TPM LiveWire
Gringrich Tweets His Rage Over Lack Of 'Explicit Discrimination' In Obama Anti-Terrorism Policies
Jillian Rayfield | December 30, 2009, 11:53AM
Newt Gingrich
Share
Send to a friend!
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich went on something of a Twitter frenzy today, criticizing the Obama administration's terrorism policies via a series of angry Tweets that slam "government failure and incompetence," and call for for an "aggressive practical strategy" of "explicit profiling and explicit discrimination" against suspected terrorists.
Gingrich joined the chorus of right-wingers who have been attacking Obama for his anti-terrorism policies, calling this "a year of weakness in national security," and Fort Hood and Flight 253 its "first fruits."
Gingrich also put himself in the camp of those calling for highly controversial profiling tactics, which Gingrich said would target "dangerous people instead of harassing and retsricting [sic] the innocent." He even goes so far as to call his profiling "strategy" a plan for "explicit discrimination."
Here's the tirade as it appeared on Twitter, in all of its glory:
It is outrageous that government failure and incompetence on terrorism will now harm every innocent person trying to flyIt is time to go to profiling of dangerous people instead of harassing and retsricting the innocent
We need a new policy of systematically going after terrorists that involves explicit profiling and explicit discrimination for behavior
My newsletter at newt.org on wednesday will outline aggressive practical strategy of profiling and discrimination against terrorist targets
President Obama does not realise the "systemic failure" he described in the terrorist airliner threat is his administrations policies
Obama policies undermining cia, moving interrogation to fbi, crippling cia morale with prosecution threats, focusing on terrorists rights
A year of weakness in national security is the "systemic failure" and the recent fort hood and detroit airliner attacks are first fruits
We do not need a wtch hunt in intelligence, we need a fundamental change in administration policies on terrorism
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
AnswerFrog
December 30, 2009 12:30 PM
That's funny. Michael Chertoff was just explaining on NPR yesterday why racial profiling is ineffective -- and how in this very case, the terrorist was an African, not an Arab. And in the liquid explosives plot, they were planning on using a married couple with a child. Apparently Al Qaeda is deliberately picking people who don't fit the profile.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jenzinoh
December 30, 2009 12:32 PM
"We need a new policy of systematically going after terrorists that involves explicit profiling and explicit discrimination for behavior"
And yet, when the DHS does this with radical Right-wing domestic groups, people like Gingrich lose their freakin' minds. In Gingrich's world, Paula Abdul and Kareem Abdul Jabbar get strip-searched and placed on no-fly lists, but Richard Reid and John Walker Lindh skate right through... Not Jose Padilla though, too ethnic sounding a name.
He is just calling for racial and religious profiling. That's it, nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't have the cajones to call it that though.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
December 30, 2009 1:23 PM in reply to jenzinoh
Yeah.... let's strip-search Paula Abdul!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
December 30, 2009 1:26 PM in reply to CityGuy
Oh and Newt is an oppotunistic moron! Him and his GOP buddies believe that another terrorist attack on America would benefit the Rethug party. That's all any of them really care about!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beautiful Mind of Barbara Bush
December 30, 2009 12:33 PM
Ok. Since conservative, white evangelical Christian males have been a primary source of domestic terrorism--blowing up federal buildings, bombing abortion clinics, murdering abortion providers, shooting up museums, threats against the president, etc.--then clearly they should be the primary target of profiling and stepped up security, right? Anal probes and scrotum cheks with a knitting needle for them all, right?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lapdogs
December 30, 2009 1:31 PM in reply to Beautiful Mind of Barbara Bush
Somebody in the MSM want to remind them of your facts.
Should be interesting to see their faces (and hear their explanations) when they think back to those attacks by "their very own" types.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ShawninMo
December 30, 2009 9:55 PM in reply to lapdogs
I can't find the exact number, maybe you can help. How many right wing, christian extremists have tried to blow up a plane?
Just a guess mind you, but I'm going to say about zero. I believe airport security is the topic. ofile who's the most likely to commit the crime you're trying to prevent. You wouldn't profile arabs while trying to find out who is planning to blow up abortion clinics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
December 30, 2009 12:42 PM
Has Newt or any of the other RW shills who've apparently peed their pants explained how "profiling" people IN THE US would have helped stop this case? Dude was last screened in Amsterdam, which (last I checked) was NOT THE US.
Also, does this mean they've finally decided to stop blaming Clinton for 9/11? I suspect not...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Scott in PacNW
December 30, 2009 1:01 PM
This is no surprise. Newtie proposed concentration camps and martial law to fight the 'drug war' in 1990.
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur01.htm
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Marinus van der Lubbe
December 30, 2009 1:11 PM
'Tweet' is the operative word for this shitbird...a little noise coming from someone who is already so discounted and out of the playoffs for good it's laughable. He is not a factor in anything...his constant interruptions sent to news agencies are a feeble attempt to stay above water. Palin, Armey and the teabagging fools have drowned him. No longer relevant, he, like McCain, makes little tweets...
Obsolete, fat and lonely..that's no way to go thru life, son...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Glenn Fleishman
December 30, 2009 1:17 PM
Newt is the greater warrior for fighting the war we just lost, ever!
He's engaged in the marvelous amnesia policy subscribed to by both sides (unfortunately) to try to erase the previous administration of their party. In this case, the 8 years of Bush incompetence evaporates with one year of Obama following...well, mostly the same policies to our great disappointment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
December 30, 2009 1:18 PM
More Newt...Just what we need for the holidays! How the Gingrich stole Christmas!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DKDC
December 30, 2009 1:47 PM
I think this entire right-wing meltdown over the Detroit flight could actually point to something much deeper - they are absolutely terrified of next year. Despite what they say about HCR, they realize that after the conference report passes the public is going to keep warming to the reform effort, and with the economy perhaps improving steadily at the same time, their entire year of lies and exaggerations about the stimulus program and the reform bill will melt away just in time for the 2010 election.
Hence, go back to the old chestnut - the Dems will allow terrorists to kill you, and you need Republicans to keep you safe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gayinmt
December 30, 2009 2:46 PM
So, in 2001 we had 9/11 of course and then the shoe bomber. So that would make that year an even bigger "year of weakness in national security". Plus, haven't innocent people been being harassed since then? I know I have. My question would be, how did their policies keep us more safe or intrude less into innocents' lives?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dilirius
December 30, 2009 3:15 PM
Since Eric Robert Rudolph is a "pro-life" activist, we should "explicitly discriminate" against all "pro-life" activists.
Since David Koresh was a right-wing "religious leader," we should "explicitly discriminate" against all right-wing religious leaders.
Since Timothy McVeigh was a conservative former member of the army, we should "explicitly discriminate" against all conservative former members of the army.
Cause you never know when and which of them will engage in terroristic activities!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
December 30, 2009 3:38 PM in reply to Dilirius
They aren't terrorists, remember? Get with the program. They're now man-made disaster makers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
December 30, 2009 5:58 PM
This is just Gingrich's way of ensuring that Muslims (or people with Muslim "sounding" names) change their names to such All-Amrrkkkan names like Chad, Thad, Justin, Dustin, Parker, Madison, Britney, Brittany, Britnay, and Brittnee.
Like when he divorced his wife with breast cancer as she lay in her hospital bed, he only wanted to make sure she would find a nice doctor to marry. Or a ward boy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?