Arkansas GOP head: We need more 'attacks on American soil'

Kytro · 06-04-2007, 01:31 AM

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

In his first interview as the chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party, Dennis Milligan told a reporter that America needs to be attacked by terrorists so that people will appreciate the work that President Bush has done to protect the country.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]," Milligan said to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country."

What the hell, this guy wants attacks so he can more easily justify his support?

I hope he means attacks would illustrate the point. Even though wouldn't actually do that.

Simius · 06-04-2007, 01:47 AM

Wow. That is fucked up. I hope this gets replayed over and over when the next time he runs for office. Anyone who thinks this way shouldn't be in charge of anything.

avsp · 06-04-2007, 04:46 AM

This kind of thinking does not bode well for if/when there is such an attack.

smokie700 · 06-04-2007, 05:01 AM

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official. The downside is if we have an attack then the complaining will be against bush for not doing this or that. I think the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9-11 speaks volumes.

garbagemanlb · 06-04-2007, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by smokie700

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official. The downside is if we have an attack then the complaining will be against bush for not doing this or that. I think the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9-11 speaks volumes.

How long was it after the initial WTC bombing that we were again attacked on American soil?

Roonie · 06-04-2007, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by smokie700

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official. The downside is if we have an attack then the complaining will be against bush for not doing this or that. I think the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9-11 speaks volumes.

I guess it is too easy to forget this incident......... A terrorist attack on our soil after 9/11.

Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two U.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. The crime remains unsolved.

The New York Post and NBC News letters contained the following note:

09-11-01
THIS IS NEXT
TAKE PENACILIN [sic] NOW
DEATH TO AMERICA
DEATH TO ISRAEL
ALLAH IS GREAT

The second note that was addressed to Senators Daschle and Leahy read:

09-11-01
YOU CAN NOT STOP US.
WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX.
YOU DIE NOW.
ARE YOU AFRAID?
DEATH TO AMERICA.
DEATH TO ISRAEL.
ALLAH IS GREAT

thatguyoverthere · 06-04-2007, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by smokie700

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official.

I understand his point too. He's not really saying "we need more attacks", he was trying to say "if we had more attacks, people would appreciate the way Bush has kept us mostly attack-free for the last six years."

But, he completely fucked up the phrasing, and now we have a deliciously juicy quote to hammer him with. Not really that fair, but conservatives love to point out that life isn't fair, so I won't shed too many tears over this guy's screwup, but that's what it was. He misspoke. Terribly...

Publius · 06-04-2007, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by smokie700

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official. The downside is if we have an attack then the complaining will be against bush for not doing this or that. I think the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9-11 speaks volumes.

No, it really doesn't. We went 8 years between the first WTC bombing and the second WTC attack on 9/11. And we HAVE been attacked repeatedly since 9/11, just not on American soil. Just like between '93 and '01 there were several attacks on U.S. interests on foreign soil (embassy bombings, USS Cole, etc.).

It's fallacious to say that Bush's policies are working because we haven't been attacked on U.S. soil in the almost 6 years since 9/11, because we went longer between the first WTC bombing and the 9/11 attack... So I gues you're agreeing that Clinton's terror policies worked even better than Bush's, because we went 8 years without an attack under Clinton, and we weren't attacked again until a new President was in office with different policies!

avsp · 06-04-2007, 09:54 AM

Is there any point in mentally preparing oneself for wnen/if it happens?

thomez · 06-04-2007, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by Publius

No, it really doesn't. We went 8 years between the first WTC bombing and the second WTC attack on 9/11. And we HAVE been attacked repeatedly since 9/11, just not on American soil. Just like between '93 and '01 there were several attacks on U.S. interests on foreign soil (embassy bombings, USS Cole, etc.).

It's fallacious to say that Bush's policies are working because we haven't been attacked on U.S. soil in the almost 6 years since 9/11, because we went longer between the first WTC bombing and the 9/11 attack... So I gues you're agreeing that Clinton's terror policies worked even better than Bush's, because we went 8 years without an attack under Clinton, and we weren't attacked again until a new President was in office with different policies!

this sounds familiar

Publius · 06-04-2007, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by thomez

this sounds familiar

time fallacy author.

thomez · 06-04-2007, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Publius

time fallacy author.

motivez · 06-04-2007, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by smokie700

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official. The downside is if we have an attack then the complaining will be against bush for not doing this or that. I think the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9-11 speaks volumes.

Al Qaeda is a patient organization that works on its own time schedule, they (and most of the Arab world) have a long view of time whereas we tend to have a shorter one. The fact that we haven't been attacked doesn't mean anything other than we haven't been attacked, yet. We have failed to secure borders, ports, much of our public infrastructure, and Bush failed to even implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.. so the idea that we're so secure they can't attack us is without much merit IMO.

You understand his point? That Americans should lose their life needlessly so that he and his party can regain some of the political capital lost because of their constantly incompetent and increasingly authoritarian methods of running the government?

The downside of another terrorist attack should be obvious: Innocent people will lose their lives. The idea that the real downside is a political consideration about how Bush will impacted is disgusting IMO.

Donkey® · 06-04-2007, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by smokie700

i understand his point but it should not be said by a public official. The downside is if we have an attack then the complaining will be against bush for not doing this or that. I think the fact that we haven't been attacked since 9-11 speaks volumes.

If anything, Bush's policies have not only turned everyone in the world against us...our own people were involved in the past two "terror plots" foiled in the US. (FT DIX and JFK airport.)

RMNIXON · 06-04-2007, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by Kytro

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

What the hell, this guy wants attacks so he can more easily justify his support?

I hope he means attacks would illustrate the point. Even though wouldn't actually do that.

Glad I am not in Arkansaw in either Party!

RMNIXON · 06-04-2007, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

If anything, Bush's policies have not only turned everyone in the world against us...our own people were involved in the past two "terror plots" foiled in the US. (FT DIX and JFK airport.)

Oh really? That is why what conversations the FBI have mention Israel and material support for Israel going through JFK and having nothing to do with Bush or Iraq! Unless you think he invented our policy toward that particular country? Funny that the killer of RFK also was upset over our military support for that country. The constant ant-Bush spin on everything is making me sick......

Donkey® · 06-04-2007, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Oh really? That is why what conversations the FBI have mention Israel and material support for Israel going through JFK and having nothing to do with Bush or Iraq! Unless you think he invented our policy toward that particular country? Funny that the killer of RFK also was upset over our military support for that country. The constant ant-Bush spin on everything is making me sick......

A reason is not THE reason.

Originally Posted by article

GEORGETOWN, Guyana -- A Guyanese man accused in a plot to attack a New York airport was deported from the United States in the late 1980s and often called Americans "oppressors," acquaintances said Sunday.

404-Israelnotfound

smokie700 · 06-05-2007, 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by article
GEORGETOWN, Guyana -- A Guyanese man accused in a plot to attack a New York airport was deported from the United States in the late 1980s and often called Americans "oppressors," acquaintances said Sunday.

Doesn't sound like HE was one of us. hmm

AVengeance · 06-05-2007, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by Roonie

I guess it is too easy to forget this incident......... A terrorist attack on our soil after 9/11.

Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two U.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. The crime remains unsolved.

The New York Post and NBC News letters contained the following note:

09-11-01
THIS IS NEXT
TAKE PENACILIN [sic] NOW
DEATH TO AMERICA
DEATH TO ISRAEL
ALLAH IS GREAT

The second note that was addressed to Senators Daschle and Leahy read:

09-11-01
YOU CAN NOT STOP US.
WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX.
YOU DIE NOW.
ARE YOU AFRAID?
DEATH TO AMERICA.
DEATH TO ISRAEL.
ALLAH IS GREAT

Once the government realized the Anthrax could be too easily traced back to themselves, they instructed the propoganda machine to drop the story. Guess what happened.

The power elite are responsible for 9/11 and the anthrax attacks, and all the other "terrorism". This one would have been too easy for real researchers and scientists to find the real guilty parties, so it was swept away.