Newt: 'Three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust'

[LadyEagle]

Israel faces nuclear Holocaust warns Gingrich

Newt Gingrich: Haifa, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem facing mortal Iranian threat, says former US Speaker of the House; emphasizes 'three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust'
Yaakov Lappin Published: 01.23.07, 19:51


The Israeli people are facing the threat of a nuclear Holocaust, former US Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich warned the Herzliya Conference held by the Institute for Policy and Strategy at IDC Herzliya on Tuesday afternoon. Meanwhile, he said, the United States could lose a few million people or a number of cities to a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction.


Gingrich, who addressed the conference via satellite from the United States, said he thought Israel's existence was under threat again for the first time in 40 years.

"Israel is in the greatest danger it has been in since 1967. Prior to '67, many wondered if Israel would survive. After '67, Israel seemed military dominant, despite the '73 war. I would say we are (now) back to question of survival," Gingrich said.

He added that the United States could "lose two or three cities to nuclear weapons, or more than a million to biological weapons."

Gingrich added that in such a scenario, "freedom as we know it will disappear, and we will become a much grimmer, much more militarized, dictatorial society."

"Three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust," Gingrich declared, adding: "People are greatly underestimating how dangerous the world is becoming. I'll repeat it, three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust. Our enemies are quite explicit in their desire to destroy us. They say it publicly? We are sleepwalking through this process as though it's only a problem of communication," Gingrich said.

The former House speaker expressed concern that the Israeli and American political establishments were not fully equipped to take stock of the current threat level.

"Our enemies are fully as determined as Nazi Germany, and more determined that the Soviets. Our enemies will kill us the first chance they get. There is no rational ability to deny that fact. It's very clear that the problems are larger and more immediate than the political systems in Israel or the US are currently capable of dealing with," said Gingrich.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356103,00.html

 

[carpro]

"Our enemies are fully as determined as Nazi Germany, and more determined that the Soviets. Our enemies will kill us the first chance they get. There is no rational ability to deny that fact. It's very clear that the problems are larger and more immediate than the political systems in Israel or the US are currently capable of dealing with," said Gingrich.


There is no denying the truth of that statement.

 

[KenH]

The West will have to make sure that terrorists do not get a hold of any nuclear weapons.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Three nuclear weapons exploding over Israel or Iran
could prematurely kill 10s of Millions of Americans.

Even a small nuclear war on the other side of the world
can ruin your day in America.

 

[carpro]

The West will have to make sure that terrorists do not get a hold of any nuclear weapons.

The West has to first realize the threat is real. They are in denial and it will take the deaths of tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocents to wake up even half of them.

 

[snrsvdbygrc]

Yep, right now you just have the bleeding hearts crying that Iran should have nukes since we do. Newt is not off track, but the liberals will be saying it is nothing but fear tactics just as Bush did to get us into war, instead of blaming those actually responsible.

I hate to say it but I think it will take something like a nuke going off or a biological attack that actually affects the activist and protestors before we would actually be able to unite as a solid fighting force again. Every war we have won had the support from home, once that dies off so does the endurance to keep fighting. The US cannot stomach a fight for very long when their soil is not had blood spilled on it and that pretty much goes for the western world as a whole.

Muslims will have a nuclear capability one day, and you can bet they will not be rational enough to use it as a deterant as the nuclear powers have to this point. Once they have a nuke, a delivery system they will use it without question, it is just a matter of when. They already have several targets.

 

[Ed Edwards]

??? Pakistan is a Muslim country.
Pakistan has nuclear weapons.

 

[carpro]

Pakistan is not ruled by Islamic fundamentalists,AKA Islamofascists...

Yet.

But it has been a base for the spreading of nuclear know how to Islamic terrorist states.

 

[Rufus_1611]

Yep, right now you just have the bleeding hearts crying that Iran should have nukes since we do. Newt is not off track, but the liberals will be saying it is nothing but fear tactics just as Bush did to get us into war, instead of blaming those actually responsible.

Newt is doing nothing other than preparing people for what they are intending to do anyway. For a political leader to make this statement...

Gingrich added that in such a scenario, "freedom as we know it will disappear, and we will become a much grimmer, much more militarized, dictatorial society."​

...should alarm the bejeebers out of American citizens. It sounds awfully similar to the statements made by General Tommy Franks...

If that happens [wmd attack], Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.”​

...and matches up with this humorous quip...

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." - George W Bush​

It sounds like some major players are prepping us to accept that if there is a WMD attack on American soil, then the easy and only solution will be martial law and dictatorship.

Suspending the Constitution is not something that should be allowed by a diligent citizenry. Contrary to the actions of Abraham Lincoln and the beliefs of many today, the Constitution is not something the powers that be just get to turn off and on at their discretion.

If the powers that be were actually concerned with the terrorist threat, they would secure our borders. Instead, they are securing the borders of middle east countries while allowing 15-20 million people, from a foreign nation, invade our land and amongst those is an unknown quantity of people classified as 'Other than Mexican'.

Then let's say we get hit by some WMD attack precipitated by OTMs and Joe American now has to live in an unconstitutional dictatorship because his "representatives" sold him out? God forbid!

"Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry​

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin​

 

[poncho]

I hate to say it but I think it will take something like a nuke going off or a biological attack that actually affects the activist and protestors before we would actually be able to unite as a solid fighting force again. Every war we have won had the support from home, once that dies off so does the endurance to keep fighting. The US cannot stomach a fight for very long when their soil is not had blood spilled on it and that pretty much goes for the western world as a whole.

Hmmm, I know I've heard this same argument before. Where was it...think think think...oh yeah PNAC and Brzezinski back in 1998 and 2000.

It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization."

The Grand Chessboard page 35.

The PNACers have been using the same argument, more or less.

Imperial mobilization, pursuit of power? What does having the will to defend our land and citizens from an outside threat have to do with imperial mobilization, military intimidation and the pursuit of power, snrsvdbygrc? Please explain. I'm not understanding how this all fits together here. So which is it, we need a [SIZE=-1]"catastrophic and catalyzing event" to give us the will to win or so we can all get together and support the pursuit of power through an expanded imperial mobilization? [/SIZE]

 

[snrsvdbygrc]

??? Pakistan is a Muslim country.
Pakistan has nuclear weapons.

That is a great point. Their leadership has not been religious in any sense of the word though. I honestly think because of their moderate stance and their problems with India they are not a major player in the world of terrorism. Musharraf has a Christian education and family in Boston and Chicago. He was adamentaly against islamic fundementalist, banning funding for them and mosques in his country. He held them at bay. His successor and current Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz was a Citibank VP and has other western influences as well. So in these respects Muslim fundamentalist are not in control of the nukes. Very easy to change in this country though.

 

[Pastor Larry]

People who are more scared of losing some "freedoms" than they are of nuclear weapons that can kill millions have a strange sense of value.

Imagine the day when you can't get on a city bus or a subway car, or walk down the street because you don't know which car is rigged with a nuclear device. And every car you look at, you wonder if that could be the one.

If you would rather have that, then that is just strange. I find it hard to believe that those who argue so vehemently against abortion would take such a low view of human life as to subject it to that kind of danger. People live that kind of world every day in the middle East. And they want to bring it here in their fight against us.

(Let me go out on a limb and prophesy that my patriotism will be questioned. I will be told I am not deserving of liberty, quoting Ben Franklin or some such. I will be accused of all sorts of things.)

But this is just strange to me.

 

[poncho]

People who are more scared of losing some "freedoms" than they are of nuclear weapons that can kill millions have a strange sense of value.

Imagine the day when you can't get on a city bus or a subway car, or walk down the street because you don't know which car is rigged with a nuclear device. And every car you look at, you wonder if that could be the one.

If you would rather have that, then that is just strange. I find it hard to believe that those who argue so vehemently against abortion would take such a low view of human life as to subject it to that kind of danger. People live that kind of world every day in the middle East. And they want to bring it here in their fight against us.

(Let me go out on a limb and prophesy that my patriotism will be questioned. I will be told I am not deserving of liberty, quoting Ben Franklin or some such. I will be accused of all sorts of things.)

But this is just strange to me.

Calm down PL don't get so excited this is just more fearmongering from the world domination crowd. Remember how we heard all the same things about Iraq and they all turned out to be lies? Well, you probably don't remember it that way but that's how it turned out. This is just more of the same.

Here's a couple things to consider before you run off and surrender America to this current bunch of Machiavellian traitors.

Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications. According to legend, Iran's President has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote, "Israel must be wiped off the map". Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made, as the following article will prove.


Experts confirm that Iran's president did not call for Israel to be 'wiped off the map'.

Everytime you've heard that rumor you have been lied too.

Iran Is Judged 10 Years From Nuclear Bomb

U.N. Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House Panel

I find it hard to believe that those who argue so vehemently against abortion would take such a low view of human life as to subject it to that kind of danger.

I find this statement kind of strange. It sort of sounds as if you would prefer the U.S. to be turned into something like the Soviet Union with it's oppresive police state and gulags where everyone is subject to the whims of men rather than the law. Seems to me one would have to have a pretty low view of human life to subject it to that kind of danger.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I am not excited at all. I simply continue to find your fearmongering very unconvincing.

Let's say that on your street was a gunman and the police came by and told you to stay in your house. Would you accept that limitation of "your freedom" for a period of time for the sake of protecting life? Would you call your children in from the yard? Of course you would. That's why your position is nonsense.

I am not about to surrender America to anyone. The idea that I have to power to do such is more nonsense than your position. I can't. I won't.

I find this statement kind of strange. It sort of sounds as if you would prefer the U.S. to be turned into something like the Soviet Union with it's oppresive police state and gulags where everyone is subject to the whims of men rather than the law.

There is no legitimate way to get this out of my words. But this is unfortunately par for the course from you. Why run to the extreme to create fear? I don't care about a police state. Everyone says that the church in Russia was far stronger than the church in America in those days, and that the lifting of restrictions has actually harmed the church. I have talked to Chinese house church leaders who don't want their religious freedom because of the damage it would do to the church. Since the church and the gospel are my priorities, the rest of this makes little difference. I am thankful for America and God's providence over it. But I don't worship it.

 

[poncho]

I am not excited at all. I simply continue to find your fearmongering very unconvincing.

Let's say that on your street was a gunman and the police came by and told you to stay in your house. Would you accept that limitation of "your freedom" for a period of time for the sake of protecting life? Would you call your children in from the yard? Of course you would. That's why your position is nonsense.

I am not about to surrender America to anyone. The idea that I have to power to do such is more nonsense than your position. I can't. I won't.

There is no legitimate way to get this out of my words. But this is unfortunately par for the course from you. Why run to the extreme to create fear? I don't care about a police state. Everyone says that the church in Russia was far stronger than the church in America in those days, and that the lifting of restrictions has actually harmed the church. I have talked to Chinese house church leaders who don't want their religious freedom because of the damage it would do to the church. Since the church and the gospel are my priorities, the rest of this makes little difference. I am thankful for America and God's providence over it. But I don't worship it.

You just read what Newt was lying about and you seem ready to give up any freedom they ask for but yet I am the one fearmongering here? What have I asked you to give up? Nothing but a little time studying what these people have been calling for all along. Look it's easy PL. Just read their past policy papers and compare it to what has been going on since 911. They write one thing and form policies to carry it out while telling us something else entirely. That's known as lying PL. They are with few exceptions total liars. Yet you hang on every one of their words as if they were the gospel. That's just weird imho.

 

[Pastor Larry]

You just read what Newt was lying about and you seem ready to give up any freedom they ask for but yet I am the one fearmongering here?

I don't know if Newt is lying or not. And neither do you. Apparently waht he said was that three nuclear weapons can cause the same amount of death as the Holocaust did. That makes sense, given the size of cities adn the potency of the weapons. As for the rest of it, I don't know whether Newt is lying or not. And neither do you.

What have I asked you to give up? Nothing but a little time studying what these people have been calling for all along.

Why should I care, though? That's the question. Why should I take time from doing what God has called me to do to study something that 1) doesn't affect my life or calling, and 2) doesn't really interest me?

Just read their past policy papers and compare it to what has been going on since 911.

I have a bunch of books going at the moment that are about far more important things.

They write one thing and form policies to carry it out while telling us something else entirely. That's known as lying PL. They are with few exceptions total liars.

They are politicians. What would you expect?

Yet you hang on every one of their words as if they were the gospel. That's just weird imho.

I hang on every word? I don't even read them. I don't know what their words are. So what is wierd is that you would make a statement that isn't true. And if you make a statement about me that I know isn't true, how can I trust your statements about others?

I don't even know of "they" are, to be honest. I like Newt alright, from what I know. He seems to make sense. But I don't really know what is behind all that, which is why I refuse to make dogmatic statements about it.

Why is this so important? Are we not called to serve a higher kingdom?

 

[El_Guero]

That is kinda the reason that we are in Iraq . . .

Kinda . . .

The West will have to make sure that terrorists do not get a hold of any nuclear weapons.

 

[El_Guero]

Tens of thousands killed in terror strikes . . . . and many more injured.

Including Chem - bio attacks.

Not including the hundreds of thousands (millions?) killed by saddam, in India, in Africa . . .

Almost everyone has their heads in the sand.


http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/wrjp255i.html

The West has to first realize the threat is real. They are in denial and it will take the deaths of tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocents to wake up even half of them.

 

[El_Guero]

Poncho

If you want to believe in lies then do so.

Any one country can build a nuclear device within months.

Any one country can build WMD within months.

What takes the help of advanced technology are: delivery systems that are accurate; clean and highly efficient Weapons of Mass Destruction; bunker to keep the systems in so that they do not get blown up by us.

The desire to become a military stronghold that will use NBC weapons takes only seconds.

:godisgood:

 

[poncho]

I don't know if Newt is lying or not. And neither do you. Apparently waht he said was that three nuclear weapons can cause the same amount of death as the Holocaust did. That makes sense, given the size of cities adn the potency of the weapons. As for the rest of it, I don't know whether Newt is lying or not. And neither do you.

How could you know you aren't interested enough to find out...

Why should I care, though? That's the question. Why should I take time from doing what God has called me to do to study something that 1) doesn't affect my life or calling, and 2) doesn't really interest me?

Didn't God call you to be on the side of truth?

I have a bunch of books going at the moment that are about far more important things.

Hope you enjoy them.

They are politicians. What would you expect?

I don't expect politicians to go around fabricating and hyping things to get people to go along with wars they want to start.

I hang on every word? I don't even read them. I don't know what their words are.

Well I do know what their words are because I've read them and listened to them so can how you, a person that freely admits to not caring not seeing and not hearing them tell me a person who has that I am "strange" for pointing out where they have lied about their intentions and plans in the past?

So what is wierd is that you would make a statement that isn't true.

Where have I lied Larry. Prove it or stop the circular logic it's boring.

And if you make a statement about me that I know isn't true, how can I trust your statements about others?

Larry you already admited that you don't care don't listen and don't watch what they are doing so what have you got to contribute to this disscusion other than the usual "trust the government" drivel?

I don't even know of "they" are, to be honest. I like Newt alright, from what I know. He seems to make sense. But I don't really know what is behind all that, which is why I refuse to make dogmatic statements about it.

Maybe you should make an attempt to educate yourself on the facts before you start denying them and making dogmatic statements about others who have...mkay?

Why is this so important? Are we not called to serve a higher kingdom?

Why are you here taking up bandwidth if you don't think it's important?

El_Guero, my very good friend. I'll get back to you in the morning. I've just wasted all my BB time for tonight on someone that admittedly doesn't care doesn't listen and doesn't watch what these neocons have been writting and planning for over a decade. Be back in the morning.:type: