Newt Gingrich: Bush should have allowed some terror attacks as a reminder
- added May 29, 2008
- 6 responses
-
-
-
- maasanova
- added this
-
Newt Gingrich discusses some of the negatives about not having terror attacks.
During an appearance at a Long Island bookstore last month, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was asked by a member of the audience why the United States has not been hit again since 9/11.
"I honestly don't know," Gingrich replied. "I would have expected another attack. I was very, very worried ... when we had the sniper attacks, because the sniper attacks were psychologically so frightening. ... I was amazed that the bad guys didn't figure out how to send ten or twelve sniper teams."
"This is ... one of the great tragedies of the Bush administration," Gingrich continued. "The more successful they've been at intercepting and stopping bad guys, the less proof there is that we're in danger. And therefore, the better they've done at making sure there isn't an attack, the easier it is to say, 'Well, there never was going to be an attack anyway.' And it's almost like they should every once in a while have allowed an attack to get through just to remind us."
During an appearance at a Long Island bookstore last month, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was asked by a member of the audience why the United States has not been hit again since 9/11.
"I honestly don't know," Gingrich replied. "I would have expected another attack. I was very, very worried ... when we had the sniper attacks, because the sniper attacks were psychologically so frightening. ... I was amazed that the bad guys didn't figure out how to send ten or twelve sniper teams."
"This is ... one of the great tragedies of the Bush administration," Gingrich continued. "The more successful they've been at intercepting and stopping bad guys, the less proof there is that we're in danger. And therefore, the better they've done at making sure there isn't an attack, the easier it is to say, 'Well, there never was going to be an attack anyway.' And it's almost like they should every once in a while have allowed an attack to get through just to remind us."
-
And if he had not said that last sentance he probably would not have sounded like a friggan moron.
-
@vladrath, to me, everything, INCLUDING the last sentence made him NOT sound like a "frigging moron".
-
He's not a moron, because he knew exactly what he was saying. Gingrich jokingly proposed using terror to remind the morons clapping at the end of the Q&A that they were still under the threat of terrorism. It's classic double-think.
What happened to America? -
I think that he's raising some interesting points here. Though I think that he is giving way too much credit to the Bush administration. In my opinion, it is precisely our imperialist foreign policy and selective, faux free trade that is the crux of anti-American terrorism. Any degree of an invasion of civil liberties is unacceptable and we would be better served by focusing on establishing and maintaining "peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."
-
Bush runs nothing and you know it
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
