IPFS
Mike Renzulli
More About: Politics: Republican CampaignsMore Lies From Ron Paul
I was active in the libertarian movement and Party for over twelve years. During my time spent among them I noticed that, in a general sense, libertarians have no problem questioning or taking to task society's inconsistencies. But when one of their own or an outsider questions or disagrees with them many times libertarians tend to refuse to believe they are wrong or even go so far as to angrily demonize the dissenter for pointing out their hypocrisy.
Overall, libertarians claim they want to find out the truth but when faced with the facts they cling to their philosophy or preconceived beliefs like a religion rather than accept reality. A mentality similar to what is seen among left wing academics. In many libertarian's minds they are never and can never be wrong no matter if the truth stares them in the face. They are in complete and utter denial not only about Ron Paul's character but also the lies and misrepresentations he spews despite evidence showing that he does.
Lies, damned lies, misrepresentations, conspiracies and 9/11
For example, during a 20/20 interview with John Stossel Paul was asked about his support of a border wall. He stated he didn't like amnesty but also didn't like the border wall. In order to stop amnesty, Paul claims, he voted for the bill. A claim vaguely similar to John Kerry being against the Iraq war before he voted for it. If Dr. No was against amnesty for illegal immigrants and the border wall, the logical step would be to vote against such legislation.
Ron Paul also lied about the Iraq war and the reasons the U.S. invaded the country. He recently made a disgusting claim that the Bush Administration was gleeful so they could use the event to justify an Iraq invasion and later use it as a precursor for an invasion of Iran. It was a mistake for the U.S. to side with Saddam Hussein in Iraq's conflict with Iran and I think Hussein kept some of the weaponry supplied. But the fact is Hussein did possess chemical and biological weapons along with yellow cake uranium and had the infrastructure that would have been used in the manufacturing of chemical or nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD's). Hussein also supported terrorist groups and harbored individuals that would have or already attacked the United States and our allies.
Contrary to what Paul and antiwar libertarians allege President Bush did not lie about the reasons for the Iraq invasion. It was not part of some grand conspiracy to lay the groundwork for an Iran invasion, snatch up Iraq's oil, nor the President finishing what his father had started. Bush made a mistake later expanding on the reasons for the war which sounded like he was trying to change the rationale. The President declared during an address to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001 that he would take the fight to terrorists and the countries that support them. The invasion of Iraq was consistent with the President's stated policy. Ron Paul has access to Congressional briefings and knew or had information available to him about the evidence of Hussein's support of terrorism and his possession of WMD's before, during, and after the invasion.
The 9/11 attacks occurred because of Islamic terrorism and not due to blowback resulting from U.S. foreign policy as Paul, some libertarians and hardcore leftists claim. It is wrong and immoral for them to resort to blaming America for such a tragedy and then accommodate scum like 9/11 Truth (so-called) organizations along with the conspiracies they further including praising traitors like Bradley Manning or publicity seeking, self-promoting, narcissistic manipulators like Julian Assange. It is a fallacious lie for Paul to deny he subscribes to conspiracy theories when he articulates such points essentially legitimizing them with his rhetoric. In addition to his gleeful statement, consider this quote from a fundraising letter sent to his supporters in 2007:
I don’t need to tell you that our American way of life is under attack. We see it all around us — every day — and it is up to us to save it.
The world’s elites are busy forming a North American Union. If they are successful, as they were in forming the European Union, the good ol' USA will only be a memory. We can’t let that happen.
The UN also wants to confiscate our firearms and impose a global tax. The UN elites want to control the world’s oceans with the Law of the Sea Treaty. And they want to use our military to police the world.
Individual rights, not state's rights
When it comes to gay marriage, Paul states that while marriage is a private matter he would leave such decisions on marriage to the states and supports enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act (a.k.a. DOMA). He knows full well that by denying gay couples the ability to legally marry, they would be unable to to use courts for divorce or inheritance resolution. A marriage license is the only document governments and insurance companies will accept for a marriage to be legitimate. Never mind that it is prohibitively expensive for couples (gay or straight) to establish trusts to legally protect their assets, wills or even signed agreements can be contested in a court of law. Oft times gay couples are subject to humongous tax rates in order for their partners to inherit the deceased loved one's wealth provided that a relative of the deceased does not challenge the inheritance.
The U.S. Constitution is designed so that all three branches of government exist equally to check one another's power. Limiting a federal court's ability to rule on cases related to liberty-infringing laws not only disrupts the checks-and-balances of the U.S. Constitution but is also an abridgement of individual rights. Paul's scheme results in people potentially being subject to a patch-work of state laws related to a variety of issues not only related to abortion, gay marriage, and sodomy but could include guns too. Imagine anti-gun politicians passing legislation limiting federal court jurisdiction on gun cases due to the precedent Ron Paul sets. Rights are for individuals not states and in our constitutional republic states are political subdivisions delegated certain powers greater than the federal entity. This is done in order to protect individual liberty when it is abridged by said jurisdictions invalidating federal, state, and even local laws that do so. While the courts do not uphold liberty consistently, their decisions that do (such as Lawrence vs. Texas, Roe vs. Wade, and D.C. vs. Heller) should be cheered and not jeered.
The facts about Hamas, Gaza and Israel
Despite what Ron Paul and other critics claim, Gaza is not a concentration camp, Israel is not an apartheid state, nor did the country's government intentionally help spawn Hamas. Prior to Hamas taking power, Gazans could leave the territory to work or travel including to take trips or work in Israel. In addition to turning the Gaza Strip into a terrorist base, in 2007 Hamas initially sealed the Israeli-Gaza border. Presently, there are numerous bureaucratic hurdles erected by Gaza immigration authorities that make obtaining a passport almost impossible for most Gazans to leave in order to work or escape living conditions there. Not surprisingly, Gaza residents fake illness or pay bribes so they can obtain papers to get out of the Gaza Strip. Consequently, it is also very dangerous for relief organizations and reporters to enter and remain in the territory since to do so would put their well-being or lives in jeopardy.
Hamas (a group who openly calls for the death of all Jews and the destruction of Israel) is one of many organizations that is an outgrowth from the Muslim Brotherhood. The group's origin was the result of backlash from some Gaza Islamists who perceived Yasser Arafat as capitulating to Israel. When it was discovered by the Israeli military in 1979 Hamas presented itself as a charitable organization and Gaza occupation commanders did not consider the organization a threat at the time since the group was not involved in military-oriented activities. In addition to also being financed by Iran, Hamas was also involved not only in charity but also able to spread it's fundamentalist ideology via religious instruction. As a result of their activities Hamas was able to build support among Gaza Palestinians in order to eventually grab control of Gaza from Arafat's PLO. Israeli forces made a stupid mistake of not scrutinizing Hamas more thoroughly and not trying to take the group down when they tangled with Arafat's Fatah faction in the 1990's. It was then that Hamas had revealed their military wing but Israel's main focus was to halt terrorism and other terrorist activities undertaken by the Arafat's Fatah PLO faction who was their main rival at the time.
In Israel proper, any Israeli citizen (regardless of race, color, religion, or creed) enjoys rights and liberties protected by Israel's constitution. There is a semblance of corruption but, overall, according to the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom, Israel is a Westernized country with a mostly free, strong economy along with institutions protecting economic and political freedom. If Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad did not sponsor or support terrorism, conduct missile attacks and were not supported by Islamist regimes (like Iran) Israel would not have to resort to stringent, bureaucratic internal security measures or to warfare which results in harm to Palestinian civilians. Hamas is responsible for the poor conditions in Gaza and it is they whom Palestinians need rescuing from. Hamas's support of terrorism and continuous rocket attacks result in the deaths of innocent Gaza and Israeli civilians. We also have yet to hear condemnations from Ron Paul and other Israel critics directed at Muslim states who have knowingly confiscated their Jewish population's money and property.
The Ron Paul Charade
Ron Paul puts on a convincing act of being a straight-shooting, kind, friendly, and honest man who is perceived by his supporters as being a maverick Congressman. However, if examined critically he is no different than the slick, two-bit politicians he claims to revile. Paul twists the truth, evades answering specific questions, or blatantly lies when he gets caught.
In the long run Ron Paul has shown himself to be nothing more than an abominable, silver-tongued siren of faux freedom who stalks around in the libertarian movement like a saint. It is time for libertarians to admit they have been had and that Ron Paul's campaigns for Congress and President are or have been nothing more than overblown self-promotion tours geared to enrich the candidate including those close to him.
It was wrong and immoral for Ron Paul to have pandered to racists and conspiracists using bigoted statements via his sleazy newsletters published with his business partner Lew Rockwell, and members of his family in which, despite his denials, he knew about them. Paul has a moral obligation to tell the truth not only about the economy (which he does very well), but also the newsletters published and signed in his name, and the issues he runs on as a candidate.
When it comes to their favorite Texas Congresscritter the question now comes down to which path will libertarians choose: the truth or mythology? If action is not taken their movement will continue to degenerate into a haven for bigots, racists, income tax cheats, self-promoting, paranoid conspiracy gurus, and anti-Semites resulting from Rockwellian influence. Ultimately, Paul's good points (if any) are overshadowed by the awful elements he attracts to his campaign that he either welcomes or is reluctant to kick out along with his lies and twisting the truth about issues.
Ron Paul should not be given the GOP nomination for President nor should any lover of liberty support him. Not only because of his ignorant and naive foreign policy but also due to his continuous lies and misrepresentations despite his image as an honest, maverick outsider.
Watch Streaming Broadcast Live:
LRN.fm
DLive
Live Chat
Telegram
Telegram
19 Comments in Response to More Lies From Ron Paul
Ron Paul is twice the man you could ever hope to be. I'm a gay guy who worked for him 2008-2012, and he is one of the most amazing men I've ever met. Marriage- especially gay marriage-is no business of the government.
Man I don't even know where to start. First of all this sounds like somebody who has never been a libertarian, just maybe one of the tea party supporters who may only agree with economic parts.
First about the whole border deal, this is something I know least one but we have to consider the facts, many people agree something has to be done about the borders. Usually bills aren't as simple as "A and B are in it, so only A and B will happen". Secondly, don't forget he is a border state representative, the role of a representative is to at the very least represent their constituents.
On marriage, he clearly believe NO FEDERAL government involvement, not for any underhanded reason, but it simply isn't in the constitution as a federal power. Secondly, he doesn't believe in federal or government recognition of marriage, it should be a personal or religious ceremony and have nothing to do with taxes or government status. I see nothing wrong with that view point.
On abortion I disagree with Ron Paul, I value federal recognition of freedom of choice. But he, I can understand is right because he is a Christian and religious, in his mind he sees a fetus as a life and believes it has individual rights. If not because of his religion he would be a liar or hypocrite. I am not religious, however at least he has the courtesy to say he wouldn't take any federal action for or against it.
On the 9/11 deal, I have to question whether you are lying. It was national news and known to the public the reasons we invaded Iraq were untrue, everybody in congress knows it is an unpopular war to support and many avoid taking blame for voting or pushing it. Have you ever been to Iraq to tell us it isn't true?
On Israel, let's not forget the fact Israel is forcing sterilization of foreign refugees from Africa so that they cannot reproduce and that a majority of Israelis think refugees should be thrown in internment camps or kicked out of the country. Let's not forget the fact Israel has been dictating the borders pretty much over the past decades and creeping into former legitimate palestinian lands. Saying that they are nothing but good people and do no wrong is vastly naive and a lie.
About 9/11, stating it was blow-back from our past involvement isn't an insult, it is a fact. We have occupied that region before during Bush senior's term in the gulf war. We have propped up leaders in Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq (Saddam), Afghanistan (Osama Bin Laden) and corrupted Pakistan. Iran and Iraq were infiltrations in which we propped up dictators directly and forcefully.
Afghanistan, we put Osama Bin Laden in power and funding Al-Qaeda/Taliban during the Cold War to fight off soviets, but when they found out they were being used they turned against us on top of religious ideals they had were extremist. Pakistan we allowed and set them up for banks to take over, put them into massive debt, basically make the populous economic slaves and have corrupted the government, contributing to many killed in internal conflicts and left desperate- joining the terrorist groups in turn.
Ron Paul doesn't praise terrorist groups, he recognizes them as terrorist groups but also has reached out and tried to understand and explain to others they are that way for a reason- that isn't solely religious-based. Labeling Manning and Assange as terrorists and traitors to this country just shows the true neo-con colors within you. Our government lacks transparency heavily, Obama promised it and has never lived up to it A FLAT OUT LIE of mass proportions. We need people like these guys, because face the facts, our government is oppressive. Far more oppressive than acceptable in these times. Without such people vital information to the public to wake up to our government's cover-up and atrocities will never see the light of day. I am a true libertarian and I support anonymous, Aaron Swartz (RIP), Julian Assange and Bradley Manning.
Ron Paul is vastly more favorable for liberty than Romney, and the past racist/bigots such as Rick Santorum, Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich. Other than Ron Paul the only other republican I would dare support is Jon Huntsman. Speaking of civil liberties Ron Paul ranks above Obama by the ACLU's civil liberties chart while all the rest of the GoP besides Huntsman barely has any score.
It seems to me you are just being pretentious as somebody who every cared for the libertarian movement and the ideals he actually preaches instead of nit-picking and twisting information about him that has little credibility or truth to his goals. No, I don't think I am always right, I know some do. Guess what though? Every political group/party has these people, not libertarians. Besides arguing that somebody's stances are wrong, when they are factual and then accusing them of being arrogant, is rather arrogant (and pretty offensive) in itself.
What surprises me is people that has the means now to check Obama and Romney out are still voting for them. their BOTH proven LIARS from their own mouths.
This time around with transparency act any one that votes for Obama or Romney is not doing their own research. It will literally be the voters fault when something goes wrong, not the presidents.
We’ve incrementally lost any semblance of freedom under the last 29 presidents, why not Ron Paul? The parasite class has expanded far beyond any capability of supporting itself and is set to implode, why not let everything crash on Ron Paul? Use him as a scapegoat! The only problem would be if he succeeded in tearing down the parasite class a notch or two, then it might become popular, but what are the chances of that Mr. Renzulli? Ron Paul is nothing to be afraid of, yet your article clearly indicates you are terrified of him, why? Might it be because you might loose those under-the-table payoffs? Just sayin…
I tend to agree with this Oracle man Renzulli when he brought up Ron Paul’s dirt to the surface as "liar and a fraud". I also agree with Mr. Tan’s insistence that Ron Paul’s candidacy hardly proves anything worth our time.
In this website, I noticed that the more his promoters lie to the public that Ron Paul has a good chance of becoming the next president of the United States, the more the poor guy gets a terrible flak. The more his media handlers project him to the limelight, the greater attention he gets as a nuisance candidate, hence this heap of dirt or garbage he receives from the annoyed public. As an eyesore in the lineup of candidates, this hostility clearly tells him to get out from there fast.
Worse are those pro-Ron Paul comments below that are too windy for readers to understand. It adds up to this spiteful reaction of the public against Ron Paul.
Having said that, I fully agree that there is no point for him staying in the presidential race. It is time to quit.
And to those who treat Ron Paul’s political campaign as some form of money-making or some kind of profitable business, it is time to close shop. Business is over.
There is no win of any kind for Ron Paul. By lying, he has only one way to go … to the dumpsite of political losers. Everywhere he is being trashed for his dirty lies and despicable way of lying in public. Today the New Hampshire Newspaper described him as the "favored candidate of the lunatic fringe". Nothing nice said about him is true! More thrashing of him as an "oddball" is everywhere! Those of you still in a Ron Paul stupor, it is time to wake up!
Josh Voorhess of the N.H. Paper wrote just about an hour ago that "Ron Paul is a dangerous man.. His defenders say they admire Ron Paul’s ‘consistency.’ It is true, Paul has been consistently spouting this nonsense. It is about time New Hampshire voters showed him the door."
In this website, spouting a Ron Paul nonsense is consistent. It will become inconsistent once New Hampshire voters show him the door. In the meantime, to wake you up, read more of those Ron Paul thrashings. They are everywhere! People are just throwing garbage in the streets. There is no fine for anti-Ron Paul littering!
Mike...let me make this short and to the point regarding your hit piece on Ron Paul. First, and most obvious in the areas of personal integrity and dignity, you can only wish and hope to ever be able to touch the boot straps of this man. Second, your entire article is a lie...entirely! Third, you are obviously as owned as an LA crack whore and are a mercenary that will attack ANYONE you are paid to attack as long as you are "paid". Dr. Paul's vote record speaks for it's self! All one has to do to determine the degree of liar you are is look at that record. You really need to post an apology for your fabricated attack on Ron Paul iffor no other reason than to thank him for his belief in protecting your right(s) for you to act like the jack ass you are. You don't understand his positions and you never will as long as your choose to remain programmed.
Goodbye Renzuli, we never knew ye.
I kinda want to thank you guys, (gals?) for making Ron Pauls point, Ernie's and Powell's point, Larking Rose's point, and the points of the multitudes of people who are waking up to the facts regarding the losses of freedom we are enduring in present-day America. And Mike, I especially want to thank you for your candor and honesty.
The major point is that, if you dig hard enough, look long enough, twist fiercely enough, you can dig up all kinds of crap on any and every U.S. Government politician in office, and probably every State government politician, as well. In fact, you might be able to dig up at least a little dirt on almost every adult American, and even every adult in the whole world.
The political races for Government offices have always been about comparing ideas and ideals of candidates and potential candidates. It would be no different in this election season.
In the comparison this political season, the biggest political dirt one can dig up on Ron Paul - and probably the one that he is trying to atone for by running at all at his age of 77 - is that he didn't fight harder for freedom over all his years in office. All the rest of his "dirt" pales in comparison. And you can't even see it when you place it next to the political dirt of just about any of the other candidates and potentials, especially the ones currently in office.
When you stand Ron Paul up next to every other American, and take a look at his nature, and see what he has had to deal with in his attempts to free Texas and America from the political, Big Business, Banking and One-World Government aggression, he is a shining star. Should he somehow win, and become the President of the United States, do you think that his policies of freedom for all, will be able to stand up against all the forces of most of the rest of the major players in office? He will try, but he is only one of a small handful of major players who even cares about freedom for all, who looks for more than simply the almighty dollar, who understands that obeying the Constitution and the Oath of Office is the most important thing in every sacred trust office of every Government in the whole of the United States of America.
Well, the Neo Cons have finally arrived! LOL
I just heard on Fox News Radio(12-29-11 between 5:15 and 5:25 CST), by a stand in for Mark Levin, that Paul supporters are Neo NAZIS and Jew Haters. LOL
Thanks Mike Renzulli! The Rats are crawling out of the cellars.
From your writing: "The demise of his campaign and reputation is certainly deserved since, as this essay clearly points out, Paul is a liar and a fraud." I think you have more than proven that he is "a liar and a fraud". I read a lot more about Ron Paul since this website has been promoting him. His view of freedom is too screwed up and dangerous. For example, I read his "freedom to drink raw milk" which is actually his freedom to contract diseases like "Salmonella, E. Coli and Listeria", and his liberty to spread the epidemic! And more of this makes it scary, which proves that he is not only a liar but a fraud. The earlier he exits, the better for our health and security. Many farm people are falling for this weirdo candidate, which even makes his bid for the presidency doubly dangerous!
I am waiting for his announcement to quit! I guess his sponsors had already made a lot of money. It’s time for him to hit the dust!
The more one learns about Ron Paul, the more he STINKS. Too bad one has to waste one's time learning about Ron Paul :)
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/28/ron-pauls-destructive-foreign-policy/
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/29/ron-paul%E2%80%99s-undeniable-war-on-israel/
http://historyscoper.com
Thank you all for your responses. I don't do hit pieces or (as one poster alleges) "slander". I deal strictly in facts. I maybe wrong about some of my conclusions but make sure I do my best to see to it that what I write about is accurate.
In 2008 when Paul first Ran someone pointed out my initial conclusions about Paul were inaccurate so I posted a commentary retracting it and stating Paul may not be a bad guy after all.
Between his present campaign and his last I not only have done more investigation and changed my mind about foreign policy but also have gotten more information on Ron Paul of which it is not good at all. I stand by not only what I have written in my previous essays about Paul and other issues including this present one too.
The demise of his campaign and reputation is certainly deserved since, as this essay clearly points out, Paul is a liar and a fraud.
Mike Renzulli … Venancio Tan – with your revelation of more lies from Ron Paul, you will make Powell Gammill, our website editor-for-Ron Paul, so unhappy that he might use a crowbar to pull your teeth off your account.
Ron Paul and what he stands for, are nothing but political stardusts in the eyes of dreaming supporters. They watch his sparkle like that of a falling star from the sky before it dies out. In the mind, he was created like a strawman out of lies by his sponsors to raise money.
In the previous Ron Paul propaganda article, I warned his props in this website not to lie at the expense of Newt Gingrich's comment.
"Ron Paul Supporters, Including Veterans, are 'indecent' according to Newt Gingrich" by Nick Allison, U.S. Army Veteran posted on December 27, 2011 by cvrp2012 http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/102123-2011-12-28-ron-paul-supporters-including-veterans-are-indecent-according-to-newt.htm
Tan: The writer of this article is part of the Ron Paul conspiracy to lie about him in public. To this writer, I say: Let the rod stands straight … don’t bend it to suit your political fantasy.
Newt Gingrich’s comment was taken OUT of context. Only a rabid Ron Paul supporter would put words into Gingrich mouth to canonize Ron Paul as a political deity -- the an "unelectable" aspirant inside the Republican Party that the GOP leadership could never allow to run as its official candidate for president!
Let’s be real – to allow Ron Paul as the GOP official candidate for president, will be the end of the Republican Party. That’s why I have repeatedly said that this will happen only when the crow turns white! I have nothing personal about Ron Paul. But mark my words!
This is what Newt Gingrich said: "I think Ron Paul’s views are totally outside the mainstream of virtually every decent American."
The writer of this article is part of the Ron Paul conspiracy to lie about him in public. To this writer, I say: Let the rod stands straight … don’t bend it to suit your political fantasy.And read again the "doctored" title of this propaganda article coming from the Ron Paul camp. The title says: "Ron Paul Supporters, Including Veterans, are "indecent" according to Newt Gingrich".
Where in the above Gingrich statement did the former Speaker say that Ron Paul supporters and Veterans are "indecent" people? W..h..e..r..e?
And this writer of the article, a certain Nick Allison who claims to be a U.S. Army veteran – whoever he is no one knows, maybe he is just one of those Paul for president drummers on the loose who props up Ron Paul everyday at least in this website – attacked Newt Gingrich by putting words into his mouth. He said [to Gingrich] and I quote: "You claim that we are indecent because we support Ron Paul, a fellow veteran …"
Where in hell did he get this? Where did this come from? Where was Gingrich’s "claim" that he and his "felllow veterans" are "indecent"? Anyway, read this carefully and refuse to be blinded by this rabid pro-Paul propaganda.
If there is anything INDECENT anyone reads here, it is this propaganda cheat – this manipulative attempt to hoodwinked the public into believing that Ron Paul is fit to become president of the United States, when millions of Americans know he isn’t and can never be!
Let’s cite one of Ron Paul’s views which millions of Americans had regarded as "indecent"[and there are so many of them]. Any "real" veteran [not just a pseudo-make-believe character created for a propaganda blitz] who believes Ron Paul’s view that 911 was to be blamed on all Americans – not on Al Qaeda’s assassins that committed this 911 carnage – is not only indecent but a dirty scoundrel!
Ad Hominem specialists are expected to react by spitting out their poison that I am writing this down because I want Newt Gingrich to become president. They can never be more than so wrong like they have always been before. Let them dive into an empty swimming pool like they always do, because I am not endorsing Gingrich for president.
Let’s leave this job of deceiving the public in this dirty manner about Ron Paul, to the enemy within. Let’s not usurp the ideological nature of the enemy within just to indulge in this fantasy that Ron Paul can become president of the United States.
So I randomly selected one link in the above under the heading "Lies damned lies, misrepresentations..."
The statement was "But the fact is Hussein did possess chemical and biological weapons along with yellow cake uranium and had the infrastructure that would have been used in the manufacturing of chemical or nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD's)."
So I clicked on the "yellowcake" link and sure enough if you actually read the story you will find that it states:
"Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said."
1. FWIW, Ron Paul actually defended Israel's right to conduct that airstrike when everyone else was condemning them.
2. The yellow cake in question was documented and safeguarded by the IAEA. The article of course goes on to mention the FALSE claims that Iraq was attempting to obtain Yellow Cake from Africa... those claims of course were the ones cited by Bush in the run up to the war.
I don't have time to fact the rest of this stuff so I will assume it is similarly shoddy or intentionally misrepresenting the facts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwwmEAvFMf4
Ahh, the irony of ig-nant people dispensing lies to say someone else is lying. Of course, the fool didn't share his alternative candidate because then he'd have to write another silly article like this...about them. sigh.
So much time and energy spent on this. I love it because it continues to stir controversy thus drawing MORE people to Freedom's Phoenix.