Muslims Say Ron Paul Is Their Kind Of Republican

The renegade Republican has piqued Muslim interest with promises to extract America from foreign wars, cut aid to Israel, and protect civil liberties. There are at least four "Muslims for Ron Paul" Facebook pages, and a scan of Paul's political donors shows many common Muslim names, like Mohammed, Ali and Ahmed.

Paul's position on civil liberties resonates with many younger Muslims, including Zahra Siddiqui, an 18-year-old political science major at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

"These laws are obviously directed at policing Muslims," Siddiqui said. "Ron Paul knows how to differentiate between Muslims and terrorists, and he would never sacrifice any citizen's liberties over security."

Paul's promise to get the U.S. out of Afghanistan and other foreign conflicts also appeals to Siddiqui, whose family is from Pakistan and who worries that U.S. drone strikes there could escalate into war. Like other Muslim Paul supporters, Siddiqui said the Texas congressman is the only candidate willing to get tough with Israel.

"He has a deep understanding of how detrimental our foreign policy has been in Islamic countries," Siddiqui said. "Ron Paul will stop the large amount of foreign aid given to Israel and will discontinue rushing to Israel's defense when it engages in oppressing the Palestinian people."

RonPaul knows even less about the history of our enemies than he does about their proper treatment under the Constitution. He actually interrupted Monday night’s Republican candidates’ debate so he could interject the following:

>>>I would like to point out one thing about the Taliban. The Taliban used to be our allies when we were fighting the Russians. So Taliban are people who want — their main goal is to keep foreigners off their land. It’s the al-Qaeda — you can’t mix the two. The al-Qaeda want to come here to kill us. The Taliban just says, “We don’t want foreigners.” We need to understand that, or we can’t resolve this problem in the Middle East. We are going to spend a lot of lives and a lot of money for a long time to come.<<<

Everything in this statement is wrong. Everything. Let’s start with the most basic point. The Taliban most certainly were not “our allies when we were fighting the Russians.” How could they have been, considering that the Taliban did not exist at the time of the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan?

I won’t belabor the point that it was not the UnitedStates but the Afghan mujahadeen,with the help of non-AfghanMuslims (mostly Arab), who did the actual fighting against the Soviets. We did,after all, fuel the anti-Soviet jihad with billions of dollars in materiel and other assistance — through our intermediary, Pakistani intelligence, with the Saudis matching our aid dollar-for-dollar. Presumably,this is what RepresentativePaul was talking about. Nevertheless, while a number of the Taliban’s eventual founders were veterans of the anti-Soviet jihad, the fact is that the Taliban was not established as an organization until 1994. That is five years after the Soviet Union skulked out of Afghanistan and three years after it collapsed.

Everything in this statement is wrong. Everything. Let’s start with the most basic point. The Taliban most certainly were not “our allies when we were fighting the Russians.” How could they have been, considering that the Taliban did not exist at the time of the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan?

SamCogar wrote:

Everything in this statement is wrong. Everything. Let’s start with the most basic point. The Taliban most certainly were not “our allies when we were fighting the Russians.” How could they have been, considering that the Taliban did not exist at the time of the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan?

Isn't that the same as saying that no current members of the Tea Party existed on planent earth prior to the Official recognization of the Tea Party as a political group?