Gingrich is a genius. Want to know why? Sit down and click on the following link and watch this speech. It goes into many of the very same ideas that I have thrown at you here on the Anvil for months and years. It delves into the unimaginable and yet entirely probable plans of Al Qaeda and the Islamist Movement. It talks candidly about our mistakes and what we need to do to correct for the future. It examines the real enemies and talks about the real war that Iraq is only one battlefront in.
The man pays attention!
Introduction from the speech:
The essence of this speech is very simple.
Six years after the attack of 9/11/2001 we are having the wrong debate about the wrong report.
The heart of our problem is in attitude. Wars require bold efforts and undertaking real risks. We must recognize the requirements for change and we must adopt a spirit that it is better to make mistakes of commission and then fix them than it is to avoid achievement by avoiding failure.
Six years after the attack of 9/11/2001, the difference between the debate we ought to be having and the debate we are having is staggering.
The gap between where we are and where we should be is so large that it seems almost impossible to explain why the Petraeus Report, while important, will be a wholly inadequate explanation as to what is required to defeat our enemies and secure America and her allies.
Instead it seems more effective to describe this dramatic gap today by imagining how things might have turned out differently had we made different decisions for our national security starting the night of September 11, 2001. What if we had begun a great national dialogue about the nature of our enemies, the seriousness of their intent, the scale of their capabilities, and the requirements of victory over them? What might then have happened?
We must think about alternative pasts if we are to create a more successful future.
America is currently trapped between those who advocate “staying the course” and those who would legislate surrender and defeat for America.
America needs a more realistic and more powerful solution to the challenges of our enemies.
This rethinking of the last six years is designed to make it easier to be creative about the next six years.
The issuance of the Petraeus Report is the right time to challenge both the stay the course policies and the legislate defeat policies.
Newt Gingrich is simply the smartest man in U.S. politics. Click the following link to know more and to understand why we need to hear just this sort of tough talk if we are to survive as a nation and a culture (hat-tip: Orville):
What If? An Alternative History of the War since 9/11
Podcasts Archive
The rumor is that the Germans have given the go-ahead in secret to our planned attacks upon Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Halloween would be a fitting day to strike, but that’s just my idea.
It’s too bad there are not more “Newts” in Germany instead of the greedy.
From Fox News:
“Germany — a pivotal player among three European nations to rein in Iran’s nuclear program over the last two-and-a-half years through a mixture of diplomacy and sanctions supported by the United States — “notified its allies last week that the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel refuses to support the imposition of any further sanctions against Iran that could be imposed by the U.N. Security Council.”
The announcement was made at a meeting in Berlin that brought German officials together with Iran desk officers from the five member states of the Security Council. It stunned the room, according to one of several Bush administration and foreign government sources who spoke to FOX News, and left most Bush administration principals concluding that sanctions are dead.”
Terrorism and the desire for genocide trumped by money?
It is an article by Jasser to which I formed my rebuttal in this article/podcast:
Don’t tell me to accept Islam
The threat of Grassroots America attacks such as the ones you describe were put into a hypothetical on Beck’s show is very, very real. The worst part about such attacks? They are almost unstoppable. They might not have the immediate visual impact of a 9-11, but the effect upon the American psyche would be profound.
Frankly, I’m not sure how these current generations of Americans would react, but the type of reaction to such unspeakable terror acts that might occur is exactly what the future of the USA is depending upon.
If we continue to act like victims then we had better be damn prepared to be treated like herd animals by our stalkers.
Glen Beck just had a piece on the unimaginable, … attacks against schools, which sent shivers down my spine.
One of his guests was Zuhdi Jasser, a moderate and secular Muslim, who we’ve seen lately, who stated the moderates better soon stand up in unison and fight extremism with all their might, or if such an attack occurred, they all might have to ‘run for the hills’ so to speak and Beck said it is almost becoming too late to take that stance. That’s how serious things are.
Interesting. And, I agree.
As I contemplate the automated phone call I just received from my sons high school explaining (through a recorded message) there was a bomb threat called into the 911 system - 3 schools threatened in a very large rural district of more than three dozen schools - I take your encouragement to heart. My son was completely unaware of any such concern in his high school and was surprised when I had him listen in to the message on a separate phone. Another son, in elementary school mentioned two fire drills - one with lots of activity. The elementary school did not make a similar call. Threatening our children puts us on a hair trigger.
I pray you are correct in your analysis about Newt.
Sounder - thanks!
I often quote what I read . . .and defining moderates as you have above, is one I will use again. 
It is well-known by now that I am all for cutting ties with Islamic nations and ousting Muslims whenever prudent. I disagree with Newt Gingrich on those points, but almost only those points.
Gingrich is simply ‘Grandfathering’ in his message. Don’t be so easily shocked. I can already tell that he’s only making these overtures to sell an already difficult war to the masses and if you listen closely to his speech and the Q&A following, you will note that he makes it very clear that all of this is in preparation for the eventuality of “losing an American city.”
Newt knows damn well, just like I do, that all this posturing and preaching most likely will not be listened to in time and that the United States will pay a steep price for our mass foolishness. But now that speeches such as the one he delivered on September 10th are now a part of historical record, when the s#@$ hits the fan, nobody will be able to deny that Newt (and Foehammer) had it right.
Then we can finally gear up to defend ourselves properly for a change.
heroyalwhyness, First, I really like your posts here.
As far as moderate Muslims go, I think that’s as misnomer. Any group who claims moderation as opposed to extremism, and who does nothing about the extremism, are disingenuous in my books. If they are truly moderate, they would be extremists in their views against extremism, would they not? And if so, we would not be receiving nothing more than two things: 1. lip service and 2. taking every possible opportinity to harass us with the islamophobia, bigot, racist charge. So there is good reason to believe ‘moderate Muslims’ is a bumper sticker slogan.
Go back to the transcript above and note the following as well:
Is Newt suggesting that the he Jizyah masquerading as Foreign Aid increase to assist this ‘networking, communicating, and road building for farmers to get their crops to market? Haven’t we all been witness to the utter uselessness of this effort with examples provided by the Palestinians, Pakistanis, Egyptians etc. etc.
?
Admittedly, Newt sounds really good . . .until I take these nuances into consideration. I’m with the poster above who votes for Tancredo. Tancredo taking Newt as a VP could work out, if Tancredo clears out the library of Esposito, Armstrong, Edward Saidisms.
Again, if I’m mis-interpretting Newts understanding of islam, I’m all ears. Now kindly excuse me while I don my heat suit and prepare for the flaming I’m about to get.
Ok, I’m ready for the flame I’m about to get . . .I’ve liked Newt, but something kept nagging at me . . .something in his responses appeared to be off just a tad from where I needed him to be.
His speech refers to ‘radical islam’ as the problem. That’s mistake number one. Using the term “radical islam” implies there is a ‘moderate islam’. IMHO, there may be moderate muslims (those identifying themselves as culturally muslim) but there is no proof of moderate islam.
Then at the very end of the tape (Q&A not incorporated on the transcipt) Newt reveals that he is swayed by the Karen Armstrong, John Esposito camp.
Go back to the video and re-listen to the reply he gives to the woman from the blog ‘family security matters’(it’s the very last question).
Here, I’ll transcribe as best as I can . . .
Note: A woman who has a website called family security matters, brings up moderate muslims referencing ‘a true moderate muslim’ M. Zuhdi Jasser(American Islamic foundation for democracy), who admits to a certain amount of interpretation of islam regarding moderninity - and asks:
Question:. . . Is there something in the koran that enables these people to remain radical?
Newt: Sure, there’s . . .there is . ..
Question contin’d: I mean is it Islam or is it not Islam?
Newt:
Unless I’m misunderstanding his reference to dualism . . .here again, I disagree with Newt. Political islam provides ample examples of dualism within its doctrines. See here where it is explained as follows:
Returning to Newt:
That test is good, but it’s only a start.
The “Marks” of the world see no danger. It’s our imagination. They feel better by handing the likes of Islamists the country on a silver platter. Anything not to cause a disturbance or certainly not defend their culture and freedoms. These people don’t know who they are, they stand for nothing except for appeasement. And generally 9/11 was warranted cause it was our fault. Trouble is, the next few generations will have to pay the price for such spineless ignorance.
@Mark: I’m sure it drives you crazy to see a politician with integrity actually speak out against the real threats against the USA. If you’re pro-illegal immigration, there’s the Exit. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way off the Anvil.
Sounds great. Let’s Make Newt president… of IRAQ! That solves several issues all at once. And Tancredo can go with him as VP, and fight immigration there, while he employess illegals to remodel his house, like he did in Colorado a few years ago. At least we finally get rid of Two-Term Tom, who pledged to serve 2 terms and be limited, yet has run 3 more times! Good Riddance.
Gingrich will not run for President, but do not be surprised if he gets tagged for a cabinet seat or even VP by whoever wins the Republican nomination. It would be the smart move for any new U.S. President.
I want him and Tancredo on a ticket NOW!
Foehammer,
I agree with you. The man is impressive! I have always thought so. Is he running? I wish I could vote for this man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN9cqtJTvF4
Some of Orville’s link seems to be here:
(thanks Orville).
There are many more clips.