The title of this should about the aggressive fbi task force with extraordinary powers to eavesdrop. That was the only thing worth hearing in this clip. The comment about reminder attacks is taken so much out of context. I find nothing wrong or sick with that statement. He wasn't being serious and saying that it would have been a good thing to do. He was making a joke in order to make a point.
A Democracy? Isn't the lican line that this is a Republic? That you schlubs aren't capable of running the government so that should be left to bought-out legislators? Fah.
How, exactly, do you go about "protecting" civil liberty while having a force that is relentless, in a non-protective-of-civil-liberties sense, for "some" types of crime (terrorism)? What prevents abuse of terrorism allegations by the government? Stringently protecting civil liberties in some cases (e.g. crimes) is not sufficient to protect civil liberties.
No one is against surveillance. We are against surveillance without oversight, without a warrant and without probable cause. As if the government can be trusted. Time after time we learn that they’re spying on peaceful groups.
.
They’ve been caught spying on everyone from the Tea Party to OWS. EVERYONE is now a “terrorist”.
.
Mark Klein blew the whistle on AT&T. David Faulk and Adrienne Kinne blew the whistle on the NSA.
People, don't take this guys comment out of context.. He was simply using this statement as a way of saying it would have made us more proactive in staying sharp against terrorism. Don't kid yourself.. as much as I think terrorism is an unlikely threat, there are some people out there who wish harm on every person and these people are becoming smarter and wealthier.. Just saying lol
For even suggesting that "we ought to have a terror attack every so often" automatically puts him into the "bad American" category in my eyes. Newt, buddy...you're a bad American.
I'm not really conservative, but I think that what he's saying actually makes sense - (except the Irag War part). He's obviously not endorsing attacks on the US - hence the "tragic" aspect of the Bush administration; if he was endorsing attacks on the US, the success at preventing attacks would have been "mistaken," not a "tragic" aspect.
The funniest thing that that Newt is the front runner, but trails President Obama by 14 points. Romney is losing the GOP nomination, but head to head with the President in polls. The tea baggers are SOOOOOOO f-ing stupid that they will nominate a candidate that represents their extremism, but isn't electable. Thanks for being so retarded baggers! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS!
"Human beings do not like living in periods where they are deeply threatened..." What about when the threat to your freedoms comes FROM your government, under the guise of protecting you. Don't be fooled by this filthy mongrel. This PIG needs to crawl back in his hole.
@RobbieWilkes he addresses that point in the video. whether or not you agree with him, you should at least acknowledge that he did make a strong counter-argument to that point. 2:45
Facetious or not... Gingrich show his colors with the line about the ant-terrorism branch of the FBI and his advice to "civil libertarians". I think I'll have to go with Ben Franklin and say, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." He is a pig. A filthy, hypocritical lying PIG!
The problem with a "small but very aggressive" division of FBI for counter-terrorism — and his flippant advice to simply not conspire with "terrorists" — is that the definition for "terrorism" is so fucking loose that it could be interpreted in any number of ways; basically anything that could be perceived as dissent: protesters, anti-nationalist bloggers, "unpatriotic behaviour", etc.
It's not nearly as black & white as people like Newt would have you believe.
His comment about "allowing" attacks was clearly a joke and not intended to be taken seriously, hence his smile and the audience's laughter. His point was simply that if people are protected well enough, they won't know they were ever in danger. I don't consider myself a strong republican but I do agree with almost everything he said.
I disagree with him with respect to the restriction of civil liberties for suspected terrorists and the likelihood of a successful attack with a biological or nuclear weapon. Apart from those points, most of what he said seemed to be reasonable.
Also, that thing about letting attacks through was obviously a joke. Relax guys.
Okay well I hate Newt Gringrich as much as the next guy, but lets be sane here. He does not actually want more terrorist attacks on America. He wasn't serious. Sometimes when you say something in your head it sounds good, and when you actually say it it sounds bad. He may be an asshole at times, but for goodness sake he is not a terrorist. Honestly, be reasonable.
Nice try Newt...911 Was an Inside Job and he knows it, he says wire tapping Americans saved us from another 911 and these people actually clapped and cheered this guy on...unbelievable.
Genius, Gingrich. Genius. Trying to heighten your popularity there with terrorists. Why haven't the other candidates tried this? Since terrorists OBVIOUSLY make up over 50% of registered voters in America, this is a genius strategy.
I hate Gingrich, but this was clearly a joke, which he was using to make a point. I don't think it's wise to joke about terrorist attacks/loss of life when you're campaigning, but that's another issue. It was a joke, and he got laughter from his audience. This kind of thing is a distraction from the real reasons Gingrich should not be in office. Remember, both Democrats and Republicans are capable of making awful jokes, and they both do it all the time.
@wwwbingcom you said its not wise to joke... when you're campaigning. Unless he was campaigning in 2008 for some other position, look at the date of the video. If you are referring to him campaigning for presidency then just to let you know this didnt happen in 2011
@sabird1 Oh it's 2008. Thanks for the correction. I would edit that to say "it's not wise to joke about terrorist attacks/loss of life." Other than that, my point stands.
@ClumsyRoot He's advocating a governmental group that has unlimited power to eavesdrop on you're life if they think you might be engaging in terrorism. This philosophy, coupled with the NDAA legislation allowing for indefinite military arrests without trial paints a very grim picture. No one should have their civil rights tossed out the window, no matter what.
@ClumsyRoot No, the US needs fewer people who are willing to defend statements that suggest terrorist attacks be allowed to happen to keep the American people in fear.
No one--Newt included--would like to see more terrorist attacks. He was pointing out the IRONY that the lack of successful attacks in the U.S. could be used to argue that there isn't really a terrorist threat anymore.
Did you notice how the audience LAUGHED at his remark? Or should we assume that all of THEM would like to see the U.S. attacked again?
I do declare Mr Gingrich. That is borderline sadist. Is this the philosophical representation of the CATO institute and the Heritage foundation? My sources point to yes.
I dunno, I think it's pretty clear he was being facetious when he said that. I'm not a fan of the guy, but I'm pretty sure he's not saying they ACTUALLY should have allowed terrorist attacks to hit the US after 9/11
Guys, I know we hate this fuck, but you need to thumbs UP this video. Click Like. It increases the chance others will see this and youtube will make it go viral by itself.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I find it extremely funny that like 70% of the internet is liberal and they think that they are all right just because there are few republicans on here. If having the government tap into my personal information is necessary for my liberty... then why would anyway be against that. liberal - "they'll catch me buying pot." THUMBS THIS UP
@BoldxFresh Having the government tap into your personal information is a violation our rights as Americans. How could an invasion of my privacy be "necessary for my liberty"? Why can't you use a logical argument instead of "hurr durr, you're wrong because you're a liberal and I'm a conservative"? This kind of partisan attitude is exactly the attitude of our current Congress, and is simply childish.
@BestDubstepVids it is necessary fro my liberty so that we can catch terrorists... sorry i thought that was self explanatory. and that in itself is a logical argument. they are taking away some privacy to help our right to life. dont know about you but id rather live without my privacy than die with it
yeah, they have to do it without warrants because the fact they could place a tap and get one within 72 hours was like... Too much work... Or... Whatever.
give this thumbs UP so it's spread more. the thumb system doesn't mean whether you agree with the video or not but whether the video is relevant to the title and should be seen more
Have any of you idiots ever heard of a "HYPERBOLE"? I dislike this man because he's not honorable and he's a big gov't progressive. You don't need nonsense examples like this to show that he shouldnt be the nominee. What you should take out of this is the overreaching power he wants for the Fed Gov't.
If anyone votes for this monster, I will be incredibly frightened. This country has gone far enough towards a dictatorship; let's not let it get any further.
i find it ABSOLUTELY MIND BOGGLING that this fucking moronic clown may win the republican nomination AND, possibly end up in the white house. WTF is the matter with this country???
@Raaszhecku That exact thing amuses me, since the main argument americans use for having their schools focus so much on history, is that they do learn from the past. I agree with you though.
Hermann Göring(and Newton Gingrich): "Naturally the common people don't want war. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag people along. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
So Newt would allow "some" terroist attacks through and would allow the FBI unlimited power to spy on all of us. This is completely contrary to the concepts of America...and NEWT is the "cerebral" Republican. And if he meant this as a joke he did not state that or imply that at all. His ideas are true Fascism to keep America in a permanent state of fear with his government that has no oversight. This is Newt's America.
The DC sniper was a CIA sniper--ITS BEEN PROVEN!!!! He was trying to scare up the Congress and the house. The ANTHRAX scare, please explain why the BUSH ADMIN all got anthrax shotsbefore the scare happened. And the letters only went to those who opposed the war. NEWT just showed this isnt something they take seriously. Anything that has happened here and or is going to happen here is because POLITICIANS gain from it in someway!!!
Man, all those people in the background laughing must be as evil as him! It must have been a rally of some sort..... or... or maybe they are smart enough to understand when someone is making a joke...
well its obvious that people want to hurt this country and its people right? so what does that mean . that means we are at war. in a war time situation security has got to tighten or we will allow ourselves more deaths that could have been prevented. i myself will forfeit some minor liberties like that to prevent another catastrophe like 911. or do you have something to hide? whatever i have to hide is not worth the lives of 3000 lives.
See, if you knew your facts, you would know that the Government had been tracking the 9/11 terrorists by wiretaps and still let 9/11 happen. Try listening to Sibel Edmonds some time. Learn what a CIA translator in 2001 actually heard.
This has been flagged as spam show
Psychologists on coping with 9-11 truth
watch?v=trfCyvLAQd8
911 Explosive evidence: Experts Speak Out!
watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4
(43 Technical & Building Professionals are Calling for a New Investigation into the Events of 9/11)
2 wars based on a LIE!
patriotsquestion911 com
ae911truth org
pavson77 2 weeks ago
I can't wait until he becomes president.
CorrosionX3 4 weeks ago
What a fucking dirt bag. How do we have people that are voting for him?
TheShadowlocker 1 month ago
Newt brain can't censor his mouth
jimthepainterbc 1 month ago
Newt you SCUM!!!!!! GO TO HELL you corporate fascistic PIG!!!!!!!!!
SpritMatterMan 1 month ago
Gingrich failed to serve his country when we needed him in Vietnam. He gets no say in any future wars. He is the worst sort of human there is.
captsparrows1 2 months ago
The title of this should about the aggressive fbi task force with extraordinary powers to eavesdrop. That was the only thing worth hearing in this clip. The comment about reminder attacks is taken so much out of context. I find nothing wrong or sick with that statement. He wasn't being serious and saying that it would have been a good thing to do. He was making a joke in order to make a point.
larsonsier 2 months ago
So Newt loves keeping people afraid? What an asshole. He should enlist and go fight since he is so pro war.
CaptainRidley 2 months ago 3
A Democracy? Isn't the lican line that this is a Republic? That you schlubs aren't capable of running the government so that should be left to bought-out legislators? Fah.
roblimo 2 months ago
Comment removed
pineapplefever 2 months ago
How, exactly, do you go about "protecting" civil liberty while having a force that is relentless, in a non-protective-of-civil-liberties sense, for "some" types of crime (terrorism)? What prevents abuse of terrorism allegations by the government? Stringently protecting civil liberties in some cases (e.g. crimes) is not sufficient to protect civil liberties.
SJGster 2 months ago
So...basically he creates a gestapo. Awesome.
klausefluoride 2 months ago
If anybody but Ron Paul gets elected...God help humanity and i'm a democrat. Ha
connzz420 2 months ago 7
No one is against surveillance. We are against surveillance without oversight, without a warrant and without probable cause. As if the government can be trusted. Time after time we learn that they’re spying on peaceful groups.
.
They’ve been caught spying on everyone from the Tea Party to OWS. EVERYONE is now a “terrorist”.
.
Mark Klein blew the whistle on AT&T. David Faulk and Adrienne Kinne blew the whistle on the NSA.
jakesteel1 2 months ago
Newt is a scary dude. He's got too many g-damn ideas, we want less government. We want to run our own lives you fat bastard.
.
jakesteel1 2 months ago
All these insiders are the same: the government can operate in secrecy but we have to divulge everything.
.
Sounds like freedom to me.
jakesteel1 2 months ago
I don't support the guy but he was clearly kidding
There's no reason to get your panties up in a bunch
sm1tty5569 2 months ago
People, don't take this guys comment out of context.. He was simply using this statement as a way of saying it would have made us more proactive in staying sharp against terrorism. Don't kid yourself.. as much as I think terrorism is an unlikely threat, there are some people out there who wish harm on every person and these people are becoming smarter and wealthier.. Just saying lol
HannaVidz 2 months ago
1:54 ... Youth Y you no care ....
NewPiji 2 months ago
he's creating a false dichotomy between terrorism and crime
mvwil 2 months ago
If there's a nuke we should sacrifice all civil liberties?
HURR DURR
mvwil 2 months ago
For even suggesting that "we ought to have a terror attack every so often" automatically puts him into the "bad American" category in my eyes. Newt, buddy...you're a bad American.
BillRayDrums 2 months ago
It seems that the US is already "relentlessly" driving themselves bankrupt and spreading themselves to thin across the World.
CamsLiveVideo 2 months ago
has he ever read history? does he get what he is saying? lol
hikyle 2 months ago
Bacon Neck'd old piece of shit. Fuck you Newt
DLee6188 2 months ago
man, this guy...
imreallyjin 2 months ago
This needs to go vial! I want him to be the one who goes up against Obama....... sure win!
77clarkem 2 months ago
Fat sack of garbage.
KincSoup 2 months ago
I'm not really conservative, but I think that what he's saying actually makes sense - (except the Irag War part). He's obviously not endorsing attacks on the US - hence the "tragic" aspect of the Bush administration; if he was endorsing attacks on the US, the success at preventing attacks would have been "mistaken," not a "tragic" aspect.
AMSMeier 2 months ago
detoth67 2 months ago
I love how even the pro Newt crowd is nervously laughing in the background like, THIS DUDES CRAZY!
Spigsley 2 months ago
if this guy becomes president we're fucked.
Phalenskate 2 months ago
sounds like he's arguing for a police state.
westt44 2 months ago
Fucking twat
RioMadMan 2 months ago
Ha! Last sentence or two: Bush did NOT keep us safe! Does Newt think 9/11 never happened? Beyond bizarre...
armadilloze 2 months ago
@armadilloze maybe he is saying bush planned it or allowed it.
FoulplayMFer 2 months ago
"Human beings do not like living in periods where they are deeply threatened..." What about when the threat to your freedoms comes FROM your government, under the guise of protecting you. Don't be fooled by this filthy mongrel. This PIG needs to crawl back in his hole.
RobbieWilkes 2 months ago
@RobbieWilkes he addresses that point in the video. whether or not you agree with him, you should at least acknowledge that he did make a strong counter-argument to that point. 2:45
ztaylor3712 2 months ago
Facetious or not... Gingrich show his colors with the line about the ant-terrorism branch of the FBI and his advice to "civil libertarians". I think I'll have to go with Ben Franklin and say, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." He is a pig. A filthy, hypocritical lying PIG!
RobbieWilkes 2 months ago 2
what a fucking evil piece of shit
yarahahrwe 2 months ago 2
Proof this fat fuck is a fascist yet?
To think people consider this Nazi a viable candidate. He doesn't want to be president, he wants to be Fuhrer.
nosferotica1 2 months ago
The problem with a "small but very aggressive" division of FBI for counter-terrorism — and his flippant advice to simply not conspire with "terrorists" — is that the definition for "terrorism" is so fucking loose that it could be interpreted in any number of ways; basically anything that could be perceived as dissent: protesters, anti-nationalist bloggers, "unpatriotic behaviour", etc.
It's not nearly as black & white as people like Newt would have you believe.
somethinguncommon 2 months ago
More people die from bee-stings a year than terrorism , it's a moral panic created by twats like this sort yourselves out America
darrenc12pdg123 2 months ago
Define Terrorist...
zaskoda 2 months ago
That "small FBI unit" sounds like Nazi SS.
dmitrogg 2 months ago 20
@dmitrogg
Because TWO FBI Special Units, one which can violate your Rights is ALWAYS about a smaller and more limited Government?
The US MEDIA FAILS TO DISCUSS THIS... WHY?
maxx1000 2 weeks ago
'dis nigga serious?
grantXIX 2 months ago
Dont worry that pos will have a heart "attack" soon
DuffyDidItTwice 2 months ago
somebody PLEASE murder this fuck.
ELTIGERBLOOD 2 months ago
This guy is a joke. He says once the people don't like living in fear they will rather live under a dictatorship.
billob212 2 months ago
His comment about "allowing" attacks was clearly a joke and not intended to be taken seriously, hence his smile and the audience's laughter. His point was simply that if people are protected well enough, they won't know they were ever in danger. I don't consider myself a strong republican but I do agree with almost everything he said.
WestSideLuigi 2 months ago
@WestSideLuigi
I don't think anyone here thought he was being serious, he's just so fucking warped as to consider that fucking shit funny.
nosferotica1 2 months ago
lol
suez00 2 months ago
I disagree with him with respect to the restriction of civil liberties for suspected terrorists and the likelihood of a successful attack with a biological or nuclear weapon. Apart from those points, most of what he said seemed to be reasonable.
Also, that thing about letting attacks through was obviously a joke. Relax guys.
Hugfrty 2 months ago
Okay well I hate Newt Gringrich as much as the next guy, but lets be sane here. He does not actually want more terrorist attacks on America. He wasn't serious. Sometimes when you say something in your head it sounds good, and when you actually say it it sounds bad. He may be an asshole at times, but for goodness sake he is not a terrorist. Honestly, be reasonable.
favzilla 2 months ago 2
@favzilla
He was using irony to make his point. There are a lot of dim bulbs on YouTube...
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
Newt is what a dumb person thinks a smart person is.
acarlisl 2 months ago 2
Nice try Newt...911 Was an Inside Job and he knows it, he says wire tapping Americans saved us from another 911 and these people actually clapped and cheered this guy on...unbelievable.
newbutthunt 2 months ago
This should go viral to sink this PIG's presidential campaign
heyheyha 2 months ago
Genius, Gingrich. Genius. Trying to heighten your popularity there with terrorists. Why haven't the other candidates tried this? Since terrorists OBVIOUSLY make up over 50% of registered voters in America, this is a genius strategy.
kaigaku4ever 2 months ago
I hate Gingrich, but this was clearly a joke, which he was using to make a point. I don't think it's wise to joke about terrorist attacks/loss of life when you're campaigning, but that's another issue. It was a joke, and he got laughter from his audience. This kind of thing is a distraction from the real reasons Gingrich should not be in office. Remember, both Democrats and Republicans are capable of making awful jokes, and they both do it all the time.
wwwbingcom 2 months ago
@wwwbingcom you said its not wise to joke... when you're campaigning. Unless he was campaigning in 2008 for some other position, look at the date of the video. If you are referring to him campaigning for presidency then just to let you know this didnt happen in 2011
sabird1 2 months ago
@sabird1 Oh it's 2008. Thanks for the correction. I would edit that to say "it's not wise to joke about terrorist attacks/loss of life." Other than that, my point stands.
wwwbingcom 2 months ago
Seriously???
Newt was making a joke in order to underscore his point. Your attempt to spin it into something "sick" is, ironically, pretty sick in itself.
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot So it's ok to joke that we should intentionally let terrorist attacks happen? Cool story bro.
Asshole.
ttujc 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot He's advocating a governmental group that has unlimited power to eavesdrop on you're life if they think you might be engaging in terrorism. This philosophy, coupled with the NDAA legislation allowing for indefinite military arrests without trial paints a very grim picture. No one should have their civil rights tossed out the window, no matter what.
connorherrold 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot You are what is wrong with America.
jrtman 2 months ago
@jrtman
Absolutely. This country needs FEWER educated, literate people who understand the use of irony.
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot No, the US needs fewer people who are willing to defend statements that suggest terrorist attacks be allowed to happen to keep the American people in fear.
jrtman 2 months ago
@jrtman
Clearly, this whole thing went over your head.
No one--Newt included--would like to see more terrorist attacks. He was pointing out the IRONY that the lack of successful attacks in the U.S. could be used to argue that there isn't really a terrorist threat anymore.
Did you notice how the audience LAUGHED at his remark? Or should we assume that all of THEM would like to see the U.S. attacked again?
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot I am saddened by your ignorance and acceptance of this man.
jrtman 2 months ago
@jrtman
I assuming you're trolling. No one is that clueless.
BTW, I despise Newt and think he'd be a disaster as president.
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot See, now this post is the definition of irony. Funny how we just came full circle.
jrtman 2 months ago
Fuck this motherfucker....america is dead...all the fuckers running for presidency are straight fucktards....
Humansarepathetic 2 months ago
I do declare Mr Gingrich. That is borderline sadist. Is this the philosophical representation of the CATO institute and the Heritage foundation? My sources point to yes.
TheAwakenedHeretic 2 months ago
most people obviously don't understand the idea of a thought experiment.
ventrilo89 2 months ago
I dunno, I think it's pretty clear he was being facetious when he said that. I'm not a fan of the guy, but I'm pretty sure he's not saying they ACTUALLY should have allowed terrorist attacks to hit the US after 9/11
Nailbunny889 2 months ago 14
@Nailbunny889 And in his facetiousness he is using it to back up an argument to further strip civil liberties.
flashcloud 2 months ago
Guys, I know we hate this fuck, but you need to thumbs UP this video. Click Like. It increases the chance others will see this and youtube will make it go viral by itself.
CoronaMage 2 months ago 4
@CoronaMage Corona Mage is right; the video itself in context has done nothing wrong, it only showcases America's stupidity.
Swagasaurusable 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I find it extremely funny that like 70% of the internet is liberal and they think that they are all right just because there are few republicans on here. If having the government tap into my personal information is necessary for my liberty... then why would anyway be against that. liberal - "they'll catch me buying pot." THUMBS THIS UP
BoldxFresh 2 months ago
@BoldxFresh Having the government tap into your personal information is a violation our rights as Americans. How could an invasion of my privacy be "necessary for my liberty"? Why can't you use a logical argument instead of "hurr durr, you're wrong because you're a liberal and I'm a conservative"? This kind of partisan attitude is exactly the attitude of our current Congress, and is simply childish.
BestDubstepVids 2 months ago
@BestDubstepVids it is necessary fro my liberty so that we can catch terrorists... sorry i thought that was self explanatory. and that in itself is a logical argument. they are taking away some privacy to help our right to life. dont know about you but id rather live without my privacy than die with it
BoldxFresh 2 months ago
@BoldxFresh
Your chances of being killed by a trigger-happy pig are greater than being murdered by a terrorist.
Grow up and put your binky and blankie aside and turn out the fucking nite-lite, you're a man now.
nosferotica1 2 months ago 37
@nosferotica1 that has lliterally nothing to do with it... i'm just explaining why it is liberty to wire tap... because it *could* save your life
BoldxFresh 2 months ago
@BoldxFresh
yeah, they have to do it without warrants because the fact they could place a tap and get one within 72 hours was like... Too much work... Or... Whatever.
nosferotica1 2 months ago
@BoldxFresh I love how you say that 70% of the internet are made of liberal potsmokers and then you expect thumbs up
DXTC4real 2 months ago
@DXTC4real not expecting it obviously just asking for it, incase liberals come to their senses and thumbs that up because its true
BoldxFresh 2 months ago
Wadsworth constant applies
noskillet 2 months ago 3
give this thumbs UP so it's spread more. the thumb system doesn't mean whether you agree with the video or not but whether the video is relevant to the title and should be seen more
Zaetix 2 months ago 4
I love how his ENTIRE audience is the elderly...
IntegralTheoryHR 2 months ago 2
The Grinch is gay
pigeonpsycho 2 months ago
Clearly his comment was hyperbole. Dumbass's that think he meant it are friggen idiots.
TheDavidDale 2 months ago
Comment removed
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheDavidDale
Agreed. These are the same brainstems who got on Bill Bennett's case when he noted that the crime rate would go down if we aborted all black babies.
Don't high school students read Swift's "A Modest Proposal" anymore?
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
Have any of you idiots ever heard of a "HYPERBOLE"? I dislike this man because he's not honorable and he's a big gov't progressive. You don't need nonsense examples like this to show that he shouldnt be the nominee. What you should take out of this is the overreaching power he wants for the Fed Gov't.
jimmyj771 2 months ago
This video title is lunacy... You would make a great news paper headliner turning what he sais into the exact opposite.
kepper85 2 months ago 3
This kinda reminds me of the rocket bombs in George Orwells "1984"
Jcrazy772 2 months ago 15
Newt would split the FBI and form half of it into brown shirts.
deathsminion25 2 months ago
Just another clown under the GOP big top; it's like Cirque du moron.
NuthingToSee 2 months ago
Well, shit. I just thought this guy was a retard, I didn't realize he had insanity and anti-americanism to boot.
thelordberg 2 months ago
why would people laugh at that?
nsbeckwith 2 months ago
Like this video so people are aware of this moron.
Djentslide 2 months ago
We've (maybe) prevented a bunch of (potential) terrorist attacks! And all it cost was trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of American lives!
Bush 2012!
ch72105 2 months ago
Of course he's not suggesting they should allow reminder attacks. Did you actually listen to what he said?
revmen 2 months ago 3
I'd like to give this guy a kick to the balls enema.
UltraValican 2 months ago in playlist Perspective Matters
If anyone votes for this monster, I will be incredibly frightened. This country has gone far enough towards a dictatorship; let's not let it get any further.
spanging 2 months ago
this guy is scum
spockhammer 2 months ago
is this the same guy who made money off of fannie and freddy downfall?
gyco7 2 months ago
is this like "a new pearl harbor"? - project for a new american century.
gyco7 2 months ago
At about 0:30, the man speaks about 'Sniper Attacks'.
Are these the 2002 Beltway attacks?
xed360x 2 months ago
So, we just need a gestapo for the "bad guys" (the ones *suspected* of terrorism) and tell the police to be really really careful.
fiddleswithbikes 2 months ago
SICKENING
amygizer 2 months ago
i find it ABSOLUTELY MIND BOGGLING that this fucking moronic clown may win the republican nomination AND, possibly end up in the white house. WTF is the matter with this country???
phantom5691 2 months ago
Ummmm....Because they already did it.
misterdirtyknees 2 months ago
What a fucking moron.
OatSharpener 2 months ago
Hey Porky! They DID allow an attack get through -- 9-11
GCar35 2 months ago 28
@GCar35 uhm, they orchestrated the entire thing, using Israeli Mossad to carry out most of the dirty work. Duh...
dieselphiend 2 months ago
@GCar35 And Pearl Harbor. Americans do not learn from their history, let alone the world's history.
Raaszhecku 2 months ago
@Raaszhecku That exact thing amuses me, since the main argument americans use for having their schools focus so much on history, is that they do learn from the past. I agree with you though.
Worfelzarz 2 months ago
@GCar35 After 9/11 you dolt.
joconnor424 2 months ago
sounds like we need to get our aggressive terrorist fighters to do more extensive eavesdropping on Newt Gingrich.
Eat2surf 2 months ago
warmonger likes the power of fear
lushfauna 2 months ago
Chancellor Grinch
byteusa 2 months ago
@byteusa - reichschancellor or palpatine type chancellor? I think a mix, with some Kim Jong Il thrown in..
FixedNewsChannel 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What a fucking piece of shit
NeroBaelside13 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hermann Göring(and Newton Gingrich): "Naturally the common people don't want war. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag people along. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
JesusDillinger 3 months ago
So Newt would allow "some" terroist attacks through and would allow the FBI unlimited power to spy on all of us. This is completely contrary to the concepts of America...and NEWT is the "cerebral" Republican. And if he meant this as a joke he did not state that or imply that at all. His ideas are true Fascism to keep America in a permanent state of fear with his government that has no oversight. This is Newt's America.
boredjoewo 9 months ago 47
That a Gingrich administration would set America back 150 years is a given-that would be their objective.
mahogma66 9 months ago
Complete nonsense! Gingrich makes a very good point using a little humor, the audience got the joke but 911NLP obviously did not or chose not to...
Trinidad1107 9 months ago
the bad guys like the CIA ??
lowaces 1 year ago
.
Q U E S T I O N
What kind of American thinks his Nation should be attacked, AGAIN?
.
maxx1000 1 year ago
The DC sniper was a CIA sniper--ITS BEEN PROVEN!!!! He was trying to scare up the Congress and the house. The ANTHRAX scare, please explain why the BUSH ADMIN all got anthrax shotsbefore the scare happened. And the letters only went to those who opposed the war. NEWT just showed this isnt something they take seriously. Anything that has happened here and or is going to happen here is because POLITICIANS gain from it in someway!!!
dasturdly40 1 year ago
Man, all those people in the background laughing must be as evil as him! It must have been a rally of some sort..... or... or maybe they are smart enough to understand when someone is making a joke...
thebrandster 2 years ago
what is this supposed to indict gingrich? he wasnt being serious you knuckleheads
lack76 3 years ago
Seriously,
What do you call a person who wishes their Nation ill harm; another attack?
Should it be your city or just D.C. or where?
What kind of American wishes basic Civil Liberties be given up for a temporary sense of security?
Then did they ever respect these basic tenets in the first place?
Dictatorships rely on less Civil Liberties being protected, Liberties he's willing to usurp and revoke.
.
maxx1000 2 years ago
well its obvious that people want to hurt this country and its people right? so what does that mean . that means we are at war. in a war time situation security has got to tighten or we will allow ourselves more deaths that could have been prevented. i myself will forfeit some minor liberties like that to prevent another catastrophe like 911. or do you have something to hide? whatever i have to hide is not worth the lives of 3000 lives.
lack76 2 years ago
Funny, our Founders fought to establish and keep these liberties your willing to forfeit.
If they were Patriots, what does that make you?
If you're willing to forfeit basic liberties, did you ever deserve them?
.
maxx1000 2 years ago
ask the families who lost someone in the 911 attack if they want wire tapping.
lack76 2 years ago
"Tomorrow is zero hour" ~ Translated 09/12/01
Too bad the Government is homophobic, NO?
See, if you knew your facts, you would know that the Government had been tracking the 9/11 terrorists by wiretaps and still let 9/11 happen. Try listening to Sibel Edmonds some time. Learn what a CIA translator in 2001 actually heard.
Oh, and warrantless is illegal.
When did it become legal?
.
maxx1000 2 years ago
No, he's quite right. Truth is often way more terrible than a lie...
libertineKuntSodom 3 years ago
9-11 was an inside job. Google: 911 Mysteries
AntiFascistUSA 3 years ago
YOUR A EVIL MAN
shocktreatmenthead 3 years ago