R. Santorum predicts unfortunate events will change opinion of the War

[purepaloma]

Yesterday, on the Hugh Hewitt show, former PA Senator Rick Santorum made references to learning the lessons of 9-11 and the recent 'attacks' in England. Then when asked by Hewitt whether he felt the leading Republican Presidential candidates were speaking with enough "seriousness" about the war, Santorum proceeded to say that alot was going to change in the next year.

"You know, I've talked to all three of the major candidates, that I think will be the major candidates, and that's Giuliani, Romney and Thompson. I think those will be the three major candidates when we head into the final analysis. And I think all of them understand the issue very, very well, they understand particularly the importance of Iran, and confronting Iran in the Middle East as an absolute lynchpin for our success in that region, and I think they are committed to that. And while it may not be a popular thing to talk about right now, and I know public sentiment is against it, they understand the importance of the national security of this country, and they also understand that between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public's going to have a very different view of this war, and it will be because, I think, of some unfortunate events, that like we're seeing unfold in the UK. But I think the American public's going to have a very different view, and part of it will be the education that these three men will be imparting on the American public during the course of this campaign."

---------------------------------
Is this REALLY what we are "hoping" for? I hope for neither more "unfortunate events" nor "the education that these three men will be imparting on the American public."

This is sickening IMO. I can't stand that the bulk of America has given into the "fear".......PLEASE PLEASE educate yourselves and others and don't just buy into this Fear Mongering !


http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/Transcript_Page.aspx?ContentGuid=bd02aa0e-7953-414b-89ff-64db473685bc

 

[LibertyBelle]

Quote by Sen. Santorum:

"and they also understand that between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public's going to have a very different view of this war, and it will be because, I think, of some unfortunate events..."


Does he know something we don't know? He knows a lot of unfortunate events are going to happen? What exactly do they need to do in order to try and get the public to have a different view of the 'war on terror'? Something to think about. This guy is now on my shit list.

This now in........grand opening of Santorum Insane Asylum, home for the criminally insane. No joke, I think he just admitted himself.

 

[Kuldebar]

Nothing new here, common practice, it appears.


Arkansas GOP head: We need more 'attacks on American soil' so people appreciate Bush

 

[PatriotOne]

Quote by Sen. Santorum:

"and they also understand that between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public's going to have a very different view of this war, and it will be because, I think, of some unfortunate events..."

And just so there is no misunderstanding, there will be video's of the terrorists telling us they did it because they "hate us for our freedoms".

Seriously, there very well may be some terrorist attacks between now and election day if one of the selected neo-cons are not doing well and expected to be "elected". The "terrorist" attacks will be U.S. Government sponsored. Period.

 

[kalami]

It's bad enough the media shills this propaganda, but a Senator?

 

[monotony]

It won't really matter though. Once people key in on Ron Paul they won't change their vote. His message is too strong.

 

[SeekLiberty]

And just so there is no misunderstanding, there will be video's of the terrorists telling us they did it because they "hate us for our freedoms".

Seriously, there very well may be some terrorist attacks between now and election day if one of the selected neo-cons are not doing well and expected to be "elected". The "terrorist" attacks will be U.S. Government sponsored. Period.

Wouldn't it be "convenient" for the neocons if Americans would "get" a 3rd Pearl Harbor? It would be such a "coincidence" for even more "opportunity."

SICK!

- SL

 

[SeekLiberty]

It's bad enough the media shills this propaganda, but a Senator?

Does it really surprise you coming from one of the criminals?

Rick Santorum (R-PA) is one of the criminals whom voted to UNconstitutionally grant Bush the alleged authority to start an UNconstitutional and illegal war.

He is partially responsible for this war crime. Now that WE THE PEOPLE are smarting up on this, they'll likely plan an "event" to convince unknowing Americans that "we're on the right path and it was for the better good." His statement shows that he very likely knows something we don't, that's PLANNED.

Criminals always give clues.

Read the following thread on this ...

Most Congressmen Guilty of War Crimes? Must Read!

http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=5615

We have a Congress infested with crooks! Anybody know what we can do about this? There is an answer if anybody wants to know.

- SL

 

[WCR]

Rick Santorum is an asshole, and people in the Senate knew that. That's why they coined the phrased, "Santorum? That's Latin for Asshole".

 

[RonPaulGetsIt]

It's good to get these fear mongering tactics out in the open. Let the masses be aware of just how convenient it would be for the neocons should we have another 9-11 type attack. We may need to be prepared to take our country back by massing the public during a time of martial law.

 

[Oddball]

What's Santoum doing these days...selling shoes??

 

[LibertyBelle]

Nothing new here, common practice, it appears.


Arkansas GOP head: We need more 'attacks on American soil' so people appreciate Bush

Shill Neocon asshole. I wonder how much his pockets are being filled. Milligan is his name, don't forget it. Talk about a terrorist.

 

[LibertyBelle]

What's Santoum doing these days...selling shoes??

No, probably chewing on them. He is criminally insane you know.

 

[SeekLiberty]

The 300+ Criminals in Congress and 16 named prime-suspects in Executive Branch.

Shill Neocon asshole. I wonder how much his pockets are being filled. Milligan is his name, don't forget it. Talk about a terrorist.

I'll remember that. Besides over 300 proven criminal Representatives and Senators in our Congress, let's not forget about the prime suspects in the Executive branch.

Here is the list of the coup in the US military chain of command and US civilian leadership who are among the prime suspects for acts of High Treason:

First and foremost are the signers of the pre-9/11 Project for a New American Century (PNAC) manifesto calling for "a new Pearl Harbor" to catalyze its global domination agenda, including Vice President Dick Cheney; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz; Richard Perle, then head of Secretary Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board; Jerry Hauer, the federal government’s top bio-terrorism expert who took anti-anthrax Cipro to the White House on 9/11; Gary Bauer, the right-wing ’family values’ zealot who ’happened’ to be one of the ’witnesses’ who immediately claimed publicly to have seen ’Flight 77 hit the Pentagon’; and then National Security Council Middle East adviser Zalmay Khalizad, soon to be the first US Ambassador to Afghanistan after 9/11 and now US Ambassador to Iraq -- the very two countries whose invasions are rationalized as retaliation for the 9/11 attacks. During the Cold War, Khalizad was a liaison to then CIA "bag man" Osama bin Laden in the CIA’s covert war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the crucible from which al Qaeda emerged.

Another key suspect is Air Force General William Hayden, now Director of the CIA and then head of the National Security Agency (NSA), which tapped the calls of lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and 9/11 "mastermind" Khalid Sheikh Mohammed the day before 9/11, and surely on many other occasions before 9/11 as well - all almost certainly without FISA warrants as required by law. These pre-9/11 warrant-less NSA taps put the lie to President Bush’s claim that he initiated the program of warrant-less NSA taps of al Qaeda suspects because of -and thus only after- 9/11. Yet another key suspect is Army Lieutenant General William "Jerry" Boykin, the radical Christian fundamentalist Special Operations commando recently proposed to head the Army’s Special Operations Command. Yet another is the Pentagon’s POP2 office, reportedly to plan and script "false flag" operations - attacks orchestrated by the US military but made to appear perpetrated by an outside enemy to justify US military "retaliation." Yet another suspect is Defense Intelligence Agency Iran expert Lawrence "Larry" Franklin, who was "loaned" to Perle and Wolfowitz’s neocon associate Douglas Feith and arrested for passing national security secrets to Israeli operatives at the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Franklin also was and is an officer in the Air Force reserves, which directed NORAD’s "Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior" war game exercises on 9/11.

Scrutiny should also be leveled at the scriptwriters for the NORAD and NRO emergency response exercises planned for and held on 9/11, especially members of their lead "White Teams," which set the content and then oversee both "Red Team attackers" and "Blue Team defenders" on the actual day of an exercise, in this case on 9/11 itself. And every one of the as-yet-to-be-identified "top Pentagon officials" who the day before 9/11, according to Newsweek, suddenly cancelled their already-booked flights for September 11.[19] Also National Military Command Center (NMCC) commander Brig. Gen. Montague Winfield, who on that same day, September 10, asked his deputy, Navy Capt. Charles Leidig to take over for him the next morning between 8:30 and 10:30 - precisely the time window of the "game" whose details and date had been given to Atta. Further investigation should be directed at the (government) "agency" the 9/11 Commission revealed, without identifying it by name, took out the vast majority of the put options on American Airlines, United Airlines, Boeing and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter in the few days before 9/11. Also, Michael Chertoff, US Attorney for the District of New Jersey during the first 1993 attack on the World Trade Center who, as a private attorney, represented Egyptian-born US resident Magdy Elamir, under investigation for illegally diverting millions of dollars and whose brother, Mohammed Elamir, funded arms smugglers linked to al Qaeda.[20] Significantly, Mohamed Atta’s name in his country of birth, Egypt, was also Mohamed Elamir. In other words, the very man President Bush put in charge of the entire 9/11 "investigation" and who is now Director of Homeland Security --the top official charged with defending the US mainland from an attack by al Qaeda-- may have been directly involved with Al Qaeda and even with Mohamed Atta himself. And FBI headquarters supervisor David Frasca and his deputy Michael Maltbie, who ignored 70 pleas by Zacarias Moussaoui’s FBI interrogator to let him investigate the contents of Moussaoui’s computer before 9/11. Attention should also be directed to Phillip Zelikow, NSC adviser along with Zalmay Khalizad to then NSC Adviser Condoleezza Rice before and on 9/11. Zelikow both orchestrated The 9/11 Commission Report cover up of the administration’s inside job and, at Rice’s personal request, rewrote the Bush administration’s official national strategic plan draft to better match the global domination agenda of the pre-9/11 PNAC manifesto.

These are just some of the names being knitted into the scroll of the Truth Revolution.

See the full post about this (and to discuss) at ...

http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=6113

Wait a minute, lets not forget about President Bush, U.S. Attorney General Gonzalez, and convicted criminal Scooter Libby that Bush let off the hook.

Interesting. Add them up! 19 proven liars that are prime suspects, or 19 foreign hijackers with box cutters? Which sounds like the fairy tale? Who are we going after now? Who SHOULD we be going after? (The criminals always leave a signature.)

By WE THE PEOPLE not holding the criminals accountable, we are making America and other Countries vunerable to more terror AGAIN, and opening the door to a new catastrophic "event." We have GOT to stop this now, don't you agree?

Anybody care to question, how?

"Hey WE THE PEOPLE of Iran ... 'Got Nukes?' ... cause it looks like we're gonna come and getcha, too!"

- SL

 

[BravoSix]

Not that I discount the very real possibility of a .gov sponsored "terrorist" act to influence public opinion, but why would "those in the know" announce it, slightly veiled, on television?

I think that, at times, people are simply looking for the next big conspiracy, and as such, read way too far into things that are said or done.

 

[Birdlady]

Not many people like Santorum, but you would be amazed how many Santorum bumper stickers I STILL SEE in PA. (And Bush stickers) People think he was a savior or something in Pennsylvania. Makes me puke...I need to move out of this state...

 

[SeekLiberty]

That's easy to answer!

Not that I discount the very real possibility of a .gov sponsored "terrorist" act to influence public opinion, but why would "those in the know" announce it, slightly veiled, on television?

I think that, at times, people are simply looking for the next big conspiracy, and as such, read way too far into things that are said or done.

That's an easy question to answer. Give me something harder.

Because liars slip up, that's why. Pure and simple. Liars have a hard time trying to bury the truth ... such as when Defense Secretary Rumsfield slipped when he said ...

"and the missile to damage this building"

I'll quote from this site ...

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics and History/Missile-Not-Flight-77.html

"Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was interviewed on 12 October 2001 by Lyric Wallwork Winik (yes, that's her real name), a columnist for Parade, the magazine that comes in many Sunday newspapers across the US. Although Parade is one of the most mainstream magazines imaginable (think People meets the Saturday Evening Post), Winik blindsided Rumsfeld with a question that few reporters/interviewers have the guts to ask:

"This is a question that's been asked by many Americans, but especially by the widows of September 11th. How were we so asleep at the switch? How did a war targeting civilians arrive on our homeland with seemingly no warning?"

Rumsfeld is apparently shaken by this young reporter's forthrightness. First, he admits what few else dare:

"There were lots of warnings."

Immediately after this sentence, though, the Secretary starts to qualify it. He subtly plays the "we didn't connect the dots" card:

"The intelligence information that we get, it sometimes runs into the hundreds of alerts or pieces of intelligence a week. One looks at the worldwide, it's thousands. And the task is to sort through it and see what you can find."

Although he doesn't directly say it, it would seem that Rumsfeld is insinuating that the poor, understaffed, shoestring intelligence and defense establishments can't put together intelligence in a timely manner.

Now things get really bizarre. After admitting that there were plenty of warnings, he says it was up to the FBI and especially state and local law enforcement to deal with the imminent terrorist attack:

"And as you find things, the law enforcement officials who have the responsibility to deal with that type of thing -- the FBI at the federal level, and although it is not, it's an investigative service as opposed to a police force, it's not a federal police force, as you know. But the state and local law enforcement officials have the responsibility for dealing with those kinds of issues."

To sum up Rumsfeld's explanation: 1) The warnings were there; 2) the Defense Department and the intelligence community couldn't figure them out; but anyway 3) it was up to the FBI, state law enforcement, and local police to uncover and prevent the worst terrorist attack in US history.

And here's something to kick around. Still answering this question, Rumsfeld goes on to make a strange statement:

"It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them."

"Missile"? What missile would that be? Did he let something slip? Or was this just a gaffe? A bad choice of words? A transcription error? Until we know for sure, it deserves scrutiny.

The article based on this interesting interview was "We Have to Defend Our Way of Life" by Lyric Wallwork Winik in Parade, 18 Nov 2001. The only part of the above exchange to be included is this:

To Rumsfeld, the Sept. 11 attacks did not come as a complete surprise. "There were lots of warnings," he says bluntly.

"The only way to deal with this problem," he continues, "is by taking the battle to the terrorists and dealing with them."

Now, it is pretty bold for Parade to quote him about the warnings. Of course, the magazine then skips Rumsfeld's subsequent shifting of blame and use of the word "missile," jumping right to the innocuous final sentence of the exchange.

Full text of the interview also available on the Defense Department's site here. http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html or if it has been removed I've archived it here http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics and History/t11182001_t1012pm.html

Presenter: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Friday, Oct. 12, 2001
From the Memory Hole www.thememoryhole.org/911/rumsfeld-warnings.htm"

I'm glad to hear you don't "discount the very real possibility of a .gov sponsored "terrorist" act to influence public opinion."

That's why we need a new investigation. Do you think Attorney Gonzalez will call for one?

Trust me, I'm not "simply looking for the next big conspiracy." (which I take offense to that statement)

The conspiracy is already here whether it was an internal coup involved (the prime suspects in my previous post in bold) or unconvicted foreign criminals.

Either way, when are WE THE PEOPLE going to get some convictions of those accountable? It's been almost 6 years now! Doesn't this bother you?

You said ... "read way too far into things that are said or done"

In my opinion, I think that is wrong-headed. Here's what I believe is closer to the truth ...

People "read way too little into things that are said or done" because they are afraid to confront the truth of what may be.

It's not a problem of "too much" curiousity but too little.

We must all stay eternally vigilent for Truth and Freedom. Obviously, we haven't done a very good job in the past. Transparency in Government for public safety isn't what WE THE PEOPLE have been getting. Our Republic is now in remnant status.

Does anybody want to know what we can do to constitutionally ensure that our employed General Government' elected and unelected servants uphold our Constitution?

- SL

 

[purepaloma]

Just an FYI, Rick is all over the news today as he's doing a Isalmo-Facism Awareness Week event on college campuses.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

This is the rhetoric that lost Santorum his election. Keep it up, jack ass!

 

[specsaregood]

//