Gingrich considers how free "free speech" should be.

[Klash]

Tweetreconsidering how free speech should be to fight terrorism

Manchester Union Leader: Gingrich raises alarm at free-speech dinner
MANCHESTER, New Hampshire -- Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich yesterday said the country will be forced to reexamine freedom of speech to meet the threat of terrorism.

Gingrich, speaking at a Manchester awards banquet, said a "different set of rules" may be needed to reduce terrorists' ability to use the Internet and free speech to recruit and get out their message.

"We need to get ahead of the curve before we actually lose a city, which I think could happen in the next decade," said Gingrich, a Republican who helped engineer the GOP's takeover of Congress in 1994.

Gingrich spoke to about 400 state and local power brokers last night at the annual Nackey S. Loeb First Amendment award dinner, which fetes people and organizations that stand up for freedom of speech.

[solidground]

Tweetso rediculous

[pigmeat]

Tweethe is a ****

[solidground]

Tweethes the nwo prize sheep

Bush and co paving the way for power mad freaks like Gingrich

Steve Watson
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:

"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."

“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.”
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 **** politicians in Germany in the 1930s.



George Washington University Law Professor and Constitutional Law Expert Jonathan Turley joined Olbermann and warned:

"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."
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:

"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."

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.

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 ******"

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.

"This is 1935 and [Iranian president] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is as close to Adolf ****** as we’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 **** Germany and urged that Britain prepare to meet it.
No Newt, this is 2006 and YOU are the closest thing to Adolf ****** 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.