When we first covered this, people accused us of twisting Newt’s words. Now Newt is defending his original statements by attacking the Bill of Rights as well. In the linked article he basically says you are guilty until proven innocent, especially if you are accused of being a terrorist.
Gingrich said the threat of biological or nuclear attack requires America to consider curbs to speech to fight terrorists, if it is to protect the society that makes the First Amendment possible.
In an interview, Gingrich said it is possible to distinguish between terrorists and others when looking to fight threatening expression.
“If you give me any signal in the age of terrorism that you’re a terrorist, I’d say the burden of proof was on you,” Gingrich said.
Any signal? Where does that leave your rights?
Yep – wanting to destroy the Bill of Rights is a signal someone is a terrorist. So I guess the burden of proof for Newt is to prove he isn’t one.
Perhaps Time magazine should have made him the Person of the year a second time.
Was this part of his Contract With America?
#3 – Was this part of his Contract With America?
No, it was part of his contract with Al-Qaeda.
Here’s the irony. If they hauled Rush off to Gitmo for making subversive attacks on the Constitution and the American way of life it protects, those idealists over at the ACLU would jump in and defend his right to spout his seditious, evil crap. Wait – that’s not funny, is it. Just true. And sad. Imagine a former Speaker of the House simply not understanding what freedom is about.
well considering that this would limit 1 in 4 words in most posts…
It’s just a shame that all madmen aren’t as easy to spot as Gingrich. After treatment, the burden of proof will be on him to show that his sanity has been restored.
Heil Gingrich, and Merry Christmas to all.
The coward Gingrich has already surrendered.
If the rest of us join Gingrich and give up our rights, then the terrorists will have won a total victory. I don’t think they ever imagined we would surrender our most cherished values to them this easily.
What the hell ever happened to my country? We used to fear nothing.
#6
I don’t this will ****** ** *** ** ****. ** **** ***** ** *** **** *******. *** ********** ***.
#8 EXTREMELY EXCELLENT point my friend!
The fact that we reacted at all that disrupted our way of life is a logical victory for those terrorists. And we are still dealing with the BS from it after 5 years.
And in other news, Newt said he’ll run for President if a clear frontrunner for the Republican party isn’t established by the fall.
Har. Har har.
At the rate things are going, even I’ll be voting for Hillary.
“biological or nuclear attack”
Blankets with smallpox?
How many nukes did the USSR have pointed at the US?
J/P=?
To think there will be some of that “Law and Order” crowd that will believe him. And he thinks wearing a little American Flag lapel pin makes him a patriot.
The people like Gingrich make Dennis Kusinich look like an even better Democratic candidate.
lol – thanks, Alix. The subtlety of the photo switch didn’t go unnoticed, sir.
It’s funny that he is using his right to free speach to say that we shouldn’t have the right to free speach. Maybe he should practice what he preaches and shut up.
#12. recall that there was already a biological attack on the US – the anthrax letters that started cropping up shortly after Sept 11. The Fibbies pointed the finger at one guy, the slunk away when there was no proof.
good thing that the burden of proof wasnt on him or he would be sharing a Gitmo cell with some other guy they are holding on a hunch ….
Rights…Rights???Rights!!!
Your God given rights have been traded for “CIVIL” rights. Your CIVIL rights are what ever the UNITED STATES government tells you. In other words, you have no Rights.
#12 – How many nukes did the USSR have pointed at the US?
How many Chinese nukes are still aimed at the U.S.? But hey, they’re an important partner… 😉
The article doesn’t give enough context for Gringrich’s remarks. This is the 21st century, there’s no excuse for the new article not to link to the actual speech instead forcing us to rely on the reporter’s pull quote and he impression of the speech.
In the United States (a Republic not a Democracy, we do not have mob rule) our rights come from God. That is God as a legal concept not a religious concept. That means that God, not Man can take our Rights away. If you are an atheist, you should really support this. Since you believe there is no God, then NO-ONE can take your rights away. If you believe in God, then only He can take your Rights away, not any act from Congress or the President or any other part of the government.
The article doesn’t give enough context for Gringrich’s remarks.
The only “context” that would justify this comment, “If you give me any signal in the age of terrorism that you’re a terrorist, I’d say the burden of proof was on you,” is if he had preceded it with “You’d have to be real douche bag to believe…” and the journalist left that part out.
14,
Actually, John made the image switch. It is better, but that’s why he wears the big hat.
An outsiders comment: Is this guy Newt completely bonkers? Since when did praying constitute “pretending to be a terrorist”….
Ron Paul for President.
These people who claim to defend freedom, while limiting our civil rights do not deserve to be listened to. What if we just ignore the newt, won’t it just go away. These people want the terrorists to win, in that they want to turn this country in to a totalitarian state, rather than be a nation where the rule of law applies to EVERYONE. He also wants to shift the burden of proof to where the accused has to prove that he is NOT guilty. One of the tenets of our government is that a person is INNOCENT, until proven guilty in a court of his or her peers.
I hope the republicans run the newt for president in ’08. He WILL lose by an historical margin.
26 – Turning the US into a totalitarian state is probably just a side-effect of their main agenda. They want to merge governmental and corporate power and run everything to increase the wealth of those who are on corporate boards or wear “c”-level titles. Such a system fits Mussolini’s definition of Fascism but that’s just a coincidence. Those people are about corporate and personal advantage, and anything else, like hifalutin notions of freedom and liberty and a chicken in every pot, will be spouted only if useful to advance the main agenda. Totalitarians? Nah. They just want to be rich and powerful, and they’re unencumbered by principles.
#27, and just what does “a chicken in every pot” have to do with freedom and liberty?
What strikes me in the comments is the often-mentioned “goal” of the terrorists, destroying the U.S. and our freedoms.
Never had any of the Al Queda people stated that as a goal. The GOAL was to get us to leave the military bases in Saudi Arabia; that was bin Laden’s big beef. There is no basis in word or fact for the idea that somehow Al Queda is the new Soviet Union.
The idea for limiting your rights comes entirely from those men who drafted the Patriot Acts 1 and 2; I think we can name names: Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, Ashcroft, and their ventriloquist dummy, Bush. bin Laden really doesn’t care what you say or where you travel.
27: You’ve got a good point there. These aren’t the old corporate fascists that liked Hitler and Mussolini. These new corporate people are ideological only in that they want no goovernment control –government corporate welfare, however, is just peachy, but no matter. They want power and that which power grants- wealth.
#20, Ron
The US of A IS a democracy. Like it or not, Americans exercise a republican form of government.
Our rights come from our being men. It does not come from God, some King, or any other artificial construct. We are born with these rights.
The only one who can take away our rights would be a dictator and that would be by force.
Get a book on Civics. Learn a bit about America. I don’t know where you live, but American school kids are usually required to understand the Constitution before they are allowed to graduate.