i mean it says alot to say something like "I think we can€‹ safely assume that 95 percent of the black males€‹ in that city are semi-criminal or entirely€‹ criminal" but obvisouly the numbers of murders, rapes, etc. are out of proportion.

But I'm surprised that he wouldn't recognize social equality for blacks in america as a possible reason for the disproportional numbers. I'm not huge on it, but I do understand that economic and social inequality do have a great deal to do with the disproportionate number of crimes committed by blacks. What would be more accurate is identifying the poverty level of those criminals, and THEN identifying the skin color of those in that poverty group as black or whatever, so he's pretty way off base there.

What I agree with to a great deal is the Israeli lobbiests in washington. From what I've learnt about them, they manipulate the facts (and much more in the early 30's and 40's) to gain pity towards the israerli people, in an attempt to gain support and stifle palestinian support.

You should note that I'm not say jews, i'm saying israeli people.

see my video below.

videos

for him to make up such a ridiculous statistic like 95%. As far as I understand, the sentiment behind his comment was that there is a crime problem among African American's in cities like LA. Well, duh. Now obviously we're dealing with just an excerpt from his article and we can't be sure whether or not he expanded on the topic by discussing the root causes of problem as onassar mentioned (social inequality). So while I can give Paul the benefit of the doubt (pretty generous on my part) regarding whether or not he has the intellectual honesty to explore the issue rationally, I cannot excuse his completely disingenuous use of statistics to frame his argument.

The worst part is, because of his position of power and influence, the congressman is doing a huge disservice to any cause that would address the real problem he is alluding to in this excerpt, by framing the discussion in such polarizing and dishonest terms. It is not a racial problem, it's a socio-economic problem. I hope Ron Paul understands this, and I'm pretty sure he does.

As far as special interest and lobbyists go, he's completely right that there is massive corruption in the process in DC but once again, the thing that disturbs me is the words he uses to frame his argument. We don't realize it over hear in the west when politicians use religious terminology like evil to discuss socio-political and economic issues, yet we assail Middle Eastern political parties as fanatical, Islamist, or fundamentalist for using religious terminology to frame their discussions of the same issues. I'm sort of ranting here, but the bottom line is that I've heard over and over Ron Paul using the language of religion in his arguments and I must say its very disquieting.