Skip to comments.Ron Paul: Highways claim more than 9/11 killed
Posted on 09/23/2007 10:47:55 AM PDT by LdSentinal
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul contends that the federal government has overreacted by limiting personal freedom in the wake of terrorist attacks six years ago, noting more people die on U.S. highways in less than a months time compared to the number who lost their lives on Sept. 11, 2001.
We have been told that we have to give up our freedoms in order to be safe because terrorism is such a horrible event, Paul said today to more than 1,000 supporters who attended a rally at a downtown Chicago hotel ballroom.
A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways, but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No. Its a government institution you know. We need to put all this in perspective.
More than 2,970 people were reported dead in the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. Federal highway traffic statistics show an average of 3,509 people a month were killed on the nations highways in 2001.
(Excerpt) Read more at weblogs.baltimoresun.com ...
9/11 was an attempt to kill 50,000+ people.
Another reason not to vote for Ron Paul. As if we need another.
The fact that only about 3000 died was a miracle itself. We can't depend on miracles to save us.
Indeed, more kids die in pools that are raped and killed by pedophiles, so why get so upset about it.
Even in 1941, there were likely more vehicular deaths than those killed at Pearl Harbor.
What a loser.
The proper term is “Paul Qaeda”.
I’m sorry. I didn’t realize there was a concerted effort by terrorists to kill people on the highways. There’s a lot of lethal stupidity, to be sure, but that’s not the same thing.
The Paulistinians are at it again. Gads, this guy’s a jack***.
A big Texas embarassment. There is a rock out there waiting for Ron Paul to crawl back under. RON!!!!!! Your rock is calling.........
Comparing car accidents to mass-murdering terrorists is particularly inapt. We can be extremely confident that deaths from car accidents will occur at roughly the same rate from year to year because they are accidents. However, with regard to terrorists, we have no such assurance. In fact, history is with replete with examples where mass-murderers who were initially ignored then went on to kill even greater numbers. This isn’t rocket-science and the fact that Ron Paul doesn’t get it calls into question is basic sanity.
Ron has lost every bit of credibility he had left. Now he is a terrorist apologist. How disgusting.
Keep digging, Ron.
Is the highway trying to kill me with the worst weapons known to mankind?
“...compared to the number who lost their lives on Sept. 11, 2001.”
It’s not about those who *have* died. It’s about those Americans who *will* die if radical islam isn’t brought under control.
Ron Paul doesn’t take terrorism seriously at all.
He probably doesn’t even believe terrorists attacked us on 9/11...
I bet Al-Qaeda’s minions are praying to allah everyday that someone like ron paul will be elected, so that we will take the heat off of them and allow them to kill and maim with no threat of us intervening.
Twenty posts and not a peep from the Paulestinian Liberation Organization on FR.
Now we have Ron Paul — comparing the 9/11 attack against the United States to accidents that occur on our highways!
Hell, I’m disappointed he didn’t use the the fact that MORE U.S. deaths/murders are caused by ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS in ONE YEAR than have been killed in FIVE YEARS in the war against Islamists.
He could have made a better case to bring the troops home to defend the borders against this invasion of thieves, murderers, drugs lords and destroyers of our national education and health systems.
Can folks still not see that Ron Paul in a VERY flawed individual who is totally unsuitable for any position of public trust or responsible for national security...
And putting things in perspective is why Ron Paul hasn't a gnat's of a chance to pop a vein while working out of the Oval Office.
Who is running against him in the GOP primary, if there is someone.
If there is one, we need to counter the TehRon Paul spam here and support this guy/gal.
Yeah this is a standard gripe of libertarians - the loss of civil liberties due to the WOT. However the strategy of belittling the deaths of 3000 people in an act of war by comparing it to accidental deaths is a poorly thought out political strategy worthy of common BDS sufferers.
The issue with the WOT should always be are we serious about this or not? If we are serious it will demand sacrifice. No, the WOT is not WWII but the country was committed to that war (with the help of a healthy Government propaganda campaign). Those citizens sacrificed many many of their civil liberties as well as their “blood and treasure” to win that war. They had no idea how long the war would last when they committed. Their commitment and sacrifice of civil liberties must surely have shortened that war.
If we are not serious about the WOT then why do we bother having a DoD? We might as well have Kucinich’s Department of Peace. In modern warfare there will be no more well uniformed armed forces storming our beaches. There will only be un-uniformed forces working against us world-wide. Which battlefield will you choose, Congressman Paul? Where will you make your stand?
Ron Paul once did good work. Hopefullly, after he retires, his public bout of senility will be a distant memory.
Uh huh. And more people die on the highways in less than a month’s time than the total deaths of US troops in Iraq since 2003.
So, even by your own twisted logic, Ron, one has no choice but to conclude that you shouldn’t be in such a big rush to “just bring the troops home.”
Nor can he distinguish between accidents and deliberate malicious acts.
I’m ashamed to admit that I have voted for him. That was a long time ago, and won’t happen again. Ever.
Ron Paul? Who is this infidel with two first names? I pick the Ron Paul booger and fling it upon this reeking heap of goat dung to show Allah's hatred for this non-believer.
You can compare risks of different kinds of travel, significance of any given disease (the gov't tends to pick and choose unfairly in that area) or even crime to crime. But you can't compare crime/terrorism to traffic accidents and make any legitimate point.
The highways are on public property. Private citizens are not the public. Gov't is the public. Gov't owns the land under the highways and might build and maintain the highways but ultimately can order everybody off the public property or lease it to an Arab hiding in Tora Bora.
The harder this klown tries to prove his relevancy and viability as a public servant, the more he displays the exact opposite.
As attractive as his calls for more limited government may be, in the end he just sounds like a crackpot. The thing about crackpots and village idiots - they are usually totally oblivious to how embarrassing they are.
What a freaking moron!
Seriously, I know Ron’s running for president. I’m just not sure he understands what country he’s campaigning in, much less what party.
The man seems incapable of discerning between conspiracy mingled with evil with the ultimate goal of mass murder, and americans excercising their freedom by travelling on our roads, inadvertently screwing up, and crashing.
“If you could stop pointing and shrieking long enough to pay attention to what’s being said, you might learn something.”
Which do you consider the greater threat, Islamic Terrorism or the Federal Government?
A ridiculous and clueless line of reasoning, IMO, and I’ve been willing to defend Paul on domestic/economic issues.
Hey, and you are not too likely to be murdered either. So why not cut back on homicide divisions in police departments? So what about justice when it’s those other guys who are dead?
Okay, whether or not the security measures have gone too far is a legitimate thing to debate, but this comparison in what appears to be an effort to minimize 9/11 is digusting and shows a lack of basic character. Hopefully he will be out of Congress soon as well. Is he being primaried, I hope?
Ron is just like any internet troll- an attention-getting jerk, who may or may not believe the crazy things he says.
As a poster, he would be banned from FR.
There are many. Here's one:
A false sense of insecurity? How does the risk of terrorism measure up against everyday dangers?
For all the attention it evokes, terrorism actually causes rather little damage and the likelihood that any individual will become a victim in most places is microscopic. Those adept at hyperbole like to proclaim that we live in "the age of terror." However, while obviously deeply tragic for those directly involved, the number of people worldwide who die as a result of international terrorism is generally only a few hundred a year, tiny compared to the numbers who die in most civil wars or from automobile accidents. In fact, in almost all years, the total number of people worldwide who die at the hands of international terrorists anywhere in the world is not much more than the number who drown in bathtubs in the United States.
Until 2001, far fewer Americans were killed in any grouping of years by all forms of international terrorism than were killed by lightning, and almost none of those terrorist deaths occurred within the United States itself. Even with the September 11 attacks included in the count, the number of Americans killed by international terrorism since the late 1960s (which is when the State Department began counting) is about the same as the number of Americans killed over the same period by lightning, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reaction to peanuts.
Ron Paul supporters on FR are sort of like naturalized trolls.