http://www.americansf...

While I whole-heartedly support the end of all aid to Israel, Egypt and ALL other foreign governments on principle, and taking into account the fact that we (RP2008) would like to get "Israel's supporters" on board for RP, as an Arab-American who COMPLETELY supports RP on ALL his positions, I find the flyer DISTASTEFUL and offensive playing into paranoia of all things Arab and making Israel a victim being forced to live in a "highly dangerous neighborhood."

Statements such as "Why can?t Israel do what they think is in its best interest without seeking approval from Washington?" are feeding into the notion that Washington has Israel's hands tied when in fact ANYONE with an awareness of ME ploitics knows its the other way around.

Success comes from speaking the truth. There is a way to rationalize with people and get there support without resorting to such cheap, politically expedient tactics that is more principled and ethical -- if only we could all adopt those principles, ethics and mannerisms of Dr. Paul maybe then we can move this country towards a higher morality. If we have not learned at least this from Dr. Paul after this election then that would truly be a loss to ourselves as a country.

So is your recommendation that we shouldn't use it? Or are you okay with using it to try and persuade a pro-Israel potential voter to vote for Ron Paul based on what you see as false arguments as presented in the flier? (which is a MUCH easier sell than convincing him that his entire "protect innocent Israel from it's inherently evil enemies" view of the middle east is incorrect to begin with)

I guess it's whether or not an individual should use arguments to promote Ron Paul that he himself may not agree with - and thereby furthering the persons incorrect assumptions, but possibly gaining his vote. Or do you risk "correcting" their false assumptions, but risk that they may now be less likely to vote Ron Paul?

Not rhetorical or sarcastic... I'm thinking out loud here.

I honestly have gone through a similar dilemma regarding Ron's "pro-life on the state level" stance. I am pro choice - and no, kicking it back to the States technically isn't acceptable to me - I believe that abortion is covered under the 9th amendment. However, is it wrong of me to approach people who i have reason to believe are pro-life and sell them on the mindset that the "states should decide" even though I may not be 100% on board with this argument?

Hi Evan

Appreciate the thoughts. Had to go and check on the 9th amendment - admittedly its been a LONG time since I last read the constitution. Though I'm not clear how the 9th applies to abortion - an issue that (for now) we differ on as I am in agreement with Dr. Paul. I'd have to devote more time to it at a later time.

My baseline principle is to not undercut what is believed to be true for political gain. Frankly I do not care for spending time trying to "convert" someone with a neocon mindset -- the effort is wasted imho. I like Dr. Paul's unyielding stances in the face of all that is thrown at him and though his responses re the ME/Israel are not radically different from the essential content of the flyer, he does - to me - show an incredible skill in framing arguments convincingly with reason while at the same time avoiding any kind of hyperbole.

My post was simply to say that (taking the specific example of the flyer and the ME issue) this was pandering to those we supposedly "need" to convince to vote RP at the expense of another group - Arabs/muslims (incorrectly all the same in the American public's mind).

Staying on principle cannot be overstated - this tactic is against the principles of RP and that's why if its done imho it comes at the expense of another voter group. So you may be "winning" some but you are also losing others.

As for the abortion issue maybe we can discuss that at another time because to me from a moral, medical and legal view point it has never been discussed intelligently by far too many.

I think its a great flyer.

It does not seem "anti-arab" to me, just pro-israel. I am going to use it.

You guys got off on a useless time-consuming tangent. Evan likes to argue, everyone avoid talking to him until the 6th.

Hi Matt

Well to say that the flyer does not seem "anti'Arab" is quite a statement having read the flyer fully after your post. It certainly makes statements that are reinforcing factual misperceptions held by neocon type "pro-Israelis" (at least they believe they are pro). And in my view that in of itself is not the best way to approach people. You are free to do what you want and your sense that it is just "pro-Israel" is - I think - out of touch. Have you actually dealt/ been friends with people of Arab background? A rhetorical question since its clear to me at least it seems unlikely.

You are free of course to do whatever you want and if its a tactic to get pro-Israel people on board for RP then fine do it - we are all free agents here.

I don't know why you would think that a discussion on a message board is useless. Its all for getting RP to win in the end and that is our common goal so lighten up.

I wish you well.

I also did notice on the forums someone else mentioned that Egypt is listed as one of Israel's enemies... despite the fact that Egypt has signed a peace treaty and has open relations with Israel. (someone know the details/truth-value on this offhand? I'm too lazy to wiki right now)

I guess it's the equivalent of making an anti-illegal immigration flier that refers to Mexico as one of America's enemies. I can see how it may upset some people.

I wrote the guy and asked for the word doc and maybe we can tweak it and still end up with the best of both worlds:

a targeted flier for Jews nervous about Israel that does not further stereotypes.

Wasn't it reaching out to racist bigots for support that got us in trouble with those news letters from way back when?

It's Isreal that's manipulating the U.S. government - not the other way around.