Gingrich Expands Bill of Rights Target List

[pisshead]

[align=left]Gingrich Expands Bill of Rights Target List [/align]
Another Day In The Empire | November 29, 2006
Kurt Nimmo
Details have emerged concerning Newt Gingrich's attack on the Bill of Rights. It is not simply the First Amendment the American Enterprise Institute and Council on Foreign Relations neocon wants to â??supervise,â?� but the Fourth Amendment as well, using Britain's recently imposed detention rule as a template. â??The former speaker also pointed approvingly to England, where suspects in terrorism cases can be detained for several weeks without charge,â?� reports the New York Sun .
According to Gingrich, if we don't torch the Bill of Rights, we are â??truly stupid,â?� because respecting our founding principles will allow al-CIA-duh to take out a city. How the CIA-ISI created organization will take out a city is not mentioned, although we can assume it will be accomplished with a â??suitcase nuke,â?� said to be walked over the border here in the Southwest.
Never mind that â??portable nuclear warheads are equipped with some protection devicesâ?¦ making their unauthorized use difficult, though not completely impossible,â?� according to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies . â??The period between routine maintenanceâ??only six monthsâ??might seem very short, but short maintenance periods appear to be a typical feature of all Soviet warheads.â?�
Moreover, â??Russian nuclear officials and experts on the Russian and post-Soviet nuclear programs adamantly deny that al Qaeda or any other terrorist group could have bought Soviet-made suitcase nukes, which were built in the 1960s for use against NATO and U.S. targets by special Soviet military intelligence agents,â?� the San Francisco Chronicle reported in early 2004.
In short, even if an al-CIA-duh operative walked a suitcase nuke across the desert into the United States, the thing would be useless. But this fact doesn't stop the neocons from inventing such fantastic stories.
According to Hamid Mir , billed as Osama bin Laden's biographer, al-CIA-duh â??smuggled many kilos of enriched uranium inside America for their dirty bomb projects.â?� Interesting how Iran apparently has a difficult time enriching uranium, but a few guys in a cave have no problem. (Mir's biographical credentials are based on the fact he interviewed Osama Bin Laden for the Daily Pakistan in 1997, a newspaper that eventually fired him.)
At any rate, Gingrich believes, in order to defeat this fairy tale threat, the United States â??should be impaneling people to look seriously at a level of supervision that we would never dream of if it weren't for the scale of the threat,â?� in other words, Bush needs to convene more neocons and Bush insiders, as he did with the nine eleven whitewash commission, and have them decide how best to kill off the Bill of Rights because, as Gingrich insists, we are engaged in â??a serious, long-term war,â?� for a hundred years or more, as promised.
â??Mr. Gingrich acknowledged that these proposals would trigger â??a serious debate about the First Amendment.' He also said international law must be revised to address the exigencies posed by international terrorists.â?�
As we know, the neocons don't do debates, so this panel would be strictly for public relations purposesâ??as was the 9/11 Commission Reportâ??and, as well, a venue to spread more seriously distorted and fabricated out of whole cloth propaganda.
â??We should propose a Geneva Convention for fighting terrorism, which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are, in fact, subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous,â?� averred Newt in an audio excerpt of his remarks, issued after the New Hampshire speech, remarkably before an audience of free speech advocates.
No word if this new Geneva Convention would cover covert action, clandestine operations, black operations, and other forms of â??unconventional warfareâ?� engaged in by the Pentagon using soldiers and operatives not in uniform.
No word, as well, if the neocon version of the Geneva Convention would cover P2OG deception operations, run by the Joint Special Operations Command, and designed to â??stimulate reactionsâ?� on the part of â??states/sub-state actors.â?�
However, considering clandestine and black op initiatives are a â??growth industry,â?� according to Michael G. Vickers , a former Special Forces soldier and one-time CIA officer, the possibility the Pentagon will enjoy a big fat waiver is a foregone conclusion.
â??Freedom of speech is non-negotiable,â?� writes Mark Jeffrey for the Huffington Post. â??It is a core American value. It is a core value of free societies in every time and place. â??To suggest that terrorism somehow changes this core value is a horrendous, unspeakable insult to those who gave their lives to protect this very freedom in America. By even causing us to consider abridging our freedoms voluntarily, the terrorists have won a profound spiritual victory. They made us doubt who we are. Or at least some of us paunchy politicians, anyway. Newt, I would even submit that by suggesting such a thing, you are guilty of aiding our enemies. You, sir, are not with America: you are with the terrorists.â?�
Finally, Newt Gingrich is not â??guilty of aiding our enemies,â?� because Newt and the perfidious neocons are the enemy.

pisshead Reviewed by pisshead on 11-30-2006. Gingrich Expands Bill of Rights Target List Gingrich Expands Bill of Rights Target List Another Day In The Empire | November 29, 2006 Kurt Nimmo Details have emerged concerning Newt Gingrich's attack on the Bill of Rights. It is not simply the First Amendment the American Enterprise Institute and Council on Foreign Relations neocon wants to â??supervise,â?� but the Fourth Amendment as well, using Britain's recently imposed detention rule as a template. â??The former speaker also pointed approvingly to England, where suspects in Rating: 5

[Bong30]

All Bullshit pissy

we will know you by your limp....................

[eg420ne]

Then explian what he was saying^^^^^i bet if it was one of them democraps you & torog be screaming bloody murder.....Wheres Billdo on this

[eg420ne]

If anyone agrees with this coward Gingrich Then your more of a coward then he...Sounds like he's plotting a prez run on the fears of the american people, give up your liberity or the terrorist win.......

[andruejaysin]

But you forget something important. Not all americans value freedom. Should cowards like bong have less voice in the future of america than you?

[Ozarks]

â??Mr. Gingrich acknowledged that these proposals would trigger â??a serious debate about the First Amendment.

Of course we can't have that debate, chicken little is already yelling "the sky is falling" as this thread shows

Amazing how fast tolerance,debate, the exchange of ideas, and free speech are abandoned by certain people as soon as they don't hear their own ideas echoed back at them.

Of course pissheads link (like all of them ) are nonsense, by paranoid left wing haters, they have taken 5 lines out of a 45 minute speech and turned it for their own "we hate the Government" agenda.

[pisshead]

yeah, i hate government...that's it...i don't like what it's become, and what it's become is not what ours was intended to be...all i have to do is read the constitution and bill of rights to see that...

even the founders said not to trust it, that it gets out of control and tyrannical, and i can pick up a history book and see that...but it can't happen here...blah blah blah...so let's not even talk about it.

but i don't expect anyone who's narrowed it down to some made up fantasy world of left and right to understand that...

here's a whole lot more links to ignore! don't click on them...just make a superficial comment and move on...


Newt World Order


Bush and co paving the way for power mad freaks like Gingrich [align=left]Steve Watson[/align]


[align=left]Infowars.net
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Newt Gingrich's latest attack on the First Amendment is a revealing insight into the long term agenda of elite minds in America today. Those who would be successors to the Bush Administration are even more bent on power and dominance and they see absolutely no place for the freedoms America was founded on to continue to exist under their leadership.
At a dinner honouring the sanctity of the First Amendment this week, Newt Gingrich stood up and gave a talk about restricting freedom of speech.
Gingrich stated:[/align]

"My Prediction to you is that either before we lose a city or, if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology that we can find to break up their capacity to use the internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us."

"I want to suggest to you right now that we should empanelling people to look seriously at a level of supervision that we would never dream of if it were not for the scale of this threat. This is a serious long term war and it will lead us to want to know what is said in every suspect place in the country, it will lead to us to learn how to close down every website that is dangerous."

â??We should propose a Geneva Convention for fighting terrorism, which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are, in fact, subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous.â?�

[align=left]Keith Olbermann devoted a section of his Countdown program to Gingrich's abomination and commented "If you're going to destroy freedom of speech Bub, you've already lost all the cities.", whilst comparing the speech to the rhetoric of Nazi politicians in Germany in the 1930s.

George Washington University Law Professor and Constitutional Law Expert Jonathan Turley joined Olbermann and warned:[/align]

"This could actually happen, the first Amendment is an abstraction and when you put up against it the idea of incinerating millions of people, there will be millions of citizens that respond, like some Pavlovian response, and deliver up rights, we've already seen that. People don't seem to appreciate that you really can't save a constitution by destroying it."

[align=left]This is not some crackpot peddling a nonsense idea that we should simply laugh off, this is the former speaker of the House who is also gearing up for a 2008 Presidential run. Turley continued:[/align]

"What you see here I think is the insatiable appetite that has developed amongst certain leaders for controlling American society. We saw that with John Ashcroft not long after 9/11 when he said that critics were aiding and abetting terrorists. There is this insatiable appetite that develops when you feed absolute power to people like Gingrich. And people should not assume that these are going to just be fringe candidates in this will never happen. Fear does amazing things to people and it can cause a sort of self mutilation in a democracy where we give up the very things, the very rights that define us and theoretically the very things that we are defending."

[align=left]Gingrich served as a Member of Congress for 20 years and as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995-1999. His "Contract with America" was sold to the nation as a remedy for big government, committed to shrinking the size and cost of government. But instead the Contract called for the exact opposite: balance the budget with a loophole-filled amendment that would reflect ill of the Constitution instead of Congress; expand NATO; deliver more crime control power to the federal government; federalize a host of laws dealing with children; etc.
In addition Gingrich is a member of the Senior Advisory Board of the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century that has produced a series of reports that document the agenda for national security challenges as far out as 2025.
So essentially when he says he "predicts" the evisceration of the First Amendment, he is quoting actual government strategy for the next twenty years.[/align]

[align=left]Gingrich, a regular attendee of the annual Summer camp at the Bohemian Grove, and long term CFR member, has previously openly referred to anyone who oppose Bush-Republican Neo-Conservative madness as being part of an "insurgency"
Gingrich also stated recently that "It's not an insult[ ]" to compare Bush administration critics "to those who enabled Hitler"
Open and truly democratic governments don't view their political opponents as "enemies" whose opposition is looked upon as an "insurgency", and they certainly don't feel a need to be at war with the people they govern. For Gingrich, and the entire Neo-Conservative movement; however, the reality is that the American people are increasingly questioning their "right to rule" and are, therefore, considered enemies or, as Newt Gingrich more aptly said, an "insurgency".
Gingrich has also previously said the third world war has already begun and that the United States must do everything in its power to bring about regime change in Iran, even if it means invading that nation.[/align]

"This is 1935 and [Iranian president] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is as close to Adolf Hitler as weâ??ve seen. We now know who they are -- the question is who we are. Are we Baldwin or Churchill?" Gingrich said, noting that Churchill recognized the danger from Nazi Germany and urged that Britain prepare to meet it.

[align=left]No Newt, this is 2006 and YOU are the closest thing to Adolf Hitler we've seen.

Gingrich went on to state that Tehran could be planning for a preemptive nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on America that would turn a third or more of the country "back to a 19th century level of development."
He said the "extraordinary challenge that the current regime in Iran poses to the safety of the United States" requires "extraordinary measures to meet it."
The idea that Iran has nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons is utterly ludicrous. In Fact the CIA has concluded that there is absolutely no evidence that Iran has any form of hostile nuclear weapons program. The level to which this traitor is twisting reality to fit his own crazy notion of the way the world operates is indicative of the Straussian global outlook that we have come to see so clearly adopted by the so called neoconservative movement.
Like Plato, Strauss taught that within societies, "some are fit to lead, and others to be led", according to Shadia Drury, author of 1999's Leo Strauss and the American Right. But, unlike Plato, who believed that leaders had to be people with such high moral standards that they could resist the temptations of power, Strauss thought that "those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior".
We have previously exposed how many major influences on the Bush Administration and leading Neoconservative think tanks are followers of Strauss. In addition to Gingrich himself, former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Weekly Standard chief editor William Kristol, His father Irving, and Gary Schmitt, founder, chairman and director of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
Leo Strauss was also a strong believer in the "Realism" form of International Relations made prominent by Thomas Hobbes. Like Hobbes, he thought that human nature was intrinsically aggressive and could be restrained only through a State formed via a powerful military industrial complex . "Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed," he once wrote. "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people."
"Strauss thinks that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat," Drury wrote in her book. "Following Machiavelli, he maintains that if no external threat exists, then one has to be manufactured. This is what Henry Kissinger was referring to in that often quoted statement he made about creating external future threats in order to guard the world order he wishes to see become more prevalent and powerful, the system we often refer to as the "New World Order". Thus for the Neocons, when the Soviet Empire weakened and a Unipolar world order was emerging, a new threat had to be there lurking to allow them to further their Straussian vision.
"In Strauss' view, you have to fight all the time [to survive]," said Drury. "In that respect, it's very Spartan. Peace leads to decadence. Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in." Such views naturally lead to an "aggressive, belligerent policy", she added.
The Bush administration is paving the way for even more authoritarian minds to take over the higher echelons of leadership in America. They are, whether wittingly or unwittingly, putting into place the tools that would be dictators know they can use to eviscerate freedom and seize power.
The Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act and prime examples of such legislation. Whilst Bush's Homeland Security goes after the toy store owners and topless bar managers, a Gingrich Administration would look toward shutting down the entire blogosphere for engaging in critical debate.
As Keith Olbermann comments, "When you talk about closing down internet sites, who is the one who is going to decide which those are?"
The Neoconservatives currently occupying the White House are puppies compared with the ones that want to occupy it. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Bolton etc are converts to the Neoconservative vision. More than anything they have embraced Neoconservativism because its philosophy fits neatly with their goal for corporate plundering and unquestionable power. It is debatable whether they truly buy into neoconservativism or are simply using it as a tool.
The true students of the movement are the Newt Gingrich's of this world. The "Internationalists" that make up the Council On Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. These people truly believe that the American people do not have the capacity to self govern and that they need to be deceived into believing they are free when in actual fact they are ruled over with an iron fist. [/align]

[Ozarks]

If you have read the Constitution, then you know debate is good, not bad. You need to free your mind from "cut & pasting" this nonsense as if it were gospel, stop being one of the "useful idiots".


BTW you will not read this on your Bozo wed sites, and you probably don't care but for the record his "speech" was about the Bill of Rights and what will be legal/illegal in the 21st century (in the name of fighting terror) as technology expands

The only thing your "boogieman of the day", Newt is advocating is debate.
A free people debating their own future, infowars,prsionerplanet can't have that.

Debate is bad, people who want debate are evil......wake up, and re-read the Constitution. :thumbsup:

[andruejaysin]

Maybe all you who find freedom to scary should find somewhere else to live. America, love it or leave it, right?

[Zimzum]

Maybe all you who find freedom to scary should find somewhere else to live. America, love it or leave it, right?

Or run for a political office and try to right the wrong.