Ron Paul to Keynote “Hard-Core Anti-Semite” Conference

Wikileaks and Julian Assange Hero Ron Paul will deliver the keynote address at the Fatima conference next month which the Southern Poverty Law Center describes as “the single largest group of hard-core anti-Semites in North America.”

Ron Paul will appear alongside the president of the John Birch Society and an assortment of other wingnuts at the two-day conference.

From the Southern Poverty Law Center

Beyond the obvious, what do a far-right Italian politician, the president of the John Birch Society and former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul have in common?

In early September, the men are all scheduled to speak – along with a lengthy list of archconservative clergy, lawyers and academics – at a conference in Canada sponsored by the Fatima Center, part of the “radical traditionalist Catholic” movement, perhaps the single largest group of hard-core anti-Semites in North America. [...]

Also scheduled to speak is Roberto Fiore, an Italian politician, who, when he won a seat to the European Parliament in 2008, was described by a fellow member of the body as “absolutely the most extreme person who has ever served in the European Parliament.”

John F. McManus, the president of the archconservative John Birch Society (JBS) is also listed as a speaker at the Canadian conference. JBS has been dogged for decades by charges of anti-Semitism, accusations society leaders vehemently deny. Those same leaders, however, take great pride in JBS being at the forefront of the conspiracy-fueled attacks on Agenda 21, a non-binding United Nations plan for sustainable development around the world. [...]

One of the speakers scheduled to join McManus at the D.C. conference is E. Michael Jones, the South Bend, Ind.-based editor of Culture Wars magazine. The magazine’s cover stories have included “Judaizing: Then and Now,” “The Judaism of Hitler,” and “Shylock Comes to Notre Dame.”

In an article raging about a new president of Notre Dame University several years ago, Jones charged that anyone who went to a mainstream university would emerge “with a Jewish world view … and maybe a Jewish spouse.”

Yes, but, Ron Paul opposes drones so I suppose he does have some common ground with characters on the far left.

  • Jimbob

    Anybody that is stupid enough to believe anything that comes out of the hate group Southern Poverty law center should check themselves into an insane ward. Looks like most of the people posting on this website should be checking their selves in.

  • PinkamenaPanic


    How’s about everyone who’s been telling us the actual facts – not the polished-turd lies – about Racist Ronnie and his ilk for as long as they’ve been playing the media?

  • Kerry Reid

    Isn’t it funny how the Pauls can take any stance, no matter how repellent and antithetical to progressive issues, and yet still we hear “Yeah, but we can make cause with them on this ONE ISSUE!” Even when, as Rand “Go Ahead and Use Drones on Liquor-Store Thieves” Paul showed, the pet issue the EmoProgs THINK they have in common with him is total BS.

    And yet, it is never possible for them to “Stand with Obama” on healthcare, immigration reform, a jobs bill, etc., etc., etc. Nope — they decide DRONES!!! is the only meaningful issue and refuse to make common cause on a host of other progressive issues.

    Truly, I am ready for the EmoProg Libertarians to shuffle off with the Teahadists and make their own sad-trombone third party. Then they’ll really SHOW US and WE’LL BE SORRY!!!

    • Kerry Reid

      Or, alternately, I am waiting for Elizabeth Warren to be president so they can use all kinds of disgusting epithets against her when she fails to do exactly what they want, when they want.

      • JMAshby

        I expect many of those who embrace Hillary will turn on her the day after the election. They call it the professional left for a reason.

        • ranger11

          And they will turn on her because this is what they do. Rebels rebel; all the time. I mean, they turned on Obama before he was even nominated in July of ’08. FISA!!!!

    • CygnusX1isaHole

      And yet, it is never possible for them to “Stand with Obama” on healthcare, immigration reform, a jobs bill, etc., etc., etc.


      a) Obama’s health care program is the Heritage Foundation privatization plan. For-profit insurance companies are the problem with health care, not the solution. Progressives should oppose the ACA. We can’t allow for-profit insurers to get a bigger hold on our non Medicaid, non Medicare health care system.

      b) The influx of immigration started with the passage of NAFTA by Clinton. Prior to NAFTA there were only a few million undocumented Mexicans in the country. Obama promised to address NAFTA. Of course he has not. Obama has deported more undocumented then Bush. We need to tear up these free trade agreements and stop interfering in the politics of Mexico. The problem with undocumented Mexicans would largely evaporate if we did. Obama will do none of these efforts. His corporate controllers need the cheap labor.

      c) Obama’s job’s bill is loaded with tax cuts and deregulation. Liberal economist and S&L regulator William K. Black wrote an article titled: The JOBS Act Is So Criminogenic That It Guarantees Full-Time Jobs for Criminologists. Obama’s job’s bill should be opposed by all progressives.

      • Kerry Reid

        “Progressives should oppose the ACA.” — Uh, hate to break it to you, but the Screaming-Meemie Kill-the-Bill Hamsherites tried that. Now, if you have the whip count for single-payer …

        Yeah, the DREAM Act is a terrible sell-out.

        Show me your legislative agenda that passes the purity test AND Congress as it actually is. Or just keep whining and losing. You’re good at that.

        • CygnusX1isaHole

          Opinion polls showed for many years that the public overwhelmingly supported a single payer system.

          Therefore it was simply a matter of activating the public through an information campaign where Democrats launched a non-stop media blitz.

          Leading Democrats could’ve held daily rallies and protests until the noise and momentum would’ve been too big to ignore.

          The president could’ve given speeches daily that he won’t sign any legislation that doesn’t contain at least a public option. (Obama ended up selling out the public option to big pharma in secret meetings.)

          The Democrats did NONE of this.

          Instead, they allowed the country to be enveloped by a corporate media disinformation campaign bellowing “death panels” and a “socialist takeover”.

          Why didn’t the Democrats fight?

          Why didn’t they allow single payer advocates to even have one seat at the policy table?

          Perhaps its because they believe in for-profit health care as much as their Republican twins.

          • Kerry Reid

            Oh, I see — you are a Bully-Pulpit Fetishist.

            Opinion polls don’t pass bills, Sparky. Legislators do. That’s the poll that matters. And apparently not enough Americans wanted single-payer to send people to Congress who supported that. Again — I invite you to show me the whip count for single payer. Did you miss that the first time I asked you? Were you at townhalls screaming for single-payer? You and your EmoProg friends clearly didn’t know how to elect enough people to Congress to give it a chance of passing.

            That “socialist takeover” language has ALWAYS surrounded healthcare. Why do you think LBJ stopped short of universal coverage, even though he had bigger majorities than Obama?

            Clearly, what matters most to you is punishing corporations — not helping kids and adults with preexisting conditions get coverage, etc. Fuck them — they are just collateral damage in that Big Anti-Corporate Revolution you’re waging in your head and on your keyboard. (Which probably came from a corporate-run sweatshop overseas.)

            And did you ever stop to think “Gee, if this ACA is such a big corporate blowjob, why are the health insurance companies AND the GOP spending millions to defeat it?” I mean — who fights against a big handout of free money, right?

          • CygnusX1isaHole

            The GOP is fighting to defeat it because they don’t want Obama and the Democrats to receive all the campaign funding from insurance companies going forward (especially since Obama passed THEIR plan!)

            Legislation to keep young adults on their parent’s policies could’ve been passed separately as well as eliminating caps on lifetime limits. Likewise, Medicaid could’ve been expanded separately. The age for Medicare could’ve been dropped to 55. All of these are genuine progressive options.

            Perhaps we can’t get honest legislators to represent single payer because corporate cash rules politics? Perhaps in the current rigged system where only money matters it’s literally impossible to elect 218 single payer advocates to the House and 60 to the Senate?

            Wall street destroys everything it touches. The housing market, stocks, bonds, food, the environment, climate and the oceans.

            To let the wall street beast loose and give it almost complete control over the non Medicaid non Medicare health care system will end up causing more suffering and death than if we did nothing. You lack any depth of knowledge on these issues so your ignorance can be excused.

            If you were truly a member of the left, well informed and educated, you wouldn’t need these obvious realities spelled out to you.

            Why not just admit that Reagan is your hero (or is it Dick Cheney?) and join the Republicans. No education or understanding of anything at all is required to be a ditto head Republican.

          • CygnusX1isaHole

            Single-Payer Advocates Have to Get Arrested to Get Heard
            LaborNotes, May, 2009:

            Eight doctors and other advocates of a national single-payer health care system–which would improve and expand Medicare to everyone–were arrested yesterday when they disrupted a Senate committee meeting on health care reform.

            The single-payer advocates wanted to know why experts
            representing their position were being excluded from the roundtable of 15 witnesses speaking before the Senate Finance Committee’s roundtable on health reform.


          • CygnusX1isaHole

            Study: Media Blackout on Single-Payer Healthcare

            NEW YORK CITY – March 6, 2009 – A timely new study documents a significant gap in recent media coverage of healthcare reform.

            Major newspaper, broadcast and cable stories mentioning healthcare reform in the week leading up to President Barack Obama’s March 5 healthcare summit rarely mentioned the idea of a single-payer national health insurance program, according to a study by the media watch group FAIR. And advocates of such a system–two of whom participated in yesterday’s summit–were almost entirely shut out, FAIR found. This despite the fact that single-payer polls well with the public, who preferred it 59-to-32 over a privatized system in a recent survey (New York Times/CBS, 1/11-15/09).

            Of the hundreds of major newspaper, broadcast and cable stories mentioning healthcare reform on NBC News, ABC News, CBS News, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, NPR and PBS’s NewsHour With Jim Lehrer, the study found that:

            -All but 18 stories made no mention of “single-payer” (or synonyms commonly used by its proponents, such as “Medicare for all,” or the proposed single-payer bill, H.R. 676)

            -Only five stories included the views of advocates of single-payer–none of which appeared on television.

            -Of a total of 10 newspaper columns FAIR found that mentioned single-payer, Krauthammer’s syndicated column critical of the concept, accounted for five instances, while only three columns in the study period advocated for a single-payer system.

            -The FAIR study turned up only three mentions of single-payer on the TV outlets surveyed, and two of those references were by TV guests who expressed strong disapproval of it.


          • kfreed

            You’ve just indicted the conservative-owned media. Congrats. While it says a lot about the media… and conservatives… it says nothing about Democrats. We’re fighting an uphill battle, no thanks to emo-stooges who are more than happy to assist the right in perpetuating fear of governement, particularly fear of the democrat in the White House.

            Here are your choices: you can either be part of the problem or part of the solution. Spreading emo-bullshit is part of the problem.

            Conservative owned media – you expected these people to be honest about health care reform and you blame Democrats for right-wing misinformation?:

          • kfreed

            BTW, the Tea party is gearing up for yet another round of August anti-health care town hall clusterfucks:

            You planning on being there? To assist or oppose the Tea Party?

            These are rhetorical questions you ought to be pondering. My money is on you assisting the Tea Party to insure that millions of people remain uninsured:)

          • Kerry Reid

            Show me the whip count for your progressive wet-dream agenda or GTFO.

            Or hell, start the revolution, Sparky. What are you waiting for? Permission from “leading Democrats” to hold rallies for single payer? Yeah. That’s how the civil rights movement did it — they waited for permission from Big Daddy politicians to highlight their issues. If you were truly a member of the left, you wouldn’t put your faith in top-down bully pulpit authoritarian fantasies of how progress happens.

            But hey – you know who supports Citzens United and “corporate cash” in politics? Glenn Greenwald. You know who spoke out against it? President Obama.

            But you just keep crying your nihilist pseudo-leftie tears about how the deck is stacked against you and you are so betrayed all the time. Because apparently you slept through the part of history class where they explained that the US was founded on slavery and genocide and corporate greed and all that “liberty” stuff was just really supposed to apply to wealthy white dudes. Or, you know, tell me what progressive president of the past would pass your purity test.

          • kfreed

            “And did you ever stop to think “Gee, if this ACA is such a big corporate blowjob, why are the health insurance companies AND the GOP spending millions to defeat it?” I mean — who fights against a big handout of free money, right?”

            That is a very good question. It seems to me the Health Insurance lobby is on the side of Tea Party extremist lunatics:

            “MEMO: Health Insurance, Banking, Oil Industries Met With Koch, Chamber, Glenn Beck To Plot 2010 Election”


          • kfreed

            What does this have to do with Ron Paul????? But since you insist on spreading stupid, allow me to correct you.

            The public does not overwhelmingly support single-payer. They fear it. I support it. The public in general does not. Take it from someone who participated in health care reform activism, including the WHIP COUNT.

            The public DID suport the Public Option because it meant that those with insurance wouldn’t be trading it in for an unknown. However, the single-payer crowd refused to support the public option.

            Why didn’t the Democrats fight? IDK. Where were you? I was at the DC Single-Payer Rally on my own dime in August 2009 via an invite form the California Nurses Association. I counted 300 people.

            Whereas the right managed to drum up thousands to attend their anti-health care rallies. When I suggested that left show up to the Summer 2009 town hall meetings (I even posted the meeting schedule at TPM courtesy of right-wing’ “Conservatives for Patient Rights”), I was told to go f—k myself.

            There you go. The left got it what it got thanks to the emo-stooges. We also got a 2010 Tea Party takeover thanks to them.

            I refuse to entertain this crap and am 100% out of patience.

          • kfreed

            P.S. Public opinion (conclusion, the public is confused and fearful)

            “A 2001 article in the public health journal Health Affairs studied fifty years of American public opinion of various health care plans and concluded that, while there appears to be general support of a “national health care plan,” poll respondents “remain satisfied with their current medical arrangements, do not trust the federal government to do what is right, and do not favor a single-payer type of national health plan.”[71]

            Politifact rated a statement by Michael Moore “false” when he stated that “[t]he majority actually want single-payer health care.” According to Politifact, responses on these polls largely depend on the wording. For example, people respond more favorably when they are asked if they want a system “like Medicare.”[67]”


      • kfreed

        Hate to break it to you, but the Kochs, who happen to fund the Heritage Foundation (as well as the Tea Party) are against health care reform and are trying their damndest to ensure Obamacare doesn’t succeed. Perhaps elements of a public/private system were extracted from the decade old Heritage solution, but there is much in the ACA that benefits the public, which is why the Kochs and their corporate cronies oppose it so vehemently:)

        The Health Insurance lobby is on the side of Tea Party lunatics. Ever stop to wonder why? I’m sure you haven’t. Again, a rhetorical question.

        “MEMO: Health Insurance, Banking, Oil Industries Met With Koch, Chamber, Glenn Beck To Plot 2010 Election”

  • trgahan

    Once again..evidence of what this new fangled faux-libertarianism is really all about…..

  • mrbrink

    I can’t wait to hear all about the Jew media cracking down on their freedoms.

    The explanations for being the guest of honor at an event paid for by “the single largest group of hard-core anti-Semites in North America” should be the stuff of bullshit-legend.

    Concerned Americans.

  • i_a_c

    Can someone please explain to me why the Pauls and people like them are magnets for anti-Semites? I mean, their opposition to civil rights makes them magnets for hardcore racists, but I don’t understand what about their views caters to anti-Semites.

    I grew up in the plains states, largely bereft of Jews, so I still don’t have any kind of concept of what it means to be an anti-Semite or why anybody would want to be one. I didn’t even get any of the jokes told at the expense of Jews until adulthood, not until I started watching Curb Your Enthusiasm, anyway.

    • kfreed

      The Pauls aren’t “magnets for anti-semites” or “magnets for hardcore racists”… they’re the original anti-semites and hardcore racists. A history lesson may be in order:
      History Commons:

      As expressed in Ron Paul’s newsletters:

      Wednesday, December 21, 2011 “Game Over: Scans of Over 50 Ron Paul Newsletters”

      • i_a_c

        Well aware of the Ron Paul newsletters. I guess I should rephrase: is there anything about the Pauls’ views on foreign policy or anything that would make them particularly attractive to anti-Semites? Is it the ending of foreign aid and hyper-isolationism? Didn’t Ron Paul say something to the effect of the US had no business in WWII? What else?

        • PinkamenaPanic

          Crank magenetism.

          Can’t type and eat a burger at the same time.

        • JimmyAbra

          I do think there is…I think their zero foreign aid to any may be disguised to either not send any money to Israel or just coincidentally appeal to those wanting to defund Israel. Of course the Pauls hide it as our aid is only holding you back much like civil rights laws have holding back those who were discriminated…it is mental gymnastics that make sense to them in a their lab brains without any social friction.

        • kfreed

          Ron Paul “says” a lot of things… mostly parroting the “concerns” of the anti-semite John Birch Society.

          Like this for example?

          “The main thesis of Part III is that all debt is created by a seemingly never-ending money supply that the Federal Reserve produces out of nothing, and that the income tax was created notonly as a means of paying off this debt, but also as a means of enslaving people to perpetual debt. The subject of war is also explored, as the filmmaker argues that World Wars I and II and Vietnam were provoked by central banking interests for monetary gain. The film thendisastrously veers off the deep end into its conclusion, which posits a coming One World Government that tracks every single person on the planet via an ID chip that locks all people intoa control grid.

          Anyone who is familiar with the work of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones will immediatelysee his influence on the filmmaker in this section of Zeitgeist. Besides Jones’ influence, most of the content in this third part of Zeitgeist originate from two primary sources (from which AlexJones himself heavily draws, whether consciously or unconsciously). The first is the various anti-government militia movements that cropped up in the 1980s and 1990s. The other source isevangelical Christianity, many of whose adherents believe that the Antichrist will someday comeon the world scene and create a One World Government with a one world currency, over which he will rule. Radical anti-government Christian organizations, such as the John Birch Society…”

          I repeat: A history lesson is in order:

          History Commons: “Context of ‘July 22, 2007: Ron Paul Says He Agrees with Almost All Positions of John Birch Society'”

          Ron Paul Newsletters: “What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays.”

          History Commons: John Birch Society Profile:

      • D_C_Wilson

        I really have to wonder why the Pauls still have any support from anyone on the left after those newsletters resurfaced.

        • kfreed

          Me too.

    • muselet

      The only thing I can think of is something like:

      The Pauls hate the Federal Reserve Bank → bankers are Jewish → hate the Jews

      I could be wrong—it’s happened before!—but that’s my guess.


      • i_a_c

        Makes about as much sense as bigotry possibly could, which is very little.

    • D_C_Wilson

      Bigots attract other bigots. If you draw a Venn diagram of the intersection of hard core racists and hard core anti-Semites, it would look nearly like two concentric circle.

    • Kylopod

      The American right has an anti-Semitic tradition that’s been mostly suppressed in the past 50 years, but still exists in certain circles–particularly among those that are labeled “paleocons.” Now, it would be highly unfair to suggest that all paleocons are anti-Semites, but for what it’s worth, that’s where old-school, traditional right-wing anti-Semitism tends to gravitate these days. The politics of the Stormfront crowd tends to be very paleocon; it’s not surprising that Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, endorsed Ron Paul in 2008.

      While today’s mainstream right likes to present itself as the Jewish people’s best friend largely because of its hawkish support for Israel, elements of anti-Semitism still bleed through on occasion, if you’ve ever listened to some of the rhetoric of Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck. It would be a mistake to think that being pro-Israel automatically makes someone free of anti-Semitism; in some cases, as in Pat Robertson’s apocalyptic rhetoric, support for the State is actually rooted in anti-Semitism.

  • hanadora444

    I went to a “mainstream” university. Where is my Jewish husband? I feel cheated!

  • IrishGrrrl

    Hoocoodanode!?!? I always had a feeling that Assange wasn’t a true liberal. No surprise now that the far-left’s Prince of Leakage is really a Prince of Sewage.

    • Lady Willpower

      I like to believe that true liberals don’t treat women the way Julian Assange does.

      • PinkamenaPanic

        Yeah, but all that’s a lie, maaaaan, ‘cuz it’s gummint plants tryin’ to bring him down with secret ops, maaaaaan.

      • kfreed

        Juilian Assange is a RW libertarian… the opposite of liberal:

        “Wikileaks Founder Assange: ‘I’m a Big Admirer of Ron Paul and Rand Paul’ – Assange also lavishes praise on Matt Drudge and the conservative movement”

        VIDEO: “College-aged support for libertarians and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) represents the United States’ ‘only hope’ in politics, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange told Campus Reform early Friday morning.”

        Here we have it, Libertarian Glenn Greenwald, Paulbot Snowden, and Julian Assange are in the bag for the Tea Party. (Koch’s Libertarian/Tea Party rag): “Assange: I’m Influenced by ‘American libertarianism, market libertarianism'”