupiers” one last time before Ben terminated the debate: “No, we’re not occupiers. That’s the same anti-Semitic argument we’ve heard over and over again.”
The typically unshakable Ron Paul was taken aback, blustering “That’s a vicious attack!”
Actually, no. It’s a desperate defensive maneuver. It’s a testament to the fact that the neocons have exhausted America’s reserves of jingoism and are running out of believable arguments to con the American people with. If there were a better argument, Ben Stein would have known it and used it. He’s perhaps more of a master of the zeitgeist than any other living person, simultaneously up to his (enormous) ears in legislation, economics, news media, pop culture, and religious influence.
Stein may have merely slipped up and admitted the obvious: that the entire thing is about Jewish influence on our foreign policy. Rejecting Middle Eastern imperialism is anti-Semitic. The truth is anti-Semitic. But I don’t think a man as intelligent and poised as he is would do something that consequential by accident. I believe this is the beginning of a sea change in political strategy, one in which a direct campaign tries to bury the Ron Paul Revolution and its Tea Party Movement under a tidal wave of negative publicity and accusations of neoheresy.Anti-Imperialism = Anti-Semitism
There’s a worn-out Gandhi quote that Ron Paul likes to repeat, “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” I believe the establishment has transitioned from the phase of ridiculing the Alternative Right to fighting them. This was most likely triggered by the recent polls which showed that the American people have become more favorable toward the Tea Party movement than either of the major parties. The likelihood of a Rand Paul victory in Kentucky confirms the seriousness of the threat.
Ben Stein, the mainstream establishment’s very own Baghdad Bob, is pulling out the big guns. If the Tea Party crowd thought they were going to be able to simply nominate and elect their own candidates to topple the current regime, they’re woefully mistaken. They’ll be called anti-Semitic. They’ll be called racist. They’ll be called conspiracy theorists. They’ll even be accused of terrorism. They’ll find themselves buried in a web of guilt by association.
We’ll find out in the coming months whether Middle America has become angry enough to stand up and remain standing for their sovereignty and their way of life. My money is on the establishment winning the upcoming electoral round, but at the cost of driving tens of millions of White Americans out of the mainstream and into our sphere of influence.
From Occidental Dissent, December 30, 2009
It’s not the NeoCons who are anti-Islamo-Fascist and wanting to fight back against the maurauding Muslim onslaught, it’s us Libertarians.
Islamo-Fascism is inherently anti-Libertarian. How can one call oneself a Libertarian yet be supportive of Sharia Law?
Ron Paul may not be an anti-Semite, but he’s certainly anti-Israel, and decided weak on fighting our enemies – the Islamo-Fascists. He may be a libertarian on domestic issues, but on foreign policy he’s gosh-darn awful, cowardly, and a diehard surrenderist.
Dondero,
Do you even know what this website is? We’re not concerned about terrorism because we don’t think Muslims belong in Western nations. Ron Paul has no interest in Sharia Law in Muslim countries and neither do we.
Excellent article and analysis.
Eric – rejecting liberal internationalism is “surrenderist?” You’ve got to be joking.
If you want to hear about how Americans should support a hateful and manipulate enemy like Israel in the face of “Islamo-Fascism”, maybe you should watch O’Reilly instead of reading the Occidental Quarterly.
And who in the name of God said anything about supporting Sharia Law?
“And who in the name of God said anything about supporting Sharia Law?”
Typical neoCON Zionist propaganda. (Calling David Horowitz?)
Very establishment-arian boilerplate at that.
This could be it, guys… Join the Tea parties… We need to show them we are ready to fight for the future of our children and our people, and that is not only OK, but the only good, right, and truly moral thing to do! Imagine electing someone not in the 2 joke parties. Fantastic.
On a secondary level I think Ben has it out for Ron simply because he is the leader of the audit the Fed bank movement. At one time the Jewish magazine “Commentary” was against racial quotas because they impinged on the economic well being of jewish teachers in NYC. What Ron is doing is coming close to the economic heart for all those smart jewish kids destined for middle managament at the Fed. Fed bank employment is a sweet deal for all those kids of Ben’s friends, good pay, but more importantly the water cooler talk allows one to make outsized portfolio gains from market timing. A good friend’s in-laws fortune came from cubicle sitting at the Fed by the father, their assets were in far greater amounts than the salary would provide alone.
If you lend support to Islamo-Fascism by pooh-poohing it, or pretending that it doesn’t exist, you are defacto a supporter of Sharia Law.
I could care less what this website is about. Bottom line: You’re either with us or against us.
In light of Major Hassan slaughtering 13 innocent soldiers at Ft. Hood last month, and the recent Islamic attempt at killing nearly 300 in Flight 253 over the skies of Detroit, we are at full War with Radical Islam.
Choose now! You’re either a friend of Liberty and preserving our Homeland, or you’re a sympathizer with our Enemies. During WWII those sympathic to the Nazis were either tarred and feathered or shot.
BTW, the individual who called me a “NeoCon,” obviously knows nothing at all about me. I’m a diehard proud 25+ year member of the US Libertarian Party, former Libertarian National Committeeman, in fact. Here’s a few of my positions:
Legalize Drugs
Legalize Prostitution
Legalize Gambling
Repeal Seat Belt Laws
End Affirmative Action
Abolish the IRS
Hardly what one would call “NeoCon.” Don’t think I’d be much welcomed at a NeoCon Pat Robertson or Gary Bauer or Bill Kristol conclave holding such views.
Eric:
You’re no libertarian, you’re a neocon. Do you even know what libertarianism is?
The anti-Gentile/anti-Christian Jews hate Ron Paul because he is so damn “goyish.” They simply cannot stand to be around a self-reliant white person that doesn’t do their bidding. If Ron Paul is an “anti-Semite” then good for him. The way things are now across the globe if you are NOT an “anti-Semite” you probably have your tail between your legs.
Let me translate Stein’s “It’s because they are Psycho” response to Paul’s asking why they hate us. What that Nut-Zionist meant was: “It’s because we love it when non-Jews kill other non-Jews in front of us.” They are chickenhawks who refuse to fight their own wars.
We should never be afraid to call Neconservatism what it is: EVIL. There is nothing “Conservative” about it. It spawned itself from the same Cultural Marxist cesspool Modern Liberalism came from. The Zionists simply Judaized Liberalism, drenched it with Hate and Violence and shrouded it with “conservative” rhetoric. A five-year old with the prerequisite will and courage could see through their wicked strategy.
These Jewish Neocons and their Gentile Bootlickers are not that smart. They are just super aggressive. They shut down debate like the Liberal Multiculturalists do. Too often we cower and run for the hills when they start screaming. WE need to activate our screaming voices. This search for “respectability” is getting us nowhere.
Happy New Years Patriots!!!!
Islamo-Fascists? My dear, you certainly have ended up in the wrong corner of the universe. Leave them alone, don’t import them in enormous numbers, and they are no problem at all. Islam is actually very weak; it can absolutely not defeat the Occident in a military conflict, but they are very good at immigration and breeding soldiers. Once they are inside our territories they can cause significant amount of damage. Hence, no or significantly restricted immigration from these countries; stop supporting Israel; no meddling with these countries, and the risk of terrorism is zero. That’s obvious. Israel acts as a chameleon with OUR face, with US money, with US technology, with US soldiers — no surprise these “Islamo-Fascists” are angry with US and the West. Stop the cause of their anger, and you stop the effect. Stop their ability to do violence by stopping immigration.
Peace and a happy New Year!
Dondero,
Do you favor cutting off all Muslim immigration and encouraging the ones already in the West to leave? Or do you have a better way of ending the threat of terrorism?
Eric, if you hadn’t just denied being a Neocon, I’d think you were trying to sound like a Neocon.
“If you lend support to Islamo-Fascism by pooh-poohing it, or pretending that it doesn’t exist, you are defacto a supporter of Sharia Law.”
Did you get that one from “The Dumb Jingoist Handbook”?
That’s the equivalent of saying “if you deny that the white race is a cancer, you’re a de-facto white supremacist”.
Fair question Richard. I would favor ejecting all Radical Muslims from the US. Those who pledge their loyalty to our country, our ideals, our Constitution, and show a knowledge of our history, would be fully welcomed to stay.
Absolutely NO! further immigration from Somalia, Nigeria, Yemen, Chad, ect…
A very perverse definition of libertarianism you hold.
Richard, if Dondero thinks seat belt laws impinge on negative freedom [a most contemptible concept if there ever were one], what do you think he’d make of the complete closing of borders?
Dondero,
So you and I both agree that there should be no increase of Muslims in America and even a reduction. So they will never make up more than the 2% of the American population that they make up now under my or your ideal scenario. Why go on worrying about Sharia and not just worry about immigration?
Dondero,
And secondly, as a libertarian do you worry as much about Mexicans bringing socialism as you do Muslims bringing Sharia? Hispanics are going to grow to 30% of the population within the next few decades and unlike Muslims will actually have real power.
“If you lend support to Islamo-Fascism by pooh-poohing it, or pretending that it doesn’t exist, you are defacto a supporter of Sharia Law.”
Eric,
Are you a supporter, de facto or otherwise, of the ‘Noachide Laws’???
http://watch.pair.com/law.html
(For some strange reason, I have a very strong suspicion you are!)
“Choose now! You’re either a friend of Liberty and preserving our Homeland, or you’re a sympathizer with our Enemies. During WWII those sympathic to the Nazis were either tarred and feathered or shot.’
Careful there with your calls to violence, slick, for you may be prosecuted one day for what you’re saying.
Seriously man, grow up and stop using these stupid, cartoonish slogans that the idiot shabbos-goy Bush ‘the lesser’ did over eight years ago. Its really embarrassing.
Oh, and btw, Mr. Dondero is Jewish (a ‘Bar-Mitzvahed’ one at that) -
—-
Eric Dondero, on November 15th, 2007 at 6:14 pm Said:
“My full name is Eric Dondero Rittberg. I am technically half-Jewish. My Mother is Jewish and my Father Italian.
“I am proud of both my Italian and Jewish backgrounds.
“And I have been Bar-Mitzvahed, and can read and speak some Hebrew.”
http://shadowdemocracy.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/ron-paul-has-shown-himself-to-be-an-anti-semite-and-a-racist/#comment-800
—-
Gee, you must have been a real ‘loyal’ staffer to Mr. Paul (LOL).
*He should have done a better job of screening you.
Eric,
Your list of positions,
“Legalize Drugs
Legalize Prostitution
Legalize Gambling
Repeal Seat Belt Laws
End Affirmative Action
Abolish the IRS”
would have made more sense if it was inverted. First things first.
Moreover, gambling is essentially legal already. Anyone can find a casino, racetrack, or lottery; they’re ubiquitous.
It is indeed hypocritical that the segment of prostitution that constitutes a billion dollar industry (pornography) “employing” (callously exploiting and meagerly paying) thousands of mostly white girls for a few years while they are young and attractive is protected and nurtured by the System, while a john who pays a hooker for sex is a criminal.
But my primary concern is this: As a “libertarian,” how do you rationalize totalitarian hate speech and hate crime laws and curbs on freedom of association (hiring, housing, clubs, political movements) together with anti-white discrimination in its endless forms, or rationalize libertarians ignoring these things? Logically, such issues should top the libertarian agenda; instead, they’re nowhere to be seen.
“Libertarianism’s'” concept of freedom is so selective and stunted as to be meaningless. “Freedom” so defined is mere hypocrisy.