Ron Paul Channels Ward Churchill

Ward Churchill wrote it as explanation/follow up to the "Little Eichmanns" commentary:

I am not a "defender" of the September 11 attacks, but simply pointing out that if U.S. foreign policy results in massive death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned. I have never said that people "should" engage in armed attacks on the United States, but that such attacks are a natural and unavoidable consequence of unlawful U.S. policy. As Martin Luther King, quoting Robert F. Kennedy, said, "Those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable."

This is not to say that I advocate violence; as a U.S. soldier in Vietnam I witnessed and participated in more violence than I ever wish to see. What I am saying is that if we want an end to violence, especially that perpetrated against civilians, we must take the responsibility for halting the slaughter perpetrated by the United States around the world.

Ron Paul said it last night:

One of the highlights of the debate came when Paul said the United States has been bombing Iraq for 10 years and doesn't understand how the Middle East operates.

"Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting," Paul said in explaining his opposition to going to war in Iraq.

"They are delighted that we're over there because Usama Bin Laden has said, 'I'm glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.' They have already now since that time they've killed 3,400 of our men and I don't think it was necessary," he continued.

To which Rudy Giuliani, who was sharp last night, rightly and forcefully responded:

"That's really an extraordinary statement," Giuliani said, interrupting FOX News panelist Wendell Goler. "That's really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of Sept. 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I have ever heard that before and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11. I would ask the congressman withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that."

That gets you points on my scoresheet, Mr. Giuliani.  Mr. Paul, you can go home now.  You've been eliminated.  Did you watch?  If so, take a moment to vote in Wizbang!'s poll.

5/16/07 0850: Hot Air has the video.  1115: Oh, heck, here's the video here:

Comments

[Everett Thompson]

Ron Paul is an honest, intelligent,responsible American. No other candidate in this group has those qualifications. Julliani is no Hero and he could have pressed for an investigation into the 911 occurance and stopped the willful destruction of evidence but instead was a part of the coverup.McCain has no credibility and Ron Paul has won all debates hands down,

[Keith]

Giacomo Giuliani is a 3 time loser and a cross dresser.
That eliminates him in MY BOOK. BTW the 9/11 Commission reprt as well as the CIA backup Dr Pauls attack provacation explanation. Read a book once in a while!

[Giacomo]

Everett and Keith:

Ahem. I do read. Plenty. And I read enough to understand that blaming the victim as Ward Churchill and Ron Paul do is flat wrong. Muslim extremists attack non-Muslims simply because we exist in a world that they feel is theirs yet refuse to be subservient to their "one true religion." Which part of that construct would you have us accept in order to avoid attacks?

"They are delighted that we're over there because Usama Bin Laden has said, 'I'm glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.'"

Note what Bin Laden did not say in this paraphrase by Mr. Paul, that they would stop trying to kill us if we leave. Of course, even if he did say that, the evidence is fairly clear that that would not be truthful. And, if we did leave entirely, we'd be ceding to the recreation of the Caliphate that Bin Laden and the Islamic extremists want.